Mr. George Leland Hunter said in his admirable work "Decorative Textiles": "The word is Latin for weave. It is of Textiles the most distinctive quality, and when applied to other materials such as wood, marble and brick, iron, bronze and gold, paint, paper and cement, is merely a borrowed and imitative term".

As these differences in textiles arise from the various materials employed and the methods of their manufacture, so, in this borrowed meaning, the word may perhaps without too great license in a practical book be taken to cover all such distinguishing qualities as roughness and smoothness, thickness and thinness, openness and closeness, stiffness and pliability - in short, the general appearance and feel of the various substances. With it, in actual use, is closely bound up the resulting handsomeness or commoness of the product.

The importance of weave in textiles is readily seen in a field outside of furnishing: the quality of wool used in a genuine homespun is probably nearly or quite as good as that in fine broadcloth - the immense difference between them is due to the processes of manufacture.

Recurring to the method of emphasising the use of a principle by showing its violation, a flagrant example of incongruity is but too frequently seen - a mantel of smooth, white-enamelled wood accompanied by a fireplace-surround of coarse, rough brick with wide mortar-joints. As usual in this enlightened age the one error - in texture - is often accompanied by another - in scale: the mantel may likely be of light proportion and delicate detail, while the brick and its mortaring are naturally heavy and relatively clumsy. Mr. Bottomley, the architect, did far better than this when he made the surround of such a fireplace of white cement.

One of the most obvious needs for discrimination in the practical use of texture is in the fabrics chosen to accompany the various sorts of interiors and the furniture therein placed. Period furnishing is an object lesson in this respect, and we can readily see that common-sense was the guiding principle of the designers of the past, as it should be ours. In the Renaissance epoch the walls were usually of plaster or of panelling in the coarse-grained oak. In Italy the prevailing wood for furniture was walnut and in England oak: in both cases the furniture was large, heavy and of bold design. The coverings used were naturally therefore the velvets, brocatelles or heavy damasks and brocades in full-bodied colourings, or hand-wrought needlework, which has a considerable roughness of texture.

The periods of Louis XV and XVI were of great refinemerit: the walls were of beautifully designed delicate panelling with small projections and were usually in tints, often heightened with colour and gold; the furniture was relatively small, slender, and of the highest elegance. In these instances, then, the textiles principally used were of lighter weight, great refinement and beautiful colour. These two extremes of material and style will be a general guide in the selection of textiles for our use to-day, but texture will often occur in connexion with actual work in both the Modern and Period methods of furnishing in Parts II and III and practical suggestions will there be made.

Here it should be said that the correct furnishing of our homes admits of considerable variation in the different substances and textures owing to the demands of use. We would scarcely, for instance, lay a silken damask upon our floors: necessity dictates that a floor-covering be of solid, heavy, and durable material, such as wool. Notwithstanding the difference in texture and weight we may nevertheless use the damask in upholstering our furniture and the woollen carpet or rug upon the floor, providing that the latter be refined in colour and design and not coarse and common in quality. We may again use silk for the over-curtains at the windows, but for curtains next the sash necessity demands a thin, translucent material, such as net. Here then we already have three materials, weights, and textures, and before we have done with the room we shall have added several more. We may theorise regarding unity as much as we please, but in such essentials what shall we do? Use dictates, and common-sense in such cases bids us yield. Indeed, does not the feeling of appropriateness-to-purpose overweigh the theoretical discrepancy?

But there is still much leeway for discrimination in texture. With the silken damask furniture-covering it would not be advisable to choose for the floor one of the immensely heavy, long-fibred Kazak rugs, but rather, if an Oriental rug is to be used, one of lighter weight and shorter pile.

We should also employ discretion in the use of accessories, so that they may not conflict with their surroundings or with each other. An extreme example of bad usage would be a rough, primitive tile or piece of pottery among the smoothest and most delicate porcelains.

If the reader will review the preceding sections he will realise more fully than ever before that all good decoration is based upon common-sense principles and that he may place confidence in the value of his own perceptions.