of support to the upper Church, are not the details of the gloomy vault. It is self-evident that they were intended to be seen, as modern improvement exhibits; and here the hand of restoration, which has long been busy at Glasgow, has our unqualified admiration.

But when we arrive at the west front of the Cathedral, our joy is stayed, for destruction is marked there, and against this act we do emphatically protest. The one western tower represented in our view has disappeared, and given place to a repetition of the modern pinnacle and ornaments of the south-west angle, for the mere sake of vulgar uniformity; and thus

-Each buttress has its brother,

And just one half

Does but reflect the other.

Glasgow originally had the commencement of two western towers, and twenty years back saw both; one in the shape of a house at the south-west angle, and the other as we have represented it. The first was quietly removed as an excrescence; and as a consequence, the second followed it because it looked odd; and in addition to this it was stated, that the tower was not ornamental enough, and that it had been attached to the previously built nave, because one of the buttresses of that portion of the building appeared within it.

We never had a doubt that the buttress alluded to was built within the tower, and not the tower added to it. If there is any truth in the succession of styles, the entire body of the nave of Glasgow is altogether of later date than the whole lower division of the western end, which in our opinion is the oldest portion of the Cathedral. The nave belongs entirely to the early decorated period,— the west doorway, with the lower stage of the towers, did belong to a period at least half a century earlier; and whatever confusion of dates may result from the modern mixture of styles, we may be assured of the absolute truth of their precedence in bygone times.

If the remaining Tower of our view was plain or ugly, why not have applied the remedy of judicious ornamentation? Why knock an old friend down because he wanted new clothing? We heartily pity the man who would destroy an historical record, because it wanted either ornament or uniformity! Why, in his hands, one half of the Antiquities of Scotland would instantly disappear. What would he do with Brechin, which has two Towers far more unlike each other than those of Glasgow were? And yet, odd as these are, who but he would venture to destroy one of the pair? In the year 1833, public attention was called to Glasgow Cathedral by Archibald M'Lellan, Esq., who, at his own cost, produced an extended Essay, urging the necessity of restoration. His work was the precursor of a Committee having the then Lord Provost at the head, with Dr Cleland as Secretary, and the author of the preceding movement appearing modestly as the tail. This movement produced a second work, in which appeared restored elevations with two elaborately ornamented western Towers. A large fund was raised, a government grant secured for these restored designs by Mr Graham of Edinburgh, and-what followed all the enthusiasm of the Committee? A change of architects, and the utter disappearance of the feature it was their main object to preserve.