From the library of Frank Simpson Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/graphicillustrat01irel GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS o f HOGARTH. • f g S = GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS O F HOGARTH, FROM PICTURES, DRAWINGS, AND SCARCE PRINTS IN THE POSSESSION OF SA MUE L IRELAND , AUTHOR OF THIS WORK; O F A PICTURESQUE TOUR THROUGH HOLLAND, BRABANT, See , AND OF THE PICTURESQUE BEAUTIES OF THE RIVERS THAMES AND MEDWAY. . ’ cr — p. LONDON: PUBLISHED BY R. FAULDER, NEW BOND STREET^ AND J. EGERTON, WHITEHALL, . • : I ; _ - 7 . . .. v ■ - ■ .!. ...J- . . . . . , V. . ... v, . A N early regard and refpect for the extraordinary talents of our coun- tryman Hogarth, have been amongft the principal reafons that induced the author to lay thefe flight memorials of him before the public. When very young he caught a liking, indeed a ftrong partiality, for the productions of this unrivalled Genius, this Pupil of Nature, born with talents to render him equally eminent both as a painter and engraver: and he ventures to hope that he does not too far flatter his own tafte when he is willing to perfuade him* VI PREFACE. himfelf that he is alfo gratifying that of the public, if he fhali be able to refcue from oblivion any genuine and authenticated traces of fuch a man. A purchase from the late Mrs. Ho- garth in the year 1780, made a con- iiderable addition to the pictures, draw- ings, and prints in the author’s col- lection. Through this and other chan- nels, he finds himfelf enabled to convey to the public a number of curious pro- ductions from the pencil of our artift ; and fuch as either have not been com- municated to them, or at leaft have not been authenticated as his. •Some of the earlieft fpecimens of them, it muft be admitted, though of a curious nature, cannot be thought fo interefting as his larger works, yet, as they are ori- ginal, ginal, and, in many inftances, ftrongly {hew a promife of Hogarth’s future fame, they may with propriety be allowed a place in this publication. The firft efforts of genius fhould always be treafured and noted with the minuted; attention and care : they in- dicate the manner in which rare en- dowments firft unfold themfelves ; and the progreftive gradations of a mind to- wards that excellence, which in Hogarth, it is acknowledged on all hands, was attained. After what has been faid, the au- thor feels it an indifpenfable duty to add that a fmall number of thefe plates were by him made public a few years fince. They were meant only as fpe- cimens for cabinet ufe and for the col- lectors V1U PREFACE. leCtors of Hogarth’s prints ; of courfe the impreffion was not fo numerous as that they could have paffed into many hands, or that it could have anfwered the purpofe of a general publication. The intention of this work is to prefent to the public, copies of fuch fpecimens only as are in the poffeffion of the author ; with a lingie exception the tracing of the Rape of the Lock. This is taken from a very rare print in the valuable collection of the Hon. Horace Walpole, the prefent Earl of Orford, by whofe pemiffion it was made. The etchings in this volume are prin- cipally by the author ; but he has re- ceived very confiderable afliftance from his daughters, whofe great attention to the PREFACE. IX the fpirit and character of the originals will, he is induced to flatter himfelf, procure from the public that approba- tion which, perhaps with fome parti- ality, he conceives to be due to their merit. The volume conflfts of flxty en- gravings, Thofe which are from ori- ginal prints are either unique, or fo yery rare, as to leaye a prefumption, from the great prices they have drawn from the packets of individuals, that they have fome claim to the attention of the public. If, neverthelefs, in the rigor of criticifm, cenfure fhould fall upon any of them, as fcar.ee worthy of the public eye, let that cenfure be foft- ened by the confederation, that the early dawning of Genius, railing itfelf into b notice X PREFACE. notice by labors not of the higheft in- terefi: or much public expedition, has of late received a fandlion, from the avidity with which they have in many inftances been fought after, both by the learned and great : and the prices they have alfo given for the originals of thefe prints will juftify this attempt to lay before the public a clofe reprefentation of them, at a much more moderate price. The author flatters himfelf that he has brought fuch proofs of the origin- ality of the plates introduced in the courfe of this work, as to remove all doubt or queftion upon the fubjedt. The merits of Hogarth are fo uni- verfally known that the author has thought it needlefs to add his tribute or PREFACE. XI or to give any particular commenda- tions, beyond fuch as neceflarily obtruded themfelves in the chara<5ter of remarks or ftridlures on the fpecimens exhibited in this volume : if he has occafionally glanced at other publications, it has been only to point out fome curious circum- ftance, or introduce fome paper in his poffefiion, which he thought might tend to illuftrate the general idea of the artift. The portrait of Hogarth, that is pre- fixed to this work, is from an original pi&ure in oil by himfelf ; and, if reli- ance may be had on the teftimony of the late Mrs. Hogarth, Mr. Paul Sand- by, the late Mr. Theophilus Forreft, and other of the artift’s particular friends who have feen it, the likenefs will be b 2 thought xii PREFIG E. thought fufficient to recommend it to the place it holds. In the index to the prints is given, fo far as has come within the author’s knowledge, the price for which each. has fold, either at public fale or by private contract. In this lift of prices it will be found that thirty-three of the original prints, amongft the number of tliofe felecied in this volume, have fold for upwards of two hundred and feventy pounds 5 a much larger fum than it is prefumed has ever been produced by the iale of an equal number of prints of any one matter, Englifh or Foreign. * PRINTS [ xiii ] PRINTS CONTAINED IN THIS WORK: TO WHICH ARE ADDED JHE PRICES THAT MANY OF THE ORIGINAL IMPRESSIONS HAVE SOLD FOR* Page, /. d. Portrait of william Hogarth ..... I A Shop Bill in the Style of Callot, (unique) 3 Arms of Ellis Gamble, a Direction Card* 1 (ditto) J 7 An Angel holding a Palm, a Shop Bill ...... 8 7 0 o Rape of the Lock, fmall oval s* 33 0 o Search Night, ditto 9 10 0 o A Funeral Ticket IQ JO 10 © A Midnight Scene, a Shop Bill 12 Arms of the Dutchefs of Kendall ............... 13 10 10 0 A Shop Bill, Mary and Ann Hogarth , *5 8 8 Q A Shop , [ xiv ] A Shop Bill, reprefenting the Commerce 1 of Florence, &c ........... J A Ticket for the School at Tiverton, 1 Devonfhire ••• J W. Hogarth, Engraver, April 1720, a Card Portrait of Daniel Button, &c. Lion’s Head at Button’s Coffee-houfe ...... Portrait of Martin Folkes and Addifon ..... Ditto of Dr. Arbuthnot, Count Viviani, &c. Ditto of Dr. Garth, Pope, &c. Frontifpiece to the Happy Afcetick Headpiece to Roman Military Punifhments > Plate II. of Ditto 3 Plate III. IV. and V. of Ditto Fac fimile of the Drawing of Modern Military Punifhments. J Print of Ditto, (unique) A Ticket for the Benefit of Walker the Comedian J Ditto for the Benefit of Spiiler, (unique) .. An Imprefiion from a Silver Tankard ........ A Scene from Paradife Loft Companion to Ditto Buft of Hefiod Portrait of Sir James Thornhill A Ticket for James Figg the Prize Fighter Page. /. s. d* 17 990 18 10 0 0 21 25 0 0 25 29 3 i 34 38 44 220 47 * 10 0 0 50 54 OO 5 5 0 62 5 5 0 77 10 0 0 79 8 8 0 82 8 8 0 85 86 89 8 8 0 A Ticket [ XV ] Page, /. d. A Ticket for the Benefit of Milward the Tragedian j 9§ 7 7 ° Ditto for Harry Fielding* (a Scene in “j the Mock Do&or) .. J ^ Difcovery * 1 12 770 Sketches from Pen and Ink Drawings 1 14 Arms of George Lambert, (unique) 115 Shepherd Boy .* 116 The Complicated Richardfon 118 14 0 o Tranfubftantiation Satirized 122 Companion to Ditto 127 A Ticket for the Benefit of Joe Miller 128 8 8 O A Ticket for the Benefit of Harry Field- J c p . f * 3 ® 5 S 0 ing, a Scene in rafquin J Portrait of Lord Vifcount Boyne 133 5 5® Orator Henly chriftening a Child 135 Oratory Chapel 138 6 6 0 Lovat’s Ghoft on Pilgrimage 147 270 Jacobite’s Journal ......... 148 2 2 0 Some of the principal Inhabitants of the J Moon, &c ..... J ^ Portrait of Juftice Welch .. 155 Falfe Perfpe&ive Exemplified 158 Chara&er and Caricatura 167 Black Girl 169 Diana 170 Garrick E xvi 3 Page. /. Garrick in the Farmer’s Return i ft Theodore Gardelle 172 Frontis-pifs . 175 5 John Wilkes, Efq. i.. 176 Satan, Sin, and Death .... • • ,*• ° • • • « •••>• * • • 17J n s. d. 5 0 g 9 GRA- WTHO GAR TH -From an Original Failure Jjainted hy himself in the fojsefsion of SAM IRELAND '( I I {■ GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS O F HOGARTH. Wi LLI AM Hogar t H was defcended from a reputable family in Weft morel and ; he was born in London in 1697, but the pre~ cife fpot is not clearly afcertained by any of his biographers, nor is it of much confequence to our prefent purfuit ; it was, however, moft probably in the parifti of St. Martinis Ludgate 5 where his father refided feveral years in the capa« city of a fchool-mafter, and occafionally fuper- intended a literary publication. To this purfuit he appears to have brought a confiderable fhare of learning, and with it, its ufu* al concomitant— a {lender fhare of fortune. What A por- ( 2 ) portion of this learning devolved on his fon we know not ; but, from the father’s literary avoca- tions, there is reafon ter believe that his education was not negle&ed. What may have been want- ing in fcholaftic knowledge, it muft be allowed,, was compenfated by the richer gifts of Nature. At an early age he betrayed a ftrong bias for the arts 5 and, having made fome progrefs in drawing, was, at the ufual period, apprenticed to? an engraver of plate, in Cranbourn Alley, Lei- cefter Fields. In the beginning of the prefent century the arts had fearcely begun to dawn in this country. Portrait-painting was the utmoft ambition of our' artifts ; in that of hiftory fearcely any patrons were to be found among us ; confequently, few profeiTors. Engraving was ftill at a lower ebb : we had few who, were of eminence in that line. France and Italy furnilhed us with all we want- ed ; and the art of engraving feerned to be either above or below our comprehenfion. At this taftelefs period was our unrivalled Hogarth def- tined to the lo weft of all the branches in. the art ; ( 3 ) engraving on plates and difhes ; with few com- petitors even in this line to urge him to a rival- fhip ; without any example before him worthy of the imitation of genius. Yet, under theie in- aufpicious circumftances, we find the earlieft at- tempts of our pupil of Nature fraught with a degree of tafte and Ikill, unknown even to others of the fame profeflion. To this fuperiority we may impute his happy feledtion of a model from a neighbouring country, the celebrated Cal lot j who is defervedly allowed to have been one of the moft fkilful and accomplifhed artifts of the laft century. Hogarth’s partiality for the works of this great genius has been generally admitted : a ftrong refemblance of manner both in their ftile and execution is every where fo difcern- ible as to confirm the idea. We are happy in having an opportunity of afcertaining the fadt here alluded to, by the annexed copy of a print, in which the ftyle of Callot’s engraving, par- ticularly in the figure, is very ftrongly marked. I regret that the card is not perfeft. The origi- nal was given to me, in its prefent mutilated ftate, A 2 as ( 4 ) as an early performance of Hogarth’s, by his friend, the late Mr. Bonneau; who received it from him as a very early produdtion. To this gentleman I am likewife obliged for feveral other very fcarce prints, introduced in the courfe of this work. Hogarth has been frequently cenfured for a want of elegance in the drawing of his human figure. This cenfure may appear juft in the mind of an enthufiaftic admirer of the Italian fchool, where artful combinations are often found to ex- ceed the charms of Nature, even in her moft per- fe£t forms. Such are the models of the Apollo, Belvidere, and Venus de Medicis. Thefe elegant cies are fair fubjedts for contemplation : but look- ing into Nature, as fhe is, they are fo unlike what we generally find there, that they can only be confidered as beautiful exaggerations, exifting merely in marble and plaifter of Paris. u God never made his works for man to mend/* Hogarth, who painted what he faw in real life only. C 5 ) only, made but little ufe of thefe ideal beings : he, confidered, with our great ethic writer, that , a// (j /j j/ am, OEFEZfllE , aLEnfeigne delAnge cLOr dans Craribonrn-S tree t LEICESTER-FIELDS ) 6^iEtcA^te r Jc Ve/a/ ( 8 ) defign we know not, but he has given to the right hand of the Angel a finger too much. A redun- dancy of the fame kind., we obferve in his print of The Sleeping Congregation, where he has intentionally added a joint more to the thigh of the angel, than is ufually found in the works of Nature. The original of this print is become extremely fcarce ; and although an early pro* dudtion, and without name or date, has yet efta- biithed itfelf, in the minds of the moft fcrupulous connoiffeur, as a genuine work of Hogarth. I have every reafon to fuppofe the very fcarce print on the fubjedt of the Rape of the Lock of which a tracing is here annexed from an ori- ginal print in Lord Ox ford’s valuable collection, muft have been one of his earlieft productions 3 as that charming poem made its appearance, enriched with the machinery of the fylphs, &c. in the year 2712. But what were Sylphs and Gnomes to young Hogarth ? The fportive fancy of Pope, dis- played in a manner fo exquifitely neat and pictu- refque, might have fafcinated the congenial mind of fome romantic tyro in the graphic art, and hav§ ( g* ) have drawn him irrefiflibly to the attempt of prehing with his graver, what the poet had fo happily defcribed with his pen. But the genius of this pupil of Nature foared not to the airy regions of poetic frenzy : thofe vifionary fcenes arife in groves and folitudes. Born and bred in the buftle of a vaft city, the paflions and hu- mours of men had made an early impreffion on the lively imagination of our young artift, and concentrated all its powers. He therefore contented himfelf with etching that incident in the poem which beft fluted his fatirical turn of mind. The fcene of aftion in this little print we pre- fume to be that, where Sir Plume 1 is commif- fxoned by the lady 2 to demand the ravifhed lock from her beau 3 . tc She faid ; then raging to Sir Plume repairs, a And bids her beau demand the ravifh’d hairs ~ ■ ■ ■ -yet it:. Iasi** V r :fes»i V * r ; V ■ . : /; r-r ^Arrns of the Dutchefs of. Kendal. . ( *3 ) its engraving, as well as the ornaments and even the writing that is round it, as to place its authen- ticity out of all queftion. A farther proof might be urged if necefiary. It is totally unlike the manner of his contemporaries ; among!! whom, it ftood in fuch a degree of repute, as to induce them repeatedly to copy it : three of thefe copies are now before us, and fo ill executed as to be deemed mere fervile imitations. The original of this print we believe to be unique, having never feen another impreffion of it. The etching of the arms of the Duchefs of Kendall, that follows, is a fac fimile of a very fcarce, and avowed engraving of Hogarth. This print may with great juftice, and credit to the abilities of our artift, be held forth in this work as an exemplification of his fuperior tafte and Ikill in the profeffion. The boys are grouped with a fimplicity and elegance in their attitudes,, not unworthy the pencil of Cipriani $ nor is the drawing of the favages who fupport the armorial bearings lefs to be admired y the manner in which they are etched, denotes a freedom of ftyle and fu~ ( H ) fuperiority of tafte, rarely to be met with in works of this kind. These arms were engraved on a large filver difh, which about fifty years ago, was fent to Mrs. Godfrey, a filverfmith in Norris ftreet in the Hay- market, to be melted down — of this fa£l I am informed by a Mr. Powel, now living; who, while it lay there, took from it three impreffions. The lady for whom this plate was engraved was a German Countefs named Erengard Schuylemberg. She came to England foon after the accefiion of King George the Firft to the throne, with whom fhe is faid to have been clofely connected. She was created in July 1716, in the fecond year of his reign, Baronefs of Dundalk in the Comity of Lowth, Countefs and Marchionefs of Dungan- non in the County of Tyrone, and Duchefs of the Province of Munfter, all in the Kingdom of Ireland ; and in April 1719 received the additional titles of Baronefs of Glaftonbury in the Coun- ty of Somerfet, Countefs of Faverflham in the County of Kent, and Duchefs of Kendall in the County of Weftmoreland, all in the Kingdom of Eng- A Mary Sc Aon Ho xve v ifi tors. Jit- this view of the fubject it like- wife appears from- the feme publication, that at that time taking a; man by the button in conve-r- fetion was become a very great nuifinee. Whe- ther tMs Guftom was derived. from the name of Button’s eoffee-houfe and- was o flur upon the forfeits who frequented it, or whatever other covert- raillery it might convey, . the paper, to which ( 27 ) which we allude, runs thus : cc That it was a J n r'U wh 1 r ? / ? / j j although they all have that of Hogarth. The originality of the defigns we flat- ter ( 59 ) ter ourfelves we have amply proved in the former plates : we Hi all therefore make no further apo- logy for their introduction, and have only to re- gret that they were not put into the hands of a more fkilful artift. This ticket was evidently engraved for the benefit of Walker, the hero of the Beggar’s Opera. That excellent fatire made its fir ft appear- ance early in the theatrical feafon of 1728; and happily employed the pencil of Hogarth in per- petuating the likeneffes of the principal charac- ters, and of tranfmitting to us a faithful pidture of the manners and decorations of the ftage at that period. The fcene, prefented in the annexed etching, was painted by Hogarth for Mr. Rich, then patentee of Covent Garden Theatre. It was fold at his death to the late Duke of Leeds for 35]. A duplicate of this picture ; the original Iketch of which in crayons is in my poffeilion, was likewife painted by Hogarth for Sir Henry Gough. H 2 The ( 6o ) The very extraordinary merit oF the Beggaris Opera, employed the pens and pencils of all ranks in its commendation : the ladies, we are told, car- ried about with them the favourite fongs in their fans ; and houfes were decorated with fcreens* that contained verfes or fcenes fiom this cele-? brated opera. The heroine of the piece, Mifs Lavinia Fenton, (Polly ^ rofe from the loweft of all fituations, that of felling oranges in the the- atre, to be fo highly diftinguifhed by the great * that verfes were in many instances addrelled to her by them, and it became faihionable even to repeat her colloquial phrafes. She made her firft appearance on the ftage at Lincoln’s Inn Fields Theatre in the year 1726, and quitted it at the end of the firft feafon of the Beggar’s Opera, when fhe retired, and coha- bited with the Duke of Bolton, till the death of his Duchefs in 1751. On this event taking place, he did not hefitate to lift her by mar- riage from a fituation at that time as little re- putable as her former one had been humble, to one ( 6i ) one of the highefl: dignities in the kingdom; She furvived the Duke fix years ; and, dying In January 1760, was buried at Greenwich. From a three-quarter portrait of her in my poiTeffion, painted by Hogarth, fhe appears to have been handfome, and to have had a peculiar fweetnefs in her eyes. Having faid thus much of the heroine of Gay’s opera, fomething may be thought due to the fame of the hero. Thomas Walker, (Mac- heath) is faid to have thrown an eafy and diflb- lute air into the character, to which all his fuc- cefiors have been ftrangers. Fie feems to have obtained no great applaufe from his theatrical talents before the appearance of this opera $ al- though ViCtor fays, that Booth had told him, he had at that time great expectation of Walker’s proving a capital aCtor. This opera, that raifed him to the firft degree ©f reputation as an aCtor, became fatal to him as a man. He addicted himfelf to intemperance, in confequence of the applaufe he received $ and, be- coming ( 62 ) coming ufelefs to the flage, was difcharged ; and went to Ireland, where he died in 1744. We fnall now advert to another hero of the theatre at this period, the celebrated James Spil- ler y who played the character of Mat of the Mint, in the Beggar’s Opera, with great ap- plaufe. Here we find the talent of Hogarth called forth in the fervice of humanity, and to the aid of this fon of mirth ; who, about the year 2728, appears to have been reduced to penury and great diftrefs. The annexed copy of an unique print in my poffeffion was engraved for the benefit of poor Spiller, the Shuler of his day. On this fmall print, the artift has bellowed uncommon labour and attention : the markings of the face of this comedian, although fo very diminutive, are yet fo nicely difcriminated, as to become a real portrait. Nor has he failed in difplaying that wit and humour, in which his greater works fo much abound : the anxiety in Spiller to get rid of his tickets, and dread of the impending dan- ger. 4 ( 63 ) ger, from the urgency of his creditors, is forcibly reprefented, in every turn of his countenance. The conceit of the money- fcale not preponde- rating againft the tradefmen’s bills, and leaving the poor comedian no alternative but to linger in a gaol, or to be fhot at as a foldier, is happily executed, and worthy the pencil of its author : the ftyle of engraving in the original print may be ranked with the belt of Hogarth’s works. The copy, though fhort of it, will yet, we flatter ourfelves give no ill idea of the original. As the biography of a player fel- dom outlives the remembrance of his contem- poraries, fome hints relative to this Angular character may not prove unacceptable to the reader. This theatrical hero was the fon of a Glou- cefter carrier, and born in 1692. The father, having acquired fome property, apprenticed this his only fon to a Mr. Rofs, a landfcape painter. In this profeflion he is faid to have made fome progrefs ; but, as no fpecimens of his talents have been handed down to our knowledge, we cannot ( 64 ) cannot fpeak concerning his merit in that Imel Before the expiration of his apprenticdhip he engaged in a {trolling company where, come- dy being his forte, he fbmetimes burlefqued Alexander the Great, and other characters of that clafs. In London his cornic talents were better underflood, and more amply encouraged. We find him, in many of his humourous parts* rivalling Pinkethman, of facetious memory, and of whom Sir Richard Steele obferves, that u Pin- key made a living of his face.” Spiller was not only the rival of Pin- kethman > but, we are told, he once picked his pocket, when afieep, at the Gun Tavern BiL lingfgate, of his part, the eharadter of the cob- ler, written for him by Johnfon, and which he was then ftudying. With this treafure Spiller haftened to Urn friend Bullock, the comedian, and Manager of Lincoln’s Inn Fields theatre ; who was likewife an author. Bullock received him graeioufiy, and without fcruple applied the theft to his own ufe, by preparing a piece on the fame fubjedb, called* the ( 65 ) the Cobler of Prefton ; and this he was enabled to produce a fortnight before the other houfe could prepare their drama for the fcage. Pilfering the fentioients and opinions' of one another is an unworthy pradiice, we are forry to find continued among writers and ma- nagers in the theatrical line, with as little cere- mony and as much fuccefs in the prefent day. As I do not remember of late times to have any where feen Spiller noticed as an author, the following epilogue, written and fpoken by him for his benefit, when a prifoner in the Mint, may be thought worth recording. It preceded the Drummer, or Haunted Houfe $ and is mentioned in a very fcarce trail, con- taining fome events of the life of this whim- Heal character, publiflied in 1729. a Our journals have fo much your minds engroft, 4C From Mi ft, and Cato, down to Heathcot’s poft, <{ “With ftrange adventures in the church and ftate , 1 « c And fometimes on the ftage new turns of fate $ 4C That, to divert you in your proper fphere, sc I’ll fhew my fortune's revolution here. u Odd may it feem, indeed, a very joke, « That player ftiould complain of being broke i 1 * But ( 66 ) & But fo it is I own it, void of £hame, cc Since ail this worthy circle are the fame. u B i pardon —I, perhaps miftake the matter, u You mayn’t have all occahon for Mint water : ) * c of his face, his funk eyes, and his loofe and £C yellow cheeks, the mod: certain marks of a S£ great old age, were inconteftable proofs againft £c what they faid to me. fiC Notwithstanding all this, I was forced tc to fuhmit to truth ; becaufe I knew for certain “ that the after, to fit himfelf for the part of €C the old man, fpent an hour in drefiing him- * c felf; and, that with the affiftance of feveral is a grand and mafterly idea. u Here incorporeal fpirits to fmalleft forms u Reduced their fhapes immenfe, and were at large, cc Though without number ftill amidft the hall * c Of that infernal court. But far within, u And in their own dimenfions like themfelves, Should any farther teflimony be required either of the talent of Milward as an actor* or of his excellence as a man, the following anonymous lines on his pi£ture, which was painted by Hayman, may not improperly be given as an authority. Such Milward was : him thus, with wondrous (kill, The painter drew. O that the Mutes’ quill, Alike to nature and to truth confin’d, Could draw the living image of his mind. Then fhould the painter’s and the poet’s art Prove the refemblance of the face and heart. That open manly look, where virtue glow’d. Was but the glafs which his fair infide fhew’d ; There probity, there mild affections dwelt, There every focial fentiment was felt, in each domeftic light, excell’d by none, The fon, the father, and the hufband (hone. Thus form’d great nature’s pow’rful fprings to know* Poffeffing all that nature could bellow He was an actor, fuch as half an age Has rarely feen upon the Britifh ftage. With Booth, with Betterton, he muff have vy’d, Had he not, in his prime of action, died. This, but thy fecond fame, O much deplor’d. So high the man above the actor foar’d. Her tears and praife the Mufe to Milward juft. Obliged and grateful fprinkles on his duft. This tribute ftie with mournful pleafure gives, And would dp more. The affitted widow liver 1 Foar ( io4 ) Four children round her, and a fifth unborn 5 She lives, her great untimely lofs to mourn. O that my verfe, to footh her prefent cares. Could fwell the tribute which the town prepares : That tribute to an adlor’s merit due, The Mufe, friends to the ftage, folicits you. In 1732 we find the pencil of Hogarth ent« ployed for the benefit of his ingenious and witty friend, Harry Fielding. This engraving is evi- dently by the fame artift who engraved the for- mer ; and is as clearly, from the manner of it* defigned by Hogarth. Where it is defeftive it muft be imputed to the want of ikill in the en- graver. The chara&er of the Mock Doctor is well conceived, and as happily exprefled 2 it is undoubtedly a portrait of Theophilus Cibber, who firft filled the part. The etching above this print, is from the original lketeh, in pen and ink, which was, moft probably, made from nature. In the ornaments will be found, on comparing them with feveral other prints in this work, a ftrong fimilarity of ftyle. Fielding, in this petite piece, has difplatyed a ftrong congeniality of mind with that of the ad- theatre 6/lqs R OYA L fe cJ6?c£ QfiocCor ^t.^iffeciC ( io 5 ) admirable Moliere, in his Medecin Malgre Ini «» and has preferved as much of his fprightly origin- al, as the nature of a tranflation and the idiom of our language would admit. The vivacity and true fpirit of farce contained in this comedy, renders it rather aftonifliing, that the managers have not availed themfelves more frequently of its merits, to put their audiences in good humour : befides the excellence of this piece, it was the means of adding much to the theatrical fame of Mifs Raf- ter, afterwards the juftly celebrated Mrs. Clive, In this farce, (he played the character of Dorcas, and in the preceding year performed the cha- rafter of Nell in the Devil to pay, in which fhe acquired great applaufe ; but her appearance in Dorcas, effeftually eftablifhed her reputation* as an aftrefs in Comedy. Theophilus Cibber like wife obtained an am- ple fhare of commendation in the Mock Doctor $ and from his reprefentation of this character. Fielding took occafion which I fhall here take occafian to advert to, on account of a manufcript, in a law hand, written at the back of the frontifpiece to the pamphlet, which is in my poffeffion. It runs a$ follows, cc Bought this book of Mr. Wayte, at the * c Fountain Tavern, in the Strand, in the pre- * c fence of Mr. Draper, who told me that he had * c it of the printer, Mr. W. Rayner. ec j. Cosin sf* Cos in s was an attorney, and Rayner a pub- lifher and bookfeller at that time > and, by this 5 memorandum, it appears that an ailion was likely to be commenced either againft the author ©f the pamphlet, or the defigner of the frontif- piece. The nature of the fubjeff, defigned by Hogarth for the latter, the eonnoiffeur is not unacquainted with. Pope ( lc 7 ) Pope is on a fcaffold whitewafhing Burlington gate, and, at the fame time, befpattering the Duke of Chandos’s coach, which is palling by ; in the print are interfperfed other ftrokes of fatire. The plate, I am informed, was fuppref- fed, nor does it appear that any further ufe was made of this memorandum, or that any profecution was commenced againfl our artift, either for this or any other publication. The pencil of Hogarth has in feveral in- ftances been employed againft the Twickenham bard, particularly in the print of the South Sea adventure, where he is reprefented as pick- ing the pocket of a fat man, who has a horn book affixed to his girdle. The fat man pro- bably alludes to Gay. The filence of Pope on this and other fimilar occafions is rather ex- traordinary, and can only be imputed to his dread of the pencil of our inimitable artift. A second edition of the Satire on Pope's Epiftles appeared in 1751, in quarto, with a larger print fuited to the fize, which print has been doubted by fome as not being the work of ( 108 ) of Hogarth: it appears in my judgment to bear even ftronger markings of the mafter than the fmaller one before mentioned. A thirds {fill lefs than either of the former, appeared about the fame time, evidently a copy, and probably by the fame hand that engraved the foregoing prints of Figg and the Mock Doc- tor. Though it was not our intention to advert to any other fubjeft than is introduced into this work, yet we cannot in juftice to the fame of Hogarth pafs this period of his life without giving an opinion on a print now before us, publiihed in the year 1733. The fhhjefl of it is the removal of the fcenery, ac- tors, &c. from Lincoln’s Inn Fields to the New Theatre. This print made its appearance under the title of Rich’s Glory, on his Tri- umphant Entry into Covent Garden, marked W. H. I. E. fculp. price fixpence. This engraving has been announced to the world, with a long differtation, as a genuine work of Hogarth, in which the ftvle of its com- ( *°9 )' compontion and manner of its engraving are mentioned as fufficient proofs of its authenti- city, even if the initials of his name had not been at the bottom of it* We are not An- gular in our opinion when we pronounce that it is fo deficient in both thofe requifite points as to render it more than doubtful as to its being the work of Hogarth. The enormous price of five guineas having been paid for it, in- duces us to give this opinion, and to prevent a further impofition on the credulity of the col- leftor. The fame motives that have induced us to give an opinion on the former print lead us to advert to another that now prefents itfelf, publifhed in 1737, under the title of iEneas in a Storm. The fubjeft reprefents King George the Second coming to England on his return from Hanover. The monarch is here fuppofed in a violent rage to have kicked his hat overboaad, an aftion it feems not uncuftomary with him when in a paffion. We are told that Garrick in an attempt to mimick this ridiculous ex- predion of paffion in the character of Bayes, re- ( no ) received filch a reprimand by a meflage from one of the ft age boxes, as to prevent a repe- tition of it. The defign of this print is too contemptible, and its execution fo unequal to Hogarth, as to induce us to give a decided negative on its being his. This paltry print has fold for the enormous fum of three gui- neas. In the year 1733 Hogarth produced his juftly admired print of Southwark Fair, the humor of which can never fail to excite rifibility while the Englifti character exifts. In this print are introduced moft of the enterprifmg heroes of that day, from the monarch of the theatre to the famed Icarus of the rope, one Cadman, who defcended from the fteeples of feveral churches in London about that time, and who afterwards broke his neck in an experiment of the kind at Shrewfbury. The heroine of this print, the tall hand- fome woman beating the drum, is a portrait of whom Mrs. Hogarth gave me the following anecdote. That H. palling through the fair. on ( I” } on feeing the matter of the company ftrike her and otherwife ufe her ill, he took her part and gave the fellow a violent drubbing : whe- ther this chaftifement arofe from a liking to her perfon or refpefl for the fex we know not* but it is certain that fhe was the kind of wo- man for which he entertained a ftrong parti- ality* A proof of this may be adduced in many of his works ; where he lias occafion to introduce a good looking female he has gene- rally given us a form not unlike her’s : in this he has certainly difplayed no ill tafte, and it mutt be confeffed that her face and figure feem to be of that attractive quality that will never fail to gain admirers in our country. The fliow cloth introduced in this print is from an etching of John La Guerre whom we have mentioned before, and from whofe pen- cil I am poffefled of a fet of drawings for the farce of Hob in the Well. Thefe drawings though inferior, are yet much in the ftyle of Ho- garth. In the etching is likewife introduced a print of Highmore, who purchafed part of the pa- tent ( 1 12 ) tent of Drury Lane theatre. The charafter of Highmore as a man of intrigue flood high at that time in the eyes of the beau monde, and an unfortunate attempt on the wife of a friend brought on him no fmall fliare of ridicule. In the annexed print this aft of gallantry is recorded. He is there difcovered by his friends in the moment when he expefted to have been made happy, looking with aftonifhment at a black girl whom they had placed in the bed, inftead of the fair one, who was the objeft of his wiflies. The figure of the hero neither in this print nor in that of La Guerre feem to give 4iim much credit for fuccefs in the line of gallantry. The original print was called the Difcovery, and was fuppreffed at a very early period of its appearance. Mrs. H. allured me there were not more than ten or twelve im- preffions taken from it before the plate, by a peculiar interference, was deftroyed. Highmore was originally a man of confi- derable property, which, by the affiftance of the gaming table at White’s, and his connexion at ( ) kt the theatre in Drury Lane, was in no fmall degree reduced, and that in a very fhort time. In the patent of that theatre Booth had a third fliare; the half of which Highmore purchafed for 2,500 pounds* Cibber had another third, which he obtained for 3,000 guineas. The remaining property in that houfe continued with Wilkes’s widow and Mr. Gifford, who purchafed Mr. Booth’s remaining fixth. These prices, though fo very much below the prefent eftimate of the value of that theatre, were yet, it appears by much too high, to be of ad- vantage to the fortunes of any of the then pro- prietors. I cannot pafs unnoticed an etching by Ho- garth, executed about this time, called, The Laughing Audience, without paying my tribute of commendation to its extraordinary merit. It ferved as a receipt for the print of the Fair and the Rake’s Progrefs. Though a fmall work the abundant knowledge of the human countenance is aftonifhingly marked in every feature, and it is P certainly ( “4 ) certainly not inferior, in execution, to many of his larger productions. Yet, with all its merits, the original {ketches, in pen and ink, have ftill more force and fpirit- Thefe invaluable {ketches, with many others of the fame kind, are in my pof- feflion ; they were drawn on final 1 fcraps of paper, from markings of characters that he ac- cidentally met with in the courfe of his rambles, and that he made, at the inftant, on his nails and palm of his hand. This anecdote was communicated to me by / Mrs. Hogarth, on whofe veracity every reliance may be had. I have feledted, in the annexed plate, a few of thefe fketches that have not been engraved, as fpecimens of the manner in which he put his firft thoughts on paper. Under one he has written, hearing void of attention * and a countenance more truly expreffive of fuch va- cuity of mind, I prefume could not have been made out with fo few touches, by any other pencil than that of Hogarth. Explanation of the'other fketches is unneeefTary : where the nice difcrimination of the human character is fo finely J . ■ ■ I ( ”5 ) finely marked, every touch fpeaks its own mean- ing. Hogarth’s great intimacy with George Lam- bert, the landfcape painter, for whom the an- nexed coat of arms was engraved by him as a book plate, is well known ; the defign is Ample, and the execution mafterly; yet the principal motive for introducing it here is, that the ori- ginal is a unique print. This circumftance is the more extraordinary, as I am informed by Mr. Richards, fecretary to the Royal Academy, and who was a pupil of George Lambert, that it was ftuck in all his books * and, that his library confifted of feven or eight hundred vo- lumes. The great merit of the pupil, as an artift, is well known : nor fhould the excellence of his matter, Lambert, our Bnglilh Pouffin, be palTed unnoticed. He was a difciple of one Haffel, a landfcape painter. In his early manner Lambert imitated Wootton ; but foon after- wards quitted his hazy and woolly manner of co- loring for one more diftm£t, and that approached P 2 nearer ( n6 ) nearer to the general hue of nature. There is a grandeur in Lambert’s ftyle of landfcape, and a corre&nefs in his defign, that out rivals moft of his countrymen in that line $ nor do we extol his talents beyond their juft merit, when we pronounce him, in fome refpe&s, fuperior to Gafper Pouffin, whofe works he has evidently ftudied. He was lefs fombre in his tints than that great mafter ; and, though perhaps not fo clafllcal, had yet to boaft more of nature. Lam- bert, confcious of his want of fkill in drawing the human figure, frequently called in the aflifU ance of his friend Hogarth, by whofe pencil his Jandfcapes were often enriched, either with groups of figures, from hiftory, or with ruftic charac T ters, that give additional value to his pictures. Of the latter clafs I have many fketches, in chalk, avowedly defigned by Hogarth for the works of Lambert, one of which is here in- ferted ; the character is, that of a fhepherd boy, it has all the fimplicity of nature, and is a true pifture of that happy appendage to our village fcenery, The 3 ( ”7 ) The nature of the fubjedt that follows is not altogether of fo harmlefs and Ample a quality as the preceding* A degree of fatire is there exhibited that we could wifh had been exerted on a fubjeft more deferving the lafli of our artift. This extreme fcarce print reprefents Jonathan Richardfon, a painter of confiderable eminence in the prefent century, peeping with a telefcope through his fon (who had more learning than the father) at a Virgil, that is placed above, on a fhelf. Lord Orford, in his anecdotes, refers in the Life of Richardfon* to this print, in the following palfage. € * The father having faid, in apology for * c being little converfant in claflic authors, that he had looked into them through his ( 135 ) upwards of fifty. The heads in the fleet ch are very highly finifhed ; and there can be very little doubt of the likenefs of that Prince of Orators, who made fo much noife about that period. As I do not remember to have feen a real por- trait of him, this print, it is prefumed, will not prove unacceptable to the curious in portraits. The mother of the child, from her beauty and fimplicity, feems to have ri vetted the attention of the parfon beyond the gravity of his facred charadler ; nor does the puritanical clerk appear to be lefs enraptured ; but, whether with the maid or miftrefs, is not eafy to determine. A print on this fubjeft w 7 as engraved in mezzo- tinto by John Simpfon, junior, which we have before mentioned as a very indifferent produc- tion. In that print there are many more figures than in the iketch annexed. Whether it was done from a pifture, or drawing of Hogarth we cannot afeertain, no original defign having fallen within our knowledge but the one here introduced. In the print by Simpfon, the ora- tor’s ( IS 8 ) Pliny, the Abbe Vertot, Montfaucon, &c. and had, for his patron, the Earl of Macclesfield ^ from whom he had a benefice of eighty pounds a year. He had befides a lefturefhip in the city, where he frequently preached charity lermons, obtained more relief for the poor, and was, perhaps* more generally followed than any preacher of his time. These advantages he voluntarily gave up* chufing rather to rely “ on the public* as the ■ Q more hofpitable prote6lor of learning and 0C fcience than fome of the upper world, in his cc own order/* His addrefles- to the public were commenced at his Oratory Chapel in Portfmouth Street, Lincoln’s Inn Fields > where fometimes he broke jefts* and fometimes that bread which he called the Primitive Eucharift . The room that was his chapel is yet {landing, and is ufed as a ware room for upholflery goods. There he ledtured two days in the week upon theology ^ and on one other day* Wednefday, upon other fciences* The w ( J 39 ) The annexed print of the Oratory Chapel is a copy from a very fcarce defign of Ho- garth, and, though iil executed, is yet a mat- ter of curiofity; as it exhibits a true portrait of that place, of which no other has come within our knowledge. Here declamation and fcurrility were pointed againft all ranks at that period, particularly againft thofe in power ; the friends to government and the prefent reigning family. Among others, Pope was frequently the objedl of his fatire; who, in return, did not forget to place the orator in a nich, where he will, in all probability blazon for ages to come. In his Dunciad, B. IIL he fays ; u Imbrown’d with native bronze, lo ! Henly ftandsj, 44 Tuning his voice, and balancing his hands. 41 How fluent nonfenfe trickles from his tongue ! a How fweet the periods ; neither faid, nor fung ! u Still break the benches, Henly ! with thy (train, 44 While Sherlock, Hare, and Gibfon preach in vain, u Oh ! great reftorer of the good old ftage, Preacher at once, and Zany of thy age ! 44 Oh ! worthy thou of Egypt’s wife abodes, a A decent pried", where monkeys were the Gcds ! S 2 u But ( H° ) a But Fate with butchers plac’d thy prieftly flail, <{ Meek modern faith to murder, hack, and maul ; €l And bade thee live, to crown Britannia’s praife. In Toland’s, Tindal’s, and in Woojfton’s days.” The ticket of admiffion to this oratory was a medal that the Orator caufed to be (truck for his fubfcribers : the defign was a (tar rifiiig to the meridian, with this motto, Ad fumma," and below, “ Invent am viam , aut faciamA To ((rangers, the admiffion was one drilling. A print, called, the Oratory, in which Henly ap- peared on a fcaffold, has this latter motto in- feribed over the door. Under a fecond im- predion of this print is added the following in- feription ; $ a O ! Orator, with brazen face and lungs, u Whofe jargon’s form’d of ten unlearned tongues ; <£ Why ftancls’t thou there a whole long hour haranguing, u When half the time fits better men for hanging.” O O This print has no claim whatever to the name of Hogarth ; although that idea has ob- tained a degree of credit with fome connoiffeurs. It ( ) It is, beyond a doubt, the work of George Bick- ham. Among the chara£ters in our view of the Oratory Chapel here introduced, the figure lift- ing up his hand, with a flick under his arm, is probably intended for George Alexander Ste- vens ; who, I am informed, was a perpetual annoyance to the orator ; and who, for breeding riots in his chapel, was at length profecuted by him. The infcription of pens for the Doc- tor’s friends, &c. &c. engraved on the pedef- tal, was varied, according to the fubjedls on which he meant to treat. This motto reminds us of an anecdote mentioned of the late Duke of Newcaftle- who, when Secretary of State, was applied to by the Orator to render him a fervice ; which not being complied with, he, in a petulant way, replied, Remember I have a u pen to which the Duke retorted, “ and my brother (meaning Harry Pelham) “ Jhall mend that pen for you” His audience was generally compofed of the Joweft orders of the people $ he once colledled to- ( 142 ) together an infinite number of fhoemakers, un- der the idea of teaching them a fpeedy way of making fhoes ; which he proved from the pul- pit to be by cutting off the feet of ready made boots. In the Daily Advertifer, on a Saturday, Hen- ly ufually put forth an advertifement contain- ing the fubjedt on which he meant to treat the enfuing evening. Among ft others, he took oc- cafion to parody the text of a fermon, preached on the 30th of January 1730, by Dodtor Crox- all, before the home of Commons. The text ran thus : /./ /////• hrftH' >// ///j/rr non / //'/nr. > my OfgyW- (14 7 ) Dodlor Webfter; who feemed to think his pa- tient’s illnefs was more feigned than real, and arofe principally from his apprehenfion of dan-* ger on reaching London. The original of the annexed print was publiflied in 1747 in mez- zotinto, from a defign by Hogarth, and pre- fented by him to the Dodtor, a fhort time after Lord Lovat’s execution : the artift affuring him it was engraved from his own defign. The likenefs of the head is very ftriking ; and the fatirical allufions of the author are pretty clearly pointed out by the lines inferted beneath. The following couplet ftrongly implies, that to return to the place of his nativity was, in the opinion of our artift, rather an unpleafant journey. u Doom’d, for my crimes, in pilgrimage to roam 3 u With weary fteps I feek my native home.” May not thefe lines apply to a farcaftic obfervation, frequently thrown out againft the North Britons, that they feldom return to their native homes, if they really have a head on their Ihoulders ! T 2 Of ( i4» ) Of this print we do not recolledt to have feen more than one other impreffion, which fold for near two guineas and a half. In the year 1748 Harry Fielding produced a periodical paper* under the title of the Jaco - bite's Journal\ which was continued weekly for fome months, with confiderable fuccefs. To the firft twelve numbers of thefe papers was prefixed, as a head piece, a wood cut of a monk leading an afs, who bears a Scotch man and woman on his back. The print is faid to have been difcontinued from its not having been cut deep enough, and confequently did not wear long. From the ftrength of the imprellion be- fore us, that does not appear to be the cafe ; it may poffibly have been difcontinued from fome political ill tendency. Be that as it may, the fcarcity of the print has induced us to give a fac fimile of it. THE THE JACOBITE’S JOURNAL ( H9 ) ( J 5° ) As this is the moment when the virtue of faints and the validity of their prophecies is much doubted, we here infert the copy of a letter on that fubjeSI, written by a correfpon- dent, and addreffed as follows : To the Author of the Jacobite’s Journal. SIR, As the difpute about the infpiration of the primitive fathers runs high, between the truly learned Dr. Middleton, and the very zealous Dr. Chapman, give me leave to decide the controverfy in favor of the latter. There is a prophecy of St. Jerome, which the prefent inclemency of the feafon proves to be true, and that he certainly was, as Dr. Chapman contends, an infpired perfon. It is not therefore marvellous, that fuch a faint fhould demolifh a dragon big enough to fwallow a Bull 5 the Prophecy. Cum fol fplendefcat, Maria purificante ; Tunc Glacies fuerit magis afpera, quam fuit ante ! Thus ( ) Thus Englijhed in the Jiyle of the ’Pifcopade. . On Candlemas Day y if the fun fnines out, The froft will be harder than it was, no doubto NOTE. Sz>l fplendebat , currente anno , Maria purificante . Yours, & c. In this year were produced thofe excellent prints of our artift, the Exemplification of In- duftry and Idlenefs, in the hiftory of two ap- prentices. The moral tendency and excellent defign of thefe fubjedls is fo well known as to render it unneceflary to beftow on them additional praife; nor Ihould I have adverted to them, but from a wifh to lay before the public the mode in which he committed his firft thoughts to paper, before he exerted his pencil in the execution of his defigns. The following extract is from his own manufcript, in my pofieffion. 4C Industry and Idlenefs exemplified in the S£ conduct of two fellow-prentices ; where the sc one, ( *52 ) cc one, by taking good courfes, and purfuing C€ thofe points for which he was put appren- 5 « ) iikenefs. I am favoured with the following anecdote relative to the parties, by Mifs Welch^ the daughter. A description of the march to Finchley was written by her father and inferted in a paper called, The Student, publifhed many years fince by the late ingenious Chriftopher Smart* In this defcription fome difference of opinion, relative to that print, took place between the writer and the artift. ‘ c Whether an oval or egg can be “ the true reprefen tation of a fphere or ball ; ® € or, whether buildings fliould be drawn by any u fuch rule, as would make them appear turn- bling down 5 and be allowed to be truly re- prefented, becaufe the defigner of them is able to fhew how a fpedlator may, in half an hour's time, be placed at fuch a point, as 5 * would make them all appear upright ? as, by a X * like ( 162 ) u like trick or contrivance, the oval may be u forefhortened, fo as to appear a circle.” He farther alks, “ Would a carpenter allow €C fourteen inches to be the true reprefentation ic of a foot rule, fince in no fituation whatever can the eye poiTibly fee it fo ?” Again. “ Did ever any hiftory-painter widen ce or diftort his figures, as they are removed * c from the center of his pidture ? or, would * c he draw a file of mufqueteers in that manner", when the laft man in the rank would be “ broader than high ? Why would he then ferve a poor column or pedeftal thus, when, sc poor dumb things, they cannot help them- felves ? And are all objects exempt from the sc rules of perfpeftive, except buildings ? Did from which circumftance, we have reafon to judge, that he was by no means fatisfied with his undertaking* The engraving was not begun till after the death of the artift, whofe concurrence, or that of his friend Garrick, we are convinced would never have been obtained for any fuch purpofe. From the plate there were, as I have reafon to believe, only three impreffions taken ^ one of which is in the poffeftion of Mrs. Garrick;, one in the colleftion of Charles Alexander Cricket, Efq. of Smith’s Hall, Effex ; and the other I purchafed, fome years ago, of the late Mr. Theophilus Forreft, of York Buildings. It is dated April 15, 1767, three years after the death of Hogarth. From the fize of this work, it became neceffary to omit fome of the upper part a f a.'r: n i n ( *79 ) part of the original defign ; which confifts of little more than part of the Iky, and a con* tinuation of the portcullis, or £C Hell-bounds high reaching tp the horrid roof.” Whatever its aim, ferious or ludicrous, the refpedt we bear to the matchlefs talents of our countryman, Hogarth, would have tempted us to fupprefs it; but, as a fear ce print, it fell immediately within the plan propofed in this work ; and rarity cannot fail to carry with it very powerful recommendations, and has fome* times, perhaps, covered a multitude of faults, in the eye of a connoiffeur. No man ever faid that Hogarth was dull and unapprehenfive 5 and, whenever a copy is made the very reverfe of its original, it would be in- jurious to any man, to fay that he had mif- conceived -the character. His intention, there- fore, muft have been to have exhibited a mock- heroic j for Satan is not reprefen ted as having merely loft that beauty and majefty which dif- iinguifh.es the higher orders of the angelic hoft; . Z z being, ( i8o ) being, in the fplendid and emphatic language of the divine poet, little lefs than “ a comet “ fhorn of his beams,” or “ th’ excefs of glory cc obfcured but the whole figure of Satan is totally deftitute of grace and beauty •, and his countenance, inftead of beaming with arch- angel dignity, reflefts the image of a very Ca- liban. Death alfo, who, as the fame poet tells us, a Stppd black as night, cc Dark as ten furies, terrible as hell, &c. 9S is introduced almoft in a blaze of fire, and with flames flafliing from all his joints : a reprefentation as unlike the general idea of that fpedlre, as it is to the defcription given by the poet; and, however terrific the ravages of this element, either from religious, or any other aflfociations, may appear to be, it is here managed in fuch a way, as, fo far from inspiring terror, to provoke a Anile* Neither has he attended to the aim, and decifive blow, which the ( iS. ) the poet reprefents thofe defperate combatants, as making at each other’s heads. cc Each at the head