For an irregular assemblage of objects to be rendered symmetrical, it is not necessary that the tower or other object which forms the axis should be in the centre: on the contrary, it will generally effect the intended purpose better if placed somewhat on one side; because, in that case, the idea of regular symmetry is not raised up in the mind. The spectator does not think of comparing one side with the other, to see if they agree in form as well as in general bulk, but he looks to see whether the one side is balanced by the other, either by bulk, by height, or by distance. Suppose, for example, a group, in which, close by the left of the axis, there are a number of high buildings crowded together, and but very few buildings on the right, and those quite low: in what manner is this group to be rendered symmetrical ? By the extension of the low buildings, on the right, so far as to produce by extension on that side, what is produced by bulk and compactness on the other. Whatever is symmetrical, must have a decided axis of symmetry; either obvious, as when a tower rises from a straggling mass of low buildings; or disguised, as when the buildings of a group arrange themselves so as to be included within a pyramidal or conical outline. An axis can frequently be given to a group of trees and buildings by tall narrow trees, such as the Lombardy poplar; but, in such cases, the buildings can never form the main feature in the landscape. These remarks are intended to hint at the proper mode of making the most of old houses in the country, which, from extensive experience and observation, we can assert ought seldom or never to be altered within, though they may generally be added to without, to an unlimited extent. The remaining part of this article being in great part written by the gentleman who accompanied us through the houses at Kingsbury, we shall place it in inverted commas.
