In general, it may be laid down as a rule, that the boundary between a lawn and the park or field beyond should not be such as to cut the landscape, as it were, in two; and another rule is, that the walks should never be so near this fence, or should not be so conducted when near it, as to admit of the spectator looking directly across. Indeed, in scenery, no rule is generally more applicable than this, viz. that all straight lines, whether fences, roads, canals, or rivers, and all regular symmetrical objects, such as buildings, should be looked at obliquely. Applying this rule, therefore, to the scenery between the walk and the fence, from 18 to 16, we should say that either the direction of the walk ought to be altered, so as to remove it further from the boundary, or the boundary extended further into the field; and instead of being bordered by a hedge-like fringe of shrubs, it should only be broken here and there by occasional bushes and trees, connected and harmonizing in position with other trees beyond the fence. If it were desirable to avoid altering the boundary, then we should recommend continuing the walk which commences at d near 19, by n and o o, to p near 16. If there were nothing to see or be seen beyond the boundary, then, unless the boundary fence were a conservative wall, that is, a wall covered with half-hardy ornamental plants, we should still prefer changing the direction of the walk, so as to take away from the monotonous appearance of continually skirting the boundary. In every place, however small, there ought to be some part left which the visitor has not seen, and which may leave the impression on his mind, that, however much he has been shown, he has not seen everything. We make these observations with great deference to Mr. Harrison, who has paid much attention to the subject of Landscape Gardening, and shown much practical taste and good sense both in that art and in architecture.