Marca 8,-1872. . ei THE BUILDING NEWS 189
HOW TO BUILD SCIENTIFICALLY
WITH THE AID OF MODERN IN-
VENTIONS.—VII.
WALLS.
RICKS. — Hand-made and Machine-made
Bricks.—The machine-made bricks are
denser, sharper at the edges, and heavier than
the hand-made. This heaviness is sometimes a
great objection where, for instance, a wall is
carried on girders or arches.
Pressed Facing Bricks.—The sizes of those
bricks which are called Nottingham bricks,
and sent to London, are 92in. x 2Zin. x 43in.,
the price in London being 70s. per thousand.
An objection I would mention is that they
sometimes scale, owing to the pressure used in
their manufacture. It is worthy of noting
that this is not so likely to occur when used
in the locality of their manufacture. Tint,
pale red.
Fareham Red Rubbing and Facing Bricks.—
Price of the facing bricks in London is 63s. a
thousand, 49s. loaded in trucks at Fareham.
Red rubbers, £6 per thousand. The colour of
the facing bricks is purple hue or plum colour,
and the trade recommend that the wall during
the progress of building should be covered up
with brown paper, as this will save it from
splashes of mortar and other injury, and the
necessity of colouring the brick is thereby
avoided. Another hint I have received—
namely, that the richness of colour of these
bricks would be improved if dark mortar be
used.
Medway Gault Brick.—The price is 37s., of
the plain white, per thousand alongside
wharf in the river Thames. The pressed
brick, 45s.; the red Wateringbury, 45s. in
London. There is used in the manufacture
of the Gault brick about one-third sand, and
it is well worth remembering that the darker
the clay the whiter will be the brick.
Pether’s Patent.—I was much pleased with
the ingenious patent press for the manufac-
ture of these bricks ; it will well repay a visit
to inspect. As to price at the wharf :—
per 1000
Ordinary pattern (where device is a com-
bination of not more than six separate
dies) for surfaces, strings, &c. ... pense O OL NO)
Arch bricks ... eve eee ane Seale ener
Column Seth a llese-o luese ae mee 0
Red bricks 10s. per 1000 extra on above.
The excise duty is 10s. extra on ornamental
work. One advantage claimed for these bricks
is that no pointing is required. Each brick has
a recess or kick on each side, the method being
to use very fine mortar, which is left to dry,
and the superfluous mortar on the face is then
brushed off with a birch broom. ‘The patentee
recommends those without a perceptible joint,
considering that a thick joint interferes with
the design of the ornamental brick. JI should
mention that some architects consider the
thick mortar joint, even in such work, an ad-
vantage.
As it may enable my readers more easily to
compare prices, I haye asked the patentee to
put the cost of his brickwork in the following
way, which he has kindly done, and is :—
In Gault. 8s. d.
The bricks for an arch Qin. deep, with 43in.
soffit for an opening 2ft. 6in. wide ... eo aS
The bricks for an arch 14in. deep and9in. sofiit 3 4
The bricks for an arch 14in. deep and 9in.
soffit composed of all headers 5 5 0
(These bricks being glazed the labour for
setting them is but a trifle per foot superficial).
3in. strings cost per foot, run .,. ees sree)
Gin. strings cost per foot, run ... ee seep.
125ft., superficial, will be covered by 1,000
bricks laid old English bond.
143ft., superficial, will be covered by 1,000
bricks laid Flemish bond.
This will enable the architect to work out
for himself the difference of cost between these
moulded bricks and decorative stonework of
various kinds.
Glazed Bricks and Tiles—White glazed
bricks, £9 12s. 6d., headers, per thousand ;
ro
stretchers, £10 12s. 6d. per thousand in London ; £12 12s. 6d., quoins, per thousand in London. Green Glazed Bricks.--Headers and stretchers, £20 per thousand ; if buff-glazed, £12. The difference in price between the headers and stretchers is from £1 to £2 per thousand. Glazed Bricks.—The use of a glazed surface in external walling, unless the whole elevation be of glazed or polished material, I have already stated I consider objectionable. Ruskin goes as faras to say that lustre is ignoble in almost everything, while Mr. Fergusson would appear to be in -fayour of glazed surfaces. As to the question where the smooth-glazed, or rough-glazed surfaces should be used, the trade would appear to be in favour of the smooth-glazed, and they consider that the rain would always cleanse it and keep it bright. On the other hand, architects generally favour the rough glazed for estheticreasons. I cannot but think we arerightin considering that asmooth-glazed surface is most objectionable, and I would add, where I covered a wall in the City with glazed tiles for the purpose of light, the tiles always, from the rain and soot, presented a streaky unpleasant appearance. Surely, by the use of the fire-engine, the soot could be washed out of the rough glazed front. It would appear, from experience, that the smooth-glazed surfaces also need washing. Blue Bricks.—Some knowledge may be use- ful as to these bricks. ‘They come prin- cipally from Staffordshire. If broken, they should haye a red core; the blackening or discolouration should not extend more than a quarter of an inch beneath the surface. The surface should be smooth and silky, and should present a glossy silvery appearance (when seen in the sun). As regards hardness, they should be sufficiently so, to turn the edge of a well-tempered knife, They are used as black bricks, but are not considered so effec- tive for building in courses, or dark bands, as the artificially-stained chocolate colour bricks, sold in London as black bricks (see treatment for further remarks hereon). They are capital for paving purposes. Perforated Bricks ave little used now, because they transmit sound, and also because they do not form good brickwork. Treatment.—W hy is a brick building usually considered inferior to one built of stone ? This is a question that must have often struck the thoughtful student. M. Grimer, in his work on the terra-cotta decorations of North Italy, supplies an answer: ‘English brick has become by degrees the least durable and most unsightly in use in any country, and has hence produced that dislike to its colour and material, which proceeds, not from its intrinsic ugliness, but from association of the imagination with ideas of coarseness and Meanness of construction.” Gwilt, while somewhat admitting that the colour is an objection, says: ‘‘'The commonplace archi- tect forgets that form is much more essential to beauty than colour. In the times of Jones and Wren red brick was beautifully wrought into architectural forms, of which a few examples still remain in the metropolis: and by Palladio, bricks were used for columns without smearing them over with plaster,” A short time ago nearly every brick building was cemented over. ‘This went out of use in a great measure, to be succeeded hy every variety of brick, until this class of work (worse even than its cement predecessor, because more painful to the artistic eye) obtained the cognomens of ‘streaky bacon ” and the ‘blear-eyed” styles; and now we are inundated with moulded bricks of every kind, and where mouldings cannot be intro- duced then the surface is diapered in brick. This is sure not to last, because it will be overdone, and the eye, even of a British public, will seek repose (if not change), and elevations with plain surfaces will be again
in demand. What is to be done? It is most difficult to say. We live in such a rapid age that the instant a novelty is propounded or discovered it is put here, there, and every- where, and one is soon tired of the sight of that which, if sparingly used, and with judg- ment, would long continue to afford us pleasure. But novelty seems to be the desire of those who employ the architect, and he bows to that desire. Coloured Bricks. —Mr. Darbishire gives some good advice in his paper on this subject read at the Institute: ‘‘The colour of the wall should be considered ; if it be dark, the devices should be darker ; if it be light, they should be lighter; for instance, in a red wall the devicés should be executed in black bricks ; if it be a wall built with the com- mon yellow stock brick, best known in London, they should be executed with Suffolk or Bath brick, so that in neither case may they present too glaring a contrast.” Again, he says: ‘‘ We need not be reminded that if a door or window receive any kind of decoration beyond its clear opening, the pro- portions of the decoration will materially affect those of the opening itself, and espe- cially if the colour of the decoration be con- spicuous. Coloured bricks are for this reason most unmanagable.” Let us next sum- marise the discussion. John P. Seddon fully admitted the difficulties which stood in the way of using coloured materials in buildings, and more particularly coloured brick. In any case polychromatic architec- ture needed the greatest care, attention, judgment, and taste. Mr. E. T’Anson ad- mitted the subject was difficult. The next speaker said colour was a dangerous element to deal with. Mr. Hayward considered it probable that before this century was ended coloured architecture would be more deve- loped than it ever had been. He objected to what bricklayers did—paint over the surface of the black bricks, or the blue Staffordshire bricks, with some thick black paint, giving a heavy tone, in place of that soft or silvery grey which black headers from the kiln usually had. The simplest kind of good brickwork always looked the best, and the less moulded bricks they used the better the building would be. He advocated only red and black bricks, and objected to the use of grey or yellow bricks, which so frequently resulted in a patchy appearance. Mr. C. Fowler thought it was rare that an actual pattern on a ground was successful. Mr. ©. C. Nelson thought coloured brick buildings applied more to the country than London, as in the latter a few months of foe would greatly alter their appearance for the worse. For the interiors of churches and hos- pitals, coloured bricks command universal approval, and are more easy of application. The French Hospital at Hackney is a very pleasing example, the corridors being all of brick. It has been built about ten years, and I lately went over it, and considered the warmth of colour and brightness (though T was told it had not been touched since built) were delightful. I have given as shortly as I could the opinions of others, because any one man’s view is of limited value, and especially if he differ from the majority of his professional brethren. In this case, however, my views accord with theirs, and I believe a great future awaits coloured brickwork, if only it be treated in broad masses and on the fore- going principles. I need only mention S. Giles’ School, in Endell-street, to show what a clever architect may do. I never pass the building without looking at it with pleasure. Conclusion. —The Daily Telegraph says: “We are a brick-using people. We love bricks ; we believe in bricks; we abide by their use with true Roman pertinacity.” If so, it does appear a great pity that more attention is not paid to brick building alone, and also in combination with terra-cotta.
