- 
 
 
 & 
 
• ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2015 
 
 https://archive.org/details/lifecorresponden01will 
 
THE LIFE 
 
 AND 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, K T 
 
 PRESIDENT OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY, LL.D. F.R.S. 
 
 KNIGHT OF THE LEGION OF HONOR, &c.&c. &c. 
 
 BY D. E. WILLIAMS, ESQ. 
 
 W 
 
 “ Mirabile est, cum plurltniun in faciendo intersit 
 mult uni differat in Judicando.” 
 
 inter doctnm et rudem ; quam non 
 Cic. de Orat. 
 
 « Inest mentibus nostris, quapdam cupidiUs, vbri videndi.” Cic. de Off. Lib. I. 
 
 IN TWO VOLUMES. 
 VOL. I. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 HENRY COLBURN AND RICHARD BENTLEY, 
 
 NEW BURLINGTON STREET. 
 
 1831 . 
 
 YY\ 
 
LONDON : 
 
 1‘RINTED BY SAMUEL BENTLEY, 
 Dorset Street, Fleet-street. 
 
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE 
 SIR ROBERT PEEL, BART. M. P. LL.D. 
 
 &c. &c. &c. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 The private papers and confidential cor- 
 respondence of the late Sir Thomas Lawrence, 
 have been entrusted to me as his biographer. In 
 these documents I find that he very frequently 
 mentions you, in terms which evince an im- 
 pression of your kindness in private life, and 
 an admiration of your talents and liberal spirit, 
 in your patronage of the Fine Arts. 
 
 In offering to you, therefore, the Dedica- 
 tion of this work, I feel that I am paying a 
 respect to the judgment and affections of this 
 great and good man, whilst I am showing a 
 deference to the general sense of your pre- 
 eminent character and public services. 
 
 a 2 
 
IV 
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 Your acceptance of this Dedication will be 
 received, as a testimony of your respect for Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence, and as a consequence of 
 your intimate connexion with the moral and 
 intellectual improvement of our country in the 
 most eventful period of her history. 
 
 I could not have the vanity to solicit it, as any 
 approbation, or countenance, however indirect, 
 of my performance, nor can it be construed 
 into any concurrence in my opinions, or 
 approval of my sentiments. For these I am 
 alone responsible before the great tribunal of 
 the public. Like yourself, I can claim one 
 of the most exalted and inestimable of distinc- 
 tions — an inflexibility to aught but conviction, 
 and an indifference to any thing that I do not 
 deem integral and right. 
 
 I have the honour to be, Sir, 
 
 With great respect, 
 
 Your most obedient, 
 
 And very humble Servant, 
 
 D, E. W ILLIAMS. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Circumstances over which I had no con- 
 trol, and with which, in the first instance, I 
 had no connexion, have devolved upon me the 
 important task of writing the life of Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence. Serious and important, indeed, is 
 this duty, both in relation to the arts, and to 
 the character for genius in the great and eternal 
 republic of Art, which this illustrious man has 
 acquired for his country. 
 
 The biography of Sir Thomas Lawrence is, 
 moreover, connected with a very peculiar era 
 of history ; and his private life and professional 
 exertions have reference to names in Europe, 
 the greatest for power, rank, affluence, talents, 
 and virtues. 
 
 No man was ever more admired in public or 
 beloved in private life, than Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence ; and probably never did the death of any 
 person, in a similar sphere, occasion more regret 
 among men of genius, or deeper sorrow in so 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 large and extensive a circle of private friends — 
 friends selected exclusively for all that is great 
 and good in our nature. 
 
 Upon the sudden, unexpected, and certainly 
 afflicting death of this eminent man, his friends 
 and admirers were anxious that his biography 
 should be given to the world, by some person 
 of a celebrity in literature, and of a character 
 which might create a confidence in the adequate 
 performance of a task so delicate, so important, 
 and so fraught with difficulties severe and in- 
 numerable. The family, and all who had known 
 Sir Thomas, were rejoiced that the office was 
 undertaken by his friend, Mr. Thomas Campbell; 
 and the republic of Letters and of Arts hailed 
 the selection as a promise of excellence, and as a 
 just tribute to the important nature of the sub- 
 ject, as well as to the memory of the deceased. 
 
 I was selected at this period as the coadjutor 
 of Mr. Campbell, — as “ the humble pioneer of 
 literature, doomed only to remove rubbish and 
 clear obstructions, from the paths through which 
 learning and genius press forward to conquest 
 and glory, without bestowing a smile on the 
 humble drudge that facilitates their progress.” 
 That smile from learning and genius, however, 
 I have happily received, in the delegation of 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 VH 
 
 the principal task to me by Mr. Campbell, 
 when circumstances prevented the performance 
 of it by himself. These circumstances will un- 
 questionably be regretted by the world — and 
 unquestionably regretted they would have 
 been, to whomever he had resigned the office, 
 — for how very few, even of the most eminent, 
 would have inspired equal hope and confidence 
 in the performance ! 
 
 Of my own very humble powers, the work, 
 I fear, will afford indisputable evidence ; but I 
 throw it forward in the free and open market 
 of public opinion, in which all performances 
 and persons eventually find their proper level. 
 I send it forth with unfeigned diffidence and 
 humility, but without any desire to deprecate 
 censure, further than by claiming a just con- 
 sideration for the very peculiar circumstances 
 under which it has been written. If it affords 
 no satisfaction to the public, let the selection 
 of me to the office be attributed solely to the 
 exceedingly kind feelings which have, in this 
 instance, obscured the judgment of that emi- 
 nent man, who in honouring me with his con- 
 fidence and friendship, has cast the one solitary 
 ray of pride and comfort over my life. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence was devoid of that 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 viii 
 
 self-love, which is almost the only substitute 
 for the education that begets the useful habit 
 of accuracy in the minor details of life. He 
 did not keep accounts, memoranda, notes, or 
 papers ; he neither recorded facts, dates, nor in- 
 cidents ; nor did he even write down the invalu- 
 able observations which he had occasion to 
 make upon men, books, and professional works, 
 in his career through life. His correspondence 
 alone remains ; and it will be seen that his let- 
 ters were generally without date, to persons in 
 different parts of the empire, and written spon- 
 taneously, in the short and precarious intervals 
 of his intense exertions at his profession. Hence 
 the difficulties of collecting the materials of 
 this biography have been incalculable, and the 
 labour, beyond what can easily be conceived. 
 But the materials being obtained, they formed, 
 from the causes just recited, a chaos of confu- 
 sion almost impossible to reduce to order. 
 
 These difficulties will be received as some 
 apology for the imperfections of the work. 
 They were of incessant occurrence, and of an 
 almost insuperable nature ; and they exacted a 
 sacrifice of time and labour, and imposed the 
 necessity of personal inconveniences, which 
 were found by Mr. Campbell, inconsistent with 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 IX 
 
 the other very important literary plans in which 
 he was then engaged. It was under these cir- 
 cumstances that the task was devolved upon 
 me; and the communication was made to me 
 in the following letter : 
 
 “ Middle Scotland Yard, 
 Whitehall, Nov. 10, 1830. 
 
 “ MY DEAR SIR, 
 
 “I have explained satisfactorily, to those who 
 have the best right to an explanation from me on 
 the subject, the circumstances which would make 
 it hopeless for me to attempt publishing the Life 
 and Correspondence of Sir Thomas Lawrence. 
 
 “ Under the sanction of Sir Thomas’s nearest 
 friends, I have consigned to you whatever do- 
 cuments I possess for the work ; conscious that 
 you will be likely to accumulate new materials 
 more promptly than I could have done, and 
 trusting that public criticism will be charitable 
 towards you, when it considers the difficulty 
 
 of your task. I should be happy to give you 
 
 ♦ 
 
 assistance in completing the biography, but I 
 have neither health nor leisure for more than 
 my present occupations. 
 
 “ I think it my duty, however, to offer a few 
 remarks on the earlier part of Sir Thomas’s Life ; 
 
X 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 the only part of it of which I have digested the 
 documents. I am convinced that you need 
 not waste any time in attempting to trace our 
 artist’s pedigree from the Knight of Palestine. 
 From the information which the Heralds’ Col- 
 lege afforded me on this subject, I can form no 
 other conclusion than that Mr. Lysons’ enthu- 
 siasm for his gifted friend warped his accus- 
 tomed accuracy of judgment on this heraldic 
 point, and that there is no proof at all of Law- 
 rence being descended from the family of 
 Ashton Hall. 
 
 46 I transmit to you some documents respect- 
 ing his early pecuniary circumstances, and the 
 aid which he gave to his father’s family, with a 
 hope that you will participate in my feelings 
 on the subject. I have been sorry to see in 
 the newspapers, many harsh reflections on the 
 relatives of Sir Thomas, for having been the 
 cause of his whole embarrassments through 
 life, by the early burthens which they are 
 alleged to have selfishly imposed on his gene- 
 rosity. Without presuming to dictate to your 
 judgment, I would recommend to you to 
 give a candid and full hearing to what the 
 family have to say on this delicate matter, and 
 to remember that a pathetic interest in the 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 xi 
 
 dead, is most unjustly obtained by any censure 
 on the living, that is founded either on exagge- 
 ration or on questionable proofs. Not to speak 
 of the difficulty of clearing up family facts so 
 long gone by, there would be much indelicacy 
 towards Sir Thomas’s memory, in making the 
 narrative of his life a vehicle for inculpating 
 his family. 
 
 “ If he had complained of them, the public 
 might have a right to be a party to his com- 
 plaint ; but he loved them tenderly ; and if he 
 were alive, he would be the first to protest ' 
 against the vulgar curiosity of dissecting his 
 domestic concerns with his dearest kindred. 
 
 “ I may be told, perhaps, that even Sir 
 Thomas’s private character now belongs to the 
 public, and that our curiosity has a right to 
 be satisfied as to the causes of this remarkable 
 fact ; — namely, that an artist, whose popularity 
 ought to have made him rich, was actually em- 
 barrassed in his circumstances throughout life. 
 Was his money spent in profligate dissipation? 
 No : it is quite clear, as far as a negative can 
 be proved, that he was neither a gambler nor 
 viciously extravagant. 
 
 “ That a part of his pecuniary difficulties arose 
 from his generosity to his relatives, I think it 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 xii 
 
 must be inferred from their own statements, 
 but not to the degree that would entitle us to 
 consider them as the principal, still less the sole, 
 cause of his embarrassed affairs. I believe that, 
 if he had been a twentieth part as circumspect 
 in money management as in conversation, and 
 half as cautious to avoid innocent extravagance, 
 he would have been, in spite of his generosity 
 to his family, a rich man. But he was utterly 
 heedless of accounts. I could not credit the 
 fact, unless I had had it from the best autho- 
 rity, that he kept his books so imperfectly, as to 
 have omitted a debt of five hundred guineas 
 due to him from one of the noblest families in 
 the kingdom ; and it is probable that he omitted 
 other sitters, who were not so punctilious as that 
 family in volunteering the payment of the un- 
 claimed debt to his Executor. He was muni- 
 ficent in his kindness to brother artists, and 
 was prodigal to all who applied for his charity. 
 I believe, too, that a vast deal more of his time 
 than is commonly supposed, was spent in gra- 
 tuitous drawings or paintings, of which he made 
 presents to his friends. 
 
 I remain, my dear Sir, 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 “ To D. E. Williams, Esq.” T. CAMPBELL.” 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 xiu 
 
 It has been said that the jealousy of painters 
 exceeds that which is imputed to authors, the 
 genus irritabile vatum, and that it is more pro- 
 ductive of its poisonous fruits. This work 
 will prove that the subject of it was totally 
 incapable of so base a passion ; and with respect 
 to his contemporary artists, it is but justice to 
 state, that, with a few rather painful exceptions, 
 (exceptions found where least expected or jus- 
 tified,) many members of the profession were 
 willing to contribute to the biography of this 
 great man, all the sources of information which 
 their friendly or professional intercourse and 
 correspondence with him could supply. 
 
 The same feelings pervaded the private 
 friends of Sir Thomas Lawrence ; and the anx- 
 iety to have his life upon record, and to contri- 
 bute all in their power to the making of his 
 biography the perfect mirror of the individual, 
 is the most conclusive testimony to the excel- 
 lence of the man. He must be of no ordinary 
 nature, who, amongst numerous acquaintances 
 of every rank and profession, finds such zeal of 
 panegyric and warmth of attachment, and with 
 scarcely any instance of indifference, and not 
 one of animosity. 
 
 It is unnecessary to enumerate the many in- 
 
XIV 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 dividuals who, by giving up their letters from 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence, have contributed to the 
 value of this work. Their names will appear 
 in the following pages, and, it is trusted, to 
 their honour. I have been much indebted for 
 papers, to Mrs. Bloxam, his beloved sister, and 
 to her sons.* 
 
 The names of the different members of the 
 Angerstein family, — of the enlightened Secre- 
 tary of the Academy, Mr. Howard, and of that 
 liberal gentleman and eminent architect, Mr. 
 Soane, as well as of Mr. Woodburn, stand 
 conspicuously among those who have given 
 up Sir Thomas’s letters for the benefit of the 
 work ; and from Mr. Clint, of Gower Street, 
 and Mr. Evans of Newman Street, I have 
 received many communications, conveyed in a 
 spirit of candour and friendship towards their 
 companion in art. It is to be regretted that the 
 severe parliamentary duties, or the important 
 literary toils, of the Marquess of London- 
 derry, or some other cause, have prevented 
 his favouring the work with a few of the 
 great number of letters which he must have 
 
 * The Author is compelled to advert to the efforts of some 
 of the friends of Sir T. L. to induce him to garble papers, to 
 suppress facts, and to set forth statements to deceive the 
 public. These attempts he uniformly resisted. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 XV 
 
 received in his frequent and long correspondence 
 with a man, from whose friendship he must 
 have derived so much of satisfaction and honour. 
 
 It affords a high degree of satisfaction to 
 revert to the promptitude, the unaffected kind- 
 ness and unostentatious warmth, with which 
 Mr. now Sir Robert Peel, came forward to con- 
 tribute the documents in his possession to the 
 biography of his friend. A love of literature, 
 a fine feeling for the beauties of art, and a 
 social though refined kindness for ingenious 
 and worthy men, have distinguished this pre- 
 eminent political character, amid the cares of 
 state, and probably the unexampled toils of 
 legal and official reforms. I took the liberty, 
 at a very late period of my labours, to com- 
 municate to Sir Robert Peel, that the attach- 
 ment towards him for kindness, and an admira- 
 tion of his judgment displayed in his patronage 
 of the Arts, were so constantly expressed by 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence, in his confidential let- 
 ters, that I felt it my duty to offer him a Dedi- 
 cation of the work. A deference to the affec- 
 tions and judgment of Sir Thomas Lawrence 
 appeared to me to render this an imperative 
 obligation. I cannot resist the feeling of in- 
 serting Sir Robert’s immediate reply to me. 
 
XVI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 his unknown correspondent. The letter must 
 afford such consolation to the family and friends 
 of the deceased ; and it presents an instance of 
 personal attachment and liberality of spirit, so 
 gratifying to the public, and consolatory to the 
 votaries of the Arts, that I feel myself justified 
 in its publication. 
 
 “Whitehall, April 7, 1831. 
 
 “ SIR, 
 
 “ I have the honour to acknowledge the 
 receipt of your letter, and cannot hesitate to 
 accept the offer which it conveys. It cannot 
 fail to be gratifying to me, to have my name 
 connected in the manner you propose, with 
 the memory of the distinguished artist whose 
 biography you have undertaken ; for whom I 
 had the sincerest esteem and warmest personal 
 regard. 
 
 “ I will not presume to offer any suggestion 
 with regard to the terms of the Dedication. I 
 take for granted that Mr. Campbell has trans- 
 mitted to you a packet of letters addressed to 
 me by Sir Thomas Lawrence, which I gave to 
 Mr. Campbell when he contemplated writing 
 the Life of Sir Thomas. 
 
 I have the honour to be, Sir, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 
 D. E. Williams, Esq. ROBERT PEEL.’ 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 OP 
 
 THE FIRST VOLUME. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Birth of Sir Thomas Lawrence. — Reflections upon ances- 
 try, in relation to genius.- — The elder Mr. Lawrence an Inn- 
 keeper. — His classical attainments. — Physical distinctions of 
 the English gentry and the common people. — Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence’s personal appearance. — His grace and dexterity 
 at corporeal exercises. — The maternal descent of Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence. — His^father’s projected tour through England with 
 his fellow student. — Attractions of Tenbury. — Sojourn there. 
 — Female loveliness. — A marriage ; its consequences. — Mr. 
 Lawrence becomes a Supervisor of Excise at Bristol. — Keeps 
 the White Lion at Bristol. — Repairs to Devizes. — His wife 
 and family. — His education of his child Thomas. — The in- 
 fantile beauty and precoce talents of the boy. — Lord and 
 Lady Kenyon . Page 1 
 
 b 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 xviii 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Retrospect of Mr. Lawrence’s residence at Bristol. — The 
 Education of young Lawrence. — Reflections upon painters, 
 foreign and English, ancient and modern. — Precocity of ge- 
 nius. — Visits the Seats of the nobility and gentry of Wilt- 
 shire. — Copying ancient masters. — Original compositions. — 
 Mr. Weld, of Lulworth Castle; his singular death. — Riots of 
 1780. — The Hon. Daines Barrington’s mention of young 
 Lawrence in his Miscellanies. — Visits to Oxford and Wey- 
 mouth. — Residence at Bath. — Patronage of the public. — 
 Early companions. — His greatsuccess in portraits. — His prices 
 compared with those of other juvenile artists. — His prices in 
 his latter days. — His juvenile likeness of Miss Shakspeare; 
 of Mrs. Siddons as Aspasia ; of Admiral Barrington. — His 
 original historical piece of Christ bearing the Cross. — His 
 own portrait in oils. — Family letters. — Premium bestowed 
 upon young Lawrence by the Society of Arts. — He repairs to 
 London ..... Page 42 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Family affections towards Mrs. Lawrence by her relations. 
 — Mr. Lawrence leaves Bath for London. — Arrangements in 
 London. — Introduction vO Sir Joshua Reynolds, — Lodgings 
 in Leicester Square. — In Jermyn Street. — A Student of the 
 Academy. — Beautiful drawings. — The Gladiator Repellens 
 and the Apollo Belvidere. — Admitted to good society. — 
 Royal patronage. — Disposal of Legacies. — A Museum pur- 
 chased. — Commissions for paintings— Acquaintance with 
 Mr. Hamilton. — Introduced to the Kemble Family . 93 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 xix 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 State of public taste. — Difficulties of gaining the public 
 approbation. — Severe competition among artists. — The King 
 and Queen’s desire that Mr. Lawrence should be elected an 
 Associate of the Academy. — Successful opposition to the 
 Royal wishes. — Peter Pindar's poem upon the subject. — Mr. 
 Lawrence’s subsequent election. — Attends the funeral of Sir 
 Joshua Reynolds. — Sir Joseph Banks and the Dilettanti 
 Society. — The Society elects Mr. Lawrence to succeed Sir 
 Joshua Reynolds, as its painter. — The by-law of the Society 
 waved for that purpose. — Mr. Lawrence appointed Portrait- 
 painter in Ordinary to the King. — Reflections upon this dis- 
 tinction. — Mr. Lawrence’s historical work of Homer reciting 
 his verses to the Greeks. — Pecuniary affairs. —Portrait of 
 Miss Farren Countess of Derby. — Mr. Burke’s observations. 
 — Portraits of the King and Queen sent out to China, with 
 Lord Macartney. — Portrait of the Duke of Portland, sent to 
 Bristol. — Portrait of the King, sent to Coventry. — Prices of 
 Paintings. — Sale of M. de Calonne’s collection of Paintings, 
 and of that of Sir Joshua Reynolds. — Anecdote of Mr. J. J. 
 Angerstein ; the commencement of his friendship with Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence. — Pecuniary arrangements . Page 112 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The earliest public exhibition of Mr. Lawrence’s works at 
 the Royal Academy, in 1787. — Lavater’s Physiognomy. — 
 Likeness of Fuseli. — Lavater’s death. — Exhibitions of 1788, 
 1789, and 1790. — Portrait of the Princess Amelia. — Anec- 
 dotes of the Royal Family. — Fate of the Princess Amelia’s 
 portrait. — Mr. Lawrence removes to Old Bond Street. — Ex- 
 
XX 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 hibitions of 1791 and 1792. — Portrait of the King.— Mr. 
 West’s Edward III. passing the Soane. — Mr. Opie’s portraits. 
 — Hoppner patronised by the Prince of Wales. — Exhibitions 
 of 1793 and 1794. — Anthony Pasquin’s criticisms. — His opi- 
 nions of Mr. West’s Scriptural characters — Observations 
 upon Scriptural subjects of paintings. — Pasquin’s criticisms 
 upon the Exhibition of 1794. — Pasquin’s biography of Law- 
 rence. — Anecdotes of Sir Godfrey Kneller. — The Exhibition 
 of 1795. — Letter from W. Cowper to Mr. Lawrence. — Public 
 sales of paintings. — Exhibitions of 1796 and 17S7. — Satan 
 calling up his Legions ; A. Pasquin’s criticisms.— Contem- 
 porary criticism. — Observations on the painting of Satan. — 
 Private letters. — Mr. Lawrence loses his mother and father. 
 — His intensity of grief at their death. —Portrait of Sir 
 Charles Grey. — Its engraving. — Anecdotes of the family. 
 — Exhibition of 1798. — Portrait of Mr. Kemble as Corio- 
 lanus. — Portrait of Lord Seaforth. — Painters’ improprie- 
 ties. — Mr. Lawrence’s letter respecting his painting of Corio- 
 lanus ...... Page 132 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Exhibition of the Royal Academy of 1799. — The emi- 
 nence of Hoppner and Opie. — The Exhibition of 1800. — 
 Portrait of Mr. Curran. — Portrait of Mrs. J. Angerstein. — 
 Backgrounds to Sir Thomas Lawrence’s portraits. — Portrait 
 of Mr. Kemble as Rolla. — The Exhibition of 1801. — The un- 
 certainty of opinions upon works of art. — Mr. Copley’s his- 
 torical painting of the death of the Earl of Chatham. — Sale 
 at Fonthill. — Sales of picture galleries. — Mr. Lawrence’s 
 Hamlet. — Teaching modelling to the Princess of Wales. — 
 Mr. Lawrence at Blackheath. — His bust of Mr. Lock. — The 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 xxi 
 
 Exhibition of 1802.— The portrait of the Marquis of Exeter. 
 — A singular marriage. — The Exhibition of 1808. — Mr. Ber- 
 nard’s Retrospections of the Stage ; his Reminiscences of 
 Mr. Lawrence. — Anecdote of Edwin and young Lawrence; 
 of Gainsborough and Foote and Garrick. — A rehearsal for 
 the stage ; Jaffier and Priuli. — The stage abandoned, and 
 the pencil resumed. — Criticisms on Lawrence’s works. — 
 Schisms of the Royal Academy in 1803. — Royal interference. 
 — The disputes terminated. — Harmony restored. — Dissen- 
 sions respecting the distribution of medals. — The Exhibi- 
 tions of 1804 and 1805. — Association of Mr. Lawrence with 
 the Princess of Wales at Montague House, Blackheath. — 
 The Delicate Investigation. — Mr. Lawrence’s affidavit. — The 
 Princess’s reply to the Report of the Lords Commissioners. — 
 Her defence, with respect to Mr. Lawrence. — Lord Eldon’s 
 sarcasm. — Portraits of Lord Grey, Lord Amherst, Lady 
 Elizabeth Foster, the Duchess Dowager of Devonshire. — 
 Purchase of the Temple of Tivoli, by the Earl of Bristol. — 
 Plan of transporting it to the margin of a bog in Ireland. — 
 Alarm of the Pope. — The Sacrilege prevented — The Exhibi- 
 tion of 1806. — Posthumous portrait of Mr. Pitt. — Portraits 
 of Lord Ellenborough, Sir Joseph Banks, and the Earl of 
 Malmesbury .... Page 199 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The Exhibition of 1807. — Portrait of the Hon. Berkeley 
 Paget. — The group of the Baring family. — Anecdotes of the 
 families of Paget and Baring. — Criticisms upon the latter 
 Painting. — Committee of Taste. — Public Monuments. — Na- 
 tional Sculpture. — Porcelain Vases. — Death of Mr. Opie. — 
 The Exhibition of 1808. — Portrait of the Earl of Aberdeen. 
 
xxu 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 — Portrait of Mr. Pitt. — Busts of Mr. Pitt. — Sir A. Carlisle 
 elected Professor of Anatomy to the Academy. — The Exhibi- 
 tion of 1809. — Jealousies of Artists. — Lectures at the Roman 
 Academy of St. Luke against detraction. — The Exhibition of 
 1810. — Portrait of Lord Castlereagh. — Political criticisms. — 
 Mr. Perry and the Morning Chronicle. — Portrait of Mr. 
 Canning; difficulties of taking his likeness. — Portrait of 
 Lord Melville. — His Lordship’s anecdote of the popular ora- 
 tor. — Reflections upon the anecdote. — Analogous cases. — 
 Death of Mr. Lock, of Norbury Park, — His character. — 
 Death of Mr. Hoppner. — Mr. Lawrence’s private letters on 
 those occasions. — His prices of portraits raised. — The Exhi- 
 bition of the Academy in 1811. — Private Correspondence. — 
 The Exhibition of 1812. — Portraits of Lord Mountjoy, Lord 
 Charlemont. — The National Convention of Ireland. — Its ridi- 
 culous suppression. — Portrait of Mr. Kemble, as Cato. — Ex- 
 hibition of the year 1813.— Portraits of Sir Thomas Graham, 
 of Miss Thayer. — Artists and their Pupils. — The Exhibition 
 of 1814. — Portrait of Lady Leicester. — Biography of Sir J. 
 F. Leicester, Lord de Tabley. — Portrait of Sir John Mac 
 Mahon, and of Lady Emily Cowper . . Page 265 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence visits Paris. — Arrival of the Emperor of 
 Russia and King of Prussia in England. — Their likenesses 
 taken by the order of the Prince Regent. — Mr. Lawrence 
 knighted. — The Exhibition of 1815. — Portrait of R. Hart 
 Davis, Esq. ; of the Hetman Prince Platoff. — Captain Jones’s 
 History of Prince Platoff. — Portrait of Prince Blucher ; of 
 the Duke of Wellington — The Exhibition of 1816. — Portrait 
 of Canova ; his kindness of disposition. — Great humanity of 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 xxm 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence. — Letters to Canova. — Portrait of Mr. 
 
 J. J. Angerstein. — Lawrence's exertions upon this portrait 
 
 Biography and family of Mr. Angerstein. — Portraits of the 
 Bishop of London, the Marchioness of Stafford, and the 
 Duke of York. — The Exhibition of the year 1817. — Portraits 
 of the Marquis of Anglesea, the Duke of York, and Mrs. Ar- 
 buthnot. — Satire upon Sir Thomas Lawrence.— Memoir of 
 
 him, by Mr. H*. Howard, R.A. — The Exhibition of 1818 
 
 Portrait of Lady E. L. Gower. — Its excellence Valuing 
 
 Paintings at Carlton House. — Death of Major W. R. Law- 
 rence. — Private Correspondence — Sir Thomas Lawrence's 
 poetry — His extensive reading . . Page 337 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 A National Gallery of Art.— The Elgin Marbles. — The 
 Committee of the House of Commons. — Discrepant Evidence 
 before the Committee. — Inconsistencies of artists. — The Re- 
 port of the Committee. — The Townleyan Marbles. — The 
 Egina Marbles refused by the English and bought by the 
 Bavarian Government. — The Phygalian Marbles. — Parsimo- 
 ny of Mr. Perceval. — Lord Byron’s irrational attack on Lord 
 Elgin. — Evidence of Mr. Nollekens ; of Mr. Flaxman ; of 
 Mr. Westmacott; of Mr. Chantrey; of Mr. Rossi; of Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence, and Mr. West.— Dr. Johnson’s observa- 
 tions on Sculpture. — The Evidence of amateur-witnesses. — 
 Mr. R. P. Knight's opinions. — The Earl of Westmorland's 
 anecdotes of George III.— The value of antique statuary in 
 England — Sums paid for Statues by the Marquis of Lans- 
 downe and Mr. R. P. Knight. — Continued controversies re- 
 specting the Theseus and Ilissus . . Page 393 
 
XXIV 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Addresses to the Students of the Royal Academy, delivered 
 before the General Assembly at the Annual Distribution 
 
 Of Prizes. Page. 
 
 I. December 10, 1823 421 
 
 IT. — 1825 435 
 
 III. 1826 440 
 
 Catalogues of the Royal Academy, from 1769 to 1830 . 451 
 Catalogue of the Works of Sir Thomas Lawrence ex- 
 hibited in the year 1830, immediately after his de- 
 cease, at the British Institution ..... 469 
 
 ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 Portrait of Sir Thomas Lawrence, from a Crayon Drawing, 
 engraved by Worthington, To face title, Vol. I. 
 
 Portrait of Lawrence, when a boy, painted by himself, en- 
 graved by Dean, Page 67 
 
 Portrait of Sir Thomas Lawrence, painted by himself, and 
 engraved by Dean, To face title, Vol. II. 
 
THE LIFE 
 
 OF 
 
 SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Birth of Sir Thomas Lawrence. — Reflections upon ancestry, 
 in relation to genius. — The elder Mr. Lawrence an Inn- 
 keeper. — His classical attainments. — Physical distinctions 
 of the English gentry and the common people. — Sir Tho- 
 mas Lawrence's personal appearance. — His grace and dex- 
 terity at corporeal exercises. — The maternal descent of Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence. — His father’s projected tour through 
 England with his fellow student.— Attractions of Tenbury. 
 — Sojourn there. — Female loveliness. — A marriage; its con- 
 sequences. — Mr. Lawrence becomes a Supervisor of Excise 
 at Bristol. — Keeps the White Lion at Bristol. — Repairs to 
 Devizes. — His wife and family. — His education of his child 
 Thomas. — The infantile beauty and precoce talents of the 
 boy. — Lord and Lady Kenyon. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence was born in the 
 parish of St. Philip and Jacob, in the city of 
 Bristol, on the 4th May 1769, and was christened 
 on the 6th of the same month.* 
 
 * Some difficulties have existed respecting the ascertain- 
 ing of the day of his birth. It was generally stated to have 
 VOL. I. B 
 
2 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 I enter minutely on the parentage and de- 
 scent of our artist, from no wish to attach un- 
 necessary importance to the ancestry of a great 
 man— such adventitious circumstances are ex- 
 trinsic to the true glory of genius, and perhaps 
 our interest in gifted men is more deeply be- 
 spoken by humility than by pride of birth. It 
 gladdens our philanthropy, — it is animating to 
 youthful talent, to see a great man emerge from 
 
 been, the 1 3th of April 1769, or 4th of May 1769 ; and, in the 
 Register of his admission as a student of the Royal Academy 
 in 1787, he is entered as eighteen years of age, on the 6th of 
 May of that year. The rector of Christchurch, Bristol, wrote 
 the following letter on the subject : — 
 
 Sm, — I have, at your request, examined the Register of 
 Baptisms of the parish of Christchurch, for the name of Tho- 
 mas Lawrence, but cannot find it in either of the years you 
 mention, or for some years either preceding or subsequent. 
 
 I find the names of two other children of the same parents 
 inserted therein, viz. “ Littleton Colston, son of Thomas and 
 Lucy Lawrence, baptized December 18, 1770, and Frances,* 
 daughter of the same, baptized December 10, 1772;” and 
 these, after a careful inspection, are all that occur. 
 
 I am. Sir, your obedient servant, 
 
 Robert Watson, 
 
 Rector of Christchurch and St. Ewen’s. 
 
 Bristol , Oct. 11, 1819. 
 
 * Both died very young. The following certificate ap- 
 peared in the Paper called “ The World,” on the 1st of May 
 1790. “Thomas Lawrence, son of Thomas and Lucy Law- 
 rence, was born 4th of May 1769, as appears by the Register 
 of St. Peter and St. Jacob, Bristol. — James New, Vicar.” 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 3 
 
 obscurity by his own powers, and to find him 
 disproving the truth of “ poverty’s insuperable 
 bar” — whether by founding a family, like Sir 
 Richard Arkwright,* or, if poor, like Burns, 
 by his being able to make his children honour- 
 ed at the ends of the earth for their father's 
 fame. When we learn that Burns’s ancestors 
 were all peasants, and that he was born in a 
 clay cottage which his father had built with his 
 own hands, there is no good heart that will be 
 less interested in the Heaven-taught ploughman, 
 than if his biographer had found his cradle in a 
 palace, or traced his lineage to the Bruce. 
 
 A democratic writer has said, that Nature is 
 
 * Nothing can more strongly illustrate the subject than 
 the system of withholding and bestowing the blushing honours 
 of titles. Sir Richard Arkwright, who had done so much to 
 enrich his country and benefit mankind, and who had made a 
 splendid estate, was knighted in his old age, as one amongst the 
 many who carried up addresses, congratulating the King upon 
 escaping from the impotent attempt of the old Bedlamite, 
 Margaret Nicholson. All who received the honour of knight- 
 hood on this occasion, w’ere facetiously called “ Peg Nichol- 
 son’s Knights.” Poor Peg died in Bedlam, A.D. 1829. She 
 lived to a great age, and, for years before her death, used to 
 sit for hours motionless in one position. Her immense, dark, 
 and brilliant eyes, contrasted with her withered face, formed 
 a singular spectacle. She was the beau-ideal of a queen of 
 witches. Her attempt upon the King was altogether of a 
 character unworthy of notice ; and it was swelled into im- 
 portance for political objects. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 partial to democracy : if she be so in the pro- 
 duction of genius, she gives poor folks but a 
 sorry chance of enjoying her favour. I believe 
 Nature to have no such classified partialities, 
 though circumstances may afford one class of 
 society better means of fostering their talents 
 than another. 
 
 When I undertook this great man’s biogra- 
 phy, I began by investigating his parentage. 
 The first account of his ancestry that I received, 
 came from the information of one of the best 
 antiquaries of England, * who had drawn out 
 his pedigree, and who asserted that Sir Thomas 
 could show r Baronets on both sides of his ances- 
 try, and that few of the equestrian order could 
 prove so good a descent. The family of Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence, he said, could claim paternal 
 descent from Sir Robert Lawrence of Ashton 
 Hall, an ancient seat in Lancashire, in the hun- 
 dred of Lonsdale, about three miles from Lan- 
 caster ; which, after having been transmitted 
 through a race of dignified possessors, for the 
 space of more than six centuries, is now the he- 
 reditary property of the Dukes of Hamilton. 
 
 Sir Robert Lawrence was one of the bravest 
 of the English gentry, who accompanied Coeur 
 
 Mr. Lysons. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 5 
 
 de Lion to Palestine ; and he was knighted by 
 that monarch in the Holy Land, in 1191, for 
 his valour at the siege of Acre. He, at that 
 time, assumed the armorial bearings now worn, 
 (with the necessary quarterings and changes) by 
 the different branches of the family in England, 
 viz. that of Sherdington in Gloucestershire, Crich 
 Grange, Devonshire, and of Hexham in Lanca- 
 shire. 
 
 To this statement was subjoined an account 
 of our artist’s maternal descent, which turns out, 
 on strict investigation, to be incontrovertible, 
 and which shows that he had what is commonly 
 called good blood, at least on one side of the 
 family. Supposing the pedigree, traced by Mr. 
 Lysons, to have been true, and supposing it al- 
 lowable to draw general theories about men from 
 individual instances, the aristocrat might have 
 been pardoned for exclaiming with triumph : 
 “ Yes, the great artist belonged to our caste, and 
 that he was not of plebeian breed might have 
 been read in his lineaments and manners, as 
 much as in the mould of his mind.” 
 
 The children of a long educated line of ances- 
 tors, the same theorist may add, have surely a 
 chance for more powers of mind than if their an- 
 cestors had been rudely educated ; for education, 
 by giving action to the nervous system and to the 
 
THE LIFE OF 
 
 6 
 
 brain, imparts vigour to the intellect; and vigour, 
 as well as disease, in any particular organ is 
 found transmissible by descent. The higher 
 classes must also, cceteris paribus , be of a supe- 
 rior appearance, for corporeal appearance is 
 mainly affected by food, air, and exercise, all 
 of which they command. 
 
 To this argument on the abstract question, 
 respecting the hereditary aristocracy of mind, 
 it may be answered, that the immediate transi- 
 tion of talent from race to race is disproved by 
 daily experience ;* and that while poverty gives 
 a stimulus, wealth gives indolence both to the 
 mind and body. It must, no doubt, be ad- 
 mitted, that, generally over the world, and par- 
 ticularly in England, we naturally associate the 
 idea of good descent with a graceful person ; 
 and it must be forcibly remembered by all who 
 
 * David Hume has made a sagacious remark that seems to 
 destroy all idea of distant pedigrees influencing genius. Ad- 
 verting to the instability of fortune, and to the secret occur- 
 rences of life, he says, that probably in five centuries from his 
 day, the descendants of every titled person then existing 
 would be mechanics ; whilst every acre of land, and title or 
 office of dignity, would in that time be possessed by the 
 progeny of existing labourers. Had David Hume witnessed 
 the American, the French, the Spanish, and Italian revo- 
 lutions, not omitting that of Greece, he might have fixed 
 his period at much less than five centuries. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 7 
 
 knew this great artist, that not only in manner 
 and conversation, he was one whose similar you 
 seldom met with, but that his form and counte- 
 nance had the appearance of a refined caste of 
 society. But granting all this, and granting that 
 the English aristocracy are a peculiarly well- 
 favoured race, it must still be conceded, that 
 human comeliness, in all its varieties, may be 
 found not much less perfect in the cottage of 
 the English peasant, than in the palaces of the 
 highest circles ; and that, unless their food con- 
 tinue to deteriorate, the peasantry will never 
 cease to do credit to “ the metal of their pasture.” 
 Even if there be any decided superiority of ap- 
 pearance in our higher classes, it cannot be traced 
 to any distinction in their lineage ; for, in point 
 of fact, there are few of our nobility who have 
 very ancient escutcheons to show, nor did the 
 Norman breed materially improve the breed 
 of England’s gentry ; for we find that the 
 Saxons were greatly admired at the Court of 
 Normandy. It is plain that the frequent inter- 
 marriages of the English aristocracy with the 
 untitled classes, from amongst which they natu- 
 rally select the handsomest partners, ought to 
 produce a finer race than the vulgar, as they 
 are constantly enriching it with the choice of 
 plebeian beauty. 
 
 VOL. i. b 4 
 
8 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 In point of fact, Sir Thomas cannot be proved 
 to have been what is termed aristocratically 
 descended on the father’s side. The pedigree 
 deduced by Mr. Lysons is refuted by the clear- 
 est proof ; for Mr. Lysons gives him a great- 
 grandfather, who is ascertained to have had no 
 offspring. The following letter shows that the 
 supposition of his being descended from the 
 Lawrences of Sherdington is erroneous. 
 
 College of Arms, 28 th April. 
 
 ulllj 
 
 At the request of Mr. Bentley, I undertook 
 to make some enquiries respecting the alleged 
 descent of the late Sir Thomas Lawrence, from 
 the Lawrences of Sherdington, in the county of 
 Gloucester ; and having, as I think, satisfactorily 
 ascertained, that the descent, as asserted in 
 the pedigree, in possession of my friend Mr. 
 Keightley, the executor of Sir Thomas, is un- 
 founded, I have the pleasure of communicating 
 to you the result of my enquiries. It will be 
 unnecessary to trouble you with the various 
 steps pursued, but merely to state the facts. 
 
 You are aware that the pedigree which Mr. 
 Keightley transmitted to you, deduces the de- 
 scent of the Lawrences of Sherdington, to Isaac 
 Lawrence of Chelsea, who died in 1684, having 
 married Griselda, the daughter of Sir John 
 Lawrence of Iver, Bart. ; he left surviving him 
 
SIR TIIOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 9 
 
 an only son, the Rev. Thomas Lawrence, Fellow 
 of King’s College, Cambridge, in 1682, and then 
 of the age of twenty-six : which Thomas Law- 
 rence is the asserted father, according to the 
 pedigree, of William Lawrence, the grandfather 
 of the late President. The pedigree in ques- 
 tion, however, gave no wife to the Rev. Tho- 
 mas Lawrence, nor any date of birth or baptism 
 to the son of William. 
 
 Thomas Lawrence, the Fellow of King’s 
 College, vacated his Fellowship in 1683; on 
 accepting, as the College record says, the living 
 of Bolton, in Warwickshire, which is a mistake 
 for Bourton (upon Dunsmore,) and there he con- 
 tinued as rector till 1691, in which year he died, 
 being not more than thirty-four years of age. 
 An examination of the register of Bourton shows 
 that he had not any children baptized there; 
 and the records of the Bishop of Lichfield sup- 
 ply the fact, that administration of his effects 
 was granted 27th July 1691, to Griselda his 
 mother ; which could not have been the case had 
 he left wife or children, as the bond or grant 
 would have stated the renunciation of such wife 
 or children. 
 
 I was not satisfied, under the circumstances 
 and the feelings entertained by Mr. Lysons, in 
 leaving the matter here ; and I therefore pursued 
 the enquiry by endeavouring to trace his mother 
 
10 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Griselda, who administered to his effects in 1691, 
 and at length discovered her Will, dated in 1698, 
 and proved in 1701 ; from which it is quite clear 
 that she had not any issue then surviving, or 
 descendants of any issue. She disposes of her 
 property to distant kinspeople, and in such a 
 way as to leave no doubt of the fact of her not 
 having any descendants of her own. 
 
 I trust, this information will be satisfactory, 
 but should you require any additional explana- 
 tion, or farther research, I shall be most happy 
 to attend to any wishes that you may be pleased 
 to express. 
 
 You will, I am confident, be glad that the 
 point has been investigated, because the decla- 
 ration that Sir Thomas Lawrence was so de- 
 scended, might have had the appearance of an 
 attempt to acquire for him additional impor- 
 tance, from sources to which there is no need to 
 have recourse, — he acquired for himself a name ; 
 and standing so illustrious in his art, no aid is 
 to be derived from fictitious genealogy. He 
 may have truly disregarded the “ pomp of 
 Heraldry” and all its pride, adopting the senti- 
 ment of the poet — 
 
 “ Nam genus et proavoset quae non fecimus ipsi 
 Vix ea nostra voco.” 
 
 The fame of Sir Thomas Lawrence will have 
 ample justice rendered to it, when posterity shall 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 11 
 
 receive his life and character from the pen of 
 his present biographer. 
 
 I am. Sir, 
 
 Your very obedient servant, 
 C. G. Young, 
 
 York Herald and Registrar. 
 
 To Thomas Campbell, Esq. 
 
 Undoubtedly his mother was a lady by birth; 
 his father, though an innkeeper by trade, re- 
 ceived the education of a man in middling gen- 
 teel life, and had been reduced to that means of 
 living, only in consequence of having quitted 
 the legal profession, and having made, in point 
 of pecuniary considerations, a premature and 
 improvident marriage. Yet still Sir Thomas ap- 
 pears to have been indebted for his rise in life 
 neither to birth nor education, nor external cir- 
 cumstances. Men are too prone, indeed, to ex- 
 aggerate the effects of external circumstances 
 on genius, forgetting that the very essential cha- 
 racteristic of genius is to be independent of 
 things so extrinsic. 
 
 Sir Thomas’s manners were the most pleasing 
 and polished that man could possess. They were 
 innate ; they sprang from the instinctive ele- 
 gance of his mind. It is true that his parents 
 were not vulgar, but the reverse : nor did they 
 fill their honest and useful occupation without 
 
12 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the most creditable characters. But still their 
 occupation was not calculated to give habits of 
 independent and easy feeling to their child. 
 It was one that required patient civility to- 
 wards the most vulgar customers. Our artist 
 too was from his childhood the object of* for- 
 tuitous patronage ; and if there were the 
 slightest assumption on the part of bis patrons, 
 his keen, shrewd eye, even in boyhood, must 
 have been apt to detect it. If bis genius had 
 been morbid ; if his good sense had not con- 
 trolled his sensitiveness ; if his temper had not 
 been bland, bis early domestic circumstances 
 might have gone far in their influence to have 
 made him a misanthrope. But Sir Thomas's 
 mind had no morbid mixture ; he took, in pa- 
 tronage, only what was beneficial to his cha- 
 racter, as well as to his interests. 
 
 He had an unarrogant self-possession which 
 few men enjoy, and, least of all, those who 
 have begun their days in a state of dependence. 
 This perfection of manner he owed to nothing 
 but the elegant mould of his own mind. 
 
 Sir Thomas’s father possessed some classical 
 knowledge, (at that day a more exclusive, and, 
 consequently, a more honourable, distinction 
 than at present,) though he does not appear to 
 have communicated any of it to our artist. He 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 13 
 
 was also fond of poetry, had taste and judg- 
 ment to select the finest models, and he early 
 accustomed his son’s delightful voice and re- 
 tentive memory to the recital of it. He was 
 justly, or at least pardonably, proud of his boy’s 
 recitations, and would often make him give 
 them before his guests in the inn, sometimes, 
 I suspect, to the child’s annoyance. However 
 that might have been, the art of repeating 
 poetry in the happiest manner, continued to be 
 one of the most pleasing traits in Sir Thomas's 
 social, or, I should rather say, private, conversa- 
 tion ; for, in mixed company, lie was too unos- 
 tentatious to use quotations ; but, in small par- 
 ties, or in talking to his sitters, he was the most 
 apt, succinct, and correct quoter of English verse 
 that could be met with. His acquaintance 
 with our poetry did not indeed extend to the 
 black letter ; but with all its popular works of 
 the higher class he was tastefully familiar; and 
 his gradual recollection of passages was at times 
 even more pleasing than his prompt remem- 
 brance of them. He won you to repeat a fine 
 passage by suggesting it ; and if you erred or 
 stopped, he thought for a few moments, in his 
 own expressive manner, and then brought out 
 the lines irresistibly accurate, and with tones as 
 agreeable as the touches of his pencil. 
 
14 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Sir Thomas was of the middle size,* and 
 there was a delicacy in his complexion as well 
 as a placidity in his features, that disguised the 
 appearance of his personal energy. But he was 
 remarkably active, and even athletic. Such, 
 indeed, was his aptitude for doing every thing 
 well that he undertook, that a gentleman of 
 rank, who was the earliest and one of the latest 
 comrades of his life, observed to me, that he 
 verily believed, that if Lawrence had been 
 doomed to drive geese from Bristol to Lon- 
 don, he would have managed his flock more 
 gracefully and dexterously than any other 
 man. 
 
 Riding was the only accomplishment which 
 he practised without excellence. He had cer- 
 tainly never learned the manege, which was a 
 study wflth the gentry at that period, but had 
 picked up (I suspect) ungainly habits of horse- 
 manship from his early class of associates. 
 
 When a boy, a report had been spread that 
 he was thrown from his horse, and nearly kill- 
 ed, and prayers were offered in the parish 
 church for his recovery. To this he makes al- 
 lusion in the following fragment, from a letter 
 which he wrote about the year 1827> to his 
 
 * His exact height was rather less than five feet nine. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 1 5 
 
 friend Miss Lee, one of the authors of the Can- 
 terbury Tales. 
 
 “ I wish I were a Catholic ; for, when cer- 
 tain pithy sayings come across me, purgatory 
 seems rather an enviable state. 4 Heaven is fill- 
 ed with those who have done good, and another 
 place with those who intended to do it.’ — 4 Hell 
 is paved with good intentions,’ &c. &c. How 
 far I have contributed to Macadamize it, I dare 
 not inquire ; but I yet hope even its smoothest 
 part will be untrodden by me. I shall have 
 the better chance, if prayers are still offered for 
 me, as they once were, for a boy who was sup- 
 posed to have fallen from his horse on Lans- 
 down Hill. Is this remembered? Yes, by 
 him who is always, in heart, her affectionate and 
 grateful friend, 
 
 “ Thos. Lawrence.” 
 
 At a subsequent period, his friend, the pre- 
 sent Marquis of Londonderry, then Lord 
 Charles Stewart, had made him a present of a 
 very fine Arabian horse, which Lawrence rode, 
 though the spirit of the animal required the 
 best of horsemanship. One day, however, he was 
 unfortunately thrown, and was taken up and car- 
 ried, in an insensible state, into the house the 
 corner of Chancery Lane and Fleet Street, then a 
 
16 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 celebrated shop for millinery. He received no 
 serious injury ; but as riding occupied his time 
 disproportionably to any benefit to his health, 
 and as he was not sufficiently at ease on horse- 
 back to render the exercise pleasurable, he got 
 rid of his Arabian, and confined himself to pe- 
 destrianism. 
 
 He was a masterly billiard player, a capital 
 actor in private theatricals,* a good shot, and 
 an expert courser. I am descending to particu- 
 lars, no doubt beneath his distinguished name ; 
 but as the following anecdote belongs to the 
 history of his boyhood, I may be pardoned for 
 introducing it. When a boy, he had a fond- 
 ness, an absolute passion, for pugilism ; and 
 though it may shock the reader’s imagination, 
 yet I have not a doubt, if nature had stunted 
 Lawrence’s mind, and, leaving him only his 
 corporeal energies, condemned him to be a 
 boxer, he would have been one of the best of 
 the “ Fancy.” I had this opinion from one who 
 knew him when they trundled their hoops to- 
 
 * Sir Thomas Lawrence was stated to have performed once 
 upon a public stage. This was not true ; but his brother, 
 Major Read Lawrence, once performed in Dr. Stratford’s 
 laughable tragedy, which had a run of two nights at Drury 
 Lane. This was kept a secret from the family till after the 
 performance. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 17 
 
 gether, and this gentleman could have been no 
 tiny playmate, for he is an uncommonly power- 
 ful man, and so well proportioned, that he stood 
 as the model of Lawrence’s Satan. When 
 they were boys about twelve years of age, 
 Lawrence used to implore this companion, 
 lovingly to go out alone with him on holidays to 
 some sequestered field, where, stripping them- 
 selves to the waist, they had it out in fair blows : 
 my informant adds, that he liked the amuse- 
 ment pretty well for a time, having the advan- 
 tage of Lawrence in size and strength, but that 
 the young artist improved so rapidly in skill, 
 and laid his colours on his future Satan with 
 such potent strokes and touches, as to make 
 him at last decline coming up to the brush.* 
 
 * It may be observed, that all the athletic sports, and box- 
 ing in particular, are indigenous to the western counties of 
 England, for which they have been celebrated through- 
 out our history. Bristol and its neighbourhood have gene- 
 rally taken the lead in producing the champions of the ring ; 
 and certainly the casual boxing-matches that may be wit- 
 nessed in the streets of that city, even among children, are 
 astonishing to inhabitants of other parts of the kingdom. It 
 is not surprising that young Lawrence caught the mania of 
 his native town, and practised that in which it was the pride 
 of all around him to excel. The same peculiarity existed in 
 France ; and Francis the First, in lamenting that his best 
 wrestlers had been thrown by those of Henry the Eighth, 
 consoled himself by reflecting, that the result would have 
 been otherwise, had he sent for wrestlers from Bretagny. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 C 
 
18 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 On the maternal side, Sir Thomas was (as I 
 have said) what is commonly called, well con- 
 nected. His mother was of the family of the 
 Reads, of Brocket Hall, in Herefordshire. Her 
 father, the Rev. William Read, had married 
 Sarah, the daughter of Andrew Hill, of Court- 
 de-Hill, Salop, by Ann his wife, daughter of 
 Sir Thomas Powis, &c. ; and his maternal 
 grandmother was niece to Sir Thomas Powis,* 
 of Henley Couch, Salop, who was created a 
 Puisne Judge of the King’s Bench, on the 4th 
 June 1713, from which he was removed the 
 14tli October 1714; and of Sir Littleton Powis, 
 who was created a Baron of the Exchequer 
 in 1695, and a Puisne Judge of the King’s 
 Bench in January 1700, in which office he 
 continued to 1726, when he resigned. Sir Tho- 
 mas Powis had married Ann, the daughter of Sir 
 Adam Lyttleton, of Stoke Milbourgh, Shrop- 
 shire, whose patent of Baronetcy, by Charles I., 
 
 * Sir Thomas Powis was created Solicitor-General the 26th 
 April 1686; Attorney -General, the 13th December 1687 ; 
 Puisne Judge, K. B. the 4th June 1713; removed and su- 
 perseded on the 14th October 1714, by Sir John Pratt, 
 father of the first Lord Camden, who was his third son by 
 his second marriage. Sir Thomas Powis died in 1719 ; and 
 his great grandson was created Lord Lilford in IV 97, the 
 manor of Lilford, Nottinghamshire, having been purchased 
 by Sir T. P. in 1711. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 19 
 
 was dated on the 14th October 1642, the year 
 in which the sword of civil war was first un- 
 sheathed, and in which the monarch bestowed 
 his favours lavishly on those who adhered to 
 his cause. In this year were created four peers, 
 and fifty-nine baronets. Edward Lyttleton, of 
 Mounslow, Shropshire, had been created a 
 Baron in the year preceding. 
 
 Our artist’s father, Mr. Thomas Lawrence, 
 and his younger brother Henry, with a sister 
 named Martha, (who died in her youth) were 
 left orphans in their childhood, by the death 
 of the Ilev. Mr. Lawrence, and their mother. 
 
 Henry was sent to the East Indies, as a cadet, 
 (at that period a more important appointment 
 than it has proved, since the peculations inci- 
 dental to early colonial possessions, have been, 
 in some degree, checked, by a more organized 
 system of government,) and was never heard of 
 afterwards by his relations. 
 
 Thomas Lawrence, our artist’s father, was 
 born at Newbury in Berkshire, in 1725. In his 
 sixteenth year, he was articled by his relation, 
 Zachary Agaz, Esq. of Sunning Hill, Berkshire, 
 to Mr. Ginger, a respectable solicitor of Hemel 
 Hempstead, Herts* It may be inferred that 
 
 * This relation, Mr. Agaz, left a legacy of two hundred 
 pounds to each of Mr. Lawrence’s children. 
 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 THL LIFE OF 
 
 his master was satisfied with his diligence and 
 abilities, and with his integrity and conduct, 
 since, at the expiration of his clerkship, Mr. 
 Ginger offered him a share of his business as 
 a junior partner. He had now, however, re- 
 ceived his little patrimony from the hands of 
 his guardians, and disliking his profession, he 
 agreed with a young friend, Mr. Thomas Price, 
 (afterwards the reverend head-master of King 
 Edward’s School at Birmingham,*) to make a 
 pedestrian tour together through the greatest 
 part of England. Mr. Price having relations 
 then living in the small town of Tenbury in 
 Worcestershire, our tourists bent their way to 
 that place.f It was doomed to be the termina- 
 tion of their excursion, and to decide the de- 
 stiny of at least one of the young friends. Mr. 
 Lawrence was so captivated by its beautiful 
 situation, its rich scenery of orchards, gardens, 
 and hop-grounds, and the romantic river Terne 
 
 * Appointed in 1752. 
 
 t Tenbury, in the hundred of Doddingtree, Worcester- 
 shire, and one hundred and thirty-three miles from London, 
 contains about two hundred and thirty houses, and six hun- 
 dred inhabitants. It is beautifully situated on the Terne, 
 over which it has a stone-bridge of six arches. The church 
 is large and handsome. 
 
Silt THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 21 
 
 wandering through them, that he made it his 
 subsequent abode for more than four years. 
 He resided at the house of a Mrs. Green, at the 
 Bank, and was much respected. His studies 
 during that period, I fear, were not intensely 
 intellectual. He devoted his pen to verse, and 
 his time to pleasant society, or to rural walks 
 and luxuriant musings. There were innocence 
 at least, and a love of nature, in this mode of be- 
 guiling time. He imagined himself favoured 
 by the Muses, and with a little more fire he 
 might have turned his amiable enthusiasm to 
 some account in their service. But that fire 
 he lacked ; and he lived at a time when, com- 
 paratively to the age just passed, poetical taste 
 was on “ the peace establishment,” and w r hen 
 imitations of Horace were thought to deserve 
 the name of poetry. Still our artist’s father, at 
 this period, is entitled to indulgent and inte- 
 resting remembrance. He was young, hand- 
 some, and enthusiastic, and of a remarkably 
 fine person. The spell of landscape scenery 
 and of love fixed his destiny, and caused his 
 being the father of a man of genius. If not one 
 himself, he only anticipated his consanguinity 
 to the character. Heartfelt gladness in the 
 beauty of earth and of woman, is a poet’s first 
 promise of his call, and we ought not to mock 
 
22 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 those who feel it, if they reckon mistakingly 
 upon being gifted with the further endow- 
 ments of poetry. Their illusion is seldom left 
 to last undisturbed, and it brings its own pun- 
 ishment, as Mr. Lawrence (senior) probably 
 found, when he became the object of Chatter- 
 ton’s satire. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence was the first who taught the 
 lips of our artist to recite from the Bible and 
 from Milton. The little repeater must have been 
 at that time fit to be himself a subject for poetry 
 and a study for painting. It matters not whe- 
 ther another might or might not have better 
 directed his poetical taste: still none could have 
 done it earlier ; and his father was, both de 
 jure and de facto , his first guide to the beau- 
 ties of verse. He also habitually amused him, 
 whilst employed in drawing, by reading to 
 him aloud. For these considerations, it would 
 be malignity to draw the father’s personal ge- 
 nius into any comparison to that of his son, who 
 transferred poetry to the canvass. 
 
 I cannot, however, with sincerity give praise to 
 Mr. Lawrence’s (senior) poetic effusions. I was 
 overjoyed to get verses into my hands, that had 
 been written by the father of Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence, and for a moment mistook the accidental 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 23 
 
 for the intrinsic worth of the curiosity. But I 
 should hardly infect the reader with the same 
 illusion, if I were to publish these verses.* 
 
 * The following poem is, however, one specimen, and of 
 a fair average, of his general merit. It is void of any thing 
 illiterate, and at least shows a gentlemanly class of education. 
 
 Lines addressed to the Rev. Thomas Price, Head Master 
 of King Edward’s Free Grammar-school, Birmingham, by the 
 father of Sir Thomas Lawrence, in the year 1752, the year 
 before he married : — 
 
 While you, my friend, employ your age 
 In Horace’s or Virgil’s page, 
 
 (Bards venerably great) 
 
 Or in melodious numbers tell 
 How the lamented Daphne fell 
 An early prey to fate ; 
 
 By pensive contemplation drawn, 
 
 I rove along the winding lawn, 
 
 Or tread the enamel I’d green ; 
 
 Unnumber’d objects throng my eyes, — 
 
 Lost in amazement and surprise, 
 
 I view the charming scene. 
 
 The daisied mead, the balmy breeze, 
 
 The feather’d choirs that on the trees 
 In vocal concert join ; 
 
 The mossy bank, the limpid stream, 
 
 The tow’ring forests, all proclaim 
 Their architect divine ! 
 
24 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Mr. Lawrence’s leisure and trifling occupa- 
 tions, seem now to have encreased his sensibility 
 to present impressions, and to have shut out 
 calculations of the future. Whilst luxuriating 
 at Tenbury, on the rich prospects of nature, he 
 
 Yet some, pursuing impious schemes, 
 
 With wild and incoherent dreams 
 Amuse their shallow brain ; 
 
 They, “ that a God exists, ’’ deny — 
 
 “ All is the effect of chance,” they cry. 
 
 How groundless, and how vain ! 
 
 Say, Atheist, when yon orbs above, 
 
 In symmetry and silence, move 
 Around th’ illumin’d ball ; 
 
 When peals of thunder rend the sky, 
 
 When rains descend and lightnings fly. 
 
 Is chance the cause of all ? 
 
 No — a superior pow’r, — a God 
 Hath fix’d in Heaven his blest abode, 
 
 Whose being knows no end ; 
 
 Through Him, the thunder rends the air, 
 
 Through Him, the flashing lightnings glare, 
 Through Him, the rains descend. 
 
 Hail, Great Creator ! Lord of all, 
 
 Beneath thy throne, I prostrate fall ; 
 
 Oh deign t’ inspire my breast ; 
 
 Oh lead me through this maze of life, 
 
 Through busy cares and factious strife, 
 
 To thy eternal rest. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 25 
 
 paid no attention to the prudential prospects of 
 his own life. On the contrary, before he left 
 the orchards of the Terne, he contracted a love- 
 marriage, with a truly poetical omission of any 
 previous plan of means for the support of a wife 
 and family. 
 
 He had ingratiated himself with the respect- 
 able society of the neighbourhood, and, in par- 
 ticular, had come to be on the most intimate 
 terms with the family of the Rev. William 
 Read, the vicar of Tenbury. This gentleman 
 had married Miss Hill, of Court-de-Hill, Salop, 
 whose mother’s maiden name was Powis, and 
 whose consanguinity to Sir Thomas and Sir 
 Ashton Powis, to Sir Adam Littleton, and to 
 Lord Littleton, of Mounslow, Shropshire, I 
 have already stated in detail. 
 
 In addition to the vicarage of this place, of 
 which Mr. Read was the patron as well as the 
 incumbent, he was the rector of Rochford, two 
 miles from Tenbury, and first portioner of the 
 rectory of Burford, in Shropshire. 
 
 In the course of his free association with the 
 family of this clergyman, Mr. Lawrence was 
 thrown much into the society of his younger 
 daughter Lucy, who resided alternately at her 
 father’s vicarage and at Court-de-Hill, (the seat 
 of her uncle, Andrew Hill, Esq.) in Shropshire 
 
26 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 — In her frequent walks between these re- 
 sidences, she was generally, if not always, ac- 
 companied by Mr. Lawrence, who was now in 
 his twenty-fifth year, whilst she was in her 
 eighteenth. The confidence thus reposed in 
 the young gentleman may redound much to 
 the good opinion which Miss Head’s relations 
 entertained of Mr. Lawrence’s moral character ; 
 but what are we to think of the prudence and 
 consistency of those relations ? Had they sanc- 
 tioned the attachment, they could not have 
 given it a better chance of taking root, than by 
 allowing a young poet and a handsome girl to 
 take their rural walks for miles together every 
 other fine day, not perhaps quite so invisibly as 
 they might have wished, but still sequestered 
 enough for all the purposes of courtship. Much 
 poetry to his Lucy, we may be sure that the 
 youth poured forth ; and most charming poetry 
 it may be guessed that Lucy thought it. The 
 negligence or dullness that foresaw not their 
 attachment, was equalled only by the cruelty of 
 persecuting it when it was formed. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence and Miss Lucy Head having 
 fallen in love with each other, as naturally as 
 the flowers grew up in the fields around them ; 
 but anticipating that the consent of her rela- 
 tions to her marriage was unlikely to be ob- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 27 
 
 tained, resolved rather to marry without than 
 against their opposition. The esteem in which 
 Mr. Lawrence must have been held, in a rural 
 neighbourhood where every virtue was to be 
 scrutinized, and every foible blazoned, may be 
 inferred from the circumstance, that, in spite of 
 the power and influence of the young lady’s 
 kindred, he found a respectable clergyman in 
 the neighbourhood, the Rev. Mr. Baldwin, who 
 was willing to unite them,* and in that gentle- 
 man’s house, at the village of Corley, near the 
 Clee Hill, Shropshire, they were accordingly 
 married. Never had human union a fairer apo- 
 logy in instinctive sympathies and in the in- 
 discretion of others. After the ceremony, the 
 young couple returned to their respective 
 homes, and for a while continued to meet, in 
 appearance, on the usual terms of their former 
 friendship ; but in a few weeks they induced a 
 mutual friend to break the intelligence, both to 
 the family at Tenbury vicarage, and to that at 
 
 * The marriage took place just three years before Lord 
 Hardwicke’s marriage-act violated the best interests of so- 
 ciety, in favour of those who, in preceding ages, had accu- 
 mulated wealth and honours. Had that act come out a 
 little sooner, Mr. Lawrence durst not have married in the 
 private house of a clergyman, and the greatest painter of 
 our age might never have existed. 
 
28 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Court-de-Hill. The consequence was, the poor 
 young bride’s immediate expulsion from both 
 houses. A humane order was even issued by 
 her religious father and wealthy uncle, prohi- 
 biting all her kith and kin from holding any 
 communication with her or her husband. 
 
 It is consolatory to reflect, that neither the 
 wealth, the family interest, nor the religious 
 influence of this church pluralist, could enforce 
 an order so repugnant to nature. This Vicar 
 of Tenburv’s son, the Rev. William Read, af- 
 terwards Rector of Munslow and Aston, (be- 
 yond Ludlow, Shropshire,) always received his 
 sister and her husband as guests endeared to 
 him by the ties of nature and of suffering. The 
 three daughters of this gentleman, and conse- 
 quently the nieces of Mrs. Lawrence, were ce- 
 lebrated as beauties at Tenbury. We shall pre- 
 sently see that Miss Hill, afterwards Mrs. Ga- 
 taker, and aunt to Mrs. Lawrence, procured for 
 her husband, Mr. Lawrence, the office in the 
 Customs at Bristol. Mr. Andrew Hill, of Court- 
 de-Hill, is described as a beau ideal of a coun- 
 try gentleman of that period, fit for a proto- 
 type of Esquire Western, — a keeper of fox- 
 hounds, and a mighty Nimrod. So enraged 
 was he at the marriage of his favourite niece 
 Lucy, that he not only never saw her more, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 29 
 
 but he altered a bequest to her in his will of 
 5000/. to the sum of one shilling. 
 
 Lucy, the beauty of Tenbury, and the gene- 
 ral favourite of both the families of Hill and 
 Read, and the fondling of her father, was doom- 
 ed never again to behold his face. At the point 
 of death, unavailing regret seized him for his 
 severity to his daughter, and a messenger was 
 sent to Bristol, to require her to hasten with 
 her children, to receive his dying embrace. She 
 arrived, but to see his corpse and to witness his 
 funeral. Her mother consoled her with the as- 
 surance of her father’s forgiveness ; and the old 
 lady kept her grandson, William Read Law- 
 rence, with her at Tenbury for several years, 
 till she died. 
 
 I may here observe, that sectarianism was, in 
 this instance, as it so often proves in life, a 
 source of enmity, with all its consequent evils. 
 The Rev. Mr. Lawrence, the father of the Be- 
 nedict, had been a violent presbyterian, and all 
 the relations were of the same sect. The Reads 
 were bigoted high church people — and hence 
 a source of acrimony and unforgiveness. 
 
 On the death of Airs. Read, of Tenbury, law 
 proceedings were instituted against her brother, 
 Andrew Hill, of Court-de-Hill, to recover her 
 legacy of 4000/. left her by his father, in order 
 
30 
 
 TIIE LIFE OF 
 
 to its distribution among her children. The 
 litigation in Chancery lasted only twenty 
 years, and an issue at common law having been 
 decided, by Lord Mansfield, in favour of the 
 plaintiff, the money was at length paid — 
 after some who should have received it were 
 in their graves. Mr. Lawrence had received 
 about 900/. when his wife came of age, proper- 
 ty possessed by her independently of her father. 
 
 With no solace but mutual affection, the fa- 
 ther and mother of our artist left Tenbury in 
 poverty and anguish, and repaired to Thaxted, 
 in Essex, where, I believe, Mrs. Lawrence had 
 relations, a little more compassionate than those 
 who had banished her from her home. At Thax- 
 ted they took a small house, and continued there 
 so long as to have three children. The eldest of 
 these, named Thomas, died in infancy. The 
 second, Andrew, lived, and was brought up to 
 the Church. He died on the 1st August 1821, 
 at the Naval Hospital at Haslar, having held 
 the curacy of Long Parish in Hampshire, and 
 a chaplainship in the navy. He was likewise 
 chaplain to the Earl of Craven, and had been 
 chaplain to Admirals Calmedy, Sir H. Parker, 
 Lords Nelson and Collingwood, Sir Robert Cal- 
 der, &c. &c. on board the Blenheim, Britannia, 
 St. George, San Joseph, Prince of Wales, and 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 31 
 
 other first-rate ships of the line. Their third 
 son, William Read Lawrence, entered the ar- 
 my ; and, having attained to the rank of major 
 (in the 72nd regiment), expired at the house of 
 his last-named brother, three years earlier, on 
 the 21st of February 1818. Neither of the 
 brothers had been married. 
 
 The choice of such professions for their sons, 
 shows that poverty had not lowered their cre- 
 ditable pride; indeed, in the education of all 
 their children, they were a laudably anxious 
 pair. 
 
 It would appear, that with respect to what 
 is termed interest, arising from family con- 
 nexion, the provision for Mr. Lawrence and 
 his children was derived from the relations of 
 his wife. This is highly honourable to the 
 character of Mr. Lawrence ; for, had he not 
 been highly esteemed, after his clandestine mar- 
 riage, and the expulsion of both by her parents, 
 this interest in his affairs would not have been 
 felt by her relations. 
 
 They had sixteen children in all ; of whom, 
 however, only five were alive in 1797, the year 
 in which both Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence died. 
 These survivors were the two sons already 
 mentioned, Sir Thomas (the youngest of the 
 sixteen), and two daughters. Lucy, the eldest, 
 
32 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 was married to Mr. John Meredith, a solicitor 
 of respectability in Birmingham, and is since 
 dead,* and the youngest, Ann, born in 1766, 
 who married the Rev. Richard Rouse Blox- 
 ham, D.D. Rector of Brincklow, and Vicar of 
 Bulkington, Warwickshire, and the second 
 master of Rugby School, is still living. Her 
 marriage gave Sir Thomas Lawrence three 
 nieces and six nephews, two of whom occupy 
 a place in British Literature, from their account 
 of the Sandwich Islands, which both of them 
 visited. 
 
 The aunt of Sir Thomas Lawrence, his mo- 
 ther’s eldest sister, married Mr. Theophilus 
 Knowles, a gentleman residing near the town 
 of Tenbury.f 
 
 * She died on the 18th February 1813, leaving one daugh- 
 ter, married to J. Aston, Esq. of Birmingham. 
 
 f I find in the county paper the following notice of the 
 death of Mrs. Knowles, and honourable mention made of 
 Mrs. Lawrence’s family : — 
 
 “ On Thursday last was interred, in the parish church of 
 Burford, in the county of Salop, Mrs. Knowles, wife of 
 Theophilus Knowles, Esq. near Tenbury, and one of the 
 daughters of the late Rev. William Read, Clerk, Vicar 
 of Tenbury, in the county of Worcester, and Rector of 
 Rocheford, in the county of Hereford — a gentlewoman of 
 great natural and acquired abilities, and in several branches 
 of polite literature well conversant. Of religion and religious 
 worship she had a just and awful sense. In all her adora- 
 
Silt THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 33 
 
 Three children had been born to the father 
 of our artist, when, his resources failing him at 
 Thaxted, a relation of Mrs. Lawrence’s procured 
 for him the Supervisorship of the Excise at 
 Bristol. This relation here referred to was Ann 
 Hill, of Court-de-Hill, who had married Air. 
 Gataker, a surgeon to George II. Mrs. Gata- 
 ker was aunt to Mrs. Lawrence, and had a 
 country-house at Thaxted, the town residence 
 being in Pall Mall. 
 
 This appointment was at that time one that 
 could be made to yield, with dexterous manage- 
 ment, a more considerable income than it does 
 
 tions to the Great Disposer of all things, both in the public 
 service of the church, as well as the more retired devotion of 
 the closet, she was constant, zealous, and sincere. In her 
 temper she was easy and cheerful, and of access free and 
 open. In her person she was graceful, and her deportment 
 was humane, gentle, affable, and courteous. In doing good 
 to her fellow-creatures, she always experienced the greatest 
 satisfaction, and to the distressed and the afflicted she was 
 the mother and the friend. In every condition and relation of 
 life she maintained the character of the good Christian, the 
 affectionate wife, the sincere friend, and the accomplished 
 gentlewoman." 
 
 This panegyric was written by Mr. Kendall, a gentleman 
 who had ample means of estimating the object of his praise; 
 and it was published in the neighbourhood, where the parties 
 were too intimately known to admit of much exaggeration. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 I) 
 
34 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 at present ; for, though the Custom-house and 
 Excise officers were then worse paid in direct 
 salaries than now, certain gains were con- 
 nived at that could not now be tolerated. Bris- 
 tol, too, was then the second commercial city 
 in the empire; and its central situation in a 
 wide, populous, and fertile country, secured 
 to it a vast mart for the exchange of produc- 
 tions, till the more concentrated powers of 
 machinery covered Lancashire with manufac- 
 tures, and made Liverpool a richer port, both 
 for exports and imports. 
 
 Nothing, however, can be more honourable to 
 Mr. Lawrence’s memory, than the certainty 
 that he filled this office with disadvantage to 
 no one but himself, and to the contraband 
 traders — he disdained to profit by illicit gains. 
 The public can have little idea of the lawless 
 violence and desperate excesses of the smugglers 
 on the western coasts at that period, from any 
 thing which occurs in the present day. The 
 whole of the contraband trade was on a differ- 
 ent system, and upon a larger scale ; and it 
 required a union of skill, vigilance, and intre- 
 pidity, in any officer to compete with such an 
 organized body of outlaws. Sir Thomas used 
 occasionally to mention instances of his fa- 
 ther’s presence of mind, acuteness, and reso- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 35 
 
 lution, in circumventing the boldest leaders of 
 the different gangs. He must have raised to 
 himself a host of very dangerous enemies; and 
 yet, in his subsequent avocation of innkeeper, 
 no machinations could fix upon him any charge 
 of impropriety with respect to the revenue, 
 although the state of the revenue laws at that 
 period, and the machinery for executing them, 
 by no means required innkeepers to be imma- 
 culate. Nothing is recorded of him as a su- 
 pervisor, but his vigilance and courage in cir- 
 cumventing and combating smugglers, and his 
 inability to subsist by doing “ the state some 
 service.” 
 
 In the year of our artist’s birth, (at Midsum- 
 mer 1769,) Mr. Lawrence resigned his situation 
 as Supervisor of the Excise, and entered upon 
 the speculation of keeping the White Lion Inn, 
 in Broad Street, Bristol.* Conjointly with this 
 concern he took the American Coffee-house, 
 and shortly after added to his dangers and his 
 
 * It appears, upon a reference to the records of the Ex- 
 cise office, with which I have been favoured by J. C. Free- 
 ing, Esq. the secretary of the Excise- Board, that Mr. Law- 
 rence entered the service, as a subordinate officer, on 13th 
 January, 1747 ; and, having passed through the intermediate 
 stations, he was appointed supervisor at Bristol on 6th June, 
 1760. His resignation is dated 22d May, 1769. 
 
 D 2 
 
36 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 cares the speculation of a small farm, in the 
 vicinity of the city. The then members of the 
 city of Bristol, Mr. Cruger and Mr. Brinck- 
 dale, offered to advance Mr. Lawrence the 
 requisite sums for his speculations as innkeeper 
 and farmer ; and it must be from this source 
 that he derived his capital in trade. 
 
 It is honourable to his memory to state, that 
 one of his first cares, upon entering upon his 
 new avocation, was to supply his inn with a 
 good library for the use of his customers ; and 
 the wretched coloured daubs that had disgraced 
 the walls of his rooms, gave place to the best 
 engravings of the paintings of Salvator Rosa, 
 and the old masters. 
 
 When the tree takes not root, we can hardly 
 expect that it should flourish ; and as Mr. Law- 
 rence did not continue long at Bristol, it may 
 be inferred that he was not prosperous there. 
 In fact, in a few years he became a bankrupt ; 
 and one source of his failure was a disease which 
 destroyed a great number of his post-horses. 
 
 The reverse of dishonour must have been 
 the consequence of his failure, from the nature 
 of the speculation in which he afterwards im- 
 mediately entered — an enterprise obviously re- 
 quiring character and the command of money. 
 In fact, the White Lion was exclusively a com- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 37 
 
 mercial inn; and refinement, at that period, had 
 not extended itself to the secondary mercantile 
 classes of the provincial cities and out-ports. 
 It may be easily imagined, that the prospects 
 of an inn, frequented by all that was fashion- 
 able, splendid, and illustrious, were sufficient to 
 induce Mr. Lawrence to quit a tavern in a dark, 
 dirty, and narrow street, presenting nothing 
 but scenes of the sordid toils of commercial 
 craft. He left the place in 1772, and became 
 the landlord of the Black Bear Inn at Devizes. 
 This was a magnificent speculation. All the 
 rank and wealth of England at that time flock- 
 ed to Bath at a certain season, just as they now 
 repair to the metropolis ; and very few went to 
 Bath that did not stop at Devizes, of which the 
 Black Bear was the principal inn. 
 
 1 suspect, however, that his success as an inn- 
 keeper at this place was scarcely able to meet 
 the exigencies of a numerous family, and their 
 situation may now be imagined to have been 
 trying.* Without invidious comparison, Mrs. 
 Lawrence appears the more interesting per- 
 sonage of the two ; and traditional gossip itself 
 has been able to leave nothing in her meek 
 
 * On the failure of Mr. Lawrence, the Black Bear was 
 taken by a Mr. Halcomb, grandfather of the gentleman who 
 lately contested Dover. 
 
38 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 and sensitive character to amuse the pain of our 
 sympathy with what she must have suffered. 
 A lady in birth, breeding, and habits, she had 
 to endure the sordid cares of a business that 
 exposed her to the tempers of all visitants, and 
 to the necessity of witnessing scenes of rude 
 dissipation, at a time when English conviviality 
 was much more intemperate than at present. 
 But she devoted herself to the cares of her 
 house and to the education of her children, 
 amidst all the untoward scenes in which she 
 was involved by her husband’s business and 
 embarrassments. Mr. Lawrence might be a 
 less interesting character; but though I find 
 his want of success in business laid to the 
 charge of his faults, I can see no sufficient 
 grounds for the accusation. At least his fail- 
 ings leaned to the side of talent and liberality. 
 He was active, good-humoured, addicted to no 
 sort of dissipation, and thus, in many respects, 
 well fitted for his vocation. I have letters be- 
 fore me describing him as a foolish intruder on 
 his guests at Devizes, who, whilst they were 
 waiting, fatigued and hungry, for a bill of 
 fare, would come up to them with a volume 
 of Shakspeare under one arm, and of Milton 
 under the other, expatiate on their beauties, 
 and offer to recite passages* It is but common 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 39 
 
 justice to discredit one half of the stories that 
 have been told of him to this effect. Ridicule 
 is always inventive and uncharitable, and weak 
 minds revel in the extravagant. But the most 
 ludicrous describers of his character admit that 
 he had a considerable share of worldly shrewd- 
 ness, and his own interest would deter him 
 from habitual intrusion on his guests. The 
 expression of their displeasure must have been 
 a sufficient check to a man of even ordinary 
 feeling. At the same time, there may be some 
 truth in the general tradition, that he had cer- 
 tain traits of the independent gentleman and 
 lover of literature in his habits and manners, 
 that were not quite in harmony with his de- 
 pendent calling. Among his guests he had 
 many personal acquaintances, and, in conver- 
 sation with them, he played the scholar some- 
 times more than the landlord. He dressed in 
 the height of fashion, at a time when the fa- 
 shionable costume was more ostentatious than it 
 is now ; and with his full suit of black, starch- 
 ed ruffles, and an enormously fine periwig, he 
 offended the envy of brother tradesmen, and 
 possibly the pride of vulgar customers. 
 
 As his son Thomas grew up a prodigy, even 
 in childhood, he was also fond of showing him 
 to strangers, and occasionally exposed his vanity 
 
40 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 to a sneer. But the moment that the little 
 artist was seen, his beauty and genius effaced 
 the visitants’ impatience, as the following anec- 
 dote will show. I had it from a quarter that 
 leaves no doubt of its truth, otherwise it would 
 seem to me incredible, as it traces back the 
 manifestations of young Lawrence’s talents to 
 the very verge of infancy, that is, to his sixth 
 year. 
 
 In 1775, Mr., subsequently Lord, Kenyon 
 arrived with his lady, late in the evening, at 
 the Black Bear Inn at Devizes. They were 
 on their way to Bath, and had felt the incon- 
 veniences of the heavy style of travelling in 
 those “ good old times and, as they confess- 
 ed, they were not in the best possible humour, 
 when Mr. Lawrence, senior, entered their sit- 
 ting-room, and proposed to show them his won- 
 derful child. “ The boy,” he said, “ was only 
 five years old, but he could take their like- 
 nesses, or repeat to them any speech in Mil- 
 ton’s Pandsemonium.” To that place the of- 
 fended guests were on the eve of commend- 
 ing their host to go, and the lawyer’s lips were 
 just opened to pronounce the sentence, when 
 the child rushed in ; and, as Lady Kenyon 
 used to relate, her vexation and anger were 
 suddenly changed into admiration. He was 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 41 
 
 riding on a stick, and went round and round 
 the room, in the height of infantile joyous- 
 ness. Mrs. Kenyon, as soon as she could get 
 him to stand, asked him if he could take the 
 likeness of that gentleman, pointing to her 
 husband. “That I can,” said the little Law- 
 rence, “ and very like too.” A high chair 
 was placed at the table, pencils and paper 
 were brought, and the infant artist soon pro- 
 duced an astonishingly striking likeness. Mr. 
 Kenyon now coaxed the child, who had got 
 tired by the half-hour’s labour, and asked him 
 if he could take the likeness of the lady ? 
 “ Yes, that I can,” was his reply once more, 
 “ if she will turn her side to me, for her face 
 is not straight.” Our artist learnt in good 
 time not to speak so bluntly before ladies ; but 
 his remark produced a laugh, as it happened 
 to be true. He accordingly took a side like- 
 ness of Mrs. Kenyon. About the year 1799, 
 an intimate friend of Lady Kenyon’s saw this 
 portrait, and could distinctly trace a very strong 
 resemblance to what her Ladyship had been at 
 the period when the likeness was taken. The 
 drawing was about five inches broad, and deli- 
 cately shaded, but exhibited an indecision or 
 feebleness of contour, that might have been 
 expected from a childish artist. 
 
42 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Retrospect of Mr. Lawrence’s residence at Bristol.— -The 
 Education of young Lawrence. — Reflections upon paint- 
 ers, foreign and English, ancient and modern. — Precocity 
 of genius. — Visits the Seats of the nobility and gentry of 
 Wiltshire. — Copying ancient masters. — Original composi- 
 tions. — Mr. Weld, of Lulworth Castle; his singular 
 death. — Riots of 1780 . — The Hon. Daines Barrington’s 
 mention of young Lawrence in his Miscellanies. — Visits to 
 Oxford and Weymouth. — Residence at Bath. — Patronage 
 of the public. — Early companions. — His great success in 
 portraits. — His prices compared with those of other juve- 
 nile artists. — His prices in his latter days. — His juvenile 
 likeness of Miss Shakspeare ; of Mrs. Siddons as As- 
 pasia ; of Admiral Barrington. — His original historical 
 piece of Christ bearing the Cross. — His own portrait in 
 oils.— Family letters. — Premium bestowed upon young 
 Lawrence by the Society of Arts. — He repairs to London. 
 
 It is unfortunate that Mr. Lawrence should 
 have been obliged by circumstances to neglect 
 the education of only that son whose talents 
 were the most worth cultivating, and the most 
 likely to yield a prolific return. 
 
 Almost immediately after the father was set- 
 tled in his new speculation of the inn at Bristol 
 (Midsummer 1769), I find that he sent his two 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 43 
 
 eldest sons to a school of local eminence, at 
 which were the children of the most respect- 
 able gentry of the neighbourhood. This was 
 in 1770, and the seminary was at a place called 
 the Fort, near Bristol, and was kept by a 
 Mr. Jones, whose sister had married General 
 Trapaud. Only ten pupils were received into 
 this academy ; and the efforts of Mr. Lawrence 
 to educate his children amongst the class of 
 gentry in which they were born, and in which 
 they were eventually destined to move, re- 
 dounds highly to his honour. The two girls, 
 with the child Thomas, had been put out 
 to nurse. Our artist, at the age of six, was 
 sent to the same school, where, however, 
 he continued only two years. His brother 
 Andrew had been sent to the University of 
 Oxford. At the period of his being put to 
 this school, his father had been keeper of the 
 inn at Devizes between three and four years, 
 and having had sixteen children, and this last 
 speculation not proving advantageous, it is 
 probable that the res angustce domi were the 
 cause of young Lawrence being sent for home. 
 That this school was of the most respectable 
 class is evident ; and I suppose it is in refer- 
 ence to this academy, as Lawrence never went 
 to any other, that the present Earl of Shaftes- 
 
44 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 bury, in writing to him respecting his portrait, 
 reminded him that they had been schoolfellows 
 together. It does not appear that he ever 
 received any instruction after the age of eight, 
 except some lessons in the Latin classics and 
 in French, from a dissenting clergyman at De- 
 vizes, named Jervis, whose son, likewise in the 
 Church, then resided as chaplain, or librarian, 
 with the celebrated Earl of Shelburne, after- 
 wards Marquis of Lansdowne, at his seat of 
 Eowood, Wilts. 
 
 But as Mr. Lawrence left Devizes almost 
 immediately after his child was taken from 
 school, the amount of instruction received by 
 his son must have been very trifling. Even 
 during the time that he was receiving lessons in 
 Latin and French from the Reverend Mr. Jer- 
 vis, 1 find that his father was his instructor in 
 English, and in the subordinate branches of edu- 
 cation. I have reason to believe that, during 
 all the activity of the two inns at Bristol and 
 of that at Devizes, and amidst the distraction 
 attendant upon failing and embarrassed circum- 
 stances, the sons and daughters derived the 
 greatest advantages from the instructions of the 
 mother. Sir Thomas Lawrence has been heard 
 to allude to these exertions of this exemplary 
 lady, and to lament that the obligation he had 
 been under, to resort to his talents so prema- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 45 
 
 turely, had deprived him of the great benefits 
 which his brothers and sisters had received from 
 the instructions of their mother. 
 
 It has been observed, that the mind which is 
 worth education, will educate itself ; and, not- 
 withstanding the professional studies and ex- 
 ertions of our artist, he had acquired a respect- 
 able extent of accomplishments and know- 
 ledge. With the Greek and Latin classics 
 he was not acquainted, and he was altogether 
 ignorant of modern languages, except the 
 French, and even that he translated with dif- 
 ficulty. Philological studies had never been 
 presented to him ; and his active mind, intent 
 upon making up for the want of education, 
 and upon the acquisition of knowledge, was 
 more disposed to grasp at facts and things, than 
 to study words. 
 
 His great predecessor, Sir Joshua Reynolds, 
 was the son of a clergyman and a schoolmaster ; 
 but with these advantages, Sir Joshua was ac- 
 knowledged to be far from a classical scholar ; 
 and, although intended for the profession of 
 physic, and accustomed to copy anatomical 
 plates from his youth, it is singular that this 
 great artist’s principal defect was in drawing 
 the anatomy of the human body. 
 
 It has been observed, that painters have sel- 
 dom been men of education, further than the 
 
46 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 desultory reading of history, of poetry, and 
 works of fiction, suited either to amuse their 
 leisure hours, to make them pass current in the 
 world without an appearance of deficiency, or, 
 finally, to supply an extensive choice of subjects 
 for their pencil. The remark cannot apply to 
 great architects, for their art implies a know- 
 ledge of abstract mathematics, and an erudite 
 acquaintance with the ancients. Nor can it so 
 strongly apply to sculptors, whose studies are 
 directed principally to the elucidation of the 
 works of antiquity. If the remark be well 
 founded, certain it is, that it applies with 
 very peculiar force to the painters of this coun- 
 try, whilst amongst those of the middle ages 
 upon the Continent, there are to be found many 
 very illustrious exceptions to the general rule. 
 
 Cooper, one of our earliest painters, was 
 deemed an excellent musician ; but music then 
 required little science. Jarvis, although a trans- 
 lator of Cervantes, was a weak man, and by 
 no means a scholar.* Richardson was a man 
 of intellect, but a deficient scholar, — his youth 
 having been spent in an attorney’s office. 
 
 * Pope, in one of his letters, says, that he knew two mad- 
 men, one of whom was resolved to translate Don Quixote, 
 though he knew not a single word of Spanish. This alluded 
 to Jarvis, whose translation, however, is the best in our 
 language. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 47 
 
 Thornhill had every advantage of education, 
 and he was at once a member of parliament 
 and of the Royal Society, when science or let- 
 ters were an indispensable qualification to be- 
 come a candidate. Hogarth was grossly illite- 
 rate; Wilson had received a good education 
 from his father, who was a clergyman ; Gains- 
 borough was untaught by himself or others ; 
 Reynolds and Lawrence were English scholars, 
 and nothing more ; West had no pretensions to 
 literature ; Rarry must have received but little 
 scholastic instruction, though of that little he 
 had made good use ; Opie’s talents were pre- 
 coce and great, but they were untaught ; Mor- 
 land’s dissipation precluded knowledge, and he 
 was in every respect ignorant; and Romney 
 was destitute of education. The case, however, 
 is very different with the present generation ; 
 for the profession has partaken of the general 
 improvement of the age even more than any 
 other class, and it now not only contains, as 
 it always did, persons of great natural talents, 
 but likewise men of profound erudition, of ab- 
 stract science, and of extensive acquirements 
 in polite literature. To mention many names 
 would be tiresome, and to cite only a few 
 would appear complimentary to the individuals, 
 or invidious to others, whilst any allusion to 
 the extensive knowledge and learning of such 
 
48 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 persons as Fuseli, Howard, Phillips, and Cal- 
 cott, &c. would be supererogatory.* Painting 
 is the poetry of the heart and mind displayed 
 upon the canvass, instead of upon the pages of 
 a book ; and the faculty itself implies a su- 
 periority of intellect, which, if accompanied by 
 other acquirements, carries our nature to a 
 most exalted height, and constitutes one of the 
 most enviable states of being. 
 
 It is, however, remarkable, that painters in 
 England have been painters, and nothing but 
 painters ; whilst those upon the Continent, 
 though carrying their art to a much more 
 exalted pitch, were sculptors, architects, great 
 mathematicians, or civil or military engineers, 
 or acted with eminent talent in great public 
 employments. The acquirements of M. A. 
 Buonarroti were diversified and immense ; but 
 in science he was at least equalled by Sir Chris- 
 topher Wren, although the latter did not add 
 painting to his many accomplishments. Sir 
 Christopher, however, is almost the only in- 
 
 * Fuseli, in one sense, was an offensive pedant, most 
 disagreeably ostentatious of his classic learning. He held 
 the literature of his cotemporary artists in sovereign contempt, 
 and denounced them as even ignorant of orthography. His 
 expression used to be, that he felt degraded in being one of 
 them. His exposure of the ignorance of many members of 
 the Royal Society was equally severe. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 49 
 
 stance in which an English artist, in profound 
 and extensive acquirements, could cope with 
 those of Italy. 
 
 The disadvantages attendant upon the early 
 years of Sir Thomas Lawrence, are calculated to 
 create a great and rational surprise at the ex- 
 tent of his acquirements, although, as I have 
 already observed, they were not classical or 
 profound. 
 
 Before he was eight years of age, he was taken 
 finally from school, at which he had continued 
 only two years. The few lessons he received 
 afterwards from Mr. Jervis were useless, for 
 they were confined to the Latin and French 
 grammar, and could only be meant as a foun- 
 dation of studies that were never afterwards 
 pursued. His mother was precluded, by un- 
 toward circumstances, from affording him any 
 instructions, and all he received from his father 
 consisted of lessons of recitation, or, what 
 would be called by the vulgar, spouting. These 
 latter, with a person of animal propensities, or 
 whose feelings were not refined, and whose mind 
 was not intent upon better things, would have 
 proved a coarse excitement to habits of dissi- 
 pation. The stage might have been his voca- 
 tion; and it has been currently reported that 
 he had tried it as a source of support. The 
 subsequent pages will prove the idea to be 
 
 VOL. i. E 
 
50 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 absurd. He never acted upon any public stage, 
 nor did he ever take part in any private theatri- 
 cals, but on a few occasions, when he played in 
 the private theatre at the Marquis of Aber- 
 corn’s, the Priory, at Stan more.* 
 
 Even prior to this singularly gifted infant 
 being sent to school, at the age of six, his father 
 had delighted in the talents of his child. Whe- 
 ther Mr. Lawrence’s ruling passion was pas- 
 time with his children, or whether the loveli- 
 ness and extraordinary talents of this child, ab- 
 sorbed his cares and excited his exertions, it is 
 useless to enquire; but our infant artist was 
 evidently a source of very amiable pride, and of 
 constant application, on the part of the parent. 
 
 I find, in the numerous papers before me, 
 very amusing and characteristic scenes of the 
 child’s precocity. At four years’ old, he used 
 to read the story of Joseph and his Brethren 
 with an emphasis and a gesticulation which 
 were striking, as reflections of adult age in 
 miniature, and which fully showed that he 
 
 * It has been stated in print, that Sir Thomas was a capital 
 violin player. He might, perhaps, like the Irishman in Joe 
 Millar, have been unable to say whether he could or could 
 not play the violin, “ as he had never tried.” He knew not 
 a note of music, and, what is singular, was totally insensible 
 to the exquisite expression of the violin, though he could 
 enjoy harmonies on the piano, and had an ear sufficiently 
 good to take a part in a glee. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 51 
 
 entered into the feelings of the characters, and 
 embraced the whole scope of the action. At 
 five, he used to repeat Pope’s “ Ye Nymphs 
 of Solyma, begin the Song,” and other poems, in 
 a manner that must have had something very 
 peculiar ; for I find that he excited the atten- 
 tion of eminent characters and competent 
 judges, and that those who were almost an- 
 noyed at his father’s intrusion of him upon 
 their privacy, were so enraptured by his beauty, 
 infantile grace, and genius, that they circulated 
 stories of this extraordinary boy, amidst the 
 fashionable and intellectual circles of the metro- 
 polis. At this age he received a present for 
 repeating Lyeidas ; and some drawings of eyes 
 attracted the attention, and excited the admira- 
 tion of Mr. Prince Hoare. This is really ex- 
 traordinary ; for Sir Thomas Lawrence v r as, 
 throughout the course of his profession, of all 
 artists the most peculiar in his excellence of 
 painting the eye. Fuseli, who could not abs- 
 tain, sometimes, from depreciating him, after, 
 like " a good-natured friend,” imagining many 
 defects, would be overcome by a real admira- 
 tion, and would exclaim with enthusiasm — 
 “ But, by G — t, he paints eyes better than 
 Titian !” 
 
 At the age of seven, this infant prodigy had 
 excited so much attention that his likeness was 
 
 e 2 
 
52 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 taken, and engraved by Sherwin. His recita- 
 tions from Milton and Shakspeare are now 
 spoken of, by an eminent authority, as full of 
 discrimination, feeling, and humour, set off by 
 appropriate gesture, and by the various tones of 
 a voice full, harmonious, and flexible. That 
 these readings must have been extraordinary, 
 may be inferred from the fact, that the Black 
 Bear at Devizes was then the resort and so- 
 journ of all the wits of the kingdom who re- 
 paired to Bath in the season. Here Garrick, 
 Foote, Wilkes, Sheridan, Burke, Johnson, 
 Churchill, and others, were to be found, resting 
 for the night, or for the many hours required 
 in those days for the change of horses ; and it 
 was the gratification of Mr. Lawrence to talk 
 to those eminent characters, and to exhibit to 
 them his son. 
 
 Mr. Hugh Boyd, one of the supposed au- 
 thors of Junius, when stopping at the inn at 
 Devizes, on his way to Bath, was much enter- 
 tained by the recitations of Shakspeare by the 
 father of Sir Thomas, and invited him to his 
 house in town. The invitation, after a lapse of 
 time, was accepted, and Mr. Boyd made much 
 of his son, then in his tenth year, and took him 
 to different houses, where the child displayed his 
 extraordinary talents with his pencil, particu- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 63 
 
 larly in copying some stuccoes at the house of 
 Mr. Richard Lee. 
 
 Mr. and Mrs. Garrick were delighted at stop- 
 ping at the Black Bear at Devizes, in their way 
 to Bath, and Mr. Lawrence used to address the 
 Roscius with, “ Tommy, Sir, has learned one 
 or two speeches since you were here.” Garrick 
 and his wife used to retire to a summer-house 
 in the garden, and amuse themselves for some 
 time with the recitations of young Lawrence, 
 in whom they seemed to take a pride and inte- 
 rest. The following letter, embracing this and 
 other subjects, is appropriate on this occasion. 
 It is from the author of the Life of Sir Tho- 
 mas’s friend, Fuseli, to Thomas Campbell, Esq. 
 
 DEAR SIR, 
 
 The following anecdotes of Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence recur to my memory ; the first I have 
 upon the authority of Mrs. Garrick, who told 
 it to me. 
 
 Garrick was very much amused by the sin- 
 gularities of the father of Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence, who was an innkeeper at Devizes. He 
 and Mrs. Garrick generally passed and repassed 
 through that town once a-year, and always 
 stopped at Mr. Lawrence’s house. No sooner 
 had the innkeeper brought forward his bill of 
 
54 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 fare, and given an account of the accommoda- 
 tions which he could afford them, than he always 
 addressed Garrick in these words : ‘ Tommy, 
 Sir, has learned one or two speeches since you 
 were here;’ and he prevailed upon them to 
 adjourn to a summer-house in the garden to hear 
 him recite them. Garrick, at this time, con- 
 sidered that the future walk in life of the boy 
 was poised between the pencil and the stage ; 
 for he then showed talents for the former, but* 
 fortunately, he directed his efforts to the pencil. 
 
 “ Sir Thomas was not only kind by nature 
 to his fellow-men, but extended this feeling to 
 the brute creation. A few years since he had 
 a favourite cat, which was large in size, its co- 
 lour milk white; this was his constant com- 
 panion, was caressed by him, and fed with his 
 own hand. His kindness and attention to this 
 animal were unceasing. When he was in 
 France, it escaped from the upper windows of 
 the house, broke its leg, and was otherwise so 
 much injured, that it died shortly after. The 
 feelings of Sir Thomas Lawrence were so much 
 hurt, that he declared to me he never would 
 again keep a favourite animal. 
 
 Sir Thomas painted animals, particularly 
 dogs, with great truth and power. A small 
 Marlborough spaniel, of great beauty, belong- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 55 
 
 ing to me, was a favourite with him, and he 
 introduced a portrait of this dog into the pic- 
 ture of Miss Peel, which was exhibited in the 
 year 1828 . He always took great notice of this 
 dog ; and when Sir Thomas has dined with me 
 alone, which he sometimes did, he used to 
 place him on a chair by his side, and call him 
 “ his patron,” saying, at the same time, “I hope 
 I have made you live at least a hundred years.” 
 You know, I presume, that Fuseli and Sir 
 Thomas were on the most intimate terms, and 
 that the latter painted his epic subject, “ Satan 
 calling up his Legions,’' with the wish that it 
 should be exhibited in Fuseli’s Milton-gallery. 
 This offer, however, was declined. 
 
 Yours faithfully, 
 
 John Knowles. 
 
 To Thomas Campbell, Esq. 
 
 On one occasion, we find Sir William Cham- 
 bers present, and a Colonel Hamrich giving the 
 child a guinea for the beautiful handwriting 
 displayed in his copy-book. 
 
 It may be useful to compare the precocity of 
 Lawrence, and his inclination for drawing, to 
 what has been evinced by the most eminent 
 painters that our frigid clime has as yet pro- 
 duced. 
 
56 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Richardson did not commence his studies in 
 painting, until he had wasted the six years of his 
 apprenticeship at the desk of a scrivener, and 
 had attained the age of twenty. He studied 
 under Riley four years. Sir James Thornhill 
 resorted to the profession reluctantly, as a con- 
 sequence of family misfortunes, and he had 
 little instruction. Sir Joshua Reynolds evinced 
 an early inclination to the art, which was dis- 
 couraged by his father. His earliest effort was 
 the perusal of Richardson’s Treatise, at the age 
 of eight. Both his sisters had a talent for draw- 
 ing; and I find the Duke of Marlborough 
 making Miss Reynolds a present of a gold 
 snuff-box (a singular present to a lady), for her 
 miniature copy of Sir Joshua’s painting of the 
 Duke’s children. Sir Joshua, as a child, used 
 to copy the paintings of his two sisters, and the 
 prints of his father’s books. There is now in 
 the possession of his family a perspective view 
 of his father’s book-case, drawn on the back of 
 his Latin Exercise, and under which his father 
 has written, 44 Done by Joshua, out of pure idle- 
 ness.” At the age of eight, he read the Jesuit’s 
 perspective with great effect, and put its precepts 
 into practice, by a drawing of his father’s school 
 and the church at Plympton. These are the 
 earliest efforts of this great artist. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 57 
 
 Hogarth informs us, that at the age of 
 twenty, engraving arms, cyphers, &c. on cop- 
 per was his highest ambition ; and the earliest 
 instance of his using a pencil is after he was 
 apprenticed to Mr. Gamble the silversmith. 
 
 Wilson, when a child, amidst the rustics of 
 Montgomeryshire, attracted notice by sketch- 
 ing men and animals, with a burnt stick, upon 
 the walls, until Sir George Wynn sent him to 
 London, and placed him under Wright the 
 portrait-painter. 
 
 The humble origin of Gainsborough leaves 
 his early youth in much obscurity. He evinced 
 his powers at a very early age, and, at ten, his 
 sketches of landscapes possessed decided talent. 
 His capacity expanded under many discourag- 
 ing circumstances ; but his father prompted 
 his efforts, and pronounced him a genius. At 
 fourteen he came to London, and studied un- 
 der Hayman and Gravelot. 
 
 West is reported to have made his first 
 effort at drawing at the age of seven, when he 
 sketched, in red and black ink, the portrait of 
 the infant of his sister sleeping in the cradle. 
 It is related, that, at eight, his rude sketches of 
 birds and flowers induced the Indians to teach 
 him to prepare red and yellow colours, and his 
 mother supplied him with indigo, whilst he made 
 
58 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 brushes with the hair pulled clandestinely out 
 of the back of the cat. Prior to the age of 
 nine, he had taken a view of the river near 
 Philadelphia. His efforts were encouraged by 
 his family. He received no regular instruction 
 in his art, and had no opportunities of studying 
 from good models, till his arrival in Italy, at 
 the age of twenty-two. 
 
 Barry’s genius for drawing exhibited itself 
 when he was an apprenticed sailor-boy in a 
 trading vessel. He had no education in his 
 profession. He was more than seventeen years 
 of age before he attempted oils, and was twenty- 
 four years old when he repaired to Italy. 
 
 Romney, the son of a builder, exhibited very 
 early talents in mechanics, music, and painting. 
 He received but little instruction, and from an 
 artist (Steele) who could teach but little to the 
 purpose. 
 
 Opie, at twelve, had gone through Euclid 
 without the aid of a master. His father, a car- 
 penter, used to chastise him for soiling the 
 boards with his chalk sketches ; but the earliest 
 effort of his pencil worth notice, was drawn after 
 he had attained his tenth year. At sixteen, his 
 portraits in Cornwall sold at seven shillings and 
 sixpence each. Opie had no instruction in 
 painting, and I believe never visited Italy. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 59 
 
 The records of Morland’s precocity are evi- 
 dently exaggerated ; but certain it is, that, at the 
 age of six, his drawings were able to compete 
 with those of the younger students of the aca- 
 demy. 
 
 From these memoranda it appears, that there 
 is no instance in this country, and I believe 
 none upon record in any other, of a genius for 
 painting exhibiting itself so precocely as that 
 of Sir Thomas Lawrence. The only parallel 
 instance may be that of Morland ; but little 
 can be ascertained of the early life of this ex- 
 traordinary and unhappy man, with sufficient 
 accuracy to fix the date of his first productions. 
 The periods of young Lawrence’s early draw- 
 ings, and of his gradations to the perfection he 
 ultimately reached, are sufficiently ascertained. 
 
 In the above sketch of English artists, it will 
 be found that none have laboured under greater 
 disadvantages in youth than the subject of this 
 biography. He had no instruction whatever 
 in painting ; he had not the advantage of visit- 
 ing Italy ; his mind in boyhood was dissipated 
 by his parent to many objects, instead of being 
 confined to one ; and it will be my painful duty 
 to record hereafter, that the invaluable period of 
 acquiring a knowledge of the art in youth, was 
 devoted to very laudable efforts to relieve his 
 
60 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 parents, and to support them in their hours of 
 affliction. 
 
 His first portrait of a public character, that 
 of Mr. and Mrs. Kenyon, was drawn at the age 
 of six. The manner in which reminiscences of 
 early incidents are produced, is often pleasurable, 
 and as honourable to those who produce them. 
 Mrs. Wyatt, the wife of Mr. Wyatt the ma- 
 gistrate of Lambeth-street Office, recently sent 
 to Mrs. Bloxam a portrait of her (Mrs. Blox- 
 am’s) mother, drawn by young Lawrence at 
 seven years of age, and given fifty- three years 
 before to Mrs. Wyatt’s mother, when a visitor 
 at Mrs. Lawrence’s, at Devizes. At seven, we 
 find the boy Lawrence attracting the attention 
 of Sir William Chambers and other eminent 
 men. The first idea of instructing his mind, or 
 of rendering his hand any thing but a machine 
 to obey his intuitive faculty, was imparted by 
 a clergyman of the name of Kent, who lent him 
 “Rogers’s Lives of Foreign Painters.” The 
 Rev. Dr. Kent resided about two miles distant 
 from Mr. Lawrence, and had his children often 
 to see him, always giving them presents suited 
 to their ages and dispositions. He left the child 
 Lawrence a small legacy. Miss Trusler, sister 
 of the eccentric Dr. Trusler, kept Dr. Kent’s 
 house, and it was he who gave their niece, Miss 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 G 1 
 
 Storace, money to repair to Italy, where she 
 Italianized her name to Storace. At the age of 
 
 o 
 
 fourteen, this girl displayed such a wonderful 
 strength of voice, that the worthy Dr. Kent 
 charitably promoted her musical studies. Mme. 
 Storace’s life affords one of the very few in- 
 stances of a fortune accumulated on the stage, 
 and her great wealth was left to Mr. Braham, 
 the first of English singers. 
 
 But young Lawrence’s father was averse to 
 his reading upon the subject of painting, and 
 assumed as a principle, that genius must be its 
 own instructor, and that any study of rules 
 and principles would only cramp the faculty 
 and reduce it to the mould and order already 
 established. All that he would permit was, 
 that the boy should be allowed to see whatever 
 collections of the ancient masters he could pro- 
 cure admission to in the mansions of the gentry 
 in the neighbourhood, and that he might catch 
 what notions he could from such rapid and tran- 
 sitory glances. This idea is sufficiently pre- 
 posterous ; but we find young Lawrence, at the 
 age of eight, taken to the seat of Paul Methuen, 
 Esq. of Corsliam House, Wilts, which had then 
 one of the finest collections of the old masters 
 in the West of England. I do not mean to de- 
 preciate the collection of this eminent family by 
 
G2 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 observing, that the western counties were never 
 very favourable to the arts ; and Sir Joshua 
 Reynolds remarked, that although Devonshire, 
 his native county, had produced more good 
 painters than any other in England, it had 
 fewer collections of art, and the lowest estimate 
 of its value. 
 
 In going through the rooms of Corsham 
 House, the visitants were so absorbed by their 
 splendour, that they totally forgot that the 
 child was with them. He was suddenly miss- 
 ed, when the parents, retracing their steps, 
 found him in one of the rooms the party had 
 just left. His attention was riveted to a paint- 
 ing by Rubens ; and, upon being taken from 
 the spot, he murmured with a sigh, “ Ah, I 
 shall never be able to paint like that !” Many 
 of the drawings of this extraordinary child, 
 taken at the age of eight, are now extant ; and 
 they exhibit a freedom, a grace, and a poetic, 
 or amiable reading of the subject, without de- 
 parting from likeness, characteristics which dis- 
 tinguished his mature productions. At Wilton, 
 the seat of the Earl of Pembroke, there is now 
 one of his early paintings, a head of the full 
 life size. 
 
 At the age of ten, our young artist burst 
 from mere portraits to original compositions of 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 63 
 
 the highest class. He now painted as a sub- 
 ject, “ Christ reproving Peter for his denial of 
 him before Pilate/’ and “ Reuben’s application 
 to his father, that Benjamin might accompany 
 him and his brethren into Egypt.” Nothing 
 can be more worthy of observation than this 
 fact. The painting of likenesses — I do not 
 use the word portraits, for it conveys a higher 
 idea — or the taking of views of landscapes, 
 may be achieved by a child of a great natural 
 capacity for design ; but to originate an his- 
 torical subject, implies an intellect distinct from 
 genius for any particular art. It is the more 
 remarkable, as Sir Thomas Lawrence, when 
 arrived at the age of maturity, indulged so 
 little in his talent for historical composition. 
 But after painting these two historical subjects, 
 he again assayed his pencil in a similar class, 
 and chose that of Hainan and Mordecai, which 
 he finished with great rapidity. 
 
 The fame of the juvenile artist now spread 
 amongst the highest families of the county, 
 and I find Mr. Weld,* of Lulworth Castle, 
 
 * This Mr. Weld became the husband of the lady after- 
 wards known as Mrs. Fitzherbert. She was the niece of Sir 
 Edward Smythe, of Eshe Hall, Durham, and sister-in-law 
 to Sir Carnaby Haggerstone, of Haggerstone Hall, Northum- 
 berland. Mr. Weld lost his life in a singular manner. His 
 
64 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 taking him to Mr. Methuen’s, the Earl of Pem- 
 broke’s, and to the seats of the nobility and 
 gentry. He was no longer a beautiful and sur- 
 prising child ; his talents now assumed a higher 
 rank. 
 
 It was not long after that the Honourable 
 Daines Barrington made the following mention 
 of young Eawrence, in his Miscellanies, p. 317, 
 
 wife was a Catholic, and he had personally witnessed the 
 ferocious excesses of the mob against the Catholics in the 
 riots of 1780 . He accompanied a friend of the author of 
 this work to witness the excesses of the mob, when their at- 
 tention was attracted by the proceedings before Lord Mans- 
 field’s house, the north east corner of Bloomsbury-square, a 
 house till lately occupied by Mr. Meux, the brewer. The 
 mob knocked at the door, and the servant opening it told 
 them, that it was not Lord Mansfield’s, and on which they 
 quietly departed ; but being better informed, they returned, 
 and again knocking at the door, it was opened to them, but, 
 for a length of time, not a person dared to enter, fearing re- 
 sistance. At last one man ventured in, and being not even 
 reproved, the rest became more bold, and rushing in, a scene 
 of Bedlam ensued. The insane demons of religious bigotry 
 flew to the bed-rooms, and from the second-floor, the first 
 thing they did was to throw a grand piano out of the window, 
 without any notice to their friends below, one of whom re- 
 ceived the corner of it on his arm, and which drove the pike 
 of the railing through it, so that it required two men to dis- 
 engage the limb. Mr. Weld was so heated and agitated by 
 the scene he had witnessed, that he returned home, and 
 plunging into a cold bath, in his state of heat and excite- 
 ment, it occasioned his death. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 65 
 
 4to. 1781. “ As I have mentioned so many 
 
 other proofs of early genius in children, I here 
 cannot pass unnoticed a Master Lawrence, son 
 of an innkeeper at Devizes, in Wiltshire. This 
 boy is now (Feb. 1780) nearly ten years and a 
 half old ; but, at the age of nine, without the 
 most distant instruction from any one, lie was 
 capable of copying historical pictures in a mas- 
 terly style, and also succeeded amazingly in 
 compositions of his own, particularly that of 
 4 Peter denying Christ.’ In about seven mi- 
 nutes, he scarcely ever failed of drawing a 
 strong likeness of any person present, which 
 had generally much freedom and grace, if the 
 subject permitted. He is likewise an excellent 
 reader of blank verse, and will immediately 
 convince any one that he both understands 
 and feels the striking passages of Milton and 
 Shakspeare.”* 
 
 * Daines Barrington was the fourth son of John Shute, 
 Esq. a barrister, and son of a merchant, who resided at 
 Theobalds, in Hertfordshire. He (Mr. Shute) had two fine 
 estates left him, one by a Mr. Barrington, of Tofts, in Essex, 
 who had married his cousin, the daughter of one of the 
 sheriffs of London. Mr. Shute assumed the name of the 
 donor, and was created an Irish peer in 1720, • by the title of 
 Baron Barrington, of Newcastle, in the county of Dublin. 
 He had been dismissed from the Board of Customs in 1711, 
 and in 1722 he was dismissed the House of Commons, as 
 
 VOL. T. F 
 
66 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 In 1779, Mr. Lawrence and his family were 
 obliged to leave Devizes, and they repaired to 
 
 member for Berwick, on the ground of his having been a 
 principal mover in the celebrated fraud termed the Harbo- 
 rough Lottery. He married the daughter of Sir William 
 Daines ; and the Hon. Daines Barrington, the author from 
 whom the quotation is made, was the fourth son by this mar- 
 riage. Daines Barrington lived a life of taste and vertu, 
 pursuing the law in the spirit of an amateur, and attend- 
 ing to it sufficiently as an excuse for his holding the offices 
 of a Welsh judge and a judge of Chester, but which he 
 at last resigned. He was an ingenious, pleasant man, and at 
 his death in 1800, he was buried privately in the Temple 
 Church. 
 
 The fifth son of the Baron, and consequently the brother 
 immediately younger to Mr. Daines Barrington, was the late 
 Bishop of Durham, who died in 1826, at the age of ninety- 
 two, having been in the prelacy fifty-seven years. This ex- 
 cellent prelate was sitting for his portrait to Mr. Evans, the 
 pupil of Sir Thomas Lawrence, when he was taken ill, and 
 begging Mr. Evans to help him from the throne or platform, 
 and ring for a glass of water, he made an effort, but ineffec- 
 tual, to sit again. He afterwards made several appointments, 
 in anxiety to have his portrait finished, but died before it 
 was completed. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence was taking his portrait in bishop’s 
 robes, when he mentioned that he had a picture of a dog done 
 by Lawrence, when he was only eight years old, at Devizes. 
 Sir Thomas begged for this juvenile effort of his pencil, and 
 the bishop cheerfully gave it. 
 
 A person once called on this prelate, to beg him to sub- 
 scribe for a copy of posthumous sermons by a clergyman (not 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 G7 
 
 Weymouth, first visiting Oxford. Many of 
 the heads of colleges, and the dignitaries of 
 the University, had stopped at Devizes in their 
 way to Bath for the fashionable season, and 
 upon their return to the University, the beauty 
 and talents of the child of Mr. Lawrence, the 
 keeper of the Black Bear, had often been the 
 topic of conversation. When he was known to 
 be in Oxford, the father was much noticed, 
 and the child as much caressed. He took the 
 likenesses of the most eminent persons then at 
 Oxford; but his pencil was not confined to 
 grave sexagenarians ; for many of the younger 
 nobility and gentry were anxious to have their 
 portraits taken by the phenomenon ; and the 
 female beauty of this dignified city and its 
 wealthy neighbourhood, equally pressed upon 
 his talents 
 
 It may be supposed that young Lawrence 
 was extraordinarily beautiful, or extraordinarily 
 clever, or both ; for, though only ten years of 
 age when at Oxford, almost every man of emi- 
 nence at the University subscribed to his portrait, 
 
 in his diocess,) who had left a large family in indigence. 
 “That 1 will,” said the Bishop ; “give me a pen.” He 
 wrote his name and a check for a thousand copies (a guinea 
 each), and returning the paper, said, “ Here’s my subscrip- 
 tion ; but don’t send me the sermons.” 
 
 F 2 
 
68 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 painted by Mr. Prince Hoare of Bath, and 
 engraved by Sherwin. 
 
 I have an old book before me, of which one 
 part is headed, “ The names of the nobility 
 and gentry who have been pleased to subscribe 
 to a likeness of a young artist, (whose picture 
 was in the last royal Exhibition,) painted by Mr. 
 Hoare of Bath, and engraved by Mr. Sherwin. 
 Subscription, 106*. 6r/.” The names are chiefly 
 the heads of colleges and clergymen at Oxford ; 
 but I find those of the Bishops of Oxford and 
 Llandaff, the Earls Bathurst and Warwick, 
 Lords Barrington, Deerhurst, Apsley, Wel- 
 lesly, Fincastle, the Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, 
 Lord Charles Murray, Lady Egremont, his 
 Excellency Count Bruhl, &c. &c. &c. Of 
 the younger subscribers to this print, then at 
 Oxford, many have since become eminent in 
 literature, or in public affairs. 
 
 His visits to Oxford and to Weymouth must 
 have been greatly to his advantage; for in 1782 
 his father repaired to Bath, where he resided at 
 No. 2, Alfred Street, near the New Rooms. His 
 first residence, however, was at a Mrs. Page’s, on 
 St. James’s Place ; but for his house, No. 2, Al- 
 fred Street, he paid 100/. a-year, a high rent fifty 
 years ago in that city. Mrs. Alcock, sister to 
 Mr. Cumberland the poet, boarded with the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 69 
 
 family as a friend, paying 120/. a-year for her 
 board and that of her servant. The eldest son, 
 the Rev. Andrew Lawrence, obtained the lec- 
 tureship of St. Michael’s, Bath, with a salary 
 of 140/. a-year, and paid his father 80/. for his 
 board. Mrs. Alcock was deformed, but a most 
 accomplished and agreeable lady. 
 
 Old Mr. Lawrence placed his two daughters 
 at an eminent boarding-school ; and the eldest, 
 at the expiration of a year, became the com- 
 panion to the three daughters of Sir Alexander 
 Crawford; and the youngest soon after support- 
 ed herself by a most laudable exertion of her 
 talents, as head-teacher in a seminary at Sutton 
 Coldfield, Warwickshire. 
 
 It is important to mention these facts, as 
 they are honourable to the individuals, and are 
 closely connected with what has been said rela- 
 tive to the early support which Sir Thomas 
 afforded to his family. 
 
 I now find young Lawrence surrounded by 
 the most intellectual and recherche of the no- 
 bility and fashion of the period. Bath at that 
 time was London, devoid of its mixed society 
 and vulgarity. It contained its selection of all 
 that was noble, affluent, or distinguished in the 
 metropolis; and amongst this circle our artist 
 was now caressed. 
 
70 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 It became a fashion to sit to him for his oval 
 crayon likenesses. At first, the price was a 
 guinea, and it was soon raised to a guinea and 
 a half. His portrait of Mrs. Siddons as Zara 
 was now engraved; and his portrait of Admiral 
 Barrington met with a similar distinction. This 
 was immediately after his arrival at Bath. Sir 
 Henry Harpur, married to the late Lord War- 
 wick’s sister, wished to have adopted him as his 
 son ; and Mr. Hoare, then at the head of the 
 arts in Bath, was about to paint a figure of 
 Christ, and designed the head and bust of 
 young Lawrence as his model. 
 
 The costume of that day was not favourable 
 to painters of portraits ; and some of young 
 Lawrence’s portraits of the beauties of that era, 
 represent them in red jackets, hats, and fea- 
 thers, the abhorrence of modern taste. 
 
 The Honourable Mr. Hamilton, residing on 
 Lansdown Hill, the uncle of the late Marquis 
 of Abercorn, was distinguished for his love of 
 art and liberal feeling, and he had an invaluable 
 collection of the old masters, chosen with a 
 knowledge and a taste that protected him from 
 imposition. I find him assiduous in his atten- 
 tions to young Lawrence. A new world was 
 now opened to the juvenile artist. He revelled 
 in the luxury of this collection, and soon pro- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 71 
 
 duced some splendid copies of invaluable paint- 
 ings ; and as the choice of subjects was unre- 
 strained, they may mark the talent of the 
 future head of the arts in England. Young 
 Lawrence copied in crayons the Transfigura- 
 tion of Raphael, the Aurora of Guido, the 
 taking down from the Cross of Daniel de 
 Volterra, and the Vision of San Romueld by 
 Andrew Sacchi. For these copies his father 
 refused three hundred guineas. He likewise 
 copied the subject of Saul receiving sight from 
 Ananias, by P. da Cortona. 
 
 Fashionable patronage was showered upon 
 the young painter in abundance. Among his 
 zealous patrons were Lord Barrington, his 
 brother the admiral, the late Bishop of Durham, 
 and Sir Henry Harpur. Lord Viscount Cre- 
 morne was proud of showing him attention ; 
 and the beautiful Duchess of Devonshire, the 
 sister of the Earl Spencer, whose union of 
 beauty, intellect, rank and affluence rendered 
 her at that period nearly the most distinguished 
 lady in the courts of Europe, added to her 
 celebrity, by her producing under her auspices 
 this splendid instance of talent for the arts. 
 
 But it was not merely patronage that the 
 young artist received from the titled and great, 
 on account of his talents, for to genius was 
 
72 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 added so much of beauty of face and person, with 
 such elegance of manners and charms of dis- 
 position, that I find him sought after as the 
 companion of the wealthy and dignified. Among 
 these were the present Marquis of Ely ; his 
 brother, the Bishop of Clogher; the distin- 
 guished General Ross, the hero of Washing- 
 ton, who lost his life in the advance against 
 Baltimore, in 1814 ; Mr. Abel Dottin, the 
 present member for Southampton ; and the list 
 might be swelled to the utmost gratification 
 of vanity. 
 
 An incident occurred at Bath, in 1783, of 
 his being offered a handsome sum of money 
 for taking the likeness of a person just deceased ; 
 but, although willing to gratify the affections 
 of the relation who had made the request, 
 his dislike of painting from such a subject, 
 obliged him to decline the offer. 
 
 He had now passed his twelfth year of age, 
 and his atelier was the resort of all the distin- 
 guished company of this splendid concentration 
 of wealth and dignity. His room was fre- 
 quented by fashionable loungers, by foreign 
 virtuosi, and by the real and pretended judges 
 and patrons of the arts. He as yet painted only 
 in the prevalent taste of that day — crayons ; 
 but his large crayon paintings became objects 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 73 
 
 of intense interest. Many found their way to 
 the metropolis, and several were shown at Paris, 
 as very beautiful productions of “ a provincial 
 genius” of England ; for, to the French, every 
 place in the kingdom is deemed provincial, 
 rustic and barbarous, but the capital. 
 
 Young Lawrence was now in the habit of 
 regularly finishing three or four crayon paint- 
 ings every week, according to the number of 
 them that might be merely heads, or busts, or 
 three-quarter lengths. For his half-lengths, 
 he received three guineas, at that time, and for 
 Bath, a very extraordinary sum. It would be 
 curious to compare this price with that received 
 by other great artists for their juvenile produc- 
 tions. The early productions of Reynolds are 
 acknowledged by his pupil and biographer, 
 Mr. North cote, to be of inferior merit, care- 
 lessly drawn, and in very common place atti- 
 tudes. At that time, all attitudes were nearly 
 the same ; and an indispensable grace was to 
 have a laced hat under the left arm. Reynolds 
 had fallen into this established “ principle of 
 portrait painting but it is upon record that a 
 customer found fault with this, and desired 
 that the portrait might be altered, and “ the 
 bonnet placed to its right use.” Reynolds 
 accordingly painted a hat on the head, but he 
 
74 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 unfortunately forgot to efface that under the 
 arm, and the painting was for some time ex- 
 hibited with two hats * 
 
 Reynolds’ first portrait which evinced suffi- 
 cient talent to bring him into notice, was that 
 of Captain Hamilton, painted in 1746, when 
 the artist was twenty -three years old ; and the 
 earliest record of his price is in 1752, when 
 he was in his twenty-ninth year, and his charge 
 was then 5/. 5s. for a head, i. e. a three-quar- 
 ters. In 1755, the price was 12/. 12 s . ; in 1758, 
 21/. ; soon after 1760, 36/. 15s., and in 1781, 52/. 
 10s., the highest charge he ever made. Van- 
 dyck in 1632 ( cetat thirty-four,) received but 
 25/. for his whole-length portrait of Charles the 
 First, a munificent patron of the arts, and of 
 this artist in particular. He was paid in this 
 same year 20/. for a half-length of the Queen, 
 and 100/. “ for one great piece of his Majes- 
 tie, the Queene, and their children.” Ra- 
 phael’s portrait of the Marquis of Mantua, 
 which was placed, from its excellence, as the 
 chief ornament of the Presence Chamber, was 
 sold at the death of Charles for 200/. The 
 
 * Hudson kept stores of bodies, male and female, already 
 painted, and a sitter, upon a second visit, was always sur- 
 prised to find his or her body quite finished, though the face 
 was still in outline. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 75 
 
 early prices of the greatest masters have often 
 been lower than the charges of painting sign- 
 boards or tea-trays ; so little idea has the pub- 
 lic and cognoscenti of the real merits of a 
 painter, until some fortunate circumstance or in- 
 fluential patron points him out to notice. Even 
 Poussin laments the many years in which he 
 sold his works, for less than the paint and 
 canvass cost him. 
 
 Morland’s extraordinary juvenile drawings 
 from pictures and casts sold only for 7s. 6d., 
 and his bold, fancy drawings from popular 
 ballads and romances, prior to his attaining the 
 age of sixteen, were sold, in gilt frames, for 
 from three to five guineas. Gainsborough’s 
 price for a head, in oils, when he was about thir- 
 ty-five years of age, at Bath, was five guineas. 
 This was about twelve years before the juvenile 
 Lawrence was receiving, at the same city, three 
 guineas for small heads only in crayons. Gains- 
 borough raised his price to 8/. 8s. ; and, at his 
 zenith, he received 42/. for a half, and 105/. for 
 a whole-length. 
 
 Hogarth studiously concealed the prices he 
 received for his portraits, and from which it 
 must be inferred that they were not very high. 
 
 Opie’s usual price for a portrait, when he was 
 sixteen years of age, was 7s. 6d. This was 
 
76 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 in Cornwall, after be had been patronized by 
 Lord Bateman. West received 2100/. for nine 
 paintings of the Royal Family, some consisting 
 of single portraits, and some of family groups. 
 
 The prices, therefore, received by young Law- 
 rence for his crayon portraits, must be consider- 
 ed as extremely high. The greatest price Rey- 
 nolds ever received was fixed about this year, 
 at only 52/. 10s. ; and so enormous was this 
 considered, that it was one cause of the very 
 many portraits returned upon his hands. So 
 often did these returns take place, that Rey- 
 nolds did not contradict a friend, who, in his 
 presence, averaged the price of all his portraits, 
 since his becoming fashionable, at only 10/. 10s. 
 each. 
 
 Young Lawrence generally received four 
 sitters a day, and he gave to each about half an 
 hour. It was his practice to paint from me- 
 mory, one half hour longer, immediately after 
 his sitter had left him. Thus was his youth 
 consumed in the business or trade of his pro- 
 fession, to the utter neglect of his laying in a 
 store of principles and ideas, upon which he 
 might have established his fame in the more 
 sublime descriptions of works. Sir Joshua, who 
 had been two years a student under the first 
 painter of his age, and who had the advantage 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 77 
 
 of a three years’ residence in Rome, Venice, 
 Florence, and other cities in Italy, lamented to 
 the day of his death, his want of a regular aca- 
 demical education in art. The success of Law- 
 rence may be appreciated by the fact of his 
 never having received any instruction whatever, 
 and of his never having visited the Continent, 
 until his style was formed and his excellence 
 attained. As I have mentioned the prices re- 
 ceived by Sir Joshua and other eminent artists, 
 at the zenith of their fame, I may here likewise 
 take notice of some of the last prices received by 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence. For a head-size, or 
 three-quarters, 210/. ; for a kit-kat, 315/. ; fora 
 half-length, 420/. ; for a bishop’s half-length, 
 525/., and for a full-length, 630/. ; for an extra 
 full-length, 735/. As a proof of the admiration 
 in which his talents were held by the affluent, 
 I may here mention, that Lord Gower paid him 
 fifteen hundred guineas for his admirable por- 
 trait of his lady and child ; six hundred guineas 
 was paid him by Lord Durham, for his portrait 
 of Master Lambton. 
 
 About this period (1783) a Miss Shakspeare 
 (afterwards married to a Mr. Wiltshire, of Bath) 
 was a celebrated beauty, and, according to the 
 phrase and manners of that day, what was called 
 “ the reigning toast.” Mr. Lawrence had the 
 
78 
 
 TliE LIFE OF 
 
 entre to the Bath Theatre, then considered 
 almost the only nursery of the English stage. 
 He frequently took his son with him, particu- 
 larly when Mrs. Siddons was to perform ; for, 
 with the majestic figure, the empassioned coun- 
 tenance, and superb attitudes of this great ac- 
 tress, young Lawrence was enraptured, pro- 
 nouncing her a perfect model for the study of 
 an historical painter. On one of these occasions 
 he happened to see the admired of all beholders, 
 — Miss Shakspeare, and the next day he pro- 
 duced an admirable likeness of her from me- 
 mory ; which enhanced his fame, and rendered 
 his rooms still more attractive to the fashionable 
 world. 
 
 But he devoted his genius with more zeal to 
 an elaborate pencil drawing of Mrs. Siddons, as 
 Aspasia, in the Grecian Daughter ; and he 
 chose the point of time when she stabs the ty- 
 rant. This admired production was engraved, 
 and it met with an extensive sale at five shil- 
 lings a copy. This distinction is not to be 
 overlooked, for engraving was then at a low 
 ebb in England, and it was not customary to 
 engrave any paintings that were not very much 
 admired. Very many years after, a friend 
 and pupil of Sir Thomas Lawrence pointed 
 out a set of these engravings on sale, in a 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE 
 
 79 
 
 print-shop in Maiden-lane. He was always 
 anxious to buy up his juvenile works, wherever 
 he could find them, and he lost no time in pos- 
 sessing himself of these prints. They were, 
 after his death, sold by auction among his 
 other works. 
 
 After his portrait , of Mrs. Siddons, that of 
 Admiral Barrington was engraved, and had 
 an extensive sale. The first painting of Sir 
 Joshua’s that was engraved, was the portrait 
 of William, second Duke of Devonshire ; the 
 second portrait he had painted. He was then 
 twenty-nine years of age. The engraving was 
 in mezzotinto. 
 
 The tide of success that had flowed so ra- 
 pidly and incessantly upon his precoce efforts, 
 had kept him too sedulously employed to obey 
 those aspirations, or to indulge in those designs, 
 which genius never fails to form. From 1782 
 to 1786, he had been unable to pursue any study 
 of his art, or scarcely to copy, or even to inspect, 
 any of the great masters ; and thus the import- 
 ant age of from thirteen to seventeen had pass- 
 ed, without his availing himself of one single 
 source of improvement, which had been more 
 or less opened to every painter who has ever 
 excelled in the highest and most classical 
 branches of his profession. When a Derby- 
 
80 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 shire Baronet, struck with the beauty and ge- 
 nius of the lad, offered to send him to Home, 
 at the expense of 1000/., his father told Sir 
 Henry, “ that his son’s talents required no cul- 
 tivation.” I am particularly anxious to dwell 
 upon these facts, as they render more surpris- 
 ing his having avoided the errors of taste and 
 of science, which might naturally be expected 
 in a person entirely self-taught, and who had 
 lived excluded from the society of artists, and 
 without even the advantage of a reference to 
 many of the standard-works of the masters. 
 But his taste was excellent and intuitive. 
 
 It was not until 1786, when he had passed 
 his seventeenth year, that I can find any trace 
 of his having made any attempt at oil paint- 
 ing. In that year, he painted in oil a whole- 
 length figure of “ Christ bearing the Cross.” 
 The canvass was eight feet high. It is impos- 
 sible to trace what became of this first attempt ; 
 nor can I ascertain whether the composition was 
 wholly original, or an imitation, in any respect, 
 of any master. It would be curious to compare 
 this juvenile effort with his more mature pro- 
 ductions, after his ideas must have been warp- 
 ed from their own nature, by an acquaintance 
 with the ideas of other artists. When Sir 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 81 
 
 Joshua Reynolds, in his latter days, was shown 
 his first portrait that had brought him into no- 
 tice, the portrait of Captain Hamilton, painted 
 in 1746, when he was only twenty-three years 
 of age, he lamented exceedingly that he had 
 made so little improvement in his subsequent 
 life. 
 
 After this large painting of Christ bearing 
 the Cross, young Lawrence painted his own 
 portrait — a head, or three-quarters size. In 
 this he had evidently aimed at the style of 
 Rembrandt in his middle life, when he had 
 neglected his higher finish, and before he had 
 availed himself of the broad fulness of the brush, 
 with deep contrasts, and sudden transitions, and 
 with great breadths of shadow. To his study 
 of Rembrandt in this portrait, he added a few 
 signs of his imitating Sir Joshua himself. 
 
 These are the only two interruptions I can 
 now trace, to the lucrative employment of his 
 time in drawing portraits in crayon. 
 
 I cannot refrain from inserting a letter he 
 wrote at this period to his mother : it is full of 
 juvenile ardour and enthusiasm, which must 
 not be mistaken for vanity ; and it affords an 
 idea of his connexions and views at that early 
 period. 
 
 VOL. I. G 
 
82 
 
 fHE LIFE OF 
 
 MY DEAR MOTHER, 1786 ‘ 
 
 I think myself much obliged to you for 
 the books you sent me ; and the shirts, which, 
 believe me, were very acceptable, as my stock 
 was a little reduced. Rollin would be very 
 acceptable ; but, perhaps, Andrew cannot spare 
 him. Having received no answer from Mr. 
 Brummell, I wrote to the Earl of Gainsbo- 
 rough, informing him that the picture was at 
 his service, and I expect an answer soon. Lady 
 Middleton said he was mad after it. I am now 
 painting a head of myself in oils ; and I think 
 it will be a pleasure to my mother to hear it is 
 much approved of. Mr. P. Hoare called on 
 me ; when he saw the crayon paintings, he ad- 
 vised me to pursue that style ; but, after see- 
 ing my head, and telling me of a small altera- 
 tion I might make in it, which was only in the 
 mechanical part, he said the head was a very 
 clever one ; that to persuade me to go on in 
 crayons he could not, practice being the only 
 thing requisite for my being a great painter. 
 He has offered me every service in his power ; 
 and, as a proof of fulfilling his word, I have a 
 very valuable receipt from him, which was 
 made use of by Mengs, the Spanish Raphael. 
 His politeness has indeed been great. I shall 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 83 
 
 now say what does not proceed from vanity ; 
 nor is it an impulse of the moment, but what 
 from my judgment I can warrant. Though Mr. 
 P. Hoare’s studies have been great, than any 
 paintings I have seen from his pencil, mine is 
 better. To any but my own family I certainly 
 should not say this ; but, excepting Sir Joshua, 
 for the painting of a head, I would risk my 
 reputation with any painter in London. I hope 
 you and Andrew will not be disappointed when 
 you see it ; for it will be sent, that I may know 
 your opinions. I have had the pleasure of see- 
 ing the great Mr. Barry ; he did not recollect 
 my name, nor did I wish to make myself 
 known — as, being ignorant of it, I became, what 
 I desired — a spectator. He is, in truth, a great 
 man ; to his wonderful talents for his profes- 
 sion he unites the classic truth of his scho- 
 larship, and the noblest and most sublime 
 mind I ever met with. There is a clearness 
 and precision in his ideas, together with a 
 strength of language by which they are con- 
 veyed to you, so that even the most indifferent 
 subject, when taken up by him, appears in a 
 different light to what you ever before viewed 
 it in. How great the pleasure, then, I received, 
 when that mind was employed, for the most 
 part, in canvassing my loved pursuit, you may 
 
84 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 easily conceive. The large pictures, and the 
 large books, would look well here, if you can 
 spare them. I can think of no better present for 
 my dear mother. Uncle Codger must e’en sit 
 for his portrait in oils, which shall not disgrace 
 the original. I now conclude myself, 
 
 Your ever affectionate 
 
 and dutiful son, 
 
 Tho s . Lawrence. 
 
 Send the prose volumes of Miss Bowdler’s 
 works, unless wanting. 
 
 The insertion of the following characteristic 
 letter must be grateful to my readers : — 
 
 Crescent, May 15, 1830. 
 
 I will acknowledge I was a little surprised, 
 but I was infinitely more pleased, to see your 
 handwriting, my dear Miss Jewsbury. I re- 
 joiced to hear from you, and I rejoiced in the 
 occasion. I only regret that I can supply so 
 little information. My intimate acquaintance 
 with Sir Thomas was confined to the last 
 months of 1785, and to the first six months of 
 the ensuing year; these I spent in the house 
 of his friend and patron, Ur. Falconer of Bath. 
 He passed several evenings in every week with 
 us; and I scarcely recollect any thing with 
 
Silt THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 85 
 
 more pleasure, than the little social circle that 
 surrounded that joyous tea-table : he was one 
 of its pleasantest members ; and his appear- 
 ance, which depended upon his inclination or 
 convenience, was ever hailed with delight. A 
 kindred taste for the art drew him and Sir 
 Sidney Smith together, and he sometimes, 
 though more rarely, made one of the little 
 party. I have seen the future President, and 
 the future hero of Acre, drawing at the same 
 table ; the one tracing a human countenance, 
 the other a ship. Sir Thomas was very en- 
 gaging ; he was kind and warmhearted, and 
 his manners were graceful and easy. I am 
 told they lost in warmth more than they 
 gained in polish, in his after-intercourse with 
 the world. He often recited long passages 
 from Milton and Shakspeare, which he did 
 even then with taste and feeling ; and fre- 
 quently sketched, for our amusement, the cele- 
 brated beauties, or the distinguished public cha- 
 racters, he had seen at the Rooms the evening 
 before. These he impressed upon his own memo- 
 ry, by tracing them, with imaginary lines, upon 
 the crown of his hat ;* and he rarely failed to 
 
 * This must remind the reader of Hogarth’s habit of 
 sketching, on his thumb-nail, any ludicrous countenance he 
 by chance met with in the streets. 
 
86 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 give, in a few hasty strokes, so correct a likeness, 
 that we easily recognised the characters (when 
 we afterwards saw them) from the representa- 
 tion. At this time he was painting portraits 
 for three or four guineas a-piece in crayons. 
 A mutual friend has a likeness of me in 
 this style. He became acquainted with Bun- 
 bury,* and drew his portrait, with one of his 
 long caricatures depending from his hand — 1 
 believe, his “ Long Minuet.” The drawings I 
 possess of his are, two masterly sketches in 
 black chalk, the one of a younger sister, the 
 other of myself ; and a personification of Con- 
 templation from Milton’s “ II Penseroso,’’ a 
 very highly finished and beautiful pencil draw- 
 ing. He was remarkably handsome as a boy ; 
 he wore his collar thrown back, and his hair, 
 which was beautiful, was so redundant, that its 
 rich dark curls almost obscured his face when he 
 stooped to draw. You must remember, my dear 
 Miss Jewsburv, I am describing the costume of 
 half a century back. I was told he lost much 
 of his beauty when he assumed the manly at- 
 tire, and reduced his fine hair to the trammels 
 
 * Brother of Sir Charles Bunbury, and the most eminent 
 of caricaturists, in the opinion of persons of knowledge, 
 though Gilray’s political caricatures were offered at the 
 shrine of party, and the ludicrous in character and mode 
 was sacrificed to the mania of the day. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 87 
 
 of the stiff powdered fashion of that day ; but 
 I never saw him after. All this I feel is just 
 nothing ; but to supply the deficiency I will 
 write to Dr. Falconer (son of the one above- 
 mentioned), whose excellent memory and longer 
 intimacy will supply, I hope, much that may 
 be useful. His father and his uncle (the learn- 
 ed editor of the Oxford Strabo) were very 
 kind to young Lawrence, and fostered his early 
 genius with the encouragement and assistance 
 that even genius requires in its first efforts, &c. 
 
 Sarah Thackeray. 
 
 Prior to this period (1785), a circumstance 
 had occurred which encreased his anxiety to 
 sacrifice his provincial fame, and to launch upon 
 a bolder sea of enterprise in the metropolis. 
 
 The Society of Arts, in the Adelphi, had 
 voted him their medal and the reward of five 
 guineas for the most successful copy from the 
 old masters. The piece which had procured 
 him a distinction so flattering to a lad of his 
 age, who had not yet breathed the atmosphere 
 of art in the metropolis, was a crayon copy of the 
 copy of the Transfiguration of Raphael.* Of this 
 
 * This most sublime work was removed from Italy to 
 Paris by Napoleon, and exhibited in the Louvre, where it 
 sustained irreparable injury by the French picture-cleaners, 
 against whom Fuseli launched the torrent of his indignation, 
 
88 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 copy of a successful copy in the possession of 
 the Hon. Mr. Hamilton, the uncle of the late 
 Marquis of Abercorn, I have already made men- 
 tion. The proceedings of the Society on this 
 occasion are as follows : — 
 
 “ Adelphi, March 9, 1784. 
 
 “ Valentine Green, in the Chair. — Mr. Whitford 
 and Mr. Mathews. 
 
 “ Took into consideration the single claim, 
 class 129. — Marked the claim G. — Examined 
 the claim. — Resolved, that as the drawing 
 marked G., appears, by a date upon it, to have 
 been executed in the year 1782, it cannot, 
 according to the conditions, page 197, be ad- 
 mitted a claimant.” 
 
 In consequence of this difficulty, the follow- 
 ing proceedings took place : — 
 
 “ Adelphi, March 30, 1784. 
 
 “ Valentine Green, in the Chair. 
 
 “ Dr. Johnson, Mr. C. Smith, Mr. Hincks, 
 Mr. Samuel, Mr. T. Smith. 
 
 “ Took into consideration the drawing of the 
 Transfiguration, marked G., and opened the 
 paper containing the names of the candidates, 
 according to the directions of the Society ; and 
 it appeared to the Committee, that the candi- 
 date was Thomas Lawrence, aged thirteen, 
 1783, in Alfred-street, Bath. 
 
SIR TIiOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 89 
 
 “ The Committee having received satisfactory 
 information, that the production was entirely 
 the work of the young man, 
 
 “ Resolved, to recommend to the Society to 
 give the greater silver palette, gilt, and five 
 guineas, to Mr. Lawrence, as a token of the 
 Society’s approbation of his abilities.” 
 
 “ Adelphi, May 5th, 1784. 
 
 “ James Davison, Esq. Vice-president, 
 in the Chair. 
 
 “ A motion is made, that the Inscription on 
 the palette voted to Mr. Thomas Lawrence, 
 jun., be — Drawing in crayons , after the Transfi- 
 guration of Raphael, 1784.— Agreed to.” 
 
 “ Owen Salus Brereton, Esq. Vice-president, 
 in the Chair. 
 
 “ Mr. W. R. Lawrence attended on behalf of 
 Mr. Thomas Lawrence, jun., to whom the silver 
 palette and five guineas have been adjudged, 
 as a bounty for a drawing of the Tranfigu- 
 ration ; and received the same for his brother.” 
 
 Upon these documents I must observe, that 
 the drawing was identified as the sole perform- 
 ance of young Lawrence, by Mr. Prince Hoare. 
 
 The first reward of the Society at that pe- 
 riod was its gold medal : the second reward 
 
90 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 was the silver palette. There was no gold or 
 gilt palette then, although the silver palette 
 sometimes received a gold rim, when a work 
 was of very extraordinary merit, and yet ex- 
 cluded, by circumstances extrinsic to its merits, 
 from competing for the highest prize. This 
 was the case with Mr. Lawrence’s drawing. It 
 was the law of the Society, that a work of this 
 description, to compete for the main prize, must 
 be performed within one year prior to the date 
 at which it is sent to the Society. Mr. Law- 
 rence’s drawing was marked as performed in 
 1782, and it was not sent to the Society till the 
 year 1784 ; and this excluded it, according to 
 the conditions of the Society, (page 197) from 
 being taken into consideration for the higher 
 prize. It was considered, however, to possess 
 such very extraordinary merit, that the Society 
 was not content with putting the gilt rim to 
 the palette, but ordered it to be entirely gilt. 
 Pecuniary rewards for works of art had long 
 been abandoned, and this vote of five guineas 
 was a very striking testimony of the opinions 
 of the Society in favour of the work. From 
 this vote in 1784 to 1811, there have been but 
 two instances of pecuniary rewards for works 
 of art. The one was a vote of Si. Ss. in 1787, 
 and the other a vote of 21/. to Master C. Poss, 
 
SIR TIIOMAS LAWRENCE. 9] 
 
 in 1811 , but both unaccompanied by medal or 
 palette. 
 
 A person who recollects these proceedings, 
 informs me, that the beauty, the fine form, and 
 graceful manners of the boy, forcibly struck 
 every body present, when he appeared before 
 the Society. 
 
 This Copy of the Transfiguration is on glass, 
 and it is certainly an extraordinary produc- 
 tion for a boy of that age. The expression, 
 the buoyancy of the figures, the grace of the 
 draperies, and the perspective, are admirable. 
 The aerial colours appear to have acquired a 
 tinge of blue, or tone of lead, from time, and 
 the draperies of the figures on the earth are 
 made of a very strong red, and the figures are 
 massy, in order to add to the aerial perspective, 
 and to increase the buoyant, floating appear- 
 ance of the Saviour. 
 
 Inflamed by this extraordinary success, no- 
 thing could suppress his desire to repair to Lon- 
 don, and to become a student of the Royal 
 Academy at Somerset House. Whatever were 
 the motives of liis father in abandoning the 
 successful employment of his son at Bath, by 
 which he had been enabled very much to re- 
 trieve his want of success at Bristol and Devizes, 
 I find him now repairing to the capital, and 
 
92 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 launching forth in a style which implies the 
 possession of pecuniary means to support the 
 respectability of his birth and connexions. 
 
 But in his way to London, he visited Salis- 
 bury, where the patronage he received, as well 
 as the flattering attentions bestowed upon him 
 by some of the principal inhabitants, induced 
 him to remain for a short period. Some of 
 his crayon portraits executed in Salisbury in 
 this year, (1787,) are still in the possession of 
 a gentleman of that city. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 93 
 
 « 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Family affections towards Mrs. Lawrence by her relations. — 
 Mr. Lawrence leaves Bath for London. — Arrangements 
 in London. — Introduction to Sir Joshua Reynolds. — 
 Lodgings in Leicester Square.— In Jermyn Street. — A 
 Student of the Academy. — Beautiful Drawings. — The 
 Gladiator Repellens and the Apollo Belvidere — Admitted 
 to good Society. — Hoyal Patronage. — Disposal of Lega- 
 cies. — A Museum purchased. — Commissions for Paint- 
 ings. — Acquaintance with Mr. Hamilton. — Introduced to 
 the Kemble Family. 
 
 During the six years that the elder Mr. 
 Lawrence had resided at Bath, I find no traces 
 of his intercourse with the family of his wife. 
 As Mr. Read had died in peace with his 
 daughter, and as his widow had received one 
 of the grand-children, it is reasonable to sup- 
 pose that at least an ostensibly friendly inter- 
 course existed between the families, especially 
 as the elder son of Mr. Read had never aban- 
 doned his sister or discarded her husband. I 
 
94 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 cannot, however, suppose that anything more 
 than mere civilities, or, at best, the rights of 
 hospitality, were extended to Mr. Lawrence by 
 his wife’s relations. Both the families of the 
 Hills and the Reads were affluent, and pos- 
 sessed of what is termed 44 county influence.” 
 Either of them might have obtained for their 
 relation, that public employment which is the 
 ordinary reward or price of electioneering in- 
 terest in the country ; or they might, by other 
 means, have prevented a resort to the labours 
 of a young boy of fourteen for the support of 
 his parents and family. This public means of 
 support, in a city so near to the local conse- 
 quence of the families, must have mortified 
 their pride, and probably did not tend to close 
 the breach between the parties,* 
 
 * Except in America, and recently settled countries, 
 where, from the obvious causes of the incessant influx of 
 strangers, and of migrations in search of land, the ties of 
 blood are scarcely more than nominal, I fear there is no coun- 
 try in which the bonds of family union are so loose as in 
 England. Many of our laws, particularly that of primogeni- 
 ture, are the causes of this unnatural state of society ; 
 but as the certainty of the cause, and even the facility 
 of its removal, would not produce the remedy, we must 
 reverse the poet’s line, “ Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere 
 causas ." In Ireland, though the relation of father and son 
 scarcely prevents the pistol or the bludgeon to the head, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 95 
 
 In 1787, Mr. Lawrence left Bath, and re- 
 paired to London. His pecuniary resources 
 must have been respectable, for I find his first 
 place of residence to be No. 4, Leicester Square, 
 where he hired a suite of handsome apartments, 
 the house being occupied by a confectioner. 
 Leicester Square was then a place of high fa- 
 shion. It had been the residence of the father 
 of his late Majesty, George the Third, and, 
 at the time to which I now refer, it was distin- 
 guished by that of Sir Joshua Reynolds, whose 
 house was the daily resort of all that was illus- 
 trious for title, or distinguished for wealth, 
 fashion, or talents. I have a family memoran- 
 dum before me, that Mr. Lawrence paid for 
 his suite of rooms, four guineas a week, a price 
 for lodgings of no ordinary amount in those 
 days. Mrs. Lawrence remained for some time 
 at No. 2, Alfred Place, Bath, and Mr. Andrew 
 Lawrence repaired to Frome, in the exercise of 
 his profession ; but young Lawrence soon wrote 
 
 yet the fight being over, or prevented, natural affections are 
 resumed. In England, decency prevents outrage; but fami- 
 lies, from the slightest causes, especially of interest, sink into 
 a state of quiet neglect and almost ignorance of each other. 
 The Irish son-in-law or step-son of an eminent Irish artist, 
 being asked by an afflicted father to be allowed to see his 
 daughter, whom he had fraudulently married, immediately 
 offered him “ Satisfaction /” 
 
THE LIFE OF 
 
 96 
 
 to his mother to come up to London, that he 
 might have a comfortable home, “ and not be 
 obliged to eat his meals out.” 
 
 When these arrangements were made, the 
 lodgings in Leicester Square were given up ; 
 and young Lawrence had apartments taken for 
 him at No. 41, Jermyn Street, his father and 
 mother taking lodgings for themselves at Duke 
 Street, St. James’, where their son took his 
 meals. 
 
 Provincial and metropolitan fame are very 
 distinct ; and notwithstanding young Law- 
 rence’s having been the phenomenon of Bath, 
 and even notwithstanding his having obtained 
 the prize medal of the Society of Arts, he had 
 nobody to introduce him to Sir Joshua, to 
 whom he was now a very near neighbour. But 
 Sir Joshua was of easy access to persons of de- 
 cided talents; and, upon an application from 
 Mr. Lawrence, with a reference to the early 
 works of his son, the President of the Academy 
 willingly appointed an interview.* The father, 
 and our young artist, repaired to the house 
 of the affluent head and origin of the English 
 school, and they were received with kindness. 
 Young Lawrence took with him his oil portrait 
 
 * It has been said that young Lawrence brought up a 
 letter of introduction to Sir Joshua, from Mr. Prince Hoare, 
 of Bath. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 97 
 
 of himself, as a specimen of what he could 
 do. There have been disputes about the exact 
 period at which this portrait was drawn ; but 
 I have inserted the letter, which determines 
 the point. He found the attention of the 
 President bestowed upon another juvenile as- 
 pirant, who had evidently come upon a similar 
 errand, and who stood in trembling expectation 
 of the decision of the oracle, which was to de- 
 termine his future course ; Sir Joshua having 
 examined the specimen of his art, dismissed this 
 other visitant with the negative encouragement 
 of, “ Well, well! -go on — go on.” The anhela- 
 tion of young Lawrence during this scene, may 
 be easily imagined. 
 
 Sir Joshua now inspected the portrait of 
 our youth. He was evidently much struck 
 with it, and discerned those marks of genius 
 which foretold the future fame of the juvenile 
 artist. He bestowed upon the painting a very 
 long scrutiny, in a manner which young Law- 
 rence thought, an alarming contrast to the more 
 hasty glance with which he had dismissed the 
 other. 
 
 At last, turning to the boy, with an air of 
 seriousness, he addressed him — “ Stop, young 
 man, I must have some talk with you. Well, 
 I suppose now, you think this is very fine, and 
 this colouring very natural ; hey ! hey !” He 
 
 VOL. I. H 
 
98 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 then placed the painting before the astonished 
 and trembling youth, and began to analyse it, 
 and to point out its numerous imperfections. 
 Presently, he took it out with him from the 
 gallery to his own painting-room, and young 
 Lawrence knew not how to interpret this; 
 but Sir Joshua soon returning, addressed him 
 kindly, and concluded by saying, “ It is clear 
 you have been looking at the old mastejrs ; but 
 my advice to you is, to study nature; apply 
 your talents to nature.” — He then dismissed 
 him with marked kindness, assuring him that 
 he would be welcome, whenever he chose to 
 call. Of an invitation so flattering and useful, 
 our young artist availed himself with a fre- 
 quency that would have put it to too severe a 
 test, had it been meant in the ordinary sense of 
 compliment ; but Mr. Lawrence was always 
 received with a kindness which indicated that 
 Sir Joshua was highly pleased with his society, 
 and desirous to promote his interests.* 
 
 * No two men ever possessed more pre-eminently the 
 same amiable quality, the — mitis sapientia . — A ludicrous con- 
 trast to this kindness occurred with the asperous Fuseli, who 
 being, miraculously, in a good humour, gave a friendly recep- 
 tion to a young gentleman that had brought to him a letter 
 of introduction from an old friend. “ I shall be very happy 
 to see you, whenever you are disengaged,” said Fuseli. The 
 ingenuous youth took this literally, and called the next day. 
 
Silt THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 99 
 
 On the 13th Sept. 1787, he was admitted a 
 student at the Royal Academy ; and Mr. How- 
 ard, the present Secretary and Trustee of the 
 institution, says, “ His proficiency in drawing, 
 even at that time, was such as to leave all his 
 competitors in the antique school far behind 
 him. His personal attractions were as remark- 
 able as his talent : altogether he excited a great 
 sensation, and seemed, to the admiring students, 
 as nothing less than a young Raphael suddenly 
 dropt among them. He was very handsome ; 
 and his chestnut locks flowing on his shoulders, 
 gave him a romantic appearance.” 
 
 He made, however, but two or three draw- 
 ings in the Academy, which were executed 
 with a black-lead pencil on white paper, elabo- 
 rately tinted down, till the high light had the 
 effect of white put on, rather than of the paper 
 left ; a style at that time novel, or at least not 
 practised in the school. Two drawings of the 
 Gladiator Repellens, and of the Belvidere Apol- 
 lo, were deemed very accurate and beautiful. 
 
 1 ought to mention, that while residing at 
 4, Leicester Square, he opened a public exhibi- 
 tion of his works, his father performing the office 
 
 “ By Gort /” cried Fuseli, as he entered the room, “you must 
 have plenty of spare time on your hands !” The ingenui 
 vultus puer retired in confusion, nor did he ever call again. 
 
100 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 of exhibitor ; this, of necessity, could be but a 
 very temporary means of pecuniary advantage.* 
 The talents of young Lawrence were of a na- 
 ture peculiarly adapted to work their own way 
 into celebrity ; but notwithstanding the singu- 
 lar union of all these elements of worldly suc- 
 cess, which he possessed at so early an age, his 
 entre to Sir Joshua’s house, must have been of 
 incalculably additional advantage to him. It 
 brought him into contact with the great, the 
 fashionable, and the intellectual, whilst it exhi- 
 bited the President’s familiarity with him, and 
 the delight which he took in his society. 
 
 In one of his letters, written about this time, 
 Sir Thomas beautifully describes his love of 
 moderate pleasures, and his aversion to excesses 
 of any sort. It would be difficult, in biogra- 
 phy, to find an instance of a person so tempe- 
 rate under so many temptations to excesses. 
 He must have had many attractions to the 
 wise and good, or have been singularly acute 
 in discovering talents, before their public deve- 
 lopement, and as singularly happy in exciting 
 esteem in those whom he discovered to possess 
 them. 
 
 The following letter from Mr. Lysons to Mr. 
 Thomas Campbell, describes young Lawrence’s 
 
 * A similar scheme, even by Sir Joshua and Mr. West 
 had failed to be profitable. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 101 
 
 early association with the learned and ingenious 
 author of the “Environs of London.” The 
 allusion in the postscript is to Sir Thomas’s 
 pedigree, a subject that will be discussed in a 
 subsequent chapter. 
 
 • * ; i r . 
 
 Rodraarton, near Cirencester, 
 April 13th, 1830. 
 
 MY DEAR SIR, 
 
 I have sent up, to the care of Mr. R. 
 Smirke, copies of the few letters of Sir Tho- 
 mas Lawrence, 'which I thought could be in 
 any way interesting or amusing to the public. 
 I am sorry to say, that my search among my 
 brother’s papers, to see whether I could find 
 any thing which might be of use to you in your 
 work, has been very unsatisfactory. My bro- 
 ther’s first acquaintance with Sir Thomas ap- 
 pears to have commenced in the year 1787. 
 He was then, as you will see, about eighteen 
 years of age, and was living at 41, Jermyn 
 Street, where he appears to have resided two 
 or three years. He afterwards removed to Old 
 Bond Street, and continued there perhaps rather 
 longer, before he removed to Greek Street. 
 
 I recollect very well his being two or three 
 evenings at my brother’s chambers, amusing 
 himself with practising etching; and I have 
 proofs of two plates which he then etched. 
 One, from a beautiful drawing of Mrs. Siddons, 
 
102 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 which I have made out to have been done be- 
 fore August 1790 ; and the other, a very clever 
 etching, from the head of an old woman, the 
 drawing of which has the date of 1791. Very 
 few of his letters have dates. My brother was, 
 as you know, in habits of intimacy with Sir 
 Thomas for many years, but they were for the 
 greater part of the time both inhabitants of the 
 metropolis, and when absent, Sir Thomas was 
 not a frequent correspondent. For several 
 years, Sir Thomas, Mr. Farrington, the It. A., 
 Mr. Smirke, Mr. Robert Smirke, and my bro- 
 ther, dined together when in town, once a week, 
 taking it by turns, at his chambers and their re- 
 spective houses, for some years before my bro- 
 ther’s death. Mr. Ralph Price was added to 
 this party quadripartite : I used to join them, 
 when occasionally in town. I am quite sorry 
 that it has not been in my power to be of more 
 service to you. 
 
 I have lent my valuable drawings by Sir 
 Thomas, to Mr. Lane, for his beautiful litho- 
 graphic work. 
 
 I remain, my dear Sir, 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 Daniel Lysons. 
 
 P. S. Was any thing satisfactory made out re- 
 specting Thomas Lawrence, of King’s College ? 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 103 
 
 The following letter, as it relates to a period 
 later by two or three years, belongs, strictly 
 speaking, to a part of the work rather more 
 advanced ; but, addressed by Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence to Mr. Lysons, it may be now intro- 
 duced. 
 
 DEAR SIR, Old Bond Street, Thursday. 
 
 A particular friend of mine promised to 
 get me introduced at Sir William Hamilton’s, 
 to see this wonderful woman you have doubt- 
 less heard of — Mrs. Hart. He has succeeded ; 
 but has unfortunately made an appointment for 
 that purpose on Sunday next, at half-past ten. 
 What shall I do? I hear it is the most grati- 
 fying thing to a painter’s eye that can be ; and 
 I am frightened, at the same time, with the in- 
 timation that she will soon be Lady Hamilton, 
 and that I may not have such another oppor- 
 tunity ; yet I do not know that I can receive 
 greater pleasure than I should have in viewing 
 the beautiful scenery of Nature with Mr. Ly- 
 sons. Send me word your opinion on this 
 case, and whichever way it leans (as I know 
 you are a special pleader), it shall be decisive. 
 
 I am, dear Sir, 
 
 Your obliged servant, 
 
 Tho\ Lawrence. 
 
104 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 There is no date to this letter— but it must 
 have been written in 1790. The print of Lady 
 Hamilton (called Emma), from Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence’s drawing, was published in 179L* 
 
 The person here alluded to was one of the 
 most extraordinary of modern times. A man 
 of genius might have drawn from her vices and 
 her virtues an original character for the most 
 interesting work of fiction. A Syren in voice, 
 a Cleopatra in manners, and a Venus in beauty, 
 she was the wonder of her sex, and wanted 
 only purity to be its ornament. Degrading as 
 the history of her life might be, it was confess- 
 ed, even by those who repudiated their own ad- 
 miration, that it was impossible to look upon 
 her without involuntary partiality ; for not only 
 were her form and face perfectly lovely, but she 
 had the art of impressing, if not a conviction, at 
 least a belief, that her feelings at moments were 
 great and good. The horrors to which she lent 
 her agency, and in which she committed Lord 
 Nelson, long afterwards at Naples, may excuse 
 
 * This lady had even been the living model at the Aca- 
 demy ; and was the Euphrosyne of that most infamous of 
 quacks, Mr, Graham, at his lectures on health, in Pall Mall, 
 which were patronized by the aristocracy, till the police sup- 
 pressed them. She was painted as a voluptuous Bacchanal 
 by her friend Romney. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 105 
 
 me from doubting if she ever possessed a spark 
 of genuine sensibility,— but in semblance, phy- 
 siognomy, and manner, she acted the possession * 
 of feelings equally, and appeared giftedly alive 
 to the pathetic and the playful. Her tones 
 of speech were sweet, natural, and musical, her 
 voice in singing superb, and her science in 
 music exquisite, though caught almost intui- 
 tively. She was an enchantress, misplaced from 
 romance into real life. 
 
 Sitting once at a private party, with an 
 eminent musician, whose creed was the in- 
 sufferable nature of English singing, many sim- 
 ple, and many of the most complex and ela- 
 borate, pieces of vocal music were produced 
 to Mrs. Billington and Lady Hamilton, the 
 only ladies of the party. Each sung, con amove ; 
 and the musician spoke in raptures of Lady 
 Hamilton’s voice, her feeling, execution, deli- 
 cacy, and quick apprehension ; and, added this 
 anti-English cynic, “ In point of science and 
 learning, she has nothing to be afraid of in the 
 rivalsliip with Mrs. Billington.” 
 
 Mr. Lawrence was now admitted into the first 
 circles. His society was even courted by many 
 persons eminent in literature and science ; and, 
 thus introduced, his Majesty very shortly after 
 became his ostensible though temporary patron. 
 
106 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 This latter fact is very singular ; for it is re- 
 markable, that notwithstanding the great and 
 original talents of Sir Joshua Reynolds, and 
 notwithstanding that those talents formed so 
 beautiful a contrast to what had preceded him 
 in this country, and even to the talents of his 
 contemporaries, he never received a single com- 
 mission either from the King or his royal 
 consort. He twice painted their Majesties ; but 
 on each occasion, at his own request, and at his 
 own expense.* 
 
 This royal patronage of the juvenile Law- 
 rence is still more remarkable, from the singular 
 manner in which the King viewed the works of 
 Mr. West, which he admired almost to the 
 exclusion of every other painter, ancient or 
 modern. 
 
 Lawrence had been admitted a student of the 
 Royal Academy ; and amongst his contem- 
 poraries were Mr. Benjamin West and Mr. 
 Westall, with both of whom he contracted an 
 intimate acquaintance, which continued through 
 life, and which, with the latter, amounted to the 
 warmest friendship. In 1790, when young 
 Lawrence came of age, he received 2001 ., the 
 legacy of his relation Mr. Agaz. He proposed 
 
 * This neglect of Sjr Joshua, is said to have arisen from his 
 refusing to sell a painting beneath its value. 
 
SJR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 107 
 
 to his father, that he (the father) should take 
 a house large enough to accommodate his friend 
 young Westall, and a servant boy, and to fit up 
 a room for painting, Mr. Westall having com- 
 menced certain paintings for Alderman Boy- 
 dell’s publications. The father therefore took 
 a long lease of No. 57, Greek Street, Soho, at a 
 rent of 80/. per annum. The house had been in- 
 habited by a surgeon, and had been marked by 
 popular prejudices as the scene of dissections, 
 and the sewers and floors had been taken up to 
 search for skeletons, or even for proof of coming 
 at “ subjects” unrighteously. 
 
 In 1787, when his second daughter, Anne, 
 now Mrs. Bloxam, came of age, Mr. Lawrence 
 persuaded her to let him receive her legacy of 
 200/. under Mr. Agaz’s Will, and to use it for 
 the good of the family, or, to “ turn it to good 
 account.” This was assented to ; but Mr. 
 Lawrence, without consulting the family, pur- 
 chased a little museum then exhibiting in the 
 Strand, and consisting of natural curiosities, 
 stuffed birds, &c. &c., and to these he added his 
 son’s paintings, such as his “ Christ bearing the 
 Cross.” The exhibition was daily a source of 
 loss and vexation : it did not pay its expenses ; 
 and he at last sold it for a mere trifle. Whe- 
 ther the speculation of the house in Greek 
 
108 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Street were more profitable, I do not know. 
 Mr. Lawrence induced his daughter, after this 
 loss, to refuse an offer of accompanying the 
 family of Sir A. Crawford to Italy, and this 
 accomplished young lady became the compa- 
 nion and friend of the Countess of Lincoln, 
 afterwards Duchess of Newcastle. She was 
 joint instructress of her ladyship’s daughter, 
 Lady Ann Maria Clinton, afterwards married 
 to the brave and distinguished Lord Comber- 
 mere. 
 
 Miss Lawrence was married in 1 79 6, at St. 
 Ann’s, Soho, and until her marriage had had 
 under her care several young ladies of rank : 
 in these praiseworthy efforts, she was suc- 
 ceeded, at her marriage, by her sister Lucy. 
 
 An artist now of repute, (Mr. Evans) says, 
 “ Two drawings of his now before me, done in 
 1789 and 1790, are, in every respect, equal to 
 his maturest productions of a similar kind, ex- 
 cept only in that exquisite refinement of ex- 
 pression and execution, which he preeminently 
 attained, though at the expense of much of the 
 vigour and freedom which those early works 
 possessed.” £ 
 
 I must now allude to his intermediate place 
 of residence. After he had lived less than a 
 year in Leicester Fields, he removed, as I have 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 109 
 
 mentioned, to No. 41, Jermyn Street. This 
 was immediately opposite to St. James’s Church. 
 His apartments were at the house of a fashion- 
 able milliner, and they were unexceptionable, 
 but for one, and only one, disadvantage. His 
 painting room* looked directly into the church- 
 yard, and the artist found that although he 
 had overlooked this circumstance as trivial, it 
 had a material influence upon the looks of his 
 sitters. Superstition, prejudices, and fantasies, 
 at that day were triumphant. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence very soon removed from this 
 accommodation ; and it is an odd coincidence, 
 that he was succeeded in his tenement by him 
 who, at his death, succeeded him in the chair 
 of the Royal Academy — Mr., now Sir M. A. 
 Shee. 
 
 About the year 1790, he contracted a close 
 intimacy with Mr. W. Hamilton, R. A., then 
 residing in Dean Street, Soho. Mr. Hamilton 
 was of eminence in his art, and was calculated 
 to have an influence upon a young man com- 
 mencing his career in London. At this period, 
 Mr. Hamilton had received his education in 
 Italy, by the patronage of Mr. (Adelphi) 
 iraams, with whom he was connected in busi- 
 ness. He painted historical subjects and ara- 
 besque, and was a distinguished contributor to 
 
110 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the splendid embellishments of Macklin’s Bible, 
 Boydell’s Shakspeare, and other works. His 
 style was that of the modern Italians, light, 
 airy, and pleasant, but without any profound 
 principles of his art. In portraits he did not so 
 much excel, though he had eminent success 
 in his portraits of Mrs. Siddons as Isabella, 
 Euphrasia, and as Lady Randolph in the scene 
 with her son. Mr. Hamilton was affluent and 
 devoted to his art, and he conceived a strong 
 attachment to Mr. Lawrence, with the highest 
 admiration of his promising talents. Young 
 Lawrence became almost one of Mr. Hamil- 
 ton’s family, until his very sudden death in 
 1801 ; and often has the President of the 
 Academy been heard to say, that some of 
 the happiest days of his life had been those 
 spent with Mr. and Mrs. Hamilton. Young 
 Lawrence had but recently lost his beloved 
 mother, when he was summoned to the bed- 
 side of his friend, whose fever carried him 
 off in three days; and he evinced the most in- 
 tense feelings for his sufferings, and a very 
 bitter and permanent regret at his loss. It was 
 Mr. Hamilton that first introduced Mr. Law- 
 rence to Mrs. Siddons and Mr. John Kemble, 
 and laid the foundation of an intimacy which 
 had a powerful influence upon the professional 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 Ill 
 
 and private life and character of the artist. 
 Mr. Lawrence always spoke of the time he had 
 passed with Mr. Hamilton, as of the most 
 pleasant and best spent of his life. He and 
 Mr. Hamilton used to draw a great deal from 
 the antique statues at night, whilst Mrs. Ha- 
 milton would read to them either poetry, his- 
 tory, or works of imagination. 
 
112 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 State of public taste. — Difficulties of gaining the public ap- 
 probation. — Severe competition among artists. — The King 
 and Queen’s desire that Mr. Lawrence should be elected an 
 Associate of the Academy. — Successful opposition to the 
 Royal wishes. — Peter Pindar’s poem upon the subject. — 
 Mr. Lawrence’s subsequent election. — Attends the funeral 
 of Sir Joshua Reynolds. — Sir Joseph Banks and the Dilet- 
 tanti Society. — The Society elects Mr. Lawrence to suc- 
 ceed Sir Joshua Reynolds, as its painter. — The by-law of 
 the Society waved for that purpose. — Mr. Lawrence ap- 
 pointed Portrait-painter in Ordinary to the King. — Re- 
 flections upon this distinction. — Mr. Lawrence’s historical 
 work of Homer reciting his Verses to the Greeks.— Pecu- 
 niary affairs. — Portrait of Miss Farren Countess of Derby. 
 
 Mr. Burke’s observations. — Portraits of the King and 
 
 Queen sent out to China, with Lord Macartney. —Portrait 
 of the Duke of Portland, sent to Bristol. — Portrait of the 
 King, sent to Coventry. — Prices of paintings.— Sale of M. 
 de Calonne’s Collection of Paintings, and of that of Sir 
 Joshua Reynolds. — Anecdote of Mr. J. J. Angerstein ; the 
 commencement of his friendship with Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence. — Pecuniary arrangements. 
 
 The history of art in this country, affords no 
 instance of so rapid a progress to eminence, as 
 that experienced by Sir Thomas Lawrence. 
 
SIR TIIOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 113 
 
 He had every disadvantage to contend with. 
 The public had been satiated with portraits, 
 and caprice and fastidiousness were, as usual, 
 the consequences of satiety. But men of great 
 powers and of very varied faculties, had been 
 long eminent in portrait painting, and the ge- 
 neral taste was too refined, and the public judg- 
 ment too well informed, to admit of success 
 without very decided merits. The portraits 
 by Sir Joshua Reynolds, Barry, Gainsborough, 
 Wilson, Opie, Hoppner, Romney, and even 
 West and Beechy, had been studied and criti- 
 cised ; and the rage for portraits had brought 
 under the public scrutiny the whole school, 
 from Vandyck and his contemporaries even to 
 Hudson, besides the casual exhibitions of por- 
 traits in this country by Titian, Raphael, and 
 the earlier masters. 
 
 Public opinion was therefore a very severe 
 tribunal for a young aspirant to appear before. 
 But Sir Thomas Lawrence had encreased diffi- 
 culties to contend with. The King had com- 
 menced his patronage of historical painting by 
 West, and the nobility and gentry are never 
 slow in adopting the royal taste. Young 
 Lawrence had but a provincial fame ; the taste 
 of Bath was meretricious in every thing, even 
 to a proverb ; and it was the subject of reproach 
 
 VOL. i. 
 
 i 
 
114 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 and satire in the periodical works of the day. 
 Besides, Lawrence was totally untaught, or 
 self-taught ; he had not the real, and, what is 
 of more consequence, (with respect to vulgar 
 opinion) the fictitious advantage of having tra- 
 velled to Italy. Moreover, he was so young, 
 that it was necessary either to believe him a 
 prodigy, or to decry him as an empiric. No 
 dilemma can be more dangerous than this, 
 for a youth entering a career of severe com- 
 petition in public life. However, the tide of 
 public opinion, fortunately, in this instance, 
 flowed in the right channel, and the talents of 
 the young, self-taught prodigy were duly appre- 
 ciated. 
 
 The King had contributed largely to the 
 support of the Royal Academy, prior to its de- 
 riving a sufficient revenue from the better pa- 
 tronage of the public. Although his Majesty 
 had never given a single order to its President, 
 and had exclusively confined his notice and 
 admiration to very inferior artists, still this 
 patronage of the Academy, by his name and 
 pecuniary contributions, had given him more 
 power in the decisions of its councils than has 
 been experienced in later days. 
 
 At the express desire of his Majesty and of 
 the Queen, young Lawrence, after one defeat, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 115 
 
 was admitted an Associate, by the suspension 
 or contravention of a law that would have ex- 
 cluded him at his age, and under the circum- 
 stances in which he was placed. 
 
 The law was imperative against the admis- 
 sion of any Associate under the age of twenty- 
 four ; and the reception of Mr. Lawrence, 
 though at the express desire of the King and 
 Queen, met with opposition from several of the 
 Academy, notwithstanding his election was 
 supported by Sir Joshua Reynolds. 
 
 A demi-official document from the Academy 
 merely says, “ In November 1791, (Nov. 10,) 
 he (Mr. Thomas Lawrence) was elected an As- 
 sociate of the Royal Academy, at an earlier age 
 than any artist before or since, and in 1794, 
 (Feb. 10,) an Academician.” * 
 
 Upon the latter point, it must be observed, 
 that the Royal Sign Manual, appointing Mr. 
 Lawrence an Academician, is dated, not Feb. 
 10, 1794, but Dec. 4, 1795. 
 
 This appointment gave rise to one of Peter 
 Pindar’s witty Poems, published in 1791, un- 
 der the title of the “ Rights of Kings.” It com- 
 prised eight odes, a proemium, and a conclud- 
 ing address to Mr. Pitt. It may be doubted 
 
 * His Diploma-Picture was a Gipsy girl, and it is now in 
 the Council Chamber of the Academy. 
 
 1 2 
 
116 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 whether this poem on Mr. Lawrence’s admis- 
 sion to the Academy, did not excite more 
 irritation among the profession than any, or all, 
 of the attacks of Anthony Pasquin. Mr. Jer- 
 ningham, this year, published his poem, “ The 
 Shakspeare Gallery, or Subjects for Painters,” 
 and Peter Pindar wrote his Burlesque Subjects 
 for Painters, a work of great humour. 
 
 Peter’s Address to the Public, as a Preface 
 to his “ Rights of Kings,” thus tells the story 
 about Mr. Lawrence : — 
 
 “ GENTLE READElt, 
 
 “ The foundation of the following Odes is 
 simply this. The President of the Royal Aca- 
 demy, happy to be able to gratify our amiable 
 Monarch, in the minutest of his predilections, re- 
 ported lately to the Academicians, his Majesty’s 
 desire, that a Mr. Lawrence might be added to 
 the list of R. A.’s, his Majesty, from his superior 
 knowledge of painting, being perfectly convinced 
 of this young artist’s uncommon abilities, and 
 consequently fair pretensions to the honour. Not- 
 withstanding the Royal wish, and the wish of 
 the President, and (under therose) the wish of Mr. 
 Benjamin West, the Windsor Oracle of paint, 
 and painter of History, the R. A.’s received the 
 annunciation of his Majesty’s wish, Sir Joshua’s 
 wish, Mr. West’s wish, with the most ineffable 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 117 
 
 sang froid , not to call it by a harder name — 
 disgust. The annunciation happened on the 
 night of an election of Associates, at which Mr. 
 Lawrence ought to have been elected an Asso- 
 ciate, (a step necessary to the more exalted 
 one of R. A.) — Behold the obstinacy of these 
 royal mules J — the number of votes, in favour 
 of Mr. Lawrence, amounted to just THREE, 
 and that of his opponent, Mr. Wheatley, to six- 
 teen ! ! ! Indignant and loyal reader, the Lyric 
 Muse, who has uniformly attacked meanness, 
 folly, impudence, avarice, and ignorance, from 
 her cradle, caught fire at the above important 
 event, and most loyally poured forth the follow- 
 ing Odes, replete with their usual sublimity.” 
 
 This may be a humorous, but it is not a dig- 
 nified or useful mode of treating the subject. 
 Mr. Wheatley’s moral conduct had offended 
 decency ; but he was admitted an Associate in 
 November 1790, and an Academician on the 
 10th February 1791. After Mr. Lawrence’s 
 defeat by him in November 1790, he was elected, 
 as we have seen, in the ensuing year. 
 
 If Majesty should be so ill-advised as to in- 
 terfere beyond its proper province, a firm and 
 decent resistance, on the part of the Academy, 
 would of necessity ensue; nor is there in the 
 kingdom a corporate body more capable of spi- 
 
118 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 rit and discretion, in such a case, than the 
 Royal Academy. 
 
 Peter Pindar’s ^verses, however, are very 
 witty ; and the following extracts may give 
 an idea of the poem. Whether it were fortu- 
 nate, or the reverse, to be made the subject of 
 such a joke, Lawrence’s friends of that period 
 can best determine. 
 
 ***** 
 
 * * * * 
 
 “ Refuse a Monarch’s mighty orders ! 
 
 It smells of treason — on rebellion borders. 
 
 ’Sdeath, Sirs ! it was the Queen’s fond wish as well, 
 That Master Lawrence should come in ! 
 
 Against a Queen so gentle, to rebel, 
 
 This is another crying sin ! 
 
 ***** 
 
 * * * * 
 
 “ Behold, his Majesty is in a passion ! 
 
 Tremble, ye rogues, and tremble all the nation ! 
 Suppose he takes it in his Royal head, 
 
 To strike your Academic Idol dead ; 
 
 Knock down your house, dissolve you in his ire, 
 And strip you of your boasted title — ’Squire ! 
 
 * * * * * 
 
 * * * * 
 
 “ I own I ’ve said, (and glory in th’ advice,) 
 
 ‘ Be not, O King, as usual, over nice. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 119 
 
 Dread Sire, (to take a phrase from Caliban,) 
 
 “ Bite ’em,” — 
 
 To pour a heavier vengeance on the clan, — 
 
 Knight ’em.’ 
 
 ***** 
 
 * * * * 
 
 “ Go, Sirs, with halters round your wretched necks, 
 Which some contrition for your crime bespeaks, 
 
 And much-offended Majesty implore. 
 
 Say, piteous, kneeling in the royal view, — 
 
 ‘ Have pity on a sad, abandon’d crew, 
 
 And we, great King, will sin no more : 
 
 Forgive, dread Sir, the crying sin, 
 
 And Mister Lawrence shall come in.' 
 
 ***** 
 
 * * * * 
 
 Your hemp cravats, your pray’r, your Tyburn mien, 
 May pardon gain from our good King and Queen, 
 
 For they are not inexorable people ; 
 
 Although you thus have run their patience hard, 
 
 And though you are to such great folk compared, 
 Candle-extinguishers to some high steeple.” 
 
 At the funeral of Sir Joshua, which took 
 place on the 3rd March 1792, I find Mr. Law- 
 rence, and twelve other Associates, in the pro- 
 cession ; his antagonist, Mr. Wheatley, not at- 
 tending, though an Academician. It is curi- 
 ous to read the names of these young Associ- 
 ates, in relation to their subsequent progress in 
 
120 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 their profession. Among them I find those of 
 Mr. (Sir Francis) Bourgeois, Mr. Bonomi, Mr. 
 Stothard, and Mr. Smirke. Mr. Shee attended 
 the funeral as a student ; and it is singular, that 
 of the ten students honoured by this distinction, 
 Mr. Shee alone has since been known to the 
 public. 
 
 At the death of Sir Joshua, young Law- 
 rence, then only in the twenty-third year of his 
 age, received an unexpected honour, of which 
 even eminent artists were justly proud. He 
 was unanimously elected Sir Joshua’s successor, 
 as Painter to the Dilettanti Society. Sir Joseph 
 Banks, when made President of that body, 
 had proposed to Mr. Hamilton to become a 
 member, and to be appointed portrait-painter 
 to the Club ; but Mr. Hamilton replied, “ Por- 
 trait-painter I am none ; my friend Lawrence, 
 however, is the most proper person you can 
 select ; his talents are of the highest order, 
 and, though young, he will do honour to your 
 appointment.” In order to make him a member 
 of that body, as well as the painter to it, the 
 Society was obliged to rescind, or rather wave, 
 one of its fixed and primary laws, “That no 
 person was admissible as a member who had 
 not crossed the Alps.” 
 
 His Majesty also appointed him to succeed 
 Sir Joshua, as his Portrait- painter in ordinary. 
 
Silt THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 121 
 
 Lord Chamberlain's Office, 
 26th February, 1792. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 I lose no time in acquainting you, that I 
 have appointed you to be Painter in Ordinary 
 to His Majesty, in the room of Sir Joshua Rey- 
 nolds, deceased ; and you are requested to attend 
 this office on Thursday next, at two o’clock, to 
 be sworn in, I am. Sir, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 
 Salisbury. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, Bond Street. 
 
 A person of his talents and manners wanted 
 but a few good introductions into society to 
 become esteemed and popular ; and we now 
 find him intimate with the Kemble family, and 
 with those of Mr. Angerstein, Mr. Locke, Lord 
 Abercorn, the Templetons, Sir Francis Baring, 
 and the highest persons in the country, who 
 were distinguished for any love of literature 
 or the arts. It cannot escape observation, that 
 the appointment of so young a man (only 
 twenty-three years of age,) and one who had 
 been but so short a time in London, and had 
 exhibited so little at the Academy, to succeed 
 Sir Joshua Reynolds, as Portrait-painter to the 
 King, was a most extraordinary honour ; and 
 our opinion of this distinction will be enhanced 
 
122 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 if it be remembered that he was not only nothing 
 more than an Associate, but had enjoyed that 
 distinction only for the short space of between 
 four and five months. At this period, more- 
 over, were living in high repute, Mr. West, 
 Fuseli, Mr. Barry, Opie, Northcote, and other 
 eminent men, all of whom were full Academi- 
 cians, and some even high officers of the Aca- 
 demy. 
 
 From his expensive but temporary lodgings, 
 near Sir Joshua, in Leicester Square, young 
 Lawrence, as I have already observed, removed 
 to apartments in Jermyn Street. 
 
 It was in 1788, in his lodgings in Jermyn 
 Street, that he painted for Mr. Richard Payne 
 Knight, his historical piece of Homer reciting 
 his poem to the Greeks. The figure in the 
 foreground of the young victor in the foot- 
 race, was a study from the living model. A 
 pugilist of that day, and who since became ce- 
 lebrated, presented the finest model that artist 
 could have for imitation. This man, named 
 Jackson, performed astonishing feats of agility 
 and strength. His figure was large, but he had 
 a distinct and marked indication of every indi- 
 vidual muscle, and his joints were small and 
 knit in the manner which is copied so inimit- 
 ably in many of the statues and paintings of 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 123 
 
 Michael Angelo. Mr. Lawrence was much 
 struck with his subject, and painted it with 
 great care and study. 
 
 Our artist’s business was now considerable ; 
 not only was he able to live in a very respect- 
 able style, but I have reason to believe that he 
 was, about this period, the sole support of his 
 father and mother, and was also very liberal to % 
 the whole of his family. 
 
 A family document now before me, but 
 drawn up from memory very recently, (a lapse 
 of forty years) states, that this young gentle- 
 man allowed his parents only 300/. a-year, and 
 for which he was boarded, and his man-servant 
 provided with his dinner, his father keeping 
 only two female servants. The present Mrs. 
 Bloxam, then having under her care several 
 titled pupils, with, for that period, immense 
 salaries, allowed her father 1 70/. per annum ; 
 whilst the eldest son, the Rev. Andrew Law- 
 rence, continued to him his allowance of 80/. a- 
 year, making in all an income of 550/. a-year, 
 and which more than covered the annual ex- 
 penditure of the family in Greek Street. In 
 addition to this, Mr. Westall paid for the ac- 
 commodation of himself and man-servant. 
 
 It is extremely painful to be thus comment- 
 ing upon the private and pecuniary affairs of 
 
124 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 any family. The public have nothing to do 
 with the subject ; and every proper feeling 
 would have made a biographer avoid it, were 
 not the most full explanations made necessary, 
 by the even calumnious and false reports, which 
 have unfortunately been circulated by the press 
 upon the topic, in its real or supposed relations 
 to the embarrassments which harassed and 
 afflicted this eminent man throughout his life. 
 
 It is acknowledged, however, in the same 
 document, that the elder Mr. Lawrence ex- 
 tracted from his young son, upon the very 
 threshold of his arduous career, a sort of bond 
 in favour of himself and family. Surely this 
 was scarcely kind towards a son who had al- 
 ways been so dutiful, confiding, and generous, 
 and whose nature was bountiful to prodigality. 
 It is to be wished that the integrity of truth 
 had admitted of a contradiction to this, making 
 assurance doubly sure, and taking, as it were, a 
 bond from fate. Sir Thomas, however, filled 
 up the blank left for the sum ; and the full 
 amount of which (such was his liberality) was, 
 it is said, never demanded of him. 
 
 Rather prior to this, as early, I believe, as 
 1790, Mr. Lawrence made a most fortunate 
 effort, by a portrait of a celebrated beauty and 
 actress, Miss Farren, afterwards Countess of 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 125 
 
 Derby. She was represented in what was then 
 called a white John cloak, and a muff, and the 
 painting had the good fortune of exciting 
 among the critics of the day, very many, and 
 not unfavourable comparisons between it and 
 Sir Joshua’s admired portrait of Mrs. Billington 
 as St. Cecilia. This portrait placed him above 
 all competitors except Hoppner, who, although 
 always second in the race, vigorously contested 
 the palm with him till his death in 1810. But 
 Miss Farren having on a muff and furred cloak, 
 they were deemed by the critics inconsistent 
 with uncovered arms, and other circumstances 
 of the painting. It was upon Mr. Lawrence 
 feeling amazed at these hypercriticisms, that 
 Mr. Burke said to him, “ Never mind what 
 little critics say, for painters’ proprieties are 
 always best.” 
 
 But what at once stamped his future success, 
 was an order he received from their late Ma- 
 jesties, in July 1792. This was for two elabo- 
 rate whole-length portraits of the King and 
 Queen, to be sent by Lord Macartney as a pre- 
 sent to the Emperor of China. His Lordship’s 
 extraordinary embassy to the Celestial Empire, 
 was then the subject of praise, or ridicule, or 
 wonder, in every person’s mouth; and the ce- 
 lebrity of this expedition reflected a beneficial 
 
126 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 influence upon the productions of Mr. Law- 
 rence's pencil.* 
 
 Business now flowed in upon him rapidly. 
 On the 17th September 1792, he sent off* to 
 Bristol a whole-length portrait of the Duke of 
 Portland, and which was put up in the Town 
 Hall of that city. 
 
 Two days afterwards, he transmitted to Co- 
 ventry a full-length portrait of his Majesty. 
 This fine painting was presented to the corpo- 
 ration by the then sitting member, Sir Samp- 
 son Gideon/ afterwards Lord Eardley, who 
 was so pleased with the production, that he 
 remunerated the artist by the very extraordi- 
 nary sum, at that day, and to so young a man, 
 of three hundred guineas. 
 
 His Majesty sat for this portrait at Bucking- 
 ham House. 
 
 Although the subject of the prices received 
 by Sir Thomas Lawrence, at different periods 
 of his life, will be fully entered into, in a subse- 
 quent chapter of the work, it will not be super- 
 
 * Among the presents which excited most attention were 
 these portraits, and a pair of magnificent globes, made by 
 Mr. Dudley Adams, and on one of which (the celestial) 5864 
 stars were inserted in their different magnitudes, being made 
 of gold, silver, and different coloured foils, beautifully set in 
 light blue enamel. * 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 127 
 
 fluous, in this stage of it, to give a brief list of 
 his remuneration for some of his principal por- 
 traits of every description, painted prior to his 
 becoming an Academician (in 1795). 
 
 Portraits chiefly painted prior to, or imme- 
 diately after, Mr. Lawrence’s coming to London. 
 
 Mrs. Adair 
 
 
 Gs. 
 
 10 
 
 Lady Louisa Lenox 
 
 . 
 
 15 
 
 Mr. Long 
 
 . 
 
 20 
 
 Lady Milner 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Lord Douglas . 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Captain Markham 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Mr. Locke 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Lord Barrington 
 
 . 
 
 SO 
 
 Lord Palmerston 
 
 • 
 
 30 
 
 Duchess of Buccleugh 
 
 30 
 
 Lord Melbourne’s 
 
 Chil- 
 
 dren 
 
 . 
 
 40 
 
 Mrs. Ramus 
 
 , 
 
 30 
 
 Sir W. W. Wynne 
 
 . 
 
 30 
 
 Mr. Law . 
 
 . 
 
 30 
 
 Lady Theo. Viner 
 
 . 
 
 30 
 
 Lady Cremorne 
 
 . 
 
 40 
 
 Mr. Capper 
 
 . 
 
 20 
 
 Lady Apsley 
 
 . 
 
 20 
 
 Lady J. Long 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Lord Lauderdale 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Sir J. Melthorpe 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 His Niece 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Lady Melthorpe 
 
 . 
 
 25 
 
 Gs. 
 
 Miss Lenox . . 25 
 
 Miss Day . . 25 
 
 Mr. Munday . . 25 
 
 Mr. Sheepshanks . 25 
 
 Lord Sondes . . 30 
 
 Lady Sondes . . 30 
 
 Sir G. Heathcote . 30 
 
 Mrs. Masters . . 30 
 
 Mr. Raby Williams . 15 
 
 Mr. Williams . .15 
 
 Mr. Watts . .15 
 
 Son of Lord Abercorn 15 
 Daughter of Ditto . 15 
 
 Mr. Kelly . . 15 
 
 Lord Mulgrave . 15 
 
 Mr. Darnsey . .15 
 
 Sir J. Sinclair, pencil 5 
 
 Duke of York, do. . 5 
 
 Duke of Clarence, do. 5 
 Prince of Wales, do. 5 
 
 Rev. Septimus Hodson, do. 5 
 Hon Mrs. Berkely . 20 
 
 Captain Berkely . 20 
 
 Mr. Read (Old Jewry) 20 
 
128 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 List of Portraits painted by Mr. Lawrence 
 about the years 1792, 1793, &c. 
 
 
 Gs. 
 
 Lady Newdicote 
 
 25 
 
 Lord G. Cavendish 
 
 70 
 
 Queen 
 
 80 
 
 Princess Amelia 
 
 15 
 
 Mr. Douglas 
 
 60 
 
 Mr. Hunter, H. L. 
 
 30 
 
 General Pattison, ditto 
 
 40 
 
 Mr. Hornsby, ditto 
 
 40 
 
 Miss Hornsby, ditto . 
 
 40 
 
 Lord G. Talbot’s Sons 
 
 60 
 
 Lord Ducie’s Sons 
 
 80 
 
 Miss Farren 
 
 100 
 
 Mr. Beresford . 
 
 55 
 
 Mrs. Armistead 
 
 50 
 
 Mr. Atherley 
 
 50 
 
 Mr. Munday 
 
 50 
 
 Lord Belmour . 
 
 50 
 
 Lady Basset’s Daughters 50 
 
 Duchess of Gordon 
 
 15 
 
 Lord Mulgrave . 
 
 15 
 
 Sir G. Beaumont 
 
 , 15 
 
 Sir G. Heathcote 
 
 . 25 
 
 Major Doyle 
 
 . 25 
 
 Dr. Moore 
 
 . 25 
 
 Mrs. Berkeley . 
 
 . 15 
 
 Gs. 
 
 Sir R. & Lady Meredith 30 
 Young Mr. Locke . 25 
 
 Mr. Price . . 25 
 
 Lord Valletort . . 25 
 
 Mrs. Nugent . . 15 
 
 Mrs. Annesley • .120 
 
 Lord Cremorne . 40 
 
 Mrs. Martindale . 25 
 
 Mr. M unday . .25 
 
 Mr. Gataker . .15 
 
 Lord Spencer . . 30 
 
 Mr. Cholmondely . 25 
 
 Mrs. Johnson . .15 
 
 Mrs. Berwick * . 25 
 
 Lord Cecil Hamilton . 15 
 
 Lady Jane Long . 25 
 
 Lady C. Bentincke . 25 
 
 Mr. Law . . .25 
 
 Lord Rawdon . . 25 
 
 Lord G, Cavendish . 70 
 
 Duke of Portland . 100 
 Queen . . .60 
 
 Princess Amelia . 15 
 
 Mr. Miller . . 25 
 
 Mr. Anderson . .25 
 
 In 1795 was the sale of M. de Calonne’s collec- 
 tion of paintings, the produce of which amounted 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 129 
 
 to 24,025/. 14 . 9 . Qd. Sir Joshua’s collection, in 
 the same year, had produced but 10,319/. 2 s. 6d. 
 But at M. de Calonne’s sale, Mr. John Julius 
 Angerstein was present, and he happened to 
 overhear Mr. Lawrence’s admiration of a female 
 portrait, by Rembrandt. This was a half- 
 length portrait of an old lady dressed in black, 
 with a large white ruff round her neck, and a 
 Bible hanging to her waist by a chain. The 
 painting was knocked down to Mr. Anger- 
 stein for one hundred guineas. Mr. Lawrence 
 at this time was in possession of Rembrandt’s 
 Rabbi, and on which he had often bestowed 
 the highest encomiums. 
 
 Air. Angerstein, during the sale, approached 
 Mr. Lawrence, saying, “ My reason for pur- 
 chasing this portrait is, that it will make a capital 
 companion to your Jew Rabbi, to which you 
 are so partial ; and I have to beg the favour of 
 your acceptance of it.” Mr. Lawrence accepted 
 this flattering and friendly compliment. The 
 painting probably sold at a remarkably low 
 price ; for he was subsequently offered two 
 hundred and fifty guineas for it. 
 
 Mr. Angerstein’s friendship to Mr. Lawrence 
 continued to his death. Shortly after this, Mr. 
 Angerstein, combining the liberality of an en- 
 larged mind and a kind heart with habits of 
 
 K 
 
 YOL. i. 
 
130 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 business, and a penetration into character, made 
 a very considerable advance of money to Law- 
 rence, but upon a plan most likely to be per- 
 manently useful, and best adapted to his dis- 
 position. The sum advanced was sufficiently 
 large to relieve Mr. Lawrence of all interrup- 
 tions to business ; and the arrangement was, that 
 he should pay, until the debt was liquidated, 
 into Mr. Angerstein’s banker’s, and to the ac- 
 count of that gentleman, the whole of his pro- 
 fessional receipts. In the mean time, Mr. Far- 
 rington, Lawrence’s friend, was to be allowed 
 to draw every week to the extent of 20/. for his 
 household expenses. 
 
 It has been seen, that Mr. Lawrence, imme- 
 diately upon leaving his temporary lodgings in 
 Leicester Square, entered upon a plan which 
 certainly had not the recommendation of eco- 
 nomy. Whilst he had apartments in Jermyn 
 Street, his father and mother, at his expense, 
 were to keep a separate house in Greek Street ; 
 and this double domicile, with the attendant 
 expenditure, continued for many years. 
 
 Very late in life, he had occasion to ask a 
 pecuniary accommodation from a friend, and 
 which was paid by the executors ; and he accom- 
 panied the request by saying, “ You, no doubt, 
 wonder why I should ask for this, and former 
 
Sill THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 131 
 
 favours of the same nature, when 1 am in the 
 receipt of so large an income ; but the truth is, 
 I began life wrongly. I spent more money 
 than I earned, and accumulated debts for which 
 I have been paying heavy interest. 
 
132 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The earliest public exhibition of Mr. Lawrence’s works at the 
 Royal Academy in 1787. — Lavater’s Physiognomy. — Like- 
 ness of Fuseli. — Lavater’s death. — Exhibitions of 1788, 
 1789 and 1790. — Portrait of the Princess Amelia. — Anec- 
 dotes of the Royal Family. — Fate of the Princess Amelia’s 
 portrait. — Mr. Lawrence removes to Old Bond Street. — Ex- 
 hibitions of 1791 and 1792. — Portrait of the King. — Mr. 
 West’s Edward III. passing the Soane. — Mr. Opie’s por- 
 traits. — Hoppner patronized by the Prince of Wales. — 
 Exhibitions of 1793 and 1794. — Anthony Pasquin’s cri- 
 ticisms. — His opinions of Mr. West’s Scriptural charac- 
 ters. — Observations upon Scriptural subjects of paintings. 
 — Pasquin’s criticisms upon the Exhibition of 1794. — 
 Pasquin’s biography of Lawrence. — Anecdotes of Sir God- 
 frey Kneller. — The Exhibition of 1795. — Letter from W. 
 Cowper to Mr. Lawrence.— Public sales of paintings. — 
 Exhibitions of 1796 and 1797. — Satan calling up his Le- 
 gions ; A. Pasquin’s criticisms. — Contemporary criticism. — 
 Observations on the painting of Satan. — Private letters. — 
 Mr. Lawrence loses his mother and father. — His intensity 
 of grief at their death. — Portrait of Sir Charles Grey. — 
 Its engraving. — Anecdotes of the family. — Exhibition of 
 1798.- -Portrait of Mr. Kemble as Coriolanus. — Portrait of 
 Lord Seaforth. — Painters’ improprieties. — Mr. Lawrence’s 
 letter respecting his painting of Coriolanus. 
 
 It is singular that, notwithstanding his re- 
 putation, Mr. Lawrence did not venture to 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 133 
 
 exhibit any of his paintings at the Royal Aca- 
 demy, before 1787. In that year, however, he 
 came out, to use an expression of Dr. Johnson’s, 
 “ twenty thousand strong.” He exhibited seven 
 paintings, an extraordinary number for a lad 
 of only eighteen years of age. These were : — 
 No. 184, a Mad Girl ; 207, Portrait of a Lady ; 
 229, Portrait of a young Lady ; 231, Portrait 
 of a Lady ; 234, Mrs. Esten, in the character of 
 Belvidera ; 255, a Vestal Virgin ; and 258, Por- 
 trait of a young Lady. His residence is mark- 
 ed in the Catalogue, at No. 4, Leicester Square. 
 In this year Sir Joshua Reynolds exhibited 
 thirteen portraits, but not of any extraordinary 
 consequence, except a likeness of the Prince of 
 Wales. 
 
 A splendid edition of “ Lavater’s Physiog- 
 nomy,” translated into English, was to be pub- 
 lished this year ; and young Lawrence, though 
 only a student, was engaged to draw the like- 
 ness of Fuseli, which was to adorn and illus- 
 trate the work. Lavater, in 1799, received a 
 wound, when Massena stormed Zurich, and of 
 which he died in 1801. 
 
 In the succeeding year, 1788, of six hundred 
 and fifty-six works of art, contained in the 
 Catalogue of the Exhibition of the Royal 
 Academy, eighteen were from the pencil of Sir 
 
134 
 
 TIIE LIFE OF 
 
 Joshua Reynolds, and six from that of Mr. 
 Thomas Lawrence. These were : — 60, Portrait 
 of a Lady; 61, a Gentleman; 110, a Gentle- 
 man ; 112, a Lady ; 113, a Lady ; 147, a Gentle- 
 man. This second year of his appearing before 
 the public, he excited general notice. 
 
 A w r ork was published under the title of 
 “ The Pee, or the Exhibition exhibited in a 
 New Light, or a Complete Catalogue Rai- 
 sonn6 for 1788.” In this critical analysis, I find 
 especial notice bestowed upon Mr. Lawrence. 
 Of No. 60, the author says, “ This is a wonder- 
 ful effusion of an early genius, of whom we 
 shall have occasion to speak more hereafter.” 
 Of 112, Portrait of a Lady, that is, of Miss 
 Madden, this writer says, “ After carefully exa- 
 mining and admiring the sky, the drapery, and 
 the background of this little gem, let us cry 
 out, as we look upon the face, 4 Happy the artist 
 who had such a model, and happy the model 
 that had such an artist !’ But they are both 
 very young ; let the Bee, therefore, gently buzz 
 in their ears, 4 Beware of vanity ! it is alike the 
 bane of the artist and the beauty.’ ” The writer 
 afterwards criticises No. 147, the Portrait of a 
 Gentleman (Mr. Dance). He says, “ This is a 
 production in oils of a very young man, whose 
 crayon pictures we have mentioned (see 60 and 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 135 
 
 112). It is so very harmoniously coloured, that 
 we confess ourselves at a loss whose style to 
 recommend the artist to pursue.” 
 
 The worst misfortune that could have be- 
 fallen the aspirant, was, to have been left un- 
 noticed by the critics. Severity of censure 
 would have been preferable to neglect, in an 
 age when criticism assumed the garb of satire 
 or reproach, and was seldom unpolluted by per- 
 sonal invective. For a lad of less than twenty 
 years of age, on his second appearance before 
 the world, to excite such commendation from 
 a public writer, was scarcely less extraordi- 
 nary than fortunate. His address is marked 
 No. 41, Jermyn Street, in the Catalogue. 
 
 In the next year, 1789, the Exhibition con- 
 tained six hundred and fifteen works of art ; 
 and it niay be supposed that Mr. Lawrence 
 was increasing in reputation, for I find not less 
 than thirteen paintings marked down to him in 
 the Catalogue. These were : — 51, Portrait of a 
 Gentleman ; 100, a Lady of Quality ; 122, a 
 Lady (crayons) ; 128, a Lady ; 130, a Gentle- 
 man ; 171, a Gentleman ; 194, a Lady of Qua- 
 lity ; 232, a Lady of Quality ; 459, a Head 
 from Nature ; 528, Portrait of a Lady ; 536, 
 a Gentleman ; 554, H. R. H. the Duke of 
 York; 555, a Gentleman. The subjects of these 
 
136 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 were Mr. Clutter, Lady Cranmer, Mrs. Hamil- 
 ton, Master Linley, &c. 
 
 Business now flowed in upon him in an ex- 
 traordinary degree ; and his industry and appli- 
 cation, for his age, were exemplary. 
 
 In the ensuing year, 1790, he had twelve 
 paintings in the Academy, the number in this 
 year’s exhibition being seven hundred and three, 
 or above the average. Mr. Lawrence’s works 
 were marked in the Catalogue : — 19, Portrait of 
 a Gentleman ; 26, H. R. H. the Princess Ame- 
 lia ; 100, Her Majesty ; 103, a General Officer; 
 145, a Lady; 151, a Nobleman’s Son; 171, an 
 Actress ; 202, a Nobleman’s Children ; 219, a 
 young Nobleman ; 260, a Clergyman ; 268, an 
 Officer ; 27 5, a young Lady of Quality. 
 
 The Princess Amelia was at this period a 
 most engaging child, in her seventh year ; and 
 Mr. Lawrence used to mention several amusing 
 anecdotes respecting his taking this likeness. 
 On one occasion, the child ran to her father, 
 telling him in grief, that she was sure that Mr. 
 Lawrence did not like her as much as her sis- 
 ters, since he had given each of them two draw- 
 ings, and only one to her. The child’s sorrow 
 prevented the progress of the portrait for that 
 day, and until the presents were equalized. 
 But the King used to quizz Mr. Lawrence’s 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 137 
 
 flirtations with Mrs. Papendick, the wife of his 
 Majesty’s German musician. Mrs. Papendick’s 
 daughter, Mrs. Wumb, long kept one of the 
 most costly schools in England, and she was 
 possessed of great musical talents. But the 
 portrait of the Princess Amelia became, by 
 what means I do not know, the property of a 
 broker near Soho Square. Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence, a few years before his death, learnt the 
 fact, and he immediately hastened and pur- 
 chased it, I believe, for a trifle. It formed part 
 of his property at his decease. 
 
 The list of 1790 exhibits not only a flattering, 
 but a substantially useful eminence in public 
 estimation to a young artist scarcely of age. 
 
 He was now induced to speculate upon a 
 more expensive style of living ; and the patron- 
 age he received, and the influx of business, so 
 steadily progressive, fully authorized him to in- 
 cur these increased charges, notwithstanding 
 the claims upon him which have been already 
 noticed. He this year resigned his apartments 
 in Jermyn Street to Mr. Shee, and took a 
 house, No. 24, Old Bond Street, in which he 
 aimed at a more showy style of life. 
 
 The Exhibition of this year, 1791, contained 
 six hundred and seventy -two works, and eleven 
 were by Mr. Lawrence. These are, according 
 
138 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 to the Catalogue, — 75, Portrait of a Lady of 
 Quality; 97, a Gentleman ; 122, a Lady; 140, 
 a Gentleman ; 180, Homer reciting his Poems 
 to the Greeks ; 255 , Portrait of a Lady ; 375, 
 a Gentleman ; 385, a Gentleman ; 394, a Gen- 
 tleman ; 429, a Gentleman ; 516, a Child. 
 
 In the succeeding year, or 1792, the impor- 
 tant addition of A, the abbreviation of Asso- 
 ciate, is affixed to his name in the Catalogue of 
 the Poyal Academy ; and his life, from this 
 year, may justly be said to have received a 
 fresh impulse, and almost a new direction. 
 But the Exhibition contained the extraordinary 
 number of seven hundred and eighty works, 
 comprising ten from the pencil of Mr. Law- 
 rence, who (Sir Joshua being dead) was already, 
 though not without a strong and honourable 
 rivalry, the first painter in Europe. His works 
 in this Exhibition were : — 1, Portrait of a Lady 
 of fashion, as La Penserosa ; 25 , a Gentleman 
 and his Lady ; 65, His Majesty ; 109, a Gen- 
 tleman ; 150, a Lady of Quality ; 183, a 
 
 Gentleman ; 209, an Etonian ; 225, a Lady of 
 Quality; 366, a Naval Officer ; 513, a Noble- 
 man’s Children. 
 
 His portrait (65) of Flis Majesty was hung 
 next to Mr. W est’s celebrated historical paint- 
 ing of Edward the Third passing the river Soane, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 139 
 
 which was specially ordered by the King for 
 the Audience Chamber of Windsor Castle. 
 This great historical painting, by the successor 
 of Sir Joshua Reynolds in the chair of the 
 Academy, divided the public attraction with 
 the contiguous portrait of His Majesty, by Mr. 
 Lawrence, a fact most flattering to the feelings, 
 and auspicious to the hopes, of this juvenile 
 competitor for fame with so celebrated and so 
 experienced an artist. 
 
 But if Mr. Lawrence confined himself to a 
 branch of art in which he had little to fear 
 from the competition of Mr. West, he had 
 rivals in that branch of a most formidable 
 character. 
 
 Mr. Opiewas upon the full tide of his popu- 
 larity. Without depreciating the very extra- 
 ordinary talents of this eminent man, it may 
 be justifiable to remark, that imagination could 
 scarcely conceive a stronger difference, than his 
 style of thick colouring and heavy touch, and 
 the brilliant colouring, vigour, and grace which 
 Mr. Lawrence infused into all his portraits. 
 Many of Mr. Opie’s productions speak forcibly 
 to the feelings, and must ever be invaluable to 
 men of taste ; but his portraits were identity 
 seen through an unpleasant medium, whilst 
 Lawrence, with equal truth to the original, cast 
 
140 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 over it the graces and serene cheerfulness of his 
 own mind. 
 
 But a very powerful rival to Lawrence was 
 still found in Mr. Hoppner, who now resided 
 in Charles Street, St. James’s Square, basking 
 in the meridian heat of the patronage of the 
 young Prince of Wales. Factitious circum- 
 stances conspired to prevent any fair estimate 
 being formed of these eminent men, and every 
 opinion about either was tinged by political and 
 similar prejudices. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, though only twenty-three 
 years of age, was portrait painter in ordinary 
 to His Majesty, whilst Mr. Hoppner received 
 the honour of being nominated portrait painter 
 to the Prince of Wales ; and in the Exhibition 
 of this year (1792) he displayed his fine talents 
 in portraits of His Royal Highness and of the 
 Duke and Duchess of York. 
 
 Hitherto, unfortunately, His Majesty’s pa- 
 tronage of artists had evinced very little taste 
 for art, and very little knowledge of the merits 
 of those whom he patronized. The Prince, on 
 the contrary, was the glass of fashion and the 
 mould of form. He had considerable taste in 
 the lighter elegances and attractive brilliancies 
 of art ; he was the oracle of fashion, and a po- 
 sitive arbiter elegantiarum , from whose decision 
 none had the temerity nor any desire to appeal. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 141 
 
 This reputation for grace and elegance ren- 
 dered his patronage omnipotent in portrait- 
 painting, where vanity is to be administered to, 
 and pride, in all its caprice, to be flattered. The 
 more sober and homely ideas of the King 'were 
 not likely to be a passport for any portrait- 
 painter to the vanity of ladies, and hence Mr. 
 Hoppner for a long time almost monopolized 
 the female beauty and young fashion of the 
 country. Such a position was calculated to 
 crush an artist so young as Mr. Lawrence ; and 
 his talents must be appreciated by the fact, 
 that he gradually overcame all prejudices, and 
 by the beauty of his pencil completely outstrip- 
 ped his rival, till the death of Mr. Hoppner 
 closed a career of competition which was so 
 honourable to both of them. 
 
 In the mean time it may be observed, that 
 in this year (1792), the death of Sir Joshua 
 Reynolds, and the election of his successor as 
 President of the Royal Academy, called up a 
 host of acute and acrimonious writers in the 
 periodical publications of the day, by whom 
 every eminent man in the profession was ridi- 
 culed or otherwise attacked, in a manner which 
 the good taste of the present age could not 
 tolerate or sanction. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence either escaped censure, or re- 
 ceived praise, although one of the belligerent 
 
142 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 writers, the saturnine and malignant Anthony 
 Pasquin, two years afterwards selected him as 
 an object of his virulent acumen. 
 
 In the succeeding year (1793), Mr. Lawrence 
 shone conspicuously in the Exhibition of the 
 Academy. A new stimulus had been given tp 
 the arts, and the Exhibition contained the un- 
 precedented number of eight hundred and fifty- 
 six works. Of these, nine were from the pen- 
 cil of Law r rence, and they brought him a great 
 accession of fame. In the Catalogue, they stood 
 — 7, Portrait of a Gentleman ; 15, a Gentle- 
 man ; 63, His Royal Highness the Duke of 
 Clarence ; 80, a Nobleman ; 191, Prospero rais- 
 ing the storm ; 231, Portrait of a Gentleman ; 
 235, a Lady ; 545, a Lady of Quality ; 614, a 
 Gentleman. 
 
 Of these, only two were portraits of ladies ; 
 the current of female patronage ran in a con- 
 trary direction.* 
 
 In the succeeding year (1794), there was 
 a reaction among the artists ; for the works 
 in the Academy fell off, from eight hundred 
 and fifty-six to six hundred and seventy. One 
 cause of this was the strong direction given 
 
 * The portraits were, seriatim, of Mr. Whitbread, Sir 
 George Beaumont, the Duke of Clarence, the Marquis of 
 Abercorn, the Hon. Mr. Robinson, Mrs. Finch, Lady Catha- 
 rine Harbord, and Mr. (now Earl) Grey. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 143 
 
 to every energy, towards the war with 
 France. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, who is styled in the Cata- 
 logue R. A. Elect, and Principal Painter in Or- 
 dinary to His Majesty, produced the eight fol- 
 lowing portraits : — 78, Portrait of a Gentleman ; 
 115, a Bishop ; 131, a Nobleman ; 160, a Lady 
 (to be disposed of) ; 168, a Lady ; 1 73, an Arch- 
 bishop ; 181, a Gentleman ; 199, a Boy. 
 
 He was now of such decided fame, that sa- 
 tirists might expect to make money by select- 
 ing him as the object of censure or panegyric. 
 I accordingly find that he now begins to be a 
 constant object of attention with the coarse but 
 acute lampooner, Anthony Pasquin. 
 
 In his “ Memoirs of the Royal Academy for 
 1794,” Pasquin says of Opie, that “ an indifferent 
 spectator would be led to imagine that he was 
 concerned in a coarse woollen manufactory, as he 
 seizes all possible occasions to array his person- 
 ages in that species of apparel, from an emperor 
 to a mendicant.” After proceeding in this man- 
 ner, he says of him, that “ his style of colouring 
 becomes, in my opinion, more defective every 
 year. It is now, in all his flesh, but little more 
 than black and white, imperfectly amended by 
 the mixture of brown ochre, or some ingredi- 
 ent equally fatal to the purposes of truth.” 
 
 In this there is some little of truth, exagge- 
 
144 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 rated and coarsely conveyed. The satirist pro- 
 ceeds to attack Mr. Hamilton for “ a flutter of 
 style — the light is so scattered, that it looks 
 like luminousness run mad.” This, however, is 
 qualified by much faint praise; after which, 
 the author is unsparing of Mr. West. 
 
 Of that artist’s Edward the Black Prince 
 receiving John, King of France, prisoner after 
 the Battle of Poitiers, he says — “ Though it is 
 the presumed assemblage of warriors, and im- 
 mediately after a hard-fought battle, their faces 
 are as placid, and their habiliments as trim, as 
 if no such event had occurred or was in agita- 
 tion. The idea of the horses is assuredly bor- 
 rowed from Mr. Bayes’s cavalry ; and the posi- 
 tion of the cardinals entirely accords with the 
 received notion of ultramontane affection.” 
 
 Of Mr. West’s next picture, the Descent of 
 the Spirit upon Jesus, after his baptism in Jor- 
 dan, Pasquin complains of “ the splashings ” of 
 the water. “ The figure of Christ looks like a 
 deserter who had been recently whipped, and 
 was sneaking off to a surgeon, with a blanket 
 over his wounds. The identity of Mr. West’s 
 figures is so continually apparent, that I believe 
 he has a few favourite domestics who are the 
 saints and demons of his necessities.” 
 
 Pasquin’s observations become less coarse and 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 145 
 
 personal, and consequently of more importance, 
 when he says, criticising the same painting — 
 “ If it be not ludicrous, it is impious, that such 
 a personification as this should be made public 
 for vulgar contemplation. It is paying a post- 
 humous obeisance to the artifices of wily priests, 
 in the darkest ages of Christianity. It must be 
 extremely painful to the wise, to behold the 
 Spirit of God pourtrayed as a dove, and even 
 God himself occasionally, as an imbecile old 
 man. There is a point which mortals cannot 
 approach but in glimmering thought : it is that 
 which borders upon an intellectual image of 
 the universal Spirit — the great Mind of the 
 Universe , who, in the motions of a subtile fluid, 
 suited to the visual organ, illuminates the world 
 — who lives in the perfect action of substance, 
 the purity of nature.” 
 
 Criticism so excellent, and observations so 
 useful, must not, however, be conveyed entirely 
 at the expense of Mr. West, for they apply, in 
 a great degree, to even the highest masters. It 
 would not be difficult to show equal profanations 
 in the most celebrated paintings of the greatest 
 artists ; and the age of gothic superstition and 
 barbarous idolatry having passed, a class of scrip- 
 tural subjects cannot be too much discouraged. 
 One half of the paintings from the Old and 
 
 VOL. i. l 
 
146 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 New Testament by the great masters, but for 
 their art, ought to be destroyed for their im- 
 piety. Where Rubens represents Christ an 
 adult, as an Athleta, — or the infant Christ as a 
 pulpy Dutch child, with the ludicrous conse- 
 quences of juvenile habits ; or where Correggio 
 paints Joseph planing boards at the carpenter’s 
 bench, or Carracci, the young Christ holding 
 with his thumb the carpenter’s chalk-line, 
 whilst his father, as a journeyman mechanic, is 
 marking the floor ; gross and crassid must be 
 the Christian spectator whose love of art is not 
 waived in offence at the impiety. Such in- 
 stances are innumerable ; but even these are 
 not so offensive, as the perpetual attempts to 
 embody in sensible objects the abstractions of 
 philosophy, or the warm and impassioned me- 
 taphors of the East. We rise, how r ever, to a 
 climax where scenes of blood, of slaughter, 
 and of individual sufferings under cruelty, are 
 culled from the Scriptures to be represented 
 upon the canvass. However sublime the art, 
 or exalted the specimen of it, that picture is 
 dearly purchased which degrades a moral sen- 
 timent, or weakens a social sympathy, by fami- 
 liarizing the mind to scenes of blood, or by 
 representing cruelty under any circumstances of 
 palliation. He who paints such subjects as the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 147 
 
 Murder of the Innocents, or St. John’s reeking 
 head in a dish, ought to be consigned to the 
 office of decorating the walls of a slaughter- 
 house. 
 
 Pasquin proceeds to criticise the juvenile, and 
 since eminent, friend of Lawrence, who had just 
 painted a Minerva for the Council Chamber of 
 the Guildhall of London. He says, “ This lady, 
 I do affirm, does not beam a divinity : she is all 
 legs and thighs, like the late Sir Thomas Robin- 
 son. The drawing of the foot would disgrace 
 a schoolboy ; and the folds of her drapery are 
 all unascertained and dashed in at random. She 
 is evidently either pregnant or padded, and 
 seems prouder of her belly than her head; but 
 this was, perhaps, a discreet compliment to city 
 prejudices. To be brief, it is a brazen, forward 
 minx, unknown to Jove, to Prometheus, and 
 Alma Mater .” 
 
 Such was the pungent, epigrammatic style of 
 criticism of this writer ; similar in prose to what 
 Dr. Wolcot annually poured forth in verse, to 
 the annoyance of the artists. 
 
 No two writers were more happy than Dr. 
 Wolcot and Anthony Pasquin, in the applica- 
 tion of epithets to peculiarities in painting, but, 
 unfortunately, both of them often made this 
 talent subservient to malevolence and to per- 
 
 L 2 
 
148 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 sonal objects. Their works must therefore be 
 read with extreme caution. 
 
 It is not for the purpose of reviving persona- 
 lities, or of circulating a severe and cauterising 
 style of criticism, that these observations are 
 quoted. They are brought forth as the indicia 
 of the age, when art had its first struggles for 
 existence in England. They console us by a 
 contrast with the milder feelings and more po- 
 lished manner which accompany the acumen 
 of the present day. But a principal, and, it ap- 
 pears to me, a thoroughly justifiable reason for 
 these quotations is, that the passages refer to 
 what is now become national property, and a 
 source of fixing the public taste and judgment. 
 The Minerva, for instance, is the public property 
 of the City of London, and stands a record of 
 the national talents, to all foreign visitors, as 
 well as to the aristocracy of the city that arrive 
 at the honour of being popular representatives 
 in the civic parliament. The criticisms are 
 nought with respect to the individual artists, 
 for he attacked the juvenile productions of men, 
 who, whatever their early prolusions may have 
 been, have since raised themselves and the art 
 to a very high point of fame. 
 
 Of Mr. Lawrence’s portraits in this exhi- 
 bition, Pasquin proceeds, considering his in- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 149 
 
 curable ill-nature, to take the following favor- 
 able notice. 
 
 No. 78. Portrait of a Gentleman. — “This is 
 a likeness of Sir Gilbert Elliot : as this portrait 
 is not finished, I shall forbear to investigate its 
 merits or demerits.” 
 
 After this damning, not with faint praise, but 
 with a sneer, the “ picture not being finished,’’ 
 he proceeds to 
 
 No. 115. Portrait of an Archbishop. — “This 
 is a likeness of the spiritual Lord of Canterbury. 
 It conveys a full idea of the florid, well-fed 
 visage of this fortunate arch-prelate; and a 
 monk better appointed never sighed before the 
 tomb of Becket.” 
 
 This prelate was Dr. John Moore, who had 
 been translated from the see of Bangor in 1783, 
 and retained that of Canterbury to the year 
 1804. Dr. Watson, the Bishop of Llandaff, 
 one of the most learned, intellectual, and cer- 
 tainly the most scientific prelate of his day, albeit 
 he made such a wretched apology against his 
 antagonist, bears witness to the mild and in- 
 offensive manner in which this prelate sustained 
 his honors and executed his functions. 
 
 No. 131. Portrait of a Nobleman. — “ This is 
 a likeness of Lord Auckland, a man to whom 
 the capricious goddess has been equally boun- 
 
150 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 tiful. This heterogeneous nobleman is so fan- 
 tastically enveloped in drapery, that I cannot 
 ascertain what is meant for his coat, and what 
 for the curtain ; they are all of the same strength 
 and importance. This is destroying the subor- 
 dination of objects most completely. Perhaps 
 his Lordship is pourtrayed in the very act of 
 writing his glorious manifesto at the Hague, as 
 he appears to think so intensely on the theme, 
 that his eyeballs seem bursting from their 
 spheres.” 
 
 I must concede to this satirist that his obser- 
 vations are here strictly just, although they are 
 not conveyed with great amenity. The drape- 
 ries and costume were so loosely painted that 
 they were confounded ; and the eyes, like those 
 of another portrait painted a few years before 
 Sir Thomas's death, were starting from their 
 spheres. 
 
 This latter remark is curious, for scarcely can 
 ancient or modern art produce a better painter 
 of eyes than Sir Thomas Lawrence. 
 
 Sir Joshua Reynolds laid it down as a fixed 
 principle, that, to create the beautiful, the eyes 
 ought to be always in mezzotint. Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence, though always aiming at the beauti- 
 ful, never pursued this rule ; for his eyes had 
 scarcely any tint at all, or were tinted above the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 151 
 
 mezzo. In his painting-room in Russel Square, 
 the light was high, but in that at 57, Greek 
 Street, it was higher than artists usually paint 
 from, for it was introduced from the second 
 story by the removal of the floor. 
 
 No. 173. Portrait of a Lady of Quality. — 
 “ This is a whole-length of Lady Emily Hobart, 
 in the character of Juno; the face is chalky 
 and sickly ; the robe is so white and so unin- 
 cumbered with shadow, that it might pass for 
 an habiliment of porcelain texture. While I 
 viewed it, I was betrayed from a recollection of 
 the surrounding objects, and I momentarily 
 imagined, that if I cast a stone at the vestment, 
 I should shiver it to pieces.” 
 
 In this portrait, Lady Hobart was dressed 
 in white, with a rose in her hand. She had close 
 sleeves and long gloves ; a peacock on a vase was 
 introduced in the background, Barry having 
 so successfully introduced the peacock into his 
 Grecian Marriage. This family, perhaps owing 
 to Pasquin’s critique, refused to take this por- 
 trait ; and Sir Thomas Lawrence never painted 
 any thing for the lady’s family afterwards. 
 
 The Lady Emily Hobart here pourtrayed, was 
 this year married to Lord Castlereagli, and sur- 
 vived his Lordship, after his decease in 1822. 
 The likeness was the last taken of her Ladyship 
 
152 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 in her maiden state, when she was in her twenty- 
 third year, and formed a lovely subject for the 
 artist’s pencil. 
 
 No. 181. Portrait of a Gentleman. — 44 This, I 
 understand, is the likeness of Mr. Knight, and is 
 repulsive in the attitude. It fills me with the 
 idea of an irascible pedagogue explaining Euclid 
 to a dunce. Mr. Lawrence began his professional 
 career upon a false and delusive principle. His 
 portraits were delicate, but not true and attrac- 
 tive — not admirable ; and because he met the 
 approbation of a few fashionable spinsters (which, 
 it must be admitted, is a sort of enticement very 
 intoxicating to a young mind), vainly imagined 
 that his labours were perfect : his fertile mind is 
 overrun with weeds : appearing to do well to a 
 few T , may operate to our advantage in morals, 
 but will not be applicable to the exertion of pro- 
 fessional talents. Many have caught at transitory 
 fame from the ravings of idiotism, but none have 
 retained celebrity, but those who have passed 
 through the fiery ordeal of general judgment. 
 There appears to be a total revolution in all the 
 accustomed obligations of our being. Men can 
 do as well, and be as much respected now, after 
 the forfeiture of character, as before ; and artists 
 seem to think, that they can paint as well, and 
 be as much encouraged, without a knowledge 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 153 
 
 of the common elements of their profession, as 
 with them. This surely is the saturnalia of vice 
 and insignificance.” 
 
 This criticism is at least in bad keeping, and 
 is full of confusion between the opinions and 
 their illustrations. 
 
 Of Hoppner, Lawrence’s rival, Pasquin speaks 
 in terms of praise, qualified a little by his usual 
 malevolence. * 
 
 In his second number of the “ Memoirs of the 
 Royal Academy,” Pasquin has some very sharp 
 flashes of wit, with many good observations 
 upon art, and criticisms upon English painters. 
 His observations upon Sir Joshua Reynolds are 
 the best. 
 
 Among the head professors, he is pleased to 
 give a memoir of Mr. Lawrence, — a sufficient 
 
 * Mr. Hoppner was born in London, in 1759, and educated, 
 as the child of a German domestic, under the direction of 
 his Majesty ; from which circumstance many have inferred, 
 that he was a natural offspring from the royal loins ; and this 
 idea had not been sufficiently weakened by his own broad 
 suggestions. He copied Sir Joshua in his portraits, and 
 Gainsborough’s style of landscapes in his backgrounds. 
 Like Sir Joshua and Lawrence, he was most happy in his 
 portraits of ladies and children. He was natural, mellow, and 
 deep ; and had he confined himself to landscapes, to which 
 his genius inclined him, he would have been of the highest 
 celebrity. 
 
154 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 distinction from such a hand, for a young artist 
 who had not yet attained his twenty -fifth year, 
 and whose works had only been exhibited five 
 times at the Academy. He says, “Addison has 
 observed, that ‘ censure is the tax which every 
 man pays for being eminent.’ This tax, though 
 always strenuously demanded, is, like most 
 other taxes, — not always cheerfully paid. In 
 animadverting on the merits of the Royal Aca- 
 demicians in this detail, I have been reported 
 by some as too partial, and by others as too 
 severe. To sport a paradox, to be too partial is 
 to be severe, as well as to be severe is to be 
 partial : as few take the trouble to reprove errors 
 but in those tbey regard : — the gardener re- 
 moves with care every noxious weed that might 
 impede the growth or spoil the brilliancy of his 
 favourite flower, but those he does not value, he 
 resigns to the rude elements, to ‘ waste their 
 sweetness in the desert air.’ 
 
 “ I am told that some of the R. A.’s have felt 
 themselves sorely hurt, and have curvetted ex- 
 ceedingly at a little wholesome correction which 
 has occasionally dropped from my pen; while 
 others there are who have sensibly smiled, and 
 freely owned that they are but men, and, as 
 public men, properly subject to the dominion 
 of criticism. Notwithstanding my ascribed un- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 155 
 
 charitableness, I will repeat, after the Duke 
 of Buckingham, 
 
 ‘ ’Tis great delight to laugh at some men’s ways, 
 
 But a much greater to give merit praise.* 
 
 “ Mr., or, as he was then characterised, Master 
 Thomas Lawrence, began his studies at a period 
 when other boys are at their Syntax, and, at the 
 very early age of eight, made some very pro- 
 mising attempts at portrait-painting : at the age 
 of nine he was capable, without any instruction, 
 of copying some historical pictures in a style 
 that indicated great genius, and he gave the 
 admiring world a composition of his own: the 
 subject was the Denial of Christ by Peter. 
 About this time, he drew the portraits of Mr. 
 West, the President, and Mr. Humphries, and 
 finished both within the hour. 
 
 “ I will hot use the hyperbolical falsehood 
 which Pope applied to Kneller,* in saying ‘ he 
 
 * Kneller was organically vain, almost to insanity ; and, as 
 if in memory of his vanity, his pompous monument is oppo- 
 site to and rivals that of Sir Isaac Newton, in the western 
 aisle of Westminster Abbey. On one occasion, Kneller 
 heard a low man damning himself. “ G — d d — mn you, in- 
 deed !” cried the indignant artist. “ God may damn the 
 Duke of Marlborough, or Sir Godfrey Kneller ; but do you 
 suppose he would take the trouble to damn such a low fellow 
 
156 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 was by Heaven, and not a Master taught 
 though the compliment would be more near to 
 truth, as Kneller was the scholar of Frank 
 Hals ; but young Lawrence, like Epicurus of 
 old, may claim the merit of being self-taught. 
 If he had enjoyed the advantage of having 
 studied in Italy, and been bred in the school of 
 the Carracci, instead of the seminaries of Somer- 
 setshire, I think he might have been arranged 
 among the most prominent masters in either of 
 the Homan or Florentine academies : all the 
 assistance he had to cultivate his genius was the 
 unremitting attention administered by a tender 
 father, who, though he knew but little of the 
 arts, knew much of his duty: it is but justice 
 to Mr. Lawrence to observe, that he repays this 
 parental kindness with the most filial piety. 
 
 “ Among many of the most celebrated cha- 
 racters of the times, his portraits of the Bishop 
 of Oxford, most of the heads of houses, and the 
 nobility of the University of Oxford, were en- 
 
 as you V* On another occasion, when the salvation of Catho- 
 lics and Protestants was discussed in a company, Kneller 
 rose, and said, “ I think God is merciful, and at the last day 
 will say to the Protestants, ‘ You go to that part of Heaven,’ 
 and to the Catholics, ‘ You go to that then, turning to me, 
 he will say, * But you, Sir Godfrey Kneller, are at liberty to 
 go wherever you please.’ ” 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. * 157 
 
 titled to much celebrity : all this was effected 
 before he was ten years of age : after that he 
 settled at Bath, where all the beauty and fashion 
 of the place constantly presented themselves to 
 his pencil. After this he made the metropolis 
 his constant residence, and commenced his stu- 
 dies at the Royal Academy. After a limited 
 time of probation, he was elected an Academi- 
 cian ; at the demise of Sir Joshua Reynolds, and 
 at the age of twenty-eight, he succeeded him 
 in the appointment of principal Painter to the 
 King.* Swift, in his advice to a young divine, 
 recommends to him to abstain from attempts 
 at wit, for it was possible he might not possess 
 any : for the same reason, I would recommend 
 to Mr. Lawrence to discontinue his attempts at 
 the sublime in painting; it is dangerous ground 
 where to fall is to be contemptible — he has not 
 ballast enough in his mind. 
 
 “ The most important effort of a young 
 painter should be, to yoke his imagination in 
 the trammels of reason, so that the sober move- 
 ments of the one may set boundaries to the 
 wildnesses of the other : though this is truly 
 difficult, it must be effected, or else the licen- 
 
 * Pasquin is not always accurate in dates and facts. 
 
158 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 tiousness of that quick creating spirit will only 
 give variegated monsters to the sight, which 
 can never be subservient to historic truth or 
 moral allegory. 
 
 “ Mr. Lawrence, in his handling, is too pro- 
 fuse of his lights : where there are so many in- 
 troduced, they distract the attention : I know if 
 his colouring is too sombre it will not please 
 the ladies, but if too glaring it will offend the 
 eye of the connoisseur. I am sorry to be 
 obliged to remark of the English artists, that, 
 having obtained applause, they early neglect 
 their academic studies : they should remember 
 that Carlo Maratti, at the great age of eighty, 
 said he failed not to improve ; and Boucher the 
 French painter, at nearly the same age, never 
 omitted one night’s attendance on his studies 
 in the French Academy. As Nature has been 
 very lavish of her gifts to Mr. Lawrence, I 
 heartily recommend it to him, to omit no op- 
 portunity by study to improve those gifts : his 
 present manner is too chalky, too fluttering, 
 and too undetermined. 
 
 “ I have much reason to believe, that this gen- 
 tleman has been injured in his professional 
 movements, by the presuming interference of 
 men who were not calculated to pass judgment 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 159 
 
 upon the fine arts. The disgusting, imperti- 
 nent affectation of saucy drivellers, when com- 
 menting upon similar productions, is a melan- 
 choly proof how far our pride can subdue our 
 discretion. Mr. Arthur Young, in a book of 
 travels, has inserted the following passage, which 
 is dated from Bologna. ‘ In the church of 
 Saint Giovanni, in Monte, there is the famous 
 Saint Cecilia of Raphael, of which Sir Robert 
 Strange has given so fine a print, and in which 
 he has done ample justice to the original.’ This 
 is evidently an erroneous criticism, as the en- 
 graver quoted never possessed the powers of 
 doing ample justice to the works of so divine a 
 painter.* Sir Robert Strange did wonders in 
 the graphic art, considering the disadvantages of 
 his education ; but Mr. Young should be taught 
 to know, that no engraver can do complete 
 justice to the best efforts of a painter, who does 
 not draw as correctly, and understand the hu- 
 man anatomy as well. The grand circumstance 
 which elevates the person who designs from 
 him who merely copies that design, is briefly 
 
 * The absurdity of the passage is palpable: — in the abstract 
 nature of engraving, it is impossible to do justice to such 
 works. For his period, Sir Robert Strange exhibited pro- 
 digious skill in his art. 
 
160 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 this, that the first must be illumined by the 
 rare influence of genius, before he can be emi- 
 nently considered ; but the latter may be high- 
 ly respectable in his more servile province, with- 
 out possessing any such godlike advantages. 
 Perhaps it would have been as wise, though 
 not so pompous, if Mr, Young had written 
 more about turnips, and less of virtu” 
 
 Such was the ordeal through which Mr. Law- 
 rence had to pass in the year 1794. But what- 
 ever malevolence or jealousy might instigate 
 others to utter against him — however a man 
 like A. Pasquin might attempt to fill his pock- 
 ets, or gratify his disposition to lampoons at the 
 expense of others, Mr. Lawrence had too much 
 equanimity to be ruffled. In private life, he 
 felt that he could profess himself “ Integer vitce 
 scelerisque purus” and he toiled diligently at 
 his art, presuming that he should find his level 
 in the brisk competition that he had to sustain. 
 The public were just in their estimate of his 
 powers, and he pursued the even tenour of his 
 way, with gradual, but uniform, undeviating, 
 and most flattering success. 
 
 This year,* 1794, he removed from Old Bond 
 
 * His notice to quit his lodgings in Old Bond Street, was 
 on the 24th December, 1794. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 161 
 
 Street, and took a house in Piccadilly, opposite to 
 the Green Park : this he furnished in good style ; 
 and though his habits and disposition for mode- 
 rate pleasures and calm enjoyments, precluded 
 his being what, in the language of the world, is 
 termed a hospitable man, he lived with a repute 
 for liberality.* 
 
 The exhibitions of the Academy, notwith- 
 standing the mania of the country for war, 
 began now to rise more uniformly in the num- 
 ber of works displayed to the public. That of 
 the year 1795 contained seven hundred and 
 thirty -five works, of which nine excellent paint- 
 ings from the pencil of Mr. Lawrence testified 
 his industry, and gave most unequivocal proofs 
 of an improvement which would soon leave all 
 competition at an immeasurable distance. In 
 the Catalogue, Mr. Lawrence’s works are num- 
 bered — 55, Portrait of a Lady of Quality; 
 75, a young Lady ; 86, a Nobleman; 131, an 
 
 * His habits, however, were far from social and hospitable: 
 his application precluded this ; for sometimes he would be- 
 gin a head at ten in the morning, and finish it by four in the 
 afternoon. Such exertions exhausted him, and he sought 
 repose, not in conviviality, but in a change to milder occu- 
 pations under his own roof, or sometimes in the delasscment of 
 an evening with a few private friends, who were selected with 
 a taste that reflected credit on his discernment. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 M 
 
162 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Officer; 168, a Gentleman ; 175, a Lady of Qua- 
 lity ; 191, A Gentleman ; 596, William Cowper, 
 Esq. ; 602, a Family. 
 
 An intimacy had existed for several years 
 between Mr. Cowper and Mr. Lawrence, their 
 dispositions in many respects being congenial. 
 The following letter from the poet to the pain- 
 ter, must please all who are interested in the lives 
 of these eminent men. 
 
 “ DEAR SIR, 
 
 “ As often as I have comforted myself with 
 the hope of seeing you again soon, I have felt a 
 sensible drawback upon that comfort, from the 
 fear of a disappointment, which, considering 
 your profession and your just pre-eminence in 
 it, appeared to me extremely probable. 
 
 “ Your letter, most welcome otherwise, gave 
 me this most unwelcome information the mo- 
 ment I saw your name at fhe bottom of it. 
 We all feel our loss, and much as I suppose 
 you are beloved by my friend Hose, who has 
 pretty acute discernment, I will venture to say 
 he is not more mortified than myself. You do 
 me justice, if you believe that my invitation 
 did not consist of words merely : in truth, it 
 was animated by a very sincere wish that it 
 might prove acceptable to you : and once more 
 I give you the same assurance, that, at any time 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 163 
 
 when you shall find it possible to allow your- 
 self some relaxation in the country, if you will 
 enjoy it here, you will confer a real favour on 
 one whom you have already taught to set a 
 high value on your company and friendship. I 
 am too old to be very hasty in forming new con- 
 nexions : but short as our acquaintance has been^ 
 to you I have the courage to say, that my heart 
 and my door will always be gladly open to you. 
 
 “ Mr. Rose is gone this morning to Newport, 
 and does not know that I write. My cousin, 
 whom you often heard me mention by the 
 name of Johnny, is gone with him. Him Mr. 
 Rose will introduce to you on his return to Lon- 
 don ; and though perhaps, being a little shy, he 
 may not discover it in his manner when he has 
 the pleasure to see you, he has already caught 
 from me an ardent desire to know you. 
 
 “ Mrs. Unwin sends her compliments, and sin- 
 cerely joins me in the wish that you will never 
 hereafter consider us as strangers, or give us 
 reason to think you one. 
 
 “ I remain, dear Sir, affectionately yours, 
 
 “ William Cowper.” 
 
 “ Weston, Oct. 18, 1793.” 
 
 “ When will you come and give me a drawing 
 of the old oak ?” 
 
 “ To Thomas Lawrence, Esq. 
 
 Old Bond Street, London.” 
 
 M 2 
 
164 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Anthony Pasquin this year published nume- 
 rous critiques on the Exhibition, but he took 
 no notice of Mr. Lawrence, except remarking, 
 that his portraits generally were among the very 
 best of the good. 
 
 The year 1795, I have already observed, was 
 distinguished by two very memorable sales — 
 that of M. de Calonne, and that of Sir Joshua 
 Reynolds. Of the first, the following is a 
 contemporary notice in a leading periodical of 
 that day. 
 
 MONSIEUR DE CALONNE’S PICTURES. 
 
 “ In this very magnificent and splendid collec- 
 tion of the first pictures that ever were painted 
 by the first masters that ever existed, there is so 
 much to admire, so much to wonder at, that the 
 spectator is at a loss where to fix his attention ; 
 and the eye wanders from the vivid glow that 
 beams on the canvass of Rubens, to the strong 
 contrasts of Rembrandt, the silvery tones of 
 Teniers, the savage grandeur of Salvator Rosa, 
 the pure taste and majestic dignity of Raphaelle, 
 and the antique simplicity and native energy 
 of Michael Angelo. 
 
 “ There are fourteen pictures by Rubens ; 
 eight by Vandyke; seven by Rembrandt; six 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 165 
 
 by Wouvermans ; seven by Teniers ; two by F. 
 Mieris ; three by Gerard Dow ; two by Ostade ; 
 three by that very scarce master Paul Potter ; 
 three by Berghem ; five by Cuyp ; two by 
 Adrian Vandervelde; three by Pynaker; two 
 by Sir Joshua Reynolds ; and one by Gainsbo- 
 rough. The Annunciation, by Michael Angelo 
 Buonarroti, was purchased by M. de Calonne 
 at Venice, from the family for whom it was 
 painted. Besides this, there are of the Italian 
 school, one by Raphael; one by Lionardo da 
 Vinci ; four by P. de Cortona ; one by Corre- 
 gio ; three by Parmegiano ; one by Schidone ; 
 four by Carracci ; ten by Guido ; two by Domi- 
 nichino ; three by Guerchino ; four by Albano ; 
 eight by Salvator Rosa ; ten by N. Poussin. 
 
 “ By Claude there are eight, and by Vernet 
 three ; two of them remarkably fine. Besides 
 these, there are many of the most capital works 
 of eminent masters of the Roman, Florentine, 
 Venetian, Spanish, French, Flemish, Dutch, 
 and English schools. 
 
 “ Amongst them there are, as there must be 
 in every large collection, some inferior pictures ; 
 but these are comparatively few ; and consider- 
 ed as a whole, they form unquestionably the first 
 and finest collection ever exhibited for sale in 
 this or any other country. Though the room 
 
166 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 is large, yet the pictures are so numerous that 
 many of the first class are in situations very 
 disadvantageous to their appearance; two of 
 the Claudes are surrounded with high-coloured 
 paintings, a circumstance which gives them a 
 relative coldness that they have not when seen 
 detached. Many of the small, high-finished ta- 
 bleaux are hung almost to the ground, and can- 
 not be seen. The view of the destruction of 
 the Old Bridge at Paris, ought to be above the 
 eye, and it is below the knees ; and some fine 
 pictures in the lower room cannot be seen at 
 all. This, considering the number, was per- 
 haps unavoidable, and therefore must not be 
 imputed as an error to the hanging committee, 
 but as a misfortune.” 
 
 In Sir Joshua’s sale, the following paintings 
 sold for the prices affixed to each : — 
 
 The Halt of Banditti, by Wouvermans, 103 
 guineas; the Vision of Daniel, (Bembrandt,) 
 170; Susannah and the Elders, (Rembrandt,) 
 156 ; St. Teresa, (Guido,) 44 ; an Italian Land- 
 scape, (Claude,) 145 ; a Moonlight, Rubens, 80 ; 
 Jupiter and Leda, (Michael Angelo,) 74. 
 
 Never was there into any country such a 
 sudden influx of art, compared to the splendid 
 collections of the finest old paintings which 
 were poured into England about this period. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 167 
 
 in consequence of their possessors being ruined 
 by the events proceeding out of the French 
 Revolution. Had these superb paintings been 
 segregated in a national gallery, how immedi- 
 ate, great, and permanent might have been the 
 consequences to our national taste ! but, unfor- 
 tunately, the mania for war had seized upon the 
 nation, and they were bought by the affluent, 
 and hid in their mansions from the study of 
 the artists. * 
 
 * The following are a few of the prices since given by the 
 British Institution, and by individual amateurs, for paintings ; 
 showing the great increase in the value of works of art in 
 this country. 
 
 1. A painting of the Venetian school, by Paolo 
 
 Veronese . . . . £1575 
 
 2. Christ healing the Sick, 1811, by Benjamin 
 
 West, P.R.A. .... 3150 
 
 3. Elijah restoring to life the Widow’s Son, 1813, 
 
 by Richard Westall, R.A. . . 420 
 
 4. Mary anointing the feet of Jesus, 1814, by 
 
 William Hilton, R.A. . . .588 
 
 5. Christ giving sight to the Blind, 1814, by 
 
 Henry Richter . . . 525 
 
 6. Distraining for Rent, 1815, by David Wilkie, 
 
 R.A. . . . .630 
 
 £6888 
 
 In .1809, Mr. Thomas Hope purchased Mr. Sharpe’s 
 Music Master for 100 guineas, to which the Institution 
 
168 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 In the year following, 1796, the Exhibition 
 was again productive to the extent of eight 
 hundred and eighty -five works, and Mr. Law- 
 rence did more than sustain his reputation, by 
 sending eight portraits. These were : — 102, 
 Portrait of a Lady of Quality ; 103, a Noble- 
 man ; 116, a Lady ; 147, a Bishop ; 163, a No- 
 bleman ; 164, an Artist; 183, a Gentleman; 
 202, an Officer. 
 
 In the following year, 1797, the artists seem 
 to have been extraordinarily prolific, for the 
 Exhibition was swelled to 1194 works, more 
 than double the number of some former years, 
 and the periodical press was equally active in 
 its criticisms. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, who in 1797 had removed to 
 Greek Street, Soho, exhibited few paintings this 
 year, for an obvious reason, — his time had been 
 occupied upon his Satan, a work which aspired 
 
 awarded a premium of 60 guineas. The Earl Grosvenor 
 purchased Mr. J. J. Chalon’s Landscape and Cattle, and Mr. 
 II. P. Hope, Mr. Dawe’s Imogen for 200 guineas, which also 
 obtained a 60-guinea premium, and Mr. Howard’s first 
 Navigator. 
 
 In 1810, among others, Lord Mulgrave purchased Mr. 
 Haydon’s Dentatus for 400 guineas; Mr. Thomas Hope, 
 Hilton’s Surrender of Calais for 100 guineas, and Mr. Dawe’s 
 Andromache and Ulysses for 200 guineas. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 169 
 
 to the highest rank in the highest school of art. 
 His paintings exhibited at the Academy in 
 1797 were : — 74, Portrait of a Nobleman’s Fa- 
 mily ; 148, a Nobleman; 166, a Lady; 170, 
 Satan calling his Legions — First Book of Mil- 
 ton; 188, Portrait of a Gentleman; and 237, 
 a Lady. 
 
 Lawrence was now the Magnus Apollo at 
 whom every shaft was directed, or over whom 
 every shield was held, by those who pretended 
 to direct the public taste. Pasquin, as usual, 
 was most active. He published his “ Critical 
 Guide to the Present Exhibition at the Royal 
 Academy,” in which he commences with the 
 fact , that “ the public taste is thoroughly de- 
 praved.” Having, by the assumption of this 
 fixed principle, consoled himself for the public 
 continuing to admire Lawrence, in spite of his 
 equivocal or mixed praise, he next comments 
 upon Messrs. West, Smirke, Stothard, andTres- 
 ham, for painting in a new style, or, according 
 to a discovery made by a Miss Probis, of the 
 old Venetian art of colouring. Pasquin, sure 
 to detract, after expressing his heresy of the 
 new style, asserts, that “ all who have hitherto 
 endeavoured to discover this secret, have been 
 much indebted to the researches of Count Cay- 
 lus.” But, unfortunately, Count Caylus, in his 
 
170 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 pursuit of an idea or description by Pliny, dis- 
 covered the art of mixing wax with certain 
 colours ; whilst Pasquin, in a subsequent publi- 
 cation, claimed a prodigious merit for discover- 
 ing the secret of the new style, which, according 
 to him, consisted of priming the canvass with 
 chalk and size, or by a thin coat of black, in 
 water colours, in the manner of the Bassans, 
 and even Tintoret. 
 
 Pasquin places Lawrence, inter alios, “ at the 
 head of this servile province (Portraits) of the 
 arts, so pernicious to science, and dishonourable 
 to the Institution” (Academy). He then en- 
 ters upon a tirade against the Satan, curious in 
 relation to another version of his critique, which 
 he inserted in a subsequent publication. 
 
 170. Satan calling his Legions. T. Law- 
 rence, R. A. — “ The frequency with which we 
 have been annually compelled to notice the 
 daring folly of our callow artists, in assuming 
 the baton of an historical painter, before they 
 had even the common knowledge of the human 
 anatomy, has filled us with regret ; and yet it 
 appears, that no warning can restrain their 
 lunacy, nor any admonition amend their man- 
 ners. Before Michael Angelo, or Raphaelle, at- 
 tempted to walk in this path of sublimity, they 
 added the force of incalculable and unremitting 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 171 
 
 study to the purest and strongest endowments, 
 and even then they took up the pencil trem- 
 blingly, well knowing the complicated difficul- 
 ties of the pursuit : 
 
 ‘ But fools rush in, where angels fear to tread.’ 
 
 “ This picture is a melange made up of the 
 worst parts of the divine Buonarroti and the 
 extravagant Goltzius. The figure of Satan is 
 colossal and very ill-drawn ; the body is so dis- 
 proportioned to the extremities, that it appears 
 all legs and arms, and might at a distance be 
 mistaken for a sign of the spread eagle. The 
 colouring has as little analogy to truth as the 
 contour, for it is so ordered, that it conveys an 
 idea of a mad German sugar-baker dancing 
 naked in a conflagration of his own treacle; 
 but the liberties taken with his infernal Majesty 
 are so numerous, so various, and so insulting, 
 that we are amazed that the ecclesiastic orders 
 do not interfere in behalf of an old friend.” 
 
 From this he proceeds to criticise No. 188 , 
 Portrait of a Gentleman. — “ This is another re- 
 presentation of Mr. Kemble the actor, of whose 
 visage we have so many copies, that we are led 
 to think that half his time is wasted in sitting 
 for his multifarious portraits ; but this at least 
 is not in any way favourable to his character. 
 
172 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 or the reputation of his friend Lawrence. There 
 is a black air of defiance in it, which does not 
 argue a mind at peace either with himself or 
 mankind, and as the portrait is social and not 
 scenic, such a direction of feature and of expres- 
 sion is absurd, if not disgusting.” 
 
 His next analysis is of No. 1 66, Portrait of 
 a Lady. T. Lawrence, It. A. — “ We are in- 
 structed by the Catalogue to view this picture 
 as an intentional likeness of Mrs. Siddons, but 
 it is no more like her, than Hebe is similar to 
 Bellona. We have here youth, flexibility of 
 features, and an attempt at the formation of 
 beauty, to denote a lady who is proverbially so 
 stern in her countenance, that it approaches to 
 savageness, — so determined in the outline of her 
 visage, that it requires the delusion of the scene 
 to render it soft and agreeable, and who is so far 
 from being young, that her climacteric will be 
 no more. In the colouring of this perform- 
 ance, the cheeks are so betinted with carmine, 
 that it looks more like a new varnished doll, 
 than the energetic priestess of Melpomene : 
 but this young artist has been prematurely 
 exposed, before his experience could warrant 
 his ambition, or his observations could correct 
 his taste. His adherents, or rather his enemies 
 in disguise, have circulated an idea, that the 
 
 O 7 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 173 
 
 late President declared, on beholding one of his 
 pictures, ‘ This young man has begun at a point 
 of excellence where I left off;’ but this is surely 
 a libel on the dead Knight, and one of those 
 time-serving liberties now so commonly taken 
 with departed greatness, for no reasonable man 
 could deliberately utter an opinion as an autho- 
 rity, which no other being (unconnected with 
 the flattered object) could possibly defend ; 
 but the efforts of Mr. Lawrence are befitting 
 the frivolity of the day. He paints to please 
 those who would be agonized to think ; and 
 where thought is not, absurdity fattens.” 
 
 Such criticisms, which pleased “ the wisdom 
 of our ancestors,” would now excite a stronger 
 feeling than contempt ; but, with reference to 
 the paintings upon which they were written, 
 their absolute want of truth might well have 
 consoled all the parties concerned, for their ran- 
 cour. But genius is sensitive, and professional 
 business teaches artists as well as others, that, 
 with the great Pacific Ocean —the public, it is 
 not truth, pure and undefiled, that either injures 
 or benefits the most. But to accuse an artist 
 of copying from Buonarroti or the extravagant 
 Goltzius, and at the same time of being frivolous, 
 reaches the acme of insane raving. The fire and 
 vigour, the decision of outline and force of ex- 
 
174 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 pression, in this portrait of Mrs. Siddons, were 
 surely the reverse of frivolous. 
 
 In a pamphlet entitled “ The Hoyal Acade- 
 my, or a Touchstone to the present Exhibition, 
 by Anthony Touchstone,” (1797,) the criticism 
 upon Mr. Lawrence’s Satan is thus metamor- 
 phosed : — 
 
 “ The frequency with which we have been 
 annually compelled to notice the daring folly of 
 our callous artists, in assuming the baton of an 
 historical painter, before they had even a com- 
 mon knowledge of the human anatomy, has 
 filled us with regret ; but we must, in this in- 
 stance, candidly acknowledge that we rejoice to 
 find our warnings and admonitions had not the 
 power to dampen the ardour of Mr. Lawrence, 
 and to prevent the pleasure the public must 
 indubitably feel in perusing this effort of mas- 
 culine genius. Mr. Lawrence, knowing the ne- 
 cessity of unremitting study being added to the 
 purest and strongest endowments, before he at- 
 tempted to walk in this path of sublimity, came 
 into the field, like M. Angelo or Xtaphaelle, armed 
 from top to toe with every requisite for the 
 contest, and not like his heedless, headless bro- 
 thers of the palette, who essay with all the hardi- 
 ness of ignorance, this the most difficult com- 
 plicated branch of the graphic art : 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 175 
 
 ‘ But fools rush in, where angels fear to tread.’ 
 
 “ This picture is not much inferior to the 
 best conceptions of the divine Buonarroti and 
 the extravagant Goltzius. The figure of Satan 
 is colossal, and drawn with excellent skill and 
 judgment. 
 
 “ Before we entered the room, we confess 
 that we felt, for a moment, a secret wish that 
 it had come from the pencil of Fuseli ; but the 
 instant that we saw it, (and the more we looked 
 on it, the more was the eye of criticism filled 
 with satisfaction,) we esteemed it as a wonder- 
 ful production of the human mind, and equal 
 to any thing of the kind produced in modern 
 days. 
 
 “ Satan is ably and nobly conceived, and con- 
 veys to the imagination every due idea of fallen 
 majesty and terrific power. 
 
 “ The attendant fiend, also, deserves our 
 warmest praise. The growling look and cloudy 
 malignity depicted in his visage, and the sullen, 
 evil disposition with which he appears to rest 
 upon his spear, while listening to his master, 
 are all traits of a masterly hand. 
 
 “We must add, however, before we con- 
 clude, that from following the direction of the 
 hilt of Satan’s sword, it seems to us that some- 
 
176 THE LIFE OF 
 
 thing of its remainder should necessarily ap- 
 pear: — 
 
 ‘ Verum ubi plura mtent in carmine — non ego paucis 
 OfFendar maculis.’ Hor. 
 
 ‘ But where the beauties thus in clusters blaze, 
 
 A fault like this should pass unnoticed as we gaze.’ ” 
 
 This is a fine instance of tergiversation; by 
 the transposition of a few words, the latter cri- 
 tique is made to express directly the reverse of 
 the former ; and what was detraction is turned 
 into praise. 
 
 Another periodical work, in reviewing the 
 Exhibition, thus speaks of Mr. Lawrence’s con- 
 tributions to it. 
 
 EXHIBITION OF PAINTINGS, &C. AT THE ROYAL 
 ACADEMY, SOMERSET-PLACE. 
 
 “ No. 170. Satan calling his Legions, (Milton, 
 Book 1). — This aspiring Artist has undertaken 
 a subject, perhaps the most difficult in his art ; 
 to represent a figure the most grand and sub- 
 lime that Poetry has ever described. 
 
 “ In the attempt, though great, he has not 
 failed. The composition of the picture is simple. 
 The figure of Satan, after recent defeat, and in- 
 effable disgrace, has all the ferocious energy and 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 177 
 
 violent dignity of his character ; and it is well 
 contrasted with that of Beelzebub, which is 
 marked by dejection and despondence. 
 
 “ Though the style and form be far beyond 
 common life, and not in the usual practice of 
 modem art, the drawing is executed with great 
 accuracy and skill. The countenance, though 
 terrible, still retains part of its former lustre 
 and beauty ; and he appears altogether no less 
 than angel fallen . 
 
 “ The colouring has great clearness and force ; 
 and the mind of the beholder is properly im- 
 pressed by the general effect of a sober, appro- 
 priate and grand style pervading the whole 
 picture. 
 
 “ No. 74. Portrait of a Nobleman’s Family. — 
 A very fine picture of Lord Exeter, his late 
 Lady, and his child. The figures are well 
 grouped, and the colour is rich and clear ; 
 forming, altogether, one of the best Portraits in 
 the Exhibition. 
 
 “ No. 166. Portrait of a Lady. — A charming 
 Picture of Mrs. Siddons, where the Artist has 
 highly flattered her, without losing the resem- 
 blance. 
 
 “ No. 188. A good Head of Mr. Kemble.” 
 
 Such is the opposition of opinions forming 
 the atmosphere which is to inspire or destroy 
 
 VOL. i. n 
 
178 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the artist in his struggles for celebrity and 
 support. 
 
 But the two preceding years, 1796 and 1797, 
 of which the professional labours of Mr. Law- 
 rence have been thus recorded, were destined 
 to be of importance in his private life. 
 
 Of his satisfaction at what the discerning few 
 thought and said of his talents, and of his con- 
 sciousness of his possessing great powers, the fol- 
 lowing letter to his friend Miss Lee is a proof. 
 
 “ May, 1796. 
 
 “The first thing I shall tell you is, that 
 I have gained in fame — not more than my 
 wishes ! — you do not desire them to be bound- 
 ed — but more than my expectations. To 
 hear the voice of praise, nor feel it igno- 
 rance or flattery, is sweet and soothing. The 
 work I have undertaken has answered my 
 secret motive in beginning it. My success in 
 portraits will no longer be thought accident 
 and fortune; and if I have trod the second 
 path with honour, it is because my limbs are 
 strong to reach the higher walks. My claims 
 are acknowledged by the circle of taste, (our 
 little world !) and are undisputed by competi- 
 tors and rivals. 
 
 “ But believe not that I am inflated with a 
 triumph which, however great when compared 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 J 79 
 
 with contemporary merit, did never yet satisfy 
 the soul that thirsted for fame. (You at least 
 will not laugh at these rhapsodies.) What cold 
 mind ever reached to greatness? and who 
 would not cherish that ardency in man, which, 
 however clogged by weakness and imbecility, 
 is evidence of Deity itself, and stamps his 
 soaring nature ? When I think of, ‘ What 
 shall I do to be for ever known ?’ I feel myself 
 a sluggard in the race. 
 
 “ Dear friend, let me guard against your laugh 
 by giving it you. Think of the country Mayor 
 who, taking on him the office, told his friends 
 that ‘ for all that, he was but mortal man !’ I 
 shall write to-morrow. I invited Paoli to the 
 dinner. I know it will please you that I am 
 grateful in little things — at first at least, for 
 the novelty ; destroy this. 
 
 “ Pray read it alone, I am ashamed of its ego- 
 tism ; yet these are my thoughts.” 
 
 It may reasonably be doubted, whether the 
 faults ascribed to this celebrated painting of 
 Satan, are not to be attributed to the class of 
 ideas, or species of subjects, from which it is 
 derived. It has no connexion with human pas- 
 sions, sympathies, or interests, nor ought an artist 
 to present such images to the imagination, if 
 
 N 2 
 
180 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 they are not of the order of beauty, or grace. 
 The poet avails himself of a species of generaliza- 
 tion, and when he describes a Pandemonium, the 
 reader receives his ideas with the modification of 
 his own temperament ; he dwells not on it sole- 
 ly, and much less does he bring out each of the 
 minutiae identically with the poet. He rejects, 
 weakens, or strengthens, according to his indi- 
 vidual nature, every little muniment of the 
 poet’s epic creation, and adds as many accessory 
 ideas as may suit his humour. The case is 
 totally different where the painter presents his 
 own conception of the poet’s imaginings, as an 
 unvarying object, permanent, and to be viewed 
 in its unchangeable identity, without the spec- 
 tator having the power of selection or rejection, 
 or of associating or separating parts. Where 
 the poet’s idea is that of immensity, the painter 
 may represent it, as Mr. Martin has done, by gi- 
 gantic proportions receding till they are lost in the 
 obscurities of space, or by small light objects sur- 
 rounded by immense shades, blackening into dis- 
 tant and utter darkness. But a supernatural being 
 of abhorrence cannot be represented on the can- 
 vass, unless he be made hideous by deformity or 
 extravagance, for the painter cannot concentrate 
 his disposition in a look, nor give, by a counte- 
 nance, the actions by which a poet makes up 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 181 
 
 the character. Personifications, therefore, of the 
 Devil, are to be avoided upon canvass. 
 
 With these observations upon the abstract 
 nature of the subject, a criticism upon the paint- 
 ing becomes more intelligible. 
 
 As a painting, it is full of beautiful parts in 
 detail (the nature of the subject precluding a 
 unity of excellence). The anhelation is admi- 
 rably expressed in the face, but, unfortunately, 
 the chest is thrown in, by the dark shade conse- 
 quent from the light being reflected from below. 
 The importance of purpose which pervades the 
 countenance ; the surprise at the abject or rather 
 supine beings he is evoking ; the astonishment 
 that they are not aware of the crisis, the spirit 
 that supposes them capable of being animated 
 with its own grand feelings; the malignity 
 thrown into extremely beautiful features, prove 
 a power of mind in the artist, never surpassed. 
 
 And why is not the painting the first in the 
 highest order of merit? — it is full of faults. 
 
 The colour of the flesh is not natural or 
 pleasing, and is not to be accounted for by any 
 lurid reflections from the scene supposed to be 
 underneath ; the white in the eyes, beneath the 
 nostrils, and upon the line of the lips, is ugly 
 and absurd — the lights and shades upon the 
 attendant are too sudden and unnatural. 
 
182 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 But the body is out of drawing. The limbs 
 are disproportioned to the trunk ; and, as if aware 
 of this, the artist has hid in gloom the helmet, 
 always a means of producing grandeur, whilst 
 the red hair from the helmet falls between the 
 shoulders and the shield, producing the appear- 
 ance of drapery proceeding from nowhere. In- 
 distinctness is often a source of the sublime, 
 but here it is used at too great a sacrifice. The 
 sword is disproportioned to the shield, and to 
 the hand that is to wield it ; and the little 
 bandage that is made an offering to decency, is 
 unprecedented and uncopied. 
 
 But with ail these defects, the painting is 
 decidedly the grandest, and, in many respects, 
 the most successful attempt at the sublime that 
 has ever been made in this country. 
 
 It evinces great powers of mind, and of a 
 more severe cast, than have been attributed to 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence. 
 
 It may be said that when Sir Thomas aimed 
 at a union of the sublime and beautiful, he suc- 
 ceeded ; but that when he attempted the terrible, 
 he was extravagant and without being forcible. 
 
 Perhaps this picture may strengthen the sup- 
 position. The spirit Beelzebub is massive, ex- 
 travagant, and vulgar, without being awful in a 
 lower sphere to Satan. If it were merely in- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 183 
 
 tended to produce an effect by strong contrast, 
 the idea was not worthy of Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence. 
 
 Even with all these severe, and, perhaps, hy- 
 percritical remarks, in many respects this is the 
 grandest painting ever produced by Lawrence. 
 It has more body, and tone, more oil and less 
 varnish, than some of Sir Joshuas best efforts, 
 which are deteriorated by the greenish blacks 
 and varnish conspicuous, for instance, in his 
 Mrs. Siddons as the Muse of Tragedy, a paint- 
 ing, but for this fault, the finest of its class upon 
 earth. 
 
 In the next letter, it appears that he pro- 
 posed to paint a likeness of himself for Miss 
 Lee, but he never carried his intention into 
 effect. 
 
 “ May, 1796. 
 
 “ MY DEAREST FRIEND, 
 
 “ I AM not so much on the fret, because I have 
 the consolation of your letter : let this be one to 
 you. I am still teased and tormented : it 
 is, however, but a temporary vexation, and 
 I shake it from my mind as well as I can. 
 Your “ exact representation of visionary en- 
 joyments” shall soothe and soften my soul : I 
 will catch them when I can, for I fear there 
 are no other. All is visionary, and Bontas was 
 in the right. Shall I then worship the other 
 
184 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 power ? No, I think not. If I had not the firm- 
 ness, I have the taste to despise it ; so I shall 
 jog on in the same path, deceived, but not de- 
 ceiving. 
 
 I believe I shall set off from hence on 
 Tuesday. My picture I shall finish with you, 
 so pray prepare me a painting-room. Do you 
 know that, to paint it the better, I have had a 
 cast made from myself? There it is before me ; 
 and a very sensible head, I assure you ! Much 
 more so than the original, for it has not a 
 thought — still, cold, and sullen; the eyes are 
 closed too, so you shall not have it. My friend 
 shall have a more pleasant memorial of me.” 
 
 At this period, his father and mother were 
 staying with him, and from his leaving Bath 
 he had fulfilled towards them all the duties of 
 an affectionate and liberal son. 
 
 But in May 1797, his mother expired, in his 
 house. In a letter to his friend Miss Lee, he 
 thus alludes to her death 
 
 “ Greek Street, Wednesday, May, 1797. 
 
 * * * 
 
 “ 1 have mentioned other griefs in order to turn 
 my thoughts from that pale Virtue, whose fading 
 image I can now contemplate with firmness. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 185 
 
 I kiss it, and not a tear falls on the cold cheek. 
 You can have no notion of the grand serenity 
 it has assumed. I think, I cannot but persuade 
 myself, since the fatal stroke, it seems as if the 
 soul, at the moment of departure, darted its 
 purest emanations into the features, as traces 
 of its happier state. Have you seen death 
 
 often ? It cannot be a common effect. * * 
 
 * * * # 
 
 But half an hour since, I had the dear hand in 
 mine, and the fingers seemed unwilling to part 
 with me. Farewell. 
 
 e< Let me know the day you come. — My fa- 
 ther’s and sisters’ best respects.” 
 
 About this period he makes the following 
 allusion to his father, for whom he evidently 
 had a strong filial attachment : — 
 
 “Apropos, I have not yet let or sold my 
 house, and matters in Greek Street are as they 
 were. My father, at times, is much troubled with 
 his cough ; but I hope and believe he is not 
 otherwise worse than when you saw him, but 
 rather better. The country air, peace, and con- 
 tent, will, I trust, soon restore health, and gra- 
 tify the wishes of his children, to whom, what- 
 ever difference of character or disposition there 
 
186 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 may have been, his essentially worthy nature 
 and general love for them make him too dear 
 an object of regard, not to form the greatest 
 portion of their solicitude. To be the entire 
 happiness of his children, is perhaps the lot of 
 no parent. 
 
 “ I was yesterday a little of a truant, at a 
 sort of private public breakfast, and paid for it, 
 by being as tasteless a spectator of pleasure as 
 sobriety could have wished ; — puritan enough 
 to have excited the indignation of Sir Andrew. 
 I had a little chat, though, with the good Mrs. 
 
 , who spoke for some time of you, and as 
 
 if she knew you both. I shall certainly strike 
 up to the knot, — Mrs. Something, Mrs.M., Mrs. 
 
 , and Mr. Thomas Lawrence ! as good a 
 
 casino party as may be met with, could he play ! 
 
 “ I have within this day or two seen Mr. 
 Lysons, and had from him a very accurate 
 description, and completely in detail, of a very 
 valuable work he is on the eve of publishing, 
 respecting some discoveries at Woodchester, in 
 Gloucestershire. I luckily had him all to my- 
 self, in a chaise, and he actually pinned himself 
 down to that one topic, which, from the range 
 of subjects he generally takes, was singularly 
 fortunate !” 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 187 
 
 In the succeeding October he lost his father, 
 his affection for whom may be estimated by 
 the intensity of his grief at his death. The 
 following abrupt communication of the event 
 to Miss Lee, shows how little able he was to 
 dwell or be explicit upon a subject so afflicting 
 to his feelings : — 
 
 “ MY DEAREST FRIEND, 
 
 “ The cause of my silence is a terrible one, 
 — my father’s death. He died before I could 
 reach him ; but he died full of affection to 
 us, of firm faith and fortitude, and without 
 a groan. 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 In fact, Lawrence was engaged at his house 
 in Piccadilly, when a messenger burst into the 
 room and announced that his father was dying. 
 Lawrence, in the intensity of his feelings, ran 
 out of the house, and proceeded through the 
 streets without his hat; but notwithstanding the 
 rapidity of his pace, he did not arrive until 
 after his father had expired. 
 
 In July, the papers announced the election of 
 a Royal Academician, in the room of Sir Wil- 
 liam Chambers : of eighteen candidates, four 
 
188 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 only were honoured with suffrages : — Gilpin, 18 ; 
 Tresham, 11 ; Beech y, 6 ; Bonomi, 1. 
 
 “ Mr. Gilpin was declared duly elected ; how- 
 ever, the decision must wait the approbation of 
 his Majesty, who, by signing the diploma of 
 the new member, confirms the choice of the 
 Royal Academicians. We learn that one of 
 the unsuccessful candidates, Mr. B., feeling him- 
 self aggrieved, has resigned his situation as an 
 Associate, and means to make an application to 
 the Throne upon the subject.” 
 
 The following is rather a curious advertise- 
 ment, of that period, and must seem strange to 
 modern notions. The subject is flattering to 
 so young an artist. 
 
 PORTRAIT OF SIR CHARLES GREY, K. B. 
 
 For the Benefit of the Widows and Children 
 of the brave Men who have lost their Lives 
 during the War. 
 
 This Day is published, 
 
 A Portrait of Sir Charles Grey, K. B., late 
 Commander-in-Chief in the West Indies ; from 
 a capital picture painted by Mr. Lawrence, 
 R. A., Portrait Painter in Ordinary to his Ma- 
 jesty ; engraved in a most finished style by Mr. 
 Joseph Colly er, Engraver to her Majesty ; and 
 published by the proprietor, W. Austin, Draw- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 189 
 
 ing-Master, Turnham Green. Proof prints, 
 two guineas ; prints, one guinea each. 
 
 Mr. Austin respectfully solicits the patronage 
 of the public to an undertaking he has the 
 pleasure of submitting to them ; the profits of 
 which, he pledges himself, shall be applied to 
 the fund established for the relief of the widows 
 and children of the brave Britons who have lost 
 their lives in their country’s cause, in the expe- 
 dition under the joint command of those gallant 
 officers, Sir Charles Grey, K. B. and Vice-Ad- 
 miral Sir J. Jervis, K. B. Mr. Austin doubts 
 not, from the characteristic benevolence of the 
 English nation, of being enabled to add to the 
 increase of a fund founded on such noble prin- 
 ciples. And it must be a peculiar gratification 
 to every Briton to be in possession of a portrait 
 of an officer, to whose bravery and skill his 
 country is so essentially indebted. He assures 
 the public that every exertion has been used by 
 the artist, whose abilities are universally ac- 
 knowledged, to render the print deserving that 
 consideration which is so justly due to the 
 merits of the brave General it is intended to 
 represent. The painting from which it is taken 
 has long been acknowledged as a production 
 which reflects the highest credit on Mr. Law- 
 rence’s pencil : and he has the pleasure of an- 
 
190 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 nouncing that the print is now ready for deli- 
 very. 
 
 The following illustrious characters have al- 
 ready honoured Mr. Austin with their patron- 
 age : — His Royal Highness the Duke of York, 
 His Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence ; his 
 Grace the Duke of Portland, his Grace the Duke 
 of Grafton, his Grace the Duke of Northum- 
 berland, his Grace the Duke of Devonshire ; 
 Duchess of Devonshire; Marquis Cornwallis, 
 Marquis of Lansdowne ; Earl Spencer, Earl 
 Fitzwilliam, Earl of Besborough, Earl of Guild- 
 ford, Earl of Stamford, Earl of Carlisle, Earl of 
 Lauderdale, Earl of Egremont ; Viscount Gal- 
 way, M.P. ; Lord Petre, Lord Mulgrave, Lord 
 R. Spencer, M.P., Lord Fred. Cavendish, Lord 
 Charles Fitzroy ; Right Hon. H. Dundas, M.P., 
 Right Hon. C. J. Fox, M. P., Right Hon. 
 W. Windham, M.P., Charles Grey, Esq. M.P., 
 John Crewe, Esq. M. P., S. Whitbread, Esq. 
 M. P., R. B. Sheridan, Esq. M. P., Paul Orch- 
 ard, Esq. M. P., W. H. Lambton, Esq. M. P., 
 T. W. Coke, Esq. M. P., Sir W. Milner, Bart. 
 M.P., M. A. Taylor, Esq. M.P., Thomas An- 
 son, Esq. M. P., W. Keene, Esq. M. P., B. Hob- 
 house, Esq. M. P., Evan Nepean, Esq. M. P., 
 Sir J. St. Aubyn, Bart. ; Hon. Mrs. Bouverie ; 
 Mrs. Orde; Hon. Mr. Petre, Hon. Colonel 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 191 
 
 Lenox, M. P. ; Colonel Fisher, Colonel Man- 
 ley, Colonel Patterson ; Captain Grey, R. N. ; 
 Captain Herbert ; Dean of Winchester ; Cap- 
 tain Grey ; G. Tierney, Esq. M. P., &c. &c. 
 
 The Sir Charles Grey here alluded to, but for 
 his military exploits in reducing the French 
 West-India Islands, in conjunction with Sir 
 John Jervis, afterwards the hero of St. Vincent, 
 would not have been the founder of an “ Order” 
 in his ancient family. He was the younger 
 brother of Sir Harry Grey of Ho wick, the 
 second Baronet in the family, an eccentric old 
 gentleman, who for many years resided in the 
 old white house (then woefully dilapidated,) at 
 the corner of Great Ormond Street and Powis 
 Place. He lived in entire seclusion, sitting 
 every day and all day long in his brown silk 
 stockings and breeches, brown coat with steel 
 buttons like shields, at the drawing-room win- 
 dow, looking into a small mirror that reflected 
 the street, through which scarcely a passenger 
 was then to be seen. The second brother of 
 this eccentric old northern Baronet was killed 
 in a duel by Lord Pomfret ; and the title was 
 inherited by Charles Grey, who had acquired 
 so large a sum of money by his command in 
 the West Indies, that he had been created Baron 
 
192 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Ho wick in 1801, and Earl Grey in 1806. It is 
 singular, that whilst the first Earl Grey was 
 winning his military laurels and his civic order , 
 as a strong ultra Tory under Mr. Pitt, his son 
 was the most zealous, eloquent, powerful, and 
 uncompromising friend of liberty, as a member 
 in the House of Commons. Mr. Fox created 
 the Tory General an Earl, in 1806, and his son, 
 the present Earl, succeeded to the title in 1807. 
 
 In the year 1798, the patronage of art in this 
 country was sustained, as in the preceding year, 
 to a very extraordinary extent, if there be 
 taken into consideration the commercial and 
 financial embarrassments, and, above all, the 
 raging fury for war, with which the Govern- 
 ment had contrived to inoculate all classes of 
 the people. But art can be patronized only by 
 the affluent, and the fine arts are seldom cherish- 
 ed but by the desoenvre classes. The policy 
 of government was now to enrich these classes 
 to excess, by the mismanagement and misappli- 
 cation of the revenue, as well as by partial laws ; 
 and the wealth, perhaps unrighteously, bestow- 
 ed upon the aristocracy and their dependents, 
 had the usual effect of creating a more exten- 
 sive demand for the arts that gratify pride or 
 embellish life. Painting, in particular, seemed 
 to have received a remarkable stimulant. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 193 
 
 The Exhibition had, at its commencement, 
 in 1769, contained but a hundred and thirty- 
 six works ; for about eight years, the number, 
 had scarcely exceeded four hundred, and had 
 for ten years after, averaged less than six hun- 
 dred; but from 1793, the commencement of 
 the war, the number of works exhibited had 
 risen, from eight hundred and fifty-six, to one 
 thousand one hundred and ninety-four, in 1797 
 (the year of suspending cash payments) ; and to 
 one thousand and fifty-four in the year 1798. 
 
 In the Exhibition of 1798, Mr. Lawrence 
 had six portraits, one of which was of the high- 
 est historical character. In this portrait, of Mr. 
 Kemble, as Coriolanus at the hearth of Aufi- 
 dius, he had succeeded in the expression of 
 stern dignity, of self-possession, and firmness of 
 purpose, without being betrayed into any thing 
 theatrical or extravagant, the danger which 
 few painters can shun, in painting from the liv- 
 ing models of the stage. This painting, how- 
 ever, was never very much admired by the 
 profession. 
 
 His works in the Catalogue of 1798 were — 
 30, Portrait of Mrs. Allnut; 51, Lord Sea- 
 forth ; 184, Mr. Bell; 225, Mr. Kemble, as Co- 
 riolanus at the hearth of Aufidius; 253, Mr. 
 Thompson ; 257, Mrs. Neane. 
 
 VOL. i. 
 
 o 
 
194 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 The portrait of Lord Seaforth was reckoned 
 by artists to be an excellent work, but “ to the 
 mind’s eye” it was an absolute caricature. If 
 Mr. Burke were right, that “ Painters’ pro- 
 prieties are always best,” it must be acknow- 
 ledged that their improprieties are always the 
 worst. In these cases, however, it is difficult 
 to determine how much of error emanates from 
 the artist, and how much is imposed upon him 
 by the patron. When Gibbs, the pupil of Sir 
 Christopher Wren, copied himself, by adding 
 the Roman body of St. Martin’s church to an 
 old Gothic tower, with arabesque ornaments, 
 a knowledge of the artist’s science and judg- 
 ment must relieve him from the obloquy, and 
 make us trace the absurdity to patronage, to the 
 taste of the day, or to some such circumstance. 
 
 In Lord Seaforth’s portrait, the savage dress 
 of the Highlands of Scotland is mixed with the 
 modern military dress of England, in its worst 
 taste ; and, to render inconsistency doubly in- 
 consistent, the Scotch bonnet is upon a head 
 bien poudre. The red uniform coat, with yel- 
 low facings, buttons merely over the chest, leav- 
 ing the abdomen protuberant in a white kersey- 
 mere waistcoat, whilst his Lordship holds, and 
 pointing to the ground, not a claymore, but a 
 modern military sword approaching to a rapier. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 195 
 
 It is lamentable to see such excellent paint- 
 ing made even offensive by incongruities so 
 striking. 
 
 The subject of this painting was Francis 
 Humberstone Mackenzie, Governor of the 
 island of Barbadoes, and Lord Lieutenant of 
 Ross-shire. 
 
 Very recently, an engraving has circulated 
 the portrait of a Scotch chieftain in his kilt, 
 an absolute sans culotte , wearing spectacles. 
 The costume of savage life, or of barbarous 
 ages, is totally inconsistent with the expression 
 of physical defects relieved by the contrivances 
 of modern science. 
 
 In the following letter to a friend, Mr. Law- 
 rence makes allusion to this celebrated historical 
 portrait of Coriolanus. 
 
 “ MY DEAR MADAM, 
 
 “ If you are conscious that a letter which 
 deprives me of the expected pleasure of your 
 society, is the most unpleasant to your feelings 
 that I have yet received from you, I must in 
 common politeness acknowledge it is so to mine ; 
 and this happens to be one of the few instances 
 in which I can approach to the polite without 
 an effort. You have, it is too true, given me 
 very ill news ; yet, in conveying it, your letter is 
 
 o 2 
 
196 the life of 
 
 so kind and flattering, that if I do not the less 
 regret my loss, vanity is more subdued by 
 friendship than any knowledge of my own na- 
 ture could have informed me. You can never 
 have felt the awkwardness (not even with Mr. 
 Lock) of expressing your feelings, by a term of 
 the use of which you fancy yourself unworthy. 
 Friendship is one which at the first glance sup- 
 poses reciprocal kindness in action as well as 
 thought. Where it is all on one side, the feel- 
 ing on the other must be gratitude. You see, 
 Madam, the errata I have made, and must 
 kindly correct it for me, believing that I mean 
 the latter, till chance and fortune enable me to 
 assert the former. And they yet may. I un- 
 derstand there is a stranger expected soon in 
 this pleasant, vain, and transitory world. He (for 
 it must be a boy) must spring up a painter, and 
 receive my instructions when I am President 
 of the Academy, which two things, you know, 
 dear Madam, are the most likely that can 
 be. 
 
 “ I thank you for the hint of the ‘ white fib.’ 
 What ! cannot I gain belief in disavowing the 
 good fortune ascribed to me ? 
 
 “ Mr. Warren told me he would forgive my 
 breach of engagement with him, if I brought 
 up good news of Mrs. Boucherette. Can you 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 197 
 
 bind down her husband to send it me the mo- 
 ment he is authorized to do so ? I fear we shall 
 not see him soon ; but, that, when he does come 
 up, he may not be disappointed in his convey- 
 ance (a single man will not travel with his 
 equipage), tell him from me (upon no hint 
 from any who may have suffered from the 
 blunder) that the something coach does not (or 
 does) set off at ten o’clock. 
 
 44 Upon my word, ’tis true, and Mr. J. Warren 
 will bear me out in the assertion. 
 
 44 Pray, Madam, do not oppose your judgment 
 in art to that of an experienced practitioner. I 
 know what your painting must be, if you set 
 about it as you ought; and that you would 
 wilfully make it an exception to all you do 1 
 can never believe. 
 
 44 1 cannot refrain from telling you, that I have 
 nearly finished a sort of half-history picture — 
 Coriolanus at the hearth of Aufidius, which I 
 hope you will like. Indeed, if you do not, you 
 cannot with any justice abuse the painter, for 
 your loitering in Lincolnshire throws me so 
 entirely on my own judgment, that failure 
 seems unavoidable. And now, dear Madam, 
 lest you should impute to me the benevolent 
 wishes of Mr. Dogberry, I conclude my letter, 
 yet not without again thanking you for the 
 
19S 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 very kind one to which it is an answer. I am, 
 with my best regards to Mr. Boucherette, 
 
 “ Dear Madam, 
 
 “ Your very grateful and devoted servant, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 This painting of Coriolanus was bought by 
 Sir Richard W orsley, and is now at Appulder- 
 combe, Isle of Wight, the seat of Lord Yar- 
 borough, who married Sir Richard’s niece. Sir 
 Richard revived the story of Candaules and 
 Gyges, with the difference, that the husband 
 was slain, not in body, but in reputation, and 
 by that peculiar engine of English ingenuity — 
 an action at law. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 199 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Exhibition of the Royal Academy of 1799. — The emi- 
 nence of Hoppner and Opie. — The Exhibition of 1800. — 
 Portrait of Mr. Curran. — Portrait of Mrs. J. Angerstein. — 
 Backgrounds to Sir Thomas Lawrence’s portraits. — Por- 
 trait of Mr. Kemble as Rolla. — The Exhibition of 1801. — 
 The uncertainty of opinions upon works of art. — Mr. Cop- 
 ley’s Historical Painting of the Death of the Earl of Chat- 
 ham. — Sale at Fonthill. — Sales of Picture Galleries. — 
 Mr. Lawrence’s Hamlet. — Teaching Modelling to the 
 Princess of Wales. — Mr. Lawrence at Blackheath. — His 
 Bust of Mr. Lock. — The Exhibition of 1802. — The Por- 
 trait of the Marquis of Exeter. — A Singular Marriage. — 
 The Exhibition of 1803. — Mr. Bernard’s Retrospections of 
 the Stage; his Reminiscences of Mr. Lawrence. — Anec- 
 dote of Edwin, and young Lawrence ; of Gainsborough 
 and Foote and Garrick. — A Rehearsal for the Stage ; 
 Jaffier and Priuli. — The Stage abandoned, and the pencil 
 resumed. — Criticisms on Lawrence’s works. — Schisms of 
 the Royal Academy in 1803. — Royal interference. — The 
 Disputes terminated. — Harmony restored. — Dissensions 
 respecting the distribution of Medals. — The Exhibitions of 
 1804 and 1805. — Association of Mr. Lawrence with the 
 Princess of Wales at Montague House, Blackheath. — The 
 Delicate Investigation. — Mr. Lawrence’s affidavit. — The 
 Princess's reply to the Report of the Lords Commissioners . 
 — Her defence with respect to Mr. Lawrence. — Lord El- 
 don’s sarcasm. — Portraits of Lord Grey, Lord Amherst, 
 
200 
 
 TIIE LIFE OF 
 
 Lady Elizabeth Foster, the Duchess Dowager of Devon- 
 shire. — Purchase of the Temple of Tivoli, by the Earl of 
 Bristol. — Plan of transporting it to the margin of a bog 
 in Ireland. — Alarm of the Pope. — The Sacrilege prevented. 
 — The Exhibition of 1806 . — Posthumous portrait of Mr. 
 Pitt. — Portraits of Lord Ellenborough, Sir Joseph Banks, 
 and the Earl of Malmesbury. 
 
 Though the occasional production of great 
 historical pieces tended very much to raise the 
 fame which Mr. Lawrence had acquired in the 
 other branch of his art, he was at this time by 
 no means without a rival near the throne. 
 
 In the Exhibition of the Academy for the 
 year 1799, which contained the high number of 
 eleven hundred and eighteen works, Hoppner 
 had eight portraits of eminent characters, and 
 Opie nine. Among the subjects of Hoppner’s 
 pencil were the Earl of Chatham, the Duke of 
 Rutland, the Countess of Sutherland (the pre- 
 sent Marchioness of Stafford), the Archbishop 
 of York, and Lady Melbourne; a list proving the 
 artist’s popularity and his patronage by the great. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence’s works were six, namely — 
 5, Mr. Hunter ; 76, the Duke of Norfolk ; 
 137, Mr. S. Lysons; 223, Miss Jennings; 234, 
 General Paoli ; 294, Mrs. Allnutt. 
 
 In the succeeding year, it may perhaps be 
 said, that Mr. Hoppner had at least an equality 
 of eminent patronage ; if he did not even take 
 the lead of fashion. The Prince’s name was a 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 201 
 
 tower of strength, at that time, to every person 
 connected with the arts, on whom he bestowed 
 his notice; whilst the patronage of the Sovereign 
 was rather associated with ideas of decorous 
 habits and submissive conduct than of profes- 
 sional merits, especially with respect to elegance 
 and grace. The utter neglect of Sir Joshua, 
 and the patronage of very inferior men, with 
 the exclusive purchase of bad paintings, were 
 frequently quoted in proof of the royal appro- 
 bation of mediocrity ; and whilst the nation was 
 so blindly divided into two uncompromising 
 parties, seeing every thing through the distorted 
 media of their passions, the rank of painter in 
 ordinary to his Majesty was, at best, but a very 
 equivocal advantage to a person who, like 
 Lawrence, excelled in painting the graces and 
 elegancies of fashion. 
 
 Hoppner, therefore, was elevated upon a 
 higher current of favour than he would otherwise 
 have acquired ; though, let not this be under- 
 stood in depreciation of his talents, for his merits 
 were considerable ; and, even without such facti- 
 tious aids, they must, under any circumstances, 
 have procured him celebrity. His bad health, 
 moreover, was latterly a check to his exertions, 
 and ought to be taken into consideration in any 
 comparison between these great rival artists. 
 
 But in the Exhibition for the year 1800 , which 
 
202 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 contained eleven hundred works, Mr. Lawrence 
 had seven fine portraits, one of which was of an 
 historical character. —28, Portrait of Mr. Bou- 
 cherette’s children; 54, Mr. Curran; 178, Mrs. 
 J. Angerstein; 193, Kolia; 213, Portrait of 
 the Kev. Mr. Pennicotte ; 246, Lord Eldon ; 
 526, Mrs. Twiss. 
 
 It would be difficult to conceive a subject 
 more hard for an artist to treat than the bust of 
 Mr. Curran. His person was small and ill- 
 shaped, almost to deformity, whilst his face was 
 the most unfortunate specimen of the coarsest 
 Irish features: its expression was incessantly 
 varying, and which much increased the difficulty. 
 But there was an inimitable brilliancy of eye, 
 and his countenance, when excited, could ex- 
 press the drollest humour or the utmost viva- 
 city. It was that energy of his passion which 
 produced his extraordinary metaphors in his 
 speeches, that Lawrence endeavoured to catch 
 the expression of in this portrait, and he emi- 
 nently succeeded, at least in a second attempt. 
 
 The first portrait perplexed, and even dis- 
 tressed Lawrence, and it was a total failure. 
 Shortly after the painting was finished, Law- 
 rence dined casually with Mr. Curran, and saw 
 him in all his glory of animation. Lawrence 
 could not help exclaiming to him, “ I have not 
 painted your portrait at all, — I never saw your 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 203 
 
 proper character before. Come to-morrow and 
 give me another sitting.” Mr. Curran was leav- 
 ing England the next day, but he deferred his 
 journey, and gave Lawrence one sitting, in which 
 he finished the most extraordinary likeness of 
 the most extraordinary face within the memory 
 of man. 
 
 In a contemporary criticism upon the Exhibi- 
 tion of this year, it was justly observed that “ a 
 more spirited performance than the portrait of 
 Mr. Curran, the Irish Member, (which we under- 
 stand was finished from one sitting only,) never 
 appeared from the pencil of this gentleman : 
 there is an energy of expression in the counte- 
 nance which is seldom conveyed to the canvass, 
 and the fire of the eye is peculiarly well ex- 
 pressed.” 
 
 The following letter from the husband of the 
 surviving sister of Sir Thomas Lawrence alludes 
 to this portrait. The Lady Elizabeth Bulteel, 
 here mentioned, was the tenth of twelve chil- 
 dren, and the second of the four daughters of 
 the present Earl Grey. She married C. Bulteel, 
 Esq. of Fleet House, Devonshire. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 Rugby, March 31, 1830. 
 
 “ I have been long endeavouring to discover 
 the house in which Sir Thomas Lawrence was 
 
204 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 born, at Bristol, and have at length succeeded. 
 A drawing has been taken, which will be imme- 
 diately engraved by Skelton of Oxford : I have 
 requested that gentleman to send you a proof, 
 immediately upon its appearance. In the course 
 of my enquiries, I met with a gentleman, who 
 stated that Sir Thomas, about three years ago, 
 informed him, ‘ that if he knew where a portrait 
 of Mr. Curran, the celebrated Irish Barrister, 
 was to be found, underneath it was a portrait of 
 himself.’ Such a portrait, Sir Thomas either 
 painted for or presented to Earl Grey ; as his 
 daughter. Lady Elizabeth Bulteel, told Mr. Say 
 (the portrait painter) that such a portrait was 
 in her father’s possession. If this information 
 will be of any service in your intended memoirs 
 of Sir Thomas, you may wish to see Mr. Say 
 himself upon the subject : he resides at No. 20 , 
 Blenheim Street, London. 
 
 “ I have the honour to be, Sir, 
 
 “ Your obedient servant, 
 “Thomas Campbell, Esq. B. B. BlOXAM.” 
 
 Of the next portrait (Mrs. J. Angers tein), 
 the same critic observed — “ No. 178. Portrait of 
 Mrs. J. Angerstein, by Lawrence, is perfectly 
 graceful in point of design ; but the colouring is 
 flat, compared with the generality of this gen- 
 tleman’s productions. There is likewise a va- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 205 
 
 cuity in the background extremely unpleasant. 
 This picture conveys the idea of a beautiful 
 female wandering over a desolate and unfre- 
 quented island.” 
 
 If the portrait appeared flat at that period, it 
 augurs well for the duration of the painting, 
 for at this moment the colour, notwithstand- 
 ing the no-colour of the white muslin dress, is 
 full, rich, mellow, and redolent of harmony. 
 Artists strongly admire the composition of Sir 
 Thomas’s composed, or, I should say, discom- 
 posed backgrounds, such as are witnessed in his 
 portraits of the Duke D’Angoul£me, Prince 
 Blucher. But, “ rationem artis intelligunt docti, 
 indocti sentient voluptatem and, certainly, these 
 backgrounds in themselves convey no ideas of 
 pleasure, whilst they are too frequently irra- 
 tional with reference to the subjects in the fore- 
 ground. A stormy sky is out of unison with a 
 placid child sporting on velvet, or with Cato in 
 sedate thought, or with a lady superbly dressed 
 for the drawing-room ; and if ever Nature, or 
 nature’s mimic, war, produced such a hurly-burly 
 of smoke and brimstone, of blunderbuss and 
 thunder, as the admired background of the 
 Duke D’Angoul£me’s portrait, his Grace would 
 not have been of quiet countenance, with his 
 plumed cocked-hat off, he would have been 
 seeking shelter, and exclaiming for a score of 
 
206 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 tailors to supply him with cloaks. In such 
 points as these, I cannot agree with Quintilian, 
 that rationem artis intelligunt docti; for of all 
 mankind, the artists least attend to such things. 
 Hogarth’s fishes sporting in the foliage which 
 surrounds the clock against the drawing-room 
 wall, are not more absurd. 
 
 In this admirable portrait of Mrs. Angerstein, 
 she is represented in the open air, of an unshel- 
 tered background, without hat or shawl. The 
 costume of that day was unfavourable to ele- 
 gance, and the dress has the appearance of a 
 robe de chambre , or morning dishabille. She is 
 leading a child, and its attitude is remarkably 
 infantile, and playfully pretty ; but there is a sin- 
 gular disproportion of head, almost indicating 
 hydrocephalus. 
 
 But the matronly grace and lady -like ele- 
 gance of the principal figure, — the rich, soft, and 
 large black eyes,— the sweet mouth and expres- 
 sion of the whole face, with the beauty of the 
 hair so simply arranged, constitute as delicious 
 a portrait of its sort, as even Lawrence ever 
 produced. The mellow depth and body of 
 colour are remarkably appropriate to the senti- 
 ment of this delightful painting. It is a sweet 
 specimen of what Horace meant by the simplex 
 munditiis. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 207 
 
 Of the next portrait, or theatrical painting, 
 Rolla, it was observed, that “ the portrait of Mr. 
 Kemble, in Rolla, is a masterly performance ; 
 yet we cannot reconcile our minds to the colos- 
 sal form of the figure. If virtue consisted in 
 stature, then indeed we should expect to see 
 the hero a second Titan ; but as such is not the 
 case, why give us a giant Rolla ? The features 
 bear a striking resemblance to the performer 
 for whom they are designed, but the muscular 
 form, we should conceive, was copied from a 
 pugilistic Jackson or Broughton. The attitude 
 of the child, which is, we understand, a portrait 
 of Mr. Sheridan’s infant son, is excellently con- 
 ceived ; and the leg turned round the hero’s arm 
 has a good'effect. The colouring of this picture 
 is very chaste, and the anatomical part ably exe- 
 cuted; and were it not for the dimensions of 
 our Rolla’s person, it would have been vain to 
 seek a fault.” 
 
 The fault, however, was not so much the 
 massive proportions of the principal figure, as 
 the want of relief by background, and the 
 melo-dramatic extravagance of the action. But, 
 in one point, this portrait eminently shows the 
 cast of thought in Sir Thomas Lawrence. All 
 theatrical portraits of that period were unna- 
 tural, extravagant, and ranting ; and the artist 
 
208 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 who had carried these errors to the height was 
 Mr. Hamilton, Lawrence’s friend, and from 
 whom he had imbibed many erroneous notions 
 and vicious practices in art. These are suffi- 
 ciently evident in the painting under discus- 
 sion; but what with Hamilton would have been 
 absolutely unnatural as well as extravagant, 
 becomes with Lawrence merely exuberant of 
 force. Jackson the pugilist sat, or rather stood, 
 for this model ; and his figure is merely an an- 
 glicizing of the massive, robust forms so much 
 admired in the paintings of Rubens and the 
 Flemish school. 
 
 Lawrence painted this portrait upon the can- 
 vass on which he had painted the subject from 
 Prospero and Miranda — Prospero calling up 
 the storm. The portrait of Mr. Kemble as 
 Rolla is the property of the present Sir Robert 
 Peel. 
 
 In the Exhibition of the succeeding year, 
 1801, Mr. Lawrence exhibited the six follow- 
 ing paintings, the total number of works of art 
 being one thousand and thirty-seven : — 62, 
 Portrait of General Stuart; 92, of Mrs. G. 
 Byng; 173, of the Hon. Sophia Upton ; 190, 
 of the Hon. Caroline Upton; 197, Hamlet; 
 207, Portrait of Mr. Antrobus. 
 
 Hoppner, the rival of Lawrence, who had 
 
SIR TIIOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 209 
 
 hitherto proceeded with him in the Exhibition 
 almost pari passu , this year produced nothing. 
 He was labouring under increased symptoms of 
 that disease which eventually brought him to 
 the grave, depriving posterity of many beauti- 
 ful works that might have shed their influence 
 in civilizing our nature. Opie exhibited but 
 little this year ; Phillips, Beechey, and Sliee were 
 eminent ; but Lawrence stood the undisputed 
 lord of the ascendant. Mr. Copley exhibited 
 this year a portrait of R. Richards, then a bar- 
 rister of few briefs, of Lincoln’s-Inn. This 
 was one of the last paintings exhibited by the 
 father of the late Lord Chancellor of England; 
 and whilst the subject of the portrait was des- 
 tined to be an eminent judge, the son of the 
 artist was rising to the highest rank in the state, 
 with the singularity of preserving his free prin- 
 ciples unimpeached, and the esteem of all par- 
 ties undiminished. No man ever rose from the 
 lowest to the highest rank of his eminent pro- 
 fession with so thorough a purity from tergi- 
 versation as this personage. 
 
 In this year, an action was tried of a nature 
 to show that the diversity of opinions among 
 artists upon their works, is at least equal to the 
 glorious uncertainty of the law. The following 
 is a report of the trial alluded to. 
 
 vol, i. r 
 
210 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 “ COURT OF KING’S BENCH, 
 
 “ Thursday, July 2, 1801 . 
 
 “ JDelatre v. Copley. 
 
 “ The plaintiff in this action is an engraver, 
 and the defendant a celebrated painter. This 
 action was brought to recover the sum of 5801 . 
 the balance of a contract entered into between 
 the parties. The plaintiff had engaged to copy 
 an engraving of Mr. BartoJozzi, from the cele- 
 brated painting of the Death of the Earl of 
 Chatham, for which service he was to receive 
 800/. He was engaged three years in com- 
 pleting the work. When it was finished, the 
 defendant refused to perform his part of the 
 contract, stating as a reason, that the copy was 
 by no means correct ; and that the resemblance 
 of the characters had not been attended to. 
 The plaintiff called Mr. Bartolozzi, Mr. Nagle, 
 Mr. Landseer, Mr. Smith, &c. to prove his case. 
 Mr. Bartolozzi stated, that the plaintiff was a 
 gentleman of undoubted merit in his profes- 
 sion, and to whom he had paid upwards of 
 700/. for his services as an engraver. This 
 gentleman gave it as his opinion, that the copy 
 was a very good one, in which he was confirmed 
 by the evidence of the other professional gen- 
 tlemen. 
 
 “ They underwent a long cross-examination. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 211 
 
 After which Mr. Erskine addressed the Jury 
 on the part of the defendant. He described 
 the difference between the two engravings, and 
 ludicrously commented on the disparity of re- 
 semblance in the copy to what the original 
 exhibited. On this ground, the defendant had 
 resisted the fulfilment of the contract, as the 
 agreement was, that the plaintiff should make 
 a fair copy. He said, that the copy which the 
 defendant had presented was of no value ; the 
 likenesses of the persons composing the groupe 
 assembled round the illustrious person at the 
 moment of his death, had not been preserved, 
 consequently, the picture was not valuable, the 
 public not choosing to purchase a work which 
 did not present a correct likeness. He said he 
 should call many of the first artists in this 
 country to prove the defendant’s case, and had 
 no doubt, from the evidence they would give, 
 that the Jury would find a verdict for his 
 client. The learned Counsel then called Mr. 
 West (the President of the Royal Academy), 
 Sir William Beech ey, Sir F. Bourgeois, Mr. 
 Opie, Mr. Hoppner, Mr. Fittler, Mr. Cosway, 
 Mr. Boydell, Mr. Holloway, Mi. Collyer, Mr. 
 Dunkarton, &c. — These gentlemen stated, they 
 had examined the engraving done by Mr. 
 Bartolozzi, and also that of the plaintiff: they 
 
 p 2 
 
212 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 considered that he had utterly failed in pro- 
 ducing a correct copy. They particularly de- 
 scribed the minutiae of the art, and contrasted 
 the engraving, pointing out the particular ob- 
 jections in the plaintiff’s copy, which they 
 stated to be the failure of resemblance in the 
 different characters. They considered that this 
 had originated in his not attending to the pro- 
 priety of outlines ; and said, that the art was 
 mechanical, though they admitted that the 
 powers of genius had a great effect in consti- 
 tuting perfection. 
 
 “ The Attorney-General replied. He address- 
 ed himself in a forcible manner to the feelings 
 of the Jury. He said his client was, by their 
 verdict, either to be established as an artist of 
 reputation, or utterly ruined, for such would be 
 the effect of their decision, if given in favour 
 of the defendant. It was rather hard on his 
 client, that so many of the first-rate artists 
 should be called to give so severe a critique on 
 his performance, which they had done without 
 one iota of Christian charity, forgetting at the 
 time they were sitting in judgment on him, 
 that their works, though he certainly did not 
 mean to depreciate their worth, were as open 
 to the censures of criticism as those of the 
 plaintiff ; some little allowance might have 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 213 
 
 been made on that ground. He then entered 
 into an examination of the evidence, and com- 
 mented with some ‘ pleasantry on the nicety of 
 discrimination which the witnesses had evinced 
 in their remarks. He concluded with submit- 
 ting, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, 
 especially as the defendant, during the whole 
 time this work was in hand, had not made any 
 objection to the method in which he was pro- 
 ceeding ; and that the sum he engaged for was 
 inferior to what Mr. Bartolozzi had received 
 for his copy from the painting. 
 
 “Lord Kenyon lamented that he was not 
 skilled enough in the art to be competent to 
 direct the Jury. They, however, would decide 
 upon the weight of evidence, and give a verdict 
 accordingly. It was singular that the defendant 
 had not expressed himself dissatisfied with the 
 work while it was in hand. 
 
 “ The Jury, after retiring for a short time, 
 found a verdict for the plaintiff for 580 /.” 
 
 4 
 
 The sale, a few years ago, of Fonthill, and 
 its large and splendid collection of virtu , had 
 its precedent in this year, 1801 . It is a singular 
 exposition of the fluctuating nature of colonial 
 property, that this gorgeous palace of him 
 whom Childe Harold termed “ England’s 
 
214 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 wealthiest son,” should, in the space of about 
 twenty years, be twice visited by the auc- 
 tioneer’s hammer, until, upon the last occasion, 
 the whole estate passed from the Croesus of 
 Jamaica, to the affluent colonist of the East. 
 — The following is extracted from a contem- 
 porary description of the first sale at Font- 
 hill, which took place in August 1801. 
 
 “ Fonthill Auction. — There never was in 
 this part of the country, or perhaps in the 
 world, a collection of finer or more superb fur- 
 niture, in proportion to its quantity. So very 
 ill-founded has been the foolish surmise that 
 nothing was meant to be sold but old-fashioned 
 and worn-out articles, the books and a very few 
 of the best paintings only have been kept back. 
 
 44 The general sensation which this unexpected 
 auction excited, more especially in these parts 
 (Wiltshire), can hardly be conceived. Even 
 the harvest has but little restrained the popular 
 curiosity. The distinguished elegance of this 
 noted seat ; the natural beauty of the grounds ; 
 the art and expense so profusely lavished on 
 their improvement ; the fine and extensive 
 sheet of water, stretching as far as the eye can 
 discern, in a straight line, by the eastern wing of 
 the house, and rendered eminently pleasing and 
 majestic by the flocks of swans which play on 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 215 
 
 its bosom ; the various clusters of wide-branch- 
 ing trees, which diversify’the’park in every di- 
 rection ; the gardens, enriched and embellished 
 by every species and degree of European and 
 Asiatic luxury ; a spacious family mansion, in 
 the best style of modern architecture, replenish- 
 ed with an excess of the most voluptuous ac- 
 commodation, — naturally attracted, as may well 
 be conceived, all the fashion far and near, from 
 Salisbury, Andover, Bath, Weymouth, and all 
 the subordinate towns, the villas, and even the 
 hamlets in their respective vicinities. The roads 
 swarmed all the morning with shoals of the 
 young and gay, slaving as they could to this 
 splendid exhibition ; and, long before noon, 
 every chamber in the house, as well as all the 
 adjacent grounds, were crowded with genteel 
 people; the court and stable-yard with car- 
 riages ; and all the gates, doors, and passages, 
 with lackeys and beggars. 
 
 “ The auction was in the great hall, where an 
 organ, six-and-twenty feet high and fifteen 
 wide, is placed. This very masterly instru- 
 ment, built and finished in such superlative 
 taste that it is said to have cost nearly two 
 thousand pounds, played till the business of 
 the day commenced. 
 
 “ The auctioneer began with an eulogium on 
 
216 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the goods to be exposed, and stated them to be 
 the most splendid and transcendent he ever had 
 the honour of bringing to the hammer. Indeed, 
 there was not an item in this day’s sale which 
 might not, both for value and magnificence, suit 
 the most elegant palace in Europe. 
 
 “ Not a stool, or tripod, or spring blind, or 
 window-curtain, brought so little as a guinea. 
 Some marble slabs went at more than a hun- 
 dred guineas each. A bust of Homer was 
 knocked down at twenty-seven guineas, and 
 that of Virgil at nineteen. 
 
 “ Every thing in the room, fitted a la Turque , 
 sold immensely high. The richness of the hang- 
 ings, all silk or satin, of superlative quality — the 
 brilliant French plates of glass, which decorated 
 and enlivened every side of the room — the sofas 
 formed in the most sumptuous style of Oriental 
 magnificence— the chair and stools, gilt with 
 burnished gold, attracted every eye ; and it was 
 laughable to see even our Wiltshire farmers fur- 
 nishing their homely parlours with the gorge- 
 ous accumulation of inordinate fortune and of 
 effeminate taste.” 
 
 A few months afterwards, the picture galle- 
 ries of two other of the wealthiest proprietors of 
 Jamaica were brought to the hammer, and the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 217 
 
 following list will show the prices which good 
 pictures sold for in England at this period. 
 
 Mr. Christie sold a most capital collection 
 of paintings, being the united Cabinet of Sir 
 Simon Clarke, Bart, and George Hibbert, Esq. 
 and which were sold without reserve. 
 
 A Landscape by Cuyp, was knocked down 
 at 180 guineas ; a Family Concert by Schalken, 
 195 ; a Landscape by Wouvermans, 240 ; a 
 Sibyl by Guido, 330 ; a Landscape by Claude 
 Lorraine, 480 ; two Conversations by D. Te- 
 niers, 650 ; a Crucifixion by Rubens, 150 ; Sol- 
 diers embarking by Wouvermans, 300 ; Flight 
 of Jacob by P. de Cortona, 320 . A Land- 
 scape by Wouvermans fetched 340 guineas. 
 Lord Darnley purchased a Salvator Rosa for 
 460 ; and a Diana returning from the Chase, by 
 Rubens, was knocked down to Mr. Bryan, for 
 1050 guineas. The whole collection, which 
 amounted to not more than one hundred and 
 forty-one pictures, is supposed to have netted 
 upwards of 15 , 000 /. Mr. Hope purchased many 
 admirable specimens of the Flemish School. 
 
 At a sale of the deceased Countess of Hol- 
 dernesse’s paintings, at the same period, the fol- 
 lowing paintings sold as underneath. 
 
 Storm at Sea (Vandervelde), 130 guineas; Pair 
 of Views on the Rhine (Sachtleven), 30 ; Lady 
 
218 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 with a Child in a Cradle (W. Mieris), 195 ; 
 Interior of a Dutch Cabaret (Ostade), 305 ; 
 Landscape (Ruysdael), 65 ; Portraits of a Dutch 
 Family (Terburgh), 37 ; Inside of a Gardener’s 
 House (Teniers), 310 ; Group at Cards, Music, 
 &c. (Palamedes), 165; His own Portrait (Rem- 
 brandt), 78; a Frost Piece (Schweickhardt), 72 ; 
 View on the Scheldt (Peters), 33 ; the Raree- 
 Showman (W. Mieris), 200 ; Landscape on the 
 Banks of a Canal (Vandervelde), 53; View on 
 the Sea Coast near Schevening (Ditto), 155 ; 
 Horses Watering (P. Wouvermans), 170; the 
 Judgment of Paris (Rubens), 305 ; a Land- 
 scape (Hobbima), 280 ; Landscape with Cat- 
 tle and Figures (Vandervelde), 300; a Hermit 
 at Devotion (Rembrandt), 70. 
 
 Lord Carysfort, Sir F. Baring, and Aider- 
 man Hibbert, were among the purchasers, who 
 offered most liberally. 
 
 The sales of exquisite paintings at this period 
 in England were extremely numerous. The 
 Revolution of France, and the sudden transi- 
 tions of property throughout Europe, continued 
 to pour into England the finest paintings from 
 every part of the Continent. No attempt, 
 however, was made to form a National Gallery. 
 George the Third was absorbed in the piety 
 of Mr. West and the portraits of Sir W. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 219 
 
 Beechey. — Lawrence, for some years, had had 
 little of the royal patronage. In vain had 
 Reynolds, Barry, the first Marquis of Lans- 
 downe, Mr. Desenfans, and Sir F. Bourgeois, 
 and other enlightened men, urged the necessity 
 of creating a National Gallery, the formation of 
 which could have been facilitated by the un- 
 precedented sales of great pictures in this coun- 
 try. Perhaps the omission was fortunate ; for 
 even now, a National Gallery seems not to be 
 understood amongst us. The paintings in our 
 incipient Institution have perhaps already ex- 
 perienced a ten-fold injury from heat and dirt ? 
 to what they would have suffered in the rooms 
 of a private possessor. 
 
 But I revert to the paintings of Mr. Law- 
 rence in the Exhibition of 1801. 
 
 The two portraits of the Miss Uptons in 
 this Exhibition were much admired. JVliss 
 Caroline and Sophia Upton were the youngest 
 daughters, and the youngest of the six child- 
 ren of Clot worthy Upton, Esq., created Ba- 
 ron Templeton, in Antrim, in 1776. At the 
 period of these portraits being taken, they 
 were about nineteen years of age. Their eldest 
 brother, the present Viscount Templeton, suc- 
 ceeded to the title in 1785, whilst the sister 
 immediately older than the subject of the first 
 
220 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 portrait, married the present Marquess of Bris- 
 tol, the son of the Earl of Bristol and Bishop of 
 Derry, who in Ireland, during the National Con- 
 vention, became so celebrated a Rex populi , and 
 whose eccentric proceedings on the Continent af- 
 terwards occasioned so much mirth. I have be- 
 fore alluded to his flight from Italy for throwing 
 a tureen of soup at the head-priest of a Catholic 
 procession passing under his window whilst he 
 was at dinner, and annoying him with its bells: 
 this was long a joke in that part of the world 
 to all but the Earl himself. 
 
 But the painting that placed Mr. Lawrence 
 above all competition this year, was his full- 
 length portrait of Mr. John Kemble, in the 
 character of Hamlet. 
 
 It is absurd to call this a theatrical portrait, 
 merely because the character of Hamlet is to be 
 found in a drama, and because the embodying 
 of the conception of a figure is partly taken 
 from an actor. Were an historical name given 
 to this painting, it would be reckoned a repre- 
 sentation of the finest form and countenance that 
 imagination could trace. Talma used to admire 
 exceedingly the dress of Hamlet on our stage, for 
 its positive elegance, and for its displaying the 
 figure ; but with reference to its Italian charac- 
 ter, and to its application to a Danish prince. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 221 
 
 he used to say, “ If I were to dress the charac- 
 ter thus on the Parisian stage, I should be pelt- 
 ed off.” The figure of Hamlet is full of dig- 
 nity, calm, noble, and unobtrusive, whilst the 
 countenance expresses lucid thought and so- 
 lemn musings. Perhaps the expression of the 
 face might have admitted of a more deter- 
 minate character. An awe is inspired by the 
 “ inky suit,” and deep gloomy background ; 
 and the light falls merely on the face and 
 chest, and perhaps rather too strongly upon 
 the skull held in the left hand. In the fol- 
 lowing letter, Lawrence makes an allusion to 
 this painting : — 
 
 “ Thank you, dearest Mrs. Boucherette, for 
 your kind letter, — the pleasantest Monday 
 sight that I can see. I expected one from my 
 brother, and was so unnatural, that I was more 
 glad to find it yours. 
 
 “ I am very glad that, after the Two Friends, 
 you like my Hamlet, which, except my Satan, 
 I think my best work. I must now try, though, 
 to give a something much better (for the low 
 centre of your pier) ; for I begin to be really un- 
 easy at finding myself so harnessed and shackled 
 into this dry mill-horse business, which yet I 
 must get through with steady industry, well 
 
222 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 knowing that this is the very season of my life ( 
 when it is most necessary. 
 
 “ How good you are to tell me of those friends 
 who become dearer to me every hour in my 
 life, and, I think, in exact proportion as I 
 begin to see the real blessings of existence, and 
 to prize what is valuable as I ought ; only I 
 have been a dreamer, and wake too late. I 
 have lived half my life; and though Heath 
 may not divide me from the being that I love, 
 Circumstance (a creature of some potency) may 
 as effectually do it, with more bitterness, if not 
 equal sorrow. I am not fanciful enough to 
 expect it otherwise. 
 
 44 These 4 high winds,’ that so scatter friends, 
 are indeed alarming. What would they be to 
 you ? — You see I have erased it. — 4 The dreaded 
 picture’ is not begun. 
 
 44 1 am glad to learn from you that Lady 
 
 enjoys the country so much, and hope 
 
 in God she will return to you more tranquil 
 than you say she seemed. I believe you were 
 right in the favourable opinion of the gentle- 
 man whom we suppose the cause of her uneasi- 
 ness. She could not love an unworthy object, 
 if we looked only to the goodness of her heart ; 
 and her understanding is too enlightened to be 
 easily deceived by appearances. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 223 
 
 “ I mean very soon to see Norbury, and shall 
 thus meet with you again. I shall sit as near 
 Augusta at the breakfast-table as possible, that 
 I may have a glance at the handwritings when 
 they come in. Lady Nelthorpe ! ! — Heaven be 
 praised, dear friend, for your charity to the 
 profligate! it must give me so constantly the 
 benefit of your compassion. My Lady shall 
 owe her pictures to you. 
 
 “ Believe me, with the truest gratitude, 
 
 “ Dear Madam, ever, ever yours, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 At this period Mr. Lawrence was very much 
 with the Princess of Wales, who was residing 
 at Blackheath. 
 
 In 1801 , Turnerelli, the sculptor, was em- 
 ployed in giving lessons to Her Royal High- 
 ness the Princess of Wales, at Blackheath, and 
 having made a model of the infant daughter of 
 Sir John Douglas, at Her Royal Highness's 
 request, Mr. Lawrence, who had then recently 
 finished a portrait of the Princess, on seeing 
 the model, observed, that he had an intention 
 to attempt the bust of a friend. He accord- 
 ingly desired the clay to be put together on a 
 modelling-board, and conveyed it to the seat of 
 Mr. William Lock, of Norbury Park, Surrey, 
 
224 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 and, during his visit there, took sittings of that 
 gentleman, and produced an admirable bust in 
 the antique style ; the hair was singularly fine, 
 in flowing tresses, and the character of the aged 
 countenance studied with great accuracy. Se- 
 veral casts were made, and some of them, I 
 have little doubt, are at present in being. This 
 was his first, and probably his last, essay in 
 modelling. 
 
 Sir Joshua, I believe, had made but one simi- 
 lar effort at modelling. 
 
 In 1802, the Exhibition contained one thou- 
 sand and ninety-one works, among which I 
 trace only one to Hoppner. Mr. Lawrence 
 exhibited nine. These were — 5, Portrait of 
 Lady Templeton ; 17, of the Marchioness of 
 Exeter; 56, of Earl Cowper; 72, of the Prin- 
 cess of Wales and Princess Charlotte; 176, 
 of Lady Cunningham ; 184, of the Honourable 
 T. Erskine; 421, of George S ton estreet, paint- 
 ed for the Phoenix Company ; 422, of a Master 
 in Chancery ; 621, of Sir William Grant, Mas- 
 ter of the Polls. 
 
 The first of these portraits was Lady Mary 
 Montagu, the only daughter of the Earl of 
 Sandwich, and who was married about five years 
 previously to the taking of this portrait, to 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 225 
 
 Lord Templeton, the brother of the Miss 
 Uptons, whose likenesses were exhibited in the 
 Exhibition of 1801. 
 
 The second portrait is that of the Marchio- 
 ness of Exeter, the Earl having been created a 
 Marquis whilst the work was in progress. The 
 lady, his Lordship’s third wife, had been the 
 Duchess Dowager of Hamilton, and was daugh- 
 ter of Mr. Peter Burrell, whose ancestor was 
 standard-bearer to the Black Prince at the battle 
 of Poitiers, though he himself and his brother 
 were in trade. 
 
 His Lordship’s first marriage had been un- 
 fortunate, and his second was at least singular. 
 Disturbed in mind at the unhappy result of his 
 first union, he had retired to a farm-house near 
 Shrewsbury, where he lived incog., and solaced 
 himself in rural musings. His command of 
 money, and his want of employment, at last set 
 the busy gossips of the neighbourhood at con- 
 jectures, and inferences were drawn not very 
 favourable to his character and sources of indo- 
 lent support. At last, his host thought of cut- 
 ting acquaintance, partly on this score, and 
 partly because the neighbourhood began to 
 think him attached to his daughter. “But,” 
 replied the noble recluse, “ what would you say, 
 if I really loved Sarah Hoggins, and married 
 
 VOL. 1. Q 
 
226 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 her ?” This altered the case. The wedding was 
 agreed upon, the parties repaired to Burghley, 
 and until they arrived at the splendid palace 
 of the Cecils, Sarah Hoggins had no idea that 
 she was to be the Marchioness of Exeter. 
 
 The portraits of the Princess of Wales and 
 Princess Charlotte opened a fine connexion for 
 Mr. Lawrence, and it led to an intimacy be- 
 tween him and her Royal Highness, to which 
 it will be necessary to advert, hereafter. 
 
 The portrait of Mr. Erskine was remarkably 
 expressive of his energy of character, and the 
 fire and spirit of his countenance seemed to give 
 animation to his body. 
 
 In 1803, Mr. Lawrence produced but five 
 works, and all of them portraits : the contents 
 of the Exhibition amounted to one thousand 
 and twenty-eight works. Mr. Lawrence’s paint- 
 ings were — 21, Portrait of the Right Honour- 
 able Lord Thurlow ;* 64, of Lady C. Hamil- 
 ton ; 105, of the Right Honourable W. Wynd- 
 ham ; 127, of the Honourable Miss Lamb; 
 182, of Lady C. Campbell. 
 
 The reason of thus falling below the average 
 of his annual number, is not be ascertained. In 
 the following letter to his friend Mr. Lysons, he 
 
 * This, I believe, was the last portrait taken of the first 
 Lord Thurlow ; he died in the year 1806. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 227 
 
 makes a humorous allusion to the alarm of an 
 invasion, which the Government then kept up 
 among the people. 
 
 “ Greek Street, Oct. 19, 1803. 
 
 44 MY DEAR LYSONS, 
 
 “ I have been very neglectful in not answer- 
 ing your kind letter sooner, which indeed I 
 should have done, to have learnt how you were 
 after your accident, but that Farington in- 
 formed me you were recovered. I spent the 
 evening last night at Mrs. Hughes’s, and she, 
 as well as Mr. F., speaks in raptures of your 
 pleasant situation — to me no pleasant language, 
 who, 1 fear, must wait for another year before I 
 can enjoy the same pleasure. My time here 
 is so occupied, that my visit to Bath is given up. 
 
 44 1 have no news to tell you. You are pretty 
 certain, I suppose, of Bonaparte’s finishing the 
 country before you do, and of that slight trans- 
 fer of property which will make Hempsted 
 very convenient to some French general, or 
 pleasant barracks for his soldiers. Leave the 
 pictures, for they respect the arts. I mean to 
 write over my door, Milton’s sonnet with a 
 trifling alteration.* We are here all in the 
 
 * His eighth sonnet written <4 when the assault was in- 
 tended to the City.” 
 
 Q 2 
 
228 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 dismals, and this being Fast-day, I am going to 
 eat beaf-s teaks with Kemble at Jemmy Cur- 
 tis’s brewhouse! — Pray give my best respects 
 to your brother and sister, and believe me ever, 
 my dear friend, 
 
 “ Yours, with the greatest truth and esteem, 
 
 “ T. Lawrence.” 
 
 In the succeeding letter to his sister, the ac- 
 count he gives of his taking a part in the pri- 
 vate theatricals of the Marquis of Abercorn at 
 the Priory, at once refutes the absurd but de- 
 famatory stories that have been circulated about 
 his dissipating his time upon the stage. 
 
 “ Greek Street, Jan. 28, 1803. 
 
 “ MY DEAREST SISTER, 
 
 “I am very much concerned to find that your 
 painful illness is not quite subdued, and that you 
 still suffer from it. I have no medicine to send 
 to you ; none to advise but patient endurance, 
 which you have already, and that consciousness 
 of deserving every good which will support you 
 under every evil. Few can feel it, and those 
 few are the most unwilling to acknowledge that 
 they can. I remember the time when I thought 
 you had perhaps too much spirit ; but too much 
 of animal spirits is, I suppose, when joined with 
 solid principle, as necessary in youth, as a too 
 
SIR TLIOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 229 
 
 fertile imagination is in genius. The demands 
 which age and middle life have upon both, 
 would else be coldly answered. You have 
 played a noble part in life, and will have a much 
 better right to claim the plaudits of your friends 
 than the wise hypocrite of whom the vanity is 
 recorded. I am writing from a moralizing chair 
 stuffed with blankets. William has perhaps 
 informed you, that I have had a trifling fever, 
 from which, in a few days, I shall be quite re- 
 covered. How I caught it I don’t exactly 
 know, nor indeed does it matter, since I am 
 getting rid of it. 
 
 “ You have seen in the papers an account of 
 a theatrical fete at the Marquis of Abercorn’s. 
 Shall I give you a little account of it? It 
 was projected by a woman of great cleverness 
 and beauty, Lady Caher— very young and full 
 of talent, with Lady Abercorn, and the rest of 
 the female party ; and of course it was acceded 
 to by Lord Abercorn, who, whatever character 
 of pride the world may have given him, is just 
 as pleasant and kind and gentlemanly with his 
 family and friends, as a man can be. 
 
 “ It was determined to do it in a quiet way, 
 and more as an odd experiment of the talents 
 of the party, than any thing else but this 
 and that friend would be offended; — and at 
 
230 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 last it swelled up to a perfect theatre (in a room) 
 and a London audience. 
 
 “ The Prince, the Duke and Duchess of 
 Devonshire, Lord and Lady Melbourne (their 
 sons of the party), Lord and Lady Essex, Lord 
 and Lady Amherst, with a long et cetera , 
 and, amongst the rest, Sheridan, were present ! 
 
 “ A Play was at first thought of, and I was 
 for Miss Bailey’s Comedy, “ The Trial one 
 slightly spoken of by the world, but which, 
 I am sure, Mr. Homer would like for its truly 
 natural dialogue and character ; — perhaps, for 
 the great stage more incident may be necessary, 
 but not where the characters are nicely and 
 accurately acted. At last, however, the pieces 
 fixed upon were the “Wedding Day,” and 
 “ Who’s the Dupe ?” In the first, the characters 
 were thus : 
 
 Sir Adam Contest 
 Mr. Milden . . 
 
 Lord Xlakelana . 
 Mr. Contest . . 
 
 Mr. J. Madox 
 Mr. Madox. 
 Your Brother. 
 Mr. G. Lamb. 
 
 Ladies. 
 
 Lady Contest . . . Lady Caher. 
 
 Hannah Hon. Miss Butler. 
 
 Mrs. . .... Mrs. J. Kemble. 
 
 Lady Autumn . . Lady C. Lindsey. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 231 
 
 Who’s the Dupe ? 
 
 Old Doiley 
 Sandford . 
 Grainger . 
 Gradus . 
 Servants . 
 
 Mr. J. Madox. 
 
 Mr. Lamb. 
 
 Your Brother. 
 
 Mr. G. Lamb. 
 
 The Lords Hamilton. 
 
 Ladies . 
 
 Miss Doiley . . . Hon. Miss Butler. 
 
 Charlotte . . . Mrs. J. Kemble. 
 
 “ I was obliged to be in town, and at first neg- 
 lected my parts, but not being coxcomb enough 
 to do it wholly, I made good sail at the last, 
 and was perfect. The day at last came, and 
 was very pleasant from all its distractions and 
 inconveniences. The Prince was to dine at six, 
 and in the same room that the performers 
 dined in, who of course had an earlier hour, 
 half-past three. We all sat down like a Rugby 
 school party, but rather more vociferous, huz- 
 zaed our Manager, and hissed our Hostess off 
 for talking of the Prince and hours. At last 
 the dressing, &c. ended. The orchestra, behind 
 the scenes, sat down : Lady Harriet Hamilton 
 played the organ, — Lady Maria, the piano- 
 forte, — Lady Catherine the tambourine; Mr. 
 Lamb, Lord Melbourne’s eldest son, (a per- 
 former) Mr. Madox, Violoncello. First Violin, 
 
232 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 and two others, hired. A most perfect orches- 
 tra, with admirable scenery, and light as day. 
 
 The Prince then came in, and of course the 
 orchestra struck up, God save the King ; then a 
 little terrifying bell rang, the curtain drew up, 
 and the Wedding Day began. At first, I will 
 own to you, Sheridan’s face, the grave Duke of 
 Devonshire, and two or three staunch critics, 
 made me feel unpleasantly ; for I opened the 
 piece. However, this soon wore off. Our set 
 all played extremely well, like persons of good 
 sense, without extravagance or buffoonery, and 
 yet with sufficient spirit. Lady Caher, Mr. J. 
 Madox, and G. Lamb were the most conspicu- 
 ous ; the first so beautiful, that I felt love-mak- 
 ing very easy. 
 
 A splendid supper closed the business, and 
 the Prince, the Devonshires, Melbournes, West- 
 morelands, &c. slept at the Priory. 
 
 Wednesday it was determined to act it again ; 
 but I have unfortunately prevented it by my ill- 
 ness, and they knew of it only on the morning ; 
 so that I occasioned great inconvenience, and 
 have just been of consequence enough to frus- 
 trate a pleasant scheme. At Easter, if not be- 
 fore, it will be done again. You know me too 
 well, dear Anne, to believe that I should be of 
 such a scheme, mider any but very flattering 
 
Slit THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 233 
 
 circumstances ; as it is, I was right to join it. 
 Lord Abercorn is an old Jermyn Street friend 
 - a staunch and honourable one, and particu- 
 larly kind to me in real services and very gra- 
 tifying distinctions. These all formed one 
 strong reason for joining in the thing ; and an- 
 other secret one was, that whatever tends to 
 heighten a character for general talent (when 
 kept in prudent bounds) is of use to that parti- 
 cular direction of it which forms the pursuit of 
 life. I have gained, then, and not lost by this 
 (to you) singular step. I am not going to be 
 a performer in other families. I stick to Lord 
 Abercorns ; and, for the rest, I pursue my pro- 
 fession as quietly and more steadily than ever. 
 
 “ Adieu, dear, dear Anne, 
 
 “ Ever your attached Brother, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 Mr. Bernard the actor, who has published 
 two witty volumes of all the good things he 
 ever heard or saw, and of all the clever people 
 he ever knew,* notices the father of Mr. Law- 
 rence, and speaks of his son’s design to adopt 
 
 * Vide one of the most amusing of recent publications, 
 — Retrospections of the Stage, by the late Mr. John Bernard, 
 Chap, iii.vol. 2. 
 
234 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the Stage as his profession. Considering that 
 the father was always exhibiting him as a 
 spouter, and introducing him to the players, 
 such a transient wish of a lively, clever boy 
 was almost unavoidable. The story is of some 
 interest. Mr. Bernard says — 
 
 “ Lawrence not only used to entertain his 
 friends at home round a snug parlour fire, with 
 his readings, but whenever a new play was an- 
 nounced, would come over to Bath and proffer 
 his services to the actors to read their parts 
 — a kindness which some who intended to 
 sponge at his house would accept, but others 
 of more dignity declined.”* — “ But Lawrence, at 
 this time, owed all his notoriety to his son Tom, 
 a boy of about nine years of age, who exhi- 
 bited a wonderful precocity of talents at taking 
 likenesses. His father, however, had taught 
 him to read Shakspeare and Milton with con- 
 siderable effect, and considered his ability in 
 this respect (since it proceeded from himself) 
 of a much higher order than the former, which 
 was natural. Nevertheless, a distinction be- 
 tween the two was, that, as a reader, little Tom 
 was but little Tom — a very clever child at 
 nine years of age, whilst, as a sketcher of like- 
 nesses, he disclosed the future powers of the 
 President. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 235 
 
 “ There was something about little Lawrence, 
 however, which excited the surprise of the most 
 casual observer. He was a perfect man in mi- 
 niature. His confidence and self-possession 
 smacked of one-and-twenty. Lawrence fre- 
 quently brought his boy to the Green-room, 
 and we would set him on a table and make him 
 recite Hamlet’s directions to the players. On 
 one of these occasions, Henderson was present, 
 and expressed much gratification. The little 
 fellow, in return for our civilities and flatteries, 
 was desirous to take our likenesses, the first time 
 we came to Devizes, and Edwin and myself 
 afforded him an opportunity soon after, on one 
 of our non-play-day’s excursion. After dinner, 
 Lawrence proposed giving us a reading as usual, 
 but Tom reminded him of our promise. We . 
 preferred a specimen of his talents, as being most 
 novel. The young artist collected his mate- 
 rials very quickly, and essayed my visage the 
 first. In about ten minutes, he produced a faith- 
 ful delineation in crayon, which for many years 
 I kept as a curiosity. He next attempted 
 Edwin’s, who, startled at the boy’s ability, re- 
 solved in (his usual way) to perplex him. 
 
 “No man had a more flexible countenance 
 than Edwin. It was not only well featured, but 
 well muscled, if I may be allowed the expres- 
 
236 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 sion, which enabled him to throw over its sur- 
 face, as on a moral prism, all the colours of ex- 
 pression, minutely blending or powerfully con- 
 trasting. He accordingly commenced his sit- 
 ting, by settling his face into a sober and rather 
 serious aspect, and when the young artist had 
 taken its outline and come to the eyes, he began 
 gradually, but imperceptibly, to extend and 
 change it, raising his brows, compressing his 
 lips, and widening his mouth, till his face wore 
 the expression of brightness and gaiety. Tom 
 no sooner perceived the change, than he started 
 in supreme wonder, attributing it to a defect in 
 his own vision. The first outline was accord- 
 ingly abandoned, and a second commenced. 
 Tom was now more particular, and watched him 
 narrowly, but Edwin, feature by feature, and 
 muscle by muscle, so completely ran, what 
 might have been called the gamut of his coun- 
 tenance (as the various components of its har- 
 mony), that the boy drew and rubbed out, till 
 his hand fell by his side, and he stood silently 
 looking in Edwin’s face, to discover, if possible, 
 its true expression. Edwin could not long 
 maintain his composure at his scrutiny, and re- 
 vealed the hoax with a burst of merriment and 
 mimic thunder.* 
 
 * Probably Edwin was, of the class, as perfect an actor as 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 237 
 
 “ Little Tom could not take up Shakspeare or 
 Milton and read at random. He had been in- 
 structed in particular speeches, and to those he 
 referred. There was one in Milton (Satan’s Ad- 
 dress to the Sun) he had long wished to learn, 
 but his father, from an apprehension that his 
 mind was yet unequal to this grasp, had passed 
 it over. Tom had listened, nevertheless, when- 
 ever the former had read it to a friend, and sur- 
 prised his father not slightly with the news that 
 he could imitate him. A family in Devizes, 
 who were well known to Lawrence, giving a 
 party one evening, requested the favour of his 
 son’s company for his readings ; Lawrence con- 
 sented, but on condition that Tom was not re- 
 quested to select other than his own passages. 
 
 we ever possessed. This trick upon young Lawrence has 
 very often been played, but never with more quiet humour 
 than by Garrick and Foote, upon the simple Gainsborough, 
 when he first came to London. Poor Gainsborough stood 
 with his hands in his waistcoat pockets, watching the two, 
 to him unknown, gentlemen, down stairs ; and when the 
 door was shut, he began to mutter to himself—- “ Rot those 
 two fellows! — I begin to believe them two rogues. — As to 
 that little fellow, (Garrick,) he has every body’s face but his 
 own — and thus proceeded the suspicious and irritated artist, 
 till he wrought himself up to the resolution, that “ they 
 were London rogues,” and that they should never enter his 
 house again. 
 
238 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 He then cautioned his boy against attempting 
 any thing in which he was not perfect, and par- 
 ticularly the Address of Satan. In the evening, 
 Tom walked to the house, with Milton and 
 Shakspeare under his arm, and was shewn in to 
 the company with the utmost attention. 
 
 “ When the complimenting was over, he was 
 asked, what recitation he preferred in Milton. 
 He replied, ‘ Satan’s Address to the Sun but 
 that his father would not permit him to give it. 
 For that reason, they were particularly eager to 
 hear it, as they wished to discover whether Tom 
 was a mere parrot, or a prodigy. His dutiful 
 scruples, however, were not to be overcome, till 
 they had promised to obtain his father’s forgive- 
 ness. He then turned to the forbidden page, 
 and a written slip of paper dropped from it ; a 
 gentleman picked it up, and read it aloud, 4 Tom, 
 mind you don’t touch Satan.’ 
 
 “ My reader must conceive the effect which 
 the wording of this caution produced on the 
 hearers. Tom, however, did have dealings with 
 Satan, and handled him, as I was informed, with 
 great discretion. 
 
 “ As young Lawrence grew up, his Shak- 
 spearian readings, and his frequent visits to the 
 theatre, imbued him with a strong dramatic 
 propensity. About his sixteenth year, he had 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 239 
 
 serious intentions of making the Stage his pro- 
 fession. I was now in Bath once more, but with 
 a wonderful improvement in my fame and for- 
 tunes. No man could be more favourably situa- 
 ted than myself (combining private with public 
 advantages) to give advice and assistance to an 
 aspirant ; and the young artist needed no in- 
 troduction in coming to me for both. I heard 
 him recite Jaffier, and though a private recita- 
 tion, I will admit, is an imperfect criterion, 
 I did not perceive, on this occasion, any evi- 
 dence of talent he could balance against that 
 which he was acknowledged to possess in his 
 present pursuit. I desired him, however, to 
 call on me again, and said that, in the interim, I 
 would speak to Mr. Palmer. In the interim, I 
 met his father, and felt myself bound to dis- 
 close what had passed. Lawrence had failed in 
 his business at Devizes, and was looking for- 
 ward to his son’s efforts for support. Knowing, 
 from experience, the precarious fortunes of an 
 actor, and, by this time, the value of his son’s 
 talents, he was necessarily alarmed at my intel- 
 ligence, and begged I would use all my in- 
 fluence in dissuading him from his design. I 
 knew young Lawrence’s filial attachment, which, 
 among his acquaintance, was indeed proverbial, 
 and I suggested that the best plan would be, to 
 
240 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 achieve the desired object by a surprise. I ap- 
 pointed Lawrence therefore to come to my 
 house the next morning about twelve, with 
 some friends, and sent word to his son to meet 
 me there about half an hour after. I then went 
 to Mr. Palmer, told him the circumstance, and 
 requested his co-operation. He promised it 
 most freely, and agreed to attend the rendez- 
 vous at the time appointed. 
 
 44 By half-past twelve the next day, all the 
 parties were assembled, old Lawrence and his 
 friends in the back-parlour, young Lawrence, 
 Mr. Palmer, and myself, in the front. The 
 Manager was no sooner introduced, than, with 
 great adroitness, he desired a specimen of young 
 Lawrence’s abilities, and took his seat at one 
 end of the room. I proposed the opening scene 
 between Priuli and Jaffier, and one between 
 Jaffier and Belvidera. 
 
 44 We accordingly commenced, I Priuli. and 
 he Jaffier ; and he proceeded very perfectly till 
 the well-known speech of — 4 To me you owe 
 her.’ He came to the line — 
 
 ‘ I brought her, gave her to your despairing arms ; 
 
 Indeed you thank'd me ; but’ — 
 
 but here Jaffier stammered, and became station- 
 ary. I held the book, but would not assist 
 him ; and he re-commenced and stopped, reite- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 241 
 
 rated and hemmed, till his father, who had 
 heard him with growing impatience, could con- 
 tain his vexation no longer, but, pushing open 
 the door, thrust in his head, and prompted him 
 to the sentence — 
 
 ‘ a nobler gratitude 
 
 Rose in her soul, for from that hour she loved me, 
 
 Till, for her life, she paid me with herself.’ 
 
 then added — ‘ You play Jaffier, Tom ! — d 
 
 me, if they suffer you to murder a conspirator !’ 
 
 “ The whole party now made their appear- 
 ance, and began to remonstrate, when Mr. 
 Palmer, taking young Lawrence by the hand, 
 assured him, in the most friendly manner, that 
 he would do any thing to serve him, but that it 
 was his conviction, that he did not possess those 
 advantages which would render the Stage a safe 
 undertaking. This address did not produce an 
 instantaneous effect. It was obvious that the 
 young artist entertained a reverse opinion. A 
 conversation now ensued, in which I abusing 
 the life of an actor, and other friends painting 
 the prospects of a painter, young Lawrence at 
 length became convinced, but remarked, with a 
 sigh, that if he could have gone on the stage, he 
 might have assisted his family, much sooner 
 than by his present employments. 
 
 “ My reader can appreciate the affection of 
 
 VOL. I. R 
 
242 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 this sentiment ; but I am unable to describe its 
 delivery, or the effect it took upon every per- 
 son present. Passing over, therefore, the scene 
 that ensued, I will only add, that young Law- 
 rence went away, renouncing his intentions and 
 retaining his friends. 
 
 “ It is certainly one of my pleasantest recol- 
 lections, that by thus lending my aid to check 
 this early propensity, (which, if encouraged, 
 must have led to a renouncement of the pencil,) 
 I was an agent, however humble or indirect, in 
 the furtherance of my worthy friend’s ultimate 
 prosperity.” 
 
 But I revert to the Exhibition of the Boyal 
 Academy at Somerset House for this year, 1803. 
 A writer on the arts at that period observed, 
 upon its opening — “ The Exhibition is, on the 
 whole, highly creditable to the artists. Its prin- 
 cipal excellence is in portraits and landscapes ; 
 indeed, there is almost a total absence of the 
 higher departments. History -painting and ma- 
 rine subjects are very scarce. Defective, how- 
 ever, as the Exhibition is in these particulars, 
 we cannot but wish it was yet more deficient ; 
 for the specimens produced in these walks of 
 the art, do little honour either to the art itself 
 or the artists by whom they are executed : — 
 though exhibiting much excellence, it contains 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 243 
 
 also great defects. There is a false, showy, 
 meretricious taste gaining ground with men 
 otherwise of considerable note, which, under the 
 sanction of their name, may do considerable 
 injury to the true and classical taste of^the 
 rising generation of artists. The evil of this 
 corruption of taste, in alliance as it is with 
 great abilities, cannot be too strongly reprobated 
 and resisted. If this taste be right, all that we 
 have hitherto loved and revered in the art is 
 wrong ; we must tread back our steps, and cast 
 aside the lessons which the most celebrated 
 masters of antiquity have given us. Lawrence 
 has one excellent portrait that cannot be praised 
 too much — that of Lord Thurlow. It is a true 
 effigy, and represents the leading features of 
 that nobleman’s character, — a shrewd, perspica- 
 cious, and vigorous mind, distinguished, as it 
 has been, fora strong and systematic judgment. 
 His women have, in general, much of the gaudy 
 dissoluteness of taste that we noticed above, and 
 sometimes trespass on moral, as well as on pro- 
 fessional chastity.” * 
 
 This charge of a gaudy dissoluteness must 
 have proceeded from the atrabilarious views of 
 the critic, for it is totally foreign to Lawrence’s 
 
 * This latter observation had emanated from Hoppner, 
 who had repeatedly made it in very coarse language. 
 
 R 2 
 
244 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 style ; nor did he ever paint to the imagination 
 such voluptuous pictures as were exhibited by 
 Romney, Hoppner, and even Sir Joshua Rey- 
 nolds. None of his portraits in this Exhibition 
 became popular. 
 
 The year 1803 was full of memorable com- 
 motions in the Academy ; but it does not ap- 
 pear that Lawrence imbibed the bitter spirit of 
 the disputes, or at all entered into the cabals of 
 the artists. Had the Sovereign equally abstain- 
 ed from interference, it would not have occa- 
 sioned any regret with men of honour and in- 
 dependent spirit. The disputes in an Academy 
 of Art may be better settled by appeals to rea- 
 son and by the refined feelings indigenous to 
 the arts, than by the rescript of royal authority. 
 
 The following quotations from the works of 
 that period, will afford a fair view of the case : — 
 
 “ ROYAL ACADEMY, SOMERSET-PLACE. 
 
 “April 15, 1803. — The Council of the 
 Royal Academy feel themselves compelled to 
 notice a paragraph in The Morning Post of 
 yesterday, of an unwarrantable kind, levelled 
 at the President, and the Royal Academy at 
 large. The circumstances which occasioned the 
 paragraph are as follow: — Mr. West sent, for 
 the Exhibition, an historical picture, represent- 
 
SJH THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 245 
 
 ing Hagar and Ishmael in the Wilderness. On 
 the first view of the picture, a member of the 
 council expressed his opinion of its having 
 been previously exhibited, although the words 
 * B. West, 1803,’ were on the face thereof. The 
 next morning, the same member having exa- 
 mined former catalogues, found that a picture 
 of the same subject had been exhibited in 1776. 
 This circumstance led to farther investigation, 
 and the words “ B. West, 1776,” were observed 
 in another part of the picture, but without any 
 obliteration whatever : the Secretary was direct- 
 - ed to communicate these circumstances imme- 
 diately to Mr. West in writing, which, in the 
 hurry of preparing for the exhibition, he omitted 
 to do, and it is to be observed, that the first 
 intimation Mr. West had of the paragraph in 
 question, was through the medium of an Even- 
 ing Paper (the Courier), sent to him at the 
 Royal Academy yesterday evening, being the 
 first time his health had permitted him to at- 
 tend since the pictures were sent for the 
 exhibition. 
 
 “ The newspapers referred to state, ‘ The 
 Members of the Council, indignant at the de- 
 ception, regarded each other for some time with 
 silent astonishment.’ This circumstance the 
 Council positively deny. The illness of the 
 
246 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 President naturally suggested itself to the 
 Council as the cause of the mistake, a mistake 
 which deprives the exhibition of the picture, as 
 the usual practice of the Academy expressly 
 forbids the second exhibition of any picture 
 whatever. 
 
 “ It is necessary to observe, that Mr. West 
 states, that he is in the habit of altering and 
 repainting his pictures, adding the date of the 
 year in which the alterations are made. Upon 
 this principle, the picture of Hagar and Ishmael 
 has been altered, and in a great degree repaint- 
 ed, and the name and year 1803 added.” 
 
 “ J. S. Copley, Dep. Chairman, 
 “ John Soane, 
 
 “ F. Bourgeois, 
 
 “ I. M. W. Turner, 
 
 “ Charles Rossi, 
 
 “ Ozias Humphry.” 
 
 It would be useless to enter farther into the 
 history of this case than to state, that the Coun- 
 cil was opposed by an appeal to the general 
 assembly of the Academicians, and that Mr. 
 Wyatt was appointed to the Presidency, in lieu 
 of Mr. West.* 
 
 * Mr. Fuseli, and Mr., now Sir M. A. Shee, distinguished 
 themselves in this controversy. On the ballot for the re- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 247 
 
 At the annual meeting of the Academy in 
 the ensuing December, to elect the officers for 
 the following year, the subjoined statement will 
 explain how these differences were settled by 
 the wand of royal authority. 
 
 “Royal Academy. — On Saturday evening, 
 a General Assembly of the Academicians was 
 held at Somerset House, for the purpose of 
 choosing officers for the ensuing year, and re- 
 ceiving his Majesty’s commands on the subject 
 of the late contentions in the Society. His 
 Majesty, after disapproving of the conduct of 
 the General Assembly, directs the Secretary to 
 re-enter the Resolutions of Council of May last, 
 which had been expunged by the order of the 
 General Assembly. His Majesty then expresses 
 his full approbation of the conduct of the sus- 
 pended members of Council, and commands 
 the Secretary to expunge from the books of the 
 Royal Academy all the Resolutions of the Ge- 
 neral Assembly on the first of this month. His 
 Majesty also commands his communications to 
 be entered in the books of the Academy, and 
 
 election of the President, Fuseli had written the name of 
 Mrs. Moser, indicating that an old lady was a fit rival to Mr. 
 West. Mrs. Moser was attached to Fuseli, who, disregard- 
 ing her, was in love with Angelica Kauffman, and many 
 cross-readings took place between them. 
 
248 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 strongly recommends harmony and good-will 
 to its members.” 
 
 “ The Royal recommendation to harmony 
 operated most powerfully. Mr. West imme- 
 diately arose, and after assuring the meeting of 
 the purity of all his intentions, declared that, in 
 every thing he had done, his object had been 
 to support the dignity of the Academy, and to 
 restore harmony to its distracted councils. The 
 Secretary followed in the same strain ; and, 
 after a few observations from Mr. Farington 
 and Mr. Smirke, the Assembly then proceeded 
 to the election of officers. Those of last year 
 were nearly all re- chosen ; the President then 
 recalled to the attention of the General Meet- 
 ing, his Majesty’s paternal recommendation and 
 desire to see peace and harmony established in 
 the Society, whereupon all the members (two 
 excepted) instantly rose, joined hands, and de- 
 clared that, in future, sincerity and friendship 
 should reign amongst them.”* 
 
 It would be attributing very little sagacity 
 to the reader, to point out the impropriety of 
 the interference between a council and an ap- 
 
 * This must strongly bring to mind the satire in Le 
 Diable Boiteux, where, it is said — we were reconciled, 
 shook hands, embraced, and hated each other ever after. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 249 
 
 peal to the general body of any institution; but 
 Mr. West’s speech was very little to the honour 
 of those whom he addressed; for his conduct 
 having been to support the dignity of the Aca- 
 demy, a royal command, to give weight to that 
 conduct, in opposition to the vote of a general 
 assembly, implied that that assembly was indif- 
 ferent to its dignity, or too dull of comprehen- 
 sion to follow the right way of attaining it, 
 until that way was enforced by a royal man- 
 date. 
 
 I must add the following statements of the 
 schisms which prevailed at this period, respect- 
 ing the distribution of medals and prizes 
 
 In February 1803, the Royal Academy fixed 
 the subjects for the premiums to be given, on 
 the 10th of December following, for the best 
 designs in painting, sculpture, and architecture. 
 Some days previous to the deciding on the 
 merit of the works offered, each candidate was to 
 attend at the Academy, to make a sketch of a 
 given subject, in the presence of the Keeper or 
 Secretary. 
 
 Several councils had been called to determine 
 the subjects for the sketches; but, from the ver- 
 satility of some of the members, no resolution 
 had been come to. At a Council held on the 
 19th of August, expressly to determine the 
 
250 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 question respecting the sketches, the President 
 and two of the members opposed the giving any 
 premiums this year; contending, that, as the 
 proceedings of the Academy had been interrupt- 
 ed, and the time passed by, no medals ought to 
 be given. Other members (recollecting they had 
 been young, and candidates also,) could not help 
 feeling for the young students ; and, after a 
 very long debate, the President and his friends 
 were overruled ; and it was determined to give 
 three medals on Saturday, the 24th of December. 
 
 The students, three in painting, one in sculp- 
 ture, and two in architecture, were directed to 
 attend ; they accordingly did so, made their 
 sketches, and thereby complied with the direc- 
 tions of the Council. 
 
 The General Assembly met to determine the 
 premiums on the 23rd, when, in opposition to 
 the vote of the Council, August 19th, and to 
 the astonishment of some of the members, it 
 again became a question whether any premiums 
 should be given. 
 
 Mr. Farington moved a ballot thereon. 
 
 Mr. Soane objected, and stated, if it must 
 now be a question, it should be determined by 
 holding up of hands ; this was overruled, and 
 a ballot took place, when it was determined to 
 give premiums. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 251 
 
 The Assembly then proceeded to ballot for 
 the successful candidates, which being com- 
 pleted, the ballots were sealed up, to be opened 
 on the evening of giving the premiums. 
 
 On Saturday the 24th, the General Assem- 
 bly met at seven o’clock for that purpose, when 
 the President declared a gold medal would be 
 given for the best painting, and another for 
 sculpture, but none for either of the designs in 
 architecture. 
 
 Mr. Farington stated, that on questions of 
 architecture, himself, and those who acted with 
 him, being painters, were always determined 
 by the opinions of architects ; and that, on the 
 present occasion, he had consulted a member 
 of that body, who had been in the room a few 
 minutes that morning, and declared the de- 
 signs utterly unworthy of a premium. 
 
 Mr. Soane replied, by regretting the absence 
 of Mr. Dance, the member probably alluded 
 to, whose opinion, he feared, had been misun- 
 derstood! and so far from agreeing in that 
 opinion, after mature and impartial considera- 
 tion, he solemnly declared the two designs in 
 question were, in his judgment, entitled to 
 great praise, and in no respect inferior to any 
 yet presented to the Academy; while the 
 sketches were, if possible, still stronger proofs 
 
252 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 of the zeal and merit of the artist. He felt for 
 the credit of the institution, and was alive to 
 the situation of the students, whose names had 
 not been declared, and which he had no clue to 
 guess at ; he deprecated the injustice and cruel- 
 ty of acting on a hasty decision, and lamented 
 the evils that must follow such a flagrant vio- 
 lation of the laws of the Academy. He en- 
 treated the meeting to postpone, at least for a 
 few days, the farther consideration of the de- 
 signs in architecture. He conceived, in fair- 
 ness, this request would be admitted, particu- 
 larly when it was recollected, that out of forty 
 Academicians, there were only four architects, 
 Messrs. Dance, Soane, Wyatt, and Yenn ; and 
 that Mr. Dance, who had only taken a cursory 
 view of the designs for a few minutes, was not 
 present; that Mr. Wyatt was out of town; 
 and Mr. Soane and Mr. Yenn fully decided 
 respecting the merits of the designs in archi- 
 tecture. 
 
 Mr. Soane then proposed a motion for delay- 
 ing the farther consideration of the subject, and 
 that a General Assembly should be called for 
 that purpose. This question, on a ballot, was 
 lost by a decided majority. 
 
 In this year, Mr. Nicholas Carlisle was ap- 
 pointed the Secretary to the Antiquarian So- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 253 
 
 ciety, the number of votes being, for Mr. Car- 
 lisle, 125, Mr. Dibdin, 77, and Mr. Cox, 15. 
 
 In the ensuing year, 1804, the Exhibition of 
 the Royal Academy fell off to nine hundred 
 and sixty-eight works, and Mr. Lawrence con- 
 tributed only the six following : — 17, Portrait 
 of Mrs. C. Thelluson and Child ; 25, Mrs. Wil- 
 liams ; 110, J. P. Kemble, Esq. ; 121, J. Curtis, 
 Esq. ; 157, Sir James Macintosh ; 193, Mrs. 
 Siddons. 
 
 In the year 1805, the number of works ex- 
 hibited at the Royal Academy fell off to eight 
 hundred and thirteen, and the arts appeared to 
 retrograde amongst us. The whole country was 
 absorbed by one subject, — the war with France, 
 which assumed features, and inflamed the pas- 
 sions of all classes, in a manner unprecedented 
 in a civilized nation. 
 
 There was one other topic of public conver- 
 sation, which was daily assuming appearances 
 of a serious nature. The differences between 
 the Prince of Wales and the Princess occasion- 
 ed considerable inconveniences to the higher 
 classes of society, and the public began to take 
 a warm interest in the subject. The King and 
 the nation espoused the cause of the Princess, 
 who resided with her daughter at Blackheath. 
 
 Since Mr. Lawrence had taken the portraits 
 
254 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 of the Princess and the Princess Charlotte, in 
 1802, he had become very intimate at Montague 
 House, Blackheath, and fame was busy in attri- 
 buting his visits to improper motives. Whether 
 suspicions of this nature are indigenous to our 
 national character, or were produced, in this 
 instance, by the disturbance of the public mind 
 upon this subject, certain it is, that Mr. Law- 
 rence was extremely annoyed at the detractions 
 circulated respecting him. His amiable man- 
 ners and cheerful conversation must, among the 
 society of Montague House, have been a solace 
 and an inestimable acquisition to a lady cir- 
 cumstanced so unhappily as the Princess. A 
 prurient disposition to slander, upon such sub- 
 jects, may deprive men or females of all society 
 but that of their own sex, and rob the middle 
 and decline of life of its most innocent and 
 best associations. 
 
 To such a degree was Mr. Lawrence annoyed 
 on the subject, that in the ensuing year, 1806, 
 when, what was termed the Delicate Investiga- 
 tion was pending, he offered himself to any 
 scrutiny that the Commissioners might wish 
 to subject him to. Upon the Commissioners 
 making their report to the King, on 14th July 
 1806, though the Princess was fully acquitted 
 of criminality, her manners and conduct were 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 255 
 
 impugned as of more levity than was acceptable 
 in the society of this country. As this last 
 opinion or charge of levity, alluded to the Prin- 
 cess’s conduct towards Mr. Lawrence and an- 
 other gentleman, the former was so ill-advised 
 as to make the following affidavit upon the 
 subject : 
 
 AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS LAWRENCE, ESQ. 
 
 “ I, Thomas Lawrence, swear, that in the year 
 1801, I did sleep several nights at Montague 
 House, and that, frequently, between the close 
 of the day’s sitting and her Royal Highness 
 dressing for dinner, I was alone with the Prin- 
 cess. That I saw her in the evening, and re- 
 mained till twelve, one, or two o’clock, but 
 never alone, except in one single instance, and 
 that for a short time, when I remained with her 
 Royal Highness in the blue-room, or drawing- 
 room, as I remember, to answer some questions 
 that had been put to me. I cannot recollect 
 the particulars, but solemnly declare, that I 
 have not the least objection for all the world to 
 have heard or seen what took place; that I never 
 was alone with her Royal Highness in any 
 other place; that I never was w r ith the door 
 locked, bolted, or fastened, otherwise than in 
 the common and usual manner, which leaves it 
 
256 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 in the power of any person on the outside to 
 open it. So help me God. 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 “ Hatton Garden, 24th Sept. 1806.” 
 
 In Lawrence’s correspondence with a lady 
 of the Household, by whose prudence he often 
 modified his conduct, he had certainly impress- 
 ed her with a notion, that the Princess of Wales 
 was much more partial to his society than to 
 that of her other visitors ; but this might be 
 true, without any inference of impropriety. 
 Upon the Report of the Commission being duly 
 read and discussed, the King wrote to his 
 daughter-in-law his full conviction of her tho- 
 rough innocence, and he ordered her accusers 
 to be indicted for perjury : they were screened 
 from the hand of justice. The oppressor and 
 the oppressed, and the issue of their ill-starred 
 union, have gone to their final count, and the 
 subject is alluded to, only in as much as it in- 
 volves the name of Lawrence. 
 
 The evidence of William Cole, a servant to 
 the Princess, taken at Lord Grenville’s house 
 in Downing Street, on June 6, 1806, implicated 
 Mr. Lawrence on all the facts which he (Law- 
 rence) denied in his affidavit before the magis- 
 trate at Hatton Garden. Thomas Stikeman, a 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 257 
 
 Page of the Princess, in his evidence taken be- 
 fore Lord Grenville, contradicted Cole, in all 
 points respecting Mr. Lawrence, as other wit- 
 nesses had contradicted him with respect to Sir 
 Sidney Smith and Captain Manby. The four 
 Commissioners, Lords Erskine, Spencer, Gren- 
 ville, and Ellenborough, in their report of June 
 14, 1806, to the King, (George III.) attach to 
 the Princess a levity of conduct with Captain 
 Manby, but make no such allusion to Mr. 
 Lawrence. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence’s affidavit was sent as a vouch- 
 er, with the defence of the Princess, transmitted 
 to the King on October 2, 1806, and in which 
 her Royal Highness, after commenting upon 
 the inconsistencies and self-contradictions of the 
 witnesses, thus proceeds with respect to Mr. 
 Lawrence : — 
 
 “ What I recollect, then, is a§ follows : — He 
 began a large picture of me and of my daugh- 
 ter, towards the latter end of the year 1800, or 
 the beginning of 1801. Miss Garth and Miss 
 Hayman were in the house with me at the 
 time. The picture was painted at Montague 
 House. Mr. Lawrence mentioned to Miss 
 Hayman his wish to be permitted to remain 
 some few nights in the house, that, by early 
 rising, he might begin painting on the picture, 
 
 VOL. i. 
 
 s 
 
258 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 before the Princess Charlotte (who, as her resi- 
 dence was at that time at Shooter’s Hill, was 
 enabled to come early) or myself came to sit. 
 It was a similar request to that which had been 
 made by Sir William Beechey, when he painted 
 my picture. And I was sensible of no impro- 
 priety when I granted the request to either 
 of them. Mr. Lawrence occupied the same 
 room which had been occupied by Sir William 
 Beechey ; it was at the other end of the house 
 from my apartment. 
 
 “ At that time, Mr. Lawrence did not dine 
 with me ; his dinner was served in his own room. 
 After dinner, he came down to the room where 
 I and my ladies generally sat in an evening. 
 Sometimes there was music, in which he joined, 
 and sometimes he read poetry. Parts of Shak- 
 speare’s plays I particularly remember, from his 
 reading them very well ; and sometimes he play- 
 ed chess with me. It frequently may have hap- 
 pened, that it was one or two o’clock before 
 I dismissed Mr. Lawrence and my ladies. 
 They, together with Mr. Lawrence, went out 
 at the same door, up the same staircase, and at 
 the same time. According to my own recol- 
 lection, I should have said, that in no one in- 
 stance had they left Mr. Lawrence behind 
 them alone with me. But, I suppose, it did 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 259 
 
 happen, once, for a short time, since Mr. Law- 
 rence so recollects it, as your Majesty will per- 
 ceive from his deposition, which I annex. He 
 stayed in my house two or three nights together, 
 but how many nights, in the whole, I do not 
 recollect. The picture left my house by April 
 1801, and Mr. Lawrence never slept at my 
 house afterwards. That picture now belongs 
 to Lady Townshend. He has since com- 
 pleted another picture of me; and, about a 
 year and a half ago he began another, which 
 remains at present unfinished. I believe it is 
 near a twelvemonth since I last sat to him. 
 
 “ Mr. Lawrence lives upon a footing of the 
 greatest intimacy with the neighbouring fami- 
 lies of Mr. Lock and Mr. Angerstein, and I 
 have asked him sometimes to dine with me to 
 meet them. While I was sitting to him at my 
 own house, I have no doubt I must often have 
 sat to him alone, as the necessity for the pre- 
 caution of having an attendant, as a witness to 
 protect my honour from suspicion, certainly 
 never occurred to me. And upon the same 
 principle, I do not doubt that I may have some- 
 times continued in conversation with him after 
 he had finished painting. But when sitting in 
 his own house, I have always been attended 
 with one of my ladies. And, indeed, nothing 
 
 s 2 
 
260 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 in the examinations states the contrary. One 
 part of Mrs. Lisle’s examination seems as if she 
 had a question put to her, upon the supposition 
 that I had been left alone with Mr. Lawrence 
 at his own house ; to which she answers, that 
 she indeed had left me there, but that she thinks 
 she left Mrs. Fitzgerald with me.” 
 
 It is, however, but justice to state, that one 
 of the ladies mentioned by the Princess, in a 
 private letter in my possession, alludes, in very 
 affectionate terms, to the great danger that Mr. 
 Lawrence was in “of losing his head.” — Mr. 
 Lawrence’s servant was examined. Shortly 
 after, Lord Eldon, in conversation with Mr. 
 Lawrence, said to him, “ Sir, you are a very for- 
 tunate man, indeed.” “ Why so, my Lord ?” 
 “ Because you have the most faithful, clever, 
 and prudent servant, who has served you cun- 
 ningly, — at the hour of need.” 
 
 But reverting to the Exhibition of 1805, it 
 included only five works from the pencil of this 
 artist. These were — 96, Portrait of the Ho- 
 nourable C. Grey; 156, Lord Amherst; 157, 
 H. Hoare, Esq.; 195, Lady E. Foster j 219, 
 the Bishop of Gloucester. 
 
 The first of these was the portrait of the 
 present Lord Grey, then second to only Mr. C. 
 Fox, as a luminous statesman and orator, in 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 261 
 
 the House of Commons. Mr. Grey was now 
 terminating his splendid career of twenty-one 
 years as a commoner in the Lower House ; for 
 two years after lie acquired his order of Earl 
 Grey, and one year after, lie had become Lord 
 de Howick by courtesy. 
 
 The subject of the second portrait, Lord 
 Amherst, was William Pitt Amherst, the re- 
 cent and celebrated Governor General of India, 
 and he was elevated to the rank of Earl from 
 that of Baron in the succeeding year, 1806. 
 At the period of this portrait being taken, his 
 Lordship was only twenty-eight years of age. 
 
 The Lady Elizabeth Foster, whose portrait 
 was exhibited this year, from the pencil of 
 Lawrence, was the last Duchess of Devonshire, 
 and long a star of fashion in England, and, since 
 the Duke’s death, as well known in Italy. She 
 was painted as a Sibyl with a broken column 
 immediately behind her, and a view of the 
 temple of Tivoli in the background. This 
 temple, called the Sibyls’ temple, had been 
 purchased by the lady’s father, the Earl of 
 Bristol, from the innkeeper on whose pre- 
 mises the temple stands. It was the design of 
 this eccentric nobleman to take the temple to 
 pieces, and to transport it to Ireland, where he 
 intended to erect it, as a picturesque and classic 
 
262 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 ruin, on the confines of a bog which was his 
 property. As soon as the papal government 
 was convinced of this design, it prohibited the 
 removal, alleging, that all ancient remains were 
 the national property, and not to be claimed by 
 the owners of the ground on which they stood. 
 
 Her Ladyship was the daughter of the Earl 
 of Bristol and Bishop of Derry, whose erratic 
 career has already been so often adverted to. 
 She had been married to John Thomas Foster, 
 Esq., who died in 1809. She afterwards es- 
 poused the friend of Fox, the popular whig 
 Duke of Devonshire, whose first wife, the 
 celebrated and beautiful daughter of the Earl 
 Spencer, had died in 1806. 
 
 The last portrait, the Bishop of Gloucester, 
 was Dr. J. Huntingford. 
 
 Notwithstanding the acknowledged merit of 
 Mr. Lawrence, and that he had now nearly 
 acquired the acm£ of his art, which afterwards 
 elevated him to the first in the first rank of 
 living artists, as yet his titled patronage had 
 been small, compared to that bestowed upon 
 his rivals. Beech ey absorbed all the patronage 
 in portraits from Buckingham Palace, while 
 that of Carlton House continued to be poured 
 upon Hoppner, who now revived to his full 
 exertions. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 263 
 
 In the next year, 1806, the Exhibition still 
 had a numerical paucity of works. They 
 amounted to only nine hundred and thirty- 
 six, and of these only six were sent in by Mr. 
 Lawrence. But in this year Mr. Lawrence 
 had to paint a posthumous portrait of Mr. 
 Pitt, though it was not finished, or at least ex- 
 hibited, for two years after. 
 
 The portraits he exhibited in 1806 were — 
 35, Portrait of Lord Ellenborough ; 72, Sir Jo- 
 seph Banks; 91, a Fancy Group; 125, the 
 Earl of Malmesbury ; 137, William Baker, 
 Esq.; 176, Miss Reddell. 
 
 Lord Ellenborough, who had been raised to 
 the peerage in 1802, on his succeeding Lord 
 Kenyon as Lord Chief Justice of the Court of 
 King’s Bench, was now in the height of his 
 professional fame, and in the full vigour of his 
 extraordinary powers. The severity of his coun- 
 tenance, like that of Lord Thurlow, equally 
 gave scope for a fine, vigorous portrait, and the 
 success of Lawrence was complete. This por- 
 trait was engraved. 
 
 The second portrait, of Sir Joseph Banks, has 
 long graced the walls of the British Museum, 
 and for its breadth and depth, its rich full tone, 
 its freedom of touch and identity of likeness, 
 it is one of the best of Mr. Lawrence’s works. 
 
264 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 It is now engraving, as one of the best orna- 
 ments to Lodge’s Portrait Gallery. 
 
 Of the third portrait, the subject was the 
 first Earl of Malmsbury, who had been raised 
 to the peerage, in consequence of his alleged 
 acuteness and profound skill in political diplo- 
 macy, a science in which our country has not 
 been celebrated. His Lordship was the son of 
 the author of Hermes. He had resided in 
 Russell Street, Bloomsbury, and from his habit 
 of reading at night in bed, his house was burnt 
 down, and some of his family with difficulty, 
 and in a state of nudity, escaped from the flames. 
 Upon the site of this house was built that which 
 became the residence of Mr. J. Kemble. At 
 the period of this portrait, his Lordship had 
 possessed his title only six years, and he was in 
 the zenith of his fame. He lived for fourteen 
 years after, dying in 1820. Whatever were 
 his diplomatic talents, the}^ were called into 
 exertion at a period when they were peculiarly 
 necessary ; for he had to cope with the most 
 bold, original, and powerful statesmen of the 
 French revolution. It may be no proof of 
 demerit, but the views his Lordship took, or 
 was instructed to take, of foreign affairs, ended 
 in our losing every object for which we had to 
 contend, and in elevating our enemies to the 
 height of power. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 265 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The Exhibition of 1807. — Portrait of the Hon. Berkeley Pa- 
 get. — The group of the Baring family. — Anecdotes of the 
 families of Paget and Baring. — Criticisms upon the latter 
 Painting. — Committee of Taste. — Public Monuments. — 
 National Sculpture. — Porcelain Vases. — Death of Mr. 
 Opie. — The Exhibition of 1808. — Portrait of the Earl of 
 Aberdeen. — Portrait of Mr. Pitt. — Busts of Mr. Pitt. — 
 Sir A. Carlisle elected Professor of Anatomy to the Aca- 
 demy. — The Exhibition of 1809. — Jealousies of Artists. — 
 Lectures at the Roman Academy of St. Luke against de- 
 traction. — The Exhibition of 1810. — Portrait of Lord Cas- 
 tlereagh. — Political Criticisms. — Mr. Perry and the Morn- 
 ing Chronicle. — Portrait of Mr. Canning ; difficulties of 
 taking his likeness. — Portrait of Lord Melville. — His 
 Lordship’s anecdote of the popular Orator. — Reflections 
 upon the anecdote. — Analogous cases. — Death of Mr. 
 Lock, of Norbury Park. — His character.— Death of Mr. 
 Hoppner. — Mr. Lawrence’s private letters on those occa- 
 sions. — His prices of portraits raised. — The Exhibition of 
 the Academy in 1811. — Private Correspondence. — The 
 Exhibition of 1812. — Portraits of Lord Mountjoy, Lord 
 Charlemont. — The National Convention of Ireland. — Its 
 ridiculous suppression. — Portrait of Mr. Kemble, as Cato. 
 — Exhibition of the year 1813. — Portraits of Sir Thomas 
 Graham, of Miss Thayer. — Artists and their Pupils. — The 
 Exhibition of 1814. — Portrait of Lady Leicester. — Bio- 
 graphy of Sir J. F. Leicester, Lord de Tabley. — Portrait 
 of Sir John Mac Mahon, and of Lady Emily Cowper. 
 
 In 1807, the artists seemed inspired with 
 fresh life, for the Exhibition was one of the 
 
266 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 finest and largest that the country had ever 
 beheld. It contained one thousand one hundred 
 and thirteen works, and Hoppner and Opie were 
 prolific in their productions, and more than 
 even ordinarily successful. Hoppner had eight 
 superb portraits, including those of Lord King, 
 Mr. T. Grenville, the Prince of Wales, Lord 
 Hawkesbury, the present Lord Farnborough, 
 and Sir Samuel Hood. Opie had six portraits, 
 including those of Lord Lowther, the Duke of 
 Gloucester, and Dr. Parr. Mr. Lawrence, for 
 some reason I am not aware of, had but two, 
 though these were of great excellence. They 
 were: — 17, Portrait of the Hon. B. Paget; 
 and 210, Portraits of Sir F. Baring, Bart., J. 
 Baring, and C. Wall, Esq. 
 
 At the time that this celebrated painting was 
 exhibited, Sir Francis Baring was sixty-seven 
 years of age. Lord Erskine had very properly 
 designated him as fie the first merchant in the 
 world and yet it is evident, that his immense 
 wealth had been made without any enlarged 
 principles of commerce, and almost in utter 
 ignorance of its philosophy. Sir Francis Ba- 
 ring was Mr. Pitt’s commercial oracle in the 
 House of Commons, and he supported that 
 statesman’s notions of trade and finance, the 
 utterance of whose doctrines, in or out of Par- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 267 
 
 liament, would now excite suspicions of lunacy, 
 or of something much worse. On these sub- 
 jects, the age has indeed made a wonderful 
 progress. Sir Francis was born on April 18, 
 1740, and created a Baronet on May 11, 1793, 
 and died on September 12, 1810; and so very 
 extensive were his connexions, and so immense 
 his influence in the commercial world, that a 
 depression of the funds which took place at 
 this time, was attributed principally to his 
 death. 
 
 Mr. C. Wall married Miss Harriet Baring, 
 the sixth child and eldest daughter of Sir 
 Francis. 
 
 The Hon. Berkeley Paget, whose portrait was 
 exhibited this year, was the sixth son of Henry 
 Bayly, who became, by descent, Baron Paget, 
 and was created Earl of Uxbridge in 1784. The 
 origin of the family of Bayly was a Scotch par- 
 son, who came into England with James I. and 
 was appointed tutor to his son Charles ; Dr. 
 Bayly was first made Chaplain to Prince Henry, 
 and afterwards created Bishop of Bangor. The 
 Earl of Uxbridge became wealthy, principally 
 by working a copper-mine in conjunction with 
 Mr. Hughes, a Welsh clergyman, who, until 
 this discovery of copper upon his wife’s pro- 
 perty, was an exemplification of the poverty of 
 
268 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the Welsh clergy. The Hon. Colonel Hughes, 
 his son, has long been an enlightened and public- 
 spirited member of the legislature. 
 
 The critics in the periodicals observed of 
 these two paintings : — 
 
 “ Portrait of the Hon. B. Paget. — The cha- 
 racter and likeness are faithfully and spiritedly 
 depicted; and the hair and costume well arranged 
 and pencilled. An uncommon quantity of cold 
 colour is ventured in this picture, but most 
 judiciously managed. 
 
 “ Portraits of Sir F. Baring, Bart., J. Baring, 
 and — Wall, Esqrs. — The painful difficulty of 
 eliciting much picturesque matterfrom any given 
 quantity of three English gentlemen, habited in 
 the present native costume, is feelingly known 
 to most portrait-painters. To translate back- 
 wards to the times of Charles the First, or tra- 
 vel our countrymen to Turkey or Spain, carries 
 usually its punishment along with it. Such 
 difficulties are, however, only a spur to the ge- 
 nius of Mr. Lawrence, who has in the present 
 instance ably overcome them, produced a grand 
 performance, and what may be called a fine 
 Venetian picture, possessing all the luxuriance 
 and splendour of Paul Veronese. In the centre 
 is seen a body of fine warm colouring, of various 
 hues and delicious tone, accompanied by so 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 269 
 
 much cold colour as gives value and support to 
 the principal, of all which the arrangement is 
 excellent. The subject, a mercantile consulta- 
 tion, is well invented ; the figures interestingly 
 composed, and the faces admirably painted. 
 The air and expression of Sir F. Baring are 
 particularly forcible and impressive. The dra- 
 pery, of which much has necessarily been intro- 
 duced, is disposed, folded, and generalised with 
 great taste. The drawing, as usual, is correct.” 
 This is merely newspaper criticism. The 
 picture is of high merit for composition and ex- 
 pression, but hard in the outlines and in the 
 colouring. The contrast is too sudden, and the 
 colours in themselves are not very pleasant, nor 
 are they altogether consistent with English cos- 
 tume. Sir Francis Baring is in black, upon a 
 light ground, whilst the other figures, in the 
 foreground of the picture, are in light dresses 
 upon a dark surface. This group was painted 
 in imitation of a celebrated picture by Sir 
 Joshua Reynolds, in which he represents the 
 first Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Ashburton, 
 and the celebrated Colonel Barr6 in a political 
 conference. Sir Thomas Lawrence, considering 
 all things, has managed the subject judiciously, 
 and has produced an imitation of the original 
 without committing any plagiarism. The prin- 
 
270 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 cipal faults of the painting are the perspective 
 of the table, which has the appearance of an in- 
 clined plane, and the throwing the strong light 
 upon the subordinate persons, whilst the prin- 
 cipal person of the group is at least in the 
 shade in the background. Mr. Wall and Mr. 
 John Baring are listening with an earnest acute- 
 ness disproportioned to the expression conveyed 
 in the likeness of Sir Francis ; for it may be 
 doubted whether he is speaking, or whether he 
 is himself listening to some distant sound which 
 he is endeavouring to catch by holding his 
 hand to his ear. The background is unpleasant, 
 but these defects are compensated for by the 
 fine painting of the two figures of Mr. Baring 
 and Mr. Wall. I suppose, by the ledger open 
 on the table, it was the good sense of the head 
 of this affluent family, not to conceal that his 
 great wealth arose from the useful pursuits of 
 mercantile industry — a source of affluence in- 
 finitely more honourable, though less aristocra- 
 tic, than the ancient levying of black mail, the 
 torturing of Jews, or plundering of peasants and 
 artizans ; or than the modern sources of aristo- 
 cratic grandeur — the revenue. In another 
 group of the Baring family, comprising Lady 
 Baring, Mrs. Wall, and Sir Thomas Baring and 
 two boys, one of the young gentlemen has his 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 271 
 
 hand supported upon, apparently, a ledger rest- 
 ing on her ladyship’s knee, though his juvenile 
 companion seems more intent upon sport in the 
 open field, to which he is pointing. The intro- 
 duction of the ledger amidst a rural scene, and 
 upon the lap of a lady, must seem to have some 
 meaning, which ordinary sagacity in analysing 
 paintings cannot be expected to discover. 
 
 It is not always possible to convey a story 
 in a painting, and it is very often necessary, in 
 order to read a picture, to be pre-informed of 
 the ideas intended to be conveyed. This arises 
 from the nature of the art, and from the choice 
 of subjects, and for neither is the artist always 
 accountable. Sir Thomas, in this group, intend- 
 ed to convey the idea of the boys being on a 
 subject of geography, and whilst one is point- 
 ing to the country, in illustration of his opinion, 
 the other is taking a book from his grand- 
 mother to confirm his argument. 
 
 Government had now appointed a Committee 
 of Taste, and among some of the first of its pro- 
 ceedings this year, was its selection of the mo- 
 dels for the monuments voted by Parliament, 
 to the memory of Pitt, Nelson, and Cornwallis. 
 These models were sent for the inspection of the 
 Committee of Taste, appointed by Government, 
 in order to the selection of those best calcu- 
 
272 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 lated to convey to posterity the talents, hero- 
 ism, integrity, and honour of the illustrious 
 dead ! 
 
 Never, perhaps, was the art of sculpture at 
 so low an ebb in England as at this period ; 
 and our public monuments remain in unfortu- 
 nate record of the fact. 
 
 The recent history of sculpture in England 
 may be referred to in proof of the indispensable 
 necessity of academies and galleries of art, to 
 produce even moderate performances among 
 men unquestionably of the very highest merit. 
 When the Continent was thrown open to our 
 artists, and to our countrymen in general, in 
 1814, sculpture seemed at a tangent to become 
 almost a new art amongst us ; and from that 
 date it has progressively improved. But the 
 opening of the Continent was of the highest 
 importance to us in every branch of art. Mr. 
 Wedgewood had given our countrymen what 
 they had been previously ignorant of- — a know- 
 ledge of beautiful outlines and forms. His intro- 
 duction of the Etruscan and other antique vases, 
 as models for our porcelain and domestic uten- 
 sils, did much to improve our taste. His adop- 
 tion of dead colours was another improvement. 
 Latterly, however, outline has been little at- 
 tended to, and the exquisitely beautiful forms 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 273 
 
 and surfaces of Mr. Wedge wood’s manufac- 
 tures have almost gone out of memory. 
 
 Dr. Spurzheim, in his lectures, used to insist, 
 that French heads possessed the organ of form, 
 in which English heads were sadly deficient. We 
 seem tacitly to fall into the Doctor’s opinions ; 
 for even the antique we adopt through the me- 
 dium of the French, who seldom transmit it 
 pure and undefiled. Our first manufactories of 
 china were at Bow and at Chelsea, the porce- 
 lain being made out of the Petunse or Chinese 
 clay, which our India ships used to bring home 
 as ballast, until the jealous Mandarins were in- 
 formed of the use it was put to, and stopped 
 the exportation, in fear of our destroying their 
 trade in the manufactured article. Sir James 
 Thornhill and our first artists, used to design 
 forms and outlines for the manufacturers at 
 
 9 
 
 Chelsea; and some of the vases and utensils 
 made there are extremely beautiful. 
 
 This year the arts sustained a great loss in 
 the death of Mr. Opie, whose funeral was of a 
 character to evince the estimation in which he 
 was held. 
 
 “ FUNERAL OF JOHN OPIE, ESQ. THE PAINTER. 
 
 “ April 20, 1 807, the remains of this much- 
 lamented and deservedly celebrated artist were 
 
 VOL. I. T 
 
274 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 removed from his late house, in Bernard Street, 
 for interment in St. Paul’s Cathedral. The fu- 
 neral was attended by several noblemen and 
 gentlemen, royal academicians, &c. The body 
 was carried in a hearse, by six black horses, or- 
 namented with ostrich-feathers ; then followed 
 thirty mourning coaches, the three first with 
 four horses each, and the remainder with two 
 horses each ; then succeeded noblemen’s and 
 gentlemen’s carriages to the number of thirty, 
 which closed the procession. 
 
 When the funeral cavalcade reached Temple 
 Bar, it was met by the city officers, when it 
 took the following 
 
 ORDER. 
 
 Street-keepers and Constables to clear the way. 
 
 Six men in black caps, two and two. 
 
 Mr. Pringle, the undertaker, on horseback. 
 
 Two funeral-conductors on horseback. 
 
 Four cloakmen on horseback. 
 
 Two conductors ditto. 
 
 Two City-marshals, in full uniform and black sashes, on 
 horseback. 
 
 Two Marshals’ men with their staves. 
 
 State lid of feathers, with a page on each side. 
 
 THE HEARSE 
 
 And six horses, with pages on each side. 
 
 ORDER OF MOURNING COACHES. 
 
 1st Coach. — Pall-bearers — Sir John St. Aubyn, Sir John 
 Leicester, Samuel Whitbread, Esq. M. P. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 275 
 
 2nd Coach. — Pall-bearers — Hon. William Fullarton El- 
 phinstone, Lord de Dunstanville, William Smith, Esq. 
 M.P. 
 
 3rd Coach.— Chief Mourners — Mr. Alderson, Dr. Wood- 
 house, Mr. Henry Thompson, Mr. J. Penwarne. 
 
 4th Coach. — Members of the Royal Academy — B. West, 
 Esq. President — H. Fuseli, Esq. Keeper — J. Soane, Esq. Prof. 
 Arch. — John Richards, Esq. Secretary. 
 
 5th Coach. — Academicians— E. Garvey, Esq., J.Northcote, 
 Esq. W. Owen, Esq., R Westall, Esq. 
 
 6th Coach. — Associates — Messrs. Samuel Woodford, West- 
 macott, Theoph. Clarke, Callcott. 
 
 7th Coach. — Ditto— Messrs. H. Twiss, Oliver Ashby, Ed- 
 ridge. 
 
 8th Coach. — Ditto — Mr. Artand, Sir William Beechey, Sir 
 Francis Bourgeois, Mr. Edward Birch. 
 
 9th Coach. — Messrs. George Dance, James Farington, 
 John Flaxman. 
 
 10th Coach.— Messrs. John Hoppner, J. Loutherbourg, 
 Joseph Nollekens. 
 
 1 1th Coach.— Charles Rossi, Robert Smirke, Thomas Stod- 
 dart, M. A. Shee. 
 
 12th Coach.— Messrs. Henry Tresham, J. W. M. Turner, 
 — Thompson, James Wyatt. 
 
 13th Coach. — Messrs. Henry Howard, Henry Bone, George 
 Gerrard. 
 
 14th Coach. — Messrs. W. R. Bigg, Philips, James Heath. 
 
 15th Coach.— Dr. Charles Burney, Mr. Prince Hoare, Sir 
 William Rush, Major Hamilton. 
 
 16th Coach. — Alderman Boydell, Rev. J. Straithfield, Mr. 
 D. Giddy, Mr. R. Wilson. 
 
 17th Coach.— Sir W. Blizard, Sir. D. Williams, Sir J. 
 Earner, Dr. R. Edwards. 
 
 T 2 
 
276 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 18th Coach. — Dr. Pearson, Dr. Ogilvie, Mr. Carlisle, Mr. 
 Rogers. 
 
 19th Coach. — Mr. Slade, Mr. Fauntleroy, Mr. Favell, Mr. 
 Silk. 
 
 20th Coach. — Messrs. Phillips, D. Jones, M. Gifford, 
 R. Taylor. 
 
 21st Coach. — Messrs. Taylor, Jeremiah Taylor, Holcroft, 
 Boaden. 
 
 22nd Coach.— Messrs. Dyer, Perry, E. S. Biggs, Penwarne. 
 
 23 rd Coach.- * 
 
 24th Coach.— Messrs. Tuffin, Longman, Tobin, Woodroffe. 
 
 25th Coach. — Mr. Gurney, Mr. L. Roberts, Mr. J. King- 
 ston, Mr. P. Martineau. 
 
 26th Coach. — Messrs. Allen, Stevenson, Bullock, Watts. 
 
 27th Coach. — Messrs. Clints, Stone, Wilkie, Stewardson. 
 
 28th Coach. — Messrs. Clover, Lane, Reynolds, Haydn. 
 
 29th Coach. — Messrs. Williams, Todd, Bernard, Colonel 
 Phillips. 
 
 30th Coach. — Empty. 
 
 The thirty Noblemen and Gentlemen’s Carriages had the 
 blinds up. — The following is the inscription on the coffin : — 
 JOHN OPIE, ESQ. 
 
 Royal Academician, 
 and 
 
 Professor in Painting, 
 
 Died April 9, 1807, 
 
 Aged 45 years. 
 
 Opie’s manners and figure were bars to his 
 ingratiating himself with his female sitters ; 
 but, like Vandyck, he was the painter of mind 
 and character, and not of fashion. His un- 
 couthness was the result of early habits, Fu- 
 
Sill THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 277 
 
 seli’s of a morose nature. Horne Tooke used 
 to perplex and quizz Fuseli, by pressing him 
 with definitions, and by the reductio ad absur- 
 dum ; whilst of Opie he used to say, “ Mr. Opie 
 crowds more wisdom into a few words than 
 almost any man I ever knew. He speaks as it 
 were in axioms, and what he observes is wor- 
 thy to be remembered.” 
 
 It is painful to reflect upon the struggles 
 through life by such a master-mind. His wi- 
 dow relates that, “ During the nine years that 
 I was his wife, I never saw him satisfied with 
 any one of his productions; and often, very often, 
 have I seen him enter my sitting-room, and 
 throwing himself in an agony of despondency 
 on the sofa, exclaim, ‘ I am the most stupid of 
 created beings ; I never, never shall be a painter 
 as long as I live.’ ” I may sport a paradox in 
 saying, that this was perhaps true; but al- 
 though no painter whilst he lived, he is a great 
 painter now he is dead ; for his works live in 
 the esteem of all men. 
 
 In the Exhibition of 1808, nine hundred and 
 ninety-eight works were produced. Opie had 
 now disappeared from the scene ; and Hoppner 
 this year had but one work. Mr. Lawrence had 
 the five following 74, Portrait of the Earl of 
 Aberdeen ; 95, Right Hon. William Pitt, a 
 
278 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 posthumous picture ; 133, Hon. Lady Hood ; 
 134, J. Farington, Esq. ; 175, the children of 
 J. Angerstein, Esq. 
 
 Fuseli, speaking of the different painters of 
 England, used to say of Lawrence, “ His por- 
 traits are as well, if not better, drawn, and his 
 women in a finer taste, than the best of Van- 
 dyck’s ; and he is so far above the competition 
 of any (living) painter in this way in Europe, 
 that he should put over his study, to deter 
 others who practise this art from entering — 
 
 ‘ Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’ entrate/” 
 
 The opinion of Hoppner, respecting Law- 
 rence’s female portraits, was not in unison with 
 this; and a comparison between Vandyck and 
 Lawrence, with respect to the painting of fe- 
 males, it must be confessed, was sufficiently 
 preposterous. 
 
 The Earl of Aberdeen, at the period of this 
 portrait, was in the twenty-third year of his 
 age ; and a portrait of the same nobleman, by 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence, was exhibited at the 
 Academy in 1830, after the decease of the 
 artist. The latter portrait was a very favour- 
 able specimen of Sir Thomas’s best style. But 
 the first portrait, a three-quarters length can- 
 vass, was sober of tone, and of a severe style. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 279 
 
 exhibiting great breadth and depth, and full of 
 classic dignity. It has been said of Sir Tho- 
 mas, that, generally speaking, he made his 
 male portraits too effeminate. In many in- 
 stances, the remark was well founded : but this 
 portrait was full of strength and calm dignity, 
 without departing from refinement. This fine 
 portrait was analogous to that of Mr. Hart 
 Davis, though certainly not equal to it. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence occasionally delighted 
 in departing from his gay and fashionable style 
 of modern portraits, and in imitating a more 
 severe style, into which, however, he infused 
 all his elegance and with more or less of his 
 brilliancy. Of this class, his portraits of Lord 
 Aberdeen, of Mr. Hart Davis, Miss Thayer, 
 and perhaps of Lord Durham, with that of Capo 
 D’lstrias, are specimens. Lord Aberdeen’s por- 
 trait, as I have already said, is a three-quarters 
 length, and he is represented with his collar open, 
 and robe of green as a national Scotch dress, 
 thrown in thick and graceful folds over his chest 
 and shoulder, in the style of some of the old Spa- 
 nish portraits. In point of colouring, the effect 
 produced in this picture by merely green and 
 red, with the brown and black used in the 
 shadows, is very excellent. It is not only a 
 study to artists in the use of these colours, but 
 
280 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 it is a model in the style of portraits, varying 
 the monotony of fashion prevalent since Sir 
 Joshua Reynolds, and establishing a style in a 
 medium between the black masses and deep 
 shadows of Titian and Vandyck, and the mo- 
 dishness now in vogue. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence always expressed the greatest 
 repugnance to paint a likeness after the death 
 of a person. In his youth, he had positively 
 refused such a commission, and he now took 
 the posthumous likeness of Mr. Pitt with re- 
 luctance. The famous bust of Mr. Pitt, by 
 Mr. Nollekens, was chiselled from a post-mor- 
 tem cast, the artist never having seen the ori- 
 ginal till called upon to make this mask. It 
 was by means of this mask, and of the portrait 
 of Mr. Pitt by Hoppner, which Nollekens 
 borrowed from Lord Mulgrave, that he was 
 enabled to make the full-length statue of the 
 statesman, in the Senate-house of Cambridge 
 University, and for which he received three 
 thousand guineas. No artist, at least of emi- 
 nence, could have been worse chosen for this 
 subject. The face and figure of Mr. Pitt were 
 not suited for a servile identity of likeness ; and 
 perhaps what Gainsborough failed in, and that 
 in which Hoppner was scarcely successful, Law- 
 rence of all men could have achieved with the 
 happiest results. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 281 
 
 The following was the best periodical critique 
 upon this portrait of Mr. Pitt 
 
 “ Mr. Lawrence has been peculiarly success- 
 ful in his portrait of the late Mr. Pitt. It is as 
 accurate a likeness as could be obtained, and 
 admirably expresses the lofty character of the 
 original. The picture is also a fine composi- 
 tion. Mr. Angerstein is the fortunate pur- 
 chaser.” 
 
 Notwithstanding Gainsborough’s applauded 
 likeness of Mr. Pitt, another artist says, that 
 “ This is by far the best portrait which has ever 
 been produced of Mr. Pitt. There was in 
 the face of Mr. Pitt some characteristics which 
 did not exist in his mind; a meanness, an inde- 
 scribable simpleness — we scarcely know whe- 
 ther we should not say a vulgarity . But what- 
 ever might be the character of his countenance, 
 it must be confessed on all sides, that his un- 
 derstanding was not reflected in his face — there 
 was nothing of dignity or nobleness about it. 
 It was not the physiognomy of a great orator : 
 except, indeed, he was painted in the ardour 
 and impetuosity of debate, when his intellect 
 was collected in his countenance, and his talents 
 beamed through his person. 
 
 “ The present portrait of Mr. Pitt has a mix- 
 ture of ideal art, with a sufficiency of that per- 
 sonal resemblance which a portrait requires. 
 
282 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 It is Mr. Pitt taken in his happiest mood, and 
 represented rather in the dignity of his action, 
 and the elevation of his great mind, than in the 
 faithful portraiture of his person. It is a por- 
 trait in the epic style of painting, and worthy 
 of going down to posterity. 
 
 “ There is in the countenance of this picture 
 that majestic and tremendous dignity with 
 which Mr. Pitt withered the attacks of his 
 opponents ; that severity by which the corusca- 
 tions of wit and humour were extinguished be- 
 fore him ; that proud and undaunted conscious- 
 ness of personal integrity, by which he extorted 
 admiration from the bitterest enemies of his 
 public conduct. 
 
 “ All the other portraits of Mr. Pitt have 
 been tame likenesses of the man ; none of them 
 have, therefore, pleased. Simply as Mr. Pitt, 
 there was every thing in his personal resem- 
 blance to excite contrary emotions to pleasure. 
 As well might Alexander the Great have been 
 painted with the hump on his back. Mr. Law- 
 rence has better understood the dignity and 
 latitude of his art. He has painted Mr. Pitt 
 more in the likeness of his mind than in that of 
 his person ; but he has given a sufficient like- 
 ness to gratify the desires of affectionate remem- 
 brance, and has superadded that dignity and 
 character which are of more value to posterity.” 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 283 
 
 This year Mr. Anthony Carlisle was elected 
 Professor of Anatomy to the Royal Academy. 
 On a ballot, the numbers were — for Mr. Car- 
 lisle, 25 ; for Mr. Bell, 4. 
 
 I believe Sir Anthony Carlisle’s lectures have 
 always been considered too scientific for the 
 object for which they were intended. They 
 were not, perhaps, sufficiently scientific for the 
 theatre of a Hospital, and too scientific for the 
 students of an Academy of Art. Perhaps they 
 were better adapted to the regions of Alma 
 Mater — the two mothers who confine the 
 Alma to their own brood, and only whilst 
 the offspring consent to be in leading-strings, 
 or to move in the go-cart of their ancient 
 nurses. 
 
 Almost every thing that has been said in the 
 controversy respecting the utility or the inutility 
 of anatomical lectures to artists, applies rather 
 to the treatment of the subject by the lecturer, 
 than to the question itself. The ancients were 
 well acquainted with osteology, but less in- 
 formed with respect to the muscles and viscera, 
 and yet in their statuary, muscular action and 
 positions in repose are as perfectly represented 
 as their human figures with respect to the bones. 
 He who addresses himself to the eye, must re- 
 ceive his ideas from the eye ; and if the artist, 
 who has to paint the leg or arm of the human 
 
284 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 subject, cannot imbibe, from vision, an accurate 
 idea of the limbs in their perfection of contour, 
 as exhibited by light and shadow, it is in vain 
 to lecture to him about the tibia, or radix, or 
 upon the dissection of muscles.* 
 
 In the year 1809, Mr. Lawrence did not 
 exhibit a single painting in the Academy ; the 
 works amounted to only eight hundred and 
 eighty-six. Hoppner was in unwonted strength, 
 and exhibited six. 
 
 The late Mr. Owen, of esteemed memory, 
 decidedly one of the brightest stars of the 
 Royal Academy, once complained, that Law- 
 rence, though deserving of his high reputation, 
 owed much of his fame to the fortunate cir- 
 cumstance of that monopoly of personages most 
 distinguished for rank, beauty, and elegance, 
 which was exclusively reserved for his pencil. 
 Such superior models, in every sense, gave him 
 the advantage over his competitors; for every 
 one knows the difficulty of competing with 
 him who is borne to fame upon the full tide of 
 fashion. 
 
 * The absurdity of being guided by anatomical theories in 
 objects addressed to the vision, has been often proved. 
 Hippocrates describes the knee-pan to be a single bone, and 
 ancient statuaries, in contempt of what vision dictated, ac- 
 commodated their figures to this imperfect notion. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 285 
 
 But Mr. Owen forgot that Lawrence worked 
 his way to eminence against, and not by means 
 of this monopoly. The King patronised scarcely 
 anybody but Mr. West and Sir W. Beechey ; 
 and the Prince noticed nobody but Hoppner. 
 The nobility and richer classes are always guid- 
 ed by the example of the Royal Family ; and 
 the middle classes, in this instance, divided their 
 patronage between Opie, Lawrence, and many 
 others. 
 
 Horace’s “genus irritabile vatum” conveys 
 no idea of the feelings existing between rival 
 painters. It would seem almost as if each 
 artist’s palette had been put into his hand from 
 Pandora’s box ; and the Vates are gentle turtle- 
 doves compared to painters. It is, I suppose, 
 for this reason, that at the Roman Academy 
 of St. Luke, two lectures are annually deli- 
 vered to the students and artists against “ envy, 
 malice, hatred, and all uncharitableness.” It 
 is to be imagined that these lectures have a 
 salutary effect upon the Catholic audience, or 
 upon the Italian temperament, and, on these 
 alone ; for I am credibly informed by English 
 residents and students at Rome, that the pupils 
 from our country are remarked for envy, de- 
 traction, and overreaching, more than those from 
 almost any other part of Europe. 
 
286 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 In 1810, the Exhibition of the Royal Aca- 
 demy contained nine hundred and five works, 
 and Mr. Lawrence exhibited four capital paint- 
 ings. These were — 61, Portrait of Lord Vis- 
 count Castlereagh ; 67, the Right Hon. George 
 Canning ; 159, a group of Portraits, consisting 
 of Mrs. Wall and her brother, T. Baring, Esq., 
 and the sons of the late Lady Baring ; 171, Por- 
 trait of Lord Viscount Melville. 
 
 The manner in which our best designs are 
 often made the sport of accident, was rather 
 ludicrously displayed in the critique on the first 
 of these paintings. The portrait of Lord Cas- 
 tlereagh was a three-quarters length, represent- 
 ing him in a green coat, and dressed with the 
 negligence and indifference to effect which dis- 
 tinguished his Lordship’s costume. The ex- 
 pression was calm ; and Mr. Lawrence had 
 caught that of the person as accurately as he 
 had done that of the countenance. 
 
 The Morning Chronicle, then the property of 
 the estimable Mr. Perry, had, at that time, a 
 high reputation for literature, and among other 
 able men then on the establishment of the paper 
 was a Mr. P r F y, whose strong poli- 
 
 tical writings during the Irish rebellion had 
 drawn upon him the vengeance of the Irish 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 287 
 
 Government, Lord Castlereagh being the Se- 
 cretary of the Lord Lieutenant. Mr. P. F y 
 
 had been sentenced to stand in the pillory for a 
 libel, which, however, had been read with satis- 
 faction throughout his country. On this occa- 
 sion, Lord R. Fitzgerald leaped on the scaffold 
 and shared the honours of the pillory, (for, under 
 such circumstances, the punishment was an ho- 
 nour,) amidst the enthusiastic applause of pro- 
 bably the largest crowd that ever assembled to 
 witness that most barbarous species of punish- 
 ment which, to within these very few years, 
 
 disgraced our criminal jurisprudence. P r 
 
 F y bore the most vehement animosity 
 
 against Lord Castlereagh, not, however, in me- 
 mory of his punishment, (for it was deemed by 
 him and his party as an apotheosis rather than 
 a disgrace,) but he hated the Irish Secretary, as 
 the origin of the Union, and as the advocate 
 of English or Anglo-Irish politics in Ireland. 
 
 Lord Castlereagh’s amenity of disposition 
 never forsook him, and to the last, whenever he 
 
 met Mr. P r F y in the streets, he bowed 
 
 to him with an expression of kindness, or would 
 even, with as much suavity of tone as possible, 
 enquire after his health, en passant The dema- 
 gogue’s ire was never in the least quenched by 
 
288 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 this gentle bearing of him who held the United 
 Kingdom, and, eventually, all Europe, in his 
 grasp. 
 
 Mr. P r F y this year happened to 
 
 be sent by Mr. Perry to review the exhibition 
 of the Royal Academy, and the first picture 
 that struck his jaundiced eye was Mr. Law- 
 rence’s portrait of Lord Castlereagh. The cri- 
 tic’s brain was inflamed by a thousand reminis- 
 cences, and, forgetting all moral justice to the 
 artist, he poured forth his bile in a tirade, to the 
 horror of poor Mr. Lawrence, who read it the 
 next morning in the Chronicle, and who for 
 many days was unable to resume his placidity 
 of disposition. 
 
 He bitterly complained of this critique to 
 his friend Mr. Perry, whose inexhaustible good- 
 nature made him really regret the mischief, and 
 led him to do all he could to pacify the artist. 
 But there seemed to be a fatality attending the 
 subject. 
 
 In 1814, another portrait of Lord Castlereagh 
 was exhibited at the exhibition of the Academy, 
 by Mr. Lawrence, who anxiously expected that 
 his friend Mr. Perry would take that opportu- 
 nity of making the amende honorable for the 
 former injury. The subject, however, had 
 escaped that gentleman’s recollection, and, sic 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 280 
 
 volvere Parcas , he again sent the identical 
 
 P r F y to review the Exhibition of 
 
 the Academy. 
 
 P r, true to his political animosities, again 
 
 pounced upon the portrait of the ex-Irish Se- 
 cretary ; and my readers may imagine the dis- 
 tress of the sensitive and inoffensive Lawrence, 
 when, instead of an ingeniously flattering cri- 
 tique upon his work, he read, in the Morning 
 Chronicle of 3rd May 1814, the following out- 
 rageous tirade : 
 
 “Royal Academy. — 23, Portrait of Lord 
 Castlereagh, by Lawrence, is not a likeness. It 
 has a smug, smart, upstart, haberdasher look, of 
 which there is nothing in Lord Castlereagh. 
 The air of the whole figure is direct and for- 
 ward ; there is nothing, as there ought to be, 
 characteristically circuitous, involved and pa- 
 renthetical in it. Besides, the features are cast 
 in quite a different mould. As a bust, Lord 
 Castlereagh’s is one of the finest we have ever 
 seen ; it would do for one of the Roman em- 
 perors, ’bating the expression.” 
 
 The portrait, it must be confessed, conveyed 
 no idea of the figure and carriage and very 
 little of the face, of Lord Castlereagh. 
 
 VOL. i. u 
 
290 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 It may be permitted me, ere I leave this sub- 
 ject, to make one brief offering to the memory 
 of Mr. Perry. This gentleman, by his wit and 
 fine talents, raised the Morning Chronicle from 
 obscurity into an extensive circulation, with a 
 reputation equal to any ever possessed by a daily 
 political paper in this country. His kindness 
 to all around him was almost paternal, and his 
 liberality in pecuniary transactions was carried 
 even to an excess. Notwithstanding this, and 
 his living with his numerous family in a style 
 of elegant and profuse hospitality, he died rich, 
 esteemed and beloved by all who had had any 
 connexions with him. His reputation for talents, 
 and his fame for honourable and fine feelings, 
 have been sustained by his friend, who, as the 
 trustee for his family, has edited the Chronicle 
 since his death. 
 
 The portrait of Mr. Canning exhibited this 
 year, was the first of that statesman that Mr. 
 Lawrence had taken ; and, contrary to the al- 
 most invariable character of the artist’s works, 
 Mr. Canning’s fine face and form were the only 
 ones which his pencil did not in this instance, 
 or in any other, much improve. He ge- 
 nerally made the face more wrinkled and hag- 
 gard than it was, nor did he impart to it its 
 really fine animation and intellectual expres- 
 sion. The portrait, a three-quarters, with the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 291 
 
 finger to the ear, is both the most pleasing, 
 and the most accurate, of any of those taken 
 by Lawrence. In the two full-length portraits 
 representing this splendid speaker in the House 
 of Commons, it is singular that Mr. Lawrence 
 should have formed his background and front 
 of such imperfect views of the House of 
 Commons, as even to represent the table of a 
 wrong colour, whilst the petty flight of stairs 
 between the benches, as the French would call 
 them, of the extreme right and right centre, 
 are petty, false in perspective, and destructive 
 of effect. There must have been some extra- 
 ordinary difficulty in catching the expression 
 of this great man’s countenance, for no artist 
 succeeded in the attempt, whilst Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence was extraordinarily correct in com- 
 parison to others. 
 
 Whilst Lord Melville was sitting for the 
 portrait exhibited in this year’s Exhibition, 
 parts of London were agitated by a dema- 
 gogue who had been active in the Reform and 
 Revolutionary Societies of 1793, and who con- 
 tinues to this hour his avocation of itinerant 
 orator and coffee-house rhetorician, at “ so much 
 per speech.” — “ You know not,” said Lord Mel- 
 ville, “ the sources of those sentiments towards 
 the English public (taking the expression in its 
 lowest sense), with which men in office are so 
 
 u 2 
 
292 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 often reproached. That man, who is now an 
 idol of the populace, and for whom they are 
 disturbing the peace of London, and endanger- 
 ing their own safety, was long in my pay at 
 three guineas a- week, when I was Secretary of 
 State, and he was one of the secretaries of the 
 Reform Society. Every week, he used to bring 
 me the correspondence, minutes, and private 
 books of the society, and acquaint me with all 
 the open and concealed members, and with 
 the whole arcana of what was going on ; and, 
 when I was fully satisfied that he had told me 
 every thing and with veracity, I used to pay 
 him his weekly bribe of three guineas.” 
 
 It is difficult to conceive a case, in which the 
 briber is not by far more reprehensible than the 
 bribed ; and Lord Melville must have felt most 
 bitterly the duty which his office in the minis- 
 try imposed upon him, of sacrificing private 
 integrity to the public good, in thus taking 
 advantage of the turpitude, and probably of 
 the hard necessities of a wretch, to induce him 
 to betray his companions perhaps even unto 
 death. The confession to Mr. Lawrence, on the 
 part of his Lordship, must have argued extreme 
 candour, or extreme insensibility to the nature 
 of the transaction. 
 
 His Lordship must be exonerated from the 
 subsequent practice which prevailed, of not 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 293 
 
 using information thus obtained, at a time 
 when moderate punishment would check the 
 disaffected, but of allowing the informer to 
 stimulate to crime, or at least of reserving the 
 information, until the criminals were deemed 
 fit for the executioner ! 
 
 It is obviously the very first principle of 
 natural and social justice, that no man should 
 forfeit life, for conduct which has not been 
 denounced as deserving death, by a law open, 
 positive, and too clear to admit of misconstruc- 
 tion. The year 1794, however, witnessed in this 
 country an attempt to deprive more than a 
 dozen enlightened and worthy men of life, by 
 subtle and astute inferences from laws, so obso- 
 lete, obscure, tortuous, and inconsistent, that it 
 required a speech of upwards of nine hours in 
 length to persuade a jury that those laws had 
 given a clear and plain warning that the con- 
 duct of the accused was criminal, and to be 
 punished by the gallows. This mode of getting 
 rid of political opponents, constructively, roused 
 the indignation of even the Lord Chancellor 
 Thurlow, who, though impervious to humane 
 feelings, could not help decrying the attempt 
 to deprive his fellow-creatures of life, by 
 “ wresting the laws to authority ” When the 
 stern, deistical Chancellor heard that the pious 
 Attorney-General had addressed the jury for nine 
 
294 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 hours, to persuade them to hang their fellow- 
 men, he exclaimed with wrath — “ What ! speak 
 for nine hours; then, by G — d, there is no 
 treason in the case !” 
 
 France is not the only country that has had 
 her reign of terror ; but in France the terrorism 
 was the result of a fine principle carried too far, 
 and put in practice without any forms. The 
 terrorism of another country was a violation of 
 all principles, but with an immense deal of out- 
 ward ceremony. 
 
 That the spies of the class here mentioned 
 by Lord Melville, often stimulated to the crimes 
 for the execution for which they were to receive 
 their reward, has been fatally proved. The annals 
 of Algiers, if the Algerines have annals, can pro- 
 duce nothing more horrible than the execution 
 of the two brothers, Mr. J. and H. Sheares, in 
 Dublin, in 1798. After the death of the mild 
 and estimable Henry Sheares, it appeared that 
 he had never seen the sanguinary proclamations 
 found in his desk: they had been introduced 
 without his knowledge, by the informer. 
 
 I insert a copy of a letter from this unhappy 
 victim of one of those miscreants who received 
 such large sums of money from our Govern- 
 ment, for betraying, as it often proved, the 
 innocent to death. The letter is a dreadful 
 picture of an agonized mind. The Lord Chan- 
 
Silt THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 295 
 
 cellor here alluded to was Fitzgibbon, the first 
 Earl of Clare, and he consented to pardon this 
 unhappy man, on condition that he betrayed 
 some of his friends to their deaths. Whether 
 terror would have induced this gentleman to 
 accept life upon terms so base, was never prov- 
 ed; for, by a blunder incredibly stupid, the 
 gentleman who was to carry the Lord Chan- 
 cellor’s reprieve to the culprit, arrived at New- 
 gate, just in time to see his friend’s gory head 
 reeking with blood, as the executioner held it 
 up to the mob, with the usual exclamation of 
 " Behold the head of a traitor !” 
 
 “ MY DEAREST FRIEND, 
 
 “ The dreadful die is cast. Fly, I beseech 
 you, to the Chancellor, and save a man whose 
 fate will kill his family. Oh, my dearest friend, 
 my whole dependence is on you. Tell the 
 Lord Chancellor I will pray for him for ever, 
 and that the Government shall ever find me 
 what they wish. Oh, my family, my wife, my 
 children, my mother — go to them — let them 
 throw themselves at the Chancellor’s and Lord 
 Shannon’s feet. Those papers which were 
 found in my office have ruined me. You 
 know, my dear friend, I had nothing to do 
 with them. You know I never was an advo- 
 cate for violence or blood. 
 
296 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 “ I have been duped, misled, deceived ; but 
 with all the wishes and intentions to do <rood, 
 my principles were never for violence; my 
 nature is soft to a fault. My whole happi- 
 ness is centered in my beloved, my adored 
 family. With them, I will go to America, if 
 the Government will allow me, or I will stay 
 here, and be the most zealous friend they have. 
 Tell the Lord Chancellor I depend upon the 
 goodness of his nature ; that I will atone for 
 what is past, by a life regular, temperate, and 
 domestic. Oh, speak to him of my poor, wretch- 
 ed family, my distracted wife, and my helpless 
 children. Snatch them from the dreadful hor- 
 rors which await them, and save the life of 
 your truest friend. I will lie under any condi- 
 tions the Government may choose to impose on 
 me, if they will but restore me to my family. 
 
 “ Desire my mother to go to Lord Shannon 
 immediately, and my wife to the Lord Chan- 
 cellor. We are to receive sentence at 3 o’clock. 
 
 64 Fly, 1 beseech you, and save a man who 
 will never cease to pray for you, to serve you. 
 
 “ Let me hear from you, my dear fellow, 
 as quickly as possible.— God bless you. 
 
 “ Newgate, S o’clock.” 
 
 The writer of this truly afflicting letter was a 
 man generally beloved for his mild, gentle nature.^ 
 and sincere and affectionate temper. He was of 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 297 
 
 irreproachable life, humane, timid, and ingenu- 
 ous, even to a degree of simplicity. He who re- 
 ceived " the price of blood” is even, at this hour, 
 a placeman, enjoying the otium cam dignitate . 
 
 Captain Brenton relates,* that for the Mutiny, 
 as it was termed, in our fleet, more than five 
 hundred of the finest seamen, and probably the 
 finest men in the world, suffered death — that is 
 to say, they were hanged for asking, in the 
 most decorous and submissive manner, for ob- 
 jects which were afterwards granted as essential 
 to humanity and justice, and indispensable to 
 the good of the service. Nothing can be more 
 useful than to refer to these facts, as illustrations 
 of national history, and as beacons to warn us 
 into the channels of better conduct. 
 
 This year, Mr. Lavnrence had the misfortune 
 to lose a friend for whom he entertained the 
 highest regard, and from his intimacy with 
 whom he derived much satisfaction. I allude 
 to Mr. Lock, of Norbury Park, whose death, 
 in addition to that of Sir Francis Baring, was 
 severely felt by Mr. Lawrence. A mutual 
 friend thus communicated the death of Mr. 
 Lock to the public. 
 
 * For public spirit, tempered, perhaps, even to a fault, by 
 private gentlemanly feeling, Captain Brenton’s Naval History 
 is one of the best works upon the subject, published for 
 many years. 
 
298 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 “ In addition to the loss of Sir T. Baring, we 
 have now to communicate, with deep regret, 
 the death of W. Lock, Esq. of Norbury Park, 
 Surrey, the most zealous protector of the arts, 
 and (out of the profession) perhaps their most 
 enlightened and perfect judge. Mr. Lock dis- 
 tinguished himself, in early life, by his choice 
 collection of pictures, models, and fine works in 
 sculpture, and still more by his liberality and 
 taste. He, of all the lovers of the arts, was con- 
 sidered by its professors as their arbiter, their 
 advocate, and common friend — the compas- 
 sionate benefactor of the humblest, the revered 
 associate or patron of the most celebrated artists 
 of his time — of Sir Joshua Reynolds, Mr. 
 Barry, Mr. Hoppner, and Cipriani ; of Wilson, 
 Barrett, and Sandby ; of many now living ; Mr. 
 West, the President of the Academy, Mr. Fu- 
 seli, who benefits it by the instruction of its 
 youth, and other of its members, who will hear 
 of Mr. Lock’s death with unfeigned sorrow, 
 and an admiration inseparably connected with 
 his remembrance, — for so much acuteness and 
 sensibility— such various knowledge — such solid 
 yet unpresuming judgment, with taste so pure, 
 elevated, and enlarged, — a man, in short, so gift- 
 ed and accomplished, so just, and admirably 
 good — they can seldom hope to know. He will 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 299 
 
 be more generally regretted by the highest 
 circles in society, for that extensive informa- 
 tion, and those simple manners, which made 
 him so fine an example of an English gentle- 
 man ; and for attainments of the scholar which 
 procured him, in earlier life, a public testimony 
 from Johnson ; but especially, and most deeply 
 will he be lamented for those many charities 
 and virtues that have given to Norbury, the 
 spot where he resided, a sacredness, a peculiar 
 sentiment of blessing and respect. He died 
 October 5, 1810, at the age of seventy-eight, 
 and is survived by Mrs. Lock, and a family 
 whom he lived to see in that happiness and 
 respectability of connexion, which their charac- 
 ters and stations claimed. His son, Mr. W. 
 Lock, succeeds him in his estate, the known 
 inheritor of his worth, and himself of distin- 
 guished powers. 
 
 “ October 14, 1810.” 
 
 Mr. Lawrence’s feelings on this occasion may 
 be judged of, by the two following letters which 
 he wrote to Miss Crofts, 
 
 “ Nothing is more cheering than the sight 
 of a friend’s letter, on return from a cheer- 
 less journey — yet cheerless is not the word for 
 
300 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 that which I have had to-day, for I have been 
 to such a scene of goodness, with all its grief, 
 as makes affliction salutary and almost soothing. 
 It has not unfitted me for your kind letter, or 
 for the thoughts of the dear friends still left 
 me ; but I am a little worn with it, and my 
 answer must partake of my mind’s weakness. 
 I shall, to-morrow, attend the funeral, and then 
 seek my usual occupations. I am not afraid of 
 forgetting this dear man ; and know that I am 
 the better for his life, and for his death. It is 
 thus a blessing, as well as a distinction, to have 
 known him. 
 
 “ Friday morning. — I have deferred my jour- 
 ney this morning, in the unreasonable hope, 
 that, possibly, I might receive a letter with the 
 post-mark of Hochford upon it. It is now, 
 however, past the time, and I go to Norbury, 
 to witness grief and resignation, the one as sin- 
 cere, the other as pious, as can exist in the ten- 
 derest and most virtuous minds. Mr. Lock is 
 to be buried, by his own accurate directions, in 
 the simplest manner, and exactly as his mother 
 was — a walking funeral, and the coffin borne by 
 his labourers. He died without pain, and from 
 the evening of his being seriously ill, was, to 
 his last moment, in quiet delirium, with no 
 agitation, and no pang of returning sense. It 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 301 
 
 is, however, dreadful to think, that at seventy- 
 nine, for he was even that, his death was most 
 probably hastened by accident. Adieu, my 
 dear friend, 
 
 “ Most faithfully yours, 
 
 “ Tho s . Lawrence/’ 
 
 To Miss Crofts during a relation’s late illness 
 he wrote — 
 
 “ It is much too long, my dear friend, since 
 I had the pleasure of writing to you, and still 
 longer for my own comfort, that of hearing 
 from you. Yet I know how far this word 
 must be from your feelings, and how little, 
 therefore, it could communicate to mine. Of 
 all the melancholy scenes which you have been 
 called upon to soothe, you are now present at 
 that which is the most touching, because we 
 must confess, that the subject of it is the 
 most interesting, loved, and worthy ; having 
 and deserving more of your affection than 
 either of the unfortunate beings whose suffer- 
 ings and release from them you have been 
 doomed to witness. That her sweet and pure 
 soul may soon ascend to God who gave it, is 
 the most rational prayer that can be offered to 
 Him ; since the symptoms you describe render 
 
302 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 recovery hopeless. What a blessing it is, that, 
 whether from fatal increase of the circulation 
 or other cause, the most direful of all maladies 
 carries with it, to the sufferer, its deceiving 
 balm, and seems to brighten the unconscious 
 spirit for its purer sphere. Let me be remem- 
 bered by her (I mean in your conversation.) 
 Fail not to tell her how much the sweet cheer- 
 fulness of her nature won on me, as it did on 
 others : her modesty, her clear and unaffected 
 sense : that I never spoke of or thought of her, 
 but with such expressions and feelings of 
 esteem, as are allowed to those who have no 
 other right to utter or cherish them, than what 
 is mven them in their sense and love of worth. 
 I can too well conceive the grief of friends at 
 losing so great a treasure, but I dare not con- 
 jecture of that sorrow and despair that must 
 harrow up a husband’s soul ! a nature so faith- 
 ful as Mr. A.’s.” 
 
 In a letter which he wrote this year to Miss 
 Lee, he expresses, with the freedom and con- 
 fidence of friendship, his private opinion of his 
 family group of the Baring family and Mrs. 
 Wall. I have great satisfaction in inserting this 
 letter, as its allusions to the death of his for- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 303 
 
 midable rival, Mr. Hoppner,* are in a spirit free 
 from that which might have influenced more 
 worldly and selfish men. His picture of his 
 own situation is affecting. 
 
 “MY DEAR MISS LEE, April, 1810. 
 
 “ You are good and kind as yourself, my dear 
 friend, to be thus interested for me in that 
 which will never cease to be an object of in- 
 terest with me — the retaining and advancing 
 my professional fame, if fame be not too large 
 a word for this e last infirmity.’ My pictures 
 went in perfect safety to the Exhibition, and 
 are the best that I have produced. That which 
 I mentioned to you is a work embracing many 
 difficulties in the art. A group of five por- 
 traits composing a single domestic scene, from 
 its design approaches more to historical cha- 
 racter than is usually seen in pictures of this 
 kind, yet I think, with a great deal of nature 
 in it, the colouring and effect are carried farther 
 
 * Lawrence called several times upon Mr. Hoppner during 
 his illness, in the spirit of kindness and friendship, but the 
 latter always denounced the visits as merely the gratification 
 of a rival's joy at his approaching dissolution. Assuredly, no 
 such feeling ever actuated Lawrence, whose kindness to Mr. 
 Owen, and to all his friends in sickness, was excessive. 
 
304 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 and on higher principles than in any other that 
 I have painted, and this with more general 
 harmony and freedom from my defects. It has 
 less manner, and more style. 
 
 “ I know that you have sufficient knowledge 
 of painting to see the distinction between the 
 two, and that it is very great. My other pic- 
 tures are portraits of Lord Melville, Mr. Can- 
 ning, and Lord Castlereagh. 
 
 “ I look for many a scurvy joke on the two 
 last, and many a criticism on the first, given 
 with infinite liberality and candour, and all the 
 sagacity of ignorance. 
 
 ec The death of Hoppner leaves me, it is 
 true, without a rival, and this has been acknow- 
 ledged to me by the ablest of my present com- 
 petitors; but I already find one small misfor- 
 tune attending it, viz. that I have no sharer in 
 the watchful jealousy, I will hot say, hatred, 
 that follows the situation. At this (in all but 
 historical painting) advanced period of the arts, 
 it is quite impossible — it would have been to Sir 
 Joshua — to get so far beyond all rivalry as to 
 leave it hopeless. There are too many ingeni- 
 ous men, if not men of genius, to make this 
 attainable ; and that defect of understanding 
 that I have shewn in the necessary and just con- 
 duct of life, has deprived me of that great ad- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 305 
 
 vantage — independence, which gives such full 
 security to professional station. This in some 
 measure stimulates my exertions, and gives my 
 competitors hope that it may do so ; but still, 
 as I find my health better than I ever had it, my 
 faculties not decaying, and I hope, and indeed 
 know, my knowledge in my art increasing, as I 
 think I have more of what gives elevation to it, 
 than they at present possess, I shall go forwards 
 as resolutely as I can, and as long as I can, trust- 
 ing with patient confidence to the result. 
 
 “ Yours respectfully, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 In the following letter, of a prior date, his allu- 
 sions to Mr. Hoppner are full of good feeling. 
 
 “ I laid my letter on my table to be sent by 
 the post, and too late I found it was forgotten. 
 
 I shall perhaps get a frank for it to-day. 
 
 “ Poor Tom Sheridan, they say, is in a de- 
 cline. His spirits, however, do not leave him, 
 and he still jokes on this dreadful misfortune 
 and his own consequent distress. 
 
 “ That I should not meditate on marriage is 
 strange, for I am reading Ccelebs, and like it 
 with all its goodness. It advocates the cause 
 with more temperance, and therefore, judg- 
 
 vol. i. x 
 
30 G 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 ment, than her other works. You should 
 have the Quarterly Review with the Edin- 
 burgh, though inferior to it. Burns is reviewed 
 by Jeffrey, in the latter — by Walter Scott in 
 the former. You will be sorry to hear it, my 
 most powerful competitor, he whom only (to 
 my friends) I have acknowledged as my rival, 
 is, I fear, sinking to the grave. I mean, of 
 course, Hoppner. He has always been afflicted 
 with bilious and liver complaints, (and to these 
 must be greatly attributed the irritation of his 
 mind,) and now they have ended in a confirmed 
 dropsy. But though I think he cannot recover, 
 I do not wish that his last illness should appear 
 to be so reported by me. You will believe 
 that I can sincerely feel the loss of a brother 
 artist, from whose works I have often gained 
 instruction, and who has gone by my side in 
 the race these eighteen years. 
 
 <k Yours, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 It may be regretted that the daughter of Mr. 
 Thomas Sheridan alluded to in this letter, was 
 never painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence, for her 
 extreme beauty and grace were calculated to 
 inspire his genius to its brightest efforts. Miss 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 307 
 
 Sheridan has since married the eldest son of the 
 Duke of Somerset. 
 
 I insert the following familiar and friendly 
 letter from Mr. Lawrence to Miss Crofts. 
 
 “ North Willingham, Wragley, Nov. 3, 1810. 
 
 “ I must have appeared most blameably neg- 
 ligent, my dear Miss Crofts, kind, dear friend, in 
 not acknowledging your recent care of me, and 
 very gratifying letter ; but my time is so occu- 
 pied here, with riding, and walking, and eating^ 
 and all the genera of idleness and good living, 
 that I have fewer moments to myself, than 
 when up to my ears in business, in that Greek 
 Street which you were so anxious for me to 
 quit. You wished me to have air and exercise ; 
 the former has given me as good, coarse, tight, 
 and distended a skin as a man ought to have, 
 and if to have all my bones aching with the 
 latter, be any satisfaction to you, you may se- 
 curely enjoy the comfort. I am at home in all 
 country exercises, coursing, shooting, &c. and 
 have so thorough a knowledge of an estate, that 
 all I have now to do is to get one ; for as to 
 managing it, I flatter myself I can do that as 
 well as the dear widow Blackacre, or farmer 
 Smith himself. I feel, however, with all of 
 
 x 2 
 
308 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 comfort, hospitality, and friendship around me, 
 — I feel the want of those friends sharing them 
 with me, who are now the great essentials of the 
 happiness of all of life that is to be given me — 
 you would both of you like to share them, as 
 would both be respected and loved by all who 
 are now here. Our party is composed of Mr. and 
 Mrs. Boucherette, and three daughters ; Mrs. 
 and Miss Lock ; Mr. and Mrs. J. Angerstein 
 and family ; Mr. Angerstein, and your obliged 
 friend. I cannot conceive beings who would be 
 more in unison with all your feelings, than this 
 circle, and it is quite ungrateful in me to find 
 it incomplete : but I will own to you that I 
 pine to be nearer that spot which I have left, 
 and those good and inestimable partners that 
 endear it to me. 
 
 “ My stay is longer than I intended, but by 
 the end of next week I shall certainly be at 
 home. 
 
 64 1 have an additional reason, a strong incen- 
 tive for rising earlier than I used to do ; I have 
 a beautiful flannel waistcoat to put on, all warm, 
 and without seam before, and which, with the 
 assistance of the housemaid, I can button be- 
 hind. ’Tis such luxury as I have never before 
 tasted ! I am the envy of all the men, and the 
 gazing attention of all the women, who think 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 309 
 
 what a man he must be, who is so carefully 
 looked after ! ‘ But he looks so fat and good- 
 
 humoured.’ 
 
 “ Adieu, now. If there may be any one who 
 may like to look at this hand- writing, indulge 
 them, and, for the flattery, tell them they have 
 all my grateful respects and homage. 
 
 “ Ever, dear friend, your obliged 
 
 “ T. Lawrence.” 
 
 In this year, 1810, he raised his prices of por- 
 traits considerably. In 1802, his prices had 
 been, for a three-quarters, thirty guineas ; for 
 a half-length, sixty guineas ; and for a whole- 
 length, one hundred and twenty guineas. But 
 in June 1802, he had fixed the charge for the 
 smallest size at thirty-five guineas, quadrupling 
 it for the whole length. At these rates, he con- 
 tinued to paint till 1806, when he raised his 
 charge for the smallest size, to fifty guineas, and 
 for the whole-length, to two hundred guineas. 
 Having persevered in these prices to 1808, he 
 raised them to eighty guineas for the smallest 
 and three hundred and twenty for the whole- 
 length size; and in 1810, he farther advanced 
 them to one hundred guineas for small heads, 
 and four hundred guineas for full-lengths. At 
 the latter prices, he continued to paint till the 
 
310 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 year 1820, when he finally made an advance 
 in prices, and which he never afterwards ex- 
 ceeded. 
 
 The Exhibition of the Royal Academy for 
 the year 1811 contained only nine hundred and 
 fifty-five works. Mr. Lawrence’s contributions 
 were only six. — No. 13, Portrait of the Hon. C. 
 A. Cooper ; 69, Mrs. Stratten ; 88, Major-Ge- 
 neral the Hon. C. Stewart; 113, B. West, 
 
 Esq. R.A. ; 170, the Sons of Labouchere, 
 
 Esq. ; 194, Warren Hastings, Esq. 
 
 The catalogue of this year’s Exhibition could 
 hardly have been printed ere the first-named 
 of the preceding six persons had ceased to be 
 the Hon. C. A. Cooper, by the death of his 
 brother, which brought him into the title of 
 Earl of Shaftesbury, and which he now enjoys. 
 His Lordship was about forty when this por- 
 trait of him was taken, and it was much ad- 
 mired. 
 
 The Hon. C. Stewart, whose portrait was 
 now exhibited, is the present Marquis of 
 Londonderry, with whom Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence’s intimacy and friendship will be often 
 mentioned in tfie present work. 
 
 The most curious of these portraits, however, 
 was that of Warren Hastings, and it revived 
 the recollections of the celebrity of the indivi- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 31 1 
 
 dual, and of the sensation which his impeach- 
 ment had made throughout England.* 
 
 The following is one of the familiar letters 
 which Mr. Lawrence wrote about this period. 
 
 It is addressed to his friend Mrs. Boucherette, 
 the daughter-in-law of Mr. J. J. Angerstein. 
 
 “ Have you room in your library for more 
 books? and did you read the last, the fourth 
 volume of the Canterbury Tales? A Novel is 
 coming out of Miss Lee’s, that, with or without 
 leave, I shall send. Have you got Heber’s 
 Poem on Palestine? Clio? The Edinburgh 
 Review ; Holcroft’s Journey ; Godwin’s Chau- 
 cer ? &c. &c. And pray, Sir, in this fit of virtue, 
 do you remember the pictures ? I do — I do — * 
 I do. — Not Mr. A/s. That shall not go down, 
 it is so wretchedly poor ; but I’ll try and get 
 him, while chain’d to the house by this cold, 
 to let me take a sketch of him as he is now — as 
 he looks when beaten by me, as he was last 
 night at chess. 
 
 “ I have done a very unpleasant thing — voted 
 
 * The likeness was taken for a Mrs. Barton. Warren 
 Hastings was rather small in person, and at this period his 
 life was in the sere, but Lawrence often spoke in admiration 
 of the severity of dignity and grandeur in his appearance. 
 His expression used to be, “ What a fine lion-like repose 
 there is about him !” 
 
312 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 against Fuseli at the election for Keeper of the 
 Academy, but I could not avoid it, for I was 
 pledged to another before lie applied to me, and 
 thought him the most unlikely person to stand 
 for the situation. — He is very indignant at it, 
 and unjustly so, for he has no claim ; the most 
 elevated genius was not to make me break my 
 faith with a respectable man,* which his oppo- 
 nent is. I have no opportunity to explain 
 myself to Mr. Lock, but I choose to do it in the 
 Willingham circle, because I would not have 
 you think me capable of a cold unfriendliness 
 that is not in my nature, and in some way the 
 circumstance might have reached you. 
 
 “ The Regency, I hear, is given up, from the 
 King’s appearing to recover so rapidly. I don’t 
 know how he is to-day, but I will send to know 
 before my letter is sealed. Perhaps this illness 
 is a good thing for ministers, for weak as the 
 King must be, the attempt to force others upon 
 him will be immediately deprecated. The Op- 
 position would else be resistless. 
 
 “ What is this story which Miss A (to 
 
 whom you will not forget my respects) has 
 written about, of the piece of wood in poor 
 
 Miss F ’s lungs ? Can it be believed to be 
 
 true ? A medical man says it cannot be. 
 
 * Mr. Rigaud. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 313 
 
 “ I come to the close of my paper. — Forgive 
 
 me, dear Mrs. B , and my true friend, for 
 
 the liberty of this long letter, but love having 
 abandoned me, I turn with the truant’s feelings 
 to that gentler passion that has not yet deceived 
 me, to beings whom I esteem more than I can 
 
 say. Of Miss I see nothing, and wish to 
 
 see nothing. Her’s was a light heart, and mine an 
 erring and self-blinded mind ; yet she had vir- 
 tues, and I at length have reason. Encourage me 
 in my new rationality, you, its much-thought- 
 of friend, that, when I meet you again, I may 
 tell you I have been gay, virtuous, and good. 
 
 “ You must forgive me, my dear Mrs. Bou- 
 cherette, for not replying to your letter of Tues- 
 day last. Long and kind as it was, the various 
 businesses that occupy me deprive me of that 
 prompt attention in this duty of friendship that 
 so distinguishes me in every other. Believe 
 only that my heart writes to you long before 
 my pen performs the office, and that already I 
 anticipate the pleasure I shall receive in answer- 
 ing your letter of the 25th. 
 
 “ You ask me after Charles Lock. — To the 
 astonishment of all, he returned yesterday from 
 Yarmouth, to divide a day between Norbury 
 and town, and then return again. William 
 brought the news to dinner at Mr. Angerstein s. 
 
314 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 whose cold is a great deal better. You tell 
 me so many secrets, such histories of the march- 
 ing and counter-marching of the corps, — of the 
 pleasant dinners at Mr. — What’s his damned 
 name? (not my own) — of the agreeable ankle- 
 deep walks, and the many recollections you 
 have of the group in the round room, (shut up 
 since my departure,) that I am compelled in 
 decency to send you something of novelty in 
 return.” 
 
 44 P. S. Our Col. Commandant — The King — 
 is the same to-day that he has been these 
 two days. I fear this augurs badly for the 
 head.” 
 
 In the commencement of the succeeding 
 year (1812), I find a letter to his brother, Ma- 
 jor Lawrence, who was then abroad; and of 
 this I am induced to give the following short 
 extracts, 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, with his incessant occupation, 
 might be well excused for a want of punctu- 
 ality in his private correspondence ; nor can a 
 similar want in a man of Mr. Pitt’s business be 
 so severely treated as to be termed a vicious in- 
 dolence. Mr. Lawrence does not overrate his 
 talents in this letter, nor does he mistake his 
 station in the arts, except in placing himself 
 lower than he was entitled to stand. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 315 
 
 Few persons can agree with him in his cri- 
 ticism of the character of Cato, either as drawn 
 by Addison or as acted by Mr. Kemble ; at least 
 the painting does not well illustrate his position, 
 for he has not attempted to pourtray any pas- 
 sion whatever, Cato being represented in the 
 stoicism of lucid reflection. 
 
 “ January 29, 1812. 
 
 “ MY DEAR WILLIAM, 
 
 “You are always in my mind, in my respect 
 and affection, though my pen is so very tardy 
 in telling you so ; but I know and see, by your 
 constant and kind remembrance of me, that 
 you make allowance for that state of eternal 
 occupation, and those harassing engagements, 
 which are not sufficient to justify, but with my 
 irrational dislike of writing, make my silence 
 more naturally to be accounted for by those who 
 know me. Had I any portion of the talents of 
 Mr. Pitt, I might dare to quote him as an ex- 
 ample of the same strange repugnance to this 
 duty. He latterly entirely gave up all private 
 correspondence whatever, but in the greatest it 
 is still a vicious indolence, as well as in the 
 smallest, in which latter class (save as a modern 
 painter) you must place your brother. 
 
 * * * * 
 
 “ I often consider it as a most serious comfort 
 
316 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 that my brothers and sisters are so essentially 
 worthy, and in all respects the true progeny of 
 those good and innocent beings who gave us 
 birth. In sins of omission (often of the most 
 ruinous effect) I consider myself as the least de- 
 serving of my family. In one great essential of 
 worldly prudence (and of equal benefit to virtue), 
 I have much of my father’s carelessness, with a 
 torpor of constitution that is dreadfully against 
 exertion. Still I am in habits of daily industry, 
 and when an object of importance or difficulty 
 is before me, leave it not till I have mastered it, 
 so that next to Mr. West (as Historical Painter) 
 I believe I now stand the first in my profession. 
 
 “ The work I am now about (and of which I 
 have not yet told them at Rugby,) is a gene- 
 ralised portrait of Kemble in Cato, or rather 
 Cato meditating on the Phasdon of Plato, for 
 which I take Kemble as my model. You will 
 be surprised to know that it is his finest part, 
 and that his acting makes it a most interesting 
 play. He has done it by great penetration into 
 the only means of doing it, (and of the capabi- 
 lity of which, from all the reports of the first 
 acting of the play, Booth’s, &c. I am convinced 
 Mr. Addison was ignorant) viz., that of giving 
 to the patriotism of Cato, not the mere cold de- 
 clamation of principle, but the rich enthusiasm 
 of passion ; and of making him as much in love 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 317 
 
 with his country, as Romeo is with his mistress. 
 The scene in the fourth act, where the body of 
 his son is brought in, is nobly and powerfully 
 affecting. Perhaps it will be the last picture I 
 shall paint with Kemble for my subject, and I 
 know it will be my best. 
 
 * * * * 
 
 “ My dear William, God bless you, and keep 
 you in health, that we may again have the com- 
 fort of embracing a man and a brother whom we 
 all so entirely esteem and love. 
 
 “ Ever your affectionate, 
 
 “T. Lawrence.” 
 
 The following amusing letter is a playful 
 account of a little excursion he took out of town. 
 
 TO MISS CROFTS. 
 
 “June, 1812. 
 
 “Will you, my dear friend, put a question 
 to the ‘ Master’ for me, of whether a pure white 
 silk sash or girdle, with its rich gold fringe, 
 would not be the most elegant of any altera- 
 tion? and whether, with perfect propriety, I 
 might not introduce a very tender rose, care- 
 lessly put in it, of the purest blush, but just 
 serving to tie together the curtain and the dra- 
 pery on which my lady sits ? I think I can 
 afford to tie part with the blue, or wanting it, a 
 
318 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 violet or two, or border above the fringe, may 
 recall it. Disdain not this important trifling, 
 or despising it, be thankful that you buy this 
 triumph of your wisdom at so cheap a price as 
 three-pence. 
 
 “ I think you would have smiled, could you 
 have seen my new situation this morning. 
 When I had got some mile or two on my route, 
 
 I became dog-sick of my mud-boots, and of 
 being the derision of every stage-coachman who 
 laughed at me, or went past, as the Levite by 
 the poor Samaritan. At length, I perceived a 
 wee modest cart, with an old higgler in it, , 
 sitting on a swung seat, and drawn by a ragged, 
 puffing pony. It was too resistless not to 
 be attempted, and for the glittering bribe of 
 eighteen-pence, I was permitted to be his cheek- 
 by-jowl, and jolted cart-companion. There 
 never was such luck, for he was going to put 
 up at the Black Bull, gilt with most generous 
 profusion, that stands near Aldgate pump ! But 
 let not this alluring description tempt you on 
 any emergency to ascend such vehicle, especially 
 if you are to go from Whitechapel Church to 
 the said “ Black Bull,” for I do assure you that 
 none, except the fair female singers of Italy, 
 who had one half of silver, could sit it with im- 
 punity. Yet the seat, I allow, swings with 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 319 
 
 most accommodating sympathy, and when wet, 
 its powers of adhesion take away all danger of 
 falling off. 
 
 “ As some one might have chanced to know 
 me in this novel situation, I rather held my 
 head down, I confess, and perhaps escaped de- 
 tection. Once or twice, I attempted the um- 
 brella, but it seemed an insulting refinement 
 to my companion, and I contented myself with- 
 out it, — and here ends my fortunate misad- 
 venture. 
 
 “ Oblige me, dear friend, with as early an 
 answer as you possibly can, and send me assu- 
 rance that everything of illness is gone from you. 
 Believe me ever, with the highest esteem, 
 “Yours, 
 
 “ T. Lawrence.” 
 
 But the Exhibition of this year (1812) con- 
 tained nine hundred and forty works, and Mr. 
 Lawrence had sent eight, which was more than 
 the average of the preceding years. These were 
 — 19, Portrait of the Earl of Lonsdale ; 20, Miss 
 W. Pole ; 57, Mr. Kemble, as Addison’s Cato ; 
 65, Viscount Mountjoy ; 88, Mrs. May ; 103, 
 Sir W. Curtis ; 108, the Earl and Countess 
 Charlemont and their child ; 228, T. Taylor, 
 translator of Plato, Aristotle, &c. 
 
320 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 The Lord Mountjoy here mentioned, is the 
 present Earl of Blesington, having been elevated 
 to that title in the year 1816 . 
 
 The Lord Charlemont is the son of the cele- 
 brated Earl Charlemont, the patriotic friend of 
 Fox, and Grattan and Flood, and who was 
 commander-in-chief of the volunteer force of 
 Ireland, at the dangerous period of the Na- 
 tional Convention. The exhaustion of the 
 country by the disastrous and truly disgrace- 
 ful civil war, termed the “ American war,” 
 had left Ireland entirely at the mercy of an 
 enemy ; and the inhabitants, to the number of 
 about one hundred and fifty thousand men, 
 formed themselves into volunteer regiments for 
 the purposes of a protection which the Govern- 
 ment confessed it was unable to supply. This 
 patriotic army soon assumed a deliberative cha- 
 racter. It published its manifestoes and procla- 
 mations, and at length chose delegates to consti- 
 tute a military convention, in order to effect a 
 thoroughly radical reform, if not a separation 
 of Ireland from English connexion. The Civil or 
 Constitutional, and the Military Parliaments sat 
 in Dublin at the same time, and the members of 
 the former often excused themselves for omis- 
 sions of duty, by pleading that they were in 
 their seats in the more important house. The 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 321 
 
 Civil Parliament was execrated throughout the 
 country, whilst all classes were enthusiastically 
 attached to the Military Parliament. Its mem- 
 bers were escorted by volunteer infantry, ca- 
 valry, and artillery, and perhaps never did any 
 nation exhibit so alarming a position as Ire- 
 land at this remarkable period. Lord Charle- 
 mont was brought into collision with the cele- 
 brated Earl of Bristol and Bishop of Derry, 
 (so often alluded to in these volumes,) in at- 
 tempts to attain the supreme guidance of 
 the Convention Parliament. The Bishop was 
 furious and revolutionary, and the Earl was 
 only a constitutional Whig. The latter at last 
 had the ascendency, and was able to dissipate 
 the passions then raging for political reforms. 
 The Bishop was a reformer, in that uncompro- 
 mising spirit which was afterwards displayed 
 in France.* 
 
 * Probably the history of mankind presents nothing more 
 thoroughly ridiculous, than the extinction of this military 
 Parliament by Lord Charlemont. Surrounded by an enthu- 
 siastic population in arms, the military delegates struck terror 
 into the hearts of ministers, and created a belief in Europe, 
 that Irish reform, or emancipation, would be carried at 
 the cannon’s mouth, or at the point of the bayonet. Lord 
 Charlemont, the President, appointed a sitting upon the 
 important question, Reform, which agitated the whole coun- 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 Y 
 
322 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 But it is important to state, that decidedly 
 the most popular work that had appeared at the 
 Royal Academy for many years, was the por- 
 trait of Mr. Kemble, in the character, as the ca- 
 talogue curiously stated, of Mr. Addison’s Cato. 
 
 It is an immense homage paid to the manes 
 of John Kemble, to derogate this painting 
 from the highest school of history, by term- 
 ing it a portrait of any person, even with the 
 apotheosis of ‘ in the character of Cato.’ Let 
 the painting be estimated as a highly intellectual 
 conception of Cato, in his most calm and serene 
 contemplation, for it shows not the 4 Atrocem 
 animum Catonis’ of Horace. 
 
 With all the ability in art, and the sur- 
 prising effect produced by this great historic 
 piece, it has, to the vulgar, many striking 
 faults. It is not Cato, in the majesty of his 
 stern virtues, nor in the intensity of thought, 
 but it is Cato as no other modern has had intel- 
 lect enough to draw him, except Shakspeare 
 — Cato in his serene and lucid humanity. 
 
 try. Arriving and taking the chair, an hour before the ap- 
 pointed time of convocation, he addressed a speech to a few 
 followers of his own, dissolved the parliament, and locking up 
 the hall, went home with the keys in his pocket— and thus 
 was terminated this, in appearance, most formidable Na- 
 tional Convention of Ireland. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 323 
 
 The relaxation of the body, in its inclining 
 forwards, without any loss of solemnity and 
 dignity — the amazingly fine eyes, large and 
 brilliant, but subdued by the soul reflecting on 
 itself — the whole figure, and even the legs in 
 perfect repose, and yet tense to show the un- 
 relaxing severity of Cato, form a conception of 
 the character, and a power of representing it, 
 which give an idea of the artist, different from 
 what he had generally inspired. This is not 
 Lawrence, elegant, refined, and diffident ; it is 
 the great artist full of an integral, perfect con- 
 ception, and with an immense power of em- 
 bodying it — a power which does not make him 
 reject, but which absorbs him from, the busi- 
 ness to which his mighty art is obliged to stoop, 
 portraits. — In this painting, there may be an 
 association between the artist’s character and the 
 mood of an opposite character which he repre- 
 sents ; and great is the faculty of imbuing one 
 nature with the features of its reverse, where 
 they assimilate, but appear to common minds to 
 be in antithesis. 
 
 Notwithstanding fervent admiration, it must 
 be held honesty to have the details of errors 
 noted in a work which aims at truth. A 
 great artist is of more importance to mankind 
 than can be conceived but by a few minds ; 
 
 Y 2 
 
324 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 and yet the public, or what ought to be the 
 public, is the shrine to which no sacrifice ought 
 to be slain, but to which all things ought to 
 yield. 
 
 In this painting, Sir Thomas Lawrence has 
 shown many errors and marks of negligence 
 which it is not hypercritical to notice. Except 
 where he gave way to the impulses created by 
 the object before him, he had a singular con- 
 ception of foreheads, and yet, where those which 
 he had to paint were defective, he could correct 
 the error of nature, though where nature had 
 not erred, he often saw not the perfection of her 
 works. Lord Liverpool had the brow serve , the 
 forehead low, and suppressing the countenance 
 with a terrible expression. But in all the por- 
 ti'aits of Lord Liverpool, Sir Thomas Lawrence 
 has got over this apparently insuperable diffi- 
 culty, whilst he has verged upon it where it did 
 not exist, and, in some cases, not only removed 
 it, but added a wide expansion of forehead to 
 the person who possessed not the feature. In his 
 portrait of Lord Bathurst, he had a predominant 
 idea of nobility, and he has given a great breadth 
 of figure, an erect carriage, and full chest, and a 
 capacious forehead. In the portrait of Prince 
 Metternich, he has sacrificed equally to fiction, 
 but he has scarcely concealed the expression of 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 325 
 
 eyes which belied the nobility of forehead. In 
 Count Hardenburgh, he has given neither the 
 collective coldness and cunning of Metternich, 
 nor the closed brow of Lord Liverpool ; but he 
 has omitted the expression of wisdom and 
 goodness, or faintly expressed it, which the 
 countenance possesses. 
 
 But to return to the subject from the di- 
 gression. 
 
 The faults in this splendid portrait of Kemble 
 are few but striking. There is a short forehead, 
 at variance with the fullness of eye ; and the car- 
 tilage of the nose, as in all his portraits of John 
 Kemble, is unnaturally large and distended.* 
 
 But the foreground of the picture wants 
 relief and richness, whilst the background is in 
 every respect defective. It is thrown upon the 
 principal figure, when an expanse or a perspec- 
 tive would have added to the dignity of the 
 subject. 
 
 The little of sky that is seen is of the thick, 
 perturbed, soapy description, which he has in- 
 troduced into so many of his paintings, but 
 which is totally at variance with the serene 
 
 * When this portrait was first exhibited, the nostril was 
 so much distended, as to be unnatural ; it was altered, but 
 not sufficiently. The painting, when hung high, seems, in 
 this respect, defective. 
 
326 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 expression of this. The drapery is hung like a 
 Gothic arras, and is kept up meanly and ab- 
 surdly by a nail driven into a stone Doric 
 pillar. 
 
 But the drapery itself is not a colour, but 
 the fading of a colour, or something discolour- 
 ed, — a feature pervading so many of Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence’s paintings. 
 
 Mr, Lawrence, in the Exhibition of the Aca- 
 demy for 1813, had the eight following portraits ; 
 the total number of works in the Catalogue were 
 nine hundred and forty-five : — 7, Portrait of 
 Lieutenant-General Sir Thomas Graham ; 28, 
 Sir H. Englefield ; 63, Miss Thayer ; 139, the 
 Countess Grey; 158, Lady Ellenborough ; 159, 
 Lieutenant-General the Hon. Sir C. Stewart ; 
 208, the Marquis Wellesley ; 222, James Watt, 
 Esq. 
 
 The portrait of Sir Thomas Graham proved 
 this year to be very attractive ; for that officer’s 
 extraordinary victory over the French at Ba- 
 rossa, had made him popular, and the subject of 
 much curiosity. Sir Thomas Graham had en- 
 tered the army in the forty -fifth year of his age 
 (1795), and had nevertheless attained to the 
 rank of a general officer. In 1811, his victory 
 at Barossa had drawn the public attention to 
 the vigour of his character and the severity of 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 327 
 
 his military duties, and this portrait of him was 
 the most spoken of in the Exhibition. In the 
 succeeding year, he was created Baron Lyndoch. 
 Oliver Cromwell had entered upon the military 
 profession at about the same period of life, and 
 yet surpassed all men of his epoch in military 
 science and practical manoeuvres ; but the ge- 
 nius of that great man was scarcely ever equall- 
 ed, and his character is yet to be developed by 
 the impartial historian. 
 
 It has been said, that Sir Joshua Reynolds 
 was perpetually trying experiments in colours, 
 and that his results were uncertain, and not to 
 be reduced to any general rules. Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence tried few or no experiments, and his 
 results were equally uncertain. Not only did 
 some of his portraits fade, whilst others stood, 
 without any explanation of the cause, but some 
 parts of a picture got prematurely flat, to the 
 destruction of the uniform tone, or consistent 
 reading of the work. 
 
 The portrait of Miss Thayer, exhibited in 
 1813, was also exhibited in Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence’s posthumous exhibition at the British 
 Institution (1830), in company with other pic- 
 tures painted at the same time. The discrepancy 
 of tone was remarkable. The portrait had been 
 painted with great carelessness, and yet (for it is 
 
328 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 singular) there was no indecision of touch, or 
 confusion of outline or of idea. But the pic- 
 ture had got flat, and there was a dark mixture 
 in the colouring, producing what in common 
 language would be called a dinginess. There 
 was moreover a poverty and hardness of out- 
 line totally foreign to the artist. But withal, it 
 was a beautiful portrait, — sober, subdued, chaste, 
 and, without using the word in its very general 
 and sometimes exculpatory sense, it was clas- 
 sical ; even the small, poor, black spencer, added 
 to the harmony of the portrait, though the pink 
 of the lining had faded and was gone. Acci- 
 dents of this sort are innumerable ; and whilst 
 some create a design and fine effect never in- 
 tended, others mar the best studies. 
 
 The ideas attached to the word student, by 
 modern painters of eminence, are rather singular. 
 This species of apprenticeship is at least at 
 variance with any other ; and if it be considered 
 that great artists seem to think it their duty to 
 conceal, rather than to impart knowledge to 
 their students, the world will cease to remark 
 upon the very few recent instances of great 
 masters producing great scholars. 
 
 Sir Joshua Reynolds, instead of descanting 
 upon his principles and practice in colouring, 
 and upon his experiments in this branch of art, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 329 
 
 concealed every thing from his pupils with the 
 jealousy and suspicion of a miser watching his 
 horde. He made his experiments in private, 
 and when he went out, he anxiously locked up 
 all his ingredients, lest his students should dis- 
 cover his secrets. Surely this was not honour- 
 able to the artist, nor a likely way to benefit 
 the art. Unless this habit was duly explained 
 to the friends of the students, when they paid 
 their premiums of admission, it can scarcely be 
 accounted consistent with fair dealing. Sir 
 Joshua had but one pupil that rose above the 
 mediocrity of art — Mr. Northcote. Sir Tho- 
 mas Lawrence’s pupil, Harlow, had he lived, 
 would have been a great painter, but more 
 from his original powers than from any study 
 or application.* 
 
 * Of his early apprentices, Sir Thomas had a high opinion 
 of Mr. Hargreave, and wished him much to pursue his pro- 
 fession in the Metropolis. The following is the original 
 indenture of Mr. Hargreave’s service. 
 
 “10 May 1795. Agreement between Thomas Lawrence 
 of New Bond Street, in the Liberty of Westminster and county 
 of Middlesex, Esq. of the one part, and Thomas Hargreave 
 of Carnaby Street, Westminster, and Henry Hargreave of 
 Liverpool, in the county of Lancaster, father of the said Tho- 
 mas Hargreave, of the other part. 
 
 “ By which, Thomas Hargreave binds himself ‘ to serve 
 the said Thomas Lawrence for two years from March last, 
 
330 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 The Exhibition of 1814 was the lowest, in 
 the scale of numbers, that had occurred for 
 many years, nor did it rise superior in quality 
 to preceding exhibitions. The catalogue con- 
 tained only eight hundred and eleven works. 
 It may be remarked that this was the last of 
 the catalogues that printed the future president’s 
 name without his title of Sir, and it was the 
 first that announced his residence in Russell 
 Square. 
 
 The contributions of Sir Thomas Lawrence 
 in the Exhibition were remarkable ; for, inde- 
 pendent of their talent, they showed an absorp- 
 tion of what is called patronage. 
 
 In this year, 1814, Mr. Lawrence exhibited 
 in the Academy, as follows: — 23, Portrait of 
 Viscount Castlereagh ; 56, Lady Leicester ; 64, 
 H. R. H. the Duke of Y ork ; 138, Lady Grant- 
 ham ; 146, the Marquis of Abercorn ; 237, the 
 Right Hon. John Mac Mahon ; 271, Lady 
 
 Emily Cowper ; 277, Master W. Lock. 
 
 The portrait of Lady Leicester represented 
 her as Hope with the olive branch, and attend- 
 ed by angelic genii. It met with so much ad- 
 miration that it formed the subject of one of 
 
 in his art or profession of a painter or artist/ in consideration 
 of receiving £52. 10s. per annum, payable quarterly." 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 331 
 
 our most popular engravings. Sir John Fleming 
 Leicester, created Lord de Tabley in 1826, had 
 long been a great patron of art in England ; but, 
 what was peculiar to him, was, that he confined 
 his patronage exclusively to native artists, and 
 his gallery contained the finest specimens of our 
 English school. Sir John was created Lord de 
 Tabley, one of his ancestors having possessed the 
 estate of Nether-Tabley in Cheshire, in the 
 reign of Edward I. Sir Peter Leycester, in his 
 antiquities of England and Ireland, published 
 in 1673, gives a lively description of his kins- 
 woman, Lady Eleanor Byron, whose portrait, by 
 Sir Peter Lely, is among the Beauties of Charles 
 the Second’s reign, at Hampton Court. Sir 
 John’s father was the early patron of Wilson and 
 Barret, and Sir John himself was instructed in 
 drawing by Vivares, the landscape engraver, 
 and Paul Sandby, then of the highest repute as 
 a landscape painter in water colours ; but the 
 pupil confined himself to pen and ink drawings, 
 sketched over with Indian ink and bistre. He 
 travelled through Italy with Sir Richard Colt 
 Hoare, to whom he was attached, by a simi- 
 larity of pursuits in the love of the arts. On 
 his return, he became the companion of the 
 Prince of Wales in his social hours, private 
 amusements, and field sports. On one occasion. 
 
332 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 the Prince proposed a trial of skill between Sir 
 John Leicester and two of the best shots in 
 England. The bets were made, and the Prince’s 
 opponent chose two officers of the guards, who 
 were esteemed to carry the art of pistol shoot- 
 ing to a pitch which admitted of no supe- 
 riority. These were Colonel Richardson and 
 Colonel Lenox, afterwards Duke of Richmond, 
 and whose skill was afterwards called into play 
 against the Duke of York. After various trials, 
 the prize was adjudged to Sir John Leicester. 
 
 Sir John was an excellent musician. His 
 landscapes in water colours exhibited much 
 feeling and considerable science in perspective 
 and colouring, whilst few men were better 
 judges of paintings in general. He was an 
 excellent carver and turner, and ingenious in 
 mechanical contrivances. His portrait, in a 
 hussar uniform of that day, was painted by Sir 
 Joshua Reynolds, and engraved. 
 
 But the beautiful woman whose portrait was 
 now exhibited by Mr. Lawrence, was married 
 in 1810, at the age of sixteen, to Sir John 
 Leicester, and was born in 1762. She was 
 the daughter of Lieutenant- Colonel Cottin, and 
 the god-daughter of the Prince of Wales, and 
 was married by special licence, at Hampton 
 Court Palace, in the room where hung the por- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 333 
 
 trait by Sir Peter Lely of Sir John’s beautiful 
 ancestor, Lady Eleanor Byron. The passage 
 from Sir Peter Leycester’s work, about this 
 beauty of Charles the Second’s court, was 
 aptly applied on this occasion to the bride: — 
 “ This Eleanor is a person of such comely pre- 
 sence, handsomeness, sweet disposition, honour, 
 and general repute in the world, that we have 
 not her equal.” 
 
 Sir John Leicester performed for his coun- 
 trymen, the important service of making it 
 fashionable to estimate native artists by their 
 intrinsic merit, in lieu of the affectation of ad- 
 miring Italian artists, and declaring those of 
 England to be barbarous. He was the origin 
 of the British Institution established in 1805, 
 of the Calcographic Society in 1810, and the 
 patron of the Irish Academy established in 
 1813. Mr. West, in a letter, observes, “ No 
 English gentleman ever did so much for mo- 
 dern art as Sir John Leicester. He has left 
 nothing undone that he could do to encourage 
 and serve the English artists ; and I could 
 name many others, who have only just done 
 enough (and that unwillingly) to save them- 
 selves from the shame of having done nothing. 
 But he has never cooled nor tired ; and, surely, 
 his opening his house for an exhibition of our 
 
334 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 pictures, is the crowning of all. I am now too 
 old to bustle about ; but I will join my bro- 
 ther artists in any thing; by the public cele- 
 bration of his birth-day, yearly ; or by any 
 other public testimony, to do honour to our 
 noble patron.” 
 
 When the Marquis of Stafford and Lord 
 Grosvenor, at the suggestion of Mr. Shee, 
 opened their galleries of the ancient masters to 
 the public, Sir John Leicester threw open his, 
 at his house in Hill Street, Berkeley Square; 
 and his superb collection of works by every 
 native artist of distinguished merit, proved 
 that our countrymen were acquiring the fa- 
 culty of estimating what was good, without 
 reference to the prejudices of names, or the 
 affectation of connoisseurship. Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence’s works were pre-eminent in this 
 gallery, among those of all our great artists, 
 from Wilson and Gainsborough down to those 
 of his contemporaries. 
 
 A singular portrait in this Exhibition of 1814 
 was that of the Right Hon. John Mac Mahon; 
 and, without losing the likeness, the artist con- 
 trived to conceal the defects of the subject. 
 Colonel Mac Mahon was an extraordinary in- 
 stance of the constancy of the fickle goddess. 
 From the most humble origin, he rose to be 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 335 
 
 a subaltern officer in the army, and was at the 
 siege of Charleston in America, under Sir Henry 
 Clinton, in 1781. He rose in the Prince’s esti- 
 mation almost from the first interview, and was 
 the only person that enjoyed the confidence and 
 attachment of his royal patron from his first 
 entering his service to his death. “ Put not 
 your trust in Princes,” was a proverb not con- 
 firmed by the life of this fortunate courtier. 
 
 It would be impossible to proceed without no- 
 ticing the portrait of the Lady Emily Cowper. 
 
 This is one of the sweetest portraits, or repre- 
 sentations of infantile nature, that ever was pro- 
 duced, and greatly excels some of Lawrence’s 
 portraits of children which have carried off the 
 palm of fame. There is not the slightest attempt 
 at effect ; the countenance is full of childish joy 
 and archness, fresh and sportive ; the hair na- 
 tural, the body natural, and the whole expres- 
 sion that of infantile simplicity, redolent of 
 health and beauty. Lawrence seems to have 
 been so captivated with the simple purity of 
 the subject, that he has totally forgotten the 
 artist ; he has not painted with an eye to fame, 
 or to the Exhibition, and though the child is 
 breathing from the canvass in its individual 
 identity; such is the archness of the look, that 
 the painting might seem to be a study to be 
 
336 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 introduced into an historical picture, or into a 
 work of beautiful fiction. The colouring of 
 this portrait is finely softened by time ; and it 
 is altogether an invaluable painting. The sub- 
 ject was Lady Emily Catherine Caroline Fran- 
 ces Cowper, the eldest daughter of the present 
 (sixth) Earl Cowper, by the daughter of the 
 first Viscount Melbourne, whom he married 
 in 1805. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 337 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence visits Paris.— Arrival of the Emperor of Russia, 
 and King of Prussia in England. — Their likenesses taken by 
 the order of the Prince Regent. — Mr. Lawrence knighted. 
 — The Exhibition of 1815. — Portrait of R. Hart Davis, 
 Esq. ; of the Hetman Prince Platoff. — Captain Jones’s 
 History of Prince Platoff. — Portrait of Prince Blucher ; 
 of the Duke of Wellington. — The Exhibition of 1816. — 
 Portrait of Canova ; his kindness of disposition. — Great 
 humanity of Sir Thomas Lawrence. — Letters to Canova. — 
 Portrait of Mr. J. J. Angerstein. — Lawrence's exertions 
 upon this portrait. — Biography and family of Mr. Anger- 
 stein. — Portraits of the Bishop of London, the Marchioness 
 of Stafford, and the Duke of York. — The Exhibition of 
 the year 1817. — Portraits of the Marquis of Anglesea, the 
 Duke of York, and Mrs. Arbuthnot. — Satire upon Sir Tho- 
 mas Lawrence. — Memoir of him, by Mr. H y . Howard, R. A. 
 — The Exhibition of 1818. — Portrait of Lady E. L. Gower. 
 — Its excellence. — Valuing Paintings at Carlton House. — 
 Death of Major W. R. Lawrence. — Private Correspon- 
 dence. — Sir Thomas Lawrence's Poetry. — His extensive 
 reading. 
 
 As soon as the success of the Allies had 
 opened the French capital to English visitors, 
 Mr. Lawrence was among the first that repaired 
 to Paris, anxious to obtain a view of the Gal- 
 
 VOL. i. 
 
 z 
 
338 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 lery of the Louvre, before the works of art 
 were removed to the countries from which they 
 had been taken by the Emperor Napoleon. To 
 his friend, Miss Crofts, he wrote the following 
 amusing letter : 
 
 “May, 1814. 
 
 “ You must forgive me, my dear friend, that, 
 in the worrying moments of my short stay at 
 Calais, I omitted to write to you as I promised 
 and intended. My journey from thence to 
 Paris was sufficiently rapid, and, as Lord Stew- 
 art fully expected me, I found on my arrival 
 a most hearty welcome, and have experienced 
 the kindest conduct from him ever since. 
 
 <e Had I delayed my journey a day longer, I 
 should have lost the view of some of the finest 
 works of this Gallery, the noblest assemblage 
 of the efforts of human genius that was ever 
 presented to the world. It very much sur- 
 passed my expectations, and particularly in its 
 most celebrated pictures. The Transfiguration 
 is still the very first. A few days will see the 
 whole taken away ; and much as we ought to 
 reprobate the injustice by which the greater 
 part of them was obtained, it is impossible to 
 witness their departure without regret,— at least 
 I know not how to check this feeling. No one 
 can see France and Paris without bowing to 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 339 
 
 the greatness and extent of this man’s concep- 
 tions. I use a phrase that is forced upon me. 
 I speak of him as present, and every where he 
 is ; and it is as impossible that he can ever be 
 separated from the past greatness of his country, 
 as for human efforts to blot out the sun. Her 
 present state of just humiliation is extreme, and 
 it does move one’s compassion for poor Louis, 
 who is utterly innocent of the crimes that have 
 produced it, that, with the feelings of a French- 
 man, and with all his goodness, he is doomed to 
 present himself to his countrymen, on a throne 
 “ so shorn of its beams,” and possibly for years, 
 “ in dim eclipse.” That so much greatness of 
 intellect, so vast a reach of thought (for the 
 plans of improvement projected by Bonaparte 
 are still superior to those effected,) should have 
 been mixed with such insensibility to virtue, is, 
 in my mind, one of the most painful mysteries 
 of Divine wisdom that can be contemplated. 
 Clemency, benevolence, magnanimity, are vir- 
 tues that seem, of necessity, to belong to the 
 being who could have projected works of so 
 much usefulness, beauty, and magnificence; and 
 he had none of these ! He only was not, in its 
 accurate and worst sense, — cruel — wholly in- 
 different to human suffering, but not delight- 
 ing in inflicting it as such. 
 
 z 2 
 
340 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 “ I hoped since my arrival not to have been 
 entirely idle during my stay ; but political cir- 
 cumstances prevent my intended effort after its 
 having been arranged. All the ministry have 
 gone out, and those who are to come in, can 
 calculate on a short stay, after signing the treaty 
 which the Allied Powers think necessary for 
 their future safety. 
 
 “ Pleasure, and not innocent dissipation, has 
 here all the activity of high change in London. 
 I see, however, and smile at it. Let those 
 plunge into it, who are not scared from its con- 
 tagion by superior enjoyment. I live with 
 military men, but my mornings are spent in 
 viewing works of art, my evenings at the 
 Opera, or French Theatre, and at Lady Castle- 
 reagh’s, or a walk through some other English 
 house. All this terminates sufficiently soon to 
 keep health unimpaired, and early rising ha- 
 bitual. 
 
 “ I have lost a kind friend, and from his 
 good-nature and worth, a most valuable man, — 
 poor Mr. Boucherette, who was killed by a fall 
 from his curricle. 
 
 “ Adieu, dear Miss C. Believe me, your 
 obliged and attached friend, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 341 
 
 His stay in Paris was short, and his letters to 
 his friends but few. He was soon recalled 
 home upon important business, by the special 
 order of the Prince Regent. 
 
 The Bourbon family being placed upon the 
 throne of France by Marmont, the Emperor of 
 Russia, the King of Prussia, and the princes, 
 statesmen, and illustrious officers who had 
 brought the war to a conclusion, were desirous 
 of visiting England, the country which had 
 been the origin and support of all their exer- 
 tions and successes. 
 
 As soon as they arrived as visitors to the 
 Regent, his Royal Highness was anxious that 
 their likenesses should be taken in a manner 
 that might not only commemorate their visit, 
 but transmit the state of British art to future 
 generations. This may be pronounced, if not 
 the commencement, at least the full tide of the 
 Prince’s patronage of Mr. Lawrence, and from 
 this era it flowed in one powerful and undevia- 
 ting course. Nothing could be more fortunate 
 to a great artist than his living at a period of 
 such extraordinary events ; for the latest pos- 
 terity, to the end of time, will derive their ideas 
 of the persons of these great characters, from the 
 pencil of Lawrence. 
 
 The Prince Regent enjoined Mr. Lawrence 
 
342 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 to lose no opportunity of taking the portraits 
 of the Autocrat of Russia, the King of Prussia, 
 Prince Blucher and the Hetman PlatofF ; and, 
 as these personages were absorbed in company, 
 public affairs, and in visiting the institutions of 
 the country, it required the utmost vigilance and 
 importunity of Mr. Lawrence to obtain even 
 short and irregular sittings. The likenesses 
 were taken at what was called York House, a 
 branch of St. James’s Palace, now pulled down, 
 and on its site is erected the spacious house 
 which was intended for the Duke of York, and 
 is now the property of the Marquis of Stafford. 
 
 The public, in the ensuing year, 1815, were 
 gratified by the exhibition of some of the por- 
 traits taken at York House. 
 
 But on 22nd April 1815, the Prince Regent 
 was pleased to confer the honor of knighthood 
 upon Mr. Lawrence; and the distinction was 
 accompanied by very flattering assurances of 
 the Regent’s esteem of a man whose genius 
 had so greatly elevated the character of the 
 country for the arts, in the estimation of Eu- 
 rope. More titles of dignity, from that of 
 knight to marquis and duke, were conferred in 
 the years 1814 and 1815 than at any period of 
 our history. It is understood that the Em- 
 peror of Russia was the first to suggest to the 
 Prince Regent the propriety of knighting Mr. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 343 
 
 Lawrence. The Emperor had previously re- 
 quested a similar honour to be conferred upon 
 his physician, a Scotchman by birth, and the 
 request was accordingly complied with ; but 
 when the Emperor learned that the Regent’s 
 physician, Sir Henry Halford, was a baronet, 
 he was far from pleased at the lower title of 
 knight being accorded to his medical friend. 
 The Regent hearing this, created the Emperor’s 
 physician a baronet. 
 
 The Exhibition of the Royal Academy for 
 this year (1815,) contained nine hundred and 
 eight works, and Sir Thomas Lawrence’s were 
 as follows : — 28, Portrait of Mrs. Wolfe ; 65, 
 H. R. H. the Prince Regent; 76, H. H. Prince 
 Metternich Werinebourg, Achan Hauzen, Mi- 
 nister for, &c.; 109, Field-Marshal the Duke 
 of Wellington, holding the sword of state, on 
 the last day of the public thanksgivings at St. 
 Paul’s; 155, Field-Marshal Prince Blucher; 
 163, the Hetman Prince Platoff; 276, R. Hart 
 Davis, Esq. 
 
 Of the latter portrait, before alluded to in 
 this work, it would be impossible to speak in 
 too high terms. It is masculine and severe, 
 and totally devoid of any of the tricks of art 
 to produce effect, or to catch the fancy of 
 the ignorant. 
 
 It is really a surprising portrait, with very 
 
344 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 little more of light than Titian, in his Vene- 
 tian Senators, has used, when he has merely 
 given a bright gleam to the upper part of the 
 face, with a slight reflection upon the lower part 
 as if from the black drapery in which every 
 thing else is obscured. Without being tech- 
 nical or pedantic in the art, it may be observed, 
 that the harmony with respect to the tone of 
 the colours and their relation to each other, and 
 with reference to the selection of objects, and 
 the reading of the character in the countenance 
 and figure, (a three-quarters length,) constitutes 
 the perfection of keeping , or a classic unity, 
 which excites one undivided, absorbing feel- 
 ing, delightful to indulge in, from its being un- 
 disturbed by aught calculated to lead the mind 
 from its singleness of thought. Where the 
 spectator’s attention is divided between the 
 principal figure and the background ; or his 
 eye wanders from the portrait to the red cur- 
 tain, or architectural devices, all unity is de- 
 stroyed, and the principles of three or four 
 paintings are confused into one, without per- 
 haps admitting any single feeling to be predo- 
 minant. It was not thus that Rembrandt, 
 Titian, or perhaps Vandyck painted portraits, 
 though Lawrence has sometimes fallen into the 
 error, as in his portrait of Cardinal Gonsalvi, and 
 even in that of the Pope. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 345 
 
 In this fine portrait of Mr. Hart Davis, the 
 mind’s energies are brought to one concentration 
 of interest.— Even the hair, and the fur of the 
 robe round the open neck are managed with very 
 great skill, and show the painter’s nice discrimi- 
 nation making all subordinate objects harmo- 
 nize to one principle. The head of this portrait 
 absorbs the varnish more than the other parts of 
 the canvass ; but it would be preferable to 
 make the body flatter, rather than to lighten 
 or brighten the tone of the upper part of the 
 picture. 
 
 The Hetman Prince Platoff was a capital por- 
 trait, and represented him with his long, oval, 
 Asiatic face, and with a considerable expression 
 of cunning, which was in fact his character. 
 Captain George Mathew Jones, (R. N.) in his 
 travels into Russia, gives an interesting account 
 of this Hetman’s conduct to his subjects: — 
 “ From a common Cossack of the Don, he be- 
 came for many years, and died, their Hetman. 
 Indeed, with him may be said to have expired 
 their freedom, — for a native is no longer ap- 
 pointed by the Emperor to that distinguished 
 office.” — Of the two English women whom 
 Platoff is said to have taken with him from 
 England, I could not hear any account, other 
 than that they had left the country. — As I 
 
346 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 had ever been an enthusiastic admirer of the 
 old hero’s character, I was much shocked to 
 find his memory generally execrated, and him- 
 self represented as the most unfeeling and ava- 
 ricious of mortals. The ground of accusation 
 was as follows:” — Captain Jones then proceeded 
 to relate the excessive inconvenience experi- 
 enced by the Cossacks in their old capital, and 
 that in determining the site of the new, Plat- 
 toff, unmindful of the general good, was influ- 
 enced solely by bribes, gross and nefarious. — 
 The portrait of this fortunate savage was ex- 
 cellent. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence was happy in his 
 portrait of Prince Bluclier. Not only was the 
 likeness excellent, but the composition of the 
 picture was equally good, and the whole atti- 
 tude and person of the man was made expres- 
 sive of his character. 
 
 The likeness of the Luke of Wellington, 
 exhibited in this Exhibition, was not the most 
 fortunate of those taken by Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence of this illustrious character. It was full 
 of glare, with a light showy view of Sc. Paul’s 
 in the background, whilst the Luke seemed 
 unconnected with aught around him ; and to 
 render the parts of the picture consistent, it 
 was necessary to tell the spectator that the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 347 
 
 Duke had been sword-bearer of a city procession 
 to St. Paul’s. 
 
 In the next year, (1816) the Exhibition con- 
 tained but nine hundred and seventy works. 
 The following were by Sir Thomas Lawrence : 
 — 12, Portrait of J. J. Angerstein, Esq. ; 25, the 
 Bishop of London ; 47, the Bishop of Durham ; 
 48, the Marchioness of Stafford ; 61, Field-Mar- 
 shal H. R. H. the Duke of York ; 107, Lady 
 Wigram ; 161, Major-General Sir H. Torrens, 
 K.C.B. ; 184, Canova. 
 
 During Canova’s visit to England, his like- 
 ness was taken by several of our artists, but 
 particularly by Mr. Jackson and Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence. Both of these were excellent por- 
 traits, and were engraved. At the period of 
 these portraits being taken, he was in his 
 fifty-ninth year, and he died six years after- 
 wards. 
 
 It is related that Canova was highly pleased 
 with Fuseli, and expressed himself delighted 
 with his works. If this be fact, it is worthy 
 of observation ; for no two men could be more 
 opposite to each other in manners, habits, sen- 
 timents, and talents. Canova was principally 
 instrumental, on his return to Rome, in pro- 
 curing the honorary distinctions of the Aca- 
 demy of St. Luke’s, for Lawrence, Fuseli, and 
 
348 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Flaxman : it can hardly be inferred from this, 
 that he admired the works of men so very 
 different in their genius, and one of them so 
 directly opposite to himself in every particular. 
 In 1815 , at the death of Fuseli, Sir Thomas 
 bought many of his works at a very liberal 
 price ; for he had died richer in fame than in 
 purse. 
 
 It may be remarked of Canova, as a proof 
 of his superiority to prejudices and early no- 
 tions, that when his visit to England gave 
 him the opportunity of examining the Elgin 
 Marbles, he at once acknowledged their excel- 
 lence, and renounced his ideas of the perfec- 
 tion of the Italian school of Michael Angelo. 
 It was after he had fulfilled his mission of as- 
 signing the works at the Louvre to the re- 
 spective places to which they were to be re- 
 stored, that he visited England. He was well 
 received in this country, and the Prince Re- 
 gent presented him with a snuff-box set round 
 with diamonds. 
 
 There is a remark of some consequence, 
 which applies equally to Canova and Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence. They were both of humane dispo- 
 sitions, sensitive to the sympathies of life, and 
 full of all its charities, and yet they scarcely at- 
 tempted any work that may be called pathetic. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 349 
 
 It would be difficult to name two men of equal 
 fame, whose works were addressed so much to 
 the imagination and so little to what is termed 
 pathos. Other men, whose works have been 
 full of deep feeling, have had little of that feel- 
 ing in their own natures. 
 
 The instances in which Sir Thomas exhibited 
 the kindness of his heart to others, were so very 
 numerous, that a selection, even of the strongest 
 cases, would, I fear, occupy too large a portion 
 of space for me to insert them in this work. 
 
 In Greek Street, he had an old faithful 
 female servant, who, although passed the age 
 at which pulmonary consumption usually preys 
 upon the system, was labouring under that fa- 
 tal complaint. It was suggested to Lawrence 
 that the servant did nothing, and could do no- 
 thing in the house, and that he had better send 
 her — to the hospital. His nature revolted at 
 such unkindness. 
 
 He exempted her from labour, had her nursed 
 with great care, and attended by his own medi- 
 cal adviser, and daily solaced her by his kind 
 enquiries and conversation. For the last three 
 weeks of her life, he provided himself with a 
 bed in a neighbouring lodging-house, and gave 
 up his chamber to her, and in which the poor old 
 creature died : she was buried at his expense. 
 
350 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Congenial feelings excited a reciprocal es- 
 teem and attachment between Canova and Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence. I insert extracts from two 
 letters received by Canova from his friend. 
 
 “ TO THE MARQUESS CANOVA. 
 
 “ Your kind and generous attentions to the 
 friends whom I took the liberty to introduce 
 to your notice, should have received fuller and 
 more frequent acknowledgments from me, than 
 the constant pressure of professional business, 
 with its complicated engagements, has enabled 
 me to return. Admitting, however, that cause 
 of silence in its fullest extent, I am still left 
 without just excuse for my neglect, since we 
 have generally the power of selecting the most 
 important objects for our attention, and there 
 can be few more so than correspondence with the 
 eminent and good, especially when they are en- 
 deared to us by acts of beneficence, and by those 
 solid proofs of remembrance that call as strongly 
 on our affection as their characters on our 
 respect. 
 
 “ Accept, my dear Marquess, my mingled 
 thanks, apologies, and regret ; and when you wish 
 to pardon me, feel for a man who is doomed to 
 live entirely alone — who does this credit to your 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 351 
 
 Academy, that he slights no work, while defect 
 can be perceived and corrected by him, — but 
 who, being from that feeling, little assisted in 
 his labours, finds them too many for his com- 
 fort, his intentions, or his health. I have for 
 these last three months declined all new com- 
 missions, although now, indeed, engaging in 
 one by command, (of which I will speak here- 
 after,) which you will perceive could not but 
 be gladly and gratefully undertaken. 
 
 “The Academy of St. Luke, whether it be 
 matter of custom or not, does me but too much 
 honour in deigning to request my portrait. I 
 have never painted myself, and, except when a 
 boy, have never been painted by others. I 
 could wish indeed to defer the task, till age had 
 given my countenance some lines of meaning, 
 and my hair, scanty and grey as it is, some 
 silvery hues, like those of our venerable Presi- 
 dent, Mr. West; but, in some way or other, if I 
 have any power of improving an ordinary face, 
 your friends may depend on my exerting it in 
 this instance ; and though I have many causes 
 to dislike myself, which may have stolen into 
 my countenance, not one of them shall appear 
 in the picture, if I can help it. 
 
 “ In the mean time, let me attempt to conci- 
 liate my brethren of your Academy for my 
 
352 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 delay, and your brother for my unintentional 
 omissions, by sending to you a portrait, at the 
 time, sufficiently like the admired and beloved 
 original, to make the absence of any other not 
 to be regretted. 
 
 “ With the picture, I entreat you to accept a 
 print from my portrait of the Duke of Wel- 
 lington. 
 
 “ Let me now, dear Marquess, acquaint you, 
 that His Royal Highness the Prince Regent 
 has graciously commanded me to attend at 
 Aix-la-Chapelle to paint for him portraits of 
 the Monarchs, their first Ministers, and Gene- 
 rals — a task which makes exertion too impe- 
 rious a duty to make it wise in me to look at 
 my comparative unfitness for it. But let me 
 have your wishes for my success. — c Go with 
 me to my trial.’ — Pray for me in my life — and, 
 though a Protestant, I will believe in the full- 
 est efficacy of your charitable intercession for me 
 on my death. 
 
 “ When I was last admitted to the Prince Re- 
 gent’s presence, he spoke with the greatest de- 
 light of the prospect of possessing your works, 
 and wished for nothing short of an entire mono- 
 poly of your genius ; but I believe he knows 
 not a misfortune that already attends him, for 
 you have sent a Helen to Lord Castlereagh 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 353 
 
 that even Lady Castlereagh will not permit 
 His Royal Highness to have, and which I 
 think is your most beautiful head, entirely 
 justifying the old gentlemen of Priam’s court 
 in their indulgent admiration. 
 
 “ How grateful is to you for your 
 
 goodness to him ! You will not let your ge- 
 nius be without a rival. Your benevolence has 
 a fame that, were it less bright, might threaten 
 to eclipse it. May you live to the extremest age, 
 that art may retain, and present, one of the 
 purest and brightest examples of love and 
 honour, stimulating its professors by your 
 works; and be not offended that your actions 
 encourage those to write to you with the fami- 
 liarity of affection, who perhaps should properly 
 have addressed you with the more distant lan- 
 guage of respect.” 
 
 In the portrait of Mr. J. J. Angerstein, Law- 
 rence’s highest powers and deepest feelings 
 were excited by his warm-hearted and sincere 
 attachment to his oldest, most estimable, and 
 valued friend. For identity of likeness, for 
 individuality of character, for the strong im- 
 press of nature, and for every indication of care 
 and exerted powers in the artist, this was one of 
 the finest works he ever produced. It is scarce- 
 
 2 A 
 
 VOL. i. 
 
354 
 
 THE LIFE Oi- 
 
 ly a pleasant portrait to look at with respect to 
 sentiment. The nervous irritation of age, in an 
 exhausted system, is painfully depicted in the 
 lips and in the excitement of the eyes. 
 
 Mr. J. J. Angerstein was of a respectable 
 German family settled in Russia. He was 
 born at St. Petersburg^ in 1735, and was 
 recommended to come to England by Mr. 
 Thompson, the eminent Russia merchant. Mr. 
 Angerstein arrived in London about the year 
 1749, and having acquired a knowledge of 
 business in Mr. Thompson’s counting-house, 
 he became an underwriter at Lloyd’s, and was 
 very soon distinguished for his vigilance, acute- 
 ness, industry, and integrity. To him the little 
 world of underwriters, called Lloyd’s, owes its 
 present-form and segregation, as well as the rooms 
 and offices at the Royal Exchange in which the 
 business has for so many years been conducted. 
 Mr. Angerstein first procured an act of Parlia- 
 ment to render penal the changing the names 
 of ships, a practice by which great frauds used 
 to be committed. In the distresses of 1793, 
 he suggested to Government the novel plan 
 in this country, of assisting trade by public 
 advances of loans of Exchequer Bills; and he 
 afterwards originated with ministers the cer- 
 tainly less moral scheme of establishing lot- 
 teries in aid of the revenue— a scheme, how- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 355 
 
 ever, which the Government readily embraced, 
 and continued long after the public sense of 
 the immoral tendencies of lotteries was con- 
 firmed by fatal experience. Mr. Angerstein 
 was not only a successful contractor for lot- 
 teries, but he became an equally fortunate par- 
 ticipator in the government loans. His vigi- 
 lance was inexhaustible. By his means alone, 
 that miscreant Ren wick Williams, called the 
 Monster, from his habit of wounding and 
 maiming females in the streets, was brought 
 to what, in this country, was then called jus- 
 tice — i. e. six years imprisonment. Mr. An- 
 gerstein then pointed out to Government an 
 inconvenience and gross nuisance in Kensing- 
 ton Gardens, and finding the Government in- 
 sensible to the public good, he remedied the 
 evil at his own expense. By his means, the 
 Veterinary College was re-established; and by 
 his exertions and influence the funds at Lloyd’s 
 offered a reward of 2000/. for the invention of 
 a life-boat, or means of saving the lives of ship- 
 wrecked persons. So affluent had this emi- 
 nent man become, that he and his partner, Mr. 
 Rivaz, ensured for 656,800/. the cargo of bul- 
 lion shipped for England from Vera-Cruz, in 
 the Diana frigate. 
 
 In 1811, Mr. Angerstein retired from busi- 
 2 a 2 
 
356 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 ness, and resided at Pall Mall and at his beau- 
 tiful villa of Woodlands at Blackheath, on 
 which he expended large sums with great taste 
 and judgment. 
 
 He was long pre-eminent as a munificent 
 and judicious patron of the Arts. His gal- 
 lery in Pall Mall contained forty-two paint- 
 ings of the first excellence, collected chiefly 
 from the sales of the Borghese, Colonna, and 
 Orleans galleries, and from those of the King 
 of Sardinia, the Duke de Bouillon, &c. In his 
 selections, his judgment was aided principally 
 by Mr. Lawrence and by Mr. West. 
 
 Mr. Angerstein died at Woodlands, on 22nd 
 Jan. 1823, in the 88th year of his age. 
 
 He was twice married; first, to the widow 
 of Mr. Charles Crockatt, by whom he had a 
 son, John, who married the daughter of Mr. 
 Lock, of Norbury Park, and a daughter, Ju- 
 liana, married to General Sabloukoff. Mrs. 
 Angerstein had had a family by her first hus- 
 band, and the utmost harmony and affection 
 had always reigned between the two branches. 
 He was buried at Greenwich ; and among other 
 eminent persons, his remains were attended to 
 the grave by his friend Sir Thomas Lawrence. 
 
 His personal property was sworn to be un- 
 der half a million, and he left estates in Nor- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 357 
 
 folk, Kent, Lincoln, and Suffolk. To his 
 daughter-in-law, Mrs. Boucherette, the wife of 
 Ayscough Boucherette, Esq. he left the in- 
 terest of 20,000/. with remainder to her chil- 
 dren* His will was dated January 1823. His 
 pictures at Woodlands were entailed. Those 
 of his gallery in Pall Mall were directed to be 
 sold, and they have since happily formed the 
 nucleus of our National Gallery. The best 
 catalogue raisonnd of this admirable collection, 
 appeared in the New Monthly Magazine in 
 1822. 
 
 For the above summary of this most hu- 
 mane, munificent, and enlightened man, I am 
 indebted to my friend Mr. W. H. Watts, the 
 biographer of Mr. Angerstein, in the obituary, 
 and a gentleman whose spirit must have made 
 him sensibly feel the inestimable value of the 
 character which has now become the property 
 of posterity. 
 
 In a short-lived work, termed, Annals of the 
 Fine Arts, edited by an architect, Lawrence 
 was not always treated with decorum or jus- 
 tice. The following critiques upon his exhibi- 
 tion of this year appeared in that work : — 
 
 “No. 12, Portrait of J. J. Angerstein, Esq. — A 
 forcible, speaking likeness of a liberal patron of 
 the fine arts, marked with the distinguishing 
 
358 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 characteristics of Sir Thomas’s pencil, and is one 
 of the best specimens of British portraiture. 
 
 “ No. 25, Portrait of the Bishop of London. — 
 This characteristic portrait of the learned prelate 
 must add to the reputation of the painter, and 
 of the school of which he is so shining an or- 
 nament. 
 
 46 No. 48, Portrait of the Marchioness of Staf- 
 ford. — A faithful portrait, but inferior to the 
 well-remembered likeness of that lady by Phil- 
 lips a few years ago. 
 
 “ No. 61, Field Marshal His Royal Highness 
 the Duke of York. — His Royal Highness is here 
 represented in a Field- Marshal’s uniform, over 
 which he wears the robes of the order of the Gar- 
 ter, which are gracefully arranged, and form a 
 brilliant specimen of colouring. 
 
 “No. 184, Portrait of Canova. — A forcible 
 and impressive likeness of this eminent sculptor, 
 who is not more celebrated for his talents than 
 for his private worth and modesty. 
 
 In this year, I find the following letter ad- 
 dressed to his friend Miss Crofts. 
 
 “ MY DEAR MISS CROFTS, 
 
 " If either of us have cause to regret our 
 Hart Street evenings, I am sure it is myself. 
 You are occupied with the same duty, now 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 359 
 
 growing more delightful, because you will have 
 that wish of your heart fulfilled, of watching a 
 sick friend into health ; and besides this, you 
 seem gay to downright profligacy ! have ac- 
 quaintances, friends, carriages, and, I dare say, 
 lovers, at command. To be sure, I have Kemble 
 left (still unwell), and have always a welcome 
 from him ; but as I forswear dinners, and their 
 consequent society, winter is at present without 
 its cheerfulness ; and were it here with all its 
 festivity, it could not repay me for the loss of 
 a friend like you, to whom I could, as I have 
 done, fearlessly confide the happiness or sorrow 
 of my heart, and heighten the one or alle- 
 viate the other, by communicating them to 
 worth like yours, and to a friendship so gene- 
 rous and feeling. 
 
 “ I could not have had this comfort in man’s 
 regard. Our old plays, romances, — real life, — all 
 exhibit some Hephsestion or Pylades (less than 
 an Alexander or Orestes you would not endure 
 to see me) to whom the hero confides every 
 thing. Is it coldness in me, or greater esteem 
 for women, that I select them, and never trust 
 the other sex, in matters where my heart is deep- 
 ly interested ? Male friends I have (alas ! have 
 had). Mind : — frank — honourable — I have now 
 almost a father ; but you know, even the novel- 
 
360 
 
 TIIE LIFE OF 
 
 ist never trusts a father, so that unless I change 
 my nature and opinions, which strengthen in 
 obstinacy with increasing age, I am not likely 
 to have another dearest friend, should you desert 
 me. 
 
 “How cheering is your account of dear Hester! 
 How good she is to us all to be going on so well ! 
 I see your walkings and ridings and chairings 
 — in fine weather delightful, and in bad, Has- 
 tings can present the grand in all its terrors. 
 Have you often been to that interesting scene, 
 and watched the putting off the fishing-boats in 
 brisk gales, and their coming in ? It has so much 
 bustle, anxiety, energy, and almost danger, as to 
 leave very powerful impressions on one’s senses 
 and imagination. Many a rude lover’s heart pal- 
 pitates on those evenings. Many a wife’s is sad 
 as the wind rises in the hour after the boats are 
 gone, and the long long night seems darkening 
 into a storm ! I have seen many pale faces on 
 that beach in the morning, when “there’s no 
 bathing, Sir” — and the small bending specks at 
 intervals appear on the horizon. 
 
 “ The weather is setting in severely ; and the 
 zealous courtesy of an humble friend, in setting 
 me down to breakfast in a best room, the fire of 
 which I heard lighted, as I was touching upon 
 a proof in another as cold, has made short con- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 361 
 
 finement and medicine prudent. Whilst I de- 
 termine never to quack myself, I likewise de- 
 termine never to let disease get the start of 
 me through my own carelessness — at least if 
 it gets the start, it shall not win the race. If 
 the brute has such bone and muscle that it 
 will distance me, it shall be by mere strength, 
 for I will whip and spur and jostle to the last. 
 When I look to my art (and I trust to continued 
 national happiness), what a short life should I 
 have led, if I were now to die ! Yet I confess, 
 I ought now to die content ; for I have had 
 great happiness — should have in death — and in 
 that life, events, passions, characters, and inci- 
 dents, have taken their full share of interest for 
 my humble station. — Adieu, dear friend ! 
 
 “ Ever yours, 
 
 “ T. Lawrence.” 
 
 In 1817, the Exhibition of the Royal Aca- 
 demy displayed one thousand and seventy-seven 
 works. Sir Thomas Lawrence had sent eight, 
 which was his usual number to the year of his 
 death. This year, they were : — 24, Portrait of 
 Lieutenant-General the Marquis of Anglesea ; 
 44, of the sons of Pattison, Esq. ; 68, Lieu- 
 
 tenant-General Lord Lyndoch ; 72, Her R. H. 
 the Duchess of Gloucester; 150, Mrs. Arbuth- 
 
362 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 not ; 156, Mr. P. Norton ; 190, Lady Maria Og- 
 lander; 346, J. Jekyll, Esq. 
 
 The Annals of the Fine Arts, this year, con- 
 tained merely the following notice of the works 
 of Lawrence : 
 
 “ Sir T. Lawrence does not by any means make 
 his usual splendid show, but has enough to prove 
 how well-grounded is his high reputation as a 
 portrait-painter; yet a little more care in the 
 finish of his pictures would give them a value 
 but little conceived. He has eight portraits, 
 — No. 24, Portrait of Lieutenant-General the 
 Marquis of Anglesea, a fine and characteristic 
 picture, worthy of a situation in a baronial hall ; 
 150, Mrs. Arbuthnot, a sweet, simple, and an 
 unaffected head.” 
 
 TO MISS CROFTS. 
 
 Russell Square, 
 
 “ MY DEAR FRIEND, Oct. 8, 1817. 
 
 “ I have too long delayed to answer your 
 kind letter, a fault arising very much from my 
 professional labours, and the consequent lassi- 
 tude resulting from them. The simple act of 
 putting pen to paper is, I am convinced, a 
 much more formidable thing to men than it is 
 to women, who perpetually surprise one by 
 their facility in doing it, amidst every descrip- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 363 
 
 tion of distraction, noise, gaiety, and inconve- 
 nience. I am sure that ‘ where there ’s a will 
 there’s a way,’ does not hold good with us 
 ‘ slaves of the creation for the will to write is 
 almost as perpetual with us as the will to do 
 right ; and yet the way, the manner of putting 
 the pen between the finger and thumb in such 
 position as to effect the purpose, is often mat- 
 ter of such puzzling difficulty, that down go the 
 arms, as soon as by an effort they have reached 
 the table. To-day, I am writing to Lord Stew- 
 art, and my conscience will not suffer me to be 
 dutiful to one kind friend, whilst another as 
 kind, esteemed, and respected, has reason to re- 
 proach my silence. I beg to inform you, that 
 his letter came before yours. 
 
 “ I am very sorry to learn from you, that dear 
 Mary is so little recovered in her looks. You 
 know my opinions about grief for the loss of 
 beloved friends, and that I am never an ad- 
 mirer of that quick resignation which so laud- 
 ably subdues it. The time but too soon comes, 
 when sad recollection is succeeded by self-re- 
 proach, that its sadness is so diminished. I 
 know, however, that this can apply as little to 
 your tender friend as to any mourner, and that 
 * Annie’ will be long remembered by her tears, 
 when her smiles are directed to her offspring. 
 
364 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 “ You amuse me about honest Major B , 
 
 and exceedingly with your intimate knowledge 
 of his naivete and simplicity — I beg pardon, 
 innocency, I should say. From whom did you 
 gather this intuitive discernment of so rare 
 virtues ? After all, I had rather you mistook on 
 this charitable side than on its opposite, which 
 is still more liable to error, with far greater 
 loss to ourselves. The cultivation of moral, like 
 that of intellectual taste, is only to be refined 
 by the pursuit and contemplation of goodness, 
 not the detection of vice or folly ; and the 
 most brilliant satirists have often, from this 
 cause, lamentably failed, when they have at- 
 tempted to represent true passion. Sheridan 
 was one striking instance. All which wise rea- 
 soning shall leave the Major in all the inno- 
 cency you ascribe to him. I only wish some 
 rich benevolist would leave him a good for- 
 tune ; for Mary does not seem wholly disin- 
 clined to him. 
 
 “ Give my kind regards to Mary and Mr. 
 A., and a kiss to the boy, the little relic of so 
 much pleasing worth. 
 
 “ Ever your obliged friend, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 In one of the quarterly numbers of the An- 
 nals of Art for this year (1817), there was a 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 365 
 
 squib, in which the author, under the fiction of 
 a dream or vision, criticised, or rather satirised, 
 almost every artist of repute. Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence was rather too sensitive to the following 
 jeu d'esprit upon himself : — 
 
 “ Wondering why L — wr — ce had not come 
 to the surface, I instantly saw him sail by in a 
 light, elegant, japanned boat, of the same mate- 
 rial as a Birmingham teaboard, — wafted along 
 the stream with silken sails, steered by a sylph, 
 dressed in sparkling tinsel. His hair was new- 
 ly powdered ; he was bowing to all the dying 
 and the living, but offering his assistance to 
 none. He darted by with the lightness of a 
 gossamer, and with the rapidity of an arrow. I 
 looked at him with wonder that he should have 
 got so much ahead of the others, and followed 
 him with a keen eye. But in a little while, Mr. 
 Editor, instead of going down the river at the 
 same rate, steadily and firmly, he and his boat 
 were changed into a bubble, which glittered in 
 all the beautiful colours of the rainbow, in the 
 sunny air, and burst without report. How- 
 ever, out of the beautiful bubble, I saw the 
 evidence in favour of the Elgin Marbles drop ; 
 it floated along uninjured, and even un wetted, 
 by the waves.” 
 
 But it affords me infinite pleasure to be able 
 here to insert the following brief, but very able 
 
366 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 sketch of Lawrence’s talents by Mr. Howard, 
 the learned and very ingenious Secretary of the 
 Royal Academy, for whose private worth, and 
 rich fancy as an artist, Lawrence often express- 
 ed his warmest esteem and admiration. 
 
 “ In this year” (1787), Mr. Howard says, 
 “ he exhibited for the first time at the Roy- 
 al Academy, and also made his first attempt 
 at oil painting — a portrait of his own head 
 (now exhibiting). He had given it great rich- 
 ness of tone, more like that of the old mas- 
 ters than the ordinary hues of nature, inso- 
 much that Reynolds, on seeing it, cautioned 
 him against such a deviation from truth, and 
 advised him to paint what he saw . He was 
 always, however, mindful of another piece of 
 advice equally useful, which proceeded from 
 the same great authority, ‘ not to fall into the 
 vulgar error of making things too like them- 
 selves,’ and his fine taste early led him to per- 
 ceive, that the imitation , which is the legitimate 
 aim of painting, must be select, refined, and 
 true to the principles of the art, as well as to 
 the qualities of its subjects. 
 
 “ In the first part of his career, he was inclined 
 to carry his taste for the colouring of the old 
 masters a little too far, and the pursuit of tone , 
 chiaroscuro , and breadth , led him into a style 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 367 
 
 rather artificial and approaching to manner; 
 but he gradually got the better of this error, 
 and by incessant study and application, became 
 at once more artful and more natural. Inde- 
 fatigable, and never satisfied with his produc- 
 tions, like Pope, ‘ he laboured hard to gain a 
 reputation, and then laboured hard to maintain 
 it.’ On one occasion, he is known to have 
 painted thirty-eight hours together, without 
 reposing or taking any sustenance but coffee. 
 It is remarkable that, in the latter part of his 
 life, when his great practice might have been 
 expected to make him more rapid in the com- 
 pletion of his works, the increased pains he 
 took, arising no doubt from his improved per- 
 ceptions, acquired for him the character of 
 slowness, — for him who had painted that admi- 
 rable picture of Hamlet in so short a time as 
 one week ! But it was this insatiable ardour, 
 this incessant aim at excellence, which enabled 
 him to obtain so consummate a mastery in the 
 theory and practice of the art of painting, and 
 finally to establish his indisputable claim to 
 rank with Titian and Vandyke, with Reynolds 
 and Velasquez. 
 
 “ Perhaps the genius of Lawrence v r as best 
 adapted to portraiture ; but possessing so fine 
 an intellect as he did, with such complete 
 
368 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 technical skill, it is more than probable that, 
 under other circumstances, he would have 
 achieved a very high reputation as a painter 
 of History. He was a finished draughtsman, 
 had a perfect knowledge of the human figure 
 in its various classes, an exquisite feeling of the 
 beautiful, the grand, and the pathetic, with a 
 rich and luxuriant taste in landscape and back- 
 ground, — in short, seemed deficient in no one 
 requisite. He possessed, too, an enthusiastic 
 love for the higher qualities of the art, as was 
 evinced by his admiration of Michael Angelo 
 and Raffaelle, of Fuseli, Flaxman, and Stot- 
 hard, which, in a country where there was 
 any demand for historical painting, would 
 inevitably have led him to the first rank of 
 excellence. The few examples he has left of 
 his talents in this way help to prove it ; if we 
 ought not rather to say, that many of his 
 portraits, such as his Kembles, Mrs. Siddons, 
 young Lambton, &c. &c. belong equally to this 
 class of art. 
 
 “ Titian’s portraits have a grave and quiet 
 dignity about them not to be excelled ; to this 
 no doubt the costume of his time was favoura- 
 ble, and with this, the rich and mellow colouring 
 in which they are embodied is admirably ac- 
 cordant. In these qualities, Reynolds came 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 369 
 
 nearest to Titian, and, in his exquisite repre- 
 sentations of infant character, surpassed him. 
 If Lawrence must yield to his great rivals in 
 these points, he went beyond them, and Van- 
 dyke too, as a draughtsman,— indeed, against 
 the latter and Velasquez, he may dispute the 
 palm in all respects, and with greatly the ad- 
 vantage in point of variety of invention.* 
 
 “ His great technical excellence seems to have 
 been drawing, which is undoubtedly the true 
 foundation of painting. Reynolds is a remark- 
 able and almost solitary instance of what 
 chiaroscuro and ingenuity may do to conceal 
 the want of it ; but it enabled Lawrence to 
 make out his heads with a surprising minute- 
 ness and accuracy of detail, such as perhaps 
 were never before combined with so much 
 breadth and delicacy. Some of the Italian 
 critics, however, accustomed to the harder Con- 
 tinental style of finish, thought him deficient 
 in this particular. ‘ Non e reso was their 
 remark, — 4 He does not define — this perhaps 
 was an additional reason with them for calling 
 him 4 II Tiziano Inglese .’ In fact, his details 
 
 * Mr. Howard’s judgment is, in this instance, as in all 
 others, correct, and yet in Italy, and particularly in Flo- 
 rence, Sir Thomas was depreciated, upon the ground of a 
 want of knowledge in drawing. 
 
 VOL. I. 2b 
 
370 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 are so delicate as to escape a cursory notice, 
 and he knew that brilliancy and vivacity of 
 effect are incompatible with elaborate smooth- 
 ness. 
 
 “ In the intellectual treatment of his portraits, 
 he has produced a surprising variety of happy 
 and original combinations, and has generally 
 conveyed, with the feeling and invention of 
 a poet, the best representation of his subjects ; 
 seizing the most interesting expression of coun- 
 tenance which belonged to each: in this re- 
 spect, he has shown perhaps a greater dramatic 
 power than either of his illustrious rivals ; and 
 certainly, in painting beauty , he yields to none. 
 He has sometimes been censured for rather a 
 theatrical taste in his attitudes, approaching to 
 the meretricious, but in general they are dig- 
 nified, graceful, and' easy. Early in life, he 
 aimed at a depth and richness of tone more 
 readily to be found in Titian, and the best 
 Italian colourists, than in the hues of nature in 
 this climate; but he gradually quitted this 
 style, and imitated closely the freshness of his 
 models as he found them ; striving to give his 
 works the utmost brilliancy and vigour of which 
 his materials were capable.* Hence, if his 
 
 * Without in the slighest degree differing from this opi- 
 nion, I may yet observe, en passant, that the general senti- 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 371 
 
 pictures seldom possess the mellow sweetness 
 of Reynolds, he often surpassed him in some 
 of the above-mentioned qualities. In vivid 
 and varied chiaroscuro , he has perhaps no rival, 
 and may be said to have enlarged the bounda- 
 ries of his art, changing by degrees the cha- 
 racter of our annual Exhibitions, and giving 
 them at length one of acknowledged and un- 
 precedented splendour. This extraordinary 
 force and vivacity of effect, the gracefulness 
 of his manipulation, and those animated ex- 
 pressions of the human face divine,* which his 
 powerful skill in drawing enabled him to fix so 
 admirably on canvass, constitute his peculiar 
 distinction and glory as an original artist, and 
 his claim to the title of a man of genius. 
 
 “ Proofs of these high qualities are to be found 
 more or less strong, in almost all his works, be- 
 ginning with the lovely portrait of Miss Farren 
 down to Lady Londonderry and the Duchess 
 of Richmond. Those of His Majesty George 
 the Fourth, the Pope, Cardinal Gonsalvi, the 
 Emperor of Austria, Duke of Wellington, 
 Duke of Bedford, Sir W. Grant, young Lamb- 
 
 ment in Italy was, that Sir Thomas was meretricious in his 
 colouring. 
 
 * The “ acquiras vultus, elegantiam capilli, venustatem 
 oris,” &c. of Pliny, is particularly applicable to Lawrence. 
 
 2 B 2 
 
372 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 ton, the children of Mr. Calmady, &c. &c., are 
 among the finest the art ever produced. 
 
 “ On the death of Mr. West, in 1820, he was 
 immediately elected President of the Royal 
 Academy (the 30th of March), with nearly the 
 unanimous concurrence of the Academicians. 
 For this office, his talents and accomplishments 
 particularly qualified him, and he performed 
 its functions with so much success, and bore 
 his faculties so meekly as to conciliate the 
 approbation of all his brotherhood. Indeed, 
 from the moment of his election, he seems to 
 have determined to win all hearts, — and no man 
 ever possessed greater fascination ; nor has been 
 more sincerely deplored. 
 
 “ His talents were by no means confined to 
 painting. He had not the advantage of a 
 classical education in early life, but had ac- 
 quired a very extensive and intimate acquaint- 
 ance with English literature, which, from his 
 excellent memory, was always ready for use. 
 A nobleman of acknowledged taste (the late 
 Marquis of Abercorn) said of him, c He knows 
 only one language, but that he knows better 
 than any other man.’ When young, he dis- 
 played great taste in singing, and so much 
 dramatic power, that Sheridan declared him to 
 be the best amateur actor in the kingdom. His 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 373 
 
 late Majesty is reported to have said of him, 
 ‘ He is the most finished gentleman in my 
 dominions.’ * 
 
 “ After his election to the chair of the Royal 
 Academy, honours showered upon him : — 
 Knight — LL. D. — F. R. S. — Trustee of the 
 British Museum, and latterly, Member of the 
 French Legion of Honour, not to mention of 
 the Academies of St. Luke, &c. No man ever 
 loved art for its own sake more than Lawrence, 
 nor showed a more liberal spirit to rising artists, 
 some of whom he supported in their studies on 
 the Continent; of others, he purchased their 
 works, striving to assist and bring into notice 
 excellence in whatever style it might appear, 
 for his was not that narrow and exclusive feel- 
 ing which could relish but one — so often mis- 
 taken for real taste. 
 
 “ His house was a museum containing the 
 choicest specimens of painting, sculpture, archi- 
 tecture, and engraving ; and the collection of 
 drawings by the old masters which he had 
 
 * An eminent statesman, constantly about his late Majes- 
 ty’s person, denied the truth of this report. The fact is to- 
 tally immaterial. There is no infallibility in royal judgments 
 respecting gentlemen. Sir Thomas fascinated by his man- 
 ners, and attached to him by his deportment, all who ever 
 associated with him. Compared to this testimony of the ge- 
 neral voice, the opinions of any individual are of no weight. 
 
374 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 formed was probably one of the finest in Eu- 
 rope.” 
 
 Such are the opinions of a contemporary art- 
 ist — of one who combines the genius of his art 
 with the acquirements of the scholar and the 
 refinements of a gentleman. In this brief but 
 valuable memoir, the reader must appreciate 
 the taste, the sound judgment, and fine spirit 
 of Lawrence’s friend Mr. Howard, whose pen- 
 cil has so materially sustained and advanced 
 the reputation of our country for genius in the 
 fine arts. 
 
 In 1817, Sir Thomas was much at Claremont 
 House, painting a portrait of Prince Leopold 
 and of the Princess Charlotte. In a letter sub- 
 sequently introduced into this work, he describes 
 the unsophisticated and amiable life led by the 
 Prince and Princess, as well as the attentions 
 paid by them to himself. 
 
 In the succeeding year, 1818, the year in 
 which he left England for the Continent, he 
 produced eight portraits in the Exhibition of 
 the Royal Academy, the total number of works 
 in which amounted to the extraordinary number 
 of eleven hundred and seventeen. Those of 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence were — 25, Portrait of 
 Lady Ackland and her children ; 53, Lady 
 Elizabeth Leveson Gower ; 61, H. R, H. the 
 
Sill THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 375 
 
 Prince Regent ; 139, the Hon. Frederic Stew- 
 art, son of Lord Stewart ; 148, the Earl of 
 Suffolk ; 165, the Duke of Wellington, in 
 the dress he wore, and on the horse he rode at 
 the battle of Waterloo ; 230, William Morgan, 
 Esq.; 284, Lieut.-Col. the Hon. H. Lowther. 
 
 The Countess Gower’s is a fine, elaborate, 
 full-length portrait of the Countess, representing 
 her sitting in a chair, with a quiet, maternal 
 air. She has a dark rich dress and drapery, and 
 has on her knee a flaxen-headed child, arch and 
 pretty, and full of animation, and pointing with 
 its finger vivaciously to some object in the dis- 
 tance to which it wishes to draw its mother’s 
 attention. It has been observed, that the child’s 
 limbs have not the fullness and swelling con- 
 tour appropriate to childhood, and the obser- 
 vation is well-founded. Sir Thomas seldom 
 gave to children the soft, swelling tumidness of 
 infantile nature : he had not the loose pappy 
 fatness which Rubens gave to his infants, nor 
 the firm muscular fullness of Raffaelle ; but his 
 portraits of children might give an idea of what 
 Michael Angelo’s frames of children would have 
 been refined to, had they been pampered in the 
 effeminacy and luxuries of modern drawing- 
 rooms. Reynolds’s children, on the contrary, 
 were those of Rubens spiritualized, or made gen- 
 
376 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 teel ; whilst Gainsborough touched the feelings 
 by pourtraying the children of our native isle 
 in their simple pathos and humours, and in the 
 symmetry and beauty with which they are so 
 often found amongst us in humble life. But in 
 this portrait, Sir Thomas Lawrence has intro- 
 duced the child very playfully. The infant is 
 pretty, and its light skin and hair produce the 
 effect of innocence and purity, which harmonize 
 with the maternal air of the mother and the re- 
 pose of the whole painting. The arch pleasure 
 in the child’s face, the little fingers pointing to 
 the distance, and the other hand resting on the 
 table, whilst the left leg is thrown back to se- 
 cure its seat upon the lap, are touches of na- 
 ture, and proofs of genius in the painter. 
 
 In this year, he was employed by the Prince 
 Regent to make a valuation of his Royal High- 
 ness’s collection of paintings at Carlton House, 
 and the following is a note he addressed on the 
 subject to his friend Mr. W. Y. Ottley, and 
 which shows his anxiety. 
 
 Secret! “ Russell Sq., Saturday 
 
 “ DEAR SIR, Morning— seven. 
 
 “ A matter of some difficulty and delicacy is 
 confided to me, in which your knowledge of 
 art would greatly assist me, and those feelings 
 and principles of honour proper to gentlemanly 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 377 
 
 station will give additional value to that assist- 
 ance. Have so much reliance on my esteem for 
 you, and my discretion, as at once to meet me 
 on the subject, between eleven and twelve this 
 morning, at the York Coffee House, St. James’s 
 Street, where you will be nearer the scene of 
 (if my wish is granted) our mutual service. 
 
 “ The business and occasion are very pressing, 
 or I should not propose so sudden a meeting. 
 
 “ Believe me to be, my dear Sir, 
 
 “ Yours with great truth, 
 
 “ Thomas Lawrence.” 
 
 It Was in this year that he had the misfor- 
 tune to lose his second brother. Major Wm. 
 Read Lawrence, who expired suddenly on the 
 22nd of February, of an apoplexy, at the house 
 of his elder brother, the Rev. Andrew Law- 
 rence, at Haslar Hospital. 
 
 The instant he heard of his brother’s illness, 
 he hastened to Portsmouth, but did not arrive 
 in time to witness his death. He was sincerely 
 afflicted at the loss, for his nature was kind 
 and sensitive, and his affection for his family 
 extreme. As soon as he could compose his 
 feelings, he wrote to his sister, Mrs. Bloxam, 
 upon the subject; and the following is an extract 
 from the letter. 
 
378 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 * * # # 
 
 “ Andrew has indeed truly conveyed to you, 
 my dear Anne, a knowledge of every care and 
 attention bestowed on our dear lamented Wil- 
 liam, by his solicitude and love, and, as I 
 understand, by the generous kindness of his 
 friends. 
 
 “ In mentioning the almost certainty of his 
 meeting this sad fate at no long period, had the 
 immediate affliction been spared us, he has for- 
 gotten Dr. Gray’s opinion, that the only alter- 
 native to the extinction of life would have been 
 that of reason, and that speedy fatuity must 
 have taken place — of all calamities, save that of 
 fierce insanity, the most dreadful. This must 
 be partly our consolation ; but our greatest must 
 be derived from that which, at the instant, 
 adds to the bitterness of grief — the innocency 
 of his nature, and with it the sure belief, that 
 the good man on earth is now one of the re- 
 warded and blest in heaven. The modesty of 
 William’s heart, the absence of self and of vain 
 self-applause, in the meekness of his benevo- 
 lence, were qualities that gained him our fixed 
 esteem, and will make him be beloved by us, 
 and revered and mourned, while his remem- 
 brance and our reason last.” 
 
Sill THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 379 
 
 * # * * 
 
 In the latter end of the year 1818, his sister, 
 Mrs. Bloxam, lost one of her children, a young 
 lady of sixteen, of great promise, and to whom 
 her uncle bore a sincere regard. He had paint- 
 ed her portrait in the preceding March, whilst 
 at Haslar, and had had it engraved ; and he 
 often spoke and wrote of this niece in terms of 
 admiration and tenderness. 
 
 On the occasion of her death, he wrote to his 
 friend Miss Crofts a letter of which the follow- 
 ing is an extract. 
 
 “ I have lost a sweet, good, modest, little 
 being, in my niece Susan ; but who can, for the 
 innocent, lament the death of the innocent ? 
 It is a severe affliction to her parents, sisters, 
 friends. I feel thankful that this one talent, 
 which God has given me, has, in this case, 
 afforded consolation to my good sister and her 
 family, by perpetuating the form, and express- 
 ing the nature of this lovely, lamented being, 
 my dear Susan. At the foot of this letter were 
 the following memoranda — 
 f Susan Bloxam, born Nov. 15th, 1802. 
 
 died Nov. 26th, 1818. 
 buried Dec. 3rd, 1818.” 
 
380 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 “ INSCRIPTION ON THE NORTH SIDE OF A 
 TOMB, ERECTED IN THE CEMETERY OF 
 HASLAR HOSPITAL, NEAR GOSPORT, HANTS. 
 
 “ Sacred to the memory of William Read 
 Lawrence, Esq., Major of the 72nd regiment 
 of foot, who died at Haslar, Feb. 22 nd, 1818, 
 aged 60. — This inadequate tribute to his worth, 
 and mark of their affection, is erected by his 
 surviving brother and sister. 
 
 “ INSCRIPTION ON THE SOUTH SIDE. 
 
 “ In the same vault lie interred the remains of 
 his niece, Susan Bloxam, (second daughter of 
 the Rev. Richard Rouse Bloxam, of Rugby in 
 the county of Warwick, D. D., and Anna his 
 wife,) who resigned her spotless soul to her 
 Maker, Nov. 26th, 1818, aged sixteen years. 
 To whose beloved memory this stone is inscri- 
 bed by her afflicted parents. 
 
 “ Could virtue, innocence, and beauty save 
 Thy form, blest spirit, from an early tomb, 
 
 We had not mourn’d thy loss ; but God who gave, 
 
 Call’d thee from hence, eternally to bloom — 
 
 In mercy call’d thee from this world of woe, 
 
 Ere sorrow’s shaft had pierced thy gentle breast ; 
 
 And thy sad Parents humbly meet the blow 
 In pious trust, that what He wills is best.” 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 381 
 
 “ TO THE MEMORY OF SUSAN BLOXAM. 
 
 “ In Spring’s delightful hours, as some pure rose, 
 
 Rear’d by the hand with fond assiduous care, 
 
 And guarded nightly from the chilling air. 
 
 Begins its earlier blossom to disclose, 
 
 And every day with softer blushes glows, 
 
 Stooping its lovely head with grace so rare, 
 
 From stem too delicate, too weakly fair, 
 
 While far around its sweet perfume it throws : 
 
 Such was the promise of thine early grace: 
 
 So, nurtured fondly by a mother’s hand, 
 
 Didst thou too, Susan, fair in mind as face, 
 
 With modest, downcast loveliness expand, 
 
 But now art gone to scent some holier place 
 With incense pure, and near thy God to stand. 
 
 “ Philip Homer, B. D. Rugby, Dec. 8th, 1818.” 
 
 It may be proper, in this place, to advert to 
 the poetry, or rather the verses, with which Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence used often to amuse a leisure 
 hour— for most of it was composed by this 
 period. The mere versification of a person not 
 of literary habits, and written sometimes not 
 even for the partial glance of friendship, but 
 for his private amusement, it can scarcely be 
 deemed proper to publish. They must be re- 
 ceived as a proof of a turn of mind, as a re- 
 flection of the disposition, and as a mirror afford- 
 ing a view of the man, rather than as intellec- 
 
382 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 tual efforts. They invariably evince feeling, or 
 humour, playful and innocent. 
 
 ON A DRAWING OF A BOY CLIMBING A ROCK. 
 
 Proceed, dear boy, and climb the hill, 
 
 Enjoy the morning of thy time, 
 
 And all the rocks of future life 
 As cheerful and as active climb ; 
 
 For many a venturous path remains. 
 
 Though fair appear thy prospects now. 
 
 Perhaps Ambition’s dangerous steep. 
 
 Begirt with cares of threatening brow — 
 
 Valor’s stern voice may bid thee rise. 
 
 And fix on Fame thine ardent look, 
 
 For deserts quit thy peaceful vale, 
 
 For oceans leave thy murmuring brook. 
 
 Yet on, nor shrink from generous toil, 
 
 Where noblest scenes thy steps invite : 
 
 But ah ! if passion tempt thy view, 
 
 Where Love presents some Alpine height— 
 
 There only in thy journey pause. 
 
 Nor risk the steps thy life may mourn ; 
 
 Gaze not upon its sunny top, 
 
 But fold thine arms and backward turn. 
 
 Though bright with heavenly tints it glows, 
 
 With promise of eternal day, 
 
 Its brightness to its cold it owes, 
 
 And round it storms and lightnings play. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 383 
 
 ON HIS RECEIVING OF COMPLIMENTS. 
 
 To give with delicate address 
 Is bounty’s finest art, 
 
 But half our generous actions bless 
 If vanity have part. 
 
 Some quite oppress you with their alms — 
 
 To all refinement dead : 
 
 And Scripture says, Your precious balms 
 Should never break one’s head. 
 
 Thank Heaven, the praise my works derive, 
 
 I, modest, leave to chance, 
 
 Nor ostentatiously contrive 
 Their value to enhance. 
 
 Praised when the trifles I commence, 
 
 I scorn receiving more. 
 
 But keep them, till the smallest sense 
 Of obligation 's o’er. 
 
 ON BEING LEFT ALONE AFTER DINNER. 
 
 How shall I, friend, employ my time, 
 
 Alone, no book of prose or rhyme, 
 
 Or pencil to amuse me ; 
 
 Nor pen nor paper to be found, 
 
 Nor friend to push the bottle round, 
 
 Or for its stay abuse me ? 
 
 The servants come and find me here, 
 
 And stare upon me like the deer 
 On Selkirk in Fernandez ; 
 
 And, quite as tame, they wipe the chairs, 
 
 And scrub, and hum their favourite airs. 
 
 And ask what my command is. 
 
384 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 I wish one knew the way to. change 
 Customs so barbarous and strange, 
 
 So savage and inhuman : 
 
 I wish the sex were kinder grown, 
 
 And when they find a man alone, 
 
 Would treat him like a woman. 
 
 Well, here ’s to her who, far away, 
 
 Cares not that I ’m grave or gay, 
 
 And then no more I ’ll drink, 
 
 But fold my arms and meditate, 
 
 And clap my feet upon the grate, 
 
 And on grave matters think. 
 
 ’Tis — let me see — full sixteen years, 
 
 And wondrous short the time appears, 
 
 Since with enquiry warm, 
 
 With beauty’s novel power amazed, 
 
 I follow’d midst the crowd and gazed 
 On ’s beauteous form. 
 
 Up Bath’s fatiguing streets I ran, 
 
 Just half pretending to be man, 
 
 And fearful to intrude ; 
 
 Busied, I look’d on some employ, 
 
 Or limp’d to seem some other boy, 
 
 Lest she should think me rude. 
 
 The sun was bright, and on her face, 
 
 As proud to shew the stranger grace, 
 
 Shone with its purest rays. 
 
 And through the folds that veil’d her form, 
 Motion display’d its happiest charm 
 To catch th’ admiring gaze. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 385 
 
 The smiting lustre of her eyes, 
 
 That triumph’d in our wild surprise. 
 Well I remember still ; 
 
 They spoke it joy to give delight. 
 
 And seem’d to say, ‘ If I ’m the sight, 
 Good folks, pray take your fill. 
 
 And can it be that ’neath this roof, 
 Whilst I sit patiently aloof, 
 
 This watching form can be ? 
 
 Quick let me fly — avaunt my fears ! 
 ’Tis but a door and sixteen years 
 Divide this Fair and me. 
 
 Alas, that beauty should grow old ! 
 Alas, that passion should be cold ! 
 
 Alas, that rhymes should fail ! 
 
 That no due coffee-bell should ring, 
 
 * # * * 
 
 To close my mournful tale, 
 
 Ye youths debarr’d your fair one’s eye, 
 Ye that for love, to memory fly, 
 
 Attend this moral rhyme, 
 
 List to the pensive lay it pours, 
 
 The Devil take your doors and hours, 
 Your Carpenters and time. 
 
 LINES BY SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 Hear, Angel, hear ! be conscious to the line, 
 Though rude the sounds — no syren art is mine : 
 All is spring round thee, hear a wintry lyre 
 Struck with a lover’s, not a poet’s fire. 
 
 VOL. I. 2 C 
 
386 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 And ye who seal my doom, whose thoughtful care 
 Would shut her senses to my heart’s despair, 
 
 Behold me reverence still, but disobey ; 
 
 Yes, ’tis the wretched daring lay : 
 
 Upbraid me, scorn me, hate me, if ye can, — 
 
 I play the lover, and I am but man. 
 
 Unknown, uncertain, the most envied fate. 
 
 And many sorrows ’wait the happiest state; 
 
 None too so humble but can humbler see, 
 
 And there are idiots who can envy me ! 
 
 Oh ! sweet one, tell them what it is to love, 
 
 Do thou the wretchedness they envy prove ; 
 
 Hold up the wreath thy charms have doom’d to fade, 
 
 And show the last example thou hast made. 
 
 Yet I have lived my days, have had my share 
 Of life’s best dream, have breathed empyreal air ; 
 
 For she the loveliest maid that Heav’n e’er form’d, 
 
 My sorrows moved, if not my passion warm’d ; 
 
 And I have had sweet mercy from her eye, 
 
 And I have seen her bosom heave its sigh ; 
 
 Fancied I heard soft, mournful sounds complain 
 Of wild attentions fortune render’d vain. 
 
 No, though my joys were few, my sufferings great, 
 
 High was their value in my gloomiest state; 
 
 That goodness which the purest hearts approve, 
 
 I thank my God for forming me to love. 
 
 I 
 
 The streets are bright’ning, and cold morning’s ray 
 Steals on her windows — swiftly comes the day, 
 
 And finds me lingering through the hateful night, 
 
 And brings new presage of my closing light. 
 
 ■ m 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 387 
 
 Ye close-shut casements that conceal my love, 
 
 To pierce whose gloom my eyes have vainly strove ; 
 Ye walls that guard her ! soon a long adieu 
 May part your tiightly visitant and you ! 
 
 Yet when my heart no more can bear its woe, — 
 
 Burst its keen sense, extinct its maddening glow ; 
 When my dim eyeballs shall no longer gaze 
 On the pale beam that o’er your surface plays ; 
 
 Still echo to the sound of joy within, 
 
 Be free from sorrow, as secure from sin ; 
 
 Still hallow'd be my mistress' peaceful night. 
 
 And sweet the dreams that crown her slumbers light 1 
 
 And when, sweet Moon, her eyes on thee shall bend, 
 Oh ! wake one sorrow for the hapless friend ; 
 
 For him whose wild career so early closed, 
 
 Whose fond disastrous love but in the grave reposed. 
 
 While to retrieve the past neglected time, 
 
 My days I give to unremitting toil, 
 
 And shake the rust from off my better mind, 
 Which too distracting thoughts have left to soil — 
 Ah ! then — when on the crowd these glances fall, 
 That reaching me have quicken’d every nerve, 
 
 Say, will the scene one tender thought recall — 
 Will my dear mistress’ eye one blank observe ? 
 
 Or here, while Memory's self I try to check, 
 
 And bend o'er fancy to my dull employ, 
 
 Hush every doubt, and in some languid pause 
 Fly to imagined hours of future joy ; 
 
 2c 2 
 
388 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Then, when their sacred raptures fill my soul, 
 
 Shall Friendship’s voice thus break upon my dream : 
 
 “ Lo ! she the maid, the genius we admire, 
 
 “ Gaily she smiles, and ah ! far happier seems, 
 
 “ Since yon proud youth, whom no hard fate denies, 
 
 “ Tells his prevailing tale and wins th’ unequall’d prize.” 
 Oh ! fearful sounds, are these my toil to crown ? 
 
 Oh, love ! oh ! hope, so sweet, so early flown ! 
 
 Oh! memory, pity, faith, are ye then words alone? 
 Such the sad doubt that every effort check’d, 
 
 And bade me still the dangerous purpose shun, 
 
 As better to enjoy my fleeting bliss, 
 
 Love my short hour, and waking be undone. 
 
 Such the sad doubt ! Alas ! no vision new, 
 
 Now dark realities my bosom tear, — 
 
 And oh ! to think how cruelly pursued, 
 
 Sharpens the anguish of my soul’s despair. 
 
 Well then, my soul must aid itself, 
 
 And from the long pursuit retire, 
 
 Extract a medicine from its bane, 
 
 And banish Love’s destructive fire. 
 
 Where now are all my weak alarms, 
 From splendour’s overwhelming glare ? 
 
 The worst my anxious bosom fear’d 
 Was happiness to this despair. 
 
 But go, false maid ! nor vain complaint. 
 Nor taunting look, nor whisper dread, 
 
 Nor think I’ll live unto thine eye, 
 
 When to thy heart I have been dead. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 389 
 
 Yet come it will, and soon the hour 
 
 When ne’er my name shall reach thine ear, 
 But on that thoughtless heart shall strike 
 The sorrow thou hast planted here. 
 
 From no remorse, no soft regret, 
 
 That springs from feeling’s gracious source. 
 But that plain sense of right and wrong 
 That checks the proudest in their course. 
 
 Oh ! let it guide thy future life, 
 
 And lov’d as loving may’st thou be, 
 
 And here the cold ambition end, 
 
 Of making others lost as me. 
 
 Be blest, while in my chamber’s gloom 
 I learn the hardest lesson known, — 
 
 Learn to forget life’s tenderest hope, 
 
 And live to apathy alone. 
 
 Yet sometimes recollect the past, 
 
 And think upon thy genius sweet, 
 
 And as my tears forbidden start, 
 
 Confess thy triumph was compleat. 
 
 And while thy careless pride beholds 
 In fancy all that I endure. 
 
 That very pride at last will grieve, 
 
 To think thy triumph was so poor. 
 
 How weak the suffering of the body’s pains 
 To that which mental agony sustains ! 
 
 The fever’d pulse, torn chest, and wasting frame, 
 Yield to the spirit’s agonizing claim. 
 
390 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Whatever the pang, yet many a pause between, 
 And friendship’s voice relieves the closing scene, 
 Or veils the fear, or but its weakness shows. 
 
 And soothes th’ enfeebled victim to repose, 
 
 Till the poor wretch, half pleased the news receives, 
 Sighs one regret, and finds his bed of ease. 
 
 Th* envenom’d pangs that tear the tortured mind, 
 Nor medicines reach, nor antidotes can find ; 
 
 The friendly voice that would the madman warn, 
 Passion rejects, in bitterness of scorn, 
 
 Flies in disdainful silence to his bed. 
 
 But vainly there would rest his aching head ; 
 Across the brain still shoot the fiery gleams. 
 
 Each lasts an age, and still unmental seems : 
 
 In vain would Reason’s voice the storms allay, 
 
 In vain Devotion urge her holier sway ; 
 
 Despair alone performs the friendly part, 
 
 And brings its medicine to the breaking heart. 
 
 The victor’s march and splendid conquest o’er, 
 
 The ill-directed genius we adore ; 
 
 Yet gen’rous motive shall his memory save, 
 
 Glory — the noblest failing of the brave ! 
 
 Thy triumphs, wary beauty, who shall praise — 
 
 That voice of fame thy poor achievements raise ? 
 Urg’d by no passion, Reason only blames. 
 
 Cold in thyself, to guide the fatal flames, 
 
 With nice discernment touch the starting: nerve. 
 And every torment curiously observe ; 
 
 Affect to soothe, but to inflame the pain, 
 
 And drive the poison faster to the brain ; 
 
 And when no more thy victim can endure, 
 
 But raging, supplicates thy soul for cure, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 391 
 
 Then, act the timid unsuspecting maid, 
 
 And wonder at the mischief thou hast play'd. 
 Unjust one! dost thou scorn the wand’ring wretch, 
 Forced on the pavement her cold limbs to stretch ? 
 From generous weakness first her errors flow’d, 
 Some sacrifice the direful curse bestow’d ; 
 
 The hardness of her sex her sorrows spurn’d, 
 
 And but from want to wickedness she turn’d. 
 
 And dost thou triumph no such crimes are thine, 
 No stain in thee pollutes thy boasted line? 
 
 That lost one at the throne of God shall rise, 
 
 And supplicate thy entrance to the skies ; 
 
 Give to thy youthful vanity the blame. 
 
 Take from the worst of crimes its hateful name, 
 And ask of Heav’n in mercy to forget 
 The mean ambition of the cold Coquette. 
 
 That Sir Thomas read extensively is evident ; 
 and as a slight proof of this may be inserted 
 a memorandum by his nephew Mr. Andrew 
 Bloxam. 
 
 “ In June 1829, I went up to London from 
 Oxford for a few days during term, and oc- 
 casionally breakfasted with my uncle. Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence. While at breakfast one 
 morning, the conversation turned upon the 
 authors I was reading at college, and espe- 
 cially Aristotle. Sir Thomas Lawrence ob • 
 
392 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 served that he had frequently read the Poetics 
 of Aristotle, and that he was often astonished 
 at the extent and correctness of his views in 
 matters to which, from his general character, 
 he should have supposed him to have paid 
 little attention, and especially in his observa- 
 tions on painting. Sir Thomas Lawrence 
 then quoted the passage from Aristotle, where 
 he says that poets ought to imitate good por- 
 trait-painters : for, preserving the resemblance 
 of the form they paint, they yet make it more 
 beautiful. 
 
 ie t ou$ ayoiQovg elxovoyguQous’ 
 
 xcti yug exslvoi a7rodiSovTe$ rrjv otxslotv [xogtpYjv, 
 opoiovg 7 roiovvTeg, xuWiovg ygu<pov<rw.” — Poet, x 
 
 This passage Sir Thomas Lawrence said he 
 wished to be inscribed in letters of gold over 
 the door of his painting-room, for he had con- 
 stantly followed what it enjoined. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 393 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 A National Gallery of Art.— -The Elgin Marbles.— The Com- 
 mittee of the House of Commons. — Discrepant Evidence 
 before the Committee. — Inconsistencies of Artists. The 
 Report of the Committee.— The Townleyan Marbles.— The 
 Egina Marbles refused. by the English and bought by the 
 Bavarian Government. — The Phygalian Marbles. — Parsi- 
 mony of Mr. Perceval. — Lord Byron’s irrational attack on 
 Lord Elgin.— Evidence of Mr. Nollekens ; of Mr. Flax- 
 man; of Mr. Westmacott; of Mr. Chantrey; of Mr. 
 Rossi ; of Sir Thomas Lawrence and Mr. West. — Dr. 
 Johnson’s observations on Sculpture.—’ The evidence of 
 Amateur-witnesses.— Mr. R. P. Knight’s opinions.— The 
 Earl of Westmorland’s anecdote of George III. — 
 The value of antique statuary in England.— Sums paid for 
 Statues by the Marquis of Lansdowne and Mr. R. P. 
 Knight.— Continued'controversies respecting the Theseus 
 and Ilissus. 
 
 It was not until the year 1816, that the Eng- 
 lish Government can be said to have listened to 
 any proposal to form a National Gallery of Art. 
 Should the theory ever be established, that 
 academies and galleries retard, instead of pro- 
 
394 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 mote the progress of the Arts, England will 
 have the fame of being the last of the civilized 
 nations that inflicted this injury. 
 
 In 1816, a Committee of the House of Com- 
 mons was appointed to examine into the quali- 
 ties and value of the Elgin Marbles, and to re- 
 port to the House upon the expediency of 
 purchasing them, as a nucleus of a National 
 Gallery of Sculpture. 
 
 The proceedings of the Committee, and the 
 evidence taken by it, afford an abundant scope 
 for the ridiculous. More contradictory testi- 
 mony was never produced in what lawyers 
 technically call, a Horse Cause. 
 
 Perhaps no adage was ever more false than 
 de gustibus non est disputandum, for the disputes 
 upon all objects of taste, or that are connected 
 with the fine arts, are infinite, interminable, and 
 not the reverse of acrimonious. 
 
 In the contradictory opinions so painfully, and 
 often so ridiculously palpable in the evidence 
 of the artists, delivered before the Committee, it 
 will be found that merely servile copiers of 
 facts admire exclusively the ideal. Artists, on 
 the contrary, who are all imagination, abandon 
 the ideal for even the vulgarly natural. In 
 very few instances can there be traced the 
 slightest analogy between the opinions of the 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 395 
 
 witnesses, and what have been known as the 
 characteristics of their works and the features 
 of their minds. Men exquisitely sensitive to 
 feeling never attempt the pathetic, whilst those 
 of coarse and callous natures produce works 
 of delicacy and tenderness. Fuseli's paintings 
 were certainly in unison with his character, but 
 it is said that, ere he took up the pencil, he 
 supped deep with horrors, or, in other terms, he 
 produced indigestion by feeding upon raw pork. 
 
 It is very remarkable, that whilst the Govern- 
 ment of England has been proverbial, through- 
 out every region of the earth, for an expendi- 
 ture almost insanely profligate, it has been of 
 all governments the most disreputably mean 
 with respect to promoting science, literature, 
 and the arts. 
 
 The Townleyan collection of Marbles was pur- 
 chased for the British Museum, in June 1805; 
 but the Committee remarked, that “ They were 
 in excellent condition, with the surface perfect, 
 and, where injured, they were generally well 
 restored, and perfectly adapted for the decora- 
 tion, and almost for the ornamental furniture, 
 of a private house.” This is rather an odd view 
 of the subject ; but the Committee, in the same 
 strain, proceed — “ The Townleyan Marbles being 
 entire, are, in a commercial point of view, the 
 
396 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 most valuable of the two (the Elgin).” After 
 this, from a Committee of the House of Com- 
 mons, let no man discredit the royal saying — 
 “ I always buy Mr. — — ’s paintings, they are so 
 beautifully shiny, and look as smooth as glass.” 
 
 Our Government refused to give 6000/. for 
 the Egina Marbles, because “ Their real value 
 was supposed not to exceed 4000/., at which 
 Lusieri estimated them.” The Bavarian go- 
 vernment, however, did not consider Lusieri as 
 a saint of infallibility, and it purchased them 
 for 6000/., a sum, considering the value of 
 money, and the nature of the revenue of Bava- 
 ria, equal to five times six thousand pounds, 
 in the then depreciated paper currency of Eng- 
 land.* 
 
 The Marbles of Phygalia (Arcadia) were pur- 
 chased for the British Museum, for 15,000/.; but 
 the Committee lament that the rate of exchange 
 encreased the amount to 19.000/., and declare 
 this to be more than equal to their value, 
 though, with an inexplicable inconsistency, they 
 immediately acknowledge that they would have 
 sold for this sum to a private purchaser 
 
 Mr. Perceval, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 agreed, in the first instance, to give the Earl of 
 
 * No Sovereign of Europe has been more devoted to Lite- 
 rature and the Arts than the King of Bavaria. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 397 
 
 Elgin, 30 , 000 /., “ provided Lord Elgin should 
 make out, to the satisfaction of a Committee of 
 the House of Commons, that he had expended 
 so much in acquiring and transporting (his Col- 
 lection).” This had little to do with the sub- 
 ject ; but, after a lapse of about five years, and 
 the arrival of eighty additional cases, and the 
 augmentation of the collection by the addition 
 of a collection of medals, the Committee consent 
 to encrease the offer to 35 , 000 /., but this partly 
 in consideration of what they are pleased to 
 term the rise, or, in other words, the fall, in the 
 value of money. To give more money for 
 an object, because money has risen in value, 
 might form a good argument in suing out a 
 certain description of statute from the Court of 
 Chancery. 
 
 Lord Byron’s attack on the Earl of Elgin, 
 for removing these hallowed remains of anti- 
 quity, must be well remembered, and as much 
 regretted, by every body. Had Lord Elgin 
 not performed this great public service to his 
 country, these unequalled efforts of genius 
 would have been transported to Paris long ere 
 this, or otherwise they would have been 
 pounded into mortar by the Turks, or have 
 been destroyed in the barbarous wars that have 
 since desolated Attica. 
 
398 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 The first of the professional witnesses exa- 
 mined before the Committee upon these marbles 
 was the celebrated sculptor, the late Mr. Nolle- 
 kens, an artist devoid of aught but the faculty 
 of most accurately copying Nature. Of these 
 marbles, he said, “ They are very fine — I com- 
 pare them to the finest of Italy.” 
 
 “Were you ever in Greece yourself?” 
 
 “ No, never farther than Rome or Naples.” 
 
 “ I saw all the fine things that were to be 
 seen at Rome.” — “ As to fine things, they are 
 not to be got every day.” 
 
 This is sufficiently ludicrous. But this ex- 
 perienced sculptor deposed, that he compared 
 the Elgin Marbles to the finest of Italy — that 
 the Theseus was of as much ideal beauty as the 
 Apollo, and that the bas reliefs of the Centaurs 
 and of the Frieze were in the first class of art. 
 
 The erudite, classic, and excellent sculptor, 
 Mr. Flaxman, deposed, that the bas reliefs 
 “ were the most excellent of their kind he had 
 seen.” That they were “ superior almost to 
 any works of antiquity, except the Laocoon 
 and Torso Farnese ; because they are known to 
 have been executed by the artists whose names 
 are recorded by the ancient authors.” 
 
 To estimate things, not positively, but in re- 
 lation to names, is a curious style of reasoning. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 399 
 
 or rather a style confined to the fine arts. But 
 Mr. Flaxman proceeds to state, that the The- 
 seus he estimated before the Torso Belvidere ; 
 but that it admitted of no comparison with the 
 Apollo Belvidere, because the surface of the The- 
 seus was corroded, the limbs mutilated, and the 
 head in such an impaired state, that he “ could 
 scarcely give an opinion upon it and lastly, 
 because the Apollo was so much more of the 
 order of ideal beauty. “ Even,” said Mr. Flax- 
 man, “ if the Theseus were perfect, I should 
 value the Apollo for the ideal beauty before 
 any male statue I know.” 
 
 Here then we have one great sculptor assert- 
 ing the Theseus to be of as much ideal beauty 
 as the Apollo, and another sculptor pronouncing 
 it so inferior in ideal beauty as to prevent any 
 comparison. Next, I find Canova asserting the 
 Theseus and the Ilissus to be of equal merit, 
 and Mr. Flaxman considering the Ilissus to be 
 very inferior* 
 
 * The last of worldly affairs that excited the interest or 
 engaged the attention of Sir Thomas Lawrence, was the able 
 defence of Flaxman, by their mutual friend, Mr. Campbell. 
 Whilst Lawrence’s feelings were absorbed in this subject, he 
 expired,— little reflecting that the defender of Flaxman 
 would in a few days be called upon to perform the office of 
 his biographer — a task which the world will lament that cir- 
 cumstances subsequently prevented his performing. 
 
400 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 Mr. Westmacott deposed that the Elgin Mar- 
 bles were “ good things ,” and that the Theseus 
 and the Ilissus were infinitely superior to the 
 Apollo Belvidere, but that he could not com- 
 pare them to the Laocoon, because the for- 
 mer were so destroyed on the surface. 
 
 Surely, this must equally have prevented any 
 comparison between them and the Apollo. But 
 this eminent artist then declared, that he could 
 not determine which of the statues, the Theseus 
 or Ilissus, were the best, “ they were both so 
 excellent,” and that the Theseus was vastly su- 
 perior to the Apollo Belvidere ; because the 
 latter “ is more an ideal figure.” Mr. West- 
 macott was then asked his opinion as to the re- 
 lative value of the Elgin and Townleyan Col- 
 lections, and he answered, that the latter 
 6< have a decided value ; you can form a better 
 estimate of them ; because you can make furni- 
 ture of them .” 
 
 Mr. Chantrey next waved any answer as to 
 estimating the Theseus and Ilissus in relation to 
 the Apollo, declaring their styles so different, that 
 they did not admit of any comparison, although 
 the Theseus and Ilissus were more according to 
 “ nature in the grand style.” 
 
 Mr. Rossi next deposed, that the Theseus 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 401 
 
 and Ilissus were superior to the Apollo Belvi- 
 dere and Laocoon. 
 
 Such was the absolute confusion of profes- 
 sional evidence upon these and all other points 
 of the case, that the character of the report of 
 the Committee is not to be wondered at. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lawrence was next examined : 
 and the following is the short-hand report of 
 his evidence : — 
 
 “ Martis 5° die Martii, 1816. 
 
 “ Henry Bankes, Esq. in the Chair. 
 
 “ Sir Thomas Lawrence, Knt. R.A. called in, 
 and examined. 
 
 w Are you well acquainted with the Elgin 
 Marbles ? 
 
 <fi Yes, I am. 
 
 “ In what class of art do you consider them ? 
 
 “ In the very highest. 
 
 « Do you think it of importance that the pub- 
 lic should become possessed of those Marbles, 
 for the purpose of forming a school of art ? 
 
 “ I think they will be a very essential benefit 
 to the arts of this country, and therefore of 
 that importance. 
 
 “ In your own particular line of art, do you 
 consider them of high importance, as forming a 
 national school ? 
 
 2 D 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
402 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 M In a line of art which I have very seldom 
 practised, but which it is still my wish to do, 
 I consider that they would ; viz. historical 
 painting. 
 
 “ Have you had opportunities of viewing the 
 antique sculpture which was formerly in Italy 
 and recently at Paris ? 
 
 “ Very recently at Paris. 
 
 “ Can you form any estimate of the compara- 
 tive merit of the finest of the Elgin Marbles, as 
 compared with the finest of those works of art ? 
 
 “ It is rather difficult ; but I think that the 
 Elgin Marbles present examples of a higher 
 style of sculpture than any I have seen. 
 
 “ Do you conceive any of them to be of a 
 higher class than the Apollo Belvidere ? 
 
 “ I do; because I consider that there is in them 
 a union of fine composition, and very grand 
 form, with a more true and natural expres- 
 sion of the effect of action upon the human 
 frame, than there is in the Apollo, or in any 
 of the other most celebrated statues. 
 
 “ Are you well acquainted with the Townley 
 collection of Marbles ? 
 
 “ Yes, I am. 
 
 “ In what comparative class should you place 
 the Elgin Marbles, as contrasted with those ? 
 
 “ As superior. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 403 
 
 “ Do you consider them as more valuable 
 than the Townley collection ? 
 
 “ Yes, I do. 
 
 “ Is that superiority, in your opinion, applied 
 to the fitness of the Elgin Marbles for forming 
 a school of art, or is it as to what you conceive 
 to be the money value ? 
 
 “ I mean as to both. 
 
 “Are you well acquainted with the Phyga- 
 lian Marbles lately brought to the Museum ? 
 
 “ Yes. 
 
 “ Compared with the Elgin bas reliefs, in 
 what class do you estimate them ? 
 
 “ I think, generally, that the composition of 
 them is very fine, that some of the designs are 
 fully equal to those in the Elgin Marbles ; but 
 the execution, generally, is inferior. 
 
 “ Have you any thing that leads you to form 
 any conjecture as to the age of the Phygalian 
 Marbles, compared with the age of the Elgin 
 Marbles ? 
 
 “ I should guess that they must have been 
 very nearly of the same age. 
 
 “ Do you consider the Metopes to be of 
 equal, or inferior, sculpture to the Frieze ? 
 
 “ I think that the Frieze of the Panathenaic 
 procession is of equal merit throughout. I do 
 not think the same of the Metopes ; but I think 
 2 d 2 
 
404 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 that some of the Metopes are of equal value 
 with the Frieze. 
 
 “Do they appear to you to be of the same 
 age ? 
 
 « Yes, I think so. The total and entire dif- 
 ference of the character of relief, appears to 
 have arisen from the difference of situation in 
 which they were placed. 
 
 “ You have stated, that you thought these 
 Marbles had great truth and imitation of nature ; 
 do you consider that that adds to their value ? 
 
 “ It considerably adds to it, because I consider 
 them as united with grand form. There is in 
 them that variety that is produced in the human 
 form, by the alternate action and repose of the 
 muscles, that strikes one particularly. I have 
 myself a very good collection of the best casts 
 from the antique statues, and was struck with 
 that difference in them, in returning from the 
 Elgin Marbles to my own house. 
 
 “ What do you think of the Theseus, com- 
 pared with the Torso Belvidere ? 
 
 “ I should say that the Torso is the nearest 
 in point of excellence to the Theseus ; it would 
 be difficult to decide in favour of the Theseus ; 
 but there are parts of the Torso in which the 
 muscles are not true to the action, and they 
 invariably are in what remains of the Theseus. 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 405 
 
 “ Do you happen to know at what price that 
 was valued in the collection at the Louvre ? 
 
 “ I do not. 
 
 “ You have seen the Hercules of Lord Lans- 
 downe’s collection? 
 
 “ Yes. 
 
 “ What comparison does that bear to the 
 Theseus or the Neptune? 
 
 “ I think it inferior. 
 
 “ Do you think it much inferior ? 
 
 “ There are parts that are very inferior. 
 There are parts in that, that are very grand, and 
 parts very inferior. 
 
 “ Do you think any estimate might be placed 
 on these Marbles by comparison with pictures ? 
 
 “ No, it would be very difficult ; I cannot do 
 it myself. 
 
 “ Do you consider, on the whole, the Theseus 
 as the most perfect piece of sculpture, of a single 
 figure, that you have ever seen ? 
 
 “ Certainly, as an imitation of nature ; but as 
 an imitation of character, I could not decide, 
 unless I knew for what the figure was in- 
 tended.” 
 
 Thus concluded the evidence of Sir Thomas 
 Lawrence. The last sentence is curious, and 
 may excite a smile. 
 
406 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 It was a flattering compliment to examine Sir 
 Thomas Lawrence, for, except the President of 
 the Royal Academy, he was the only painter 
 who was consulted upon the subject. His 
 opinion with respect to the inferiority of the 
 Apollo Belvidere was hardly to be expected, 
 considering the general turn of his mind and 
 the character of his works. 
 
 Mr. West, the President of the Academy, 
 thought the Apollo and the Laocoon only 
 “ systematic art whilst he said “ the Theseus 
 and the Ilissus stand supreme in art.” 
 
 Hr. Johnson observed — “ After all, it is not 
 so very easy to make a stone look like a man 
 and to this I may add, that after stones have 
 been made to look like men, it does not appear 
 to be very easy to judge of the likeness. 
 
 The Amateurs examined by the Committee 
 were Messrs. R. P. Knight, W. Wilkins, the 
 architect; the Rt. Hon. C. Long, Lord Farn- 
 borough, W. Hamilton, Taylor Combe, the Earl 
 of Aberdeen, J. B. S. Morrit, J. H. Fazakerley, 
 A. Hay, and the Rev. Hr. P. Hunt. 
 
 Mr. Payne Knight gave the preference to 
 the Apollo, and thought the Theseus a spurious 
 addition by Hadrian, and that some of the 
 Metopes were “ very poor.” — Mr. Hay thought 
 the Theseus and Ilissus superior to the Apollo 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 407 
 
 Belvidere, the Laocoon, and the Torso. It 
 would be tedious to pursue the subject on all 
 the points ; there were as many opinions as there 
 were persons. 
 
 The present Earl of W estmorland related of 
 the King (George the Third), that a Minister 
 once endeavoured to get his Majesty’s consent 
 to a measure, by urging that both Mr. Pitt and 
 Mr. Fox approved of it. “ My -Lord,” replied 
 his Majesty, “ when Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox 
 contradict each other, one may be wrong and 
 one may be right ; but when Mr. Pitt and Mr. 
 Fox agree in opinion, be assured that they are 
 both wrong.” The contradictions of all the 
 witnesses examined by the Committee may 
 lead to the inference that one of them may be 
 right ; had they all agreed, we must have in- 
 ferred that they were all wrong. 
 
 The following memoranda will give persons 
 a general idea of the value of antique statuary 
 in England. 
 
 The Marquis of Lansdowne gave for a Mer- 
 cury 700/., for his Hercules, 600/., and for his 
 Venus, 700/., but which was valued at 1400/. 
 Mr. Townley gave for his Discobolus 700/., 
 and for the Relief of the Feast of Icarus, 400/., 
 and for a large Venus, 700/. 
 
 Mr. P. Knight stated that this Venus, or the 
 
408 
 
 THE LIFE OF 
 
 , Marquis of Lansdowne’s Mercury, was each 
 worth any two of the articles in Lord Elgin’s 
 collection. If this be correct, what are we to 
 think of the host of artists, Lawrence included, 
 who thought one statue alone, the Theseus, in 
 Lord Elgin’s collection, superior to all statues ? 
 
 The veneration for the works of antiquity 
 may be estimated by a few extracts from a list 
 of prices attached to antiques, in a document 
 laid before Parliament. 
 
 44 Recumbent statue of Hercules, as on the 
 coins of Croto, with little of the surface remain- 
 ing , 1500/. 
 
 44 Trunk of a male statue recumbent, 1500/. 
 
 44 JBack and shoulders of a trunk , on which 
 the head of Hadrian appears to have been, 
 
 2001. 
 
 44 About thirty-five pieces of frieze, com- 
 pletely ruined , 1400/.” 
 
 From the sublime to the ridiculous is but a 
 step, and ce n'est que le premier pas qui coute. 
 
 The conflict of opinions respecting the The- 
 seus and the Ilissus continued long after they 
 were removed into the British Museum. In 
 1818, an artist of great genius said publicly at 
 the British Museum, that the left arm of the 
 Theseus, from the shoulder to the elbow, was 
 too short, and his neck too thick. 44 Now, 
 
SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 
 
 409 
 
 Sir,” says a writer upon art, “ this is a mis- 
 take : the left arm of the Theseus is two 
 faces in length, and his neck the size of the 
 calf of his leg ; both therefore, the arm apd 
 neck, are of the right proportions, because 
 these proportions are the regular proportions 
 of beautiful nature. He also said, that the 
 bent side of the Ilissus was too short ; this is 
 also a mistake. Nature is often shorter ; and 
 in the position of the Ilissus, it is impossible 
 that the bent side of the body could be longer, 
 because the opposite side is so much stretched. 
 The whole weight of the body of the Theseus 
 rests on the left arm, consequently the muscles 
 are more swollen, from action and compression, 
 than in the right arm, which being stretched, 
 the muscles hang in undulating relaxation ; 
 the bones of each arm are precisely of the same 
 length ; it is the action of the muscles that gives 
 each a different appearance.” 
 
 Who shall decide, when artists disagree,? 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 TO 
 
 VOL. I. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
THE LECTURES 
 
 AND 
 
 PUBLIC ADDRESSES 
 
 OF 
 
 SIR T. LAWRENCE. 
 
ADDRESS 
 
 TO 
 
 THE STUDENTS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ROYAL ACADEMY, 
 
 DELIVERED BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 
 AT THE ANNUAL DISTRIBUTION OF PRIZES, 
 10th DECEMBER, 1823, 
 
 By SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, Knt. 
 
 PRESIDENT. 
 

PREFACE. 
 
 In the general reference to works by deceased Mem- 
 bers of the Royal Academy, the picture of “ the Death 
 of the Earl of Chatham,” and other admirable composi- 
 tions by the same master, were inadvertently omitted. 
 The error was partly occasioned by the character of his 
 principal work ; which, though strictly historical, being 
 composed entirely of Portraits, did not at the time pre- 
 sent itself to the writer’s mind, as an example for Aca- 
 demical Instruction. 
 
 Mr. Copley’s name, and the picture in question, are 
 of too just celebrity to be intentionally overlooked ; 
 especially at a moment, when the claims of American 
 genius are so forcibly presented to us, by new testimonies 
 of its power. 
 
 If it be observed that the names of Gainsborough, 
 Hoppnkr, and Wilson are wanting, it must be re- 
 membered that it was to the students in historical com- 
 position that the Address was delivered ; and therefore, 
 to the masters excelling in that department, that their 
 attention was directed. 
 
 The mention of the Shakspeare Gallery cannot fail 
 to recall the powerful works of Mr. Opie; with those 
 of his distinguished compeer, still living — the biogra- 
 pher of Sir Joshua Reynolds. 
 
 2 E 
 
 vol. r. 
 

 
 
TO 
 
 THE MEMBERS 
 
 OF 
 
 THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS, 
 
 THIS ADDRESS, 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THEIR DESIRE, 
 
 IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED 
 BY THEIR OBLIGED AND FAITHFUL SERVANT 
 
 THO s . LAWRENCE, P.R.A. 
 
 2 E 2 
 

 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ADDRESS, &c. 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 The Council and General Assembly have great 
 pleasure in witnessing the number of candidates on this 
 occasion, and are well satisfied with the general progress 
 of the Schools. 
 
 In adjudging the premium for the best historical pic- 
 ture, they have been governed by those principles of Art, 
 which form its real dignity — They consider the successful 
 work, as presenting the most striking representation of 
 the subject; a bolder character of composition; an effect 
 well suited to poetic incident, (though perhaps carried 
 to artificial excess,) with that approach to historic depth 
 and richness of tone, which appears in unison with the 
 general design, and promises the future Colourist. 
 These are the merits which in their opinion have de- 
 served the prize. 
 
422 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Your own good taste, Gentlemen, will remind you, 
 that we are to judge of works by the presence of beau- 
 ties not by the absence of defects ; and that even if it 
 fully reached the faultlessness of the character, the pic- 
 ture which should exhibit only the 44 coldly correct,” 
 would with difficulty obtain our sanction. 
 
 It must not, however, be considered, that we apply 
 this term of negative praise, to the pictures that receive 
 the second premium ; but as nothing can compensate for 
 the entire want of original power, so, the superior value 
 we assign to it, will command our decision in its favour, 
 where considerable ability is not distant. 
 
 The works which have gained the silver medal, have 
 much in them to commend. They show that careful 
 attention to the drawing, and anatomical knowledge of 
 the figure, so desirable in academical studies ; and they 
 are not deficient in very pleasing colour : whether the 
 tone of that colour be strictly appropriate, is doubtful ; 
 the premiums were adjudged on other grounds; and 
 the design, chiaro-scuro, and colour, proper to historical 
 or epic subjects, will probably be more deeply considered 
 by the artists, on future occasions. 
 
 Your Judges, Gentlemen, are but Students of a higher 
 form. Continuing our exertions at a more advanced 
 station, the obstacles we have ourselves to encounter, 
 remind us of the difficulties that await you ; and we 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 423 
 
 limit our expectations of your success, by the uncer- 
 tainty of our own. It is a part of the triumph of our Art, 
 that it is slow in progress ; and that, although there are 
 frequent examples in it of youthful promise, there are 
 none of youthful excellence. Even the early paintings 
 of Raffaele, bear no comparison in finished merit, with 
 the juvenile productions of the Poet; with those of our 
 own country; of Milton, Pope, or Cowley. Proceed 
 then with equal firmness, humility, and hope ; be neither 
 depressed nor vain ; but chiefly elated, because you de- 
 termine to do better ; as knowing that in a state of rea- 
 sonable progress, the seeds of beauty are already sown, 
 if you retain the consciousness of defect. 
 
 The rising School of England ought to do much ; for 
 it proceeds with great advantages. It has the soundest 
 theory for its instruction, the brightest example for its 
 practice, and the history of past greatness for its ex- 
 citement. 
 
 The paternal care of the revered Founder of this in- 
 stitution, by the judicious selection of its officers, and 
 the assignment of their duties, provided the most effec- 
 tual means of study ; and the councils of this Academy 
 have been watchful to extend them ; while, as the esta- 
 blishment advanced, the care of its professors was 
 seconded by the general exertions of the members, till 
 in knowledge and ability it attained an eminence under 
 
424 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 its former and late President, that more than placed it 
 on a level with the most enlightened schools in Europe. 
 The noble works of those celebrated Artists, and of 
 others of their time — the comprehensive labours of 
 Barry — the Shakspeare and Milton Galleries — the 
 many sublime designs bv the great Author of the latter, 
 whose unapproached invention and high attainments, 
 enforce this tribute to living genius — The numerous 
 illustrations of our Novelists and Poets, in the greater 
 number of which, the purest spirit of Raffaele may be 
 traced — the rich embellishments of Eastern fancy dis- 
 played in others ; with as fine delineations of the pathos 
 and comedy of Cervantes — the series of Outlines from 
 Homer, and the Greek Tragedians, which embody the 
 principles of ancient Art ; and in the expression of sen- 
 timent as well as grandeur, seem coeval with its bright- 
 est age ! — these various and unrivalled efforts of the 
 pencil fully support me in the assertion ; whilst in the 
 sister arts, the names of Banks, of Nollekens, and Bacon, 
 Sir William Chambers, Mr. Dance, and Mr. Wyatt, 
 still more confirm it. We must be careful not to sur- 
 render this distinction ; and although one obvicus dis- 
 advantage presents itself in the inadequate powers of the 
 Individual who now fills the chair, I yet hope, Gentle- 
 men, that remembering by whom he has been preceded, 
 and by whom he is surrounded, you will yourselves en- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 425 
 
 deavour to make up the amount of honour ; to do justice 
 to the scene of your education, and the expectations of 
 the country ; and to perpetuate by your own, the ser- 
 vices of those great men, who so largely contributed to 
 its fame. 
 
 Except in less brilliant periods, when decision may 
 err between equality of talent, the voice of a profession 
 is usually just ; and of those distinguished persons, the 
 pre-eminence must undoubtedly be given, to our former 
 and late President. 
 
 The elevated philosophy of Sir Joshua Reynolds, in 
 those golden precepts, which are now acknowledged as 
 canons of universal taste ; and that illustrious Society, 
 of which he was the centre, combined with his genius to 
 give a dazzling splendour to his name, which seemed to 
 leave him without any competitor; yet the powers and 
 knowledge of Mr. West, deserved not the contrast in 
 their present fortunes. 
 
 At an oera when historical painting was at the lowest 
 ebb (with the few exceptions, which the claims of the 
 beautiful and the eminent, permitted to the pencil of Sir 
 Joshua), Mr. West, sustained by the beneficent patro- 
 nage of his late Majesty, produced a series of compo- 
 sitions from sacred and profane history, profoundly 
 studied, and executed with the most facile power, which 
 not only were superior to any former productions of 
 
426 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 English art, but far surpassing contemporary merit on 
 the Continent, were unequalled at any period below the 
 schools of the Carracci. The picture of 44 the Return 
 of Regulus to Carthage,” preserved with gracious atten- 
 tion in the palace of Buckingham House, and of 44 the 
 Shipwreck of St. Paul,” in the chapel of the Royal Hos- 
 pital at Greenwich, are examples that may securely be 
 adduced in testimony of the fact. 
 
 Towards the close of an honoured and laborious life, 
 and when his advanced age might reasonably have de- 
 terred him from exertion, he produced a large and in- 
 teresting work,* which, meeting with liberal reward, so 
 forcibly excited the admiration of the public, as even by 
 its attraction to add new means of patronage, to the 
 prompt benevolence that secured it. This was succeeded 
 by others, of still more arduous subject, of greater mag- 
 nitude, and, if possible, more powerfully impressive. 
 The display of such astonishing ability in age, (for he 
 was employed on them in his eightieth year,) combined 
 with the sacred importance of his subjects, gave him 
 celebrity at the close of his life, far greater than he had 
 ever before enjoyed ; and he became (almost to forget- 
 fulness of deceased greatness) the one popular Painter 
 of his country. Yet what slight circumstances may re- 
 
 * “ Christ healing the Sick,” purchased by the British Institution. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 427 
 
 tard the effect usually produced by death on the fame 
 of the eminent and good ! It is now more than three 
 years, that we have witnessed at his own residence, an 
 exhibition of the accumulated labours of this venerable 
 and great artist, — whose remains were honoured with a 
 public funeral, and whose loss was felt as a national 
 calamity — totally neglected and deserted ! the spacious 
 rooms in which they are arranged, erected in just respect 
 to a parent’s memory, and due attention to the imagined 
 expectations of the public, as destitute of spectators as 
 the vacant halls of some assembly ; and but for the pos- 
 session of other property of known value, threatening 
 to injure the remaining fortunes of the filial love that 
 raised them. But though unnoticed by the public, the 
 gallery of Mr. West remains, Gentlemen, for you, and 
 exists for your instruction ; while the extent of know- 
 ledge that he possessed, and was so liberal to convey — 
 the useful weight of his opinions, in societies of the 
 highest rank — the gentle humanity of his nature, and 
 that parental fondness, with which youth, and its young 
 aspirings, were instructed and cherished by him, will 
 render his memory sacred to his friends ! and endeared 
 to the schools of this Academy, while respect for worth, 
 and gratitude for invaluable services, are encouraged in 
 them. 
 
 For myself, indebted to his friendship for no incon- 
 
428 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 siderable portion of that service, I can truly say, that I 
 never estimated the comprehensive ability of that great 
 Artist so highly, as when comparing his labours in my 
 memory, with many of the most celebrated compositions, 
 then before me, of the revivers of modern art ; and were 
 the revered friend now living to whom my letters were 
 addressed, his report would be evidence of that im- 
 pression. 
 
 I hope it is impossible that the Nation should long 
 continue its neglect ; and seem to prove by this indiffer- 
 ence, that the general enthusiasm so recently excited by 
 those fine productions, and the respect then shown to 
 their venerated Author, were but the impulse and fashion 
 of an hour, dependent on the mere convenience of place 
 and distance, instead of the rational tribute of the judg- 
 ment, and the feeling protection of an enlightened and 
 just People. 
 
 Yet, whatever in extent of fame had been the success- 
 ful rivalry of Mr. West with his illustrious Predecessor, 
 the integrity of your late lamented President would still 
 have yielded the chief honours of the English school to 
 our beloved Sir Joshua ! of whose works, character, and 
 conversation, he often spoke, in the last years of the 
 intercourse I had the honour to -have with him, with that 
 pleased and proud remembrance, which great minds 
 always hold of the Competitor who had most severely 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 429 
 
 tasked their powers ; — of the genius that had surpassed 
 them. 
 
 With what increased splendour did that genius lately 
 re-appear amongst us ! 
 
 Many of us must remember, when after a long absence, 
 the great tragic Actress of our time, returned for a season 
 to the stage ; to correct the forgetfulness of taste, and 
 restore the dignity of her art. It was so with the return 
 — the recovered glories of Sir Joshua ! They who be- 
 lieved themselves best acquainted with his works, and 
 entitled by their knowledge to speak of them with en- 
 thusiasm, felt how much that knowledge had forgotten ; 
 how inadequate to their merits was the praise they had 
 bestowed. The prejudices, so injurious to modern art, 
 were gone — Time, seemed to have advanced the future 
 with double speed, and presenting Truth, invested her 
 with new radiance ! The few remaining competitors 
 and scholars of this great Artist, saw him then with the 
 eyes of posterity, and beheld in their own narrow period, 
 the sure stability of his fame. 
 
 It is singular, that the judgment, the unpretending 
 sense, and manly simplicity, so generally acknowledged 
 to have marked the character of Sir Joshua, should have 
 been impugned only on those opinions upon Art, which 
 seem to have been the most deliberately formed, and 
 were enforced by him with parental zeal, as his last 
 
430 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 remembrance to this Academy. Sufficient proof of the 
 sincerity of his admiration of Michael Angelo, had pre- 
 viously existed, in the actions of some of his finest groups 
 having been taken from him ; but we want no other evi- 
 dence of its truth, than his picture of Mrs. Siddons ; a 
 work of the highest epic character, and indisputably the 
 finest female portrait in the world. 
 
 The link that united him to Michael Angelo, was the 
 sense of ideal greatness ; the noblest of all perceptions. 
 It is this sublimity of thought, that marks the first-rate 
 genius: this impelling fancy, — which has no where its 
 defined form, yet every where its image ; and while pur- 
 suing excellence too perfect to be attained, creates new 
 beauty that cannot be surpassed ! It belongs only to 
 that finer sagacity, which sees the essence of the beauti- 
 ful or grand, divested of incongruous detail ; and whose 
 influence on the works of the great President, is equally 
 apparent in the calm firm Defender of the national Rock, 
 as in the dying Queen of Virgil,* or the grandeur of the 
 tragic Muse. 
 
 * This passage alludes to Sir Joshua's Portrait of General Eliott, 
 Lord Heathfield, the Defender of the Rock of Gibraltar, and to Sir 
 Joshua’s pathetic historical painting of the Death of Dido. The former 
 picture is now in the National Gallery, and the latter was the property 
 of his late Majesty George IV. In this beautiful painting, the time 
 of action is taken from the following lines of Virgil, and it would be 
 difficult to say whether the great poet, or the great painter, have more 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 431 
 
 To a mind so enlarged and liberal as Sir Joshua’t — 
 who decried not the value of an Art that gave the world 
 its Shakspeare ; and in whose society, a Garrick and a 
 Kemble lived in grateful intercourse with Mr. Burke 
 and Dr. Johnson, — we may well imagine how gratifying 
 were the contemplation and progress of tha: divine work ; 
 and allowing much to anticipated fame, we may equally 
 believe, that part of the noble purpose was protection of 
 the genius he admired ! to affix to passing excellence an 
 imperishable name ; extend the justice withheld by the 
 limits of her art ; and in the beauty of that unequalled 
 Countenance, (fixed in the pale abstraction of some lofty 
 vision, whose “ bodiless creations ” are crowding on her 
 view, and leave in suspended action the majestic form,) 
 to verify the testimony of tradition, and by the mental 
 
 deeply impressed the feelings with a sense of the pathetic and the 
 grand. — E d. 
 
 “ Nam, quia nec fato, merita nec morte peribat ; 
 
 Sed misera ante diem, subitoq; accensa furore. 
 
 Nondum illi flavum Proserpina vertice crinem 
 Abstulerat, Stygioque caput damnaverat Oreo. 
 
 Ego Iris croceis per ccelum roscida pennis, 
 
 Mille trahens varios averso Sole colores, 
 
 Devolat, et supra caput astitit : Hunc ego Diti 
 Sacrupa jussa fero, teque isto corpore solvo. 
 
 Sic ait, et dextrh crinem secat : omnis et una 
 Dilapsus calor, atque in ventos vita recessit.” 
 
432 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 grandeur that invests her, record in resistless evidence 
 the enchantment of her power ! 
 
 That the works, Gentlemen, of this illustrious Man, 
 should have the strongest influence upon you, cannot be a 
 matter of surprise : that the largest style of painting that 
 perhaps is known, should captivate the scholar as it has 
 charmed the teacher, is the most natural result that could 
 have been produced in minds of sensibility and taste; 
 but let it not mislead them. If they determine to make 
 the labours of Sir Joshua their example, let them first 
 examine by what only means their excellence was 
 acquired. 
 
 His early pictures bear evidence of the utmost delicacy 
 of finishing ; the most careful imitation. That sensi- 
 tiveness of taste, w r hich probably from boyhood he pos- 
 sessed, could never have permitted him to enter into the 
 mean details of Denner; or content himself with the 
 insipidity of Cornelius Janssen ; but in mere finishing 
 he was inferior to neither ; and the history of the great- 
 est masters is but one. Truth is the key of Art, as 
 knowledge is of power : within the portals you have 
 ample range, but each apartment must be opened by it. 
 The noblest work that perhaps was ever yet projected, 
 the loftiest in conception, and executed with as unequal- 
 led breadth, is the ceiling of Michael Angelo : the mi- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 433 
 
 matures of Julio Clovio, are not more finished than his 
 studies. 
 
 On you, Gentlemen, who with the candidates of this 
 evening are entering on the first department of the Art, 
 the conduct of Sir Joshua should act with treble force. 
 Mr. Burke says of him, “ In painting portraits, he ap- 
 peared not to be raised upon that platform, but to 
 descend to it from a higher sphere.’” To that sphere let 
 his example guide you, and it will lead you to the high- 
 est: to Correggio, to Titian, to Raffaele, to Michael 
 Angelo! To “those divine men, in whose presence - ” 
 (to use his own eloquent language,) “ it is impossible to 
 think, or to invent in a mean manner; and by the con- 
 templation of whose works, a state of mind is acquired, 
 that is disposed to receive those ideas of art only, which 
 relish of grandeur or simplicity. - ” 
 
 Tasks of great difficulty lie before you, and with them 
 you have one essential duty to perform : fulfil the latter, 
 and the former will more certainly be achieved. Be 
 faithful at all times to the dignity of your art : let no- 
 thing tempt you to bend a noble theory to imperfect 
 practice ; be constant to it in failure, as in success, 
 remembering that the most insidious approach of error 
 is masked by disappointment. There may be new com- 
 binations, new excellencies, new paths, new powers (of 
 which, to the glory of a sister country, we have fortu- 
 
 2 F 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
434 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 nately high example) ; there can be no new PRINCIPLES 
 in art ; and the verdict of ages, (unshaken, during the 
 most daring excitement of the human mind,) is not now 
 to be disturbed. The variety of nature has no limit ; 
 and in the subjects she presents, there is ample scope for 
 the utmost diversity of thought ; but since the judgment 
 of mankind has limited the circle of greatness but to 
 few, be these your audience, your tribunal: reject all 
 meaner association ; assured that once admitted to the 
 highest, the rest are at all times sufficiently at your 
 command-. 
 
 The present auspicious circumstances indicate an ap- 
 proaching aera, that may teach us to look with less regret 
 on the splendour of the past — A People more and 
 more informed on the subject of the Fine Arts ; a Legis- 
 lature alive to the importance of encouraging them ; a 
 Government adopting measures to secure for them the 
 noblest examples ; and a gracious Monarch to command 
 its efforts ! — a monarch at all times the munificent Patron 
 of this establishment, and whose reign has not been more 
 the glory of his people, than their advancement and 
 happiness are his reward. 
 
435 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 TO THE 
 
 STUDENTS OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY, 
 
 AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEDALS ON THE 10th OF DECEMBER, 1825. 
 
 UBL1 V BRED BY 
 
 THE PRESIDENT, 
 
 SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, Knt. 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 It has again been my pleasing duty to distribute the 
 highest prizes of the Royal Academy, 
 
 In deciding on the productions of youthful genius, 
 there will often be much nicety of discussion, since taste 
 and judgment, the subtlest and severest arbiters, are to 
 give the sentence. Some difference of opinion may have 
 existed on the present occasion. The result, however, 
 sufficiently proves that the Academy are pleased with 
 your exertions. 
 
 2 f 2 
 
436 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 In framing the laws which refer to those exertions, the 
 Council and Members of the Royal Academy em- 
 ployed the most serious consideration, and maturely 
 weighed every probable circumstance to which they 
 can apply. It might reasonably be expected, that the 
 known printed regulations of a public body would be 
 scrupulously obeyed, by those who are to benefit by their 
 operation, and the most injurious consequences would 
 ensue, if they could be infringed with impunity. As 
 this however cannot be permitted, the penalty of the 
 fault, or the mistake, must fall on the individual. The 
 regret indeed may be deeply felt by the Academy ; since 
 few things can be more painful to it than to see a work 
 of genius deprived of its reward, and the Institution 
 itself of the just credit, which it might otherwise have 
 gained from it. 
 
 The superior importance attached to the delivery of 
 the gold medals, which secure to the Students who re- 
 ceive them, the advantages of foreign study, determined 
 the Council of the Royal Academy to give more of 
 ceremony to it, than belongs to the distribution of its 
 Prizes on other occasions. In conformity with this 
 usage, my predecessors in the Chair have occasionally 
 given monitory addresses or finished Discourses on the 
 higher principles of art, and the works of the finest 
 Masters. A custom which produced the greatest benefit 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 437 
 
 to the arts that they have received in modern times, 
 cannot be too justly commended, or carefully followed ; 
 yet still the performance of this voluntary task must be 
 governed by the feelings and ability of the Individual. 
 A true knowledge of his limited talent may lead him to 
 fear attempting it, and chance may deprive him of the 
 power. In this predicament I unfortunately stand at the 
 present moment. An absence on the Continent, protract- 
 ed beyond my expectation, and from which I returned 
 but yesterday, has been so much occupied by my profes- 
 sional labours and by the engagements resulting from 
 them, as to have filled the period which I intended to 
 devote to the arrangement of such impressions or opinions, 
 as I might have considered worthy of your attention. I 
 think it fair, however, to mention one circumstance, not 
 perhaps generally known, which may a little extenuate 
 the omission. 
 
 Sir Joshua Reynolds, with the usual propriety of his 
 fine judgment, justifies himself for undertaking an office 
 not specified in the laws of the Academy, by many con- 
 siderations which fully authorize it, but veils the real 
 circumstance by which it was occasioned. At the com- 
 mencement of the Institution, the principles of Taste 
 were less generally diffused, and that nobler theory un- 
 known which he so essentially contributed to form. This 
 partial ignorance had its effect on the instruction of that 
 
438 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 period ; and a Professorship — not then graced by the 
 ability of a Barry, an Opie, and a Fuseli, was felt to be 
 inadequately filled, for the great purposes of the Institu- 
 tion. As the most substantial good often results from 
 temporary ill, we owe to that unfavourable circumstance 
 attending the struggling efforts of an infant society, one of 
 the purest, and most permanent triumphs of this country. 
 
 But, Gentlemen, I need not point out to you the ob- 
 vious difference between the situation, as well as powers 
 of that illustrious Man, and of the Individual who now 
 addresses you. You now, not only enjoy the benefit 
 of Sir Joshua’s enlightened taste, but of the practical 
 knowledge of Mr. West, and of the genius of the great 
 man whom we have lately lost ! You will soon partici- 
 pate, in the information and judgment of his intelligent 
 Successor.* 
 
 Of the qualifications of that gentleman for his im- 
 portant duty, it is almost improper in me to speak, since 
 they have received the full sanction of this Academy : 
 but I may be allowed to notice the generous zeal, with 
 which he prepares himself to undertake the office. 
 
 Long a master in his art, and often presenting in his 
 works examples of its highest principles, he descends 
 again to be the pupil, and travels to obtain from per- 
 sonal inspection of the practice of the greatest masters, 
 * Thomas Phillips, Esq. R. A. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 439 
 
 fresh matter for your instruction. If other motives have 
 mingled with that object — if the anxiety of friendship 
 — respect and solicitude for distinguished genius, have 
 determined, not the purpose but the moment of his 
 departure, you will not be the less grateful to him for 
 his sympathy on a subject of such general interest, but 
 rather give more weight to an obligation, so feelingly 
 enhanced. 
 
 The mention of my absence on the Continent calls 
 from me for every expression of humble gratitude, and 
 as due acknowledgment of the honour conferred by his 
 Majesty on the Royal Academy, in the late mission in- 
 trusted to its President. In venturing to undertake it, 
 I had no fears for the credit of the arts of my country, 
 too variously and powerfully supported at home ; but I 
 did justly apprehend that my own good fortune might 
 desert me, and leave me unequal to my task. 
 
 If I have escaped this danger, I chiefly owe it to the 
 beneficence of my reception — to the considerate regard 
 of his Most Christian Majesty to the wishes of the King, 
 — and to the liberality of a Foreign School, as candid 
 as it is great. 
 
 Gentlemen, I will not longer detain you, except to 
 wish you new exertions for new honours, and tranquil- 
 lity and health in their pursuit. 
 
440 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 TO THE 
 
 STUDENTS OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY, 
 
 AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEDALS ON THF. IOtII OF DECEMBER, 1826 . 
 
 DELIVERED BY 
 
 THE PRESIDENT, 
 
 SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, Knt. 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 If the distribution of the Prizes of the Royal Aca- 
 demy affected only the interests and feelings of the can- 
 didates, it would still be formed with the most guarded 
 care; for it being the duty of the General Assembly to 
 distinguish superior merit, it is their obvious policy, to 
 implant in the minds of the students that reliance on the 
 justice of the Academy, which may leave them uncheck- 
 ed in their competition by the slightest fear of preju- 
 dice or neglect. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 441 
 
 But a further duty is imposed on the Council and 
 Members of this Academy. The chief purpose of its 
 institution is the advancement of the Arts ; and the pro- 
 gress of the Schools being essential to this object, it be- 
 comes necessary, not only to be just in the immediate 
 decision, but to see what relation the works now pre- 
 sented, bear to those of a former year — how far they 
 have improved upon, or kept pace with them — or to 
 what cause, whether to carelessness or erroneous modes 
 of study, their failure may be assigned. 
 
 If any doubt, Gentlemen, of your success has existed 
 in the present instance, that doubt must appear to have 
 been unimportant, since all the Prizes are awarded. 
 
 But while a result so gratifying seems to render your 
 longer attendance unnecessary, you must permit me to 
 offer a few considerations to your attention, which I 
 have reason to believe are sanctioned by the opinions of 
 my academical friends, and which the duties assigned to 
 me, authorize me to suggest. 
 
 They relate, in the first place, to the Drawings from 
 the Life. 
 
 I need not remind you, that if the surest clue to know- 
 ledge of the living figure be a faithful imitation, that 
 mode of drawing is best adapted to it, which in itself is 
 the most simple ; since it is with the pencilling of a pic- 
 ture, or the execution of a drawing, as we are told it is 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 442 
 
 with style in writing — that being considered the purest, 
 which least attracts us from the subject. 
 
 It is on this point, that some of the drawings appear 
 to be defective. We see in them a slight — yet obtru- 
 sive mode of hatching, which, though it may have the 
 appearance of facility, cannot belong to accuracy and 
 truth. 
 
 I know that there is some temptation to this error — 
 that it seems to give evidence of power, and to show 
 how much knowledge the artist must possess, who can 
 afford to be so careless in its display. We have even 
 the revered authority of your late Professor of Painting, 
 for the term “ gracefulness’’ being applied to the execu- 
 tion of a picture, as giving it a certain ease and light- 
 ness, which conceal its real labour. But this, however 
 pleasing in the finished works of the established painter, 
 becomes a dangerous attempt in the efforts of the stu- 
 dent ; and, indeed, is contrary to every mode of study , 
 by which past excellence has been achieved. We find, 
 in the first thoughts of the greatest masters, and in the 
 details for their noblest works, no attempt at style, or 
 manner of execution. The mind is solely bent on its im- 
 portant object ; and the hand is accurate or careless, as 
 the attention is more or less directed to it. — Your pre- 
 sent studies, Gentlemen, may be considered as details 
 for your future works. It is here that you are acquir- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 443 
 
 ing knowledge, and collecting materials for those per- 
 formances, which are hereafter to render you valuable 
 to your country; and in proportion to their truth, is the 
 promise of the excellence to which they lead. 
 
 There is, Gentlemen, another defect, the very oppo- 
 site to this, which attaches to both the Schools, but, I 
 think, chiefly to the Antique Academy. It is that ex- 
 clusive attention to the relief, and high finishing of the 
 parts of the figure, which too much diverts the mind 
 from its general proportions. 
 
 We acknowledge the usefulness of the most careful 
 finishing, when it is not accompanied by this defect ; 
 and we sometimes find it difficult to condemn a drawing, 
 which presents so many beautiful details, and affords 
 such pleasing evidence of the patient labour that pro- 
 duced them. Yet I know not any fault, that should 
 more firmly and constantly be checked, than the inatten- 
 tion to which it leads. 
 
 In the great works of the ancients, proportion is every 
 thing. It stamps the character of their divinities — of 
 the Demi-God, the Hero, the Athleta, and the Slave ; 
 and these, fixed in the mind, supply the like scale for 
 the historical characters of the Painter. Even in that 
 second department of the Art which I practise, there is 
 no defect more fatal to the resemblance of the whole, 
 than deviation from the proportion of the parts. 
 
444 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The features may each be accurately like, and convey 
 their just expression ; but if either be too large, or small, 
 or too widely separated from each other, the striking 
 part of the resemblance is gone, and while a something 
 of likeness cannot be denied, its impression on the spec- 
 tator is unsatisfactory and vague. 
 
 If in these Remarks I appear to intrude on the pro- 
 vince of The Keeper *, who so anxiously, and so ably, 
 presides over your Studies, I still have reason to believe 
 that they are in unison with his sentiments; and I need 
 not say, that in their application to Historical Painting, 
 those sentiments are of the highest authority and weight. 
 
 The limited number of examples from the Painting 
 Academy, and their confined subject in composition, 
 render it less necessary for me to address the Students 
 of that School. 
 
 I feel some regret that they had not a more extensive 
 field for their labours —but it would be great injustice in 
 me not to congratulate them on their success. The 
 merit of the Pictures has been generally acknowledged 
 by the Council and the Assembly ; and the Gentleman 
 who has failed, has shown sufficient power, to justify our 
 hopes from his talent, in a future year. 
 
 We are sorry that only one specimen from the life, 
 has been presented to us in Sculpture. Still the Pre- 
 
 * Henry Thompson, Esq. R. A. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 445 
 
 mium has been given for it; from a mixed motive — that 
 of marking our approbation of the successful parts of 
 the model, and of showing to the Students, that the 
 Academy take no advantage of any temporary want of 
 combined effort, to withhold from them its Rewards. 
 
 In voting the premium for the best Architectural 
 Drawing of a known building, a prevailing sentiment in 
 its favour has arisen from the completeness of its study, 
 and the neat accuracy of its various measurements and 
 details. It is this attention to the whole of your allotted 
 task — this absence of all narrow reservation of that la- 
 bour, which cold minds are too often contented to limit to 
 what they imagine is a sufficient end — it is this generous 
 impulse to do the utmost that is expected from you, that, 
 in its enlarged principle, will fit you for communion with 
 the eminent and good, — and give you kindred right to 
 lament at their extinction ! 
 
 I know that the regulated proceedings of this evening, 
 might justify, or impose my silence — but why, when the 
 form of that estimable Being,* whose death we are de- 
 ploring, is not yet consigned to earth — why should we 
 not speak to you, Gentlemen, who may be considered as 
 part of the family of this mansion, of the loss we have 
 mutually sustained ? Why should we hesitate to offer 
 
 * Mr. Flaxman had died on 7th December 1826, three days before 
 this Lecture was delivered. 
 
446 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 to you, sympathy and condolence ; and to claim them 
 from you ? 
 
 It is just that you should admire and revere him — it 
 is just, on every principle of taste, and virtue, that you 
 should venerate his memory ! And is it not equally so, 
 that you should grieve for him, who toiled to do 
 
 YOU SERVICE ! 
 
 You remember the feebleness of his frame, and its 
 evident though gradual decay — Yet how short has the 
 time been since you saw him with you, sedulous and 
 active as the youngest member — directing your studies 
 with the affection of a parent — addressing you with the 
 courtesy of an equal — and conferring the benefit of his 
 knowledge and his genius, as though he himself were re- 
 ceiving obligation. 
 
 If, on the last meeting of this Academy, any Member 
 had been justified in declining to quit the happy seclu- 
 sion of his studies, it was this admirable man ; whose so- 
 litude was made enjoyment to him, by a fancy, teeming 
 with images of tenderness, purity, or grandeur ; and 
 whose imagination at the close of his life was severely 
 intent on subjects, that called for its greatest energy ; 
 had he lived to execute or direct them, he would have 
 left permanent records of his genius on the Palace 
 of his King. But nothing of present distinction, or 
 future fame, made him forgetful of a duty. On the day 
 when the Premiums were to be voted, he was punctual 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 447 
 
 in his attendance in these rooms ; patiently going round 
 to the performances of the Candidates — intently ob- 
 serving each — and, if a doubt existed in his mind, with 
 that modest candour which never left him, seeking to 
 guide his own opinion, by the impressions of his friends. 
 
 To you, Gentlemen, this was benefit, and honour. — 
 Yet it was but one example of the even tenour of his con- 
 duct in this Academy ; of which I could produce to you 
 eloquent testimony, from members, early associated with 
 him in his duties, and long distinguished by endowments 
 of no common kind. 
 
 The lamented Mr. Fuseli, in his lecture on Invention, 
 has well discriminated between its real character, and 
 that imaginary power which ignorance had assigned to it. 
 
 Mr. Flaxman’s genius, in the strictest sense of the 
 words, was original and inventive. 
 
 His purity of taste led him, in early life, to the study 
 of the noblest relics of antiquity ; and a mind, though 
 not then of classical education, of classic basis, urged him 
 to the perusal of the best translations of the Greek phi- 
 losophers and poets ; till it became deeply imbued with 
 those simple and grand sentiments, which distinguish the 
 productions of that favoured people. When engaged in 
 these mingling studies, the patronage of a lady of high 
 rank,* whose taste will now be remembered with her 
 * The late Dowager Countess Spencer. 
 
448 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 known goodness— gave birth to that series of composi- 
 tions from Homer and the Greek tragedians, which con- 
 tinues to be the admiration of Europe. These, perhaps, 
 from their accuracy in costume, and even the felicitous 
 union between their characters and subjects, to minds 
 unaccustomed to prompt discrimination, may have con- 
 veyed the idea of too close an imitation of Grecian art. 
 Undoubtedly, the elements of his style were founded on 
 it ; but only on its noblest principles ; on its deeper 
 intellectual power, and not on the mere surface of its 
 skill. He was more the sculptor of sentiment, than of 
 form; and, while the philosopher, the statesman, and 
 the hero, were treated by him with appropriate dignity, 
 not even in Raffaele have the gentler feelings and sor- 
 rows of human nature been traced with more touching 
 pathos, than in the various designs and models of this 
 estimable man. The rest of Europe know only the pro- 
 ductions of his genius, when it bent to the grandeur of 
 the antique ; but these, which form its highest efforts, 
 had their origin in nature only; and in the sensibility and 
 virtues of his mind. Like the greatest of modern paint- 
 ers, he delighted to trace from the actions of familiar 
 life, the lines of sentiment and passion ; and from the 
 populous haunts and momentary peacefulness of poverty 
 and want, to form his inimitable groups of childhood, 
 and maternal tenderness ; with those nobler compositions 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 449 
 
 from Holy Writ, — as beneficent in their motive as they 
 were novel in design, — which open new sources of inven- 
 tion from its simplest texts, and inculcate the duties of 
 our faith. 
 
 In piety, the minds of Michael Angelo and Flaxman 
 were congenial. I dare not assert their equality in Art. 
 — The group of “ Michael and the fallen Angel,” is a 
 near approach to the greatness of the former ; and sanc- 
 tified as his memory is by time and glory, it gained no 
 trivial homage in the admiration of the English Sculp- 
 tor ; whose iC shield of Achilles,” his genius alone 
 could surpass ! 
 
 But I trespass too long on the various business of this 
 evening. — To be wholly silent, on an event so afflicting 
 to us all, was quite impossible. 
 
 I know the great and comprehensive talents that are 
 round me — I know the strength remaining to the Aca- 
 demy, but from a long experience of the candour that 
 accompanies it,. I feel that I may safely appeal to this 
 assembly, or their acknowledgment with mine, that the 
 loss of Mr. Flaxman is not merely loss of power, but 
 loss of dignity to the institution. Deep and irreparable 
 is his loss to art, not only to his country ! and to Europe 
 — but to posterity — to whom his works, as they are to 
 us, will be inestimable treasures — but who knowing 
 how short and limited the span that Providence has 
 
 2 G 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
450 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 assigned to the efforts of the longest life, and the finest 
 intellect, and learning that his genius through its career 
 was peaceful, and had inadequate reward, will feel it 
 to be their happier destiny to admire, and not to mourn 
 him — to be thankful that he had existed , and not, like 
 us, to be depressed that he is gone — to revere and fol- 
 low him as their master, and not, as is our misfortune, 
 to lament him as their friend ! 
 
 He died in his own small circle of affection ; — endur- 
 ing pain— but full of meekness, gratitude, and faith ! 
 recalling to the mind, in the pious confidence of his 
 death, past characters of goodness, with well remembered 
 homage of the friend. 
 
 « And ne’er was to the bower of bliss convey’d 
 A purer spirit or more welcome shade.” 
 
451 
 
 CATALOGUES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ROYAL ACADEMY, 
 
 From 1769 to 1830. 
 
 The following Extracts from the Catalogues of the 
 Royal Academy from its commencement, are curious, as 
 they exhibit the progress of the Institution, and the rise 
 and maturity of Artists afterwards famous, and some of 
 whom are now living, whilst the sons of others still 
 possess the public favour. 
 
 1st Catalogue, 1769, 
 
 Contains a Prefatory apology for asking money for 
 admission. Of the works, 2 were by Bacon ; 2 Barto- 
 lozzi; 4 Sir W. Chambers; 2 Cipriani ; 5 Sir Joshua; 
 (4 Portraits, and Hope Nursing Love) ; 4 Gainsborough ; 
 4 Ang. Kauffman ; 2 West. (Departure of Regulus 
 from Rome, Venus Lamenting Adonis) ; 3 Wilson, ( all 
 Landscapes) ; 2 (Landscapes) Zuccarelli. Total con- 
 tents of Exhibition, 136. 
 
 2 G 2 
 
452 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 2nd Catalogue, 1770. 
 
 1 Bacon ; 2 Bartolozzi ; 4 Sir W. Chambers ; 3 
 Cipriani; 3 Richard Cosway; 3 John Flaxman, Sen.; 
 3 W. Hoare; 4 Angelica Kauffman; 8 Sir Joshua, 
 (7 Portraits, and the Children in the Wood) ; 2. West, 
 (Leonidas and Cleombrotus, and a Mother and her 
 Child) ; 4 Richard Wilson, (3 Landscapes, and Cicero 
 with Atticus and Quintius at the villa at Arpenum. Cic. 
 de leg. 2. 74.) ; 3 Richard Cosway; 3 James Wyatt, 
 (views of the Pantheon, Oxford Street); 3 Zoffani; 
 5 Zuccarelli. In all, 245. 
 
 3rd Catalogue, 1771. 
 
 1 Bacon ; 1 James Barry, (Temptation of Adam, 
 Paradise Lost, book 9) ; 1 Bartolozzi ; 4 Sir W. Cham- 
 bers ; 4 Richard Cosway, Associate ; 1 John Flax- 
 man, sen. (model in wax) ; 7 Gainsborough, (whole- 
 length portraits) ; 1 William Hoare ; 1 William Hol- 
 land, (architectural); 6 Angelica Kauffman ; 1 Henry 
 Morland ; 3 Nollekens ; 6 Reynolds, (2 Portraits, 
 Venus chiding Cupid, Nymph and Bacchus, Girl Read- 
 ing, an Old Man, half-length); 9 West, (Death of Wolfe, 
 Hannibal at the Altar, Compassion of Pharaoh's Daughter 
 for Moses, Hector leaving Andromache, Death of Pro- 
 cris, &c.) ; 3 Wilson; 2 J. Wyatt; 3 Zoffani; and 
 1 Zuccarelli. In all 276. 
 
 4th Catalogue, 1772. 
 
 1 Bacon; 3 Barry, (Venus rising from the Sea, 
 Medea’s Incantation over her Children, and Education 
 of Achilles) ; 1 Sir W. Chambers ; 1 Cipriani ; 2 
 
 Richard Cosway ; 3 John Flaxman, Junior ; 6 Gains- 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 453 
 
 borough, (of which four were whole-length portraits) ; 
 4 W. Hoare ; 5 Angelica Kauffman ; 7 P. J. de Lou- 
 therbourg, (Member of the Royal Academy, Paris) ; 
 1 Henry Morland ; 2 Nollekens ; 6 Reynolds, (5 
 portraits, and the Captain of Banditti) ; 5 B. West, 
 (Penn’s Treaty with the Indians, Simeon with the Child 
 Jesus, Juno receiving the Cestus from Venus, Death of 
 Hyacinth us, Una from the Fairy Queen) ; 2 Wilson ; 3 
 Wyatt ; 3 Zoffani ; and 1 John Soane, Hon. Member, 
 (front of a Nobleman’s House). In all, 324. 
 
 5th Catalogue, 1773. 
 
 2 Bacon ; 3 Barry, (two portraits, and J upiter and 
 Juno on Mount Ida); 1 Bartolozzi; 3 Sir W. Cham- 
 bers ; 2 Cosway, R.A. ; 1 Thomas Engleheart ; 2 J 
 Flaxman, Jun. ; 5 W. Hoare; 1 Richard Holland; 
 5. Angelica Kauffman ; 8 P. J. de Loutherbourg ; 1 
 Henry Morland; 4 Nollekens; 1 James Northcote, 
 (a portrait, at Sir Joshua Reynolds’s) ; 2 P. Reinagle ; 
 13. Sir Joshua, (10 portraits, a Nymph with Bacchus, 
 a Strawberry Girl, and Ugolino) ; 2. J. Soane, (at Mr, 
 Holland’s) ; 10 West, (of which 2 were portraits) ; 1 
 R. Wilson, R.A. ; 1 James Wyatt; 2 Zoffani, R.A. ; 
 1. Zuccarelli. In all, 385. 
 
 6th Catalogue, 1774. 
 
 1 Bacon ; 4 Barry, (Lear and Cordelia, Mercury in- 
 venting the Lyre, Antiochus ajid Stratonice, and a por- 
 trait) ; 1 Bartolozzi ; 1 Sir W. Chambers ; 3 Cipri- 
 ani ; 1 Cosway ; 1 Fuseli,* (Death of Cardinal Beau- 
 
 * This was the first painting which Fuseli exhibited at the Academy. 
 
454 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 fort) ; 3 W. Hoare ;7 Angelica Kauffman ; 7 P. J. 
 de Loutherbourg ; 5 Joseph Nollekens, It. A. ; 2 
 James Northcote, (at Sir Joshua Reynolds’s) ; 3 Rein- 
 agle ; 13 Sir Joshua Reynolds, (among which was the 
 Infant Jupiter); 1 J. Soane; 3 B. West; 3 R. Wil- 
 son ; 2 James Wyatt. (Associate.) In all, 364. 
 
 7th Catalogue, 1775. 
 
 4 By J. Bacon ; 2 Barry ; 2 Sir W. Chambers ; 2 
 Cosway ; 1 J. Flaxman ; 7 Angelica Kauffman ; 5 
 by P. J. de Loutherbourg ; 3 by J. Nollekens ; 1 
 James Northcote ; 12 by Sir Joshua Reynolds, (among 
 these were, a Lady in the character of St. Cecilia, and a 
 Beggar Boy and his Sisters) ; 2 by J. Soane ; 7 by 
 West, (among which were 2 portraits); 4 by Angelica 
 Kauffman ; 4 by Richard Wilson. In all, 401. 
 
 8th Catalogue, 1776. 
 
 2 By J. Bacon ; 2 by J. Barry, (Death of General 
 Wolfe, and portraits in the characters of Ulysses) ; 2 by 
 Sir W. Beechey ; 1 Sir W. Chambers ; 1 Cipriani ; 1 
 Singleton Copley ; 5 Angelica Kauffman; 11 Louther- 
 bourg; 4 Nollekens; 1 Northcote; 13 Sir Joshua 
 Reynolds, (10 portraits, Omiah, St.John, Samuel); 1 
 J. Soane ; 6 West, (among which was the Domestic 
 Scene) ; 1 Richard Wilson. In all, 379. 
 
 9th Catalogue, 1777, contained Paintings 423; 
 
 10th, 1778,429; 11th, 1779, 395; 12th, 1780, 489; 
 
 13th, 1781,547; 14th, 1782, 556; 15th, 1783, 465 ; 
 
 16th, 1784,539; 17th, 1785, 641; 18th, 1786, 616; 
 
 19th, 1787, 666. 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 455 
 
 In this Catalogue, 19th, 1787, Thomas Lawrence first 
 exhibited. He had the seven following paintings. His 
 residence was 4, Leicester Square. 
 
 184, A Mad Girl ; 207, Portrait of a Lady; 229, of 
 a Young Lady ; 231, of a Lady ; 234, of Mrs. Esten in 
 the character of Belvidera; 255, a Vestal Virgin; 258, 
 Portrait of a Young Lady. 
 
 In this Exhibition, Sir Joshua Reynolds had 13 ; 
 West, 2; Westall, 1. Sir Joshua's were not of note, 
 except a Portrait of the Prince of Wales. 
 
 20th Catalogue, 1788. 
 
 Six by T. Lawrence, Jermyn Street. 
 
 60, Portrait of a Lady ; 61, of a Gentleman ; 110, of 
 a Gentleman ; 112, of a Lady ; 113, of a Lady; 147, 
 of a Gentleman. 
 
 Sir Joshua had 18 paintings in this catalogue. In all, 
 
 656. 
 
 This year, 1788, was published “ The Bee, or the Ex- 
 hibition exhibited in a new light, being a complete Ca- 
 talogue Raisonne of the Exhibition." In the publication 
 occur the following observations upon Mr. Lawrence s 
 paintings : — 
 
 “ No. 60. This is a wonderful effusion of an early 
 genius, of whom we shall have occasion to speak more 
 fully hereafter. 
 
 “No. 112. Portrait of a Lady, (Miss Madden). 
 After carefully examining and admiring the sky, the 
 draperies, and the background of this little gem, let us 
 cry out as we look upon the face, c Happy the artist who 
 had such a model, and happy the model who had such an 
 
456 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 artist.’ But they are both very young ; let The Bee 
 therefore gently buzz in their ears, beware of vanity : — 
 it is alike the bane of the artist and the beauty. 
 
 u No. 147. Portrait of a Gentleman, (Mr. Dance). 
 This, as the production in oils of a very young man, 
 whose crayon pictures we have mentioned', (see 60 and 
 112), is so very harmoniously coloured that we confess 
 ourselves at a loss whose style to recommend our artist 
 to pursue.” 
 
 21st Catalogue, 1789. 
 
 In all, 615 paintings: 13 by Mr. Lawrence, No. 41, 
 Jermyn Street. 
 
 51, Portrait of a Gentleman ; 100, of a Lady of Qua- 
 lity ; 122, of a Lady, (crayons) ; 128, of a Lady ; 130, 
 of a Gentleman ; 171, of a Gentleman ; 194, of a Lady 
 of Quality ; 232, of a Lady of Quality ; 459, a Head from 
 Nature ; 528, Portrait of a Lady ; 536, of a Gentleman ; 
 554, H. R. H. the Duke of York; 555, Portrait of a 
 Gentleman. 
 
 22nd Catalogue, 1790. 
 
 In all, 703 : 12 by Mr. T. Lawrence, 41, Jermyn 
 Street. 
 
 19, Portrait of a Gentleman; 26, of H. R. H. the 
 Princess Amelia; 100, of Her Majesty; 103, of a Gene- 
 ral Officer; 145, of a Lady; 151, of a Nobleman’s Son ; 
 171, of an Actress; 202, of a Nobleman’s Children ; 219, 
 of a Young Nobleman ; 260, of a Clergyman ; 268, of 
 an Officer; 275, of a Young Lady of Quality. 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 457 
 
 23rd Catalogue, 1791. 
 
 In all, 672: 11 by T. Lawrence, 24, Old Bond Street. 
 
 75, Portrait of a Lady of Quality ; 97, of a Gentle- 
 man ; 122, of a Lady ; 140, of a Gentleman ; 180, 
 Homer reciting his Poems ; 255, Portrait of a Lady ; 
 375, of a Gentleman ; 385, of a Gentleman ; 394, of a 
 Gentleman ; 429, of a Gentleman ; 516, of a Child. 
 
 24th Catalogue, 1792. 
 
 In all, 780: 10 by Mr. Lawrence, A. 
 
 1. Portrait of a Lady of Fashion as La Penserosa ; 
 25, of a Gentleman and his Lady ; 65, of His Majesty, 
 this was hung next to West’s Edward III. passing the 
 Somme, painted for the Audience Chamber, Windsor 
 Castle) ; 109, of a Gentleman ; 150, of a Lady of 
 Quality ; 183, of a Gentleman ; 209, of an Etonian ; 
 225, of a Lady of Quality ; 366, of a Naval Officer ; 
 513, of a Nobleman’s Children. Hoppner was very 
 strong this Exhibition ; — he had portraits of the Prince 
 of Wales and Duke and Duchess of York. 
 
 25th Catalogue, 1793. 
 
 In all, 856 : 9 by T. Lawrence, 24, Old Bond Street. 
 7. Portrait of a Gentleman, (Mr. Whitbread, Jun.); 
 15, of a Gentleman, (Sir George Beaumont); 63, of 
 H. R. H. the Duke of Clarence ; 80, Portrait of a No- 
 bleman, (Marquis of Abercorn) ; 191, Prospero raising 
 the Storm ; 231, Portrait of a Gentleman, (the Hon. 
 Mr. Robinson); 235, of a Lady, (Mrs. Finch); 545, 
 of a Lady of Quality, (Lady Cath. Harbord) ; 614, of 
 a Gentleman, (Mr. Grey). 
 
458 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 26th Catalogue, 1794. 
 
 In all, 670: 8 by T. Lawrence, R.A. Elect, 29, Old 
 Bond Street. 
 
 78, Portrait of a Gentleman, (Sir G. Eliott) ; 115, of 
 a Bishop ; 131, of a Nobleman ; 160, of a Lady, (to be 
 disposed of) ; 168, of a Lady ; 173, of an Archbishop ; 
 181, of a Lady ; 199, of a Boy. 
 
 27th Catalogue, 1795. 
 
 In all, 735 : 9 by T- Lawrence, R.A. Piccadilly. 
 
 55, Portrait of a Lady of Quality; 75, of a Young 
 Lady ; 86, of a Nobleman ; 131, of an Officer ; 168, of 
 a Gentleman; 175, of a Lady of Quality; 191, of a 
 Gentleman; 596, of William Cowper, Esq.; 602, of a 
 Family. 
 
 28th Catalogue, 1796. 
 
 In all, 885 : 8 by T. Lawrence, Il.A. Piccadilly. 
 
 102, Portrait of a Lady of Quality ; 103, of a Noble- 
 man ; 116, of a Lady ; 147, of a Bishop ; 163, of a No- 
 bleman ; 164, of an Artist ; 183, of a Gentleman ; 202, 
 of an Officer. 
 
 29th Catalogue, 1797. 
 
 In all, 1194: 6 by T. Lawrence, R.A. &c. 
 
 74, Portrait of a Nobleman’s Family, (Lord Exeter 
 and Family); 148, of a Nobleman, (Lord Inchiquin) ; 
 166, of a Lady, (Mrs. Siddons) ; 170, Satan calling his 
 Legions, Milton ; 188, Portrait of a Gentleman, (Mr. 
 Kemble ;) 237, of Mrs. Charles Lock. 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 459 
 
 In a work called “ A Guide to the Exhibition of the 
 Royal Academy, for 1797,” I find the following critique : 
 u 170. Satan calling his Legions. Mr. Lawrence has 
 been hitherto chiefly known as a portrait painter. He 
 has in this picture soared into a higher branch of his art 
 with the greatest success. The figure of Satan is truly 
 sublime, and that of the attendant fiend, Beelzebub, is all 
 that the mind of the poet framed. Perhaps somewhat 
 less of distortion in the countenance of the arch fiend 
 would have been more according to Milton’s description 
 of him. Upon the whole, this performance must place 
 Mr. Lawrence among the first artists of the English 
 School.” 
 
 30th Catalogue, 1798. 
 
 In all, 1054 : 6 by T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter in ordinary to His Majesty, Greek Street, Soho. 
 
 30, Portrait of Mrs. Allnutt; 51, of Lord Seaforth ; 
 184, of Mr. Bell ; 225, of Mr. Kemble, as Coriolanus at 
 the hearth of T. Aufidius; 253, of Mr. Thompson; 
 257, of Mrs. Neave. 
 
 31st Catalogue, 1799. 
 
 In all, 1118 : 6 by T. Lawrence, Greek Street. 
 
 5, Portrait of Mr. Hunter; 76, of the Duke of Nor- 
 folk ; 137, of Mr. S. Lysons; 223, of Miss Jennings ; 
 234, of General Paoli ; 294, of Mrs. Allnutt. 
 
 Hoppner had 8 in this Exhibition, viz. the Earl of 
 Chatham, the Duke of Rutland, the Countess of Suther- 
 land, the Archbishop of York, Lady Melbourne, & c. 
 Opie had nine, nearly all portraits. 
 
460 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 32nd Catalogue, 1800. 
 
 In all, 1100: 7 by T'. Lawrence, Greek Street, Soho. 
 28, Portrait of Mr. Boucherette’s Children; 54, of 
 Mr. Curran ; 178, of Mrs. J. Angerstein ; 193, Rolla ; 
 213, Portrait of the Rev. Mr. Pennicotte ; 246, of Lord 
 Eldon ; 526, of Mrs. Twiss. 
 
 33rd Catalogue, 1801. 
 
 In all, 1037 : 6 by T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty. 
 
 62, Portrait of General Stuart ; 92, of Mrs. G. Byng ; 
 173, of the Hon. Sophia Upton ; 190, of the Hon. Ca- 
 roline Upton ; 197, Hamlet ; 207, Portrait of Mr. 
 Antrobus. 
 
 34th Catalogue, 1802. 
 
 In all, 1091 : 9 by T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty, Greek Street. 
 
 5, Portrait of Lady Templetoun ; 17, of the Mar- 
 chioness of Exeter ; 56, of Earl Cowper ; 72, of the 
 Princess of Wales and Princess Charlotte; 176, of 
 Lady Cunningham; 184, of Hon. T. Erskine; 421, of 
 George Stonestreet, painted for the Phoenix Company ; 
 422, a Master in Chancery, (marked Northcote in the Ca- 
 talogue by mistake); 621, of Sir W. Grant, Master of 
 the Rolls. Hoppner had only one painting in this year. 
 
 35th Catalogue, 1803. 
 
 In all, 1028 : 5 by T. Lawrence, Greek Street. 
 
 21, Portrait of the Right Hon. Lord Thurlow ; 64, 
 of Lady C. Hamilton ; 105, of the Right Hon. IV 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 461 
 
 Wyndham ; 127, of the Hon. Miss Lambe ; 182, of 
 Lord C. Campbell. 
 
 36th Catalogue, 1804. 
 
 In all, 968 : 6 by T. Lawrence, Greek Street. 
 
 17, Portrait of Mrs. C. Thelluson ; 25, of Mrs. Wil- 
 liams ; 110, of J. P. Kemble, Esq.; 121, of C. Curtis* 
 Esq. ; 157, of Sir J. Mackintosh ; 193, of Mrs. Siddons. 
 
 37th Catalogue, 1805. 
 
 In all, 813 : 5 by T. Lawrence, Greek Street. 
 
 96, Portrait of the Hon. C. Grey ; 150, of Lord Am- 
 herst ; 157, of H. Hoare; 195, of Lady E. Foster; 
 219, of the Bishop of Gloucester. 
 
 38th Catalogue, 1806. 
 
 In all, 936: 6 by T. Lawrence, Greek Street, Soho. 
 
 35, Portrait of Lord Ellenborough ; 72, of Sir Joseph 
 Banks ; 91, A Fancy Group ; 125, Portrait of the Earl 
 of Malmsbury ; 137, of W. Baker, Esq. M.P. ; 176, of 
 Miss Riddell. 
 
 39th Catalogue, 1807. 
 
 In all, 1113 : 2 by T. Lawrence, Greek Street, Soho. 
 17, Portrait of the Hon. B. Paget ; 210, of Sir F. 
 
 Baring, J. Baring, and Wall, Esq. 
 
 Mr. Hoppner had 8 in this Exhibition, including 
 Lord King, T. Grenville, the Prince of Wales, Lord 
 Hawkesbury, the Right Honourable C. Long, and Mr. 
 S. Hood. Opie had 6, including Portraits of Lord 
 Lowther, the Duke of Gloucester, and Dr. Parr. 
 
4 62 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 40th Catalogue, 1808. 
 
 In all, 998: 5 by T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty*, Greek Street, Soho. 
 
 74, Portrait of the Earl of Aberdeen ; 95, of the 
 Right Hon. William Pitt, a posthumous portrait ; 133, 
 of the Hon. Lady Hood ; 134, of J. Farrington, Esq. ; 
 175, of the Children of J. Angerstein, Esq. Hoppner 
 only one. Opie none. 
 
 41st Catalogue, 1809. 
 
 In all, 886. T. Lawrence, none. Hoppner had 6.* 
 
 42nd Catalogue, 1810. 
 
 In all, 905: 5 by T. Lawrence, R.A. Greek Street, 
 Soho. 
 
 61, Portrait of Lord Viscount Castlereagh ; 67, of the 
 Right Hon. George Canning; 159, A group of Por- 
 traits, consisting of Mrs. Wall, and her brother, T. Ba- 
 ring, Esq., of their Sons, and of the late Lady Baring ; 
 171, Portrait of Lord Viscount Melville. 
 
 43rd Catalogue, 1811. 
 
 In all, 955 : 6 by T. Lawrence, R. A. Greek Street. 
 
 13, Portrait of the Hon. C. A. Cooper; 69, of Mrs. 
 Stratton ; 88, Major General the Hon. C. Stewart ; 
 
 113, of B. West, Esq. R.A. ; 170, of the sons of 
 
 Labouchere, Esq. ; 194, of Warren Hastings. 
 
 44th Catalogue, 1812. 
 
 In all, 940 : 8 by Mr. T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter in ordinary to His Majesty. 
 
 * Mr. Lawrence had taken offence at the hanging of Lady Hood's 
 portrait in the preceding year, and refused to exhibit in the Exhibition 
 of 1809. 
 
royal academy. 
 
 463 
 
 19, Portrait of the Earl of Lonsdale ; 20, of Miss W. 
 Pole; 57, of Mr. Kemble as Addison’s Cato; 65, of 
 Viscount Mountjoy; 88, of Mrs. May; 103, Sir Wil 
 ham Curtis; 108, of the Earl and Countess Charlemont 
 and their Children ; 228, of T. Taylor, Esq. (translator 
 ot Plato, Aristotle, &c.) 
 
 45th Catalogue, 1813. 
 
 In all, 945 : 8 by T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty, Greek Street, Soho. 
 
 7, Portrait of Lieutenant-General Sir T. Graham • 
 28, of Sir H. Englefield ; 63, of Miss Thayer ; 139, of 
 Countess Grey ; 158, of Lady Ellenborough ; 159, of 
 Lieutenant-General the Hon. Sir Charles Stewart; 208, 
 of Marquis Wellesley ; 222, of James Watt, Esq. 
 
 46th Catalogue, 1814. 
 
 In all, 81 1 : 8 by T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait Pain- . 
 ter in ordinary to his Majesty, Russell Square. 
 
 23, Portrait of Viscount Castlereagh ; 56, of Lady 
 Leicester; 64, of H. R. H. the Duke of York ; 138, of 
 Lady Grantham ; 146, of the Marquis of Abercorn; 237 
 of the Right Hon. J. Macmahon ; 271, of Lady Emily 
 Cowper ; 277, of Master W. Locke. 
 
 47th Catalogue, 1815. 
 
 In all, 908 : 7 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 1 ainter to His Majesty, 65, Russell Sq uare. 
 
 28, Portrait of Mrs. Wolff; 65, of H. R. H the 
 Prince Regent; 76, of H. R. H. Prince Metternich 
 Winnebourgh, Minister for Foreign Affairs of His 
 
464 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 Majesty the Emperor of Austria ; 109, of Field Marshal 
 the Duke of Wellington, holding the sword of state on 
 the last day of thanksgiving at St. Paul’s ; 155, of Field 
 Marshal Prince Blucher; 163, of the Hetman Prince 
 PlatofF ; 276, of R. Hart Davis, Esq. 
 
 48th Catalogue, 1816. 
 
 In all, 970 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter in Ordinary to His Majesty, Russell Square. 
 
 12, Portrait of J. J. Angerstein, Esq. ; 25, of the 
 Bishop of London ; 47, of the Bishop of Durham ; 48, 
 of the Marchioness of Stafford ; 61, of Field Marshal 
 H. R. H. the Duke of York; 107, of Lady Wigram ; 
 161, Major General Sir H. Torrens, K.C.B. ; 184, of 
 Canova. 
 
 49th Catalogue, 1817. 
 
 In all, 1077 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Por- 
 trait Painter to His Majesty, 65, Russell Square. 
 
 24, Portrait of Lieutenant-General the Marquis of 
 
 Anglesea ; 44, of the sons of. Pattison, Esq. ; 68, 
 
 of Lieutenant-General Lord Lyndoch; 72, of H. R. H. 
 the Duchess of Gloucester ; 150, of Mrs. Arbuthnot ; 
 156, of Mr. P. Norton ; 190, of Lady Maria Oglander ; 
 346, of J. Jekyll, Esq. 
 
 50th Catalogue, 1818. 
 
 In all, 1117 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty, Member of the Roman Academy 
 of St. Luke’s, and of the American Academy of Fine 
 Arts. 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 465 
 
 25, Portrait of Lady Acland and her Children ; 53, 
 of Lady Elizabeth Leveson Gower ; 61, of H. R. H. the 
 Prince Regent; 139, of the Hon. Frederick Stewart, 
 son of Lord Stewart ; 148, of the Earl of Suffolk ; 165, 
 of the Duke of Wellington, in the dress that he wore, 
 and on the horse he rode at the Battle of Waterloo; 
 230, of William Morgan, Esq. ; 284, of Lieutenant- 
 Colonel the Hon. H. Lowther. 
 
 51st Catalogue, 1819. 
 
 In all, 1248. Sir Thomas had nothing in this year’s 
 Exhibition. 
 
 52nd Catalogue, 1820. 
 
 In all, 1702 : 5 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter in Ordinary to His Majesty, Member of the 
 Roman Academy of St. Luke’s, of the Academy of Fine 
 Arts at Florence, and of the Fine Arts at New York. 
 
 88, Portrait of John Bloomfield, Esq. ; 115, of John 
 Abernethy, Esq. ; 122, of the daughter of His Imperial 
 Highness the Archduke Charles of Austria ; 140, of 
 Lady Selina Meade; 171, of the Right Hon. Sir 
 William Grant, late Master of the Rolls, painted for the 
 gentlemen of the Chancery Bar, attending the Rolls 
 Court. 
 
 53rd Catalogue, 1821. 
 
 In all, 1165 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 69, Portrait of the Marquis of Londonderry ; 70, of 
 H. R. H. the late Princess Charlotte ; 106, of Mrs. H. 
 Baring and Children ; 171, of Sir Humphry Davy, Pre- 
 vol. i. 2 H 
 
466 
 
 CATALOGUES OF THE 
 
 sident of the .Royal Society, &c. ; 180, of the Lady 
 Louisa Lambton ; 193, of the late Benjamin West, Esq. 
 President of the Royal Academy ; 208, of Viscountess 
 Pollington and Child ; 331, of James Palmer, Esq. Trea- 
 surer of Christ Church Hospital. 
 
 54th Catalogue, 1822. 
 
 In all, 1049 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty, &c. 
 
 35, Portrait of Count Michael Woronzow ; 67, of 
 Mrs. Littleton ; 73, of H. R. H. the Duke of York ; 
 77, of His Majesty, for the Royal Palace, Windsor ; 80, 
 of the Countess of Blessington ; 113, of the Duke of 
 Bedford ; 134, of Field Marshal the Duke of Welling- 
 ton ; 300, of Little Red Riding Hood. 
 
 55th Catalogue, 1823. 
 
 In all, 1131: 7 by Sir T. Lawrence, Principal Portrait 
 Painter to His Majesty, &c. 
 
 7, Portrait of the Earl of Harewood ; 28, of the Arch- 
 bishop of York ; 84, of Lord Francis Conyngham ; 89, 
 of the Countess of Jersey ; 124, of the Right Hon. the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer ; 318, of Sir William 
 Knighton ; 445, of a Young Lady. 
 
 56th Catalogue, 1824 
 In. all j 1037: 8 by Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 38, Portrait of Lord Stowell ; 59, of H. R. H. the 
 Duchess of Gloucester ; 98, of the Earl of Clan wil- 
 liam ; 99, of the Children of C. B. Calmady, Esq. ; 119, 
 of Mrs. Harford ; 146, of His Grace the Duke of 
 
ROYAL ACADEMY. 
 
 4 67 
 
 Devonshire; 291, of Sir William Curtis, Bart.; 392, 
 of the Children of the Marquis and Marchioness of 
 Londonderry. 
 
 57th Catalogue, 1825. 
 
 In all, 1072 : 8 by Sir Thomas Lawrence. 
 
 28, Portrait of Mrs. Peel ; 57, of H. R. H. the Prin- 
 cess Sophia ; 71, of the Duke of Wellington ; 83, of the 
 Right Hon. George Canning ; 118, of the Lord Chan- 
 cellor ; 140, of J. Wilson Croker, Esq. ; 288, of the son 
 of John George Lambton, Esq. ; 399, of Lord Bexley. 
 
 58th Catalogue, 1826. 
 
 In all, 1105: 8 by Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 65, Portrait of Lady Wallscourt; 75, of Lord Robert 
 Manners; 91, of the Marchioness of Lansdowne ; 101, 
 of the Right Hon. Robert Peel ; 109, of the Right 
 Hon. George Canning; 158, of the Hon. Mrs. Hope; 
 307, of the Viscountess Melville ; 396, of a Child. 
 
 59th Catalogue, 1827. 
 
 In all, 1127 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 26, Portrait of Miss Croker ; 75, of the Countess of 
 Normanton ; 117, of the Earl of Liverpool ; 134, of 
 Mrs. Peel; 146, of Sir Walter Scott, Bart.; 212, of 
 Lord Frederick Leveson Gower ; 314, of John Nash, 
 Esq. ; 422, of Richard Clarke, Escj. Chamberlain of the 
 City of London. 
 
 60th Catalogue, 1828. 
 
 In all, 1214 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 66, Portrait of Lady Lyndhurst ; 77, of the daughter 
 
 2 h 2 
 
468 CATALOGUES OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY. . 
 
 of the Right Hon. W. Peel ; 114, of the Countess 
 Gower and her Daughter ; 140, of the Marchioness of 
 Londonderry, and her Son, Lord Seaham ; 158, of Earl 
 Grey ; 263, of Sir Astley Cooper ; 341, of Lady Georgi- 
 ana Agar Ellis and her Son ; 463, of the Earl of Eldon. 
 
 61st Catalogue, 1829. 
 
 In all, 1223 : 8 by Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 57, Portrait of H. R. H. the Duke of Clarence ; 97, 
 of Miss Macdonald ; 102, of the Duchess of Richmond ; 
 135, of Lord Durham ; 172, of Robert Southey, Esq. ; 
 193, of the Marchioness of Salisbury; 338, of John 
 Soane, Esq. ; 455, of Mrs. Locke, Sen. 
 
 62nd Catalogue, 1830. 
 
 In all, 1278 : 8 by the late Sir T. Lawrence, &c. &c. 
 71, Portrait of Lady Belfast ; 79, of His Excellency 
 the late Sir Ralph James Woodford, Bart. Governor of 
 Trinidad, painted for the Hall of the Illustrious Board 
 of Cabildo, of that Island ; 100, of the Archbishop of 
 Armagh ; 114, of Miss Fry ; 116, of the Earl of Aber- 
 deen ; 136, of T. Moore, Esq.; 312, of the Earl of 
 Hardwicke; 427, of John Angerstein, Esq. 
 
469 
 
 C ATALOGUE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 WORKS OF SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, 
 
 EXHIBITED 
 
 IN THE YEAR 1830, IMMEDIATELY AFTER HIS DECEASE, 
 
 AT THE BRITISH INSTITUTION. 
 
 Numbers 1 to 21 were Painted by Order of His late Majesty for 
 THE WATERLOO GALLERY AT WINDSOR. 
 
 NO. 
 
 1 HlS Most Gracious Majesty, George the Fourth. 
 
 2 Small Portrait of His Most Gracious Majesty George 
 
 the Fourth. 
 
 3 The Prince Metternich. 
 
 4 General Tchernicheff. 
 
 5 General Overoff. 
 
 6 The Earl Bathurst, K.G. 
 
 7 Field Marshal the Prince Blucher. 
 
 8 The Cardinal Consalvi. 
 
 9 Field Marshal Arthur Duke of Wellington, K.G. 
 
 bearing the Sword of State. 
 
470 
 
 CATALOGUE OF THE WORKS 
 
 10 His late Holiness Pope Pius VII. 
 
 11 The Hetman Platoff. 
 
 12 The late Earl of Liverpool, K.G. 
 
 13 The Baron Hardenburg. 
 
 14 The Count Capo dTstria. 
 
 15 The Count Nesselrode. 
 
 16 The late Marquess of Londonderry, K. G. 
 
 17 Frederick William the Third, King of Prussia. 
 
 18 Francis the Second, Emperor of Austria. 
 
 19 Charles the Tenth, King of France. 
 
 20 The Archduke Charles. 
 
 21 Alexander, Emperor of all the Russias. 
 
 22 The Lady Emily Cowper, — from the Collection of 
 
 Earl Cowper .* 
 
 23 Mrs. Harford. — R. H. Davis , Esq. M.P. 
 
 24 The Countess of Normanton — Earl of Normanton. 
 
 25 The Marquess of Londonderry, K. G. — Marquess 
 
 Camden , K. G. 
 
 26 The Countess Gower — Earl Gower. 
 
 27 The Honourable Mrs. Hope — Thomas Hope , Esq. 
 
 28 Master Hope — Thomas Hope , Esq . 
 
 29 Lady Georgiana Gordon, the present Duchess of 
 
 Bedford— The Duke of Bedford. 
 
 30 Lady Grantham — Lord Grantham. 
 
 31 Sir Francis Baring, Bart. John Baring, Esq. and 
 
 J. Wall, Esq — Sir Thomas Baring , Bart. M.P. 
 
 32 Lady Georgiana Agar Ellis and Son — The Hon. 
 
 G. A. Ellis , M. P. 
 
 33 Hamlet — Sir Thomas Baring , Bart. M. P. 
 
 * The names in Italics indicate the owners of the paintings. 
 
OF SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 471 
 
 34 His Royal Highness Prince Leopold, K. G. — 
 
 H. R. H. Prince Leopold , K. G. 
 
 35 Lady Baring, Mrs. Wall, Sir Thomas Baring, Bt. 
 
 Master Baring Wall, and Master Francis 
 Baring — Sir Thomas Baring , Bart. M. P. 
 
 36 The Baron Gentz— His Majesty. 
 
 37 The late John Julius Angerstein, Esq.— John An- 
 
 ger stein, Esq. 
 
 38 Lady Georgiana Fane— Earl of Westmoreland , K.G. 
 
 39 The Countess Cowper — Viscount Melbourne. 
 
 40 Her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte ; a Draw- 
 
 ing— John Meredith , Esq. 
 
 41 The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T. — Earl of Aberdeen 
 
 K. T. 
 
 42 The Right Hon. Sir William Grant — The Rolls 
 
 Court , 
 
 43 The Children of John Angerstein, Esq.— John An- 
 
 gerstein , Esq. 
 
 44 The Marquess of Lan sdowne— Marquess of Lans - 
 
 downe. 
 
 45 Richard Hart Davis, Esq. M. P. — R. H. Davis , 
 
 Esq. M. P. 
 
 46 Miss Thayer — F. Knight , Esq. 
 
 47 Sir Edmund Carrington, M P. — Sir Edmund Car- 
 
 rington , M. P. 
 
 48 Mrs. Littleton— E. J. Littleton , Esq. M. P. 
 
 49 The Hon. Charles William Lambton— Lord Durham. 
 
 50 The late Earl of Liverpool — Rt. Hon. Sir R. Peel , 
 
 Bart. M. P. 
 
 51 The Lord Durham — Lord Durham. 
 
 52 Donna Maria de Gloria — His Majesty. 
 
472 CATALOGUE OF TIIE WORKS 
 
 53 The Duke of Wellington, K. G. — Right Hon. Sir 
 
 R. Reel , Bart. M. P. 
 
 54 The Children of Charles B. Calmady, Esq. — Charles 
 
 B. Calmady , Esq. 
 
 55 Lady Peel — Right Hon. Sir R. Peel, Bart. M. P. 
 
 56 The late Right Hon. George Canning — Right Hon. 
 
 Sir R. Peel, Bart. M. P. 
 
 57 Right Hon. John Wilson Croker, M. P.— .Right 
 
 Hon. J. W. Croker , M. P. 
 
 58 Miss Croker — Right Hon. J. W. Croker, M. P. 
 
 59 Miss Murray — Right Hon. Sir G. Murray, M. P. 
 
 60 The Duke of Bedford— The Duke of Bedford. 
 
 61 The late Sir Thomas Lawrence, P. R. A. — His 
 
 Majesty. 
 
 62 Mrs. Wolff — Miss Croft. 
 
 63 The Hon. Miss Upton — Viscount Templetowne. 
 
 64 The Countess Rosalie — Miss Croft. 
 
 65 The late Duchess of Devonshire — The Duke of 
 
 Devonshire. 
 
 66 The Cardinal Consalvi — The Marquess of Bristol. 
 
 67 The late John Kemble in the character of Cato — 
 
 “ Eternity ! thou pleasing, dreadful thought !” 
 
 — Executor of Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 68 Lady Wigram — Sir Robert Wigram, Bart. 
 
 69 The Viscount Seaham — Marquess of Londonderry. 
 
 70 The Marchioness of Londonderry — ditto. 
 
 71 Mrs. Angerstein — J. Angerstein, Esq. 
 
 72 Miss Capel — John Capel, Esq. M. P. 
 
 73 Miss Siddcns — Duke of Bedford. 
 
 74 His Royal Highness Prince George of Cumberland — 
 
 His Majesty. 
 
OF SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. 473 
 
 75 The Marchioness of Londonderry and Lord Seaham 
 
 — The Marquess of Londonderry. 
 
 76 The Duke d’Angoul^me — His Majesty. 
 
 77 The Duchess of Richmond — The Duke of Richmond. 
 
 78 Benjamin West, Esq. — His Majesty. 
 
 79 Sir Jeffry Wyatville — His Majesty. 
 
 80 Francis Chaplin, Esq. M. P. — Executor of Sir T. 
 
 Lawrence. 
 
 81 Vice Admiral Sir Edward Codrington, G. C. B. — Sir 
 
 E. Codrington , G. C. B. 
 
 82 Satan ! — 
 
 Awake, arise, or be for ever fallen ! 
 
 — Executor of Sir T. Lawrence. 
 
 83 The late Samuel Lysons, Esq. — Rev. Daniel Lysons. 
 
 84 Mr. Samuel Woodburne — Mr. Samuel Woodburne. 
 
 85 John Soane, Esq. R. A. — John Soane , Esq. R.A. 
 
 86 His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, K.G. 
 
 His Majesty. 
 
 87 The late John Kemble in the Character of Hamlet — 
 
 His Majesty. 
 
 88 His Royal Highness the Duke of York, K. G. — 
 
 His Majesty. 
 
 89 The Prince Schwartzenburg— His Majesty. 
 
 90 The late Right Hon. George Canning, M. P. — His 
 
 Majesty. 
 
 91 The Portrait of the late Sir Thomas Lawrence, 
 
 P. R. A. at the Age of Sixteen ; his first attempt 
 in Oil Painting — John Meredith , Esq. 
 
 END OF THE FIRST VOLUME. 
 
LONDON : 
 
 P HINTED BY SAMUEL BENTLEY, 
 Dorset Stieet, Fleet Street. 
 
k J 
 
 GETTY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 
 
 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 
 
 3 3125 01034 7249 
 
I 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
mm m