By 8. H.

[We find the following interesting article in a late number of that useful serial, the London Builder, and transfer it to our columns for the gratification of our readers.]

My endeavor in the following remarks is to sketch a theory of art generally, which I attempt under the conviction that some of its branches are not fully appreciated even by those who take an interest in its manifestations. By a large proportion of educated persons, the arts of painting and sculpture are classed among mere amusements, or hobbies, and considered only as vehicles for the display of talent, affording at the most a refined species of pleasure to the observer. Of architecture they have no idea as one of the means of intellectual enjoyment and improvement to man. They see nothing in it but brick or stone, and wood, formed and arranged to serve certain purposes of utility, presenting at the farthest a clue to the condition, as to wealth or station, of the occupant of the structure. Very few, I apprehend, think of art as an influence to move the heart, or suppose it has functions to perform, and ends to fulfil, in any way connected with the moral sense and intellectual progress of mankind.

This has, I suspect, been a result of the excessive commercial development of our country; and it is perhaps natural, until the general mind becomes fully awake to the imporset-culture, that it should lean most to those mechanical, commercial, and other sciences, which have mainly contributed to our national importance.

But true greatness in a people must arise from the cultivation of all the faculties of the mind. It takes both " the beautiful and the useful to form a man;" the mind, like the body, must grow in all directions; - the moral, intellectual and imaginative faculties being alike developed. We must cultivate the entire man, and bring ourselves in contact with the universe in every possible point; and not only endeavor to expand our own natures but introduce the principle into every system of education: so that all may enjoy, not a partial, but as far as practicable, a complete and universal culture-It appears probable that a much greater uniformity in education existed among the class sic ancients, when we consider how equal was their encouragement of the different branches of intellectual pursuit. In Greece we perceive that not only literature, philosophy and science but the fine arts were carried to the highest point of perfection. This, the multitude of exquisite monuments of art still existing, fully attests. The brilliant period from Homes to Alexander was characterised by this uniform mental pursuit.

Learning and literary composition - every species of philosophy - eloquence - the art of war - are known to have arrived at the highest degree of perfection, and yet were not in advance of sculpture ant architecture; illustrated at this time by the chisel of Phidias. In fine, the whole circle of arts and sciences may be said to have disputed for pre-eminence with each other. TV may apply the same remark to the Romans in the reigns of Augustus and Adrian. A the same time, the art they cultivated was not fine art only. The aqueducts, bridges an< cloacae of the latter people have been the models of the grandest works of a similar nature in modern Europe.