diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/55710-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/55710-0.txt | 6087 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 6087 deletions
diff --git a/old/55710-0.txt b/old/55710-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 6b6e259..0000000 --- a/old/55710-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,6087 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Suppressed Plates, Wood-engravings, &c., by -George Somes Layard - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Suppressed Plates, Wood-engravings, &c. - Together with other Curiosities Germane Thereto - -Author: George Somes Layard - -Release Date: October 8, 2017 [EBook #55710] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SUPPRESSED PLATES, WOOD-ENGRAVINGS *** - - - - -Produced by Chris Curnow, RichardW, and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - - - - - - - - - -SUPPRESSED PLATES - - - - -AGENTS - - AMERICA THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - 64 & 66 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK - - CANADA THE MACMILLAN COMPANY OF CANADA, LTD. - 27 RICHMOND STREET WEST, TORONTO - - INDIA MACMILLAN & COMPANY, LTD. - MACMILLAN BUILDING, BOMBAY - 309 BOW BAZAAR STREET, CALCUTTA - -[Illustration: The title-page of the unwritten “Death in London”] - - SUPPRESSED PLATES WOOD ENGRAVINGS, &c. - TOGETHER WITH OTHER CURIOSITIES GERMANE THERETO - - BEING - AN ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN MATTERS - PECULIARLY ALLURING TO - THE COLLECTOR - - BY - GEORGE SOMES LAYARD - - [Illustration: (colophon)] - - LONDON - ADAM AND CHARLES BLACK - 1907 - -_Published November 1907_ - - I DEDICATE THIS BOOK - TO - MY TWO BOYS - JOHN AND PETER - WHO - I SINCERELY HOPE, WILL NOT HAVE SO MANY - _USELESS_ HOBBIES - AS - THEIR AFFECTIONATE - FATHER - - - - -CONTENTS - - - 1. INTRODUCTORY . . . 1 - - 2. “THE MARQUIS OF STEYNE” . . . 7 - - 3. THE SUPPRESSED PORTRAIT OF DICKENS, “PICKWICK,” “THE BATTLE OF - LIFE,” AND “GRIMALDI” . . . 26 - - 4. DICKENS CANCELLED PLATES: “OLIVER TWIST,” “MARTIN CHUZZLEWIT,” - “THE STRANGE GENTLEMAN,” “PICTURES FROM ITALY,” AND “SKETCHES BY BOZ” - . . . 43 - - 5. ON SOME FURTHER SUPPRESSED PLATES, ETCHINGS, AND WOOD ENGRAVINGS BY - GEORGE CRUIKSHANK . . . 59 - - 6. HOGARTH’S “ENTHUSIASM DELINEATED,” “THE MAN OF TASTE,” AND “DON - QUIXOTE” . . . 82 - - 7. CANCELLED DESIGNS FOR “PUNCH” AND “ONCE A WEEK” BY CHARLES KEENE - AND FREDERICK SANDYS . . . 127 - - 8. MISCELLANEOUS . . . 149 - - 9. THE SUPPRESSED OMAR KHAYYAM ETCHING . . . 179 - - 10. ADAPTED OR PALIMPSEST PLATES . . . 192 - - 11. ADAPTED OR PALIMPSEST PLATES (_continued_) . . . 226 - - - - -LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - - _Printed Separately_ - - The Title-page of the unwritten “Death in London” . . . _Frontispiece_ - - The Third Marquis of Hertford. (_From the engraving by W. Holl, of - the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence_) . . . _Between pages_ 20 - _and_ 21 - - The Fourth Marquis of Hertford. (_From a photograph_) - . . . _Between pages_ 20 _and_ 21 - - The Third Marquis of Hertford when Lord Yarmouth. (_From the coloured - caricature by Richard Dighton_) . . . _Facing page_ 24 - - The suppressed portrait of Charles Dickens . . . _Facing page_ 28 - - The “Pickwick” suppressed plate: “The Cricket Match.” (_By R. W. - Buss_) . . . _Facing page_ 30 - - The “Pickwick” suppressed plate: “Tupman and Rachel.” (_By R. W. - Buss_) . . . _Between pages_ 32 _and_ 33 - - “Tupman and Rachel.” (_By H. K. Browne_) . . . _Between pages_ 32 - _and_ 33 - - “The Last Song,” with the suppressed border (_By George Cruikshank_) - . . . _Facing page_ 40 - - The suppressed plate from “Oliver Twist” . . . _Facing page_ 48 - 1. “The Fireside Scene” - 2. “The Fireside Scene,” as worked upon by Cruikshank - - The suppressed plate from “Sketches by Boz” . . . _Facing page_ 56 - - “A Financial Survey of Cumberland or the Beggar’s Petition.” (_From - the only known uncoloured impression of the plate_) . . . _Between - pages_ 64 _and_ 65 - - “A Financial Survey of Cumberland or the Beggar’s Petition.” (_From - a coloured impression of the plate, with the figure of the valet - obliterated with lamp-black_) . . . _Between pages_ 64 _and_ 65 - - “Enthusiasm Delineated. (Humbly dedicated to his Grace the Arch Bishop - of Canterbury by his Graces most obedient humble Servant _Wm. - Hogarth_”) . . . _Between pages_ 88 _and_ 89 - - “Credulity, Superstition, and Fanaticism. A Medley” . . . _Between - pages_ 88 _and_ 89 - - Portrait of Hogarth with his Dog Trump . . . _Facing page_ 112 - - _The plate reversed and in its last state, now entitled_ “The Bruiser” - . . . _Facing page_ 112 - - The Cancelled Cartoon. (_By Charles Keene_) . . . _Facing page_ 128 - - The Cancelled “Social.” (_By Charles Keene_) . . . _Facing page_ 136 - - Suggestion by Joseph Crawhall for the Cancelled “Social” . . . _Facing - page_ 136 - - “The Painted Chamber.” (From _Antiquities of Westminster_, 1807) - . . . _Facing page_ 150 - - The suppressed portrait of “John Jorrocks, Esq., M.F.H., etc.” (_By - Henry Alken, the younger_) . . . _Facing page_ 160 - - The suppressed frontispiece for “Omar Khayyam.” (_By Edwin Edwards_) - . . . _Facing page_ 188 - - “L’Europe alarmée pour le Fils d’un Meunier.” (_The plate in its first - state_) . . . _Between pages_ 204 _and_ 205 - - _The plate in its second state, now entitled_ “La Cour de Paix - solitaire, entre les Roses piquantes et les Lis” . . . _Between - pages_ 204 _and_ 205 - - Queen Anne presiding over the House of Lords. (_The plate in its first - state_) . . . _Between pages_ 236 _and_ 237 - - _The plate in its second state, now representing_ George I. presiding - over the House of Lords . . . _Between pages_ 236 _and_ 237 - - “The Races of the Europeans, with their Keys.” (_The plate in its - first state_) . . . _Between pages_ 238 _and_ 239 - - “A Skit on Britain.” (_The plate in its second state_) . . . _Between - pages_ 238 _and_ 239 - - The Headless Horseman. (_The plate with the head burnished out_) - . . . _Facing page_ 240 - - The plate with Cromwell’s head . . . _Between pages_ 242 _and_ 243 - - The plate with Charles I.’s head . . . _Between pages_ 242 _and_ 243 - - Undescribed palimpsest plate. (_First state and second state_) - . . . _Facing page_ 244 - - Undescribed palimpsest plate. (_First state and second state_) - . . . _Facing page_ 246 - - - _Printed in the Text_ - - 1. The Suppressed Portrait of the Marquis of Steyne . . . 15 - - 2. The Battle of Life. “Leech’s Grave Mistake” . . . 35 - - 3. Rose Maylie and Oliver at Agnes’s Tomb. (_The substituted plate in - two states_) . . . 51 - - 4. The Strange Gentleman . . . 55 - - 5. “A Trifling Mistake”—Corrected— . . . 71 - - 6. Philoprogenitiveness . . . 77 - - 7. “Drop it!” . . . 79 - - 8. Enlarged detail of Hogarth’s “Enthusiasm Delineated” . . . 85 - - 9. The Chandelier in “Enthusiasm” . . . 95 - - The Chandelier in “Credulity” . . . 95 - - 10. The Man of Taste . . . 105 - - 11. Burlington Gate as it appeared prior to 1868 . . . 109 - - 12. Don Quixote, No. 1.—The Innkeeper . . . 115 - - 13. Don Quixote, No. 2.—The Funeral of Chrysostom . . . 117 - - 14. Don Quixote, No. 3.—The Innkeeper’s Wife and Daughter . . . 119 - - 15. Don Quixote, No. 4.—Don Quixote seizes the Barber’s Basin - . . . 120 - - 16. Don Quixote, No. 5.—Don Quixote releases the Galley Slaves - . . . 122 - - 17. Don Quixote, No. 6.—The First Interview . . . 123 - - 18. Don Quixote, No. 7.—The Curate and the Barber . . . 125 - - 19. Danaë in the Brazen Chamber . . . 143 - - 20. Suppressed Illustration from _The Vicar of Wakefield_ . . . 172 - - 21. Het beest van Babel, etc. (_The plate in its first state_) - . . . 218 - - 22. Het beest van Babel, etc. (_The plate in its second state_) - . . . 219 - - 23. Aan der Meester Tonge-Slyper. (_The plate in its first state_) - . . . 229 - - Aan der Meester Tonge-Slyper. (_As adapted by the Anti-Jesuits_) - . . . 229 - - 24. The Stature of a Great Man, or the English Colossus . . . 234 - - 25. The Stature of a Great Man, or the Scotch Colossus . . . 235 - - 26. Aan den Experten Hollandschen Hoofd-Smith. (_The plate in its - first state_) . . . 245 - - 27. Aan den Experten Hollandschen Hoofd-Smith. (_As adapted by the - Anti-Jesuits_) . . . 245 - - 28. An adapted Copperplate. (_First state_) . . . 247 - - 29. An adapted Copperplate. (_Second state_) . . . 247 - - 30. A History of the New Plot. (_First state_) . . . 249 - - 31. A History of the New Plot. (_Second state_) . . . 249 - - - - -SUPPRESSED PLATES, ETC. - -CHAPTER I - -INTRODUCTORY - - -No one who has the itch for book-collecting will deny that suppressed -book illustrations are, what the forbidden fruit was to our mother Eve, -irresistible. Whether such appetite represents the very proper ambition -to have at his elbow the earliest states of beautiful or interesting -books, of which the subsequently suppressed plate or wood engraving -is in general a sort of guarantee, or the less defensible desire to -possess what our neighbour does not, must be settled by the conscience -of each. The fact remains that such rarities are peculiarly alluring to -those whom Wotton calls “the lickerish chapmen of all such ware.” {2} - -There are, of course, ridiculous[1] people who value such books as -the first issue of the first edition of Dickens’s _American Notes_ -just because there is a mistake in the pagination; or a first edition -of Disraeli’s _Lothair_ because the prototype of “Monsignor Catesby” -is divulged by misprinting the name “Capel”; or _Poems_ by Robert -Burns, first Edinburgh Edition, because in the list of subscribers -“The Duke of Roxborough” appears as “The Duke of Boxborough”; or -Barker’s “Breeches” Bible of 1594, because on the title-page of the New -Testament the figures are transposed to 1495; or the first edition in -French of Washington Irving’s _Sketch Book_, because the translator, -maltreating the author’s name, has declared the book to be “traduit de -l’Anglais de M. Irwin Washington,” and in the dedication has labelled -Sir Walter Scott, _Barronnet_; or indeed a book of my own, in which I -described as “since dead” a gifted and genial gentleman who I am glad -to think still gives the lie to my inexcusable carelessness. {3} - - [1] I am quite aware that “ridiculous” is a dangerous stone to throw, - when one lives in a glass house oneself. - -But it is not _because_ of such errors that a true book-lover desires -to own _editiones principes_ of famous works. That ambition is -legitimate enough, but its legitimate reason is otherwhere to seek. - -In the case of such a book as Rogers’s _Italy_, with the Turner -engravings, the matter is very different. Here the fact that the plates -on pp. 88 and 91 are transposed is a guarantee that the impressions of -the extraordinarily delicate engravings are of the utmost brilliancy, -for the error was discovered before many impressions had been taken. -The same applies, though in lesser degree, to such a book as Mr. Austin -Dobson’s _Ballad of Beau Brocade_, illustrated by Mr. Hugh Thomson, in -the earliest edition of which certain of the illustrations are also -misplaced.[2] There is reason in wishing to possess these. See what -Ruskin himself has said of the omission of the two engravings which -had appeared in the first edition of _The Two Paths_. He writes in the -preface to the 1878 reissue: {4} - - [2] Compare also the early issues of the first edition of Ainsworth’s - _Tower of London_, in which the plates at pp. 28 and 45 vary from those - in the later issues. - -“I own to a very enjoyable pride in making the first editions of my -books valuable to their possessors, who found out, before other people, -that these writings and drawings were good for something . . . and the -two lovely engravings by Messrs. Cuff and Armytage will, I hope, render -the old volume more or less classical among collectors.” From this we -gather that “the Professor” was of the right kidney. - -It is hardly necessary to say that it is not my intention to make -this book a devil’s directory to illustrations which have been -suppressed because of indecency, and are referred to in the catalogues -of second-hand booksellers, whose cupidity is stronger than their -self-respect, as “facetiæ” or “very curious.” Indeed, this book -would itself in that case also very properly be put on the index -expurgatorius of every decent person. My purpose is to gather together, -correct and amplify the floating details concerning a legitimate class -of rarities, and to put the collector on his guard, where necessary, -against imposition. - -By its very nature this treatise cannot be complete, but I have -included most of the {5} examples of any importance which, during many -years of bibliomania, have come under my observation. To these I have -added certain re-engraved or palimpsest plates, which are germane to -the subject. - -As to these last I find amongst my papers a curious note from the -pen of R. H. Cromek, the engraver, who flourished at the end of the -eighteenth century. - -“One of these vendors,” he writes (publishers of Family Bibles), -“lately called to consult me professionally about an engraving he -brought with him. It represented Mons. Buffon seated, contemplating -various groups of animals surrounding him. He merely wished, he said, -to be informed whether, by engaging my services to unclothe the -naturalist, and giving him a rather more resolute look, _the plate -could not, at a trifling expense, be made to do duty for ‘Daniel in the -lions’ den’_”! - -That would be a palimpsest well worth possessing, if ever it were -carried into effect. It would be as fascinating an object of -contemplation as the Stothard designs for _Clarissa Harlowe_, {6} -which the same authority informs us were later used to illustrate the -Scriptures! But the history of the _cliché_, pure and simple, has yet -to be written. Our concern is with higher game than that. - -{7} - - - - -CHAPTER II - -“THE MARQUIS OF STEYNE” - - -Perhaps the most celebrated of suppressed book illustrations is the -wood-engraved portrait of the “Marquis of Steyne,” drawn by Thackeray -as an illustration to _Vanity Fair_, for which, if we are to believe -the statement of a well-known bookseller’s catalogue, “libellous -proceedings (_sic_) were threatened on account of its striking likeness -to a member of the aristocracy.” With the accuracy of this statement I -shall deal in due course. - -Before, however, proceeding to the consideration of the suppressed -illustration itself, it will be as well to pause for a moment to -consider what antecedent probability there was that Thackeray would -pillory a well-known _roué_ of the period in terms that would make -the likeness undoubted and undeniable. And in pointing out what the -great {8} novelist’s practice was in this respect I would guard -myself against the charge of presuming to censure one who is not -here to answer for himself, and whose nobility of character was -sufficient guarantee of good faith and honourable intention. Let it -always be remembered that, if Thackeray flagellated others, he never -hesitated to taste the quality of his own whip first. Even in his book -illustrations, as I have pointed out elsewhere, he was as unsparing -of his own feelings as he was in his writings. And, in using himself -as a whipping-boy for our sins, he probably believed that he was -making himself as despicable as a Rousseau. Hence he came to the like -treatment of other real personages not with unclean hands. - -Some of us may have seen, though very few of us can possess, a very -rare pamphlet, which was sold for as much as £39 on one of its -infrequent appearances in the auction-rooms, entitled _Mr. Thackeray, -Mr. Yates, and the Garrick Club_. In it was published a never-sent -reply to a letter written by Thackeray remonstrating with Yates on -the contents of a “pen-and-ink” sketch published by the latter in No. -6 of a periodical called _Town {9} Talk_, which resulted in Yates’s -expulsion from the Garrick Club. - -In this unsent letter he charged Thackeray with having unjustifiably -introduced portraits both in his letterpress and illustrations. Mr. -Stephen Price appeared as Captain Shindy in the _Book of Snobs_. In -the same book Thackeray drew on a wood block what was practically a -portrait of Wyndham Smith, a fellow-clubman. This appeared amongst -“Sporting Snobs,” Mr. Smith being a well-known sporting man. In -_Pendennis_ he made a sketch of a former member of the Garrick Club, -Captain Granby Calcraft, under the name of Captain Granby Tiptoff. In -the same book, under the transparent guise of the unforgettable Foker, -he reproduced every characteristic, both in language, manner, and -gesture, of Mr. Andrew Arcedeckne, and even went so far as to give an -unmistakable portrait of him, to that gentleman’s great annoyance. - -Besides the examples given by Yates, who was himself recognisable -as George Garbage in _The Virginians_, we know, too, that in the -same novel Theodore Hook appeared as Wagg, just as he did {10} as -Stanislaus Hoax in Disraeli’s _Vivian Grey_, and that Alfred Bunn -was the prototype of Mr. Dolphin. Archdeacon Allen was the original -of Dobbin, Lady Langford of Lady Kew; and last, but not least, we -have lately learned from Mrs. Ritchie that the inimitable Becky had -undoubtedly her incarnation. - -So we see that the antecedent improbability is as the snakes in -Iceland; for the above examples, which no doubt could be largely added -to, prove that Thackeray did not hesitate to draw direct from the model -when it suited his purpose. - -So far so good. Let us now proceed to inquire into the identity of the -“Marquis of Steyne.” - -That his prototype was _a_ Marquis of Hertford is axiomatic with all -those who have ever taken any interest in the subject; but when we come -to inquire which marquis we find that opinions are astonishingly at -variance. It would seem almost as though any Marquis of Hertford would -serve, whereas in point of fact the portrait would be the grossest -libel upon each of that noble line save one; and so incidentally we -shall, by making the matter clear, rescue from calumny an honourable -{11} race, which has hitherto through heedlessness been tarred with -the same brush as its least honourable representative. - -To show that this is not a reckless charge of inaccuracy, I quote from -four letters in my possession written by four persons most likely to -have special knowledge upon the subject. - -The first, which is from a well-known printseller, informs me “that -the Marquis of Steyne in _Vanity Fair_ was Francis, second Marquis of -Hertford, who died in 1822.” - -The second, which is from one more intimately acquainted with the -family than any other living person, says, “Unquestionably Francis, -third Marquis of Hertford, the intimate friend of George IV., was the -prototype of the Marquis of Steyne in Thackeray’s _Vanity Fair_.” - -The third letter, which is from a well-known London editor, in general -the best-informed man I have ever met, says, “It was the fourth Lord, -who died in 1870.” - -The last of the four letters supports this view and says: “It was the -fourth, not the third, Marquis of Hertford who was supposed to be the -prototype {12} of Thackeray’s Marquis of Steyne. . . . He was Richard -Seymour Conway, who was born in 1800 and died in 1870.”[3] - -Now, considering that these are the only opinions for which I have -asked, and that they are so curiously divergent, it will, I think, be -clear that it is time an authoritative declaration were forthcoming, -based upon independent inquiries. - -It may as well, then, be stated once for all that no one who has taken -the trouble to investigate the lives of the three marquises above -mentioned can hesitate for a moment in identifying the “Marquis of -Steyne” with the third Marquis of Hertford. To those who are curious -to know very full particulars about these noblemen I would recommend -the perusal of an interesting article entitled “Two Marquises” in -_Lippincott’s Magazine_ for February 1874. Nor should they fail to read -Disraeli’s _Coningsby_, and compare “Lord Monmouth” and his creature -“Rigby,” whose prototypes were the same Marquis of Hertford and _his_ -creature Croker, with the {13} “Marquis of Steyne” and _his_ managing -man - - [3] As I write, a great daily newspaper informs the world that it was - the _first_ Marquis. “ - Wenham.” - -And, whilst we are identifying the third Marquis in _Coningsby_ and -_Vanity Fair_, reference may be made to another most unflattering -portrait of that notorious nobleman in a book published anonymously in -1844, which was _immediately_ suppressed, but is now not infrequently -to be found in second-hand book catalogues. The book was (I believe) -written by John Mills, and had ten clever etched plates by George -Standfast (probably a _nom de plume_). Copies in the parts as -published are excessively rare. The title of the book is _D’Horsay; -or the Follies of the Day, by a Man of Fashion_.[4] It dealt with the -escapades, vices, and adventures of well-known men of the day under -the following transparent pseudonyms: Count d’Horsay, the Marquis of -Hereford, the Earl of Chesterlane, Mr. Pelham, General Reel, Lord -George Bentick, Mr. George Robbins, auctioneer, the Earl of Raspberry -Hill, Benjamin D——i, Lord Hunting-Castle, and others. The {14} -account of the “closing scene in the life of the greatest debauchee -the world has ever seen, the Marquis of Hereford,” is too horrible to -repeat. - - [4] This scurrilous and poorly written book has lately been thought - worthy of resurrection and republication. - -So much for the identity of the “Marquis of Steyne” as described in -Thackeray’s letterpress, which need not be dwelt upon here at greater -length, seeing that the immediate object of this chapter is to deal -with the accompanying engraving and its history. And in proceeding -to this examination it should not be forgotten, in fairness to the -novelist, that Thackeray has explained that his characters were made up -of little bits of various persons. This is no doubt true enough. At the -same time, we cannot but be aware that, although the details may have -been gathered, the outline has been drawn direct from the life. - -[Illustration: The Suppressed Portrait of the Marquis of Steyne] - -_Vanity Fair_ was issued originally in monthly parts. Its first title -was _Vanity Fair: Pen and Pencil Sketches of English Society_. Its -first number was dated “January 1847,” and had “illustrations on steel -and wood by the Author.” On p. 336 of the _earliest issue_ of this -first edition appeared the wood engraving of the Marquis of Steyne, -wanting which a first edition is, to the {15} bibliomaniac, _Hamlet_ -with Hamlet left out. In the later issues, the engraving (which I -here reproduce) was omitted, as also was the “rustic type” in which -the title appeared on the first page.[5] The publishers were Messrs. -Bradbury and Evans, {16} as was natural, Thackeray being at this time -on the staff of _Punch_. In later editions of the novel, published by -Messrs. Smith, Elder and Co., the engraving reappears—viz. on p. 22 -of vol. ii. in the standard edition, and on p. 158, vol. ii., of the -twenty-six-volume edition.[6] - - [5] To the rabid bibliophile I here present another variation, which - has hitherto escaped the bookseller. In the first edition, on p. 453, - will be found the misprint “Mr.” (for “Sir”) Pitt and Lady Jane Crawley. - - [6] It does not appear amongst the illustrations to the biographical - edition, which are restricted to the full-page plates. - -What was the reason for its sudden removal immediately after -publication? As I have said above, it is commonly stated to have been -in consequence of a threatened action for libel, of course on account -of the undoubted likeness of the “Marquis of Steyne” to the third -Marquis of Hertford. But how does this tally with facts? Lord Hertford -had died in 1842, whilst the first number of _Vanity Fair_ did not -appear until 1847. Now every lawyer knows that you cannot libel a dead -man. This was made clear some few years ago (I think) in the case -of the Duke of Vallombrosa against a well-known English journalist. -Therefore it is quite certain that, although legal proceedings might -have been threatened, they would certainly have collapsed. {17} -Further than that, those who knew the fourth Marquis are aware that -he was the last man in the world to embark upon a lawsuit or court -publicity in any way. And if any doubt upon the matter should still -remain, I am able to state positively that no trace is to be discovered -amongst the Hertford family papers of any action threatened or brought -against Thackeray on any grounds whatsoever. I think, then, that we may -dismiss once for all this aspect of the case. - -At the same time it is not impossible that some hint may have reached -the novelist’s ears that the illustration gave pain to persons then -living, and that he promptly had it removed. But against this view -there is a very strong presumption. If we turn the leaves of our -original issue of _Vanity Fair_, we shall, on p. 421, find another -wood engraving, and opposite p. 458 a full-page steel engraving, “The -Triumph of Clytemnestra,” both containing portraits of “The Marquis -of Steyne.” Now, considering that that nobleman’s august features are -as recognisable in these as in the suppressed engraving, it seems -unreasonable to suppose that the one would have been removed {18} -without the others, in consequence of family representations. - -Possibly the real truth of the matter is a very much simpler one. It -may have been either that Thackeray was himself disgusted with the -brutal frankness of the picture when he saw it printed, and insisted -on its removal, or that the block met with some accident. Indeed, I -am inclined to think, judging from my memory of the subject, that the -idea of an action for libel is one that has only found expression in -more modern booksellers’ catalogues. If I am not mistaken, the older -booksellers used to speak of the engraving not as “suppressed,” but as -“extremely rare,” and that it was supposed to have disappeared from -later issues because it was broken before many impressions were taken. -Of course, a threatened action for libel, on account of its striking -likeness to a member of the aristocracy, added piquancy to the affair, -and so redounded to the benefit of the vendor of the earliest issue of -a first edition; and the identification of Lord Steyne’s prototype, in -the letterpress, gave colour to the idea. Once set going, we may be -certain that {19} the legend would not be allowed to lapse for lack of -advertisement. To adapt what Dr. Johnson said of the “Countess,” “Sir,” -said he to Boswell, “in the case of a (marquis) the imagination is more -excited.” - -The accompanying portraits of the third and fourth Marquises of -Hertford give the reader an opportunity of forming his own opinion in -the matter of identity. That of the third Marquis is from the engraving -by William Holl of the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence, and certainly -seems to suggest, in the prime of life, the features and expression -which Thackeray has portrayed in old age. The bald head, and the -arrangement of the whiskers—which are allowed to approach the corners -of the mouth—are incontestable points of resemblance; and if the old -voluptuary is somewhat more battered than Lawrence’s rather spruce -model, we must remember that his portrait was painted by the courtly -President of the Royal Academy many years before the period of life at -which he is introduced to us by the novelist. Certainly he is not an -attractive object; and I was amused to receive a letter from a member -of the family to whom I first showed the wood {20} engraving in which -these words occur: “I find we have no portrait whatever of the Lord -Hertford in question, and am not surprised at it if he at all resembled -that of the Marquis in _Vanity Fair_!”[7] - -As regards the fourth Marquis, it is a curious fact that, -notwithstanding his vast wealth, and his tastes as an artist and -connoisseur, no painted or engraved portrait of him is known. The -photograph here reproduced is the only counterfeit presentment extant, -and is enough, if further evidence were needed, to dispose for ever -of the idea that he was the prototype of the Marquis of Steyne. It is -hardly necessary to remind the reader that it is to him, through Sir -Richard and Lady Wallace, that the nation owes a debt of gratitude for -the splendid collection now housed in perpetuity in Hertford House.[8] - - [7] This is the description of the Marquis in _Coningsby_: “Lord - Monmouth was in height above the middle size, but somewhat portly - and corpulent; his countenance was strongly marked: sagacity on the - brow, sensuality in the mouth and jaw; his head was bald, but there - were remains of the rich brown hair on which he once prided himself. - His large, deep blue eye, madid, and yet piercing, showed that the - secretions of his brain were apportioned half to voluptuousness, - half to common sense.” This might well pass as a description of the - Thackeray drawing. - - [8] Just before Lady Wallace’s death, an examination of the Hertford - House library failed to discover a first edition of _Vanity Fair_, in - which I fancied some note might possibly have been found. This was - probably due to the fact that a large number of the Hertford books were - destroyed in the Pantechnicon fire. - -[Illustration: The Third Marquis of Hertford. (_From the engraving by -W. Holl, of the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence_)] - -[Illustration: The Fourth Marquis of Hertford. (_From a photograph_)] - -{21} - -It will be noticed that in this photograph Lord Hertford wears his Star -of the Order of the Garter, to obtain which he made the “tremendous -sacrifice” of which an amusing account is given in the _Lippincott_ -article mentioned above. Of him the _Speaker_ wrote at the time of his -death: - - Living in Paris a quiet and rather solitary life—in habits - more a Frenchman than an Englishman; in tastes an artist and a - connoisseur; in purse and opportunity unlimited by any niggard need - of self-control—the fourth Marquis of Hertford busied himself in - gathering together from the treasure-houses of Europe innumerable - precious specimens of the painter’s, the goldsmith’s, and the - cabinetmaker’s art. Year after year, with tranquil perseverance, he - heaped up on every side of him all the beautiful objects on which - he could lay hands—pictures, miniatures, furniture, enamels, china - and plate, bronzes, and coats of armour—until his storehouses were - full to overflowing of treasures which, except for the pleasure of - procuring them, he could hardly ever have enjoyed. In this congenial - task he was assisted by a young Englishman, the secret of whose - connection with the Hertford family, if any such there was, the public - has never penetrated yet. To this young Englishman, who was well - known and liked in Parisian society in the tawdry splendour of the - Second Empire, and whose active generosity {22} won him wide esteem - in that desolated capital amid the terrible events of the winter of - 1870–71, Lord Hertford bequeathed the wonderful possessions which - he had accumulated in a lifetime of discriminating labour. When the - Franco-German War and the Commune were over, Richard Wallace brought - his spoils safely home, and exhibited them for a time at the Bethnal - Green Museum while he built the great galleries to hold them in - Manchester Square. But even here they were not destined to bring much - happiness to their possessor. After a short time Sir Richard Wallace - was left heirless—like Lord Hertford—by a cruel stroke of fate; and - now, by his widow’s gift, the splendid inheritance, which has passed - so quickly from the keeping of the hands that laid it up, goes to - enrich a public which will not be ungrateful for the donor’s rare - munificence, or unmindful of the sad and curious story it recalls.[9] - - [9] A footnote on p. 229, vol. iv. of G. E. C.’s _Complete Peerage_ - says: “[The fourth Marquis] is said never to have been in England. - He left his Irish estates (worth £50,000 a year) and most of his - personalty (which included the well-known Hertford collection of - pictures) to Sir Richard Wallace, Bart. (so _cr._ 1866), who is - supposed to have been an illegit. son, either of himself (when aged - 18), or of his father, or even (not improbably) of his mother; which - Richard (_b._ in London, 26th July 1818) _d._ s.p. at Paris, 20th - July 1890, in his 72nd year, and was _bur._ in the family vault at - Père-la-Chaise. Sir Richard’s ‘art treasures’ (derived as above stated) - were valued at his death in 1890 at above two millions.” - -To return again to the suppressed wood engraving itself, it is curious -to notice that old “Lady Kew” of _The Newcomes_ was sister to Lord -Steyne. Now the name “Kew” at once suggests {23} to those conversant -with the early doings of the century the nickname of the notorious -Duke of Queensberry, known to all and sundry as “Old Q,” and sets -us considering why the name should suggest itself to Thackeray in -connection with Lord Hertford. And what do we find? - -When the third Marquis was but twenty-one, he married a young lady -named Marie Fagniani. She was believed to be the daughter of the Duke -of Queensberry and an opera dancer of that name. Nothing would be more -natural, therefore, than that Thackeray, having saturated himself with -the surroundings of the prototypes of his characters, should, probably -half unconsciously, have seized upon a capital name suggested to him -in the course of preparing for his novel, and so adapted it to his -requirements. This suggestion I only make for what it is worth. It -may, of course, merely be that a search through the suburban directory -suggested the name, as was no doubt the case in apportioning to her -ladyship’s husband his second title of Lord Walham. At any rate, the -coincidence seems worth recording. - -In conclusion, there can be no possible doubt {24} that so far as -Thackeray’s letterpress is concerned, the prototype of the Marquis -of Steyne (Lord of the Powder Closet, etc. etc.) was Francis Charles -Seymour Conway (third Marquis of Hertford) of his branch; Earl of -Hertford and Yarmouth, Viscount Beauchamp, Baron Conway, and Baron of -Ragley in England; and Baron Conway and Kilultagh in the peerage of -Ireland; and as regards the suppressed wood engraving, there will, I -think, be little question that Thackeray the artist dotted his i’s -by an intentional representation of the noble lord’s not altogether -attractive features. - -[Illustration: The Third Marquis of Hertford when Lord Yarmouth. (_From -the coloured caricature by Richard Dighton_)] - -It is, however, only fair to state that Lord Hertford was probably -by no means the unmitigated scoundrel that those familiar with the -“Marquis of Steyne” might be led to suppose. That he participated in -all the amusements and most of the follies of a notorious society there -can be little doubt. At the same time, we have it on record (in the -somewhat pompous diction of the period) that he was extensively read in -ancient and modern literature, that his judgment was remarkable for its -solidity and sagacity, and that his {25} conversation was enlivened -by much of that refined and quaint pleasantry which distinguished his -near relative, Horace Walpole. He was a distinguished patron of all the -arts; and those who were more intimately acquainted with his private -life gave him the still higher praise of being a warm, generous, and -unalterable friend. “It is but justice to add,” to quote the final -words of the notice referred to, “that the writer has accidentally -become acquainted with instances of his Lordship’s benevolence, the -liberality of which was equalled only by the delicacy with which it was -conferred, and the scrupulous care with which he endeavoured to conceal -it.” - -The caricature portrait of the third Marquis here reproduced was -etched, as will be seen, by Richard Dighton in 1818, when this -Marquis’s father was alive, and he was only the Earl of Yarmouth. The -watermark on the paper is 1826, which explains the inscription “Marquis -of Hertford,” evidently a later addition—an _ex post facto_ puzzle -which proved insoluble until it occurred to me to hold the portrait up -to the light. - -{26} - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE SUPPRESSED PORTRAIT OF DICKENS, “PICKWICK,” “THE BATTLE OF LIFE,” -AND GRIMALDI - - -Having dealt in the last chapter with the suppression of the well-known -Thackeray wood-cut of the “Marquis of Steyne,” we naturally turn next -in order to the other great Victorian novelist, Charles Dickens. Much, -of course, has been written about the Buss plates in _Pickwick_, -and much about the “Fireside Scene” in _Oliver Twist_. All readers -of Forster’s _Life of Charles Dickens_ know something of the wood -engraving in _The Battle of Life_ which ought to have been, but never -was, cancelled; and some know what to look for in the vignette title -of _Martin Chuzzlewit_. It is, however, time that the scattered -details should be grouped, that reproductions of the plates themselves -should make reference easy to those {27} who would identify their -possessions, and that the additional information which is in some cases -scattered about in various impermanent writings of my own and others -should be focussed for the greater convenience of the collector. - -In the first place, I shall present to the reader a suppressed -portrait of the great novelist, which has, I believe, never since been -reproduced. It was published about the year 1837 by Churton, but as to -the name of the artist by whom it was etched there is a mystery which -yet awaits solution. The plate is, as will be noticed, signed with the -familiar pen-name “Phiz,” but was almost immediately repudiated by the -chartered bearer of that title, H. K. Browne. It was promptly withdrawn -from publication, and is now, as a necessary consequence, much sought -after by the collector.[10] Of it the author of _Charles Dickens, the -Story of his Life_, writes: - - A very remarkable [portrait] was etched about 1837 with the name - “Phiz” at the foot. It represents Dickens {28} seated on a chair and - holding a portfolio. In the background a Punch-and-Judy performance - is going on. The face has none of that delicacy and softness about - it which are observable in the Maclise portrait. It looks, however, - more like the real young face of the older man, as revealed in the - photograph now publishing [_i.e._ just after Dickens’s death]. This - portrait is very rare, and it is understood that it was withdrawn from - publication soon after it appeared. Mr. Hablot K. Browne, the genuine - “Phiz,” denies all knowledge of it. - - [10] Since writing this, I have experienced a piece of scurvy luck. - Entering a shop in the outskirts of Birmingham, I saw an impression of - the etching lying on a table. I inquired its price and was met by the - answer that it had just been sold to a lady for eighteenpence! - -The Hotten memoir thus whets the appetites of its readers, but does -not offer to satisfy them by a reproduction. This obvious duty I -therefore here take the opportunity of discharging, and would advise -the book-hunter to make a mental note of the etching in that pix of -the brain where is secreted the reagent which separates the rare gold -of the bookseller’s threepenny box from its too ordinary dross. The -reproduction here given is about the size of the original etching. - -So much for the suppressed portrait. Now let us take up our first -edition of _Pickwick_, and say what has to be said about the -much-discussed Buss plates and their substitutes. - -[Illustration: The suppressed portrait of Charles Dickens] - -_Pickwick_, as we all know, was first published in parts, and only -one number had appeared when {29} Robert Seymour, its illustrator, -died by his own hand. Messrs. Chapman and Hall, the publishers, were -at their wits’ end to get the new number illustrated in time for -publication. Jackson, the well-known wood-engraver, who was at the -time working for them, proposed for the task R. W. Buss, a “gentleman -already well known to the public as a very humorous and talented -artist.” The publishers gladly adopted the suggestion, and the -appointment was made. - -All this we find very fully set out in Mr. Percy Fitzgerald’s _History -of Pickwick_, to which I would refer the reader who is anxious to -acquaint himself with details of the transaction. The Buss etchings, -which we here reproduce, had for their subjects “The Cricket Match” -and “Tupman and Rachel,” and are to be found respectively opposite pp. -69 and 74 of the earliest issues of the first edition of the immortal -romance. They were, in the words of the artist himself, “abominably -bad,” and he was immediately superseded as illustrator by H. K. Browne, -who was destined to be inseparably connected with the novelist’s work -for so long a period. {30} - -This episode has been so often dwelt upon, and so exhaustively dealt -with, that I shall not do much more than point out how those who have -written on the subject have altogether missed what is perhaps the most -important link in the whole chain of circumstances. So put to it, as I -have said, were the publishers to get the new number out in time lest -an expectant public should be disappointed, that they were forced to -fix upon Seymour’s substitute _without consulting Dickens_. This was -really the whole _crux_ of the situation. The author only recognised -the failure of the plates. He knew nothing of the difficulties under -which Buss had laboured, and so naturally made no allowances, and -knew of no reason why subsequent ones should be better. The plates -unquestionably were poor, but we find from Mr. Buss’s own private MS., -to which, by his son’s kindness, I have had access, that this was not -by any means mainly the fault of the artist. He had previously had no -experience in etching, and only undertook the work after much pressure, -to accommodate the publishers. To quote from his own account: {31} - -[Illustration: The “Pickwick” suppressed plate: “The Cricket Match.” -(_By R. W. Buss_)] - - At Seymour’s death, Hall engaged me to illustrate Charles Dickens’s - _Pickwick_. I commenced practice, and worked hard, I may say day - and night, for at least a month on etching, and I furnished the - illustrations for _Pickwick_. Without any reason assigned, Hall broke - his engagement with me, in a manner at once unjust and unhandsome. - -As a matter of fact, the plates, as they appeared, were not etched by -Buss at all, but by a professional etcher after his designs. And it is -curious to note that each of the plates is, notwithstanding, inscribed, -“Drawn & Etch’d by R. W. Buss.” - -The artist’s bitterness against his employers was not unnatural. At the -same time, we must remember that the fact that they had on the spur -of the moment to decide upon an artist, without consulting Dickens, -puts the matter in a very different light. The fortunes of the venture -were at stake. The author, at all hazards, must be humoured. His will -was paramount, and when he insisted upon Buss’s supersession by H. K. -Browne, there was practically an end of the matter. Happily Buss’s -labour was not all lost, and it was with much pleasure that I seized -the opportunity offered me by the editor of the {32} _Magazine of -Art_ in June 1902, to point out in that publication how perverse has -been the fate which has made the name of an artist of no mean order -more familiar by his few failures than by his many successes. It is -not generally known that there are in existence two etched plates by -Buss showing that he contemplated a series of extra illustrations to -_Pickwick_. The one is a title-page with Mr. Pickwick being crowned; -the other is rather a poor rendering of “The Break-down.” - -But to return to the plates themselves: only about seven hundred copies -were published when plates by Browne were substituted for them. “The -Cricket Match” was wholly suppressed, and the subject of “Tupman and -Rachel” was etched over again, considerably altered, but evidently -founded upon the Buss plate. The latter is here reproduced for the -purpose of comparison. - -[Illustration: The “Pickwick” suppressed plate “Tupman and Rachel.” -(_By R. W. Buss_)] - -[Illustration: “Tupman and Rachel.” (_By H. K. Browne_)] - -That every Dickens collector desires to possess one of the seven -hundred copies of the first issue of the first edition which contain -the Buss plates, is a matter of course, and enough has been said to -make clear the reason of such desire. Should any of my readers fail to -sympathise, he must take {33} it as an incontrovertible sign that -he is immune from that most delightful of all diseases, bibliomania. - -It need only be added that, in the beautiful “Victorian Edition” of the -novel, published in two volumes by Messrs. Chapman and Hall in 1887, -facsimiles may be seen of the original drawings made for the suppressed -plates, as well as two unpublished drawings prepared by Mr. Buss, but -not used. The subjects of these are “Mr. Pickwick at the Review,” -and “Mr. Wardle and his Friends under the Influence of the Salmon.” -The first is an excellent drawing, and goes far to prove that, had -Buss been given time, he would have no more failed as illustrator of -_Pickwick_ than he did as illustrator of various other most successful -publications. The same edition also contains facsimiles of an unused -drawing by “Phiz,” “Mr. Winkle’s First Shot,” and of a water-colour -drawing of “Tom Smart and the Chair,” sent in to the publishers by John -Leech as a specimen of his work. From which it will be seen that the -“Victorian Edition,” limited to two thousand copies, is also one which -every Dickens lover ought, if possible, to possess. {34} - -The originals of the Buss drawings were in the possession of the -artist’s daughter, Miss Frances Mary Buss, the well-known founder of -the North London Collegiate and Camden Schools, until her death a few -years ago. They were then sold, and I have been unable to discover into -whose hands they have passed. - -So much for the _Pickwick_ suppressed plates, which, if strict -chronology were to be observed, should naturally be followed by an -account of the “Rose Maylie and Oliver” plates in _Oliver Twist_. -These, however, we shall hold over for another chapter, as they will -have to be considered at some length. Meanwhile, we will deal shortly -with the curious wood engraving in _The Battle of Life_, and with -the etching of “The Last Song” in _The Memoirs of Joseph Grimaldi_. -The former is so far germane to our subject that it should have been -suppressed, but, out of consideration for the artist, was not. - -[Illustration: The Battle of Life. “Leech’s grave mistake”] - -Every Dickens collector desires to possess the complete set of the -“Christmas Books” in their dainty red cloth bindings, dated from -1843 to 1848. A really desirable set includes, of course, {36} the -_Christmas Carol_,[11] with coloured plates by Leech, with the -_green end-papers_ and “stave 1”; _The Chimes_, with the publishers’ -names _within_ the engraved part of the title-page; and _The Battle -of Life_, with the publishers’ names on _both_ titles. But it is -only the last of these that is entitled to mention in a treatise on -cancelled illustrations, and that, as I have said, not because it _was_ -suppressed, but because it should have been. - - [11] It may be mentioned that there are two or three copies of the - _Christmas Carol_ known with the title-page and half-title printed in - green and red, instead of in red and blue. Much store is laid by this - variation amongst really moonstruck collectors. - -By those who are familiar with the story it will be remembered that -an early part of the plot leads one to suppose that Marion Jeddler -had eloped with Michael Warden, when, as a matter of fact, she had -merely escaped to her aunt. Leech, who was engaged as illustrator, -was immensely busy, and only read so much of the story as seemed -necessary for his purpose. As a result he was deceived, as Dickens -intended his readers should be, and designed the double illustration -here reproduced, in which the festivities to welcome the bridegroom -at the top of the page {37} contrast with the flight of the bride -in company with Michael Warden represented below. Thus was Dickens -curiously “hoist with his own petard.” And the curious thing is that, -notwithstanding the publicity given to the mistake in Forster’s _Life -of Dickens_, this tragic woodcut, which wrongs poor Marion’s innocence -and makes a hash of the whole story, is reproduced in the reprints up -to this very day. The poor girl’s tragic figure remains, and seems -likely to continue to do so, a victim to the stereotype. - -This episode is generally referred to as “Leech’s grave mistake,” and -grave undoubtedly it was; but the matter has its bright side, which -redounds to the credit of the great novelist. I take the liberty of -quoting from what has always seemed to me a very noble letter when we -remember that Dickens was of all men most sensitive to any shortcomings -in the work of his collaborators. He writes to Forster: - - When I first saw it it was with a horror and agony not to be - expressed. Of course I need not tell _you_, my dear fellow, Warden - has no business in the elopement scene. _He_ was never there. In the - first hot sweat of this surprise and novelty I was going to implore - the printing of that sheet to {38} be stopped, and the figure taken - out of the block. But when I thought of the pain that this might give - to our kind-hearted Leech, and that what is such a monstrous enormity - to me, as never having entered my brain, may not so present itself to - others, I became more composed, though the fact is wonderful to me. - -Of course, had it been in these days of hurried publication, Dickens -would hardly have given the matter a second thought. The average -illustrator of to-day is curiously superior to the requirements of his -author. He either does not read the episodes that he is called upon -to illustrate, or, if he reads them, he does not grasp their meaning, -or, if he grasps their meaning, the meaning does not meet with his -approval. At any rate, he constantly makes a hash of the whole thing. -Take for example _Penelope’s English Experiences_, by Miss Kate Wiggin, -now lying before me. Look at the illustration, opposite p. 58, of Lady -de Wolfe’s butler, who struck terror into Penelope’s soul because _he -did not wear a livery_, and try, if you can, to recognise him in the -shoulder-knotted, stripe-waistcoated, plush-breeched, silk-stockinged -menial with an “unapproachable haughtiness of demeanour,” which the -illustrator has portrayed. {39} Nor is this one of a few exceptional -cases: their number might be multiplied _ad infinitum_. - -But to return to _The Battle of Life_. Curiously enough, there is -another little episode connected with this book, never, I believe, -noticed before, which accentuates our impression of the generosity of -Dickens’s character. - -Three years after its publication a somewhat scurrilous little volume -(now excessively rare), bearing the allusive title _The Battle of -London Life; or Boz and his Secretary_, issued from the press. It was -illustrated by six lithographs signed with the name of George Augustus -Sala. It was a poor enough performance, but attracted attention by its -_ad captandum_ title, and the portrait of “Boz in his Study.” It is an -imaginary and far from complimentary account of Dickens’s employment -of a secretary, whose occupation it is to show him round the haunts -of vice in London, by way of providing “local colour” for the novels. -Eventually the secretary turns out to be a detective, who has been told -off by the Government to discover the nature of the novelist’s intimacy -with the revolutionist, Mazzini. It is a vulgar little {40} brochure, -and, for all its futility, must have been very distasteful to the idol -of the day. It was therefore the more magnanimous of Dickens to ignore -the part which Sala had in it, and to speak so generously of him as we -find him doing in the _Life_, besides employing him and pushing him, as -he did largely later on, in his periodicals. A smaller man would not -have allowed himself to forget such youthful indiscretions, for “memory -always obeys the commands of the heart.” - -Judged as a work of art, _The Battle of Life_ is perhaps the least -successful of Dickens’s “Christmas Books.” Edward FitzGerald’s opinion -of it was shown in an autograph letter which came into the market only -the other day. “What a wretched affair is _The Battle of Life_!” he -writes; “it scarce even has the few good touches that generally redeem -Dickens.” - -[Illustration: “The Last Song” with the suppressed border. (_By George -Cruikshank_)] - -Whilst we are on the subject of an illustration which should have been -suppressed but was not, it should be pointed out that this was not the -only occasion upon which Leech misunderstood Dickens’s purport. This -we learn from Mr. F. G. Kitton’s monumental work, _Dickens and {41} -his Illustrators_. Here he tells us that in another Christmas book, -_The Chimes_, Leech delineated, in place of Richard as described in -the text, an extremely ragged and dissipated-looking character, with a -battered hat upon his head. When the novelist saw it the drawing had -already been engraved, but the woodcut was promptly suppressed; there -still exists, however, an impression of the cancelled engraving, which -is bound up with what is evidently a unique copy of _The Chimes_ (now -the property of Mr. J. P. Dexter), where blank spaces are left for -some of the woodcuts. This particular copy is probably the publishers’ -“make-up,” which had accidentally left their hands. - -Let us now consider for a moment a very remarkable etching which was, -so far only as regards an important portion of it, cancelled in all -but the very first issue of _The Memoirs of Joseph Grimaldi_. These -were published in two volumes in 1838. Besides writing the preface, -Dickens was only responsible for the editing of Mr. Egerton Wilks’s -manuscript, which had been prepared from autobiographical notes. A good -deal of fault was found with the work, particularly {42} on the ground -that Dickens himself could never have seen Grimaldi. To this he very -pertinently replied, “I don’t believe that Lord Braybrooke had more -than the very slightest acquaintance with Mr. Pepys, whose memoirs he -edited two centuries after he died!”[12] - -The volumes are now most valued for the twelve etchings by George -Cruikshank; but the important thing from the bibliolater’s point of -view is to possess the earliest issue with “The Last Song” _surrounded -by a grotesque border_. This border, which is here produced, was -removed from the plate after the first issue of the first edition. I -have just had offered to me a copy of this edition containing “The Last -Song” _in the two states_, _i.e._ with and without the border, for the -modest sum of eight guineas! - - [12] My attention was lately called to a copy of the memoirs in - which the former owner had pasted the following amusingly irrelevant - note:—“At the Beckford sale a copy of the famous Grimm—the Grimm with - the illustrations printed in bronze-coloured ink—fetched £64.” I have - a very shrewd suspicion that the annotator had an unmethodical brain, - and believed Grimm to be short for Grimaldi! _Requiescat in pace._ - -{43} - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -DICKENS CANCELLED PLATES: “OLIVER TWIST,” “MARTIN CHUZZLEWIT,” “THE -STRANGE GENTLEMAN,” “PICTURES FROM ITALY,” AND “SKETCHES BY BOZ.” - - -In dealing with the episode of the suppressed plate in _Oliver -Twist_ we must be careful to bear in mind the fact that between the -publication of _Pickwick_ and the later novel there was an essential -difference. The former was first published in self-contained parts, -whereas the latter was published _serially_ in _Bentley’s Miscellany_. -Hence, the first editions of _Pickwick_ in book form are to be met -with bound from the parts, whereas the first editions in book-form -of _Oliver Twist_ are only to be found as issued by the publishers -complete in three volumes. And unless we grasp this distinction at the -outset we shall find it impossible to understand the apparently erratic -appearance and disappearance {44} of the suppressed plate of “Rose -Maylie and Oliver: the Fireside Scene” and its substitute. - -The first instalment of the novel was published in the second number -of _Bentley’s Miscellany_, February 1837, and it continued to run for -nearly two years and a quarter. From this it will be seen that the last -instalment of the novel was not published until three months of the -year 1839 had elapsed. - -In the meantime, however, the novel and the illustrations had been -completed, and the whole story was printed in book form and published -in three volumes in the second year of its serial issue, the exact date -being November 9, 1838. - -As a consequence we shall find the following curious result—namely, -that the owners of the very earliest issue of _Oliver Twist_ find -themselves not in the happy possession of the suppressed plate, as -would be naturally expected, but in the melancholy possession of its -exceedingly ugly substitute. - -This, to the uninitiated, would prove as great a puzzle as to -Macaulay’s New Zealander would appear the fact that in Truro Cathedral -the older {45} structure is of a later style than the new. But this -is comparing small things with great. For we are fain to confess that, -unlike the law, _de minimis curat helluo librorum_. - -Thus, then, we have to face this apparent anomaly, that, to possess -a copy of _Oliver Twist_ with brightest impressions of the etchings -throughout, we are under the necessity of combining the early plates -from _Bentley’s Miscellany_ with the later plates from the first -edition published in volume form. This not uninteresting fact I may, I -believe, claim to be the first to point out, and it goes far to explain -a very misleading note on p. 151 of Reid’s monumental _Catalogue of -George Cruikshank’s Works_, which shows clearly that the late Keeper of -the Prints was greatly at sea in the matter. - -Referring to the “Fireside Scene,” he says: “The plate was used in -1838, when the work reappeared in three volumes, in lieu of the -preceding (‘Rose Maylie and Oliver at Agnes’s Tomb’), which was thought -by the publisher to be of too melancholy a nature for the conclusion -of the story.” From which any casual reader would be {46} led to the -conclusion that “Rose Maylie and Oliver at the Tomb” was the suppressed -plate, and that the “Fireside Scene” was substituted for it, whereas -exactly the opposite was the case. - -The novel was ready for publication complete in three volumes in -the autumn of 1838. The illustrations for the last volume had been -somewhat hastily executed “in a lump.” And Dickens, who always was most -solicitous about the work of his collaborating artists, did not set -eyes upon them until the eve of publication. One of them, “The Fireside -Scene,” he so strongly objected to that it had to be cancelled, and he -wrote to the artist asking him to design “the plate afresh and to do so -_at once_, in order that as few impressions as possible of the present -one may go forth.”[13] The publication of the book, however, could not -be delayed, and thus we have it that the earliest issue of the first -edition of _Oliver Twist_ in book-form contains the “Fireside Scene” -opposite p. 313, vol. iii., which it is the desire of every Dickens -collector to possess, while the later issue of the latter part of the -novel in _Bentley’s Miscellany_ {47} contains that which Cruikshank -substituted for it at the novelist’s request. - - [13] _Vide_ Forster, _Life of Charles Dickens_, vol. i. p. 101. - (Library Edition.) - -Both the plates are here reproduced for the convenience of the owner of -this or that edition. - -But this is not all that has to be said upon the subject of the “Rose -and Oliver” plates, and again I claim to be the purveyor of a little -exclusive information.[14] - -It has generally been supposed that Cruikshank, although naturally put -about by Dickens’s disapproval, did immediately proceed to carry out -his author’s suggestion. For example, we find Mr. Francis Phillimore, -in his introduction to the _Dickens Memento_, published by Messrs. -Field and Tuer, saying: “The author was so disgusted with the last -plate that he politely but forcibly asked Cruikshank to etch another. -This was done at once.” I am, however, in a position to prove that -this was emphatically not the case. And it is what one would naturally -expect, for George was the last person in the world to acquiesce calmly -and unhesitatingly in the condemnation of work which he had himself -deemed sufficiently good. {48} - - [14] I first alluded to this in _Temple Bar_ for September 1892. - -In the year 1892 I had the privilege of examining the splendid -collection of Mr. H. W. Bruton, of Gloucester, which has since been -dispersed. On that occasion he drew my attention to a unique impression -of the “Fireside” plate in his possession, from which we (he was the -first to see the point) drew the necessary conclusion which follows. -The importance of the impression lies in the fact that it shows that -a large amount of added work had been put into the plate, principally -of a stipply nature, after all the impressions which had so displeased -Dickens had been struck off. By which it is evident that George tried -hard to improve the original plate instead of at once falling in -with the suggestion that the subject should be designed afresh. This -proof was probably submitted to Dickens and again rejected, for no -impressions of the plate with stippled additions are known to have -been published.[15] And plainly it was only after considerable effort -to make the plate do, that the artist designed the {49} far worse -picture of “Rose Maylie and Oliver before the Tomb of Agnes,” which is -a questionable adornment to the later issues of the story. And had it -not been for the delay so caused, it is more than probable that the -suppressed plate would have been even a greater rarity than it actually -is. - - [15] It need hardly be said that if any of my readers finds that his - copy contains “The Fireside Scene” differing from the first of those - here produced, he may congratulate himself on the possession of a great - rarity. - -[Illustration: The suppressed plate from “Oliver Twist”: “The Fireside -Scene”] - -[Illustration: The suppressed plate from “Oliver Twist”: “The Fireside -Scene,” as worked upon by Cruikshank] - -As I have said above, Mr. Bruton’s collection was dispersed in 1897 at -Sotheby’s. No. 145 in that sale was an unrivalled run of the _Oliver -Twist_ illustrations, seeing that it consisted of a complete set of -proofs of the etchings, and included, with other rarities, the unique -proof just mentioned. The lot sold for £32:10s. By the kindness of its -late owner, I am enabled to present to my readers a reproduction of -this unique impression of the plate in its second state. - -So much then for the story of the suppressed plate. There is, however, -something more to be said of its substitute. - -If we turn to our edition of _Oliver Twist_, so long as it does not -happen to be one published subsequently to 1845, or one containing the -suppressed plate, we shall find Rose standing with her {50} arm on -Oliver’s shoulder before a tablet put up to his mother’s memory, and -we shall find that Rose’s dress is light in colour save for a dark -shawl or lace fichu, which is thrown across her shoulders and bosom. -In the 1846 edition of the book, the plate has been largely touched up -and shaded, and Rose’s dress turned into a black one.[16] Now, it is -perfectly evident that it is the old plate altered and used over again -and not a new plate copied from the old, for every line and every dot -in the illustration to the earlier editions reappears in this. The -perplexing matter that I have to draw your attention to, however, is -that, in the same lot (145) at the Bruton sale mentioned above, there -was sold a proof of this plate with Rose Maylie in the black dress, and -this _a proof before letters_, an impossible nut for the amateur to -crack who does not know that the lettering of plates may be stopped-out -or burnished away or covered up for the striking off of misleading -impressions; from which the moral may be drawn that it is better to -believe in proof impressions after letters where they are well {52} -authenticated, than to presume that a proof is before letters merely -because those letters do not appear. _Verb. sat sap._ The plate in this -state is here reproduced for the sake of comparison. - -[Illustration: Rose Maylie and Oliver at Agnes’s Tomb. (_The -substituted plate in two states_)] - - [16] The dress is also black in a reprint of the first edition - published by Messrs. Macmillan in 1892, and in the large edition with - the illustrations coloured, published by Messrs. Chapman and Hall in - 1895. - -Before passing from _Oliver Twist_, it should be pointed out that the -first issue of 1838, which contains the suppressed plate, is also -differentiated from the second issue of the same year by what is -sometimes alluded to as the “suppressed title-page,” which runs as -follows:—“Oliver Twist; / or, the / ‘Parish Boy’s Progress;’ / by -‘Boz,’ / in three volumes, / Vol. I (II. or III.) / London: / Richard -Bentley, New Burlington Street. / — — / 1838.” - -The second issue, with the substituted plate, has:—“Oliver Twist / By -/ Charles Dickens, / Author of ‘The Pickwick Papers,’” the rest of the -title being as in the first. It is curious to notice, further, that in -a later edition the original title is resumed. - -So much for _Oliver Twist_. We must not, however, quit Dickens without -mentioning one or two other items, which more or less of right find -their place in a treatise on “Suppressed Plates.” {53} - -There is, for example, the etched title-page to the first issue of the -first edition of _Martin Chuzzlewit_, where the reward on the direction -post appears as “100£” instead of “£100,” which is often wrongly -labelled “suppressed.” As a matter of fact it was not suppressed -at all. It is nothing more than the _first state_ of a plate which -was afterwards altered. However, the bait is so valuable a one with -which to entice the bibliomaniac, that there is no prospect of the -description being lightly relinquished, and as it is one object of this -treatise to protect the unwary, allusion to it is not out of place. -The fact that it is the title-page issued after the book had appeared -serially with its forty illustrations, disposes of any lingering -idea that in acquiring it we are assured of the possession of early -impressions of the other plates. But the undiscriminating bibliomaniac -requires no logical justification, and the plate will still retain its -market value. - -A like variation is to be found in a well-known etching by George -Cruikshank, entitled “The Worship of Wealth.” The head of Mammon is -represented by a small money-bag, and the {54} features of the face -by the letters GOLD. Of this plate only one state was known until in a -happy moment one of our best-known collectors discovered and secured a -unique proof with all the letters printed in reverse, thus:— - -[Illustration] - -—a triumph which only the true _dilettante_ will appreciate at its -proper value. - -Another variation of the same kind is to be found in the first and -second issues of Pine’s beautiful edition of Horace (1733), in which -the text is engraved throughout. In the first there is the misprint -“Post est” on the medal of Cæsar. In the second “Potest” has been -substituted. Copies containing the mistake fetch twice as much in -the market as those containing the correction! This is, however, -justifiable, as the mistake connotes an early set of impressions. - -[Illustration: The Strange Gentleman] - -Another Dickens plate demanding mention is the exceedingly rare etched -frontispiece by “Phiz,” to be found in only a few copies of _The -Strange {55} Gentleman_, published in 1837 by Messrs. Chapman and -Hall. This “Comic Burletta” was founded upon “The Great Winglebury -Duel,” in _Sketches by Boz_, and was first performed at the St. James’s -Theatre in September 1836. A second edition was {56} published in 1860 -with a coloured etching by Mr. F. W. Pailthorpe, the last illustrator -to carry on the tradition of Cruikshank and H. K. Browne. The “Phiz” -etching is here reproduced. Even the second edition is extremely rare, -and readily sells for between two and three pounds. The reason for -the disappearance of the “Phiz” plate is not known, and I only give -particulars of it here because of its excessive rarity, and because -it is constantly referred to as “suppressed,” though with no strict -justification. The British Museum copy of the book only contains Mr. -Pailthorpe’s frontispiece, but a copy with the “Phiz” plate is to be -found in the Forster Library, South Kensington. - -Then, again, we have Dickens’s _Pictures from Italy_, published by -Messrs. Bradbury and Evans in 1846, with the beautiful “vignette -illustrations on the wood,” by that master engraver, Samuel Palmer. -For some reason or other that representing “The Street of the Tombs, -Pompeii,” on the title-page, disappears after the exhaustion of -the first and second editions, both published in the same year. It -reappears, however, in the late {57} reprint of 1888, and is also -only here alluded to because sometimes referred to as “suppressed.” - -[Illustration: The suppressed plate from “Sketches by Boz”] - -The last of the Dickens illustrations germane to our subject is that -much-desired etching of “The Free and Easy,” which should be found -opposite page 29 of the “second series” of _Sketches by Boz_. Both the -first and second series were originally published in 1836. In 1839 -another edition appeared with all the etchings to the original edition -enlarged (except “The Free and Easy,” which was cancelled), and with -thirteen additional plates. An edition on the lines of the first issue -of the second series, only with the illustrations in lithography, was -published in Calcutta in 1837. - -It is important, in collating the first editions of the _Sketches_, to -bear in mind the fact that the first series was in two volumes and the -second in one. Otherwise it is impossible to understand why “Vol. III.” -is engraved on each of the plates in the second series. As showing how -eagerly these volumes in fine condition, and of course uncut and in -the original cloth binding, are sought after, it may be mentioned that -thirty pounds is by no means an unheard-of price. {58} - -Unfortunately the plates will in most cases be found to be badly foxed. -The tissue of the paper itself has in many cases been attacked by damp -and rotted right through. - -In such cases any remedy except the drastic one of punching is of -course out of the question. Hence the rarity of a really “desirable” -set of the plates,—a rarity which is largely due to the hoarding away -of books in glass cases; for books require fresh, dry air, with the -rest of God’s creatures. - -It may not be out of place here, whilst on the subject of foxing, to -warn the collector that every plate in a book should be carefully -examined before any extravagant price is given for what is called a -fine copy. No doubt we are much indebted to the clever “doctors” of -prints who punch the fatal spots out and pulp them in, who fill up the -worm-holes and vamp up the cleaned prints with green-wood smoke and -coffee infusions to a respectable appearance of age. At the same time -we must never allow ourselves to forget that there are such occupations -as vamping and “improving,” and that it is not for vamped and improved -copies that we should pay excessive prices. - -{59} - - - - -CHAPTER V - -ON SOME FURTHER SUPPRESSED PLATES, ETCHINGS, AND WOOD ENGRAVINGS BY -GEORGE CRUIKSHANK - - -In Chapter III. we have incidentally considered the suppressed -grotesque border to the etching of “The Last Song” by George Cruikshank -in the _Memoirs of Joseph Grimaldi_. In this chapter we shall treat of -certain other suppressions to which the “inimitable” George’s work was -subjected. - -The first to which I shall direct your attention has a curious and -romantic history attaching to it, instinct with the rough and brutal -methods of our immediate ancestors. It is a highly-coloured etched -broadside published in 1815, the very year of the tragic death of the -gifted and ill-fated Gillray, whose mantle, as political caricaturist, -was now fallen upon his brilliant young contemporary. {60} These -were the days of hard hitting, of reckless charges, of imprisonment -for libel, of dramatic political episodes, and the wonder is that -George Cruikshank escaped the fates of the Burdetts, the Hones, and -the Hobhouses of the period. The fact is that George was a very shrewd -young man and had a very shrewd idea of how far it was safe to go. -Indeed, in this partially suppressed cartoon we find him upon the very -verge of recklessness and only drawing back from danger just in the -nick of time. - -I have spoken of the _partial_ suppression of this broadside, and in -this _partial_ cancellation it is differentiated from all others with -which we have hitherto dealt. Brutal enough as is the satire as we see -it, there is a brutality curiously hidden within, which, unsuspected -by the uninitiated, proves to what astounding lengths satire of that -period was sometimes ready to go. - -Before dealing in detail with this “Financial Survey of Cumberland or -the Beggar’s Petition” it will be as well to relate the circumstances -which led up to its perpetration. - -Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, born {61} 1771, was perhaps the -best hated of all the royal personages of the period then in England, -and this notwithstanding the fact that he was a man of conspicuous -bravery. He was, for a few years after Queen Victoria’s accession, next -heir to the throne of England. Later he ascended the throne of Hanover -under the regulations of the Salic law, and gained the affection of his -people, proving himself a wise and beneficent ruler. Probably William -IV. put his character into a nutshell when he said: “Ernest is not such -a bad fellow, but if any one has a corn he is sure to tread on it.” - -However that may be, there is no doubt that there is hardly a crime in -the whole decalogue which was not at one time or another laid at his -door, and not the least among these was the crime of murder. - -To quote the succinct account of this affair given in the _Dictionary -of National Biography_:—“On the night of 31st May 1810 the duke was -found in his apartments in St. James’s Palace with a terrible wound in -his head, which would have been mortal had not the assassin’s weapon -struck against the duke’s sword. Shortly afterwards his {62} valet, -Sellis,[17] was found dead in his bed with his throat cut. On hearing -the evidence of the surgeons and other witnesses, the coroner’s jury -returned a verdict that Sellis had committed suicide after attempting -to assassinate the duke. The absence of any reasonable motive... caused -this event to be greatly discussed, and democratic journalists did not -hesitate to hint that he really murdered Sellis.” One of these, Henry -White, was sentenced in 1815 to fifteen months’ imprisonment and a fine -of £200 for publishing the rumour. The story again cropped up in 1832, -when the duke had made himself particularly obnoxious to the radical -press, and was exploited by a pamphleteer named Phillips. The duke -prosecuted him, and he was promptly found guilty and sentenced to six -months’ imprisonment. - - [17] Not Serres, as Reid has it in his descriptive account of - Cruikshank’s works. The keeper of the prints evidently confused the - name of the valet with that of Mrs. Olive Serres, who later on called - herself Princess Olive of Cumberland, and claimed to be the duke’s - legitimate daughter. - -Notwithstanding this, there was little abatement in the persecution of -the duke. Even Lord Brougham in the House of Lords sneeringly called -{63} him to his face “the illustrious duke—illustrious only by -courtesy.” I take up a few consecutive numbers of that venomous little -contemporary paper, _Figaro in London_, and find week by week some very -plain speaking. Here are a few examples:— - - “That he’s ne’er known to change his mind - Is surely nothing strange; - For no one ever yet could find - He’d any mind to change.” - -Again:— - - “He boasts about the truth, I’ve heard, - And vows he’d never break it; - Why zounds a man _must_ keep his word - When nobody will take it.” - -Again, referring to a youth dressed _à la Prince de Cumberland_, -who had been brought up at Bow Street charged with being an expert -pickpocket, _Figaro_ says: “A similarity to the Duke of Cumberland is -a very serious matter, and in the opinion of Mr. Halls (the police -magistrate) quite sufficient to entitle any one to a couple of months’ -imprisonment, as a common thief or an incorrigible vagabond.” - -Again:—{64} - - “INQUEST EXTRAORDINARY - - Found dead of fright, a child, (how sad a case!) - Verdict—Saw Cumberland’s mustachioed face.” - -Again:—“The new piece announced at Drury Lane under the title of _The -Dæmon Duke_ or _The Mystic Branch_ has no reference whatever to his -Royal Highness of Cumberland.” - -But these might be multiplied almost to infinity. The examples quoted -make it sufficiently plain why it was that the Whig Cabinet of the day -felt it advisable to hurry on our late Queen’s marriage. - -So much for a general review of the duke’s career. We will now return -to the year 1815 and the publication of the broadside with which we are -more particularly concerned. - -The duke had just announced his intention of marrying the Princess -of Salm, who had been twice a widow. The Prince Regent had raised -no objection, but the Queen, who had a rooted aversion to second -marriages, made no secret of her disapproval. The country, too, was -indignant, because another royal marriage spelt, in accordance with -what was now the ordinary usage, a further burden upon the exchequer. - -[Illustration: “A Financial Survey of Cumberland or the Beggars -Petition.” (_From the only known uncoloured impression of the Plate_)] - -[Illustration: “A Financial Survey of Cumberland or the Beggars -Petition.” (_From a coloured impression of the plate, with the figure -of the valet obliterated with lamp-black_)] - -{65} - -On July 3 the proposal was made in the Commons to increase the duke’s -pension of £18,000 a year, which he held in addition to his salary of -£3000 a year as Colonel of the 1st Hussars, by £6000. The House was -equally divided on the vote, when a dramatic incident occurred. Lord -Cochrane, heir to the Dundonald peerage, and a member of the House of -Commons, had, in the previous year, been wrongfully found guilty of -participation in a Stock Exchange fraud and had been imprisoned. On -this very 3rd day of July he was released from prison, and immediately -repaired to Westminster. The House was at that moment going to a -division. His lordship entered just in time to record his casting -vote against the increase of the duke’s pension, and thus by an -extraordinary coincidence the duke was the poorer and the country the -richer by £6000 a year. - -This is the moment seized by Cruikshank in the broadside here -reproduced. Before the half-open door of “St. Stephen’s,” behind -which is seen a crowd of members, Lord Cochrane fires, from a mortar -decorated with a full-bottomed wig, a {66} cannon-ball labelled -“casting vote.” This, striking the duke full in the rear, drives him -towards a bank on which stand three grenadiers, the Princess of Salm -(recognisable by the flag which she carries, labelled “Psalms”) and her -little boy, who sings— - - My daddy is a grenadier - And he’s pleas’d my Mammy O, - With his _long swoard_ and _broadswoard_ - And his bayonet so handy O. - -The duke, from whose hand falls his petition, and whose head is adorned -with a cuckold’s horns, cries aloud, “Pity the sorrow of a poor young -man”; whilst Cochrane thunders out, “No, no, we’ll have no petitions -here. Do you thint (_sic_) we are not up to your hoaxing, cadging -tricks? You vagrant, do you think we’ll believe all you say or swear? -Do you think that your services or your merits will do you any good -here? If you do, I can tell you from experience that you are cursedly -mistaken. So set off and don’t show your ugly face here again. If you -do, shiver my timbers if I don’t send you to Ellenborough Castle: aye, -aye, my boy, I’ll clap you in the _grated chamber_, where there’s -neither door, window, {67} onr (_sic_) fireplace. I’ll put you in the -_Stocks_! I’ll put you in the _Pillory_! I’ll _fine_ you. I’ll, I’ll -play hell with you! D—— me, I think I have just come in time to give -you a shot between wind and water.” - -On the ground below the flying duke lie documents recording his -pensions and salaries. - -No wonder, you will say, that such a scandalous attack upon a personage -so near the throne should be suppressed with a high hand. The marvel is -that artist and publisher should have escaped the fate of Henry White -and the pamphleteer Phillips. But you will be more surprised than ever -when you learn that not only did artist and publisher go scot-free, -but that the plate, so far from being suppressed, was published and -scattered broadcast amongst the people without protest. - -Why, then, it will be asked, does it take its place in a treatise on -suppressed plates? I will tell you. - -Do you not notice in the darker impression of the plate here -reproduced—darker because the original has been painted—that such -perspective as the picture has is destroyed by a great black blot {68} -which reaches from the feet of the three soldiers right down to the -path in the right-hand lower corner of the design? Well, that great -black blot covers what would have inevitably landed George Cruikshank -and Mr. W. N. Jones of 5 Newgate Street, publisher, in a larger -building higher up the same street, if it had not been for a happy -afterthought of Mr. W. N. Jones, which took shape in a liberal use of -lamp-black.[18] - -On the space so covered the reckless George, unmindful of the fate of -Henry White, had etched the scantily clothed figure of the unhappy -valet Sellis, with bleeding throat, crying aloud, “Is this a razor that -I see before me? Thou canst not say I did it.” - - [18] This use of lamp-black has its parallel in the case of one of - the tailpieces to Bewick’s _Birds_, in the first edition of which an - apprentice was employed to veil certain indelicacies with a coat of - ink. Unfortunately, from want of density, the colouring rather serves - to accentuate than hide the offending details. In the next edition a - plug was inserted in the block and two bars of wood engraved in the - interests of decency. - -After but one or two proofs had been pulled, George and his publisher -would seem to have become appalled at their temerity, and the plate -was only issued coloured and with the peccant {69} figure blotted out. -For many years I hoped and hoped in vain to come across an uncoloured -proof displaying the hidden figure. But it was not until 1905 that -I was fortunate enough to light upon the probably unique proof here -reproduced, which had passed out of the Bruton collection into that of -the omnivorous collector, the late Edwin Truman. - -For the sake of those who have preserved the valuable catalogue of -the sale in 1897 of the Bruton collection of the works of George -Cruikshank, it should be observed that Reid’s misnomer of the valet to -which I have drawn attention above has been there repeated. - -So much, then, for the partially suppressed broadside of 1815, which -incidentally may be looked upon as the forerunner of the blottesque -censorship of Russian newspapers. We will now pass on to another -broadside which was not only suppressed in full, but of which the -copies that had already been sold were assiduously bought up. - -The circumstances surrounding this plate are by no means so dramatic -as those with which we have last dealt. At the same time, by means of -it we obtain one of those sharp contrasts in political {70} moods and -tenses which pleasurably tickle the imagination. We learn how little is -absolute in life, how much is relative. We realise how the reactionary -of to-day may have been the reformer of yesterday. In a word, we see -in this most conservative member of the Russell administration of -1846–1852 and of the Coalition of 1853, in this complacent recipient of -the peerage of Broughton de Gyfford and the Grand Cross of the Bath, -in this happy husband of a Marquis’s daughter,—we see, I say, in this -Tory nobleman of the ’fifties the irreconcilable John Cam Hobhouse of -the early years of the century, committed to Newgate for breach of -privilege, the author of the subversive _Letters to an Englishman_, and -the representative for Parliament of the Westminster mobocracy. - -[Illustration: “_A Trifling Mistake_”——_Corrected_——] - -In Cruikshank’s broadside here reproduced the future President of -the Board of Control is represented twirling his thumbs in enforced -retirement and with full leisure to repent of his indiscretions. Above -the mantelpiece representations of St. Stephen’s and Newgate are placed -in sharp contrast. Below the last a former occupant of the {72} cell -has scratched a rude gibbet. The grate is empty. On the table stand an -empty pewter pot and pipe. On the wall is seen a long quotation from -his anonymous pamphlet _A Trifling Mistake_, for which he has been -committed to prison. This, with a barbed addition, gives the title to -the broadside itself. The quotation runs:— - - “What prevents ye people from walking down to ye house and pulling - out ye members by ye ears, locking up their doors and flinging ye - key into ye Thames? Is it any majesty which lodges in the members of - that assembly? Do we love them? Not at all: we have an instinctive - horror and disgust at the very abstract idea of ye boroughmonger. Do - we respect them? Not in the least. Do we regard them as endowed with - any superior qualities? On the contrary, there is scarcely a poorer - creature than your mere member of Parliament; though, in his corporate - capacity, ye earth furnishes not so absolute a bully. Their true - practical protectors, then—the real efficient anti-reformers,—are to - be found at ye Horse Guards and ye Knightsbridge Barracks. As long as - the House of Commons majorities are backed by the regimental muster - roll, so long may those who have got the tax power keep it and hang - those who resist”!!! !!! !!! - - Vide _Trifling Mistake_. - -Below this hangs a bill headed “Little Hob in the Well.” {73} - -The reproduction of the etching here given is from a very interesting -touched proof in the British Museum. Upon it the artist’s work in -pencil can be plainly traced. To the right of the picture of Newgate -another roughly drawn gibbet can be distinguished. On the bill -the words have been added, “A New Song in Defence of the People, -corrected,” etc. The profile of the prisoner has been carefully -reduced, and a punning sub-title to the whole added, “How Cam you to be -in that Hobble?” - -The date on the margin is January 1, 1819 (obviously a mistake for -1820), and its publication, no doubt, went some way towards Hobhouse’s -election as member for Westminster, which took place immediately after -his release on the 20th day of the month in the year 1820. - -After his elevation to the peerage Hobhouse took no active part in -public affairs. He died as lately as 1869, leaving no issue. Probably -the plate was suppressed on the ground that it contained the long -quotation given above from the lawless pamphlet for which he was -imprisoned. - -As I have said in an earlier chapter, it is not my {74} intention -to make this treatise in any way a devil’s directory for those in -search of salacious curiosities. I shall therefore not dwell upon the -suppressed woodcut, which is rather coarse than loose, of “The Dead -Rider” in the _Italian Tales_ of 1823. I merely mention it for the -sake of those who may be collating the book, and would find themselves -misled by Reid’s note on the subject. He speaks of the “Elopement” -woodcut being “wanting in two or three copies consulted of the first -edition,” as though this were a matter for surprise. He fails to draw -the very obvious conclusion that “The Elopement” was substituted for -“The Dead Rider,” so that the number of illustrations might continue to -tally with the announcement on the title-page, “Sixteen illustrative -drawings by George Cruikshank.” He has apparently been confused by the -fact, which I notice confuses a good many secondhand booksellers, that -every copy has _a_ woodcut entitled “The Dead Rider,” but that it is -only the first issue that has _two_ woodcuts with the same title. - -And, whilst touching on the subject of Cruikshank’s early -indiscretions, it will, I think, be only {75} fair to repeat a story -of pretty and spontaneous atonement which I have told elsewhere, and -which deals with another suppressed broadside. - -No. 887 in Reid’s catalogue is “Accidents in High Life, or Royal Hobbys -broke down, Dedicated to the Society for the Suppression of Vice.” Its -companion picture is “Royal Hobbys of the Hertfordshire Cock Horse,” -which was suppressed as being too suggestive even for so latitudinarian -an age as that of the Regency. In the former the artist portrays the -discomfiture of the Prince and the Marchioness of Hertford through the -pole of the hobby-horse, upon which they have been riding, breaking -and throwing both of them to the ground. The lady is cursing her -folly in trusting herself to “such an old stick,” while her admirer -is exclaiming that he shall try the Richmond Road in the future, the -Hertford one being so unsatisfactory. The Duke of York is suffering -from a similar disaster, and congratulating himself upon the softness -of the cushion by which his fall has been broken, in allusion to his -income of £10,000 for having charge of his father. - -Now Mr. Bruton, who, like the late Mr. Truman, {76} had the advantage -of George Cruikshank’s friendship in later years, was able to obtain -authentication or repudiation of doubtful unsigned work from the -artist himself, and, amongst others, this plate was submitted to him -for judgment. The man’s honesty forced him to acknowledge himself to -be the author of this piece of full-blooded vulgarity, but his regret -has altered the usual laconic record of “Not by me, G. Ck.,” or “By my -brother, I. R. C.,” pencilled on the plate, to “Sorry to say this is by -me, G. C.” The old man was, when he came to look back upon a long life -of good and evil mixed, somewhat more human than that terribly pious -hero of Pope’s— - - Who calmly looked on either life, and here - Saw nothing to regret, or there to bear; - From nature’s temp’rate feast rose satisfy’d, - Thank’d heav’n that he had liv’d, and that he dy’d. - -He looked back with genuine remorse upon youthful extravagances, and, -though doubtless inclined by nature to be something of a _poseur_, -and though he attitudinised somewhat too much over his virtuous -fads at last, was not going to bolster up his reputation by an easy -forgetfulness of early indiscretions. {77} - -[Illustration: Philoprogenitiveness] - -Only a few words need be said of the other Cruikshank suppressions here -reproduced. The first is the well-known plate “Philoprogenitiveness,” -which was published in the earliest separate edition of that noble -_Essay on the Genius of George Cruikshank_, written by Thackeray -for, and reprinted {78} from, _The Westminster Review_ in 1840. And -surely it was a prurient and unnatural squeamishness which condemned -this illustration to exclusion in the subsequent editions. It is from -the _Phrenological Illustrations_, published in 1826, one of the -most famous of Cruikshank’s publications. I shall follow Thackeray’s -excellent example of refraining from any description, and just leave -the design to speak for itself, for it is a ridiculous task “to -translate his designs into words, and go to the printer’s box for a -description of all that fun and humour which the artist can produce by -a few skilful turns of his needle.” - -The second is the cancelled wood engraving entitled “Drop it,” which -appears on page 18 of the first edition of _Talpa; or the Chronicle of -a Clay Farm, an Agricultural Fragment_, by C. M. H(oskyns), published -in 1853. For some unknown reason it disappears from subsequent -editions, and is only of importance to those who pride themselves on -being the possessors of Cruikshank _editiones principes_. - -[Illustration: “Drop it!”] - -There is another Cruikshank suppression which might, were we hard -up for material, be dragged {79} into a treatise on suppressed -illustrations. I refer to a wood engraving of the redoubtable George -himself taking his publisher, Brooks, by the nose with a pair of tongs, -which resulted in the suppression of the pamphlet entitled _A Pop-gun -fired off by George Cruikshank, etc._, in which it appeared. But if -we were to open these pages to the consideration of suppressed books -and pamphlets, I should soon find my publishers remonstrating, and -the volume too big to handle. Further, it affords me the gratifying -opportunity of referring the reader to a small book of mine, published -in 1897, by Mr. W. P. Spencer, of 27 New Oxford Street, and entitled -_George_ {80} _Cruikshank’s Portraits of Himself_ which I, as -the author, of course consider has not attained the circulation -it deserves. There will be found a full account of the suppressed -pamphlet, together with a reproduction of the offending design. - -Let me close this chapter with “A Cruikshank Outrage,” which I -originally contributed to _The Gentleman’s Magazine_. It is, I -think, sufficiently apropos, and will, I hope, appeal to all good -Cruikshankians. - - This is the bookcase, this the key; - None may open this lock but me; - - And only those of the cult may come - Into my _sanctum sanc-to-rum_. - - Swear “by George” on his “Omnibus” - You are assuredly one of us. - - Swear “by George” on his “Almanack” - You will return each volume back. - - Swear by “Grimm” _in the earliest state_ - Theft and pillage you reprobate. - - Yes, that’s bound by Rivière, but - Here’s _the original cloth, uncut_. - - The “Bee and the Wasp” _on India, tilt_, - Zaehnsdorf binder, _morocco, gilt_. - - But all my “Scourges” plain bound shall bide— - Plenty of “guilt” may be found inside. {81} - - Here’s my “Omnibus,” worth a fief - Because I’ve the unpaged preface-leaf. - - “London Characters,” set complete, - _Sm. 8vo, in hlf. clf. neat_. - - Here a set of gigantic frauds - _In the original_ LABELLED _boards_. - - “Oliver Twist,” as you will have guessed, - The “Rose and Oliver” plate suppressed: - - Not with the stippling over-writ— - Only Bruton[19] can show you IT. - - And here “The Bottle” COLOURED, date - Eighteen-hundred-and-forty-eight. - - Yes, no doubt, ’twas among the first - Thrusts that the Master launched at Thirst. - - ! George, you say, was at best, you think, - As a Temperance man denouncing drink ! - - !! You dare tell me you interlope - In quest of books for your “Band of Hope” !! - - !!! You swore “by George” on his “Omnibus” - You were assuredly one of us !!! - - !!!! Avaunt, I prithee, aroynt, vacate - This orthodox shrine to George the Great !!!! - - For only those of the cult may come - Into my _sanctum sanc-to-rum_. - - [19] Since the Bruton sale in 1897 this, alas, is no longer true. - -{82} - - - - -CHAPTER VI - -HOGARTH’S “ENTHUSIASM DELINEATED,” “THE MAN OF TASTE,” AND “DON QUIXOTE” - - -In Mr. Austin Dobson’s _Hogarth_, to which all students of that master -are so deeply indebted, the following sentence concludes the list -of “Prints of an Uncertain Date”: “It has been thought unnecessary -to include two or three designs, the grossness of which neither the -ingenuity of the artist nor the coarse taste of his time can reasonably -be held to excuse.” And in this book I have made it a cardinal point to -emulate Mr. Dobson’s excellent example. - -We remember in one of Mr. G. Russell’s amusing books the story of -the erstwhile Member of Parliament who had accepted a peerage, -notwithstanding his profession of democratic sentiments. Thereupon -one of his late supporters, {83} with excellent, though somewhat -brutal, metaphor, remarked, “Mr. —— says as how he’s going to the -House of Lords to leaven it. I tell you he can’t no more leaven the -House of Lords than you can sweeten a cart-load of muck with a pot of -marmalade.” _Per contra_, let us always bear in mind, that were the -cart full of marmalade, and the pot of muck, the latter would be fully -sufficient to render the whole an abomination. Fortunately for us, the -Hogarth “Suppressed Plates” which are befitting are of exceptional -interest. And it may as well be pointed out here that those peculiarly -gross ones which are often alluringly alluded to as “suppressed” are -nothing of the sort. So far from being indeed effectively withdrawn -from observation, they have had, as a matter of fact, particular -attention drawn _to_ them by the fussy ingenuity with which their -concealment has been emphasised. - -The first of the Hogarth plates which we here reproduce—“Enthusiasm -Delineated”—is of far greater intrinsic importance than any of those -with which we have already dealt in the preceding chapters. It differs -essentially from them not {84} only in the fact that here the artist -himself is the fount and origin of the suppression but also in the -fact that it is a fine example of those palimpsest plates of which -more particular description will be found in later chapters of this -book. Peculiar interest, too, attaches to the circumstance that, superb -as it was in execution, and elaborate to a degree though it was in -conception, it was no sooner finished than the artist deliberately -decided against its publication, and destroyed the engraving after only -two impressions had been taken from the copper. Fortunately for us, one -of these is now in the possession of the British Museum. - -It will be interesting to those who are the happy possessors of -_Hogarth Illustrated_ and the _Anecdotes_ to compare this with the -reduced _copy_ (a very different matter) made by Mills and published -in these volumes. For it must always be remembered that Hogarth’s -autograph engravings are infinitely more interesting than the copies, -however eminent the journeyman engraver may have been. - -[Illustration: Enlarged detail of Hogarth’s “Enthusiasm Delineated”] - -Another plate was engraved by Mills of the size of the original, and -published separately by Ireland {86} in 1795. The date of the original -plate is given in the British Museum Catalogue as 1739, but how that -date is arrived at I am at a loss to understand. - -It will be noticed that there are upon the margin of our reproduction -some curious _remarques_ inscribed “the windmill,” “the scales,” and -others. These were drawn in pen-and-ink by Hogarth on the margins of -the two original impressions. They also appear engraved in facsimile on -the second state of Mills’s full-sized plate. It will therefore be well -for owners of this last not to jump to the hasty conclusion that they -are the fortunate possessors of one of the two impressions mentioned -above! It should be added that the MS. inscription on the British -Museum copy differs considerably from that engraved by Mills. - -The method by which the suppression of this plate came about is -exceedingly curious. - -It is probable that, after the design was completed, Hogarth came to -the conclusion that the intention of the satire might be mistaken, and -that, instead of bringing ridicule upon “the superstitious absurdities -of popery and ridiculous {87} personification delineated by ancient -painters,” it might be considered that his objective was religion -itself. - -If this were so, the episode redounds greatly to the artist’s credit, -and throws an effective light upon a little-known side of his -character. It was an act of great nobleness to suppress what was the -result of long toil, nay, more than that, what was perhaps his highest -mental, though by no means his highest artistic, achievement, from what -some might consider hyper-conscientious motives. - -It must be remembered that Hogarth lived in a gross and irreligious -age, and that what appears to us exceedingly profane was largely the -result of the outspokenness of the times. - -Ireland says that he altered and altered this plate piecemeal until its -final suppression. This, however, I venture to doubt, for reasons given -below. At all events, in the end he had beaten out and re-engraved -every figure save one, and changed, as Mr. Dobson says, what “was a -compact satire” into “a desultory work—a work of genius for a lesser -man, but scarcely worthy of Hogarth.” The final design was entitled -{88} “Credulity, Superstition and Fanaticism: a Medley,” and was -published in March 1762. - -Let us now compare the two designs. Hogarth’s general purpose in the -first was, in his own words, to give “a lineal representation of the -strange effects of literal and low conceptions of Sacred Beings, as -also of the idolatrous tendency of Pictures in Churches and Prints -in Religious Books.” In the second his text was, “Believe not every -spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false -Prophets are gone out into the world.” - -Before comparing the designs in detail, I should like to say that, -besides carefully examining the plates for myself, I have collated the -various descriptions of Ireland, Nichols, Mr. Austin Dobson, and Mr. F. -G. Stephens, whose conclusions I have not hesitated to adopt, add to, -discard or modify, as the circumstances have seemed to require. - -Let us now particularise the incidents portrayed on the two states -of the plate, both of which are here reproduced for purposes of -comparison. - -[Illustration: PLATE I. “Enthusiasm Delineated. (Humbly dedicated to -his Grace the Arch Bishop of Canterbury by his Graces most obedient -humble Servant _Wm. Hogarth_”)] - -[Illustration: PLATE II. “Credulity, Superstition, and Fanaticism. A -Medley”] - -Beginning with the preacher, we notice that {89} his is the only figure -practically unaltered and common to both engravings. By his “bull-roar” -(_vide_ the “scale of Vociferation” hanging on the wall to his left) he -has apparently succeeded in cracking the sounding-board above his head. -Notice his shaven crown, exposed by the fallen wig, which intimates -that he is a Papist in disguise; and the harlequin jacket underneath -his gown, which suggests that he is a religious merry-andrew. A point -worth remarking is that the halo surrounds his wig, and not his head! - -From his right hand (Plate I.) he suspends a puppet (caricatured from -a picture of Raphael’s) supporting the sacred triangle, which, in -attempting to personify the Trinity, was considered by some to be a -profane materialisation of a mystical idea. This he has ingeniously -turned into a gridiron or trivet of the Inquisition by the simple -addition of three legs. In Plate II. this puppet has been removed and -its place taken by a witch, riding on a broom-handle, who is suckling -what appears to be a huge rat. Beyond the preacher’s hand we find a -further addition in the shape of a cherub, hunting-cap on head, bearing -in its mouth {90} a letter directed “To St. Moneytrap.” The sermon -paper, too, has been turned about so as to bring the words “I speak as -a fool” into greater prominence. In which connection it may be noticed -that in “Enthusiasm Delineated” all the lettering would seem to be from -the burin of Hogarth, whilst that in the “Medley” has been put in by a -writing engraver, with considerable weakening of the general effect. -Dangling from the preacher’s left hand is a devil with a gridiron -(after Rubens), practically identical in both plates, though obviously -re-engraved. - -Further puppets hang ready for use on the panels of the pulpit. In -Plate I. they are caricature representations, from pictures of the -Old Masters, of Adam and Eve (suggested by Albert Dürer), of Peter -with his Key, and Paul in a black periwig armed with two swords and -elevated by high-heeled shoes (travestied from Rembrandt), and of Moses -and Aaron. In Plate II. these scriptural puppets are exchanged for -the superstitious images of Mrs. Veal’s ghost (see the writing on the -book), who, according to Defoe, appeared the day after her death to -Mrs. Bargrave {91} of Canterbury, September 8, 1705; of Julius Cæsar’s -apparition, starting at its own appearance in the looking-glass; and -of that of Sir George Villers (_sic_), not “Villiers” as Ireland has -it, whose appearance to an officer at Windsor, charging him to warn -his son, the Duke of Buckingham, of his approaching assassination, is -recorded by Lord Clarendon and Lilly the astrologer. - -In the foreground, on the right, we have in both plates a most -remarkable mental thermometer, the bulb of which is inserted in a -Methodist’s brain. In Plate I. the mercury stands at “low-spirits”; -in Plate II. at “lukewarm.” In the first a dove surmounts the whole; -in the second the Methodist’s brain rests upon “Wesley’s Sermons,” -and “Glanvid” (an evident misprint for “Glanvil”) on “Witches.” The -lettering, too, is altered, and, in place of the inscription in the -top division, is a picture of the Cock Lane Ghost, of which Walpole -wrote—“Elizabeth Canning and the Rabbit Women were modest impostors -in comparison of this.” The whole is surmounted by a figure of the -Tedworth drummer immortalised by Addison. {92} - -In the adjoining pew a nobleman, as can be seen by the decoration half -concealed by his coat, makes love to a girl, who discards a heavenly -for a very earthly affection, point to which is given by the quotation -from Whitfield’s hymn which can be read on the paper hanging over the -adjacent clerk’s desk. The “mixed expression of religious hypocrisy and -amorous desire” on the girl’s face is marvellously expressed. The other -occupant of the pew is a repentant thief, as may be seen from the “T” -branded on his cheek. - -In the first account of the plate given in the _Catalogue of Prints and -Drawings in the British Museum_, the suggestion that the felon sniffs -at a bottle of spirits held in the hands of the image is obviously -incorrect. He is dropping his tears into the bottle. In Plate II. a -less aristocratic and somewhat more decently behaved pair of lovers -occupy the pew. The puppet held by the man is clearly a repetition of -the Cock Lane Ghost, only bearing in its hand a lighted candle in place -of a hammer. What the meaning of this is I fail to understand. Of the -two other occupants of the pew one is weeping and the other asleep. -{93} A winged devil whispers evil thoughts into the sleeper’s ear. - -In both plates, on a bracket attached to the side of the pew and -inscribed “The Poor’s Box,” rests a wire rat-trap in place of the -proper receptacle. - -Turning now to the clerk’s desk, which in Plate I. has the inscription -“Cherubim and Seraph [ — ] do cry,” and in Plate II. “Continually do -cry,” we find a hideous and brutal-looking clerk singing lustily from -a book which he half supports in his claw-like fingers. Supporting him -are two winged cherubs, the ridiculous nothingness of whose bodies -(so envied by Thackeray in his days of pupilage) is accentuated by -the significant addition of ducks’ feet. Their pitiful faces accord -with the punning inscription on the edge of the desk. In Plate II. the -ducks’ feet have been removed, but to make up for the loss we have the -clerk himself, now a lean and hungry-looking individual, also decorated -with a pair of wings. - -Below the desk in Plate I. howls a dog, his collar engraved with -Whitfield’s name, whilst, below the hassock on which he sits, a ragged -{94} figure squats embracing an image. In Plate II. a book entitled -_Demonology, by K. James Ist._, surmounted by a shoeblack’s basket -in which _Whitfield’s Journal_ is stuck, takes the place of the dog, -whilst the boy of Bilston, vomiting forth nails, displaces the ragged -figure. From the neck of the bottle in his hand a figure, similar to -that held by the man in the pew, rises expelling the cork, which falls -to the ground. - -In the forefront of Plate I. lies the bloated figure of Mother Douglas, -who, after a most licentious life, was said to have become a rigid -devotee. Hogarth, who has portrayed her in other of his plates, here -ridicules her conversion. A hand belonging to a figure outside the -plate holds a bottle of salts to her nose. In Plate II. Mary Tofts, “ye -Godliman woman,” takes her place. Her well-known imposture, which it -would be out of place to particularise here, gave rise to a voluminous -literature, and a sheaf of remarkable caricatures. In place of the -salts a glass of cordial is applied as a restorative. - -[Illustration: The Chandelier in “Enthusiasm”] - -[Illustration: The Chandelier in “Credulity”] - -In Plate I., behind the prostrate woman a bearded Jew regards the -preacher with mock {96} devotion, what time he kills a flea between -his thumb-nails. Before him lies a book open at a picture of Abraham -offering up Isaac. In Plate II. the figure of the Jew is much weakened, -whilst a knife inscribed “Bloody” is laid across a picture of an altar -on the page of the open book. - -In the background of both plates a motley collection of devotees -assists at these religious orgies. To the extreme left of Plate II., -which, by the addition of several persons in the congregation, has -become greatly overcrowded, a minister directs the attention of a -terrified wretch, whose hair bristles with fear, to the extraordinary -double-globed chandelier above their heads. - -Final emphasis is given to the whole satire by the figure of a Turk -(slightly varied in the two plates), who regards with amusement through -the window the idolatry of those “dogs of Christians.” - -So much for the details of the plates. As regards the general effect of -the whole, the superiority of the suppressed design will be evident at -a glance. In lighting, balance, and composition, the substituted design -is immeasurably removed from the original. Nor would this be wonderful -if, {97} as Ireland surmised, “the alterations were made by degrees.” - -With this view, however, I find it, as I have said above, impossible -to concur. If, as he suggests, the figures were beaten out one by one, -their substitutes would occupy practically identical spaces on the -plate; but a little measurement demonstrates the fact that, with the -exception of the figure of the preacher, which has been left where it -was, and of the mental thermometer, which has been raised, almost the -whole of the design has been shifted downwards. - -I am therefore inclined to think that from the first Hogarth, from -one cause or another, made up his mind to change the direction of his -satire, and at once beat out all the figures on the plate save one. -That the arrangement of the new design should coincide generally with -that of the first is, I think, no more than one would naturally expect, -and does not in any way weaken the argument. - -In conclusion, it should be pointed out, for the sake of those who -would study the matter further, that the accounts of the impressions of -the several plates in the _Catalogue of Prints and Drawings {98} in -the British Museum_ are not easily found, being somewhat arbitrarily -placed at pages 301–307, vol. iii., part i., and pages 644–648, vol. -ii., respectively. - - * * * * * - -So far we have seen Hogarth in his character of general iconoclast and -antipapist. It is now our business to deal with him in what was a more -personal polemic. - -In the year 1731 Pope first published his notorious attack upon the -Duke of Chandos in his satire _Of Taste: An Epistle to the Right Hon. -Richard, Earl of Burlington_. - -Hogarth forthwith entered the lists, and designed and published a -well-deserved pictorial counterblast, allusively entitled “The Man of -Taste,” or “Burlington Gate.” This was immediately “suppressed” on a -prosecution being threatened because of what was deemed its scurrilous -and defamatory character. - -Notwithstanding this prompt suppression, however, the design reappeared -the following year, reduced in size, as frontispiece to a pirated -edition of Pope’s “Epistle,” which was included in a pamphlet entitled -_A Miscellany on Taste; by {99} Mr. Pope, etc._, published by Lawton -and others. Its contents were (1) Of Taste in Architecture, an Epistle -to the Earl of Burlington, with _Notes Variorum_, and a complete -Key; (2) Of Mr. Pope’s Taste in Divinity: viz., the Fall of Man, -and the First Psalm, translated for the use of a Young Lady; (3) Of -Mr. Pope’s Taste of Shakespeare; (4) His Satire on Mr. P——y; and -(5) Mr. Congreve’s fine Epistle on Retirement and Taste, addressed -to Lord Cobham. In this copy of the plate Pope, who is shown in the -original by means of the back of his head and figure, and as wearing -a full-bottomed wig, is more distinctly satirised, his face being -displayed in profile, and his head enclosed by a linen cap instead of a -wig. Amongst a few other minor alterations, it may be noticed that the -palette held by Kent is transferred from one hand to the other. - -Referring to the republication of Hogarth’s cartoon in this form, -Mr. Dobson seems somewhat inclined to argue against the story of -its “suppression,” or, at any rate, its effectual suppression; but -he does not allude to the important fact that the publisher of this -pamphlet {100} was _also_ promptly prosecuted, and the sale strictly -prohibited. From which it is clear that the suppression was as -unqualified and as prompt as could reasonably be expected. - -Steevens indeed mentions a copy upon which the following inscription -had been made:— - - “Bo^t. this book of Mr. Wayte, at the Fountain Tavern, in the Strand, - in the presence of Mr. Draper, who told me he had it of the Printer, - Mr. W. Rayner. - - “J. COSINS.” - -The signatory was an Attorney, and the wording of the memorandum -suggests the intended prosecution. - -To return to Pope’s poem. In it he passes the most scathing criticism -upon the splendid but tasteless surroundings of “Timon” at his -stupendous villa. - - “Greatness, with Timon, dwells in such a draught - As brings all Brobdingnag before your thought. - To compass this, his building is a town, - His pond an ocean, his parterre a down: - Who but must laugh, the master when he sees, - A puny insect, shivering at the breeze! - Lo, what huge heaps of littleness around! - The whole, a labour’d quarry above ground. - Two cupids squirt before: a lake behind - Improves the keenness of the northern wind. - His gardens next your admiration call, - On every side you look, behold the wall! {101} - No pleasing intricacies intervene, - No artful wildness to perplex the scene; - Grove nods at grove, each valley has a brother, - And half the platform just reflects the other.” - -And then, at the end of it all, he proceeds to justify Providence, in -giving riches to those who squander them, in a way that will hardly -commend itself to the student of the dismal science. A bad taste, he -says in effect, employs more hands, and diffuses wealth more usefully -than a good one! One would like to have heard John Stuart Mill on the -subject of “Pope.” - -The “Epistle” was addressed to Pope’s patron, the Earl of Burlington, -who was one of the noblemen who had helped to screen him a few years -before on his publication of the _Dunciad_. - -“Timon” (mainly though not entirely) referred to the Duke of Chandos, -who was, Johnson says, a man perhaps too much delighted with pomp and -show, but of a temper kind and beneficent, and who had consequently the -voice of the public in his favour.[20] {102} - - [20] Bowles says, “As Pope was the first to deal in personalities, the - following severe retaliation was published in the papers of the time: - - “Let Pope no more what Chandos builds deride, - Because he takes not Nature for his guide; - Since, wond’rous critic! in thy form we see - That _Nature_ may mistake, as well as he.” - -A violent outcry was therefore raised against the ingratitude and -treachery of Pope, who was said to have been indebted to the patronage -of Chandos for a present of a thousand pounds, and who gained the -opportunity of insulting him by the kindness of his invitation to -“Canons,” the Duke’s seat near Edgware. - -In a pamphlet entitled _Ingratitude_ published in 1733, of which only -a portion of the frontispiece is in the British Museum,[21] the matter -is thus alluded to. “A certain animal of diminutive size, who had -translated a book into English metre (or at least had it translated for -him), addressed himself to a nobleman of the first rank, and in the -style of a gentleman-beggar requested him to subscribe a guinea for one -of his books. The nobleman entertained him at dinner in a sumptuous -manner, and continued so to do as often as the insignificant mortal -came to his house. After dinner this generous man of quality, taking -him aside, put a bank-note for five hundred pounds into his hands, and -desired he might have but one book. But {103} what was the consequence -of this? Why, truly, the wretch, who is a composition of peevishness, -spleen and envy, having no regard to the benefits he had received, -in a few years after, and without any manner of provocation, or the -least foundation for truth, publishes a satire, as he terms it, but in -reality it is an infamous and calumnious libel, calculated, with all -the malice and virulency imaginable, to defame and render odious the -character of his best benefactor.” - - [21] Vide _Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum_, - Division I., _Satires_, vol. ii., No. 1935. - -From which it will be seen that Hogarth was not out of the fashion in -retaliating upon Pope’s devoted head with the cartoon which we here -reproduce. - -Let us examine it in detail. The gate, which is the main feature in the -picture, is a travesty of that which is familiar to old frequenters -of Piccadilly. Until as lately as 1868, it formed the frontage to -Burlington House. It was the joint design of Lord Burlington and -Colin Campbell, and, although well-proportioned and inoffensive, -hardly justifies the fulsome praise which has been bestowed upon -it. Kent, originally a coach-painter, with whose statue Hogarth has -surmounted the {104} structure, was patronised by, and brought -his practical knowledge to the assistance of, Lord Burlington, -himself undoubtedly a man of enlightened taste. The alteration and -reconstruction of the original Burlington House, which had been built -by his great-grandfather, the first Earl, was the first of his many -architectural projects. It was eventually taken down to make way for -the existing Royal Academy and Science Buildings. Lord Hervey laughed -at its inconvenience in the following couplet:— - - “Possessed of one great hall of state, - Without a room to sleep or eat.” - -The best of Lord Burlington’s and Kent’s joint work is to be found -in the northern park front of the Treasury Buildings in Whitehall, -“which,” says Fergusson, “if completed, would be more worthy of Inigo -Jones than anything that has been done there since his time.” - -[Illustration: The Man of Taste] - -Flanking the ex-coach-painter, Hogarth has placed reclining figures -of Raphael and Michael Angelo, who regard the modern architect with -respectful admiration! On the platform is Pope rough-casting the front -of the structure, and {106} incidentally bespattering the passers-by -with whitewash from his huge brush. Chief amongst these is the Duke of -Chandos, who vainly strives to protect himself with his hat. Ascending -the ladder is Lord Burlington, who carries up more whitening for the -beautifying of his own gate and the defilement of his neighbours’ -clothes. Over the gate Hogarth has sarcastically inscribed the solitary -word “TASTE.” The double distribution of flattery and satire is an -excellent pictorial burlesque of the _Epistle to Lord Burlington_, and -who can say that it was not richly deserved? At any rate, stroke and -counterstroke were fierce and unhesitating in those days, and, although -Pope’s and his patrons’ influence was sufficient to get Hogarth’s witty -plate suppressed, it is a tribute to the wholesome respect which the -poet had for the artist, that, pugnacious and irrepressible as his pen -generally was, Pope never ventured to make any written retaliation upon -the libeller. - -It should be mentioned that this was not the first occasion upon -which Hogarth had attacked the charlatanry of Kent. In the first -plate published on his own account, in 1724—“Masquerades and {107} -Operas”—he had included him in his ridicule of what Mr. Dobson calls -“foreign favourites and dubious exotics.” In that plate, also, he had -ridiculed “Burlington Gate,” and, curiously prompted by the spirit of -prophecy, had labelled it “Accademy (_sic_) of Arts!” He had also, in -the following year, burlesqued Kent’s scandalous altarpiece at St. -Clement Danes, which had lately been taken down in response to the -outcry against its sacrilegious impudence. - -By the kindness of the publisher of _The Builder_, I am enabled to -reproduce a wood engraving of Burlington Gate as it actually was, which -appeared in that journal on October 28, 1854. Comparing this with the -cartoon, it will be seen that Hogarth did not scruple to heighten the -effect of his satire by depriving Lord Burlington’s edifice of such -merits as it undoubtedly possessed. - -So much for Hogarth in his polemic with Pope. We will now turn for -a moment to Hogarth and his quarrel with Wilkes and Churchill, in -which we shall find him working over an old plate as in the case of -“Enthusiasm Delineated,” but with a very different object in view. Here -he adopts a method {108} of retaliation which, as we shall learn from -later chapters of this book, had become already customary amongst the -producers of political broadsides in the seventeenth century. Hitherto -Hogarth had kept clear of politics, but now, in his sixty-fifth year, -he threw himself into the fray. John Wilkes had started a paper called -_The North Briton_ in opposition to _The Briton_, the organ of the -Tory party of which Lord Bute was the leader. Hogarth had long enjoyed -Bute’s favour. He had also until now been on friendly terms with Wilkes -and his henchman Charles Churchill, the poet. On September 7, 1762, -taking sides with his patron, he published _The Times_ (Plate I.). -This so enraged Wilkes that he retaliated on the Saturday following, -in the seventeenth number of _The North Briton_, with a violent attack -on Hogarth both as man and artist. In the May following Hogarth -retorted by publishing a portrait of John Wilkes which, professing to -be a likeness, cleverly exhibited his most repulsive characteristics. -Wilkes being now on his trial for libel, Churchill came to the rescue -with his savage and slashing _Epistle to William Hogarth_. This was -published on August 1. {110} With a promptitude astonishing in those -days of tardy copper-plate engraving, Hogarth, by a clever expedient, -retaliated within a month with his exceedingly venomous print of “The -Bruiser.” The plate from which this was printed had already done duty -as a portrait of Hogarth himself with his dog Trump, engraved from the -well-known painting now in the National Gallery. - -[Illustration: Burlington Gate as it appeared prior to 1868] - -Pressed for time, in ill-health, and apprehensive lest the public might -attribute delay in replying to inability to do so, he took the old -plate, burnished out his own portrait, and substituted in its place the -head of a bear, with torn and soiled clerical bands about its neck, -ruffles on its wrists, and clasping against its chest a foaming pot -of beer, in allusion to the personal habits of the poet and ci-devant -parson. With his left paw the beast clasps a huge club, the knots of -which are labelled “Lye 1,” “Lye 2,” referring to the falsities of _The -North Briton_. There are other minor alterations which may be seen at a -glance. The whole was entitled “THE BRUISER, CHARLES CHURCHILL (once -the Rev^d.!) In the character of a RUSSIAN HERCULES, regaling himself -after having killed {111} the MONSTER CARICATURE, that so sorely gall’d -his virtuous friend, the Heaven-born Wilkes.” The plate thus altered is -to be found in five states, particulars of which may be found on p. 286 -of Mr. Austin Dobson’s _William Hogarth_, 1891. That here reproduced is -from a _copy_ of the last state engraved by Dent for John Ireland.[22] -It is only in the last two states that the clever little engraving in -front of the palette is to be found. - - [22] In copying, the design, as will be seen, has been turned from left - to right. - -So far we have dealt with work done by Hogarth in his individual -capacity. Let us now turn to such of his collaborative work as suffered -cancellation. - -In dealing with the series of suppressed _Quixote_ plates we shall be -brought into touch with two not uninteresting and accessory episodes -in the artist’s career. In the first of these Hogarth made a great -success, where a rival artist had made a signal failure. In the second, -by way of righting the balance of things, fate ordained it that this -same artist should badly best Hogarth, and that in a manner peculiarly -galling to the latter’s vanity. - -Hogarth’s father-in-law was Sir James Thornhill, {112} whose drawing -academy in Covent Garden had not proved as valuable an institution -as had been anticipated. Johan Van der Banck, the rival artist above -alluded to, had been one of Sir James’s pupils. By heading a secession -and establishing a rival school he had undoubtedly largely contributed -to the failure of his master’s venture. However, in due time, his -school too proved to be lacking in the elements of success, and came to -an untimely end. - -On Sir James’s death the “neglected apparatus” of his father-in-law -passed into Hogarth’s hands, and he set to work to establish the -academy on a different footing. The result was that it became a -successful educational centre, which only ceased to exist many years -afterwards on the establishment of the Royal Academy. A picture by -Hogarth of the interior of the school with the students drawing from -life is to be seen on the staircase leading to the Diploma Gallery at -Burlington House. - -In this case Hogarth had the laugh on his side. In the other, which is -immediately relevant to our subject, the laugh was with Van der Banck. - -[Illustration: Portrait of Hogarth with His Dog Trump[23]] - - [23] The plate being re-engraved for _Hogarth Illustrated_ became - transposed. - -[Illustration: _The plate reversed and in its last state, now entitled_ -“The Bruiser”] - -In 1738 Lord Carteret’s Spanish edition of _Don {113} Quixote_ was -published. For this Hogarth had been commissioned to design a series of -illustrations. Eight of these were executed, but, on being submitted -to Lord Carteret, did not meet with his approval. The commission was -consequently transferred to Johan van der Banck, who thus succeeded -in revenging himself for his former failure, and at the same time -unconsciously provided us with matter for consideration in these -papers. His sixty-eight designs were engraved by Van der Gucht and -republished in the English edition of 1756, of which Charles Jarvis was -the translator. Of Hogarth’s unsuccessful venture John Ireland writes -with some indignation, “As they are etched in a bold and masterly -style, I suppose the noble peer did not think them _pretty enough_ to -embellish his volume and therefore laid them aside for Vandergucht’s -engravings from Vanderbank’s designs.” It is a slight satisfaction to -know that Hogarth’s completed etchings were paid for! - -One curious fact about Jarvis’s edition demands our attention. The -plate representing the Don’s first sally in quest of adventure is -without any {114} signature, but the “style of the etching and the -air of the figures” indisputably determine for us the fact that it is -from the pencil and burin of Hogarth, so that it is open to any one who -has access to this edition to judge for themselves of the justice of -Ireland’s strictures upon Lord Carteret. - -For those who have not access to Jarvis’s edition it may be mentioned -that a copy engraved by J. Mills appears in Ireland’s _Hogarth -Illustrated_ and in the _Anecdotes of William Hogarth_, published by -Nichols in 1833. Of Hogarth’s eight designs we are therefore left with -only seven, which were “suppressed.” Of these six were published from -Hogarth’s own plates in Baldwin, Cradock and Joy’s splendid collection -of the _Works_ in 1822; whilst previously, in 1798, John Ireland had -published small copies of them together with an unfinished design of -“The Innkeeper” in his possession, engraved by J. Mills. These plates -were used over again in the _Anecdotes_ of 1833 with altered lettering -and the etchings considerably worn. - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. 1.—The Innkeeper] - -The accompanying reproductions are, save for {116} No. 1., not made -from any of the foregoing, but from the early states of the plates, -never before published, to be found in the British Museum. Thus they -will prove not only of interest to the casual reader but also valuable, -for purposes of comparison, to the possessors of any of the three -editions of Hogarth’s _Works_ mentioned above. The full descriptions of -the plates may be found in Ireland and Nichols, but for the convenience -of the reader I append a short commentary. - -No. I. _The Innkeeper_ is from an unfinished etching and is of -particular interest. By some its authenticity is doubted, but John -Ireland believed in it, and I, for one, see no reason to call his -judgment into question, more particularly as this figure bears a more -than chance resemblance to that of “The Innkeeper” in the undoubted -Hogarth referred to above published in Jarvis’s edition. In the Van -der Banck plate, which represents the knighting of the Don by the -Innkeeper, it is also evident that Hogarth’s rival has done him the -compliment of adopting his model. - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. II.—The Funeral of Chrysostom] - -No. II. _The Funeral of Chrysostom, Marcella vindicating herself._ This -scene was also taken {118} by Van der Banck for illustration, and a -comparison of the two plates is not favourable to Hogarth. - -No. III. _The Innkeepers Wife and Daughter taking care of the Don after -he had been beaten._ “Much superior to the same scene designed by Van -der Banck.” - -No. IV. _Don Quixote seizes the Barber’s Basin for Mambrino’s Helmet._ -On the whole inferior to Van der Banck’s. The barb of the Don’s weapon -is different from that in the Hogarth design published by Jarvis. The -stirrups and saddling of the horse too are different. These points have -not been referred to before, but I mention them by way of argument -against the authenticity of the Jarvis plate. As I have said before, -personally I have no doubt that it is from Hogarth’s burin. - -No. V. _Don Quixote releases the Galley Slaves._ Here the Don is found -wearing the barber’s basin as his helmet. By a not unusual oversight it -will be noticed Hogarth has made his figures left-handed, forgetful of -the reversing process due to printing from a plate. A superior design -to that of Van der Banck, who, as Ireland says, “has {121} given to -two or three of the thieves the countenances of apostles.” - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. III.—The Innkeeper’s Wife and Daughter] - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. IV.—Don Quixote seizes the Barber’s -Basin] - -No. VI. _The First Interview of the Valorous Knight of La Mancha with -the Unfortunate Knight of the Rock._ Distinctly superior to Van der -Banck. - -No. VII. _The Curate and Barber disguising themselves to convey Don -Quixote home._ An excellent representation of the curate assuming the -dress of a distressed virgin who, by his tale of having been wronged by -a naughty knight, hopes to induce the Don to return to his home. - -Whilst on the subject of Don Quixote it may be mentioned that, much -earlier in his career, Hogarth had designed and engraved a plate -dealing with “Sancho’s feast,” but this must not be in any way -identified or confused with the series begun for Lord Carteret, -although Ireland groups them all together. - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. V.—Don Quixote releases the Galley -Slaves] - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. VI.—The First Interview] - -So much for Hogarth’s suppressed illustrations, and it is, it must be -confessed, something of a relief to turn again from his cognate art to -that which is individual and typical. For we do not much value Hogarth -as an illustrator. In this character he rarely does more than repeat -for us {124} in another medium the obvious matters already dealt -with in the letterpress. “Illustration,” as Mr. Laurence Housman has -well said, “should be something in the nature of a brilliant commentary -throwing out new light upon the subject, an exquisite parenthesis of -things better said in this medium than could be said in any other: in -a word, the result of another creative faculty at work on the same -theme.” And this in no way describes Hogarth’s work as an illustrator. -It is as a great original painter working out consummately the -homeliest of morals that he appeals to us. Those morals which, to quote -Thackeray, are “as easy as Goody Twoshoes,” the moral of “Tommy was a -naughty boy and the master flogged him, and Jacky was a good boy and -had plum-cake.” For it is in “Marriage à la Mode,” “A Rake’s Progress,” -“Industry and Idleness,” that he succeeds inimitably, carrying out the -motto beneath “Time Smoking a Picture”:— - - “To Nature and your Self appeal - Nor learn of others what to feel.” - -[Illustration: Don Quixote No. VII.—The Curate and the Barber] - -But this only in passing, for our subject debars us from lingering over -Hogarth’s best. {126} From the nature of our theme we are confined -to the examination in the majority of cases of that which verges upon -failure either from artistic or social considerations. - -{127} - - - - -CHAPTER VII - -CANCELLED DESIGNS FOR _PUNCH_ AND _ONCE A WEEK_ - -[CHARLES KEENE AND FREDERICK SANDYS] - - -In the present chapter I propose to deal with three masterly drawings -prepared for the publications of Messrs. Bradbury and Evans (the -predecessors of Messrs. Bradbury and Agnew) which were suppressed for -various reasons. Two of them are drawings by Charles Keene done for -_Punch_, which were never even “brought to the block.” The third is by -Frederick Sandys, designed for _Once a Week_, and actually engraved, -but cancelled before publication for reasons which shall appear. - -For leave to reproduce the first—one of the rare cartoons (in this -case a double-page one) drawn by Keene for _Punch_—I am indebted -to {128} the generosity of Messrs. Bradbury and Agnew, to whom the -original drawing now belongs. For years it has hung amongst other -well-nigh priceless treasures in the dining hall in Bouverie Street, -Whitefriars, and, until reproduced by me in the _Pall Mall Magazine_ -in 1899, was only known to the privileged few whose good fortune -it has been to penetrate into that Temple of the Comic Muse. It is -therefore with the greater satisfaction that it is here reproduced -for the delight of that surely increasing public which recognises in -Charles Keene the greatest master of pen-and-ink drawing that England -has produced. But this is not the place to linger over the qualities of -artists. At the same time we cannot but congratulate ourselves that, by -good fortune, our chosen subject brings us into contact not only with -work to which adventitious interest attaches, but also with artistic -work evidencing a technical mastery hard indeed to surpass. - -[Illustration: The Cancelled Cartoon. (_By Charles Keene_)] - -The only public mention before the year 1899 made of this splendid -pen-and-ink drawing is to be found on page 60 of Mr. Spielmann’s -monumental work, _The History of Punch_. There, in his most {129} -interesting description of _The “Punch” Dining Hall_, it is -described as “a masterly drawing, 2 feet long, by Keene, bought by the -late Mr. Bradbury at a sale—the (unused) cartoon of Disraeli leading -the principal financiers of the day in hats and frock-coats across the -Red Sea. (‘Come along, it’s getting shallower!’)” - -Now, since this was written, further inquiries have been made upon the -subject, and two theories present themselves for consideration. The -first of them in its general outline supports Mr. Spielmann’s account, -and maintains that the picture was bought direct from Keene himself -by the late Mr. Agnew (not Mr. Bradbury), as a _solatium_ on account -of its not being used, and that the reason for suppressing it was the -anti-Jewish feeling by which it was inspired. - -In support of this view it should be remembered that Keene all along -refused to accept a fixed salary for his _Punch_ work, and was always -paid by the piece. Considering, too, that the subject of the weekly -cartoons was (and still is) a matter of general discussion at the -Wednesday _Punch_ dinners, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the -{130} subject was embarked upon with the authority of the editor, and -that other counsels only prevailed after the drawing had reached the -stage at which it now appears.[24] This being so, it seems not unlikely -that a generous employer would feel himself in some degree answerable -for the futile labour to which the artist had been put, and would offer -to buy the picture as it stood rather than that the artist should in -any way be prejudiced. If this were the case (which does not sound -improbable) it throws an interesting and edifying side-light upon the -relations existing between the artists and publishers of our great -comic paper. - - [24] Of course Sir John Tenniel was cartoonist in chief, but sometimes - the cartoon was duplicated, and on very rare occasions Sir John took a - holiday. - -Against this theory, however, I have the opinion of Sir John Tenniel -and Mr. Linley Sambourne that the drawing was done on Keene’s own -initiative by way of frontispiece to one of the _Punch_ pocket-books. -But this view of the matter I am, with submission, not myself inclined -to accept, and for two reasons. First and foremost, the drawing differs -in shape from the pocket-book folding frontispieces; and secondly, it -was the {131} practice in these yearly productions rather to satirise -some social folly or fashion of the period than to deal with matters -political or international. In addition to which it does tally in shape -with the double-page cartoons of _Punch_ itself, and, as a matter of -fact, Keene’s few cartoons were mostly done during the years 1875, -1876, and 1877, when the matter of the Suez Canal was making a new -departure in politics—a fact which, as will appear, has some bearing -upon the matter before us. - -So much for the circumstances connected with the production and -proposed destination of the picture. Let us now consider its subject -and the probable reason of its suppression. - -And, if we take down our volume of collected _Punch_ cartoons and -turn to those dealing with Disraeli, we shall be disinclined to think -that it was out of any consideration for “Benjamin Bombastes” himself -that this splendid drawing was withheld from publication. But thinly -disguised contempt is the attitude almost invariably maintained -towards him, whilst but thinly disguised personal admiration for -his great rival discounts even the bitterest political taunts {132} -flung at that devoted head. No! I am inclined to think that events -at this time, to which this cartoon referred, were wringing unwilling -approbation even from “The Asiatic Mystery’s” most bitter enemies, -and that Bouverie Street could not but acknowledge that here at least -“Ben-Dizzy” deserved well of his country. For surely the cartoon -has reference to nothing less than that crowning act of wisdom, the -purchase of nearly half the shares in the Suez Canal for four millions -sterling. Here we have Disraeli with his umbrella pointing the way, -not across the Red Sea as Mr. Spielmann imagines, but up the Canal -_towards_ the Red Sea. He calls out, “Don’t be afraid! it’s getting -shallower,” thus possibly referring to the original notion (afterwards -disproved) that the level of the Mediterranean was 30 feet below that -of the Red Sea. On the right-hand, and Egyptian, side of the water, if -we look carefully, we discover the shadowy outline of the Sphinx and -the Pyramids, which latter rise dimly to the margin of the drawing. On -the bank indistinct forms of the Liberal “Opposition” wave their arms, -hurl stones and shout “Yah” at the {133} wading financiers. Such was -the hardly congratulatory attitude assumed towards this masterly move -by Charles Keene. - -But when we turn to the cartoons dealing with this subject by Sir -John Tenniel,[25] which _did_ appear, what do we find? The first is -“Mosé in Egitto”!!! published on December 11, 1875, to which, in the -collected cartoons, the following note is appended:—“Mr. Disraeli -extorted the admiration of the country by purchasing for £4,000,000, -on behalf of the Government, the shares in the Suez Canal held by the -Khedive of Egypt.” The second is entitled “The Lion’s Share—_Gare -à qui la touche_,” on February 26, 1896, to which the note appended -runs: “The acquisition of the Suez Canal shares was accepted by the -country as securing the safety of ‘The Key to India.’” These, as will -be seen, frankly recognise the wisdom of the purchase. Hence it is not -surprising if the feeling against the suggestion contained in Keene’s -cartoon—that the financiers of the day were being put into a {134} -ridiculous position by the Conservative Leader—was strong enough to -result in its rejection. Its inclusion would have gone far to stultify -the effect of the congratulatory attitude taken up by _Punch’s_ -chartered cartoonist. At any rate, this view of the case appears to be -most reasonable, and I give it for what it is worth. - - [25] It may be mentioned as an interesting fact that no engraved - cartoon after Sir John Tenniel has ever failed to find its place in the - number for which it was designed. - -The drawing is a fine example of Keene’s power of endowing his models -with the qualities requisite to his design. Not a man of these -seventeen financiers suggests a model posing, and yet all, for this was -Keene’s invariable custom, were drawn from the life. Not one of them -but is balanced as though he were wading in water up to his knees; and -yet not one of them, we may be sure, was wading against a stream when, -probably unconsciously, he was forced into the service of the artist’s -pencil. The pose of one and all is as inevitable as is the expression -on the face of each. I would ask all my readers who are seekers after -consummate draughtsmanship to give more particular attention to this -beautiful drawing than its mere subject would demand, remembering that -Keene’s achievements in black-and-white are {135} unsurpassed, and, I -am inclined to think, unsurpassable. - -We will now turn to the consideration of the other suppressed Keene -drawing. This, we shall find, owed its rejection not to political but -to social considerations. And it is of peculiar interest, not only as -showing the scrupulous care taken by the then editor of _Punch_ to -avoid the risk of offending the susceptibilities of his readers, but -also as an example of the extensive collaboration which existed between -Keene and the late Mr. Joseph Crawhall in the supply of “socials” to -that paper week by week. - -Let us pause for a moment, then, to recall the particulars of this -remarkable co-operation. Early in the ’seventies, Keene, who was often -gravelled for humorous subjects on which to exercise his pencil, -was by good fortune introduced to the author of _Border Notes and -Mixty-Maxty_, and many other droll books of a like character. This -gentleman, always a lover of things quaint, grotesque and jocular, -had been for years in the habit of jotting down any telling incident -that came in his way, illustrating it at leisure for his {136} own -amusement. He was no great artist; but, like Thackeray, his inadequate -pencil was so compelled and inspired by the appreciation of his -subjects that he was able to set them down pictorially in a manner so -naïve and at the same time so intelligent that they are a joy to the -beholder. These suggestive drawings, by the time the introduction had -taken place, filled several volumes. - -Keene’s delight, then, may be well imagined when he was given _carte -blanche_ to cull the best of the subjects for use in _Punch_. He -wrote:— - - “I can’t tell you how strongly I have felt your rare generosity and - unselfishness in letting me browse so freely in your pastures.” - -And again:— - - “Many thanks for the loan of the sketch-books. I enjoyed them again - and again, with renewed chucklings; but what a mouth-watering larder - to lay open to a ravenous joke-seeker!” - -[Illustration: The Cancelled “Social.” (_By Charles Keene_)] - -[Illustration: Suggestion by Joseph Crawhall for the Cancelled “Social”] - -Fortunately Mr. Crawhall was as delighted to be of service to the great -artist as Keene was to avail himself of his opportunity. Hence we have -that delightful partnership of which full particulars {137} may be -found in my _Life and Letters of Charles Keene of_ “_Punch_.” - -It is necessary to say so much for the purpose of introducing the -subject of the second of Keene’s cancelled drawings. By a great piece -of good fortune I have in my possession Mr. Crawhall’s pictorial -suggestion for the rejected picture itself, presented to me by the -artist. I reproduce it here alongside Keene’s drawing for the purpose -of comparison. The humour of it is certainly rather brutal, and one is -not surprised to find that the editor considered that it would “jar -upon feelings.” Keene, on the other hand, was naturally disgusted -at his labour being thrown away, and vented his wrath somewhat -unreasonably upon the “Philistine editor.” - -For the sake of those who would like to gain some idea of the -personality of the artist’s friend who acted, as Boswell did to -Johnson, in the capacity of a “starter of mawkins,” it may be mentioned -that an excellent back view of Mr. Crawhall, drawn by Keene, appears in -_Punch_, March 11, 1882, over the following delicious “legend”:— {138} - - -_LAPSUS LINGUÆ_ - - PATER: “Now, look here, my boy, I can’t have these late hours. When I - was your age my father wouldn’t let me stay out after dark.” - - FILIUS: “Humph! nice sort o’ father you must have had, I should say.” - - PATER (_waxing_): “Deuced sight better than you have, you young——” - (_Checks himself, and exit._) - -The original of the _Punch_ drawing here reproduced was presented to -Mr. Crawhall by Charles Keene. This was the latter’s method of repaying -the former for his unqualified generosity. Mr. Crawhall was, however, -somewhat embarrassed by what he considered to be excessive payment for -services which he held required no other recompense than the honour -thus conferred on his poor drawings. The result was a generous contest -which resulted in his finally refusing to accept them, “For,” said he, -“you don’t know the value of your work. The reward is too great, and -our happy connection must cease if you put me under these obligations.” - -Keene, nevertheless, always afterwards made a colourable excuse to -send them when he could think of one, although by this time he was -well {139} aware that he was as great a magician as the Old Lady -of Threadneedle Street, and could by a few strokes of his pen make -the back of an old envelope rival the value of one of _her_ crisp -bank-notes. - -But we must not linger over the cancelled drawings of an artist who, -had he been as great in imagination as he was in originality of method -and mastery over his pencil, would have been as great as the greatest -in Art. It is now our delightful task to turn to another of the men -of the ’sixties, whose imagination and sympathy with high romance has -rarely been surpassed, and whose technical mastery, though not the -equal of his great contemporary, was yet so distinguished that, even -divorced from his other qualities, it would give him a niche in the -Temple of Fame. Frederick Sandys has but lately left us, and how few -there are who recognise the greatness of his work! For years it has -been a matter of astonishment to me that his name was not on every -tongue. Keene, alive, was practically unknown. Keene, dead, occupies -an unassailable position. Sandys is known and esteemed only by {140} -the few. The time will come when his pictures will be a fashionable -craze, and every woodcut after him, whether it be in _Once a Week_, -_The Cornhill_, _Good Words_, _London Society_, _The Churchman’s Family -Magazine_, _The Shilling Magazine_, _The Quiver_, _The Argosy_, or -what not, will be eagerly appropriated by those who wish to pass as -discerning dilettanti. - -But we must not generalise, for our concern is here with one particular -design, and enthusiasm must not be allowed to run. Done for _Once a -Week_, and cut exquisitely on the wood by Swain, that with which we -have to do was at the last moment cancelled by a timidly fastidious -editor. - -If we turn to page 672 of vol. iv. of _Once a Week_ (new series), 1867, -we shall find the following set of verses, signed “W.,” the origin and -authorship of which I am now able to make public:— - - DANAË - - The hour of noonday sleep was o’er, - And Danaë dreamt her dream no more; - Yet still its image lingered on her loom; - For there in woven colours bright, - And touched to life by purpling light, - Smiled the one godhead of the captive’s room. {141} - She raised her from the Tyrian sheet, - And clasped her sandals on her feet, - And lightly drew around her virgin zone; - And sighed—and knew not why she sighed; - And murmured, while her work she plied, - “The World may leave my love and me alone.” - Thus sang the maiden of the brazen tower, - And longed, unconscious, for the golden shower. - - “The days and months have grown to years, - And I have dried my childish tears, - And half forgotten why they ever ran; - My soul is plighted to the sky, - And we,—my wrinkled nurse and I,— - What matter if we see no more of man? - She wearies me with omens dire, - My son foredoomed to kill my sire,— - But sire and son are empty names to me. - My love! I only rest awhile, - To dream the beauty of thy smile. - And only wake again to picture thee.” - Thus sang the maiden of the brazen tower, - And longed, unconscious, for the golden shower. - - She ceased: for now began to fade - The figure of that mighty shade, - With loins and shoulders meet to sway the world; - And awful through the gloom appeared - His massive locks of hair and beard, - Like clouds in lurid light of thunder curled. - Yet, long as twilight glimmered there, - She gazed upon a vision fair; - His brow more beautiful than Parian stone, - And nestling nearer like a dove, - Soft on his lips she breathed her love, {142} - And lit his eyes with lustre of her own. - Then passion stung the maiden of the tower, - And fast she panted for the golden shower. - - She stood, with white arm fixed in air, - And head thrown back, and streaming hair, - “Oh, Lord of Dreams!” she cried, “dost thou behold?” - Then thunderous music shook the cell, - And, sliding through the rafters, fell - On Danaë’s burning breast, three drops of gold. - Her bosom thrilled—but not with pain:— - Faster and brighter flowed the rain, - And starred with light the chamber of the bride: - Her cheek sank blushing on her hand, - Her eyelids drooped, her silken band - Unloosed itself,—and Jove was at her side. - Black loured the earth around the captive’s tower, - But Heaven embraced her in the golden shower. - -I insert the poem here, as it constitutes the only trace in the pages -of _Once a Week_ of the matter with which we have to deal. - -Before proceeding to detail the circumstances connected with the -production and final suppression of the engraving, which prompted this -passable set of verses, I shall endeavour to correct certain statements -regarding it which have gained currency. In the _Artist_ monograph -on “The Art of Frederick Sandys,” in 1896, we find a few lines only -given to the consideration of the {144} wood-engraving of “Danaë in -the Brazen Chamber”; but in these few lines we have one undoubtedly -incorrect statement, and another which is open to the gravest -suspicion. The first is that the “Danaë” was engraved for _The Hobby -Horse_ in 1888; the second that it was drawn for _Once a Week_ in 1860. - -[Illustration: Danaë in the Brazen Chamber] - -As regards its engraving, this was done by Swain for _Once a Week_, -when the drawing was sent in. That it was first _published_ in _The -Hobby Horse_ as an illustration to an article by the late J. M. Gray -is another matter altogether. As regards the date of its design, 1860 -is almost certainly some years too early. Indeed, I had it from Sandys -himself that the probable date of the _first sketch_ of the subject -was as late as 1865, and that it was not till after he had traced it -on a panel[26] (the figure some two feet high) for a never-completed -oil-painting, and later had made a chalk-drawing of it for a Yorkshire -gentleman, that he decided to make a drawing on the wood at all. This -being done, its beauty prompted two poems by two of his personal -friends, the one {145} given above by Mr. Ward, the other, so far as I -can gather never published, by Colonel Alfred Richards. Now, the fact -that Mr. Ward’s poem did not appear in _Once a Week_ till 1867 lends -such overwhelming weight to Mr. Sandys’s recollection of the matter -that we may, I think, unhesitatingly reject the date of 1860 given by -the author of the _Artist_ monograph and adopt a date at least five -years later. Further evidence, too, is to be found in the fact that Mr. -Sandys continued to draw on the wood certainly as late as 1866, and his -recollection is clear as to “Danaë” being his last essay in that medium. - - [26] This is now, I believe, in the possession of Mr. Ashby-Sterry. - -I have been thus particular to correct this matter because it will, -I believe, prove of importance, when Sandys’s artistic career comes -finally to be described, to get his different productions into -chronological order for a proper understanding of his artistic -development. - -So far, then, we have arrived, at any rate approximately, at the -date when Sandys did what proved to be not only his one “suppressed” -drawing, but, as I have said, the very last drawing done by him on the -wood. {146} - -Let us now consider the circumstances under which it was produced for, -but in the event suppressed by, the editor of _Once a Week_. And that -this periodical is the poorer for its loss will be obvious to all who -love beautiful drawing, “splendid paganism,” and fine wood-engraving. - -Sandys began to draw for _Once a Week_ in 1861, his initial effort -being that splendid design, “Yet once more on the Organ play,” which -is fit to rank with Rethel’s “Der Tod als Freund,” with which there -is a certain similarity of sentiment. This was followed by eleven -drawings within the five succeeding years, all breathing the spirit of -Dürer, and carrying on the effort which Rethel, who had only died in -1859, had made to renew the life put into wood-engraving by the old -German master. In either 1865 or 1866 Sandys projected an oil picture -on the subject of “Danaë in the Brazen Chamber.” He had conceived a -new version of the Danaë legend. Instead of Jove appearing to the -imprisoned maiden in the form of a golden shower, he adopted the belief -in Jove as the God of Dreams and adapted it to the legend.[27] Danaë, -{147} who has never seen a man, is haunted by the appearance of Jove -as he has presented himself in her sleeping hours. To comfort herself -and satisfy her passionate longing she has spent her days in weaving -the image so vouchsafed to her in tapestry. For the moment her work is -discarded. The ball of wool with which she has been working lies at her -feet, and she stands, “with white arm fixed in air,” calling upon the -“Lord of Dreams” to come to her in very sooth. - - [27] καὶ γὰρ τ’ ὄναρ ἐκ Διός ἐστιν.—Homer, _Iliad_ i. 63. - -Frankly sensuous as is the picture, one cannot but admit that the -theme is treated with all necessary restraint. This, however, does not -appear to have been the opinion of Walford, the then editor of _Once a -Week_. He wrote to Sandys requiring a modification of the design. This -the artist flatly refused. The design must appear as it was or not at -all. In this refusal he was gallantly supported by the proprietors of -the periodical, Messrs. Bradbury and Evans. The editor, however, would -not give way, and the result was a deadlock. The block was actually -engraved by Mr. Swain, and in his best manner, but the editor’s will -was paramount, and it never {148} adorned the pages for which it was -intended. It was reserved to the _Century Guild Hobby Horse_, in 1888, -to rescue it from the oblivion into which it had passed. - -I am indebted to Messrs. Bradbury and Agnew for permission to reproduce -the design. Of it Mr. J. M. Gray says in his article on “Frederick -Sandys and the Woodcut Designers of Thirty Years Ago”:—“It ranks among -the very finest of Sandys’s woodcuts,” and the artist, who had not been -uniformly satisfied with the engraved versions of his work, himself -wrote to me: “It was engraved for _Once a Week_. Perfectly cut by -Swain. From my point of view the best piece of woodcutting of our time.” - -And all who love this beautiful but fast disappearing handmaiden of the -arts will heartily endorse Mr. Sandys’s opinion. - -{149} - - - - -CHAPTER VIII - -MISCELLANEOUS - - -I propose in this chapter to group together certain sporadic -suppressions in lithography, etching, wood-engraving, and process work. -They are not sufficiently important each to demand a chapter to itself, -nor do they fall into any particular categories as do the “Dickens,” -“Hogarth,” and “Cruikshank” plates. At the same time each has an -interest of its own, and is a footprint upon the byway of art with -which we are concerned. - -Fortunately for us the first of these cancelled illustrations is, -at a time when we have but lately been celebrating the centenary of -Senefelder’s great invention, lithography, of extraordinary interest, -for it was one of the earliest book illustrations produced in England -by this method. The {150} volume in which it appears (if we are lucky -enough to possess one of the first three hundred copies issued) is the -_Antiquities of Westminster_, with two hundred and forty-six engravings -by J. T. Smith. - -The date of the volume is 1807—a fact which would at first sight -seem to tell against our claim to be dealing with a pioneer English -lithograph. We must, however, remember that a book of this kind took -many years to produce, and that the publication of the illustrations -was, in many cases, of necessity years later than their execution. - -Lowndes oddly refers to the lithograph as the first “_stone-plate_” -ever attempted, but in this he claims for it too great a distinction. -To name no others, there was, we know, as early as 1803 a portfolio -containing drawings by West, Fuseli, Barry, and Stothard issued as -_Specimens of Polyautography_, by which term lithography was for a few -years described, which contains lithographs dated 1801 and 1802. - -[Illustration: “The Painted Chamber.” (From _Antiquities of -Westminster_, 1807.)] - -The subject of the design here reproduced in facsimile is the inside of -the Painted Chamber which was part of the Old Palace of Westminster. -{151} The mural paintings which were discovered at the beginning of -this century, after the removal of the tapestry hangings which are to -be seen in the lithograph, were, it will scarcely be credited, promptly -ordered by the authorities of the day to be “improved” away by a coat -of whitewash because of their untidiness! And this although they were -known to have been in existence since 1322, and although there were -strong reasons for the belief even at that time that they were executed -as early as the reign of Henry III.! Such an act of vandalism would be -inconceivable were it not that we have learnt to look upon its like as -so lamentably common. - -The account of the preparation of the lithograph, and of the -stone’s untimely fate, is fully set forth on pages 49 and 50 of the -_Antiquities_. It is too long to quote in this place, but is well worth -looking up by those who are interested in the history of this method. -It is sufficient for our purpose to say that after three hundred -impressions had been taken off, the stone was laid by for the night -without care having been taken to keep it properly moist. The result -was that {152} on the application of the ink balls in the morning -they proved too tenacious, and on their removal were found to have -torn up portions of the drawing from the stone. Consequently we have -it that impressions of this, one of the first English lithographs, are -exceedingly scarce, and are only to be found in the first three hundred -copies of the book issued. This fact connotes the further result that -the impressions of the etchings throughout the book in their earliest -states are to be found in the copies containing the lithograph. - -Before quitting this subject it should be stated that in “collating” -this book we must bear in mind a very pretty quarrel which took place -between the artist and J. S. Hawkins, who was largely responsible -for the letterpress. As has been pointed out, the first 300 copies -contained the “stone-plate.” But in only a very few copies is to -be found the suppressed title-page bearing the name of John Sidney -Hawkins, and the dedication to George III., signed “The Author.” These -few copies contain the very earliest impressions of the plates. In the -later copies the dedication is signed “John Thomas Smith,” and bound -up {153} in most of these is found a “Vindication” by J. T. Smith in -answer to “A Correct Statement and Vindication of the conduct of John -Sidney Hawkins, Esq., F.A.S., towards Mr. John Thomas Smith, drawn up -and published by Mr. Hawkins himself.” Lond. 1807, 8vo, p. 87. J. T. -Smith’s answer was further replied to in another pamphlet by Hawkins -dated 1808. - -We will now turn from this specimen of lithography to a very remarkable -example of the sister art of wood-engraving. (_Vide_ Frontispiece.) - -In the April number 1896 of _Good Words_, I dealt with some -bibliographical curiosities, one of which was the remarkable suppressed -title-page in my possession here reproduced. My object on that occasion -was to verify the fact of which I felt practically certain, that -the book for which it was prepared had never come into being, and -that therefore we had the curious anomaly of an elaborately engraved -title-page wanting a book. Books wanting their engraved title-page are -unfortunately common enough, owing to the barbarism of certain ruthless -collectors. But a title-page not only wanting a book, but which {154} -never had one, was as extraordinary as the grin of the Cheshire Cat -in _Alice in Wonderland_, which was left behind after its author had -disappeared. - -“Well! I’ve often seen a cat without a grin,” thought Alice, “but a -grin without a cat! It’s the most curious thing I ever saw in all my -life.” - -But then Alice had never seen this title-page of a book by “Sholto -Percy” which was never written, and of which _Death in London_ was to -have been the title. The wood-block is a very beautiful one, cut by -Mason, no doubt Abraham John, who engraved Cruikshank’s illustrations -to _Tales of Humour and Gallantry_. - -“Sholto Percy” was the pen-name of Joseph Clinton Robertson, who, with -Thomas Byerley, published the _Percy Anecdotes_, 1821–23. Their full -pseudonyms were “Sholto and Reuben Percy, Brothers of the Benedictine -Monastery, Mount Benger.” The anecdotes were published in forty-one -parts, at half-a-crown a-piece, before the close of the year 1823, and, -of these, two hundred and sixty thousand copies were sold during the -four years of issue! What number subsequent editions {155} have run to -it is impossible to conjecture. The title of the book had its origin -from the Percy Coffee-House in Rathbone Place, which the collaborators -frequented. They also compiled _London, or Interesting Memorials of its -Rise, Progress, and Present State_. 3 vols. 1823. - -In the dedication of this last work to George IV. we find facsimile -signatures of the two “Brothers.” That of “Sholto Percy,” the author -of the book which was evidently projected but never published, tallies -with that on the title-page here reproduced. From the fact that -Reuben’s signature is absent we gather that, for some reason or other, -the collaboration had come to an end. At any rate nothing more is heard -of the partnership, nor indeed was anything else published under one -or other of these _noms-de-plume_. And although I received various -communications from strangers upon the subject of the bibliographical -curiosities dealt with in the _Good Words_ article, no light was thrown -upon this perplexing title-page. Suppressed, therefore, it doubtless -was, because it had no reason to be anything else, and remains a rather -pathetic memorial of the gifted {156} artist and the author whose -projected enterprise was perchance cut short by one of the forms of the -Dread Enemy here portrayed. - -The block is worthy of careful scrutiny. The only impression in -existence (as I believe it to be) and in my possession is beautifully -printed on India paper. In it we find Bewick’s white line used with -excellent effect. Behind the main panel the colossal form of Death is -just visible, holding in either hand “Death in the Cup” and “Death in -the Dish.” At the lower corners his skeleton feet are just visible, -fixed on the Arctic and Antarctic portions of the Globe. At the top -of the panel Death drags a wheel off the chariot which is making -a dash from London to Gretna Green. Immediately below this is a -nail-studded coffin from which hangs a pall inscribed with the words -“Death in London.” This overhangs the central group, in which Death -spectacled and seated on a tombstone at a desk supported by human -thighs, with a human skull as footstool, receives despatches and -directs his myrmidons. Supporting this central panel two skeletons -hurl death-dealing darts, whilst below one skeleton {157} starves in -prison, and another, crowned with straw, rages as a maniac. - -On the right-hand border a skeleton highwayman, pistol in hand, -awaits his victim, ignoring the gallows which is seen under the moon -in the background, and ignorant of the noose already round his neck, -manipulated by a skeleton hangman in the division above. On the -left-hand border a somewhat cryptic design represents a skeleton toper -surmounting a skeleton quack physician who sucks a cane and, with -medicine bottle in hand, goes forth on his death-dealing mission. - -At the base Death, in a deluge of wind and rain, overturns a sailing -boat, and incidentally presses down a struggling victim with his foot. -The whole effect is finely decorative, and far surpasses anything else -of Seymour’s of which I have knowledge. - -But we must not linger too long over each item of our promiscuous -collection of cancelled illustrations. - -I shall now bring to your notice a very rare coloured plate by Henry -Alken, which, though not suppressed in the strictest sense, is yet -{158} sufficiently relevant to the subject to admit of its inclusion -in these papers. It was undoubtedly prepared for a book of which Alken -was the illustrator, but, for some reason or other, although engraved, -it was not included among the published plates. - -During the years 1831–39 there appeared in _The New Sporting Magazine_, -edited by R. Surtees, a series of sporting sketches of which “Mr. John -Jorrocks” was the hero. These papers were collected and published in -1838 under the alliterative title of _Jorrocks’s Jaunts and Jollities_, -illustrated by “Phiz.” This volume was brought to the notice of -Lockhart, who thereupon advised Surtees to try his hand at a sporting -novel. The immediate result was _Handley Cross_. In 1843 a third -edition of _Jorrocks’s Jaunts and Jollities_ appeared, with sixteen -coloured plates after Henry Alken. The novels in the meantime were -being issued with illustrations by Leech and “Phiz.” That the former -has at this distance of time lost nothing of its popularity (rather, of -course, on account of the illustrations than for the letterpress, which -reads poorly enough now) is evidenced by {159} the fact that only -the other day a copy fetched at public auction the remarkable sum of -£20. One wonders what the bidding would have reached had the book been -extra-illustrated with the unused illustration of which it is here my -purpose to treat. - -Now we must be careful, in considering any work signed “Alken,” to bear -in mind the fact mentioned by Mr. R. E. Graves in the _Dictionary of -National Biography_, that although the fertility of Alken’s pencil was -amazing, the idea of it might be fictitiously enhanced if the fact were -not grasped that he left two or three sons—one of whom was also named -Henry—all artists and all sporting artists, who have, since their -father’s time, been incessantly painting, lithographing, aquatinting -and etching for the sporting publishers and for private patrons of the -turf. - -But the original Henry Alken did his work between 1816 and 1831; -hence it is clear that the illustrations to _Jorrocks_ were the work -of Henry the younger. And this is a point which should be emphasised -for the guidance of the bibliomaniac, for it is the practice of many -second-hand booksellers to lump all work by “Alken” under one head, -from {160} ignorance possibly—in some cases I fear from unworthy -motives. For it is the work of Henry Alken, the founder of the line, -which is of greatest rarity and greatest merit, and to palm off -work done by a namesake as work done by him is plain cheating. We -remember the parallel case of George Cruikshank, who exposed a certain -publisher, in a somewhat intemperate pamphlet afterwards suppressed, -entitled _A Popgun fired off by George Cruikshank, etc., etc._ In -that case the publisher had been guilty of the more than questionable -proceeding of advertising certain “story-books” as “illustrated by -Cruikshank,” which were in reality the work of George’s nephew, Percy, -who, I fancy, would have been the last to concur in what was an -undoubted attempt to mislead the public.[28] - - [28] The woodcut of the irascible George suspending the unhappy Brooks - by the nose from a pair of tongs is reproduced in my little book on - _Cruikshank’s Portraits of Himself_. - -[Illustration: The suppressed portrait of “John Jorrocks, Esq., M.F.H., -etc.” (_By Henry Alken, the younger_)] - -Let it be clearly understood, then, that the plate which we here -reproduce was the work of Henry Alken the younger. Though of little -artistic merit, it is yet not unworthy of those which were published, -and the reason of its {161} suppression is difficult to fathom. -The plate should be undoubtedly annexed, on its very rare appearance, -by him who values his _Jorrocks_. This would make his copy, in the -words of the second-hand booksellers, a “really desirable” one. Our -reproduction is not quite the size of the original, which exactly -tallies in size and shape with the published plates. The line of -publication runs: “London, Published by R. Ackermann at his Eclipse -Sporting Gallery, 191 Regent St. 1843.” The method employed in its -production is a mixture of etching and aquatinting, and this impression -has been coloured by hand with the brilliant tints which appealed -to our sporting forebears. There need be no complaint about its -lowness of tone. It would put to the blush the most versi-coloured of -kaleidoscopes! To parody Dr. Johnson’s animadversion upon a certain -ode, it would be just from the strict artistic standpoint to say, -“Bolder colour and more timorous meaning, I think, were rarely brought -together.” - - * * * * * - -So much for some unattached suppressions of the first half of the -century. We will conclude {162} this chapter with certain cancelled -plates of only yesterday. - -To those who have not yet grasped the fact (cried aloud in the -wilderness by Mr. Kipling) that our age is as romantic as any other -if we only know how to regard matters, the fact will probably come as -something of a surprise that the last decade of the nineteenth century -has as surely its crop of “suppressed plates,” as have those ages -which were, we choose to flatter ourselves, more brutal than our own. -Less unmannerly in some respects doubtless we tend to become, and that -perhaps is the very reason (paradoxical though it may sound) why we do -not have to search in vain for “modern instances.” For now that Mrs. -Grundy is sharper-eyed than she was (notwithstanding her age), and the -libel laws are more closely knit by precedents, slips which would have -been treated as passing peccadilloes by our less squeamish forebears -rise to the dignity of “copy” for the pressman, and form staple -conversation for the insatiate tea-table. - -And when we mention the late most five-o’clock and kind-hearted of -artists, Mr. du Maurier, and {163} the still living most dainty limner -of hoops and patches, Mr. Hugh Thomson, as the providers of century-end -“cancelled illustrations,” we may be sure that the details will not be -very scandalous, nor the outrages very shocking. - -Not but that I was forced to go somewhat warily when originally -recording the famous incident of du Maurier and the peccant -illustration of the “Two Apprentices” in _Trilby_, for was I not -thereby involving myself with another, and greater, artist (very much -alive indeed!), whose pen was only not mightier than his pencil because -the latter was unsurpassable, but who might in turn pillory me in his -gallery of artfully constructed Enemies? - -It was indeed a topsy-turvy world which found the “Butterfly,” which -is popularly supposed to end its life wriggling upon the pin of the -“soaring human boy,” revenging itself upon humanity with epigrams that -“stick for ever.” - -Sad to relate, Whistler could never be brought to see du Maurier’s -rather caustic “retaliation,” particulars of which are given below, -in its proper proportions. Indeed, when I asked him to allow me to -reproduce, as a pictorial curiosity, the {164} suppressed print -of the “Two Apprentices,” which only the owners of _Trilby_, as it -appeared in serial form, are now destined to possess, he informed me -in the politest manner possible that my doing so would involve me in -an expensive and uncomfortable correspondence with his solicitors. And -what could not be done then cannot be done now, for reasons into which -I need not enter. Nevertheless, to treat seriously a hyperbolical and -exaggerated caricature as anything more than a legitimate response to -a not altogether kindly sarcasm on the part of Mr. Whistler himself, -appears to me now, as it appeared to me then, well-nigh incredible. No -one looked upon “Joe Sibley” as a true likeness, either pictorially -or verbally. It was written and read as a joke, part true, but mostly -false, and so would have stood had it not been given undue importance -by the correspondence in the _Pall Mall Gazette_. As a result, in -book form “Joe Sibley” is wanting in that delightful gallery which -contains “Durier,” Pygmalion to Trilby’s Galatea—a Galatea whose -marble heart would never beat for him; “Vincent,” the great American -oculist, “whose daughters are {165} so beautiful and accomplished -that they spend their autumn holiday in refusing the matrimonial -offers of the British aristocracy”; “The Greek,” who was christened -Poluphoisboiospaleapologos Petrilopetrolicoconose “because his real -name was thought much too long”; “Carnegie,” who “is now only a rural -dean, and speaks the worst French I know, and speaks it wherever and -whenever he can”; “Antony, the Swiss” (substituted for “Joe Sibley”); -“Lorrimer,” who was so thoroughgoing in his worship of the immortals, -Veronese, Tintoret and Co., and was “so persistent in voicing it, that -he made them quite unpopular in the Place St. Anatole des Arts”; not -to speak of “Dodor” and “l’Zouzou,” who were distinguished for being -“_les plus mauvais garniments_ of their respective regiments,” and the -rest of Trilby’s delightful adorers. Why, it seems to me that to have -obtained a niche in that pillory (forgive the mixing of metaphors), and -to see the fun of a little exaggerated banter, and perchance learn a -little lesson from it, would not be so very bad a fate after all. But I -suppose it all depends on the point of view. {166} - -As I say, I have by me a delightfully ironic missive from the late -president of the Society of the Butterfly himself, acknowledging -“the exceedingly amiable and flattering form of the playful request” -contained in my letter, with a hint at the end that lawyers might look -upon any reproduction of the forbidden matter as less than tolerable. - -Alas! that it is so, and all I can do is to refer my readers to the -columns of the _Pall Mall Gazette_ for May 15 and 25, 1894, in which -appeared Whistler’s two letters, and quote here the interview with -du Maurier upon the matter. They form a curious commentary upon the -“Gentle Art of Losing—Friends.” - - Extract from _Pall Mall Gazette_, May 19, 1894.[29] - - MR. WHISTLER AND MR. DU MAURIER THE “PUNCH” ARTIST’S ATTITUDE - - Mr. George du Maurier, “hidden in Hampstead” as Mr. Whistler put it - in his letter to us a day or two ago, was discovered by a _Pall Mall - Gazette_ reporter without the aid of any exploring party yesterday, - when that representative called to see what the famous _Punch_ artist - had to say in reply to Mr. Whistler. Mr. du Maurier was not disposed - at first to vouchsafe any answer. “If a bargee insults one {167} in - the street,” he said, “one can only pass on. One cannot stop and argue - it out.” But on second thoughts Mr. du Maurier added a few words. “I - should,” he said, “have avoided all reference to Mr. Whistler, or - anything which could have been construed into reference to him, if I - had imagined it would have pained him. I should have written privately - to him to say so, if his letter had been less violent and less brutal. - Certainly, in the character of Sibley, in my serial story _Trilby_ - I have drawn certain lines with Mr. Whistler in my mind. I thought - that the reference to those matters would have recalled some of the - good times we used to have in Paris in the old days. I thought that - both with Mr. Whistler and with other acquaintances I have similarly - treated, pleasurable recollections would have been awakened. But he - has taken the matter so terribly seriously. It is so unlike him. - - [29] By kind permission of the Proprietor. - - “You know of no reason why he should not have taken it all - good-naturedly?”—“No. I thought it might have drawn from him - something funny, something droll, to which I could have replied in - kind. But, of course, a letter like his puts a reply out of the - question. I think he must have been quite out of sorts to have allowed - himself to get so angered.” “I believe Mr. Whistler has himself said - things which the objects of them have not particularly relished!” - “Why, he has gone about all his life in England making unkind remarks - and publishing them. Here is a little book of his, _The Gentle Art of - making Enemies_, and I am one of his victims. It is not very terrible - what he says. It is rather droll. Listen! ‘Mr. du Maurier and Mr. - Wilde, happening to meet in the rooms where Mr. Whistler was {168} - holding his first exhibition of Venice jottings, the latter brought - the two face to face, and, taking each by the arm, inquired, “I say, - which one of you two invented the other, eh?”’ The obvious retort - to that on my part would have been that if he did not take care I - would invent him, but he had slipped away before either of us could - get a word out. This is really too small a matter to refer to; but - the explanation of this bit of drollery of Mr. Whistler’s is that it - suggested that I was unknown until I began to draw Postlethwaite, - the æsthetic character, out of whom I got some fun. Postlethwaite - was said to be Mr. Oscar Wilde, but the character was founded, not - on one person at all, but a whole school. As a matter of fact, I - had been drawing for _Punch_ twenty years before the invention of - Postlethwaite. However, that was Mr. Whistler’s little joke, and one - would have thought that if he made jokes about me, he might have - expected me to play the same game upon him without anticipating that I - should hurt his feelings. Then Mr. Whistler implies that I am a foul - friend, stating that I have thought a foul friend a finer fellow than - an open enemy. I am neither his friend nor his enemy. I am a great - admirer of his genius and his wit; but I cannot say that I could call - myself his friend for thirty years past. We were intimate in the old - days, but that is all. No, his whole letter is incomprehensible to - me. Of course, he has been embittered through life, by reason of his - genius not being recognised at its full value by the wide public, and - it certainly has not. This circumstance, and possibly illness, may - account for the leave he has taken of good manners. He talks of my - pent-up envy and malice. I must ask you to believe that I am not {169} - such a beast as that. I have no occasion either for malice or for - envy, and, as I say, I should never have written even what I have, had - I imagined it would give Mr. Whistler pain.” - - “Do you contemplate deleting the character of Sibley when you publish - in volume form?” “If I had a word or sign of regret from Mr. Whistler - for the savage things he says in his letter I might consider that. I - did what I did in a playful spirit of retaliation for this little gibe - about me in his book. A man so sensitive as Mr. Whistler now seems to - be should beware how he goes about joking of others. I had no idea of - taking any notice of Mr. Whistler’s letter, but since you have come - and asked me I say that if I had known it would have given pain and - brought such a torrent of abuse upon me, I should have denied myself - the little luxury of the playful retaliation in which I indulged.”[30] - - [30] After reading Mr. Menpes’s _Whistler as I knew Him_, one discovers - that extraordinary phenomenon, a man who would rather destroy a - friendship by what he considered a brilliant phrase than sacrifice the - brilliant phrase and preserve the friendship. It is not wonderful that - all Whistler’s friends did not prove so complaisant and generous as Mr. - Menpes. - -Let me then here put it on record that _Trilby_ in book form is not -only innocent of “Joe Sibley” and the “cut” of the “Two Apprentices” -but is in other respects far inferior to its serial issue. The -illustrations have been greatly reduced, and in the process have -lost much of their charm. There was, however, a large-paper edition -of the novel published in 1895, containing the same number of {170} -illustrations as the small-paper, together with “facsimiles of the -pencil studies.” This is the most desirable edition outside _Harper’s_. -The ideal form is, of course, the serial issue extracted from the -Magazine and bound up, “Joe Sibley,” the suppressed “cut” and all. - -This, then, is all that must be said about the “suppressed plate,” -which is so rigidly put under hatches that it must not even be paraded, -on this occasion only, with its fellows. “When the sleeper wakes,” -perchance, and copyright is out, a cheap edition of this present -volume, with the suppressed block inserted, will be published, and our -children’s children will marvel.[31] - - [31] The curious should refer to a delightful open Letter entitled - _Trilby_ from Mr. Whistler’s pen, which appeared in the initial number - of Mr. Harry Furniss’s late lamented _Lika Joko_. - -The whole episode is a nice commentary upon Mr. George Meredith’s -distinction between Irony and Humour. “If,” says he, “instead of -falling foul of the ridiculous person with a satiric rod, to make him -writhe and shriek aloud, you prefer to sting him under a semi-caress, -by which he shall in his anguish be rendered dubious whether indeed -anything has hurt him, you are an engine of {171} Irony.” But “if you -laugh all round him, tumble him, roll him about, deal him a smack, -and drop a tear on him, own his likeness to you and yours to your -neighbour, spare him as little as you shun him, pity him as much as you -expose, it is a spirit of Humour that is moving you.” - -In conclusion, it may be interesting to record the fact that no -communication passed between du Maurier and Whistler upon the subject, -other than that which appeared in print. - -So much for the episode of the suppressed _Trilby_ illustration, which, -as we have seen, was complicated by personal considerations. - -Let us now turn our attention for a moment to a charming little -tailpiece which has fallen a victim, not to the susceptibilities of -an individual, but to an undue consideration for the feelings of that -most living of Tom Morton’s creations, Mrs. Grundy. It is to be found -in the first edition of the immortal _Vicar of Wakefield_ as pictured -by Mr. Hugh Thomson. And in, entering our protest against the deference -which has in this instance been shown to prudishness, we must at the -same time admiringly recognise the spirit by {172} which the action -has been prompted. The “young person” no doubt succeeds on occasion in -rendering us a little ridiculous. At the same time we must not forget -that to her we largely owe our immunity from what would often shock -even the moral olfactories of her elders. - -[Illustration: Suppressed Illustration from _The Vicar of Wakefield_] - -Surely, however, the tender morals which could bear to read of -Thornhill’s attempted seduction of Olivia could not logically find -offence in the {173} charming little conceit, which by its suppression -has rendered a first edition of the _Vicar_, as illustrated by Mr. Hugh -Thomson, an allurement to the modern Mæcenas. - -Unlike _Coaching Days and Coaching Ways_, illustrated by the same -artist, after the first edition of which certain drawings also -disappeared, but without others being substituted in the later -editions, the first edition of the Thomson _Vicar of Wakefield_, dated -1890, which was published both on small and large paper, contains the -same number of illustrations as those which succeeded it. This, of -course, is because in this instance the type was not reset, and so -it was obligatory to substitute an illustration for that which was -suppressed. - -The tailpiece, here reproduced by the kind permission of Mr. Thomson -and Messrs. Macmillan, only appears on page 95 of the issues of 1890. - -After that date we have a drawing which, though a pretty enough little -picture of Lady Blarney and Miss Carolina Wilhelmina Amelia Skeggs (I -love, like the Vicar himself, to give the whole name), is to my mind -far inferior to that {174} which seems to have given offence to some -extraordinarily constructed purists. - -Mr. Austin Dobson, to whom we are indebted for the enlightening -Prefatory account, in this volume, of the more important illustrated -editions of the _Vicar_, tells me that he has an impression that the -immediate cause of the disappearance of the peccant tailpiece was a -certain objection raised by a reviewer in the _Spectator_. In justice, -however, to that organ I must at once put it on record that I can find -no trace of its having so demeaned itself. - -As a matter of fact I have reason to believe that suggestions were -made by certain persons who arrogate to themselves a sort of private -proprietorship in the “fine old English novel” and the “fine old -English caricature” that the little tailpiece was in rather bad -taste, and that the artist, rather than allow the slightest grounds -for such an imputation to exist, hastened to remove the offender, and -substituted one that was irreproachable. Personally I grieve to think -that there should be any one in existence with a moral digestion so -dyspeptic as to discover the least coarseness or ill-flavour in {175} -this dainty little fancy, And though the artist, we may be sure, has -not troubled himself unduly about the insinuation, I cannot but feel -indignant that even a hint of indecorousness should be made against -one who, above all others, has kept his pencil free from any taint of -unworthiness. However, it is an ill wind that blows nobody any good, -and we are fain to congratulate ourselves upon thus being enabled to -enrol Mr. Hugh Thomson in a brotherhood which he certainly will not -repudiate. - -Passing allusion has been made above to certain illustrations which -also disappeared from Mr. Outram Tristram’s very readable book -_Coaching Days and Coaching Ways_, illustrated by Mr. Hugh Thomson and -Mr. Herbert Railton, after the first edition of that very charming -volume was exhausted. It had been my intention to reproduce these -cancelled drawings here, but I have since come to the conclusion that -it would be little short of an outrage to perpetuate what would be -cruelly unrepresentative of Mr. Hugh Thomson’s work. So far as the -artist himself is concerned no obstacle is raised, for he writes {176} -to me in the most generous way, “‘Calling for the Squire’s Mailbag’ -was withdrawn for the same reason as ‘Wild Darrell’ (viz. because it -was not considered sufficiently good). _I should like to withdraw -scores of other drawings._ However, one cannot help oneself. It is not -very pleasant to have these reproduced again, but I quite understand -the motive of your book, and should be very churlish indeed to put -any obstacle in your way.” This seems to me so nobly altruistic an -attitude that I feel I should be lacking in mannerliness were I to take -advantage of it. - -It will be enough merely to draw attention to facts which will be of -interest to those who possess one or other of the editions of this book. - -First and foremost then, take down your copy and note whether the -number of the illustrations is 216 or 219. Happy as you are if you -possess the latter, twice happy will you be if the former be yours, -for in this case you will be the owner, not only of a first edition, -not only of an edition containing the cancelled illustrations, but -also of the edition from which the best idea of the beauty of the -original drawings may be got. And for this {177} reason, that in all -but this, the 1888 edition, the reproductions have been greatly reduced -in size. Of course we are here concerned with the cancelled pictures, -“Wild Darrell” on page 43 and “Calling for the Squire’s Mailbag” on -page 311, but we must remember that their chief value lies in their -being the guarantees of our having an _editio princeps_. So we have -it that in this instance as in the case of _Trilby_ the earliest -issues have the double charm of satisfying at the same time our taste -for the beautiful and our appetite for the curious. Unlike the case -of _Trilby_, however, we have here no romantic circumstances such as -appeal to the true bibliomaniac. The cancellation is merely the result -of a laudable determination on the part of the artist and his publisher -to eliminate such illustrations as they do not consider altogether -exemplary. Incidentally of course their action enhances, in the eyes of -the bibliomaniac, the value of those copies which they rightly consider -marred by their inclusion. But this is no business of theirs. They are -not concerned with diseased humanity but with the poor sane public for -whom they cater. {178} - -The above remarks apply of course to many minor suppressions of the -same kind. There is, to take one example, the well-known case of -Curmer’s 1838 edition of _Paul et Virginie_ and _La Chaumière Indienne_ -superbly illustrated by Meissonier, Tony Johannot, Huet, and others. -This book is a standing compliment to British wood-engraving of the -day, for, though published in Paris by a French publisher, by far the -larger number of the blocks were entrusted to Samuel Williams, Orrin -Smith, and other British hands. In the earliest issue appears on page -418 the wood-engraving of “La Bonne Femme.” Engraved by Lavoignat after -Meissonier it was suppressed in later issues probably because of its -ugliness, whether the fault of artist or engraver I know not. At any -rate the engraver was not one of the British contingent. - -{179} - - - - -CHAPTER IX - -THE SUPPRESSED OMAR KHAYYAM ETCHING - - -When the iconography of Edward FitzGerald’s _Ruba’iyat of Omar Khayyam_ -comes to be compiled, there will be one item which will be found to be -well-nigh unattainable by the enthusiastic collector. That item is not -unnaturally dismissed in a very few words by Colonel W. F. Prideaux -in his “Notes for a Bibliography of Edward FitzGerald.” He is dealing -with the third edition, published by Quaritch in the year 1872. “It may -be added,” he writes, “that a weird frontispiece to this edition was -designed and etched by Mr. Edwin Edwards, the artist friend to whom -FitzGerald lent his house at the beginning of 1871, and whose death in -1879 was a source of sorrow to him. A few copies of the etching were -struck off, but it did not meet with the {180} approval of FitzGerald, -and was consequently never used.” - -Now, I am inclined to think that this, as I believe, the only published -reference to an interesting rarity, will hardly satisfy the craving -of the FitzGerald enthusiast. I shall therefore give the fullest -information on the subject, whereby the modern Mæcenas will be afforded -full particulars of what only a few of the cult of Omar can ever hope -to possess. - -Those who know their _Ruba’iyat_ as they should will remember that -there are several allusions made by the philosopher to the amusements -of his countrymen. - -Take the FitzGerald quatrain:— - - “When you and I behind the veil are passed, - Oh, but the long, long while the world shall last, - Which of our Coming and Departure heeds - As the Sea’s self should heed a pebble cast.” - -Here, in the last line, we have what is probably an allusion to the -game of “Ducks and Drakes,” “which,” says Mr. Edward Heron-Allen in the -notes to his admirable translation, “was known to the Egyptians and -also to the Greeks under the {181} name of ἐποστρακισμος. It was played -with oyster-shells. The curious are referred to Minutius Felix (A.D. -207), who describes the game in his preface.” This last is a gentleman -with whose name I am free to confess I have hitherto been unfamiliar, -and to whose writings I have no access. I must therefore leave the -enthusiastic reader to follow up the clue for himself. However, with -the aid of Liddell and Scott, I find myself able to go one better than -Mr. Heron-Allen, and would refer the reader to Archæologus Pollux, the -author of _Onomastikon_, whose date is prior to Felix by twenty-nine -years! - -Another game which we find Omar Khayyam alluding to is that of -chequers, which is familiar to us in FitzGerald’s oft-quoted quatrain:— - - “But helpless pieces of the game he plays - Upon this Chequer-board of Nights and Days; - Hither and thither moves, and checks and slays, - And one by one back in the Closet lays”; - -altered in the later edition to:— - - “’Tis all a Chequer-board of Nights and Days, - Where Destiny with Men for Pieces plays; - Hither and thither moves, and mates, and slays - And one by one back in the Closet lays.” - -{182} - -Again we have allusion to what is probably some form of the game of -tennis in the following:— - - “The Ball no question makes of Ayes and Noes - But Right or Left as strikes the Player goes, - And He that tossed Thee down into the Field - He knows about it all—HE knows—HE knows.” - -Other passages might be quoted, but these are enough for our purpose, -for the form of amusement with which we have immediately to concern -ourselves is rather a toy than a game—a toy indeed which would seem to -have been the forerunner of a somewhat elaborate apparatus which, being -used at first for more frivolous purposes, has now been largely adapted -to educational ends. - -The Magic Lantern of modern times is generally referred back to -Athanasius Kircher, who died in 1680, although, according to some, -it was known four centuries earlier to Roger Bacon. This may be true -enough so far as the “projecting lantern” is concerned, but it can -hardly be doubted that it had in the line of its earlier ancestors the -Persian Fanus i Khiyal or Lantern of Fancy, which is used with such -effect by the Philosopher of Naishápur, and which instigated the design -of the {183} rare suppressed etching of which I here propose to treat -with some particularity. - -As literally translated by Mr. Heron-Allen, the quatrain referring -thereto runs as follows:— - - “This vault of heaven, beneath which we stand bewildered, - We know to be a sort of magic-lantern; - Know thou that the sun is the lamp flame and the universe is the lamp, - We are like figures that revolve in it.” - -As literally translated by Mr. John Payne it run:—“This sphere of -the firmament, wherein we are amazed, The Chinese lantern I think a -likeness of it; The sun the lamp-stand and the world the lantern; We -like the figures are that in it revolve.” - -As metrically translated by him into a throwback quatrain it runs:— - - “The Sphere and mankind, who therein in amaze are, - Chinese-lantern like, well it may seem, to our gaze are; - See, the sun is the lamp and the world is the lantern - And the figures ourselves, that revolve round the blaze are.” - -As rendered by FitzGerald more literally than is his wont it ran in its -first state as follows:— - - “For, in and out, above, below, - ’Tis nothing but a Magic Shadow-show, - Play’d in a box whose Candle is the Sun - Round which we Phantom Figures come and go.” - -{184} - -As altered later, it assumed the following more familiar form:— - - “We are no other than a moving row - Of Magic-Shadow shapes that come and go - Round with the Sun-illumin’d Lantern held - In Midnight by the Master of the Show.” - -All who have read the published letters of Edward FitzGerald will have -been struck by the infinite pains which he took to make this highest -effort of his genius, the translation of Omar, as perfect as possible. -His correspondence with his friend Professor Cowell teems with -allusions to, and innumerable discussions on, minute points of meaning -in the Persian. - -Therefore it will not surprise us to find that the figure of the Fanus -i Khiyal (literally the lanthorn[32] of fancy), here made use of in so -masterly a manner, had its characteristics and peculiarities carefully -considered. - - [32] It is a not uninteresting fact that the old English spelling of - the word “lantern” used above is due to the mistaken association of - the word with the plates of transparent horn formerly used in place of - glass. - -By the kindness of Mrs. Edwin Edwards and the late Professor Cowell, -I am enabled to give extracts from an unpublished letter written -by the {185} latter to FitzGerald in the year 1868, dealing -somewhat exhaustively with the matter. This letter appears to have -been forwarded by FitzGerald to Edwin Edwards, the artist, by way -of inspiration for an etched frontispiece to the edition of _The -Ruba’iyat_ which was to be published by Quaritch in 1871, not, I think, -in 1872, as Colonel Prideaux has it. - - _From Professor Cowell to Edward FitzGerald._ - - MY DEAR E. F. G.—I have sent off one letter to you to-day, but I did - not answer a question of yours in it, after all, which you remind me - of in your letter just received by this evening’s post. - - First as to the famous Fanus i Khiyal—you will find it explained - in a note by the editor at the end of my Calcutta Review Paper. I - have often seen them in Calcutta. The lantern is about a foot and a - half high—and nearly a foot in diameter, and it moves round with - a slow and slightly vibratory motion. The candle is placed inside, - and the draught sends it round. The editor in his note explains how - the draught is produced:—They are made of a talc[33] cylinder with - figures of men and animals cut out of paper and pasted on it. The - cylinder, which is very light, is suspended on an axis, round which it - easily turns. A hole {186} is cut near the bottom, and the part cut - out is fixed at an angle to the cylinder so as to form a vane. When a - small lamp or candle is placed inside, a current of air is produced - which keeps the cylinder slowly revolving. (Here is a small drawing.) - - I cannot recollect how it was suspended, the reviewer says, “on an - axis.” I think it was hung by a string from the top over a candle. - I remember seeing it go round one evening in our dining-room—the - Khánsamah brought one to show me. . . . - - Nicolas’s Fanus[34] is more elaborate than our Calcutta one, but on - the same principle. He says the figures move round from right to left - or _vice versa_—as may be. His _fanal_[35] is like mine, only it has - a metal top and bottom—the cylindrical sides being of waxed cloth and - painted; it has a handle fixed on the top which the man holds; the - candle is placed inside on the metal floor. . . . - - (Here is another small drawing.) . . . - - Yours affectionately, - - EDW. B. COWELL. - - CAMBRIDGE, - - _January 16, 1868._ - - [33] This word is curiously enough misprinted “tall” in both Nichols’ - and Quaritch’s editions of Mr. Heron-Allen’s book, whilst in the note - to Professor Cowell’s article it is printed “tale.” It is something of - a record, I should think, to find so many compositors and readers all - at fault. - - [34] Professor Cowell here refers to J. B. Nicolas, author of a French - translation of Omar, published at Paris, 1867. In a note to _Les - quatrains de Khéyam traduit du Persan_, he says: “In Persia the lantern - is made of two copper basins, separated by a shade of waxed calico - about a yard high. The lower one contains the candle, and the upper one - has a handle for the arm of the ferrásh who carries it. The shade is - folded like the familiar ‘Chinese lantern.’ Ornaments are painted on - the cloth, and it is to the vacillation of these, as the carrier shifts - it from one hand to another, that Omar refers.” - - [35] Qy.: Has this French word for lantern the same root as Fanus? - -{187} - -The letter was illustrated with two rough drawings of the Fanus -for FitzGerald’s guidance. The last of them represented the toy -held out by a truncated arm. Edwin Edwards, to whom the letter was -forwarded, at once with true artistic instinct caught at the suggestion -unintentionally conveyed, and, as will be seen from the etching here -reproduced, accentuated the hidden presence of the “Master of the -Show,” by making the arm which holds suspended this “Sun-illumined -Lantern” of a world issue from the impenetrable darkness which hides -its mysterious lord. Unfortunately, the Fanus is not etched with great -success, although the artist made a special visit to the old India -Museum, now dispersed, to study an example there on exhibition. Had the -etching equalled the conception, the design could hardly have failed to -satisfy even FitzGerald’s fastidious requirements. As it was, only a -limited number[36] of proofs (from twenty to twenty-five) were printed -by that cleverest printer of etchings, Mrs. Edwin Edwards, and the -plate destroyed. Hence their rarity. {188} - - [36] At least six of these have lately gone to America where they were - feverishly bought up by enthusiastic Omarians. - -The conception is a really fine one, and might well have proved an -illustration of the text in the best sense of that much-abused term, -being, as it is, a very different thing from a mere translation of -the words into pictorial form. It is far more than this. It is an -illuminator of the meaning, and accentuates its spiritual significance. -This is what illustration should do, but rarely does do, in these days -of rapid and perfunctory production. - -Of Edwin Edwards the artist I should like to take this opportunity -of saying a word. His name is little known outside artistic circles, -and it would be somewhat unfair to advertise it in connection with an -etched plate which failed to give satisfaction without at the same time -making allusion to pictorial work which was successful and meritorious. -That he did produce work of real value is evident from the fact that -one of his oil pictures of the Thames hangs at the Luxembourg in the -Salle des Étrangers (for he was always more appreciated in France than -in England), and that two years ago another canvas, and that hardly one -of the best examples of his {189} work, was chosen by Sir Edward -Poynter to be well hung in the Tate Gallery. - -[Illustration: The suppressed frontispiece For “Omar Khayyam.” (_By -Edwin Edwards_)] - -It may also be mentioned that high appreciation of his talents has been -shown across the Channel by eulogistic articles in the _Gazette des -Beaux Arts_, _Les Beaux Arts Illustrés_, _La Vie Moderne_, _L’Art_, -etc., etc. - -It is, however, on his work as an etcher that his reputation must -chiefly rest, and it would be more than unjust to allow the artist who -produced such a _tour de force_ as the great etching of “London from -the Greenwich Observatory,” to mention only one of his three hundred -and seventy-one works in this medium, to be advertised by an etching, -finely conceived it is true, but unsatisfactorily carried to an issue. - -Not that these facts will in any way affect the thoroughgoing -rarity-hunter in his estimate of the suppressed plate here described. -It will be enough for him to know that not more than a quarter of a -hundred of his rivals can own a proof of the etching to make him ready -to sell his last shirt for its acquisition. He will continue to value a -print for its rarity rather than for its beauty, {190} a book for its -height in millimetres rather than for its depth in thought. - -No doubt these be hard words. Then why, it will be asked, pander to -so foolish a passion? Shall I confess? Yes, indeed, and glory in the -confession that I, too, am of the gentle brotherhood, that I, too, am -a subscriber to _The Connoisseur_ (or “The Connoyzer,” as one of my -friends at Mr. W. H. Smith’s bookstall used to call that delightful -publication), that I, too,—in fine, that I am, by the favour of -Fortune, the happy possessor of two proofs of the suppressed etching to -the Omar of 1872! - -And now just one word with that gentle hunter, Mr. Thomas B. Mosher -of Portland, Maine, U.S.A., who did me the honour of transferring a -large portion of the above, originally written for _The Bookman_, to -the pages of his beautiful 1902 edition of _The Ruba’iyat_. Of that -I make no complaint, for I think it very probable that he asked and -obtained my permission. What I do complain of is that, in a footnote, -he falls foul of me for being “ungracious” to Colonel Prideaux in -suggesting the date 1871 as the year of publication of the {191} third -edition, instead of the year 1872, as Colonel Prideaux has it in his -most valuable little “Notes for a Bibliography of Edward FitzGerald” -1901. Mr. Mosher says “no manner of doubt exists as to the date.” Let -me tell him that I have it on the authority of one who was on intimate -terms both with FitzGerald and Edwin Edwards at the time when this -third edition was published that, though the book bore the date 1872 -on the title, as a matter of fact it was _published_ in the autumn of -1871 and _post-dated_. If it be “ungracious” to give Colonel Prideaux -a piece of information which he had not the opportunity of obtaining -for himself, then I sincerely hope that all who read this volume, and -find themselves better informed, as well they may, than I am, will be -equally “ungracious” to me. _La plupart des hommes n’ont pas le courage -de corriger les autres, parcequ’ils n’ont pas le courage de souffrir -qu’on les corrige._ - -{192} - - - - -CHAPTER X - -ADAPTED OR PALIMPSEST PLATES - - - “God bless the King, I mean the faith’s defender, - God bless—no harm in blessing—the Pretender. - Who that Pretender is, and who is King— - God bless us all!—that’s quite another thing.” - -So sang the old Jacobite John Byrom, and, taking my cue from him, I -do not propose to enter here into the vexed question of James Francis -Edward Stuart’s claim to this or that title.[37] It is merely a happy -accident that lends me so picturesque a figure round which to group -certain pictorial rarities, germane to our subject, of which little is -known, and of which the _petit-maître_ will be therefore grateful for -some particulars. - - [37] It may be mentioned that Jesse, in his _Memoirs of the - Pretenders_, always calls him James _Frederick_. - -The history of the engraved copperplate is full of that kind of romance -which peculiarly {193} commends itself to the lover of what is quaint -and curious in the byways of art, and perhaps the most romantic phase -of its history is that with which I am about to deal. It is the sort of -romance which was inseparable from what may be called the pre-machinery -days, and is as foreign to the spirit of this age as are the slashed -doublets of our forefathers or the starched irrelevances of their wives. - -It may be, of course, that the Process block of to-day will be found -to be as full of romance to-morrow. Indeed we have already found some -indications of this in a former chapter, and it is probably true that -romance is as all-pervading in the mental as ether is in the physical -world, and that it is only lack of the proper intellectual reagent that -makes the discovery of it difficult. - -However that may be, one thing is certain, that most of us find it -easier to come at the “poetry of circumstance” when centuries or -decades have left it behind than when it is at our immediate threshold. - -In these days of lightning pictorial satire, when Monday’s political -move is on Tuesday served up {194} in genial topsy-turvy by “F. C. -G.” in the _Westminster_ or “G. R. H.” in the _Pall Mall_, and when -_Punch’s_ weekly cartoon is voted seven days late by the Man in the -Street, it is difficult for us to realise the shifts to which political -satire was put when the laborious engraved or etched broadside was the -quickest method of getting at the picture-loving masses. Just imagine -the agony of impatience of the political satirist who had designed his -broadside and had to await the tardy engraving of the copperplate, to -be followed by the deliberate hand-printing and hand-painting of the -impressions before they could be published, perhaps only to find in the -end that the nine-days’ wonder was past, or that events had blunted his -most telling points. - -So, too, when satirist was employed against satirist, how hopeless it -seemed for retaliation to follow swiftly enough upon the occasion to -make any retort in kind worth while at all. - -Then it was that the wit of man, quickened by necessity, conceived the -clever stratagem of the _adapted_ copperplate, of which it is here my -purpose to give some remarkable examples. {195} - -I fancy I see the victim of some shrewder libel than usual, with which -the town has been flooded, pricking off in hot haste to the pictorial -satirist in his pay, and demanding the production of a trenchant and -immediate reply, so that the retort may be in the printsellers’ windows -before the attack has had time to do its deadly work. - -The satirist names a month as the earliest possible date. His employer -curses him for a blundering slowcoach. Before a month is out the -mischief will be done beyond repairing. And he is flinging himself out -of the workshop when a happy thought comes with a flash into his head. - -How about the copperplate of that broadside which fell so flat a year -ago because of its tardiness? It was meant to be a counter-thrust to -just such another attack as this, but it was a month too late. Is there -no way of fitting a new barb on to the old arrow? Is there no way of -adapting the year-old weapon to the present necessity? - -And then there follows anxious discussion and careful examination. The -head of A. burnished out here can be re-engraved in the similitude -of B. {196} C. will stand as he is and do duty, with a new index -number and altered footnote, for D. Here an inappropriate object can -be replaced by a panel of appropriate verse. The inscriptions on the -banderoles issuing from the characters’ mouths must be altered. And, -hey presto! in the twinkling of a bedpost we have our answer ready for -a not too critical public. - -The original lampooner, who counted on a good month’s start, will be -confronted with a retort before he has time to turn round. The whole -town will be set buzzing about the successful ruse, and the laugh will -be turned upon the aggressor. - -Of course it would be comparatively rarely that the adapted plate could -be wholly _apropos_, but such capital ingenuity was exercised, once the -stratagem had been imagined, that the practice was not so uncommon nor -so unsuccessful as might be naturally expected. In this chapter I am -only treating of those dealing with one particular episode, but I have -in my possession at least thirty of these remarkable productions. - -From them we find that it was not always the engraver of a plate -who re-adjusted his own {197} handiwork, but piratical hands were -sometimes laid upon the work of a master by mere journeymen engravers -who did not scruple to leave the original artist’s name for the better -selling of the plate, although it had ceased to represent even in the -remotest degree his sentiments or intentions. - -Indeed, I could tell of at least one remarkable plate originally -prepared in honour of a certain great personage, which, being -thievishly appropriated by his opponents, was by them so judiciously -metamorphosed as to cover him with as much confusion as it had -originally panoplied him with honour.[38] - - [38] Mozley, in his entertaining _Reminiscences_, tells the following - story of the latter days of the Oxford Movement, which is somewhat - parallel: “Isaac Williams published a volume of poetry called _The - Baptistry_, upon a series of curious and very beautiful engravings, by - Boetius a Bolswert, in an old Latin work, entitled _Via Vitæ Æternæ_. - In these pictures, besides other things peculiar to the Roman Church, - there frequently occurs the figure of the Virgin Mother, crowned - and in glory, the object of worship, and distributing the gifts of - Heaven. For this figure Williams substituted the Church, and thereby - incurred a protest from Newman for adopting a Roman Catholic work - just so far as suited his own purpose, without caring for the further - responsibilities.” - -This is, I believe, the first time that any attempt has been made to -bring this fascinating subject before the public. Incidentally it -has {198} been touched upon once or twice in publications of my own -as it affected other byways in art, and has been alluded to in the -Introductions to the _Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British -Museum_ (_Satires_), prepared under the direction of the late Keeper -of the Prints and Drawings, George William Reid, by F. G. Stephens, -to which monumental work all students of such subjects are profoundly -indebted. But it has never been treated with anything approaching the -completeness that it deserves. It is practically an unworked phase of -print-collecting—a new craze in which the dilettante may specialise. - -As I have said, we are fortunate in having in this place so picturesque -a figure as that of the Old Pretender, or the Chevalier de St. George, -as some like to call him, round whom to group our first batch of these -pictorial palimpsests. - -James Francis Edward Stuart was, as all who know their history will -remember, the son of James II. by his second wife, Mary of Modena. He -was born on June 10, 1688, at St James’s Palace. - -James II. was then in his fifty-fifth year. By {199} his cruelties -after Monmouth’s rebellion, by his attack on the Universities, by -the Trial of the Seven Bishops, by his Court of Commissioners of -Ecclesiastical Causes, and by his misuse of the Dispensing Power he had -alienated the whole nation, with the exception of a few Roman Catholics -and hangers-on of the Court, and his throne was tottering. - -The only element of strength in his position was the certainty that -sooner or later the crown was bound to pass to one of the Protestant -daughters of his first marriage; for though the present Queen had borne -him four or five children they had all died young. It was now six years -since there had been any hint of a royal birth. What were probably -grossly exaggerated accounts of the King’s early irregularities were -matter of common gossip, and the Queen’s health was far from robust. -Suddenly, at a most opportune moment for the Roman Catholics—so -opportune a moment indeed that intrigue at once suggested itself—it -was announced to the world that Mary was with child, and a day of -thanksgiving was appointed five months before the Queen’s delivery. -{200} - -Now was the occasion for reviving a report which had been sedulously -spread by the enemies of the Court from the very earliest days of the -Queen’s marriage—_that the King, in order to transmit his dominions -and his bigotry to a Roman Catholic heir, had determined to impose a -surreptitious offspring on his Protestant subjects_. - -In due course came her Majesty’s lying-in at St. James’s, and although -the King took every precaution, by the solemn depositions of forty-two -persons of rank who were present, against questions arising as to the -child’s identity, the celebrated “warming-pan” story was hatched, -which continued to gain credence for more than half a century. Nor -were circumstantial details of the most intimate nature in support of -the lie wanting. During the labour, it was maintained, the curtains of -the bed were drawn more closely than usual on such occasions; neither -the Princess of Orange, the nearest Protestant heir to the throne, nor -her immediate adherents were asked to be in attendance; an apartment -had been selected for the Queen’s accommodation in which there was a -door near the head of the bed which opened on a back {201} staircase. -Though the weather was hot, and the room heated by the great crowd of -persons present, a warming-pan was introduced into the bed; and finally -the pan contained a new-born child, which was immediately afterwards -presented to the bystanders as the offspring of the Queen! - -The following song, sung by two gentlemen at the Maypole in the Strand, -is sufficiently explanatory: - - “As I went by St. James’s I heard a bird sing, - That the Queen had for certain a boy for a King; - But one of the soldiers did laugh and did say, - _It was born overnight and brought forth the next day._ - This bantling was heard at St. James’s to squall, - Which made the Queen make so much haste from Whitehall.” - -The last line referred to the fact that the Queen had played at cards -at Whitehall Palace till eleven o’clock on Saturday, June 9, whence she -was carried in a chair to St. James’s Palace, and on the Sunday, June -10, between the hours of nine and ten in the morning, “was brought to -bed of a prince.” - - It is a remarkable fact [says Jesse] that as early as 1682 (six years - before this), when the Queen, then Duchess of York, was declared to be - pregnant, the same rumours were {202} propagated as on the present - occasion—that an imposture was intended to be obtruded upon the - nation. Fortunately on that occasion the infant proved to be a female, - or doubtless some improbable fiction would have been invented similar - to that which obtained credit in 1688. - -Undoubtedly the whole thing was a lie, but it did its deadly work.[39] -The whole nation was prepared to accept the flimsiest evidence, and -within six months father, mother, and child had fled to France. - - [39] Certain imprudent Roman Catholics gave colour to the popular - belief by loudly expressing their opinion that a miracle had been - wrought. One fanatic had even gone so far as to prophesy that the Queen - would give birth to twins, of whom the elder would be King of England - and the younger Pope of Rome! - -So much for the story that inspired the remarkable broadsides with -which it is here our purpose to deal. It will be noticed that these -broadsides are all Dutch in their origin, a fact that is not surprising -when we remember that they formed part of the propagandum which was -soon to land William of Orange, the husband of James’s eldest daughter, -on the throne of England. - -The first that we reproduce is entitled “L’Europe Alarmée pour le Fils -d’un Meunier.” - -The artist is that remarkably clever Dutchman, {203} Romeyn de Hooghe, -whose delicate and facile handling of the point is well exemplified in -the seascape at the back of the picture. - -Let us examine in detail the most important features of this elaborate -broadside. - -The centre of attraction is, of course, the surreptitious infant -Prince of Wales, who lies in his cradle to the left of the picture. -Those assembled about him are discussing the possibility of the plot -having been discovered. On his coverlet are various playthings, amongst -which is conspicuous a toy mill, emphasising, of course, the generally -accepted belief that he was the son of a miller, for, in their lying, -James’s enemies were nothing if not circumstantial. This allusive toy -figures in almost all the satiric prints dealing with the Old Pretender. - -At the foot of the cradle, which is decorated with an owl, an owlet, -and a snake (emblems of evil), is a pap-bowl and spoon, half concealed -by the arm of “the first mother”[40] (1) {204} who seems to be -pointing out to Father Petre (2), the instigator of the plot, that the -child has been _born too old_. The Father, whose intimacy with the lady -is suggested by a tender fondling of her right hand with his left, -fingers his rosary with the other, and gazes fixedly into her eyes. - - [40] It is not easy to decide which of the female figures is intended - to represent Mary of Modena and which the miller’s wife. At first sight - one would expect the Queen to be represented by the central figure 3, - but, on the other hand, I have in my possession a very rare mezzotint - of the period which represents Father Petre and the Queen in almost - identical attitudes as figures 1 and 2 in the present plate. This view - of the matter is supported by the following scandalous verse of the day: - - Some priests, they say, crept nigh her honour, - And sprinkled some good holy water upon her, - Which made her conceive of what has undone her. - -Edward Petre was one of the best-hated men in the country, and was -popularly looked upon as James’s evil genius. The King would have made -him Archbishop of York, but the Pope refused his dispensation. In the -year preceding the production of this satire he had been made a Privy -Councillor. - -[Illustration: “L’Europe alarmée pour le Fils d’un Meunier.” (_The -plate in its first state_)] - -[Illustration: _The plate in its second state, now entitled_ “La Cour -De Paix solitaire, entre les Roses piquantes et les Lis”] - -In the middle of the picture sits the “second mother” (3) in a -highly-wrought chair, round the legs of which twine carved serpents. -Tears course down her cheeks. With her right hand she points to the -cradle as she listens to the counsels of the papal nuncio Count -Ferdinand d’Adda (4), who, with armour peeping from under {205} -his robes and with his armoured foot treading on his naked weapon, -recommends submission of the whole matter to the arbitrament of the -sword. - -Immediately beyond the Cardinal stands Louis XIV. (5), James’s faithful -ally. In one hand he carries a bag of money, referring, doubtless, -to his offer of five hundred thousand livres for the equipment of an -English fleet to oppose the Prince of Orange’s threatened invasion; -with the other he exposes to view a list of his army. - -Behind, and to the right of Cardinal d’Adda, Louis’ son, the Dauphin -of France, makes as though he would draw his sword, whilst the Pope -(Innocent XI.), in shadow at the extreme right of the picture (7, the -number is very indistinctly seen on the dark clothing) grasps the keys -of St. Peter, and would seem to be sarcastically doubtful of the whole -affair. “The Pope,” says Voltaire, “founded very little hopes on the -proceedings of James, and constantly refused Petre a cardinal’s hat.” - -Beyond the Pope is seen the armoured figure of Leopold I. (8), with the -German eagle on his helmet. With his right hand he grasps his {206} -sword-hilt; with his left he gesticulates as though reminding the war -party that he also has to be reckoned with. No. 9 I cannot identify. - -Behind Mary of Modena’s chair stands (13, the figure is on her -breast) Catherine of Braganza, the childless wife of Charles II. She -is doubtless lamenting that, when residing at Whitehall, she had not -herself manufactured a prince on the Modena plan. Next to her (11, the -figure is on the pillar) a doctor of the Sorbonne promises them all -dispensations—a hit at James’s well-known misuse of the dispensing -powers. Next to him, with his right hand convulsively grasping a -roll of charters, stands James himself (10). In his left he carries -parliamentary and corporation papers. With despairing eyes he gazes at -the baby who, so far from giving, as he had fondly hoped, the finishing -touch to the Roman Catholic triumph in England, is likely to prove the -most damning count in the country’s indictment of his iniquities and -treasons. To the left the midwife (12) encourages him to proceed with -the imposture. Below her two monks (14 and 15), greatly alarmed, pray -aloud at the head of the cradle. {207} - -Immediately behind them two heralds, one mounted on an ass, blow -on trumpets to call attention to the Dutch fleet, which is seen -approaching through the right-hand arch, whilst through the left a fort -is seen belching forth smoke and resisting the landing of the longboats. - -In the left corner of the picture certain Quakers (17, 18, 19), whose -curious friendship with James must not be forgotten, deprecate the -priests’ blasphemies, whilst beyond them a crowd of Irish papists is -suggested by their waving symbols and a torn flag embroidered with the -sacred monogram. Behind the Quakers an oriental-looking person scans -the heavens through a telescope. - -The colonnade beneath which all this takes place has its pillars -surmounted by owls and a demoniacal bat. The arches are inscribed -with the words “Het word hier nacht,” and other inscriptions are seen -on the walls. On the extreme right of the picture is reared a banner -bearing what appear to be the words “In utrumque Turgam,” of which it -is difficult to imagine the meaning. “In utramque Furcam,” which would -be intelligible, has been suggested to me as an {208} alternative -reading, but cannot, I think, be accepted. Another friend hazards “In -utrumque (modum) resurgam,” which may be freely translated, “I shall be -‘dormy’ either way,” and would certainly make sense. Farther than that -I cannot go with him. - -So much for the first state of this elaborate copperplate which did its -part in propagating the lie which went far to lose for James II. the -crown of England. - -After having served this purpose the plate was laid aside for nearly a -quarter of a century. During this period the throne of England had been -occupied by James II.’s two daughters, Mary and Anne, to the exclusion -of their father, who died in exile in 1701, and of the Chevalier de -St. George, whose proclamation by Louis of France as James III. of -England[41] had been followed by the war of the Spanish Succession. - - [41] In the Stuart Room at Madresfield Court Lord Beauchamp lately - showed me a portrait of the Chevalier, labelled “James III.”! - -In 1713, just twenty-four years after the plate had been engraved, -the Peace of Utrecht, so vitally important as marking the beginning -of {209} England’s commercial prosperity, was signed between England -and France. Amongst other things it secured the Protestant Succession -to the throne of England through the House of Hanover, and the -dismissal of the Chevalier from France. The suspension of arms between -the English and the French which preceded the signing of the treaty -was seized upon as the opportunity for resuscitating the plate and -adapting: it to the altered circumstances. Now did some pictorial -vandal wrench and twist the figures to new and undreamt-of uses and -turn the Council of War of 1688 into the Court of Peace between the -Roses and Lilies of 1712! The plate now professes to be published -in London, though, from the fact that the publication line runs. “A -Londres chez Turner,” and from sundry misspellings, it would appear -certain that the alterations on the plate were effected abroad. - -In this second state the plate has been reduced at the top as far as -the capitals of the pillars, and at the bottom as far as the left foot -of the figure which represented Father Petre in the original. The index -figures have also been changed. {210} - -The explanation of the design as it now stands is contained in -eighty-three lines of doggerel French verse. Taking the alterations one -by one we find in the first place that the infant and cradle have been -bodily removed, and (1) the “Plan de Paix” substituted. It bears the -legend “Vrede tussen het Lelien en Roosen hof. Paix entre les Lis et -les Roses picantes.” - -The central figure (2) of the picture is now changed into an -allegorical personage labelled “Pax,” who holds in her left hand a -paper inscribed “Juste Protestation des Alliés,” whilst with her right -she indicates the “Plan de Paix.” In this way the new artist, with some -ingenuity, suggests that the spirit of peace is in sympathy with the -dissatisfaction of the Allies at the negotiations which are proceeding -between England and France. Her remonstrances are addressed to the -figure on her left (3), which formerly represented Cardinal d’Adda, -but is now labelled “Pole.” (the Abbé Melchior de Polignac), who tries -to allay her forebodings. The difficulty of the Cardinal’s hat, which -is of course out of place on an Abbé, is ingeniously got over by the -writer of the French {211} libretto, who refers to him as a Cardinal -_in petto_. As a matter of fact the writer proved a good prophet, -for, on the conclusion of the peace, for which Polignac was largely -responsible, he was, on the nomination of the Chevalier de St. George, -created and appointed Cardinal Maître de la Chapelle du Roi. He was at -the time of the publication of the altered plate plenipotentiary in -Holland for the French. It will be noticed that the _pince-nez_ and -moustache have now been dispensed with. - -The figure behind Polignac (4), which originally stood for the Dauphin, -who, by the way, was but lately dead, is now labelled at the foot -“Mont-or” (the Duke of Ormond’s name reversed), and at the head “Tori.” -By an ingenious turn of thought, the Dauphin’s warlike action of -_drawing_ his sword is now metamorphosed into the Duke’s conciliatory -action of _sheathing_ his. This refers, of course, to the instructions -which he had received from the English Government, on taking over -the command of the troops in the Low Countries from the Duke of -Marlborough, to do all in his power to bring about a peaceful issue. -{212} - -Beyond Polignac the figure (5) which formerly represented Louis XIV. -is now put to humbler uses, and merely represents a French herald. The -paper in his left hand, which originally enumerated Louis’ forces, now -bears the gratifying legend: - - Bonne Paix - De l’Anglois - Me rend guai. - -The lady in front of him (6), who formerly stood for Catherine of -Braganza, now represents Maria Louisa of Savoy, the first wife of -Philip V. of Spain (fortunately for him not such a firebrand as his -second wife proved to be). She turns to her handsome young husband -(7) (here somewhat libellously represented by the whilom “Old Hatchet -Face”) who has just renounced for himself and descendants all claims of -succession to the crown of France. His right hand rests on the scroll -of “charters” as before, but the document in his left now bears the -legend: “Leli afstand onder Conditie” (The lily to surrender under -conditions). - -Passing almost to the extreme right of the picture, the eagle-helmeted -figure (8) which {213} before represented the Emperor Leopold I. now -represents his son Charles VI., “Le Seigneur juste de la Cour d’Orient -et Occident.” Clutching his huge sword, he expresses the anger of the -Imperialists at the project for peace between England and France. In -the end he refused to concur in the peace of Utrecht, and continued at -war with France until 1714. - -On either side of him are two figures numbered alike (9, 9). That on -his right, which bears the word “Wigh” engraved on his hat, represents -the Duke of Marlborough, the deposed military leader of the Whigs. That -on his left is one of the Duke’s followers, who, by his drawn sword, -points the allusion of the librettist to the “Pacificateur par le fer.” - -To the extreme right of the picture (10) the Pope, now Clement XI. in -place of Innocent XI., encourages Polignac in his efforts for peace, -and promises him “La Pourpre” as his reward. - -Returning to the middle background of the crowd we find (11, 11) two -Jesuits. The one who looks over the left shoulder of No. 7 was in -the first state of the plate a doctor of the {214} Sorbonne. The -index number of this figure is now on his hat. Originally it was on -the pillar above him. This the adapter has apparently attempted to -turn into a rough ornamentation by the addition of parallel strokes. -Becoming dissatisfied, he has crossed out the whole by irregular -horizontal lines. To the left of figure 7 is seen (12) the Pretender, -the surreptitious infant of the original, now grown to manhood, -whispering in Philip of Spain’s ear that though he claims as a -Protestant the throne of his father, he is in his heart of the Romish -faith. This figure originally represented the midwife, but has been -metamorphosed by the addition of a man’s hat, wig, and ruffles. - -To the extreme left of the foreground of the picture the erstwhile -Father Petre is now transformed (13) into a Jesuit confessor, who -amorously converses with (14) “La Courtisane de Bourbon,” Madame de -Maintenon. This cruel aspersion on the character of one who was really, -though secretly, Louis XIV.’s wife, and whose nobleness of character -is now fully established, was characteristic of the times. The Plan -de Paix, {215} which was so obnoxious to the author of the satire, -would seem to have just fallen from her fingers, and doubtless he is -right in recognising that she had a hand in its consummation. Beyond -the table sit a monk and friar (15, 15), as formerly, except that the -removal of the cradle has necessitated an extension of their figures. -In the background, against the left-hand pillar, is (16) the “Harlequin -de France.” In front of him the three figures (17, 18, 19), originally -Quakers, are now referred to as “Esprits Libres.” The man with the -telescope (20) is “The Observer of Foreign Countries.” The other -subordinate figures are the same as before, save for the addition, in -some cases, of index numbers. - -It is interesting to notice that this plate was so successful in -its adapted state that it was made the basis of a design engraved -for a German broadside of the following year entitled “Der -Fridens-Hoffzwischen der Rose und der versöhnten Lilie,” with which it -has many points in common. - -I have treated of this plate at considerable length because it is -the most important of the palimpsest plates of this period. I shall -close {216} this chapter by reproducing one other remarkable example -designed in its first state to expose the same supposed wicked plot. In -the next chapter I shall give another dealing with the birth of the Old -Pretender, from which we shall gain some idea of the extent to which -this clever stratagem of the adapted copperplate was made use of in the -deliberate days of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. - -For the present I must pass over two elaborate broadsides engraved by -Jean Bollard, and entitled respectively “Aan den Experten Hollandschen -Hoofd-Smith” (To the Expert Dutch Head-Smith), and “Aan der Meester -Tonge-Slyper” (To the Master Tongue-Grinder). These, as we shall see -later, after doing their work against James II. and the Old Pretender, -were seized upon many years afterwards by the piratical publisher of a -remarkable Jansenist tract, called “Roma Perturbata, Ofte’t Beroerde -Romen, etc.,” and adapted to the uses of the anti-Jesuit propagandum, -in the same way as “L’Europe Alarmée pour le Fils d’un Meunier,” -described above, was adapted after twenty-five years of idleness as a -satire upon the Peace of Utrecht. {217} - -It was this same piratical tractarian who seized upon the elaborate -plate which I am here reproducing, divorced it from its letterpress, -cut the plate down to the size of his tract, and appropriated it in its -second state to the purposes of “Roma Perturba ta.” - -In its first state, which I give here, together with its accompanying -letterpress, the line of publication runs: “Gisling, Geneve, exc.” and -the title: - - Het beest van Babel is aan’t vluesten - Die Godsdienst heeft niet méer te duckten. - - (The beast of Babel is flying, - Religion has nothing more to fear.) - -[Illustration: Het beest van Babel, etc. (_The plate in its first -state._)] - -[Illustration: Het beest van Babel, etc. (_The plate in its second -state._)] - -The design is very elaborate and crowded with figures, those in the -foreground being executed with considerable spirit. The Dutch Lion (1) -carries a sword in its right front claws, as does that on the Persian -flag of to-day. On its back rides William of Orange (7) with lance -in rest and bearing a shield upon which St. Michael is represented -combating sin in the shape of a dragon. William is supported by -mounted soldiers, one of whom bears a flag inscribed with {218} the -words “Prot religion and libe”—(For religion and liberty). Over his -head flies a winged Revenge (3) carrying a shield in one hand and -the lightnings of God’s wrath in the other. Before him flies the -seven-headed Beast of Babel (2), shorn of two of his heads, which lie -bleeding on the ground beneath the lion. The monster, which “utters -horrible shrieks,” bears upon its back between its wings Father Petre -(6), who holds on his lap the infant Pretender (5), to whom his “brains -have so infamously given birth.” The too-old infant carries in his hand -the ever-present toy windmill. Blood pours from the decapitated necks -of the Beast as he plunges with his accompanying rabble into the “pool -of horrors.” Priests and other Romish officials, some mounted on goats, -asses, and wolves, flee (4) or are trampled under foot (8). - -In the mid background William of Orange (9), by a poetic licence able -to be in two places at once, a fairly common convention even in serious -pictures of that and an earlier date,[42] is being {221} greeted by -the English nobles as their saviour. To the left, through an archway, -James II. (10) is seen fleeing by boat with his wife and infant, -though, as a matter of fact, he remained in England some months after -the latter were safely abroad. To the right, through another arch, -Louis XIV. (11) is seen “embracing the child and taking pity on his -mother,” and putting two of the curious, hearse-like carriages of -the period at their disposal. Here we not only find Mary of Modena -duplicated, but the infant Pretender triplicated in the same picture! -So much for the plate in its first state. - - [42] See, for example, Tintoret’s great picture of “Adam and Eve” in - the Accademia at Venice. - -In its second and adapted state it takes its place in the armoury of -the anti-Jesuits. The Jansenist controversy was at its height in the -year of grace 1705, and Jansenism, although nominally subject to Rome, -was regarded favourably by the Protestant Dutch as being a reforming -movement within the Roman Catholic Church against the theological -casuistry of the Jesuits. - -This is not the place to go into the anti-Jansenist polemics of the -Jesuits since the publication of the “Augustinus” of 1640, though the -{222} interest of the matter is sufficiently tempting. We must content -ourselves with remembering that now at the beginning of a new century -a supreme effort was being made by the Jesuits in France to destroy -completely the pious community of Port Royal; that within four years -they were to succeed in dispersing the nuns; within another year the -cloister itself was to be pulled down; that in 1711 the very bodies of -the departed members of the community were destined to be disinterred -from the burial ground with the greatest brutalities and indecencies; -and in 1713 the church itself demolished. - -But, though Port Royal itself was doomed, Jansenism was finding freedom -under the Protestant Government of Holland. - -In 1689 Archbishop Codde had been appointed by the Pope Vicar Apostolic -in Holland. Soon, however, it was discovered by the Jesuits that he -favoured the Jansenists. - -By the machinations of the Jesuits he was therefore _invited_ to Rome, -and treacherously detained there for _three years_, in defiance of -all canonical regulations. In the meantime the Pope {223} appointed -Theodore de Cock in his place, with the intention of crushing the -Jansenists in Holland. Codde thereupon made his escape from Rome, and -the well-known struggle of the Jansenists of Utrecht and Haarlem for a -legitimate episcopal succession began. - -This was the juncture at which our copperplate was to do duty a second -time, and for such different ends. - -It has been divorced from its letterpress, altered in certain details -and slightly cut away at the top and bottom. Like those dealing with -the Head Smith and Tongue Sharpener, as will be seen in the next -chapter, it has been appropriated to the uses of “Roma Perturbata.” It -is now entitled on the panel which has been inserted at the spring of -the arches “Door Munnike-Jagt, Word Babel Verkracht” (By chasing monks, -Babel is assailed), and the piratical publisher has made many ingenious -alterations. The possibly punning publication line runs: “Benedictus -Antisolitarius excudit Rom.” Above this appears the chronograph: -“hos heros MonaChos apprenDe bataVe rebeLLes.” {224} - -The Lion (1) still represents Holland and hunts the Beast of Babel (2) -assisted by the winged Revenge (3), whose lightnings have now been -increased to seven to represent the heraldic arrows of the Seven United -Provinces. This device also now appears on the shield of Holland’s -Knight (7) in place of that of St. Michael and the Dragon. The banner -of his followers is now inscribed “Pro Secularibus.” As champion of -the Jansenists the Knight puts to rout “all the bald heads (4, 4, 4, -4), together with ‘their protector Kok’” (6), who “in disguise” rides -between the wings of the Beast with an illegitimate child (5) on his -lap, from whose right hand the toy windmill of the infant Pretender -has been removed. In the background to the left, others, in the quaint -words of the Dutch letterpress (10), “escape quickly from the town by -water, while they are clothed like gentlemen in order not to be known -as monks.” In the background to the right, others flee “like great -gentlemen in carriages,” a fairly ingenious adaptation of James II.’s -flight and Louis’ welcome of the fugitives. {225} - -The group in the middle background is now made to represent Codde -(8.B), who has escaped from Rome and is being welcomed back by the -representatives of the State (9, 9). - -{226} - - - - -CHAPTER XI - -ADAPTED OR PALIMPSEST PLATES (_continued_). - - -In the last chapter I claim to have introduced the reader to a phase -of print-collecting which has in it a sporting element of a peculiarly -enticing character. The pursuit of what I have called palimpsest -copperplates offers entertainment of the very best to one who would -make it a speciality, and, perhaps, the most alluring thing about this -curious quarry is that the hunter will never be satisfied after running -it to earth until he has secured and coupled it in his portfolio with -its necessary and enchanting fellow. - -I propose in this chapter to give a few more specimens of these curious -adapted plates. - -Many examples of reheaded statues and adapted portraits lie around us. -Mr. Augustus Hare tells of a representation of Lady Georgina Fane in -Brympton Church, which consists of the head of {227} that ready-witted -lady “added to the body of an ancestress who was headless,” whilst any -visitor to Yarmouth Church, Isle of Wight, may see the imposing marble -effigy of Admiral Sir Robert Holmes, which consists of the head of -that gallant sailor surmounting the body of Louis XIV. It appears that -Sir Robert, having captured the vessel in which the Italian-made torso -of the Grand Monarque was being conveyed to France for the modelling -of the head, retained the unfinished work and crowned it with his own -august features—a good example of the resourcefulness of the English -character. - -Again, Macaulay, enlarging upon the popularity of Frederick the Great -in England, tells how at one time enthusiasm reached such a height that -the sign-painters were everywhere employed in touching up the portraits -of Admiral Vernon, which hung outside innumerable public-houses, into -the likeness of the King of Prussia, a curious commentary, by the way, -on the family motto, “Ver non semper virit.”[43] Further, it is on -record {228} that after Trafalgar such was Nelson’s popularity, that -Daniel Orme, engraver to George III., bought a plate of Napoleon at the -sale of a Ludgate Hill printseller’s effects, and altered it into a -portrait of our national hero. - - [43] The following extract from a recent newspaper shows that the - practice has not yet altogether died out:— - - “In the action of Tussaud _v._ Stiff, heard in the Chancery Division - by Mr. Justice Buckley yesterday, the plaintiff, Mr. Louis Tussaud, - sought to restrain defendant by injunction from carrying on his - business of exhibiting models in such a way as to induce the public - to believe that the models he showed were the work of the plaintiff. - It was stated by the plaintiff’s counsel that, in consequence of - an injunction granted some years ago, it became necessary for the - plaintiff to carry on his exhibition as Louis Tussaud’s New Exhibition - in Regent Street. It was afterwards turned into a limited liability - company, and removed to the Alexandra Palace. Some of the models were - sold to the defendant, but no goodwill of the business was sold. The - defendant had since opened several exhibitions of waxworks, other - models had been added to those sold by the plaintiff, and the models - of the plaintiff had been split into a considerable number of pieces, - while models made by other persons than the plaintiff were exhibited - as Louis Tussaud’s waxworks. Counsel informed the Court that _in one - case the head of the Archbishop of Canterbury had been put on the body - of Charles Peace, and in another instance Napoleon was represented as - taking part in the execution of Mary Queen of Scots_. The defendant’s - present exhibition was a penny show in the Edgware Road. _In another - instance the head of Mr. Ritchie, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was - put upon a dying soldier._” - - The Mr. Louis Tussaud here mentioned must not be confused with Mr. - John Tussaud of the Marylebone Road Exhibition. - -Examples such as these might be multiplied, but here are enough for -our purpose. They show that the systematic practice of copperplate -adaptation has its counterpart in other departments of art. - -[Illustration: Aan der Meester Tonge-Slyper. (_The plate in its first -state_)] - -[Illustration: Aan der Meester Tonge-Slyper. _As adapted by the -Anti-Jesuits_] - -We will now consider a curious broadside {230} published about the -year 1688, the copperplate heading of which was destined to be seized -upon and adapted to other purposes nearly twenty years later by the -piratical publisher referred to in the last chapter. - -As will be seen from our reproduction, its letterpress is addressed, -“Aan der Meester Tonge-Slyper” (“To the Master Tongue Grinder”). The -engraver’s name does not appear, but the work is easily distinguished -as that of Jean Bollard, by comparing it with other signed engravings -of the same series of pictorial satires. - -Two men at a grindstone sharpen a tongue, Another tongue lies on the -anvil. Two labourers empty a large hamper of tongues into a basket, -which is steadied by a woman. Point is given to the picture by the -gossiping groups seen through the door and window, and especially by -the two Xantippes who, with arms akimbo, are slanging each other in -good earnest. - -The doggerel letterpress refers to the birth of the Old Pretender, and -the mendacious tongues of the conspirators are being delivered to the -smith to be coerced into speaking the truth. {231} - -Here is a free translation of the passage, beginning “Heden zyn my over -London”:— - - “To-day I received from London a cargo of those goods which you have - to take in hand; I have some of the biggest size, _The Admiral of - the First Flag_, which has been used so much and has become black - from lying, and which, after all appearances, seems to have had his - end bitten off; scrape thoroughly his thick skin or he will be up - to anything; swearing oaths, breaking bonds, falsely protecting the - Church is his daily work.” - -And so on, until it ends with the moral:— - - “Nothing more useful than whetting the tongue - When its aim is to speak the truth. - But when it is given to lying, - It must be pierced, flayed, and scraped.” - -So much for the plate in its first state. In its second we find it -published seventeen years later, and somewhat ingeniously adapted -to the new exigencies. It now takes its place in the armoury of the -anti-Jesuits, and is published without any acknowledgment in the -pamphlet, entitled _Roma Pertubata Ofte’t Beroerde Romen, etc., -etc._, referred to in the last chapter. This pamphlet, which is a -very warren of palimpsest plates (it has at least four, and possibly -there are others), may {232} be seen in the print-room of the British -Museum. It may, too, as I have myself proved, be discovered at rare -intervals in the shops of the old printsellers in Holland. Mine is in a -parti-coloured paper wrapper, whether as issued or added later I cannot -say. It consists of title-page, table of contents, and eleven full-page -copperplate engravings of extraordinary interest. Curiously enough, -the table of contents makes no reference to the eleventh and last. Our -palimpsest is number 9.[44] - - [44] Grateful acknowledgments are here due to the splendid _Catalogue - of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum_, 5 vols., which should - be in the library of every collector of satirical prints. - -In its new surroundings it has (_vide_ reproduction) been divorced from -its letterpress, and been cut away at the bottom. A descriptive panel -has been engraved over the doorway, and other lettering added here and -there. The publication line, “tot Tongeren by J: la Langue,” apparently -a bogus one, playing on the words of the original, “à Langres chez -Tongelel,” now appears within the border of the design. - -The tongue which lies on the anvil is now pierced by the seven -heraldic arrows of the Dutch Provinces, and words are engraved below to -the {233} effect that “There is no worse evil than that a Pope’s tongue -dares slander the State,” and on the base of the anvil, “He has given -way to slander. You must forge him before you grind him.” - -Below the quarrelling women are the words: “These maids are quarrelling -for de Kok,” referring to scandals which were afloat concerning the -morality of the Pope’s vicar-general, and a Latin chronograph appears -at the feet of the chief smith. - -The inscription over the door gives directions to “The Romish Dutch -Grinder of Tongues,” and, amongst other things, says of the tongue on -the anvil, “That is de Kok’s tongue, wounded by seven arrows, because -he has slandered the State by his speech,” which statement hardly -tallies with the inscription on the anvil, unless the vicar-general may -be regarded as the very mouthpiece of the Pope. - -This is no place, as I have said, to enlarge upon the Jansenist -propagandum, but it will well repay the enthusiastic historian to -follow out the above allusions to their original source. - -So much for our adapted broadside. - -{234} - -[Illustration: The Stature of a Great Man, or the English Colossus] - -{235} - -[Illustration: The Stature of a Great Man, or the Scotch Colossus] - -I would ask you now to look at the two prints entitled respectively -“The Stature of a Great Man, or the English Colossus,” and “The Stature -of a Great Man, or the SCOTCH Colossus.” - -{236} - -The first, dated 1740, represents Sir Robert Walpole, then in the -plenitude of his power. He stands on two woolpacks. Between his legs is -seen the British fleet lying inactive. He is flanked by Marines on the -left crying “Let us fight,” and sailors with drawn swords on the right -declaring their readiness to die “Pro Patriâ.” The plate teems with -allusions to his reluctance to go to war, by which he was subjecting -his country to the insults and aggressions of Spain and France. - -Twenty-two years later the plate was resurrected and altered to -its second state, in which it is made to represent Lord Bute. The -lower part of the plate, bearing the quotation from Shakespeare and -the “Description,” has been now cut away, and “Scotch” inserted in -the place of “English” in the title. The chief alterations are the -reduction of the full-bottomed wig and the addition of a wig-tie of -black ribbon, the addition {237} of a star on the breast, and a -new and abusive inscription on the right-hand document. In this case -the adapter has shown but little ingenuity. - -[Illustration: Queen Anne presiding over the House of Lords. (_The -plate in its first state_)] - -[Illustration: _The plate in its second state, now representing_ George -I. presiding over the House of Lords] - -We will now turn to a far more elaborate example, which, in its first -state, as will be seen in the reproduction, represents Queen Anne -presiding in state over the House of Lords. The plate is etched by -Romeyn de Hooghe. - -At the top of the picture, between female figures representing Plenty -and War, is suspended a cloth, on which the Queen is shown presiding -over the House of Commons. At her side sits Prince George of Denmark. -The whole is surmounted by the words, “Het Hoog en Lager Huys van -Engeland.” Left and right of the cloth are scrolls bearing the legends, -“Hinc gloria regni” and “Hinc felicitas publica.” - -At the base of the plate are two small self-contained etchings. That -on the left shows the heralds proclaiming the Queen; that on the right -shows Her Majesty sitting in Council. Between these are inscribed the -following words:— - - “Annæ D. G. - Magnæ Britanniæ Reginæ,” etc., etc. - -{238} - -The main design is crowded with details and figures of the utmost -interest, any description of which is forbidden by the space at my -disposal. The artist’s signature is to be seen on the floor of the Hall. - -Thirteen years were now to elapse before it was transformed into -the glorification of George I. The King now takes the place of the -late Queen in the House of Lords. The throne in the House of Commons -is vacant. The inscription on the cloth has been re-engraved, and -“Engeland” changed to “Engelandt.” The title and the panels at the -bottom of the plate have been cut away, and the index numbers on the -main design and the index letters on the cloth have been altered. The -designer’s name has been removed from the floor of the House, and -engraved on the right-hand corner of the plate. - -These are the main differences. The curious reader may occupy himself -in discovering others. - -The next example here reproduced I give because of the peculiarly -drastic changes which have been made by the pirate into whose hands the -plate has fallen. {239} - -[Illustration: “The Races of the Europeans, with their Keys.” (_The -plate in its first state_)] - -[Illustration: “A Skit on Britain.” (_The plate in its second state_)] - -In its original state it bears the punning title, “The Races of the -Europeans with their Keys.” The line of publication runs:—“Geo. -Bickham, jun^{r.,} inv^{t.} et sculp. According to the late Act, -1740. Price 1s. Sold at ye Black Moors Head against Surry Street -in y^e Strand.” The composite design is made up of variorum copies -of four separate prints recently published. These are enclosed in -the four quarters of an elaborate design, surmounted by a crouching -wolf. At the point where the four corners meet is a grotesque horned -head. At the foot are a mask and a poniard. Each panel is differently -dated, and surmounts its own set of explanatory notes. The allusions -to contemporary politics are most ingeniously conceived, but are so -numerous that space forbids even their barest description. - -In its second state the plate is entitled “A Skit on Britain.” The -line of publication runs the same as before, saving the name of the -artist, which has been changed into “Ged Bilchham.” A line of script -has also been added on this copy, which states that “This plate is -upon the same copper as ‘The Races of the Europeans,’ much of the {240} -allusions not having been obliterated,” which seems considerably to -understate the case. The enclosing design is certainly much the same -as before, though in this there are many alterations in detail, but of -the four engravings by far the greater portion has been removed. The -aerial parts are practically untouched, but of the crowds of figures -only a few unimportant groups remain. All the tables of reference have -been burnished out, and are replaced by doggerel verses. The dates have -been removed from the four compartments, and in the places of three of -them appear “Porto Bello, Nov. 1739,” “Cartagena,” and “The Havana,” -while the fourth is left blank. The main part of the satire is directed -against the policy of Sir Robert Walpole, but is of too elaborate a -nature to be entered upon here. - -[Illustration: The Headless Horseman. (_The plate with the head -burnished out._)] - -Before concluding this account of palimpsest plates I shall reproduce -three very curious prints in which the substitution of one head for -another is more than usually outrageous.[45] The original {241} -engraving was by Pierre Lombart after a made-up portrait of Charles -I., on horseback, professing to be by Vandyck. - - [45] The earliest example of the artist as Headsman that I have come - across is a very rare portrait of Queen Elizabeth, full length, seated - on a throne, dressed in a robe of state, holding globe and sceptre, - engraved about 1590. The Queen’s figure was subsequently burnished - out, and that of James I. substituted. This, unfortunately, I do not - possess. - -The plate was executed before the execution (save the mark!) of the -Martyr King. After his death the head of Cromwell was substituted, -no doubt for commercial purposes. Finally, Charles the First’s head -was restored (again save the mark!) after the Restoration. Our -reproductions are from what would seem to be the second, third, and -fourth states of the plate though a first state is not known. It will -be observed that, in the earliest—namely, that in which the head -has been removed altogether—the scarf is brought across the left -shoulder, and tied under the right arm, whilst the page-boy has bands -and frills to his breeches. In the next, or third state, in which -Cromwell’s head has been inserted, the scarf has been removed from the -shoulder, and is tied round the waist, whilst the bands and frills -have been removed from the page-boy’s nether garments. In the next, -or fourth stage of the plate, in which {242} Charles’s head has been -re-inserted, there are, besides the substitution of one head for the -other, a few minor alterations, such as the addition of the Cavalier -moustache to the face of the page-boy, the restoration of the frills -to his breeches, the alteration of the pattern of the rider’s collar, -the addition of the order of St. George to the rider’s breast, and -the substitution of the royal coat of arms for those of the Protector -at the bottom of the engraving. There are also other known states of -the plate, reproductions of which may be seen in Mr. Alfred Whitman’s -_Print-Collector’s Handbook_. These were unknown to me when I wrote the -above description.[46] - - [46] Since writing this I paid a visit to the Hall of the Middle - Temple, when the very intelligent custodian told me that Cromwell - ordered the great Vandyck, which hangs over the high table, to be - taken down, and his own somewhat repellent countenance painted in - in the place of that of Charles I. Fortunately for posterity this - outrageous order was not carried out. The whole affair reminds one of - the unconsciously grim entry in a certain bookseller’s catalogue which - ran, “Memoirs of Charles the First with a head _capitally executed_.” - -[Illustration: The plate with Cromwell’s head] - -[Illustration: The plate with Charles I.’s head] - -So much for historical instances of putting new heads on old shoulders. -But, if I am not mistaken, the very modern restoration of the west -front of one of our great cathedrals shows a late Dean’s head -surmounting the body of a saint or king, {243} which had been -mutilated by Cromwell. It would be cruel, perhaps, to be more specific, -as vanity is not the most pleasing of the Christian virtues. - -Again, there was lately a good deal of laughter caused by one of the -whims of the German Emperor. It appears that his artistic eye had been -offended by the incompleteness of a fine headless torso which was -brought to the fatherland some years since. Everything, he was aware, -could be _made in Germany_, so what more natural than to offer a prize -for the best completion of the work of a Phidias or a Praxiteles? -_Finis coronat opus_, and the sculptors of Germany were called upon to -compete. None of the results, however, satisfied His Imperial Majesty, -and two of the artists have been commissioned to try again. Would it be -_lese-majestie_ to suggest that there is only one head in Germany that -would prove quite acceptable? I present the idea to the competitors. - -Enough has been written to show that the pursuit of the palimpsest -plate is sport of the very finest for the collector, for it is a sport -which does not cease with the running of the quarry to earth. {244} - -I have reproduced, without comment, opposite pages 244 and 246, and on -pages 245, 247, and 249, a few more of these adapted copperplates for -the sake of any one who may be fortunate enough to possess either the -original or the palimpsest. He will find it no bad sport to go hunting -for its fellow. - -[Illustration: Undescribed palimpsest plate. (_First state and second -state._)] - -{245} - -[Illustration: Aan den Experten Hollandichen Hoofd-Smith. (_The plate -in its first state_)] - -[Illustration: Aan den Experten Hollandichen Hoofd-Smith. (_As adapted -by the Anti-Jesuits_)] - -[Illustration: Undescribed palimpsest plate. (_First state and second -state._)] - -{247} - -[Illustration: An adapted Copperplate. _First state_] - -[Illustration: An adapted Copperplate. _Second state_] - -{249} - -[Illustration: A History of the New Plot. _First state_] - -[Illustration: A History of the New Plot. _Second state_] - -{251} - - - - -INDEX - - -“Aan den Experten Hollandschen Hoofd-Smith,” 216, 243 - -“Aan der Meester Tonge-Slyper,” 216, 230–233 - -ADAPTED COPPER PLATES, 192–247 - -Ainsworth, Harrison, 3 - -Alken, Henry, 157–160 - -Allen, Archdeacon, 10 - -_American Notes_, 2 - -Anne, Queen, 237, 238 - -_Antiquities of Westminster_, 150–153 - -_A Pop-Gun fired off by George Cruikshank_, 79 - -“A Skit on Britain,” 239, 240 - -“A Trifling Mistake,” 70–73 - - -_Ballad of Beau Brocade, The_, 3 - -“Becky Sharp,” 10 - -_Bentley’s Miscellany_, 43–52 - -Bewick’s _Birds_, 68 - -_Book of Snobs_, 9 - -“Breeches” Bible, Barker’s, 2 - -Brougham, Lord, 62 - -Browne, H. K., 27, 28, 29, 31, 33, 54–56 - -Bruton, Mr. H. W. 48, 49, 69, 75, 81 - -Buffon, M., 5 - -Bunn, Alfred, 10 - -Burlington, Earl of, 98–107 - -“Burlington Gate,” 108 - -Burns, Robert, 2 - -Buss, Miss F. M., 34 - -Buss, R. W., 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 - -Bute, Lord, 235, 236 - - -Calcraft, Captain Granby, 9 - -Capel, Monsignor, 2 - -“Captain Granby Tiptoff,” 9 - -“Captain Shindy,” 9 - -Carteret, Lord, 112 _et seq._ - -_Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum_, 92 _et -passim_, 198 _et passim_ - -Chandos, Duke of, 101 - -Chapman and Hall, Messrs., 33, 55 - -Charles I., 241–242 - -_Charles Dickens, The Story of his Life_, 27 - -Churchill, Charles, 107–111 - -_Clarissa Harlowe_, 5 - -_Coaching Days and Coaching Ways_, 175–178 - -Cochrane, Lord, 65 - -_Coningsby_, 12, 13, 20 - -Cowell, Professor, 184–186 - -Crawhall, Joseph, 135–138 - -“Credulity, Superstition, and Fanaticism: a Medley,” 88 _et seq._ - -Croker, J. W., 12 - -Cromek, R. H., 5 - -Cromwell, Oliver, 241, 242 - -Cruikshank, George, 42, 45–54, 59–81, 161 - -_Cruikshank’s Portraits of Himself_, 80 - -Cumberland, Duke of, 60–69 - -Cumberland, Princess Olive of, 62 - - -“Danaë in the Brazen Chamber,” 140–148 - -_Death in London_, 154–158 - -Dexter, Mr. J. P., 41 - -_D’Horsay; or the Follies of the Day, by a Man of Fashion_, 13 - -_Dickens and his Illustrators_, 40, 41 - -Dickens, Charles, 2, 26 _et seq._ his _American Notes_, 2 his -suppressed portrait, 27, 28 - -_Dickens Memento_, 47 - -_Dictionary of National Biography_, 61, 62 - -Dighton, Richard, 25 - -Disraeli, Benjamin, 2, 10, 12, 131–134 - -Dobson, Mr. Austin, 3, 82 _et passim_, 174 - -_Don Quixote_, 113 _et seq._ - -“Don Quixote releases the Galley Slaves,” 118, 122 - -“Don Quixote seizes the Barber’s Basin,” 118, 120 - -“Drop it!”, 78 - -Du Maurier, George, 162–173 - - -Edwards, Edwin, 179–191 - -Elizabeth, Queen, 240 - -“Enthusiasm Delineated,” 83 _et seq._ - -_Essay on the Genius of George Cruikshank_, 77 - - -Fane, Lady Georgina, 226 - -Fanus i Khiyal, 185–191 - -_Figaro in London_, 63, 64 - -“Financial Survey of Cumberland or the Beggar’s Petition,” 60 - -FitzGerald, Edward, 40, 179–191 - -Frederick the Great, 227 - - -Garrick Club, The, 8, 9 - -George I., 238 - -George IV., 11 - -“George Garbage,” 9 - -Gray, J. M., 148 - -_Grimm’s Fairy Tales_, 42 - - -“Harry Foker,” 9 - -Hertford, Marchioness of, 75 - -Hertford, Marquis of, 10 _et seq._ - -_History of Pickwick_, 29 - -Hobhouse, John Cam, 70–73 - -_Hogarth Illustrated_, 84 - -Hogarth, William, 82 _et seq._ - -Holmes, Sir Robert, 227 - -Hook, Theodore, 9, 10 - - -Ireland, John, 84 _et seq._, 113 _et seq._ - -Irving, Washington, 2 - -_Italian Tales_, 74 - -_Italy_, 3 - - -James I., 241 - -Jansenists, the, 221 _et seq._ - -Jesuits, The, 221 _et seq._ - -“Joe Sibley,” 163–173 - -Jones, W. N., 68 - -_Jorrocks’s Jaunts and Jollities_, 158 - - -Keene, Charles, 127–139 - -Kitton, F. G., 40 - - -“Lady Kew,” 10, 22 - -Langford, Lady, 10 - -Lawrence, Sir Thomas, 19 - -Leech, John, 33, 36–38, 40, 41 - -“L’Europe alarmée pour le Fils d’un Meunier,” 202–216 - -_Life of Dickens_, 37, 46 - -_Lippincott’s Magazine_, 10 - -“Lord Walham,” 23 - -_Lothair_, 2 - - -“Marquis of Hereford,” 14 - -_Martin Chuzzlewit_, 26, 53 - -“Monsignor Catesby,” 2 - -“Mr. Dolphin,” 10 - -“Mr. John Jorrocks,” 158–161 - -“Mr. Pickwick at the Review,” 33 - -“Mr.” Pitt Crawley, 15 - -_Mr. Thackeray, Mr. Yates, and the Garrick Club_, 8 - -“Mr. Wardle and his Friends under the Influence of the Salmon,” 33 - -“Mr. Winkle’s First Shot,” 33 - - -Napoleon, Emperor, 228 - -Nelson, Lord, 228 - - -_Oliver Twist_, 26, 43–52 - -_Once a Week_, 127, 140–148 - -Orange, William of, 217 _et seq._ - - -Pailthorpe, Mr. F. W., 56 - -_Pall Mall Gazette_, 166–169 - -Palmer, Samuel, 56 - -_Pendennis_, 9 - -_Penelope’s English Experiences_, 38 - -Phillimore, Mr. F., 47 - -“Philoprogenitiveness,” 77, 78 - -_Pickwick_, 26, 28 _et seq._, 43 - -_Pictures from Italy_, 56 - -Pine’s Horace, 54 - -_Poems_, Burns’s, 2 - -Pope, Alexander, 98–107 - -Price, Stephen, 9 - -Prideaux, Colonel, 190–191 - -_Punch_, 127 _et seq._ - - -Queensberry, Duke of, 23 - - -Reid’s _Catalogue of George Cruikshank’s Works_, 45, 62, 69 - -Ritchie, Mrs., 10 - -Robertson, J. C., 154–158 - -Rogers, Samuel, 3 - -“Roma Perturbata, Ofte’t Beroerde Romen, etc.,” 216 _et seq._ - -“Rose Maylie and Oliver at Agnes’s Tomb,” 45 _et seq._ - -Roxborough, Duke of, 2 - -“Royal Hobbys of the Hertfordshire Cock Horse,” 75 - -Ruskin, John, 3, 4 - - -Sala, G. A., 30, 40 - -Sandys, Frederick, 127, 139–148 - -Scott, Sir Walter, 2 - -Seymour, Robert, 29, 31 - -“Sholto Percy,” 154–158 - -_Sketch Book_, Washington Irving’s, 2 - -_Sketches by Boz_, 55, 57, 58 - -Smith, J. T., 150 - -Smith, Wyndham, 9 - -Spielmann, Mr. M. H., 128 _et passim_ - -_Sporting Snobs_, 9 - -Stanislaus Hoax, 10 - -Stephens, F. G., 88 - -Stothard, T., 5 - -Stuart, James Francis Edward, 198 _et seq._ - -SUPPRESSED PLATES, 1–191 - -Surtees, R., 158 - -Swain, Mr. Joseph, 140–148 - - -_Talpa_, 78 - -Tenniel, Sir John, 133 - -Thackeray, W. M., 7 _et seq._ - -_The Artist_, 145 - -_The Battle of Life_, 26, 34–40 - -_The Battle of London Life;_ or _Boz and his Secretary_, 39 - -“The Bruiser,” 110, 111 - -_The Builder_, 107 - -_The Chimes_, 36, 41 - -_The Christmas Carol_, 36 - -“The Cricket Match,” 29, 32 - -“The Curate and the Barber,” 121, 125 - -“The Dead Rider,” 74 - -“The Fireside Scene,” 26, 44 _et seq._ - -“The First Interview,” 121, 123 - -“The Free and Easy,” 57 - -“The Funeral of Chrysostom,” 116 - -_The History of Punch_, 128 _et seq._ - -_The Hobby Horse_, 144 - -“The Innkeeper,” 114 - -“The Innkeeper’s Wife and Daughter,” 118 - -“The Last Song,” 42 - -“The Man of Taste,” 98–107 - -“The Marquis of Steyne,” 7 _et seq._ - -_The Memoirs of Joseph Grimaldi_, 41, 42 - -_The Newcomes_, 22 - -“The Painted Chamber,” 150–153 - -“The Races of the Europeans with their Keys,” 239 - -_The Ruba’iyat_ of Omar Khayyam, 179–191 - -_The Speaker_, 21 - -“The Stature of a Great Man, or The English Colossus,” 236 - -“The Stature of a Great Man, or The Scotch Colossus,” 236 - -_The Strange Gentleman_, 54, 55 - -“The Street of the Tombs, Pompeii,” 56 - -_The Times_, 109 - -_The Tower of London_, 3 - -“The Two Apprentices,” 163–173 - -_The Two Paths_, 3 - -_The Vicar of Wakefield_, 171–175 - -_The Virginians_, 9 - -“The Worship of Wealth,” 53, 54 - -Thomson, Mr. Hugh, 3, 171–178 - -Thornhill, Sir James, 111, 112 - -“Tom Smart and the Chair,” 33 - -_Town Talk_, 8, 9 - -_Trilby_, 162–173 - -Tristram, Mr. Outram, 175 - -Truman, Edwin, 69 - -“Tupman and Rachel,” 29, 32 - - -Van der Banck, Johan, 112, 113 - -_Vanity Fair_, 7 _et seq._ - -Vernon, Admiral, 227 - -_Vivian Grey_, 10 - - -Wallace, Sir Richard, 20, 22 - -Walpole, Horace, 25 - -Walpole, Sir Robert, 234, 236 - -_Westminster Review_, 78 - -Whistler, James M’N., 163–173 - -Wilde, Oscar, 168 - -Wilkes, John, 109–111 - - -Yates, Edmund, 8, 9 - - - THE END - - _Printed by_ R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, _Edinburgh_. - - - - -ADVERTISEMENTS - - -KATE GREENAWAY - -BY - -M. H. SPIELMANN AND G. S. LAYARD. - -Containing upwards of 80 full-page illustrations (53 in colour, -reproduced from original water-colour drawings by Kate Greenaway.) -Square demy 8vo, cloth, gilt top, with Kate Greenaway end-papers, price -20s. net. - -_SOME PRESS OPINIONS_ - - “This delightful volume, with its scores of illustrated letters, and - sketches and charming pictures, will be very widely welcomed. No one - could wish for a more satisfactory memorial of the artist and her - work.”—_Daily Graphic._ - - “Whether as regards its subject, its letterpress, or its - illustrations, this is one of the most delightful, as it is likely - to become one of the most popular volumes of the series to which it - belongs.”—_Aberdeen Journal._ - - “Certainly one of the most beautiful monuments that could be erected - to the memory of a modest artist.”—_Daily Mail._ - - “By reason of its sympathetic treatment of an intensely interesting - subject, of the charm, the quality, and the profusion of its - illustrations, and of the faultless taste of its get-up, should - rank among the favourite gift-books of the approaching Christmas - season.”—_Observer._ - - “A book which will delight young and old by its engaging - charm.”—_Jewish World._ - - “The volume, magnificent to behold, is a deeply interesting - one to read, and should be peculiarly attractive to our - readers.”—_Gentlewoman._ - - “This delightful book should prove a capital present to give to young - folks at Christmas time. The pictures in it are very beautiful, while - the story of Kate Greenaway’s fight for fame is sympathetically - told.”—_Scottish Review._ - - “The book is admirably done, thorough, sympathetic, and - accurate.”—_Outlook._ - - -BIRKET FOSTER - -By H. M. CUNDALL, F.S.A. - -Containing 91 full-page illustrations (73 in colour) and numerous -thumbnail sketches in the text. Square demy 8vo, cloth, gilt top, price -20s. net. - - It may safely be asserted, without fear of contradiction, that - the dainty water-colour drawings executed by Birket Foster appeal - to the majority of the British public more than the works of any - other artist. He produced scenes from nature with such exactness - and minuteness of detail that the most uninitiated in art are able - to understand and appreciate them, but the chief features in his - paintings are the poetic feeling with which he endued them, and the - care with which his compositions were selected. He revelled in sunny - landscapes with roaming sheep and with rustic children playing in the - foreground, and in the peaceful red-bricked cottages with thatched - roofs; it is, perhaps, by these scenes of rural England that Birket - Foster is best known. He, however, was an indefatigable painter, - and produced works selected from all parts of England, Wales, and - Scotland; he travelled frequently on the Continent; Venice, as well - as the Rhine, had its charms for him, and the picturesque scenery of - Brittany has also been portrayed by his brush. - - The collection of Birket Foster’s drawings reproduced in this volume - is thoroughly representative, and is sufficiently extensive to include - all phases of his work. The accompanying biographical text by Mr. - H. M. Cundall will be found to be most sympathetic, intimate, and - interesting. - -A. & C. BLACK, SOHO SQUARE, LONDON, W. - - -GEORGE MORLAND - -By Sir WALTER GILBEY, Bart. - -AUTHOR OF “THE LIFE OF GEORGE STUBBS, R.A.” - -Containing 60 full-page reproductions in colour of the artist’s best -work. Square demy 8vo, cloth, gilt top, price 20s. net. - -There will also be an Édition de Luxe, with letterpress printed -on handmade paper, containing the earliest impressions of the -illustrations, and limited to 250 signed and numbered copies, price £2: -2s. net. - - There is plenty of room for another Morland book, especially when - written by the greatest living authority upon the works of the artist, - and where the illustrations are reproduced, with most excellent - results, from masterpieces loaned from private collections hitherto - mostly unknown to the artistic public, and of which only a few have - either been engraved or gravured—at all events, not before reproduced - in colour. - - George Morland’s work is characterised by its great strength and - beauty of colouring. To reproduce so many of his choicest pictures, - and bring the book into this series, is no easy matter, but to - ensure success the publishers have spared no efforts to make their - reproductions worthy of the artist’s work and entirely satisfying to - the collector and student. - - The collection of pictures reproduced in this volume is thoroughly - representative, and each illustration is a gem; they show the several - phases of Morland’s charming scenes of English life in the renowned - Academician’s time. - - The student and all collectors and admirers of Morland will also - rejoice to have the appreciative text by Sir Walter Gilbey. - -A. & C. BLACK, SOHO SQUARE, LONDON, W. - - - - -TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE - -Original spelling and grammar have been generally retained, with some -exceptions noted below. Original printed page numbers are shown like -this: {52}. Original small caps are now uppercase, except that on -page 223 the small caps phrase is rendered thus: “hos heros -MonaChos apprenDe bata Ve rebeLLes”, in the simple text -edition. Italics look _like this_. Footnotes have been relabeled -1–46, and moved from within paragraphs to nearby locations between -paragraphs. The transcriber produced the cover image and hereby assigns -it to the public domain. Original page images are available from -archive.org—search for “suppressedplates00laya”. - -The List of Illustrations contains two divisions, those that were -printed upon numbered pages, and those that were printed on unnumbered -pages. Most illustrations originally printed inside paragraphs of -text have been moved to nearby locations between paragraphs, and the -corresponding page numbers have been removed as necessary to maintain -proper order of the remaining page numbers. Captions of Illustrations -were sometimes altered to conform more closely—in substance or in -typography—to the titles in the List of Illustrations (LOI). In such -cases, the original captions (if any) are nevertheless retained as part -of the image. On page 172, a caption was inserted where none had been -printed, to match the LOI. - -Page 10. “protoype” to “prototype”. - -Page 212. “fireband” to “firebrand”. - -Page 254. “Whistler, James M‘N” to “Whistler, James M’N”. - - - - - - - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Suppressed Plates, Wood-engravings, &c., by -George Somes Layard - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SUPPRESSED PLATES, WOOD-ENGRAVINGS *** - -***** This file should be named 55710-0.txt or 55710-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/5/7/1/55710/ - -Produced by Chris Curnow, RichardW, and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |