On all sides, in our large towns, we have churches built after Gothic models, and though highly fitting and beautiful as churches, i. e., edifices for purely devotional purposes - are quite useless as places to hear sermons in, because the preacher's voice is inaudible in at least one-half of the church. And everywhere in the older parts of the country, private fortunes are rapidly crystalizing into mansions, villas, country-houses and cottages, in all known styles supposed to be in any way suitable to the purposes of civilized habitations.

Without in the least desiring to apologise for the frequent violations of taste witnessed in all this fermentation of the popular feeling in architecture, we do not hesitate to say that we rejoice in it. It is a fermentation that shows clearly there is no apathy in the public mind, and we feel as much confidence as the vintner who walks through the wine cellar in full activity, that the froth of foreign affectations will work off, and the impurities of vulgar taste settle down, leaving us the pure spirit of a better national taste at last Rome was not built in a day, and whoever would see a national architecture, must be patient till it has time to rise out of the old materials, under the influences of a new climate, our novel institutions and modified habits.

In domestic architecture, the difficulties that lie in the way of achieving a pure and correct taste, are, perhaps, greater than in civil or ecclesiastical edifices. There are so many private fancies, and personal vanities, which seek to manifest themselves in the house of the ambitious private citizen, and which are defended under the shield of that miserable falsehood, "there is no disputing about tastes." (If the proverb read whims, it would be gospel truth.) Hence we see numberless persons who set about building their own house without the aid of an architect, who would not think of being their own lawyer, though one profession demands as much study and cabuild his own bouse and plead bis own rights to justice satisfactorily - but it must bo done in both instances, in the simplest and most straight-forward manner. If he attempts to go into the discussion of Blackstonb on the one hand, or the mysteries of Vitruvius and Pugin on the other, he is sure to get speedily swamped, and commit all sorts of follies and extravagancies quite out of keeping with his natural character.

The two greatest trials to the architect of taste, who desires to see his country and age making a respectable figure in this branch of the arts, are to be found in that class of travelled smatterers in virtu, who have picked up here and there, in the tour from Liverpool to Rome, certain ill-assorted notions of art, which they wish combined in one sublime whole, in the shape of their own domicil; and that larger class, who ambitiously imitate in a small cottage, all that belongs to palaces, castles and buildings of princely dimensions.

The first class is confined to no country. Examples are to be found everywhere, and we do not know of a better hit at the folly of these cognoscenti, than in the following relation of experiences by one of the cleverest of English architectural critics:

"The architect is requested, perhaps, by a man of great wealth, nay, of established taste in some points, to make a design for a villa in a lovely situation. The future proprietor carries him up stairs to his study, to give him what he calls his ' ideas and materials,' and, in all probability, begins somewhat thus; - 'This, sir, is a slight note; I made it on the spot; approach to Villa Reale, near Puzzuoli. Dancing nymphs, you perceive; cypresses, shell fountain. I think I should like something like this for the approach; classical you perceive, sir; elegant, graceful. Then, sir, this is a sketch by an American friend of mine; Who-whaw-Kantamaraw's wigwam, king of the------Cannibal Islands; I think he said, sir. Log, you observe; scalps, and boa constrictor skins; curious. Something like this, sir, would look neat, I think, for the front door; don't you? Then the lower windows, I'm not quite decided upon; but what would you say to Egyptian, sir? I think I should like my windows Egyptian, with hieroglyphics, sir; storks and coffins, and appropriate mouldings above; I brought some from Fountain's Abbey the other day.

Look here, sir; angel's heads putting their tongues out, rolled up in cabbage leaves, with a dragon on each side riding on a broomstick, and the devil looking out from the mouth of an alligator, sir.* Odd, I think; interesting. Then the corners may be turned by octagonal towers, like the centre one in Kenilworth Castle; with Gothic doors, port-cullis and all, quite perfect; with cross slits for arrows, battlements for musketry, machiolations for boiling lead, and a room at the top for drying plums; and the conservatory at the bottom, sir, with Virginia creepers up the towers; door supported by sphinxes, holding scrapers in their fore paws, and having their tails prolonged into warm-water pipes, to keep the plants safe in winter, etc.' " the result was, of course, both ludicrous and absurd. There is less dictation to architects in this country on one hand, and more independence of any class on the oth-, to bring such examples of architectural salmagundies into existence - though there e a few in the profession weak enough to prostitute their talents to any whim or ca-ice of the employer.

But by far the greater danger at the present moment lies in the inordinate ambition the builders of ornamental cottages. Not contented with the simple and befitting icoration of the modest veranda, the bracketted roof, the latticed, window, and the rely accessories of vines and Cowering shrubs, the builder of the cottage ornee in o many cases, attempts to engraft upon bis simple story of a habitation, all the opes and figures of architectural rhetoric which belong to the elaborate oratory of palace or a temple.

We have made a point of enforeing the superior charm of simplicity - and the real-of the beauty which grows out of it, in our late work on Country Houses. even went so far as to give a few examples of farm-houses studiously made sim-c and rural in character, though not without a certain beauty of expression befitting eir locality, and the uses to which they were destined. But, judging from some iticisms on these farm-houses in one of the western papers, we believe it will not be easy task to convince the future proprietcrs of farm-houses and rural cottages, that uthful simplicity is better than borrowed decorations, in their country homes. Our itic wonders why farmers should not be allowed to live in as handsome houses, (con* undiug mere decoration with beauty,) as any other class of our citizens, if they can ford it - and claims for them the use of the most ornamental architecture in their rm- houses. We have only to answer to this, that the simplest expression of beauty hich grows out of a man's life, ranks higher for him than the most elaborate one irrowed from another's life or circumstances.

We will add, by way of illus-ation, that there is no moral or political objection, that we know, to a farmer's wear-g a general's uniform in his corn-fields, if he likes it better than plain clothes; but our mind, his costume - undoubtedly handsomer in the right place, would be both surd and ugly - behind the harrow.

We are glad to find, however, that our feeling of the folly of this exaggerated precision in cottage architecture, is gradually finding its expression in other channels of e public press - a sure sign that it will eventually take bold of public opinion. The llowing satire on the taste of the day in this over-loaded style of "carpenter's thic," from the pen of one of the wittiest and cleverest of American poets, has tely appeared, (as part of a longer satire on another subject,) in one of our popular agazines. But it is too good to be lost sight of by our readers, and we recommend to a second perusal. A thought or two upon its moral, as applied to the taste of e country, will help us on most essentially in this, our experimental age of arcbitec-irc.