The Language Of Architecture.

THE LANGUAGE OF ARCHITECTURE .

From a careful investigation of the question as to the development of the Science of Architecture within the past half century in America , it appears that no very marked progress has been made in the study of its pilnciples as applied to

great public buildings . The structures erected at Washington , New York , Baltimore , Philadelphia , and Chicago , many of which have been of large proportions , yet not one exhibits any ' other peculiarity than superficial size , without

architectural science . It is said by competent judges , that the Capitol at Washinhton is a huge mass of stones , but the principles of architectural science have been in a great measure overlooked . if these were even recognized as important .

There is nothing in either the Capitol , or the other buildings lately erected near it , which develope the genius of Amei-ica . Their size , it is true , comports somewhat with the idea of our extensive country , " simply this and nothing more . "

Take as an example the Capitol itself . It is a centre building , covered by an immense dome , with wings on either side , the main building and its extensions raised above the ground , and thus

made of commanding appearance . This , it is true , is but a mere sketch of the character of this edifice , but it conveys all that its architecture can convey to the beholder . If every one did not know it- was the Capitol , it might as well be a

Museum , a Foundling Hospital , or a Retreat for the disabled in the land or naval service . We do not complain of the architecture as understood in the builder ' s sense of that term , but we complain that in this structure the science of

architecture speaks no language to the observer . He looks , and looks , and all he sees , all he knows , is , that there is a mass of stome in the shape of a building for some human use . The structure tells him nothing , it does not explain its purpose

, it does not typify its uses , it is not symbolic of the Council Hall of a great people , where the laws are made that govern now nearly thirty-six millions of people . There is nowhere on the exterior of this pile of " appropriations , " a sign ,

token , symbol , or device , which worked into the architectural construction , points to , or portrays , designates , or distinctivel y reveals , the only and single object of its erection . The several styles of architecture are peculiar ,

distinguishable , and individual , because they are the expression of the several teachings of the science , as it was understood in the ages and countries which are thus signalized . The fact , that the Roman and the Gothic differ from each other ,

is the best argument that in both peoples the language of architecture expressed different meanings . The Grecian Temple , the Mosque , the Parthenon , in a word , each distinctive language which ' spoke in architecture , spoke an idiom of its own .

The primaz-y , the fundamental principles of the science , are the same everywhere , but the expres sion of the cultivation of the science , differs as language differs . The Freemason reads in the " Great Light" '

King Solomon ' s plan of the Temple . In our day it would be called "the specification , " but he also reads the expression of the design , aim , purpose of King Solomon in erecting the structure ,, aud beyond all doubt , when finished , it spoke in *

the language of architecture to those for whom it was erected , what this purpose was . It told it so plainly , that any one of the " twelve tribes , " though he could not z ead his own language , could read the outspeaking testimony of the architecture

of the Temple . We have in a former issue called the notice of the Craft to the Hebrew Synagogue , and the-Church , side by side , on Broad Street , above Green Street . We again invite the fraternity of

Freemasons to visit these buildings and examine theni closely . They will at once see exactly what is . the meaning of the language of architecture-They will understand at once , that the style of architecture peculiar and appropriate to the

purpose of the structure is most signally manifest in these two buildings . The Synagogue is izi a style which tells the whole story of the use , the purpose , and the object of its erection . It tells him of the time of

Moses , of the " wonderful works " of God for the good of His people Israel , because it reminds him of the history of the " chosen people , " in this , if nothing else , that the architecture is of that style , which is historically connected with the Hebrews .

But on the other side of it stands stone , dumb , lifeless , voiceless , unmeaning , signifying nothing . It is a Church building one may guess—but what is that ? A Church of this age , of this day , a place for a congregation to meet in—all else is left to