February 18, 1899.
THE ESTATES GAZETTE
260
decorated the outlines, bottoms, handles and keyholes, being laid on in the infancy of the style known as Rococo, from the words rocaille coquille (rock and shell work).
Clocks underwent less of the rococo influence of Germany; but here again the Regency gave birth to a style in which the forms were tortured, and the ormolu too freely cut.
One of the quaint shapes of clocks introduced was that in the style known as a la religieux, because the form bore a distant resemblance to that of the porch of a church. The cases were mounted with gilt bronze, designed and carved with great care.
A transition bureau in the Council Hall at Compiegne is described by M. Williamson (“ Mobilier National ”) as participating in the Louis XIV. style, yet endowed with the gracious form which prevailed under Louis XV., while free from the rococo heresy and the later sinuosities• It is of purple wood, mounted with a thin band of ormolu following the outlines. The feet are thrust into metal shoes ; while at the angles, female busts emerge from sheaves of foliage projecting from the frame, and a mask of Bacchus adorns each end.
One of the most renowned mounters in metal came into notice during the first year of the Regency. This was Jacques Caffieri, who designed the fine pall for members of the Founders’ Guild, which is now in the Le Mans Museum, and is signed by him, J. Caffieri, 1715. The skill to which he afterwards attained is shown by the beautiful clock also signed by him, which is now in the Jones con-lection at South Kensington. It consists of a Chinese figure supported by a boldly-modelled elephant. One of his most famous works is the Metternich cabinet, now at Vienna.
Jftmttto ©lît anît
XXV.
LOUIS QUINZE—THE REGENCY.
The principal French architects under Louis XV. were Soufflot (1714-81), who designed the Pantheon, and Servandoni, who built the portico of St. Sulpice. The last-named was likewise a decorative designer. The chief sculptors were the brothers Couston. Nicholas, the eldest of these, had studied in Italy; and when one of his finest works was submitted to Louis XIV., with the criticism that such was scarcely antique taste, the old King had replied: “True; but it is French taste,” and this expression became the watchword of the Regency of Philip and the long reign of Louis XV. In fact, the sculpture of this period is distinguished by a grace of movement imparted by sinuous lines quite antagonistic to the placidity of ancient art; it went further, and endeavoured to realise the very shiverings of the skin.
As regards wall decoration, the palm must be given during the Regency to Watteau, the most original painter whom France has ever produced. Watteau had studied with 'he charming designer Gillot, and Audran, who invented those arabesques on a ground of gold which distinguish the saloons of the Louis Quinze period. Watteau executed delightful rustic panels, as a girl in a swing attached zo two trees and surrounded by emblems of the chase.
The best exemplar of the furniture of the Regency is Charles Cressent, to whom Philip Due d’Orleans accorded the title of premier ebeniste. He came of a family of Picardy cabinet-makers and sculptors, and probably was
Owing to the momentary poverty of the Court and the nobles the boudoir tended to take the place of the vase salon; and all the elegance of refinement was lavished on this apartment. The chiffonnier, with numerous drawers, the secretaire, whose folding front begins to serve as a bureau, the tables and chairs with serpentine feet would have been out of place in the saloons of the previous period.
The sedan chairs of the epoch were marvels of artistic beauty. They were made in carved wood; the panels of the exterior were often painted with mythological subjects. The whole of the framework was richly gilded, and crowned with a bronze gallery.
The florid style displayed in the work of the Dresden Royal Porcelain Factory at Meissen undoubtedly exercised an adventitious influence upon the styles of the Regency and: of Louis XV. The exaggerated roundness of form, and the cutting of ornament in the rococo style may be partially traced to this source, as also may the banishment of straight lines, the warping of the feet to such an extent that they appear to have forgone all semblance of solidity.
(To be continued.)
Downe’s Patent Chimney Top.—A smoky chimney is probably one of the greatest discomforts with which a household can be afflicted, rivalling as a serious nuisance the all too common trouble of defective drains. Many and various have been the attempts to effect some means of preventing or remedying the evil, too often with only poor success, but the invention of Mr. Downes, architect, of Lewisham High-road, seems to prove effectual. His patent chimney top, made in many sizes and forms, so as to be applicable to almost any form of requirement in regard to fitting, provides a continuous up-draught or current, and may even be used as simple ventilators for drains or the interior of buildings. We understand that the invention has an extensive sale and that many repeat orders have been received, which may be regarded as practical testimony to its success.
one of Boulezs pupils; but he gave ebony only the second place, devoting all his powers to the richness and elegance of his bronzes. Thus in some of his pieces amorini in bronze repose in the hollowed corners or cling to foliage trailed across the front of his commodes. In others the ebony is almost completely hidden by heavy masks and foliage of copper.
At the same time he neglected no detail of workmanship ; and none of the restorations required by Boule work, as at Windsor, have ever been found necessary in his case• He appears to have been the first to introduce the commodes with sweeping curves known as a la Regence, a la Dauphine, and so forth. The Hertford' House collection contains one of his most remarkable works, known as “ the dragon commode,” from the dragons which ornament its front. Cressent devoted some of his talent to the marquetry in shell and brass popularised by his master, Boule, but appears to have wearied of the minute application and to have perceived that his other methods produced more striking effects, such, for instance, as his marquetry in quaint figures of children and animals, which he was the first to introduce.
Under the Regency marquetry in wood achieved a wonderful development; and it eventually ousted marquetry in tortoiseshell from the field, at any rate as chief favourite.
Beginning with designs mostly geometrical this marquetry became presently an actual mosaic, imitating painting. By the aid of artificial tints, the pieces were covered with bouquets, trophies of instruments tied with ribbon, amorous emblems as torches and doves.
Such a style could not prove enduring; the play of the various resins during the drying process of years, and the action of sunshine upon the tints, produced alterations in the decorative parts. Hence this style of furniture is now somewhat scarce.
L’Epoch de la Regence gave its name, though abbreviated to the final words, to a form of commode which, however, prevailed during the greater part of the reign. This was in the form known as bombee (convex or swelling); it stood on raised feet. The top was formed of a marble slab; and a liberal outlay of ormolu
During the first year of the tenancy the tenant made an arrangement with his creditors, and the farm was offered to and taken by Mr. Brown ; but he declined to have only four years for putting the farm in course, and required that the landlord should either pay the difference to put the land into course, or that he should be allowed to- quit on the terms he entered, but no agreement was signed.
When the valuation was entered on, Mr. Waring, the landlord’s agent, acted for the landlord, we acted for the incoming tenant, and Mr. Dickinson was umpire. The umpire, at the request of Mr. Waring, declined to put the land into course, but the following note was made on the award, “The land on the above farm being out of course on Mr. Brown’s entry, and no deduction having been made on account of it, it is agreed that no deduction shall be made for land out of course on Mr. Brown’s quitting. As, however, this award was only signed by the umpire, and not by Sir William Cooke’s agent, we requested Mr. Brown, when he paid the balance of the valuation, to get the landlord to say in writing that he was to go out on quitting on the same terms, and the following receipt was given “Received from A. J. Brown, £259 14s. 9d., the balance of valuation, on the understanding that on quitting the farm the valuation is made on the same principle as on entry. (Signed) William Henry Cooke.” This receipt was stamped with a sixpenny stamp.
The Judge’s decision, as reported, gives a pretty full account of the matter as far as the award made by Mr. Merryweather is concerned, and there is no doubt that award was perfectly correct—had the umpire not gone out of his way to make a deduction in a matter which was never discussed before him as umpire.
With regard to Mr. Lancaster’s award the matter is totally different. Mr. Lancaster has allowed an away going crop on a field in exactly the same course as a field which, on Mr. Brown’s entry, was valued as full tillage land, and in Mr. Merryweather’s award it was also treated as full tillage land ; he has also made deductions as follows, “ For excess of full tillage land and of land coming fallow.” These alterations and deductions were made in spite of the note on the entry award, and the short receipt or agreement signed by the landlord.
When we commenced the second reference we were under the impression that as the award was declared invalid we were entitled to commence again de novo, as we thought that by section 9, sub-section 8, the umpire had become incapable of acting; but we are now told that this is not the legal interpretation of being incapable.
It has become the custom of the valuers of the district to try to ignore the provisions of the Act as far as possible ; but valuers do not allow for feeding stuffs unless a notice of claim is sent in under the Act, and in this case both the notice of claim and the counterclaim were put before Mr. Lancaster, and he allowed the feeding stuffs, and we cannot see how Mr. Lancaster could allow for these under an arbitration not under the Act, if section 57 has any meaning.
Yours, etc.,
JNO. DAWSON AND SONS.
Doncaster.
Preparation of Conditions by Auctioneers.—At the annual general meeting of the Worcestershire Incorporated Law Society, the following minute was presented by the committee : —It having come to the knowledge of the committee that, in one instance at least, a Malvern auctioneer prepared the conditions of sale relating to a sale of real property, the members of the society and other solicitors in Malvern were communicated with and asked to do their utmost to prevent such a practice growing up. The committee desire to draw the attention of the members generally to the matter, and to ask them to bring to the notice of the committee any similar cases which may become known to them.
Scotch Lands Valuation Assessors.—At Edinburgh, recently, was held the annual meeting of the Association of Lands Valuation Assessors for Scotland. Mr. John Brown (Hamilton) presided, and there was a large attendance. A paper was read by Mr. B. Cooke (Aberdeen) on some recent decisions in valuation cases ; and a paper on recent registration cases was read by Mr. A. McDougall (Greenock). A paper was also read by Mr. James Reith (Paisley) on the “ Valuation and Taxation of Land Values.” The officers for the ensuing year were appointed as follows : —President, Mr. Robert Hamilton (Greenock); vice-president, Mr. A. J. Lothian (Dundee); secretary, George Simpson (Leith); treasurer, James Smart (Edinburgh); committee, John Brown (Hamilton), James Reith (Paisley), Andrew Scott (Hawick), Alex. McDougall (Greenock), A. W. Bunn (Aberdeen), and Jas. Henry (Glasgow). It was resolved that the next annual meeting should be •held in Glasgow. In the evening the members dined together in the Royal Hotel.
(2) that it failed to comply with the provisions of sections 15 and 21; and (3) that it awarded compensation to the respondent for various matters in respect of which the respondent was not entitled to compensation in the circumstances of this particular tenancy; and he requested me to remit it to Mr. Lancaster, and direct him to specify the several improvements, acts and things in respect whereof compensation has been awarded, and the several matters and things taken into account under the provisions of the said Act in reduction or augmentation of such compensation and the sum awarded in respect of each improvement, act, matter and thing, and to amend his said award by making the same upon the basis of the entry award of James Dickinson in 1895, made between respondent as landlord and the appellant as incoming tenant, and disallowing all deductions for cases of full tillage and all land coming fallow, and all alterations from full tillage to crop land after first ascertaining from the umpire the sum represented by the said deductions for excess of full tillage and for the alteration from the full tillage to the crop land basis ; and alternatively, to remit the original award to Mr. Merryweather with the directions necessary to give effect to my judgment on the appeal of May 12, 1898.
On behalf of the respondent it was contended that I had no jurisdiction in the matter as (1) this award of Mr. Lancaster was not an award under the Act at all; and (2) I was as regards the Appeal of May 12 functus officio.
On the part of the appellant it was urged that immediately on the first award being adjudged invalid he appointed Mr. Dawson as his “ referee,” not as an ordinary arbitrator, and that Mr. Dawson had no authority to act on his behalf except under the Act, and that any delay on appellant’s part was to be explained by the fact that he thought during all the interval that proceedings were going on under the Act.
Except by the use of the word “referee,’ which is the word used in the Act instead of arbitrator, Mr. Dawson’s appointment and the notice to the respondent, which were put in, contain no reference to or suggestion that they were intended to be under the Act, and in the discussion before me on August 11 this point was fully brought to the knowledge of the parties as being, at any rate, open to doubt.
I am of opinion that this award is not within the Act. Rightly or wrongly, Mr. Dawson and Mr. Merryweather, acting as agents for the parties, but under their appointments as referees, and after I had refused to appoint an umpire as before stated, agreed upon an umpire as in an ordinary arbitration, and the award of Mr. Lancaster is not, and does not purport to be, in the form of an award under the Act. I must therefore decline to set it aside as being bad on any of the grounds specified in the notice of appeal.
I feel more difficulty in deciding the alternative application. It seems to me that in fairness and justice the appellant is entitled to the original amount awarded by Mr. Merryweather of £669 6s. Id., with the addition of £40 3s. 6d., the amount improperly deducted by that gentleman, and if I had been asked in May last to remit the award to him with necessary directions, a payment of these amounts would probably have been the conclusion of the matter; but Sir W. H. 0. Wemyss Cooke has a legal right to avail himself of the technical slip of his late tenant if he chooses to do so, and I do not see how this can be rectified at the present stage of the dispute. The respondent has retained Mr. Merryweather on his side now, and Mr. Merryweather has acted for him in a matter in which possibly his function as umpire had not expired. I make no comment on the propriety of this proceeding, as it is possible that both the umpire and the respondent may have honestly thought that the arbitration under the Act was at an end ; while Mr. Dawson does not appear to have raised any objection to Mr. Merryweather’s new position, but to have acquiesced in it, and to have treated the matter as an ordinary arbitration.
On the whole, I am of opinion, having regard to the conduct of the parties and their agents, that it is too late now for me to re-open the question formally disposed of last May, even if it were in my discretion t-o do so. I do not think it is, but on the contrary I feel bound to hold that I am functus officio as regards that• appeal.
I therefore dismiss this application with costs.
SOM.E: COMMENTS ON THE CASE.
To the Editor ol the Estates Gazette.
Sir,—In 1894 the Bentley House Farm was divided, and a considerable portion forming the present farm was let to a Mr. Smith ; but in consequence of the division the farm was thrown out of course, and a clause was inserted in the agreement that “ if the tenancy expired before the expiration of four years the landlord shall not charge the tenant for dilapidations in respect of any land that may be out of course.”