Aprit 12, 1872.
ground, and the rails nailed to it to stiffen them. The permanent quickset fence, with the ditch, will be mentioned further on. To avoid injury to it during the progress of the works it is left until nearly the last thing to be done. In wet ground, or wherever the possibility of a slip may be in question, a catchwater drain should be cut on the upper side at the same time that the temporary fencing is fixed. Indeed, the thorough drainage of the slopes should be insured in some kinds of ground by not only cutting a catchwater drain on the top, but by driving headings into the slope to some considerable distance, and filling them with rubble stone, if it should be easily pro- curable. Headings of this kind may often be driven under the slopeat the rate of a half- crown per lineal yard, and filled back with stone or burnt ballast for another half- crown per yard. Whena contractor executes work to the form and dimensions specified by the engineer, he ought to be held blameless if slips should occur, and be paid extra for their removal and for whatever additional work they may entail; but he is not always so held or so paid, and when that is the case he would often do well to drive these headings at his own expense as a kind of insurance against risks. ‘The worst kind of ground to deal with is an alternation of thick beds of clay and thin beds of sand, for the sand beds afford a passage for the water, and the clay absorbs it, until sometimes it becomes so saturated that on cutting through it slips ex- tensively. Some engineers object to the cutting of a catchwater drain along the top of the cutting, on the ground that the rainwater sinks through the bottom of it, and, getting behind the slope, tends to cause it to slip, and those of this opinion prefer to make the slope shed the water as perfectly and as quickly as possible into the side drains of the cutting ; but there does not seem to be much sound reasoning in this objection (except where the ground along the line of cutting is level, or nearly so, for any considerable length), for if the ground is porous, but little water will flow into the drain or ditch; and if the ground is clay, or other ground of a retentive nature, the water that flows into it is more likely to run off along it to the outfall than to sink through the bottom of it, always excepting the case above stated. To prevent slips, chases 5ft. wide and 15ft. apart have been cut into the slope of a cutting and filled with rubble stone, and the idea was that they would act as counterforts, and that the friction of the clay against the sides of the counterforts would keep the clay in its place. This plan was successfully adopted by Mr. Robert Stephenson, Mr. James Walker, however, said that he had no doubt that, al- though water was the primary cause of slips, the vibration of passing trains was the imme- diate cause ; and this opinion is borne out by the fact that slips have more often occurred a year or two years or more after the opening of the line than immediately after its comple- tion. Mr. Walker was of opinion, moreover, that the rubble counterforts above mentioned acted more as drains than as counterforts. Another method of drawing off the water from behind the slopes of a cutting was adopted at Brentwood-hill, on the Eastern Counties line. A bench was formed half way up the slope, and along it a drain was cut. In the upper half of the slope thus divided, wells were sunk down to the level of this drain, and the bottoms of the wells connected with it by cross drain-pipes. Wells were sunk in a similar manner on the lower half of the slope, the drains from the bottoms of them emptying into the side ditch. One of the greatest slips in a railway cut- ting was at New Cross, on the London and Croydon railway. The strata were as follows: After a variable thickness of yellow clay, which admits water, there is a bed of blue clay 10ft. to 15ft. thick, which is impervious to water, then a bed of flint gravel 1ft. 10in. THE BUILDING NEWS. thick, fine sand 3in., lignite lin., fine sand 2ft., ferruginous sand 4in., loose gray sand 8in.. strong blue clay 10., black clay and sand 9in., black dirty sand 4in., dark sand 6in., stone 6in., decomposed stone and sand 3in., and then the plastic clay at the bottom of the cutting. ——__>_____ ROYAL INSTITUTE OF BRITISH ARCHITECTS. Ae the usual fortnightly meeting on Monday evening last, Mr. E. I’Anson, Vice-President, in the chair, Messrs. James Dunn Simon (of 36, Tavistock-square), and William Griffiths (of 1, Westminster Chambers), were unanimously elected Associates, and Herr Guldenpfennig, of Paderborn, Westphalia, was elected an Honorary and Corre- sponding Member. Several donations to the Library having been announced, Mr. T. E. C. Srrearriecp (first prizeman in the Peek Competition) read a paper on EASTBURY MANOR HOUSE, BARKING. This paper was the substance of the descriptive sketch sent in with the drawings for which Mr. Peek’s third prize was awarded. The manor of Eastbury (or Esbery), in the parish of Barking, formed originally a portion of the lands of the great abbey of Barking. Soon after the Dissolution in 1545, the manor was granted by Henry VIII. to Sir W. Denham, Kt., a sheriff of London, by whom it was left three years later to William Abbot, who sold the property in 1557 to John Keele, and he, the same year, sold it to Clement Sysley, or Syseley. The building of the house had been ascribed to Sir William Denham, but there could be little doubt that this was incorrect, and that it was the work of Clement Sysley later (about the year 1572), who was in possession much longer, and, therefore, had more time for what was in those days a large undertaking. This was confirmed by the style of architecture, which was so thoroughly Elizabethan. The house passed through the hands of many owners, but it was reserved for one of its owners in the early part of the present century (a Mr. Scott) to destroy much of the old internal fittings and arrangements, he having extracted floors and fire- places; one or more of the latter might still be seen at Parsloes, a house in the neighbourhood, Eastbury was now in the possession of the Sterry family, who also held it in 1773. Popular tradition connected the house with the Gunpowder Plot, and it was asserted that it was one of the haunts of the conspirators, but for this there was no foundation whatever. The house was, on the whole, in a fair state of preservation, but the furniture, and, to a great ex- tent, the fittings, were entirely lost. .The walls were throughout of brick, and, with the exception of the northernmost gable of the west front, where two or three cracks appeared, were solid and good. The brickwork was executed in a sort of irregular English bond, but in some places it was difficult to find that there was any attempt at a regular bond at all. Black bricks had been introduced in patterns in two or three places. The bricks varied in size, running from 7in. to 10in. in length, 44in. {o din. in width, and 24in. to 24in. in thickness. At Gale- street Farm, a building of apparently the same date, the brickwork resembled that at Eastbury, in the bond as well as in the size of the bricks. This farm, which was about a mile and a half* from Eastbury, close to Parsloes, was worth a visit, as the materials of a still older building Had been used in its construction, such as stone quoins, moulded Early English groiningribs, voussoirs of arches, &c., which had been introduced at random into the brickwork, At Eastbury the jambs and mullions of the windows, the string-courses, the front door- way, and the angles of the turret stairs, had been plastered in imitation of stonework. Though a casual observer might fancy that the plastering was the work of a later period, there could be little doubt that it formed part of the original design. It was thoroughly well executed; the plaster was good and finely-composed, containing a little hair. It seemed to be of the same consistency as the inner, and probably the original, coating on the internal face of the walls. A further plastering appeared to have taken place in the interior later, and on this, which was thicker and contained more hair, frescoes (dating, probably, from the time of the Stuarts— certainly not much later) had been painted. That the external plastering referred to dated from the erection of the building, was supported by a variety of other circumstances. Nor did Wastbury afford the only example of such a use of plaster; there was
- an old house—“ Porter's ’—near Southend, where,
in the few remaining original windows .the quoins and mullions were similarly of plaster. Work of
293 ees the same description was to be found at Layer Marney Hall, near Colchester, and had been well described by Mr. C. Forster Hayward.* The use of plaster in this manner, though reprehensible at Layer Marney, where stone seemed to have been easily procurable, was more excusable in the case of Kastbury, which was situated in a district where stone was scarce and costly. As the Gothic age, more honest in its use of materials, had then passed away, and an era of copying and importing foreign art had taken its place, it was not to be wondered at that a builder, having designed his elevations in the bondage of Classic rules, should seek to relieve the monotony of the one material to which he was confined in the absence of stone by the introduction of what was pleasing to the eye, though offensive to the con- science. Stone had not been altogether avoided at Eastbury, however, for it had been used for the fireplaces; only one remained, however, besides those at Parsloes, and that was on the first floor of the eastern wing. ‘These fireplaces, although they varied in size, were all similar in detail, and were all in the form of what might be called an angular Tudor arch, with carving in the spandrel, and a carved frieze of Tudor roses in circles alternating with lozenges in the face of the stone above the arch. The roof—which was covered with plain red tiles hung on oak pins—together with the doors, floors, &e., was of oak or chestnut. The principal rafters, which were Yin. square, were framed with collars and tie-beams, the latter acting as binders to the second floor. The principals were 9ft. apart, and carried purlins 10in. square, into which the common rafters were framed. There were remains of lath and plastering on the underside of the collars and ashlaring of the principal, but nothing to show in what manner the ceiling of the intermediate spaces was carried. The old doors which remained were simply two thicknesses of #in. boarding nailed to- gether, vertically and diagonally, hung in solid frames 14in. by 7in., on butt hinges, andin one case with a strap. Illustrations of various other details were to be found among the beautiful series of sketches of Elizabethan houses by Mr. Twopeny. Theses ketches were taken in 1828, and showed that the front staircase was destroyed in the beginning of this century; the remaining staircase consisted of solid oak treads, triangular in section, morticed into acircular newel, with the ends let into the wall. With the interior of the house so altered, it was now difficult to pronounce with certainty, but it appeared that the small room or parlour for the steward at the southern end of west window was the only one whose walls were panelled. The great hall was plastered; also, probably, the remaining sitting- rooms on the ground-floor. On the first floor con- siderable remains of fresco were still visible in a room above the great hall. This fresco was of later date than the house (probably Jacobean) and was meant to repre- sent wood in panelling thrown into rude perspective. It consisted of a dado ; above it semicircular-headed panels containing one or two sea-pieces in brighter colouring ; over the fireplace a double panel showing a view down an avenue with a city in the distance. The same coat of arms was painted on the stucco as existed in the hall beneath, and was described in Ogberne’s ‘‘ History of Essex” as ermine, a fesse, gules, between six moor-cocks proper, borne by More, of Cheshire. The work was, however, as unsightly as the drawing was inferior. Other frescoes formerly existed in a room of the east wing. The building was, as it were, in three blocks, the centre being occupied (on the ground floor) by the great hall, the west wing by the offices, the east wing by the living rooms, the two staircases being placed at the internal angles. The west wing had suffered the building. The first room to the right on entering less from recent alterations than the other portions of by the front door was at present used as a dining- room, but probably formerly served as a pantry. The floor of this room was at present 2ft. lower than was originally the case. Next to the pantry was the buttery, or modern dairy ; here a long space had been hollowed out of the wall, Sin. in depth, which was once occupied as a fireplace. From the buttery a doorway, now blocked up, led into the kitchen, or rather that portion of it which had at a later period been partitioned off to form a larder. There was an external doorway to this kitchen with quite a modern porch. There were two doors side by side in the south wall; through theone, by an ascent of four steps, the steward’s room (now con- verted into a parlour) was reached ; from the other a few steps led down to a cellar beneath. The old dining-hall, which had since been subdivided into an entrance-hall, sitting-room, and bakehouse, was re- maining, and could be remembered forty years ago,
- Transactions of Essex Archeological Society, Vol. III.
Part 1.
