Intellectual Division Of Labour.

nately true that if the present age has been instrumental in calling into greater activity some of the leading principles of social life , it lias sometimes unduly promoted them , and even in their own proper spheres pressed them too far . The spectacle of a whole district , thrown into hopeless and helpless misery by a change of fashion , as lately at Coventry , or by an untoward political juncture

as now in Manchester , may lead men to doubt whether the system of localizing great industries—sound and wise and ^ of natural growth as it undoubtedly is—may not have been pushed too far , or at least promoted to the exclusion of some other principles which , ought to prevail in all well-regulated communities ; at any rate it shows , with peculiar force , the melancholy truth that there is no

human good without ifcs attendant evil ; and that the very circumstances which havo worked so well in enabling the vast multitude , by combining their forces , to carry on one great industry , have at the same time rendered those over whom their influence extended peculiarly unfit for turning their hand to any other pursuit . This is the point which we wish to enlarge upon in

its bearing on intellectual pursuits . It is a truth which must always have been known and admitted , but of which we have seldom had so awful or so powerful au example , that the constant devotion , either of mind or body to one pursuit , so fixes and cramps both individuals and communities , and so contracts or shapes the circumstances surrounding them , that it becomes an impossibility in

some cases , and in others a painful difficulty to turn fco other pursuits ; it consequently becomes a question for grave consideration whether the fixedness of habits of body or mind , which constant occupation in one department brings with it , be not such an evil as to counterbalance the concomitant good , when applied to the higher walks of life . We believe that on examination we shall find reason to conclude , that though uniformity of occupation is very beneficial to society , especially in handicrafts and

employments requiring a low amount of skill , variety is best for the man himself , and that as occupations rise in the intellectual scale , variety is also best for the world . To put a familiar case , ifc is far bettor for society thafc . one man mau should forge a knife-blade , another grind it , another make the handle , and another put the whole thing together , than that the same man should have all

four things to do ; but there can be little doubt that the man who was able to do all four things , and did fchem habitually—even though , ten to one , he would not do any one of them quite so well as the four special men do—would be a cleverer and a healthier man . If we now go to the other extreme of the scale , and imagine a Cabinet Minister who could negotiate wellbut could not

, speak—or could address Parliament , but could not write a good despatch , it is clear that not only would his onesidedness of capacity be an imperfection in him , but it would also be a hindrance to public service . If we have made our meaning plain , ifc will be understood that , in applying it to the higher branches of building and of architectural practice , we propose to

advocate a comprehensive rather than a special mode of conducting affairs , for the best men . It is necessary that carpenters should confine themselves to working in wood , plumbers in lead , and masons in stone , or else there are few among them who would acquire skill enough to do the work required of them iu the best possible way ; but it is at tho same time true that the man

who is master both of mason ' s work , plumber ' s work , aud carpenters ' s work , is a better-informed man , a man more able to serve himself and his employers in all emergencies , and a more valuable mail than he who only knows a single trade . It is such men who are made foremen and superintendents , and the modern press of business has long since rendered it apparent that the qualifications of acquaintance with all building matters , and competence to undertake them all , is an essential to all builders on their own account ; and there cau be

no doubt thafc the modern practice is right . Going a step further , we maintain that in those who have the ultimate control of building works , the most extensive range of knowledge , skill , and practice , is not only the most wholesome for the mau himself , but the most advantageous for the true interest of the arfc . There is a , uuion of the practical aud the artistic faculties which , as Ashifcel well said in his

Mr . p paper to the Architectural Association , " is the true glory of the profession , " and we go so far as to maintain , that within reasonable limits the most variously accomplished man will be the most eminent . This is not always believed . The idea of a speciality is so natural to men ' s minds and the possibility of going far in one direction when in

any progress every other is neglected , seams so certain that it may seem almost heresy to disbelieve it , but the higher we go in our examination of the lives and works of very great architects or artists , the more we find that their learning was not narrowed , but at once profound , and varied , and that their capacity was equal to the most complex duties and engagements .

When we think of such men as Giotto , the painter , sculptor , and architect , and remember how great he was in all these callings ; Orcagna , painter , and architect ; the great Leonardo da Vinci ; the greater Michael Angelo ; Eaffaele ; all painters , sculptors , architects , and one of fchem engineer , poet , musician , and statesman also , we may well ask ourselves whether we are wise in limiting

our practice to ono art , or to a fragment of one arfc . In our own day , the greatest European architects has shown that the practice of the two styles—supposed by most to be combatants to the knife—can be so happily carried out by the same artist as to leave it doubtful whether the Palace of Westminster , or the Eeform Club , be the completest work . It is to bo regretted that so few seem rising up to follow Barry's example , and to practice both Gothic and classic art in their highest perfection : but abandoning so

comprehensive a grasp , as one only rarely possible , it is still more to be regretted , that we do not find in the ranks of either school so much universality in knowledge or in practice as we ought . Ifc is a mistake and a misfortune for the public to suppose that because an architect builds churches , he should be dubbed a " church architect , " and to employ him on

nothing but churches ; and , similarly , to give their dwellings to a " villa architect ; " and their places , of business to a " warehouse architect . " It is a pity that professional men should promote such a division of practice ; perhaps however , the majority of special practices are very much the result of accident , and the public do more towards creating them than architects . This is nothoweverthe

, , case with regard to the division between constructive and and artistic men . That such a division should exist is emphatically a misfortune ; it will , of course , always hapben that some will have more genius for architectural design than constructive faculty , and thafc others will be naturally better mathematicians and contrivers than designers . But no man should consider himself fully

equipped for practical life as an architect till he has nofc only developed that branch of his powers which he has most ease and pleasure in exercising , but has also trained by sheer study and work those faculties which are nofc naturally active , and has brought them to a high state of cultivation , and enrich them with a due proportion of learning . Ifc maybe that ifc is right for most men to

practice in one style only , though that can only be because most men are far below the highest standard of power or capacity ; but it is most certainly wrong for any man to practice any one style until he has well mastered the nature , the laws , the details , and the rule of composition of others . The neglect of this course leads to prejudice and mannerism ; the adoption of ifc gives large views , true taste , and grandeur and breath , bf conception . Thafc these observations are ;' not uncalled for will be evident to any who can impartially recognise either the