for statuary, with their elaborately carved canopies, afford an excellent illustration of over-elaboration of detail. The extreme is reached in the canopies of the buttress niches round New Palace Yard. Here, below the projecting canopy, with its minute tabernacle work and interior vaults, carved with fine ribs and bosses, is inserted an ogival cusped arch, with foliated crockets and finial, in line with the face of the pier, while the space between the arch and the central line of the vault is enriched with a thin fretwork slab of stone, pierced with small splayed openings to portray perpendicular tracery. All this elaboration and minute detail is in a space of about 17 inches square, the result being that the back portion of the delicate vault can only be seen from scaffolds or ladders, and by peering through the small tracery openings.

Such extreme elaboration of detail, however true it may be to historic precedent, is largely lost in the vast area of this great building. Its inclusion must add greatly to the difficulties of permanent repair, and incidentally it has been held almost to detract from the aesthetic importance of the statues themselves. It is suggested therefore that the visible parts of the canopy should remain unaltered, but that in all works of repair the inner half of the small vault of the canopy might be brought down to follow the line at the back of the lower arch, the piercings in the thin slab above it being replaced by sinkings in the solid stone. Some such modification of the detail would simplify and cheapen execution, and render the work more permanent, without any appreciable loss of effect.

Example of extravagant detail.-Numerous examples of excessive elaboration even in the bolder features of the building could be given, such as the heraldic emblems over the first floor windows on the East front; also the many beasts, gargoyles, crockets, finials, etc., and the details of panelling throughout all fronts. With the exception of certain minor and subsidiary features mentioned, no proposal is made that any portion of the detail should be omitted. or essentially altered, but skilful carvers could produce the same effect, as seen from below, with the expenditure of much less labour.

Repetition of gilded standards.-Among the repetitive features are the gilded bannerets or standards, used as weather-vanes, placed on every available turret or supported by stone lions and heraldic beasts. (See photograph No. 11.) In many positions these are out of sight, and useless as weather-vanes. Many of these standards might be omitted in the ultimate scheme of repair.

Omission of detached shafts.—It is doubtful whether the numerous slender detached shafts should be reproduced in a scheme of repair. For example, between the buttressed turrets on the parapets there are small pillars 5 to 6 inches in diameter, bearing open crowns

still smaller standards, less than 3 inches in diameter in parts, bearing the orb as terminal. Many of these have been removed and photographs have been prepared to show that the omission of the shafts on certain fronts would not be very noticeable from the street level. If these shafts are to be reproduced each one must be cut from a single block of stone of sufficient size to contain the whole of the orb or crown.

In some of the more inaccessible portions of the building the backs of the turrets and pinnacles have not been worked in such elaborate detail as the fronts, and some economy might be effected by the adoption of some such method in the work of repair. (See photographs Nos. 16 and 17.)

It is proposed that the question of the general character and completeness of the repair of the structure should be referred to the Royal Fine Art Commission for their recommendation.

(c) REPAIR OF STATUES.

Statues to be repaired, not reproduced.—On all fronts the statues, which are the work of various artists, have suffered severely from decay, lamination or cleavage in the stone. (See photographs Nos. 22 and 23) but it is suggested that no attempt should be made to replace them by carved replicas. They should be regarded as monuments worthy of preservation and should be repaired by the methods usually employed by His Majesty's Office of Works, all the original work being preserved. There are approximately 254 independent statues on the main façades of the building, representing the Sovereigns of England and the Saints and Patron Saints from the Norman Conquest to the time of Queen Victoria, the greater number being lifesize and standing within canopied niches. The series of statues upon the Colonnade in New Palace Yard are of Portland stone and were executed in 1866 by Armstead, under the direction of Mr. E. M. Barry; the remainder are in Anston stone, and the work of J. Thomas and his assistants.

It is proposed that, as each section of the building is scaffolded for the general repair, all the statues in that section should be subjected to minute scrutiny. Any portions which are detached, or in danger of becoming detached, should be secured with hidden. non-corrosive metal dowels, pins or cramps-a method which has been successfully adopted in the case of a statue of King Edward I at Carnarvon Castle, which presented a very similar problem. Detached pieces should not be affixed by shellac, or by any of the special cements in general use, and any portions broken beyond the possibility of refixing or repair should not be reinstated in new stone unless their absence involves structural weakness of the statue or greater liability to weakening or decay.

by a metal cramp let into the figure behind the shoulder, and also into the main stonework. Many of these cramps would appear to be of iron, and should be renewed in non-corrosive metal such as bronze or copper.

The statue of Queen Victoria on the East front (see photograph No. 23) has a small space between its back and the face of the niche, which is filled with dirt and other debris, saturated with acid-bearing water. The result is that the surface of the stone is disintegrating at a rapid rate through the action of sulphuric acid and frost. The space between the statue and the stonework of the niche in nearly all cases is very slight, and steps should be taken to prevent this cause of failure by seeing that such spaces are properly filled.

(d) OMISSION OF PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING FROM THE GENERAL SCHEME.

Complete refacing not necessary.-The condition of the building is not such as to justify complete re-facing, nor will it be necessary to remove stones in which the surface decay does not endanger the stability of ornament or the structural security of the building. Such stones can be dealt with in the future in the ordinary course of maintenance, advantage being taken of any remedy for the decay of stone which may be discovered by the expert committee appointed by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. Every stone, however, which has failed through cleavage or lamination or in which such incipient faults can be seen and which are likely to cause failure will be removed and reinstated. But where it is unlikely that the opening of undeveloped vents and lines of cleavage would cause falls or structural instability, renewal may not be necessary. Such stone, it is thought, can be dealt with by rebedding, dowelling with non-corrosive metal, grouting up, etc.

Inner courts.-The plain ashlar surfaces of the inner courts may not require much repair, but each stone should be examined in order to ascertain whether cleavage has occurred behind the face. Such failure has been discovered in some instances, and it is estimated that approximately 10 per cent. of the plain ashlar surfaces may require treatment.

Westminster Hall.-The stonework of Westminster Hall is not dealt with in this report. The original Reigate stone has been entirely refaced with a magnesian limestone, slightly softer and less difficult to work than Anston. This stone is subject to a certain amount of decay and lamination, but has been repaired from time to time and no major repairs are now necessary. The interior has also been refaced with Ketton stone.

Internal stonework.The failure of the internal stonework is so slight compared with the serious condition of the external stonework that it is not proposed to deal with it in this report.

In connection with the selection of a suitable material for the repairs, the following groups of materials have been considered :—

(a) Natural stones,
(b) Artificial stones,
(c) Modern terra cotta,

and in the course of the investigation into their relative merits, expert advice has been obtained from Mr. J. Allen Howe, the Assistant Director of the Geological Survey, and Sir Robert Robertson, the Chief Government Chemist.

The factors that have to be considered when making a selection of stone are :

(1) Colour.

(2) Texture.

(3) Durability.

(4) Adaptability to Gothic detail.

(5) The possibility of obtaining ample supplies.

(a) NATURAL STONES.

Magnesian lime stones. It is not possible to recommend the use of the original stone for the repairs to the building, particularly as no guarantee can be given that any Anston or other magnesian limestone will be free from the dangerous inherent defects previously described. The Geological Museum in Jermyn Street was contemporary in building with the Houses of Parliament, and shows surprisingly little surface erosion. Its façades are comparatively sheltered, but the selection of the stone for this building by experts, under the supervision of a distinguished geologist, has unquestionably procured a more evenly good quality of stone than might normally have been anticipated. Such careful selection, however, has not prevented stone being used in which vents and cleavage lines can be detected. Even on the scarcely touched Piccadilly front, below the cornice, and to a greater extent on the Jermyn Street front, the presence of vents can be detected from the street. On the blind parapet of the former, and the plinth of the latter, erosion is more marked, and vent lines are well in evidence; while on the most exposed portion above the roof the stone is found to be badly corroded and full of vents and cleavages. Were the whole building equally exposed there is little reason to think that it would show greater immunity than the outer façades of the Houses of Parliament; but its style protects it from the worst results of this defect. All other buildings erected of magnesian limestone which have been examined show the same defects.

Granite. There is no English stone reasonably suitable and readily adaptable to such highly elaborated masonry as that at the

permanence and durability under existing atmospheric conditions. Granite, which unquestionably is of sufficient durability, could not be used, because of the extreme difficulty of carving Gothic detail such as exists to a great extent in the Houses of Parliament building. Further, granite used in conjunction with the existing magnesian limestone would be completely out of keeping, and would ruin the general effect of the building.

LIMESTONES.

Portland stone. The most durable and suitable of the available limestones is Portland stone. Even this stone would be unsatisfactory for use in certain portions of the work at the Houses of Parliament, on account of its variability and its inability to resist the attack of the sulphur acids in the atmosphere. The fact that, under the influence of such acids, it quickly weathers.to a dead white colour, as has already happened at the new County Hall, which was completed only in 1921, would render it unsuitable, even if it were proposed to reface the whole of the building. Apart from the question of its durability, however, the unsatisfactory effect of contrast in colour between dead-white weathered Portland stone and the warm yellow of Anston stone, could hardly be contemplated at the Houses of Parliament.

SANDSTONES.

Craigleith stone.-Probably the most durable sandstone produced in Great Britain is Craigleith, which is extensively used in Edinburgh and has also worn satisfactorily at the Bank of England and the British Museum. It has few, if any, defects and is eminently suitable for the highest class of work in which the mouldings and enrichments are comparativly simple, and the carving in low relief only. It is, however, unsuitable for the Houses of Parliament on account of its extreme hardness and consequent great cost of working. The cost of quarrying would also be heavy owing to the position in which the best stone is situated in the quarry. Moreover, the stone is too pale and cold in tone to be used in conjunction with Anston stone.

Stancliffe stone.-Among the sandstones which comply with the conditions mentioned above is Stancliffe stone, a close-grained micaceous grit, which is at present being worked at Darley Dale in Derbyshire, where it can be obtained in blocks of great size and fine quality. It is extremely hard and durable, and these qualities, combined with its pleasing light yellowish drab colour, its crisp, clean texture and freedom from vents, faults, blotches or streakiness, render it eminently suitable for use at the Houses of Parliament. It is practically immune from atmospheric acid attack and has even been used for storage troughs for synthetic sulphuric acid.