Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-09-18
sALIspuRY's spIRE IN DANGER.
The Weight of It's Leaning Walls 4.
Spreading the Cathedral Tower,

The Weight of It's Leaning Walls ia
Spreading the Cathedral Tower.
From the London Daily Graphic.
The report of Sir Arthur Bloomfield A
X. A. upon the condition of the celebrated
spire at Salisbury Cathedral Is calculated
10 cause anxiety. If not alarm. 1t is quite
evident, from that report, that the dan
gerous symptoms which threatened this
beautiful structure some centuries back.
and which it was supposed had been COM
pietely overcome by a system of "tieing''
and "bracing' then adopted, have begun
to reappear. ard that the thrust of the
leaning walls Of the spre is again forcing
the straight walls. of the spire outward.
Wffch. If not attended to immedia tely. NAV
lead to danger, If not disaster. With the
experiences of Chichester. PETERBOROUGH.
Mayence and Seville before us, it is no,
likely that the appeal for funds to execute
the necessary repairs will remain unan-
swered
Although the tower and spire of the
catneoral appear SO admirably suited to
| the building that we could not Imagine the
church without this. it's most distinguished
feature: 1t formed no portion of the orig-
nal design. The cathedral which il nea rlv
all OF the same date, was completed lex
/ cept the tower and spire) in 1873 Tho
center tower then erected was probably
either a low lantern crowned by a pyra-
ntdal roof, or dwarf spire like that of
Oxford Cathedral The bells were sus-
pended in an isolated campaniIe, which
stood about thirty feet from the west front.
TITS very solid bell tower was in existence
down to 1880. when it was pulled down
because the wise men, of that day
thought 1t interrupted the view of the
cathedral! But as it was built by the
same men who erected the cathedral ITSELF
We may be pretty sure that those who
pulled it down made the blunder not those
who set 1t up About century after the
b1tl1ing of the cathedral it was determined
a he 1nyH paT,fr al
Its place to erect the present magnificent
tower. 1t has always been a question
whether it is judicious. from a constructive
point of view, to erect a lofty tower or
spire over the center of a great church,
and the feature is almost peculiar to Eng
land and Normandy. In other parts OF
France and in Germany Except in some of
the Romanesque churches) it Is practically
unknown. The constructive difficulty is
this: A central tower cannot be supported
urOn it's own walls, but has to rest upon
four columns which are more or less re-
sfricted as to size, because If they are
made very large, they block the church
in the center Salisbury is the largest
stone central spire in existence ut Is rath
er over four hundred feet in height 1t
was very bold thing to place such a
great structure upon four columns intend
ed for one only about half the height and
we take 1t that the fact of its having stood
experiment. 1t must not however be
supposed that all has gone quite smoothly
In the history of the Salisbury spire The
first notice we have that all was not right
dates back as far as the year 1I17. when
the chapter obtained royal warrant to
acquire lands to the value of ESQ year to
restore the steeple, which was then found
to be in a dangerous state At some time
later on the spire was filled in with beams
of timber and tied with iron. Sir Arthur
Bloomfield thinks that the latter opera ton
did more harm than good. In 1851 the
pillars or piers at the west side of the
tower were found to have sunk. thereby
throwing the apex Of the spire twenty-five
inches out of the perpendicular-from
some points of view this inclination is dis
tinctly visible
Sir Arthur Bloomfield proposes that the
CT eat pinnacles at the base of the spire
should be carefully repaired as their stone
work is persisted and fractured in places
1t is to be hoped that this will stop the
spreading Of the base of the spire,
which Sir Arthur regards a serious
danger. Might not the chain round the
drum of tine dome of st. Peters, Rome,
offer a suggestion?