Petrie shows us, there is a marked change in the religious forms, and in the very object of worship. The whole reverence of the country is directed to the Sun, as the source of all vital growth and force. The king himself changes his title in conformity with the new religious views; and, as the reader follows Mr. Petrie's description of what occurred in the 14th century B.C., he becomes as convinced as if he were reading of the religious struggles in England under the Tudors and Stuarts. I cannot forego allusion to the Hymn to Aten (the Sun), of which Mr. Petrie gives a simple but powerful translation. It has the enthusiastic grandeur of some of the Psalms, in which recognition of the Divine power in the simple incidents of the nature around us is the means of appeal to the human heart. The care with which the author follows up the relationships and alliances of the royal families of Egypt, not only from monuments or other inscribed objects, but from the actual correspondence, in cuneiform character, found at Tell-el-Amarna within these few years, is on a par with the rest, and is most interesting. To any one taking even the most dilettante interest in the past of this wonderful country, the book is invaluable for its quality of infusing life into a remote antiquity. Nor must I conclude this notice without calling attention to the extent to which this interest is enhanced by the very clear and well-selected illustrations, especially, perhaps, by the portraits, the individuality of which is striking. I should doubt whether there is in our Library any book containing in 350 octavo pages as much closely condensed result of learned research put into such interesting and simple form, or-let me add-better printed. MINUTES. VII. J. D. CRACE. At the Seventh General Meeting (Ordinary) of the Session, held Monday, 1st February 1897, at 8 p.m., Mr. Alex. Graham, F.S.A., Vice-President, in the Chair, the Minutes of the Meeting held 18th January 1897 [p. 157] were taken as read and signed as correct. The following Associate, attending for the first time since his election, was formally admitted, and signed the Register- namely, Harry James Gee Smith. In regard to the award of the Royal Gold Medal for the current year, the Chairman announced that the Council proposed to submit to Her Majesty the Queen the name of Mynheer P. J. H. Cuypers [Hon. Corr. M.], of Amsterdam, as a fit recipient of the honour, for his executed works as an architect. The Chairman announced that arrangements had been made for a party of members, not exceeding thirty in number, to visit Peterborough Cathedral on Saturday the 6th February, and requested members desirous of joining the party to signify the same to the Acting Secretary at the close of that evening's Meeting. In connection with the proposed restoration of the west front of the Cathedral, the Chairman further announced that the Council, after full consideration, had decided that it would be inex pedient for the Institute to take any public action in the matter. The following candidates for membership, found to be eligible and qualified according to the Charter and By-laws, and admitted by the Council to candidature, were recommended for election, viz. :- As FELLOWS, Henry Clement Charlewood [4.], Qualified as Associate 1888 (Newcastleon-Tyne), Joseph Gibbons Sankey, M.A.Cantab., Pugin Student 1884 (Manchester), James Diggle Mould (4.), Qualified as Associate 1888 (Manchester); As ASSOCIATES, Herbert William Bird [Probation r 1891, Qualified 1896] (Hong Kong), Charles Frederick Innocent Probationer 1889, Student 1894, Qualified 1896] (Sheffield), Alfred Edward Corbett [Probationer 1891, Student 1892, Qualified 1896], Stephen Powlson Rees [Qualified 1896], Charles Henry Dorman [Probationer 1890, Student 1893, Qualified 1896] (Northampton), Alexander Godolphin Bond, B.A.Oxon. [Probationer 1894, Student 1895, Qualified 1896] (Bristol), Gilbert Wilson Fraser [Probationer 1890, Student 1892, Qualified 1896] (Liverpool), Delmé George Mootham [Probationer 1892, Student 1893, Qualified 1896], Clement Osmund Nelson [Probationer 1891, Student 1894, Qualified 1896], Rupert Claude Austin Probationer 1892, Student 1895, Qualified 1896], Henry George Fisher [Qualified 1896] (Northampton), Charles Samuel Frederick Palmer [Qualified 1896], Arthur Cates Prizeman. A Paper, by Mr. Alfred Gilbert [H.A.], R.A., entitled THE SCULPTOR'S ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE, was read by the author, and, having been discussed, a vote of thanks to Mr. Gilbert was passed by acclamation. The proceedings then closed, and the Meeting separated at 10.15 p.m. LEGAL. The London Building Act: Fire-resisting Materials. MCLACHLAN V. KEARLEY. Mr. Hugh McLachlan [4.], District Surveyor for the Western Division of the City of London, complainant in this case, reported ante, p. 160, on the authority of The Law Journal, requests that his reply to the comments of that journal on the Lord Mayor's decision should be printed in these columns. In his letter to the Editor, which appears in the current issue of The Law Journal, Mr. McLachlan says:-" You venture to suggest that the decision of the Lord Mayor was a wrong one, arriving at the conclusion that the question to be decided was whether lead was a fire-resisting material' within the meaning of the Act or not. I agree with you that the point was not with reference to fire-resisting materials,' but solely with reference to the question of combustible materials.' Sections 61 and 62 should not have been imported into the case, and had nothing to do with section 59, which last I contended had been contravened. My point was that wood is a 'combustible material,' that the dormers were solely framed and constructed of that material, and that the lead was a covering only, and required by section 61. If it had been possible to construct the dormers solely of lead, and had they been so constructed, there would have been no complaint. Mr. Daldy was instructed by his client to overlook or minimise the importance of the wood and to make the most of the lead, but he called no evidence to support his contention. It was then pointed out to him that I had given evidence that the erections were really of wood, and that the evidence was on one side only, whereon Mr. Daldy practically gave up his case." I THE GARDEN IN RELATION TO THE HOUSE. By H. E. MILNER [H.A.], F.L.S., Assoc.M.Inst.C.E. Read at the General Meeting, Monday, 15th February 1897; and registered at Stationers' Hall T is not proposed in this Paper to set forth a history of gardening in this country, but rather to state my opinion as to the treatment to be adopted in laying-out grounds, particularly in their more immediate relation to the house, and to indicate generally a practical application of the theories advanced. It would be well to first offer some remarks on a subject that has long vexed designersviz. the style of treatment to be adopted-and to try and arrive at some definition of ideas. Some extremists maintain that the garden should be a formal enclosure, with intricate flower-beds relieved by plots of grass, with little consideration for the possible creation, or the embracing, of a beautiful landscape. Other extremists would bring the field up to the drawing-room window, and dot patches of flowers and plants irregularly about the lawn, with the fond idea that such treatment is natural, and that design is incompatible with beauty. The art of architecture developed long before that of landscape-gardening. The fortress, with its small enclosure of exercise-ground, was followed by the herb-garden and orchard of the religious houses, and it was only when people were able to live in peace that any extension of pleasure-grounds became possible. The prime idea then was to provide food, and to mark in the treatment of the enclosed ground a difference between it and the surrounding country. This formal treatment developed greatly till it reached a high state of perfection under Elizabeth, when the architect who designed the house also laid out the garden with its forecourt and broad terrace, its straight walks leading from it encompassing the flower-beds, and all harmonising with the building. Yet the garden was enclosed, and little thought devoted to the treatment of the country outside beyond the planting of avenues. Bowling-greens were common, and the pleasure and rest of greensward were appreciated. Under Charles II. design began to deteriorate, and the ideal sought for was intricacy of parts, repetition, and vagaries. Soon came a reaction, and, towards the end of the eighteenth century, fashion ruled the destruction of most of the old formal gardens, to be replaced in very many instances by a no less artificial and formal imitation of nature. The designers at this time were not content with amalgamating with whatever was good of the old work a natural treatment of the outlying ground, or of giving greater breadth to the existing formal work, but swept away all this and replaced it by meaningless walks, by clumps of trees and shrubs dotted irregularly on the lawn and park, by a boundary of planting, by imitation of bits of natural scenery, by the introduction of artificial ruins and such-like Third Series. Vol. IV. No. 8.-18 Feb. 1897. сс objects, with the desire of making a picturesque landscape. There was no charm for them in the cultured classic taste that formed the quaint hedged-in retreat with its pool and splashing fountain, and the sculptured goddess relating on her pedestal the pleasures of the garden. Excess was reached in the formal treatment when the rule was repetition of intricate designs for irregularly growing flowers, of long avenues of trees with indefinite purpose, of hedges of yew, box, thorn, or privet, growing beyond control, of single plants cut into fantastic shapes, and of plants tortured to take the place of masonry or brickwork. Excess was reached in the picturesque treatment by the effacement of existing work near the dwelling, simply because it was formal, by the effacement of any appearance of division between the garden and park, by the placing of the refined building in a waste of field, by the mere extension of the nearer enclosure to the boundary, by a striving after a forced picturesque effect, and by a general feeling of artificiality, though a pretension of nature-imitation was set up. Now, does not the proper treatment lie in the happy mean? Is it not as unfitting to pretend that in a lovely undulating country, with fine old trees forming the foreground of the valley ending in a lake, with the adjacent hills clothed with trees of ever-varying shades of colour and form, with the view split up to catch a distant spire, a rising peak, or a cleft in the hills— that such a view should be circumscribed by hedges or walls, or its breadth spoiled by frittering rows of trees-as to maintain that the house shall be fixed in a field, that curved walks shall surround and lead from it and destroy all setting of the stone jewel, that clumps of trees and shrubs, artificial in their outline and grouping, should be without system dotted about as if thrown from the clouds, and that any recognition of the hand of man should be studiously avoided? The material with which the architect works in building his house differs altogether from that which the landscape-gardener has at his service. And I differentiate greatly between the treatment of terraces, walls, steps, balustrades, &c., in stone and verdure. A stone or brick terraced wall, with its broad mouldings, its recesses, its surface clothed with varying climbing plants, its open balustrading, is a lasting work; whereas a hedge in time must lose its original character. I think architects should appreciably extend their work in the garden in connection with the building; but I also think that this work should go hand-in-hand with the composition of the greater picture, which the art of landscape-gardening should produce. I quite recognise the charm and quiet beauty of true formal work-not the repetition of knots and hedges and avenues; but I say that in the treatment of ground we should pass the old limitations, that we should be influenced by a broader spirit, that we should take into account the increased resources of modern horticulture, that we should try and appeal to the mind, not merely to the eye, by the beauty of composition of line, colour, perspective, and grandeur, and that we should not degenerate a liberal art into a mechanical one. It must be borne in mind that places differ much-in the conformation of the ground, in climate, in soil, in the requirements of the owner, in the amount to be expended, and in the possibility of an extension beyond the immediate precincts. It would therefore seem futile to lay down any hard-and-fast rules for design, for that which would be suitable for a plain would be inapplicable to a hillside; that which would be fitting to a peaty hollow would be wrong on a chalky slope; that which would satisfy the poor man would hardly be deemed sufficient indication of the wealth of a proud possessor; that which would enclose an oasis from the surroundings of factories might shut off the view of lovely hill, dale, and water, and imprison the dweller within a wall-possibly charming in itself, but tiring by restraining the eye from wandering to the unseen and glorious beyond. I now deal more in detail with the site, the approach, the terrace, and the garden formation and planting. In the site of a house there should be considered aspect — relation to the points of the compass; prospect―relation to the surrounding view; convenience in regard to the approaches and communication with the stables, out-offices, and gardens; the levels of the land; and the formation of the subsoil. The forms of houses and the position of the principal rooms in them are so varied that it is difficult to put down a rule that shall be absolute for all, even in the matter of aspect. In the Southern and Midland counties of England it is preferable that the main line should face south-east. If the sides of a house form a square, and the front be to the south-east, it would have sunlight on all its walls, and, as the sun exercises its fullest force between 1 and 2 P.M., its rays would then fall at an angle on the walls, and thus by its indirect impact save much oppressive heat. If we imagine a plan that possesses desirable features, the site should have fine prospects to the south-east and to the south-west, the principal approach and entrance on the north-western face, the offices on the north-eastern side, with the stables and kitchengarden beyond; the pleasure-gardens on the south-east side, with a continuation towards the east, and the south-western face might be open to the park. The broad terrace would be on the south-east face, with its main straight walk continued to the distant fruit-garden below the kitchen-garden, and its balustraded wall continued round the western front to join with the formal forecourt or entrance drive. In Fig. 1 [p. 187] we have such an example. A large group of old elms beyond the south-east corner of the house forms the very necessary foreground, while raised planting beyond the south-west corner produces a similar effect. And here I would add that a tree, or a near group of trees, should invariably be taken into account, so that they may provide a foreground for the prospect. In fact, if no such foreground exist, it is often advisable to make one by raising the ground and planting on it a few old trees. A house should not be placed facing a parallel boundary, or row of trees, or lie of country; and this remark applies equally to smaller houses not actually in a street. In hilly ground the house should preferably be placed on a slope, and the floor-level kept well up. In fact, I find that the majority of houses have their floor-lines placed too low-I do not mean in relation to the immediate surroundings, but to the general land-level. At Iwerne Minster, the house, necessarily placed in a flat area but with hilly country around it, had its groundline raised ten feet, with the floor-line two feet above this. In ground sloping from north to south it becomes more necessary still to keep up the ground-line of the house, so that the approach may not fall to the house. A house will not appear perched up if its ground-base be sufficient. It seems desirable that such beauty as may be derived from a prospect should be obtainable from the best apartments of the house, and the position of these rooms may be regulated accordingly. It is possible that the best views cannot be obtained from the house, hence another source of attractiveness is created in the gardens and park, and care should be taken to emphasise this spot. There is the prospect into the garden, with glimpses of the winding drive, the corner of the yew hedge enclosing the herbaceous garden, the climber-covered wall, the lake, the varying colours of planting, the long-stretching lawn, with the foreground of basin, balustrade, or tree; and there is the prospect of distance, with the view of distant mountains, of sea, of abrupt bills with ever-changing shadows, of woodland, or of grassy plain, with the welcome growth of intervening trees. The principal rooms of the house should face an opening in a view, and not an abrupt hillside; and if an uninterrupted plain extend, then foreground and middle-distance objects must be introduced to break up the too regular panorama. Shelter has an obvious connection with the particular district. The most natural and |