and the proper emphasizing of the base and the cornice, and the horizontal stages (if any) of the structure, and the roof firmly and scientifically seated on the walls; after all these main portions of the structure are designed logically and in accordance with one another and with the leading idea of the building, then the finishing touches of expression and interest are given by well designed and effective ornamental detail.  Here the designer may indulge his fancy as he pleases, as far as the nature of the design is concerned, but not, if you please, as far as its position and distribution are concerned.  There the logic of architecture still pursues us.

We may not place ornament anywhere at haphazard on a building simply because it looks pretty.  At least, to do so is to throw away great part of its value.  For everything in architectural design is relative; it is to be considered in relation to the expression and design of the whole, and ornament is to be placed where it will emphasize certain points or certain features of the building.  It must form a part of the grouping of the whole, and be all referable to a central and predominating idea.  A building so planned, built, and decorated becomes, in fact, what all architecture—­what every artistic design in fact should be—­an organized whole, of which every part has its relation to the rest, and from which no feature can be removed without impairing the unity and consistency of the design.  You may have a very good, even an expressive, building with no ornament at all if you like, but you may not have misplaced ornament.  That is only an excrescence on the design, not an organic portion of it.

I have thought that it would be of use to those who are unacquainted with architectural procedure in delineating architecture by geometrical drawings if I took the opportunity of illustrating very briefly the philosophy of elevations, plans, and sections, which many non-professional people certainly do not understand.

[Illustration:  Figs. 16 through 25]

A simple model of a building, like that in Fig. 16, will serve the purpose, as the principle is the same in the most complicated as in the simplest building.  It must be remembered that the object of architectural drawings on the geometrical system is not to show a picture of the building, but to enable the designer to put together his design accurately in all its parts, according to scale, and to convey intelligible and precise information to those who have to erect the building.  A perspective drawing like Fig. 16 is of no use for this purpose.  It shows generally what the design is, but it is impossible to ascertain the size of any part by scale from it, except that if the length of one line were given it would be possible, by a long process of projection and calculation, to ascertain the other sizes.  The rationale of the architect’s geometrical drawings is that on them each plane of the building (the front, the