7b 88-B 33251 K ®f)omas (©atnafoorougf), 21. % 4H m . burner, ft* a. EXHIBITION OF PAINTINGS B Y Sfjomas #atn^oroug!), 2L AND f. M. m burner, E. 2T. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ARTISTS’ FUND AND ARTISTS’ AID SOCIETIES AT THE GALLERIES o/M. KNOEDLER & CO. 556-55S Fifth Avenue January 14th to 31st inclusive 1914 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2018 with funding from Getty Research Institute https://archive.org/details/exhibitionofpainOOunse M. KNOEDLER & CO. BEG TO THANK THEIR PATRONS FOR THEIR GREAT GEN¬ EROSITY IN MAKING THE LOAN EXHIBI¬ TION OF PAINTINGS BY THE TWO GREAT ENGLISH MASTERS, TURNER AND GAINS¬ BOROUGH, A REPRESENTATIVE ONE COV¬ ERING THE DIFFERENT PERIODS OF THEIR WORK. THE PROCEEDS OF THE EXHIBITION ARE TO BE GIVEN TO THE ARTISTS’ FUND AND ARTISTS’ AID SOCIETIES, WHO HAVE IN COMMON THE OBJECT OF ASSISTING UNFORTUNATE ARTISTS. THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH, R. A. (1727-1788) In 1727, the year that George II came to the throne, Thomas Gainsborough, youngest child of nine, first saw the light in a well-to- do tradesman’s home at Sudbury, in Suffolk. John Gainsborough, the father, was a thrifty man, who made his way as milliner and clothier, but whose chief source of revenue was from making of shrouds for the dead. The lad, Thomas Gainsborough, went to the grammar school of the town, his mother’s brother, the Rev. Humphrey Bur¬ roughs, being the master. By ten he had marked skill with the pencil; at twelve he had set his heart on being a painter, and was using brushes and oil paints. He left school at fourteen. Displaying a precocious instinct for landscape and pastels, the lad was happiest when painting from Nature—a holiday ever meant, for the bright, mischievous boy, the woods by Sudbury and his paints and canvas with him. The father saw that art it must be for his son; so after a family council the boy of fourteen was packed off on the coach to London to board with a silversmith, Dupont of Wardour Street, who sent him to Gravelot, the book illustrator, engraver and painter, from whom the lad undoubtedly caught the hint of his French delicatesse and the marked influence of Watteau. Gravelot generously got the boy into the St. Martin’s Lane Academy. Thus a year after Reynolds first stepped into London as ’prentice to Hudson, the coach set down Gains¬ borough in her cobbled thoroughfares and the eager youth and as eager boy must have often rubbed elbows in their walks down St. Martin’s Lane. Soon after Gainsborough became the pupil of Hay- man, the historical painter. Three years of apprenticeship saw him at seventeen start artist on his own account at lodgings in Hatton Garden, working for dealers, and painting landscapes and portraits at three to five guineas. He also modeled in clay but found small demand for this work. He was unsuccessful the first year and returned to Suffolk in 1745, where he was soon making many friends. Up with the lark he was painting landscapes until set of sun, painting what was before him regardless of the laws of Italy. He painted his eldest brother, John Gains¬ borough, known as “Schemer Jack,” for his eternal inventions, one of which was the flying machine that let him drop into a ditch from the roof of a house. Gainsborough’s sister, Sarah, became Mrs. Du¬ pont and mother of Gainsborough Dupont, an artist of considerable gifts, who helped his uncle later with the draperies of his lesser por¬ traits. Gainsborough met at nineteen the beautiful girl, Margaret Burr, who sitting to Gainsborough ended the sittings as the bride of the young painter. So, at nineteen, Gainsborough was married to the eighteen-year-old beauty, entering thus early on that happy family life that knew few shadows. It was a fortunate affair for the young fel¬ low: the bride brought him £200 a year Thus in 1745 a married man at nineteen, Gainsborough took a small house in Sudbury for a few months, painting woodland pieces; six months thereafter the young couple moved to Ipswich, where he remained thirteen years. He there met Phillip Thicknesse, a soldier, who was a quarrelsome, huffy, busybody of a man, but who had a real affection for the artist and realized the genius of the man, and he 4 brought many sitters to Gainsborough’s studio and the artist was soon a welcome guest in many of the houses of the great. The year 1760 that saw Reynolds move into his house in Leicester Square was also an eventful one for Gainsborough in Suffolk; he made his move towards fortune. The fame of Reynolds came to him and stirred him to be up and doing. At Thiclcnesse’s prompting he packed up and made for the fashionable town of Bath, espying sitters in plenty among the beaux and belles who flocked to the gayeties of the inland watering place. The news of his coming quickly got about and his studio was besieged by celebrities of the day. His fee of five guineas for a head he was early able to raise, and to ask forty guineas for a half-length and one hundred for a full-length. His thirteen happy years at Bath were to thrust forward his art in rapid fashion. Here he fell under the glamour of Van Dyke and the Flemings, his color developed and his handling became broader. And he made copies of Van Dyck, Velasquez, Rembrandt, Titian and others—above all, of Dutch landscapes. Here he painted the musicians, the actors, the Stratford-on-Avon Garrick, Mrs. Siddons, Perdita Robinson, and the galaxy. By the time that the Royal Academy was founded in 1768, Gains¬ borough’s reputation was so considerable and assured that his was one of the thirty-four names enrolled in its original membership, and he became a regular exhibitor at the Academy. His fame and talent were increasing steadily at Bath, and in 1770 he painted and sent to Lon¬ don to the Royal Academy one of the most famous pictures of boy¬ hood known to us, “Master Buttall,” known the wide world over as “The Blue Boy,” which is now owned by the Duke of Westminster. In 1774 the thought of coming up to London seems to have dawned upon him, especially as Thicknesse strutting about as the dis¬ coverer of Gainsborough seems to have annoyed him and he became involved in a dispute as to the painting of a portrait of Thicknesse in exchange for a certain bass viol belonging to Mrs. Thicknesse, and which ended in his destroying the portrait and returning the viol. So with a sigh of relief he packed his belongings and straightway made for London in the Summer of 1774. His success was immediate and great. He took the western wing of Schomberg House in Pall Mall, better known to us nowadays as the War Office, having for neighbor in the other wing the famous quack. Dr. Graham, to whom Society flocked, to be ushered by liveried servants into a room where a beauti¬ ful girl lay up to the neck in the earth or mud bath that brought, health. By paying extra, the bloods could see her after the bath had made her beautiful. That girl was Emma Lyon, afterwards Lady Hamilton and Nelson’s charmer. The Musidora at the National Gal¬ lery was probably painted by Gainsborough from her during these days. Reynolds, whether he felt the danger of rivalry or not, concealed it if he felt it, and with his habitual courtesy called upon Gainsborough. The call was not returned; and Gainsborough showed the same lack of tact and good feeling in absenting himself from the Academy meet¬ ings and dinners, and for several years after coming to London, sent no pictures to the annual display. Yet the two artists’ admiration for each other was prodigious and neither was backward in his acknowl¬ edgement of it. 5 Gainsborough’s triumphs leaped to him on his coming to town. A few months in Pall Mall, and the King commanded him to Buckingham Palace, where he was soon painting the King and Royal Family. Whatever had been the cause of Gainsborough’s coolness to the Academy, he returned in 1777 and he sent several important pictures to the exhibition.. The Duchess of Devonshire, owned by the late Mr. J. Pierpont Morgan, was painted the following year. In 1783 Gainsborough sent to the Royal Academy 26 canvases, 15 of which were portraits of the Royal Family. It also included the superb Rothschild “Mrs. Sheridan” seated in a landscape. The Royal Acad¬ emy was never again to display a picture by Gainsborough while he lived. The following year of 1784 he sent his great group of George the Third’s Daughters and, knowing that much of its charm depended upon its delicacy and subtleties of tone and of handling, he begged that it should be made an exception to the rule whereby no full-length portrait is allowed upon the line, agreeing to have his other pictures placed in inferior places. The Council refused the request and Gains¬ borough wrote them the following letter: “Mr. Gainsborough presents his compliments to the gentlemen ap¬ pointed to hang the pictures in the Royal Academy; and begs leave to HINT to them that if The Royal Family, which he has sent for this Exhibition (being smaller than three-quarters), are hung above the line along with full lengths, he never more, whilst he breathes, will send another picture to the Exhibition. Saturday Morn. Which he swears by God.” From this breach until his death was to be a short span of four years. It was at this time that he painted the celebrated “Mrs. Siddons” at the National Gallery and in which he made his famous, witty remark of impatience at not getting the features exactly to his liking; “Damn your nose, madame, there’s no end to it!” In 1788 while seated near an open window at the trial of Rey¬ nolds’ friend, Warren Hastings, he was taken ill and complained of pain to his wife and niece, and it turned out to be cancer. Survey¬ ing his career as he lay dying he decided that he had not acted generously toward his great rival. He wrote to Sir Joshua, begging him to come to him and bid good-bye. It is pleasant to read of the reconciliation of the two men; all past envies and humiliations blotted out. By Gainsborough the sense of the coming end to his art was far more keenly felt than the ending of his life; but as Reynolds rose to leave him, Gainsborough added smiling: “We will all meet in Heaven, and Van Dyck will be of the company.” Gainsborough died on the 2nd of August, 1788, a few days after Sir Joshua left him. Reynolds was one of the pall-bearers as they bore the dead man to the churchyard at Kew, where his wife’s body was laid ten years after¬ wards. Gainsborough, from the lack of the Italian journey, uttered a more purely native song. Steeped as he was in admiration of Van Dyck, he owed even more of his training to the love of Nature as voiced by the Flemish landscape-painters; and in his portraiture his debt to the genius of France was as heavy almost as to Van Dyck. Generous, quick to anger, as eager to make it up again, spend¬ thrift, careless, pouring out money to his poor relations, with a ready hand in his pocket at every tale of distress, he stands out a lovable man. His love of music was an obsession; when he heard 6 a finely rendered work, he would pour out money to buy the instru¬ ment, which he never mastered. He would give away a masterpiece for a good song. Of the many whimsical stories told of his extravagant and dogged insistence in buying the musical instrument from a player on hearing it well played, one of the drollest is that of his affair with Bach. The two men had much in common—dry humour, affectionate disposi¬ tion, a free tongue, and the genial readiness to take chaff as well as to sow it. Bach, who would ironically pretend to be overwhelmed with Gainsborough’s musical genius, to Gainsborough’s huge amuse¬ ment, one day found him rending the air, his cheeks blown out, with bloodcurdling efforts upon the bassoon. “Pote it avay, man,” cried the suffering Bach, “pote it avay; do you want to burst yourself? De defil! . . Py all the powers above, as I hope to be saved, it is just for all the vorld as the veritable praying of a jackass.” “Damn it!” said Gainsborough, “why, you have no ear-—no more than an adder!” Beginning by minute observations in landscape, he gradually grew to utter the general impression swiftly, with broad, deft balance, un¬ til, as at a wizard stroke, he caught the mood of a still evening or the like, and wrought it in romantic fashion upon the canvas. His sense of colour was exquisite. He was the first English painter to discover England. His judgment in placing figures in landscape was astoundingly right. To portraiture he brought an exquisite subtlety difficult to define, as his touch is difficult to describe. He paints at times with the paint as though he drew in colour; and that he secured thereby the marvellous range of pearly greys, tender lilacs, and wondrous bloom is a marvel. He was the painter of feminine loveliness, but for all the loveliness he states the character of the sitter first of all. He loved Van Dyck, and some of his chief suc¬ cesses with boys’ portraits were when he set them in Van Dyck dress. His art was personal; it grew out of his own intention. Moody and impressionable, his art depended greatly on his interest in his sitter. His method was to set his canvas and himself at right angles to his sitter; then he would stand as far from his canvas as he was from the sitter, and would so paint it, standing still, even if he had to use sticks six feet long on which to tie his brushes. He worked with great rapidity. The music that he so greatly loved, he wrought by the alchemy of his genius into terms of colour; and in his employment of it he is without rival in his own realm. He painted his portraits throughout, treating the draperies as an essential part of the harmony; it was only in the tedious portraits that he employed Gainsborough Dupont. He infused his own vitality into all he did— his figures pulse, breathe with life. With scant care for the literary and philosophic discussions of the age, he boasted that his sole reading had been in the Book of Nature. He was a pure impressionist in painting; he saw the pic¬ tured thing in mass, colour, and tone—not in line. And he caught by his exquisite handling the allure, the femininity of women in their portraits with a genius that has never been surpassed. 7 JOSEPH MALLORD WILLIAM TURNER, (1775-1851) When 1800 struck, the British genius had found its highest utter¬ ance in the realm of colour; the giant of that realm was Joseph Mal- lord William Turner. In Turner we reach the supreme artist in painting of our race; in the realm of landscape the supreme artist of all time. In the poetic employment of color, in the wide gamut of color music, in the prodigious power of the orchestration of the art of painting, he stands beyond all other achievement whatsoever, as in the art of literature Shakespeare stands above all other achievement. That Turner should have reached to this prodigious achievement in the realm of landscape is the more extraordinary, since other painters, as mere painters, have been greater craftsmen than he. Velasquez and Hals, Rembrandt and Titian, Watteau and Vermeer, knew no such vast adventure in the realm of color. One is more subtle, another more tender, another more absolute in his craftsmanship; but their range in artistic utterance is small compared with the eagle flight of Turner. Turner was given a long life, as though destiny had fitted him for its chosen mouthpiece in his mighty adventure in the arts. His art went rapidly through the phases of the earlier developments of artistic utterance—burst into the supreme utterance of the art of his own age—and launched on the vast uncharted seas of the future orchestration of color. In a mean shop at 26 Maiden Lane, long since pulled down, in the Parish of St. Pauls, Covent Garden, there lived in good King George’s days, and plied his calling of barber, one William Turner, a fellow from Devon—indeed, at South Molton still lived his father and mother. To this Devonshire barber and his wife was born April 23, 1775 a man-child whom they christened Joseph Mallord William Turner, destined to bring immortal fame to that Devonshire stock and to the England that bred him, (the greatest poet in color that the world has seen). At nine the boy Turner drew Margate Church, just before going to his uncle at New Brentford for change of air and eventually to school there, to draw cocks and hens and birds and flowers on wall and book. He was always drawing. He would copy engravings, color them, and the thrifty father would hang them in his window for sale. The early intention of making the boy a barber soon gave way to the encouragement of the arts. He was sent to Coleman’s School at Margate in 1788, and after¬ wards to Malton, a draughtsman of perspective in Long Acre, who sent him away for incapacity to understand perspective! Reynolds is raid to have taken him up; and in 1789 he was bound to the architect Hardwick, going also to the schools of the Royal Academy early in 1790, at 15, working for two years at the antique. He was making drawings in that ill-lit home the while for sale; he was coloring prints for John Raphael Smith; he was out sketching with a lad of ms own age called Girtin; and the evening saw him drawing at the generous Dr. Monro’s, besides washing in backgrounds for the archi- 8 tect Mr. Porden. What labor for a boy! Scant wonder that scholar¬ ship had small part in his life. But at least he was learning to draw; for that he was trained like a racehorse for the race. And he loved the life. With his boy companion, Girtin, he was soon the finest “water-color draughtsman” in the land, except perhaps Couzens. He was of a very secretive nature, which early drove him to “keeping himself to himself.” He was soon shunning all social intercourse, the very companionship even of his fellow-artists. In¬ deed some of his earl water-color drawings in their exquisite harmonies of green and gray, painted at sixteen, are so astoundingly original and in advance of all landscapes painted before him that his craft must have been marvelous long before he came to manhood. In isolation of the mind and of the body, in a rude ignorance, ruthlessly and without flinching, he paid the price of immortality. Dr. Monro taught him water-color drawing, he as greedily learnt architecture from Hardwick, he picked up something of oil painting from Sir Joshua Reynolds; but of education, as we mean the word, he had scarce any. With feverish eagerness he studied and copied Claude and Van der Velde, Titian and Canaletto, Cuyp and Wilson. Above all he went to Nature. He would see a picture at an exhibition, and go straight home and try to outclass it. His sole condition was soli¬ tude; he needed that. When he came to journey for subjects, he would carry all his baggage over his shoulder on a stick. Jotting, noting, his sensitive brain alive to every vista. His prodigious memory could recall cloud shapes. He found that minute methods were slow; he promptly employed broad, swift handling. At fourteen then, in 1789, he became a student at the Royal Academy, the next year he showed his view of the Archbishop’s Palace at Lambeth. His sketch-books of 1792 and 1793 are of Oxford, Windsor, Hereford, Worcester, Wales and Monmouthshire. In 1797 was his first known displayed oil painting “The National Gallery, Moonlight, Milbank.” The Academy elected Turner an Associate in 1799. He stood head and shoulders above all rivals at 24. Wilson, a mightier genius, he strove to out-distance for many a year, nor ceased until 1822; but he recognized in him a powerful antagonist. In 1802 he was elected a Royal Academician, and crossed to France where a new world was opened to his vision. He added the mystery of the sea to his ever-widening realm. The “Death of Nelson” was of 1808. In 1807 Turner challenged the accepted God of Landscape, Claude, with his “Liber Studiorum.” He now put his own vision against the more limited vision of Claude. In 1809 Turner began those one-man shows of his work in his house in Harley Street, which soon became known as “The Turner Gallery.” He was becoming rapidly rich and lived very quietly. In 1819 Turner, at the urging of Lawrence then in Rome, pushed on for the first visit to Italy; he moved eagerly from place to place, Rome and the rest, his sketch-books incessantly busy. To the Academy of 1825 he sent only the “Dieppe.” Turner is now 50. Money poured in—he had no use for it. His house becomes ever more squalid, ever more dingy. Turner has no eyes but for his art. His eternal squabbles with his publishers be¬ come ever more furious; yet he shows at the Academy his brilliant “Cologne.” It is hung between two portraits by Lawrence; puts them out—he covers his “Cologne” with water-color lampblack to give Lawrence’s portraits honor. Then he makes across sea to the Meuse, the Moselle, and the Rhine. 9 In 1827, his 52nd year, Turner began to pour forth his splendor. The serene “Mortlake” and “Rembrandt’s Daughter,” in which he tries a fall with the great Dutchman, are of this time. In 1828 he again went to Italy. It came to Turner that color affects the senses exactly as music does; if the color be blithe and gay it arouses blithe and gay emo¬ tions—if sombre and solemn, it arouses sombre and solemn emotions. And the day he discovered this vital fact, he thrust the art of paint¬ ing beyond all previous achievement into the modern achievement. In 1833, at 58, Turner painted his first picture of Venice—Venice that he was to immortalize in masterpiece after masterpiece, and state in wondrous fashion, haunted by all the wizardry of her sea romance. He begins by challenging and overwhelming Canaletto; soon he was to breathe Venice across the canvas, aerial as splendid dreams. In 1835 Turner was 60. Many an artist tied to a narrow gamut, has exhausted his genius upon that gamut before 30, and is in decline. Turner, of wiry frame, amazing virility, and nerved like steel, is to pour forth work from 60, which has a blithe feeling and freshness of youth. His powers enormously increase; he adds territory after terri¬ tory to the realm of art—vast territories such as aforetime had never even been explored. It is interesting to note that the Press now began to attack Turner. Blackwood opened the ball by assailing the “Venice.” The following year, 1836, this attack became more general over the “Mer¬ cury” and “Argus.” Ruskin at 17 took up the championship of Turner, which the old man grimly let go by him with his “I never move in these matters.” In 1842, at 67, Turner painted several of the masterpieces of his great career. The magnificent work known as “The Snowstorm,” is a masterly statement of mist and light. The critics of all kinds were furious; they called this wondrous thing, this, one of the master¬ pieces of the ages, soapsuds and whitewash. Turner had been lashed to a mast on a vessel off Harwick in a hurricane to see that vision; he had made the sailors take him out to see it—a man of 67. Monro of Novar offered him £25,000 for all he had at Queen Anne Street Gallery, but Turner answered with his “No! I won't, I can’t . . . besides, I can’t be bothered. Good evening.” In 1845 he was 70. We have Ruskin’s witness that his health began to fail, yet the little black figure squats down by the Thames mud for over half an hour, to watch how the water ripples to the shore. On the death of Shee, Turner fretted at not being made Presi¬ dent of the Academy and he left his usual lodgings and no one knew where he had gone, but was found by his old servant at Chelsea living in a cottage with a Mrs. Booth, who spoke of him as her husband. Having been wheeled to the window to look upon his last winter sunset, he died in her arms on the 19th of December, 1851. The urchins of Chelsea had called the eccentric old man Admiral Booth—or Puggy Booth. He was buried in St. Paul's Cathedral, hard by Sir Joshua Reynolds. He left his vast treasure of art to the Na¬ tion. But the huge sum that he willed for a home for poor and de¬ cayed artists of lawful English birth was fought over in Chancery, and went to his kin. So the 19,331 items of his art came into the IO Nation’s keeping, many of them ruined, most in a filthy state, but all, thanks to the care and research of lovers of his art, now emerg¬ ing into the splendid display of his genius in the National Collections and handsomely housed. Mean of money, he was artistically generous. A young fellow called Bird has his picture crowded out—Turner takes down one of his own and sets up Bird’s instead. He covers his luminous “Cologne” with lampblack to give Lawrence’s picture honor—“it will all wash off after the exhibition.” So the little, bowlegged, snuffy, big-headed man, with the small hands and feet who, when sitting perched on a high place, could paint masterpiece after masterpiece in the four days allowed for var¬ nishing at the annual display, who gave his life to the conquest of light and color, lives immortal; indeed, did not Constable affirm that the painting of Turner was the most complete work of genius known to him. It is but the dullard pedant who, untouched by the wizardry of it all, peers at the painted canvas and picks holes in details. II Catalogue GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 1. Miss Adney. Half length; turned half-way to the right; nearly full face, eyes directed toward the spectator. She wears a white satin gown with a Pompa¬ dour neck and pink ribbons. On the black hair a lace cap with pink bow. Pearl earrings. Brown background. Painted oval. Painted after 1763. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. Elizabeth Adney of Walcot, daughter and heir of John Adney of Bath, born about 1742, mar¬ ried Captain John Bragge in 1762, and died 1783. Gainsborough painted this subject twice, the first time in blue, in 1762. Companion picture to the portrait of Captain John Bragge. Mentioned in Mortimer Menpes’ and James Greig’s “Gainsborough,” London, 1909, page 169. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1906, No. 18. Collection of Mr. Adney, Bath. Collection of Sir John D. Milburn, Bart., late of Guyzance, Addington, Northumberland. 12 GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 2. James Bouchier. Half length ; turned slightly to the left; nearly full face, eyes directed toward the spectator. His right hand in his waistcoat. He has white stock and ruffles; under left arm his hat. Pow¬ dered hair. Painted oval. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. He was in the Indian Civil Service, 1772. Previously owned by a member of the family, England. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 3. Captain John Bragge. Half length; turned half-way to the left, face and eyes in the same direction. His right hand in his waistcoat. He wears a green coat and waistcoat, white stock with laces and lace ruf¬ fles ; under left arm black three-cornered hat. Powdered hair. Brown background. Painted oval. Painted during the artist’s Bath period, (1760- 1774), about 1765. Canvas 25R5 W. x 30^ H. Capt. J. Bragge was born in 1741, married Eliza¬ beth Adney 1762 at Bath Abbey, and died 1786. Companion picture to the portrait of Miss Adney. Reproduced in “The Art Journal,” December, 1911, No. 882, page 425. 13 Mentioned in “The Art Journal,” December, 1911, No. 882, page 424. Previously owned by a member of the family, England. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; Geo. Scott Chad, of Thursford, Norfolk. Half length. Seated, turned half-way to the right; face and eyes in the same direction. Hands folded in front of him. He wears a brown coat, white stock and ruffles. Powdered hair. Landscape background. Canvas 24J4 W. x 29% H. Companion picture to the portrait of Mrs. Geo. Scott Chad. Previously owned by a member of the family. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; Mrs. Geo. Scott Chad, of Thursford, Norfolk. Half length. Seated, turned half-way to the left, face and eyes in the same direction. Right hand up to her face. Low dress. Hair dressed high; a tress hanging over the right shoulder. Landscape background. Canvas 24^ W. x 29% H. Companion picture to the portrait of Mr. Geo. Scott Chad. Previously owned by a member of the family. 6 . GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; Lord Darnley. Half length; turned half-way to the left; eyes directed toward the spectator. He wears a plum-coloured coat and white stock. Pow¬ dered hair. Painted oval. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. John, Fourth Earl of Darnley, son of John, Third Earl of Darnley, and Mary, daughter and heir of John Stoyte. He was born in 1767, and mar¬ ried in 1791 Elizabeth, third daughter of the Right Hon. William Brownlow of Lurgan, by whom he had four children. He died in 1831. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 194. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1877, No. 252. Exhibited at Grosvenor Gallery, London, 1885, No. 93. Previously owned by a member of the family, England. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 7. Lady Anne Duncombe. Full length. Standing in a landscape, turned slightly to the right; face turned half-way to the left, looking over her right shoulder. Hands crossed in front of her; right hand holding the hat with ostrich feather. Low-neck blue satin 15 dress with lace trimming and ornamented with pearls; white skirt. Hair dressed high, a tress hanging over her left shoulder. On the left architectural background. Painted about 1774. Canvas 60 W. x 9154 H. Lady Buncombe was a daughter of Anthony Dun- combe, created 1747 Lord Feversham ; she mar¬ ried, 1777, Jacob, Second Earl of Radnor, and died, 1829. Engraved 1872 by J. Scott in “Engravings from the works of Thomas Gainsborough,’’ pub¬ lished by Henry Graves & Co., London, No. 53 (here wrongly called Hon. P'rances Dun- combe). Reproduced in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, opposite page 44. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, P a S e J 94- Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1873, No. 120. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1907, No. 8 7- Exhibited at the Exhibition of Old English Mas¬ ters, Berlin, 1908, No. 10. Collection of Lord Lionel Rothschild, London. Collection of Charles J. Wertheimer, Esq., London. 16 8 . GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788,) Philip Dupont. Half length; turned slightly to the left. Nearly full face, eyes directed toward the spectator. He wears a claret-coloured coat, yellow waist¬ coat and white stock. Painted oval. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. Engraved 1875 by R. Josey, in “Engravings from the works of Thomas Gainsborough,” published by Henry Graves & Co., London, No. 57 - Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 194. Collection of Louis Huth, Esq., of Possingworth, Hawkhurst. Collection of M. Kappel, Berlin. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 9. Lady Eden. Half length. Seated, turned slightly to the left, arms crossed on a book in front of her, the left resting on the book; face turned slightly to the left, eyes directed toward the spectator. Lilac low-cut dress ornamented with pearls; scarf loosely thrown over her. Hair powdered and entwined with blue ribbon, turned up; loose curls fall over either shoulder. Dark back¬ ground. 1 7 Painted about 1770. Canvas 24 W. x 29P2 H. Dorothea, Lady Eden, was a daughter of Peter Johnson, Esq., Recorder of York. She mar¬ ried as his second wife, Sir. John Eden, of Windlestone Hall, Durham. Engraved 1870 by G. H. Every in “Engravings from the works of Thomas Gainsborough,” published by Henry Graves & Co., London, No. 58. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 194. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1878, No. 15 . 6 .. Exhibited at Grosvenor Gallery, London, 1885. No. 114. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1887, No. 34. Collection of Mrs. Eden Kaye Greville (daugh¬ ter of Dorothea, Lady Eden). Collection of James Price, Esq. Collection of Sir Julian Goldsmid, Bart. Collection of Mr. Agnew, London. Collection of Ch. Wertheimer, Esq., London. 18 10 . GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; John Gainsborough (“Scheming Jack"). Canvas 20 W. x 24 H. The painter’s brother. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 196; mentioned page 44, as follows: “John, commonly known about his native town as ‘Scheming Jack,’ was the eldest of the family. He really seems, like his younger brother Humphry, to have been gifted with considerable genius for mechanics. Unfortunately, those who have recorded his achievements appear to have been quite destitute of any such gift them¬ selves, and so it is difficult to understand what ‘Scheming Jack’ really did invent. He seems, however, to have hit upon the principle of the turbine, for what else can Thicknesse mean by a ‘wheel that turned in a still bucket of water’? A metal turbine, laid on the water in a bucket, would turn as it sank to the bottom. Unhap¬ pily, like so many other inventors, Jack had been denied the faculty for contriving links be¬ tween invention and profits. The cradle which rocked itself and the ‘cuckoo which sang all the year round,’ were toys, but the turbine offered possibilities which someone about him ought to have recognized. A chronometer, built in com¬ petition for the Government prize of £20,000, which was won by Harrison, had better luck, 19 for, though unsuccessful in the competition, it was awarded a sum of money for its ingenuity.” Mentioned in Fulcher’s “Life of Gainsborough,” London, 1856, page 210, as belonging to W. Sharpe, Esq. Fulcher also gives an account of John Gainsborough, pages 12-17. In his “Sketch of the Life and Paintings of Thomas Gainsborough,” (1788), Philip Thick- nesse (Gainsborough’s friend) gives an inter¬ esting description of a visit he paid “Scheming Jack” about the year 1768. Purchased from the family by W. Sharpe in 1841. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788J 11. David Garrick. Half length. Seated, turned slightly to the right; nearly full face, eyes directed toward the spec¬ tator. His right arm resting on the back of the chair, with his left hand he is making a gesture. He wears a dark coat, white stock with laces and lace ruffles. Powdered hair. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. David Garrick was an English actor, born in Hereford, Feb. 20, 1716, and died in London, Jan. 20, 1779. His grandfather was a French Protestant who took refuge in England after revocation of the Edict of Nantes. His father was a Captain in the English Army, and main¬ tained with difficulty a family of seven children. Reproduced in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, opposite page 28. 20 12 . Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, P a & e 2 &. Collection of J. P. Schomberg. Collection of D. R. Blaine. Collection of Mr. Peel, London. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; The Hon. Mrs. Graham. Half length. Standing, turned slightly to the right, face and eyes slightly to the left. Arms in front of her, one above the other, her hand holding up her dress. Low-neck lilac dress. Hair dressed high and ornamented with pearls; a tress hanging over her right shoulder. Land¬ scape background. Canvas 28 W. x 36 H. Her name was Mary, the daughter of the Ninth Lord Cathcart; born 1757, married 1774, Sir Thomas Graham, of Balgowan, afterwards Lord Lynedoch, one of the heroes of the Peninsular War; she died, 1792. Supposed to be the study for the portrait in the National Gallery at Edinburgh. Mr. Claude says: “One of the most brilliant works of Gainsborough’s last period, superior perhaps in quality to the celebrated full length portrait of the same subject now in the National Gallery of Scotland,” Both pictures were hidden from 1792 to 1884. 21 13- Engraved 1868 by C. Tomkins in “Engravings from the works of Thomas Gainsborough,” pub¬ lished by Henry Graves & Co., London, No. 70. Reproduced in Armand Dayot’s and Claude Phil¬ lips’ “Cent Portraits de femmes,” Paris, 1910, between pages 4 and 5. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 196. Mentioned in Mortimer Menpes’ and James Greig’s “Gainsborough,” London, 1909, page I 74 - Mentioned in Armand Dayot’s and Claude Phil¬ lips’ “Cent Portraits de femmes,” Paris, 1910, page 5. Exhibited at the second special exhibition of Na¬ tional Portraits, South Kensington Museum, London, 1867, page 106, No. 463. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1907, No. 112. Exhibited at the “Exposition de Cent Portraits de Femmes,” Paris, 1909, page 4, No. 5. This picture was bequeathed by Lord Lyndoch to his nephew, James Maxton Graham, the father of the recent owner. Previously owned by A. G. Maxtone-Graham, of Cultoquhey, Pertshire. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788J Viscount Hampden. In plum-coloured coat and vest, with lace cravat and powdered wig. Painted oval. Canvas 22*4 W. x 27J4 H. 22 14 - Robert Trevor, son of Thomas, Baron Trevor, and of Anne, daughter of Robert Weldon, Esq., of Brampton, Huntingdon; born in 1701; suc¬ ceeded his brother as Fourth Baron Trevor; created Viscount Hampden of Hampden, Bucks, in 1776; married Constantia, daughter of Peter de Huybert, Lord of Van Kruningen, Holland; died in 1783. He was Minister at The Hague, 1739-46. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 197. Collection of the Earl of Hardwicke, 1888. Collection of James Price, Esq., 1895. Collection of J. Ruston, Lincoln, 1913. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; Mrs. Hatchett. Half length.. Standing; full face, eyes directed toward the spectator. Low-neck yellowish dress. Dark hair arranged in ringlets, some of which are falling down on her shoulders. Land¬ scape background, on the left a spray of con¬ volvulus. Painted oval. Painted in 1786. Canvas 24^2 W. x 29^ H. Mrs. Hatchett was the wife of Charles Hatchett, Esq., of Mount Clare, Roehampton. He was descended from the old French Noblesse and of a Huguenot family like his wife. The family of the latter disguised itself under the English surname of Collick, but the real name was lost. 23 This portrait was painted immediately after her marriage when the lady was 17 years old and presented by the artist in its present frame. Reproduced in the catalogue of the Loan Exhibi¬ tion of the Coates Collection at Lawrie & Co., London, 1893, opposite No. 24. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 197. Exhibited at the Loan Exhibition of the Coates Collection at Lawrie & Co., London, 1893, No. 2 4 - Collection of Alfred Rothschild, London. Collection of Charles Wertheimer, London. Collection of Archibald Coates, Paisley. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 15. Mrs. Horton, Afterwards Duchess of Cumberland. Bust; low white dress, transparent veil. Painted in 1770. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. Anne, daughter of Simon Luttrell, who was cre¬ ated Baron Truham in 1768, Viscount Car- hampton in 1780, and Earl of Carhampton in 1785; married, in 1765, Christopher Horton, of Catton Hall, Derbyshire, who died in 1769; in 1771, in spite of the strongest opposition of King George III, she married, as her second husband, his brother, Prince Henry Frederick, who was created Duke of Cumberland; she died in 1803 (? 1809). 24 At the time of her marriage with the Prince she was “a fascinating widow of twenty-four.” Walpole says, “She had the most amorous eyes in the world, and eyelashes a yard long,” “was coquette beyond measure, artful as Cleopatra, and completely mistress of all her passions and projects.” William B. Boulton, in his “Gainsborough,” pp. 245-6, says: “The Duke and Duchess appeared to be very partial to Gainsborough as a por¬ trait painter, for together they sat as many as twelve times to him. The Duchess was a very prominent figure in the social life of that period. She came of the Luttrell family, who were well regarded by King George as henchmen of the Court, and it was her brother the Colonel who represented the Court interest against Wilkes in the dire struggle of the Middlesex election. It is possible, however, that the King’s favour declined when he heard from Calais that his brother had married the lady in 1771. Accord¬ ing to Walpole, this lady was much in love with her first husband, Mr. Horton, whom she lost, with their infant daughter, within a fortnight. There is an unusual touch of tenderness in Horace’s mention of the poor lady’s trouble, whom he describes as ‘covering her grief for the daughter in order to conceal the misfortune from the husband.’ For the rest, his descrip¬ tion of the Duchess is a helpful commentary upon Gainsborough’s fine canvas. ‘She was rather pretty than handsome,’ he says, ‘and had more the air of a woman of pleasure than a 25 lady of quality, though she was well made, was graceful and unexceptionable in her conduct and behaviour. But there was something in her languishing eyes which she could animate to enchantment if she pleased, and her coquetry was so active and so varied, and yet so habit¬ ual, that it was difficult to resist it. She danced divinely, and had a great deal of wit, but of the satiric kind; and as she had haughtiness before her rise, no wonder she claimed all the observances due to her rank after she became Duchess of Cumberland.” Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 194. Here the picture is stated to have been painted in 1766, but Sir Armstrong told Sir Hugh Lane some years after that he thought it must have been painted in 1770. Exhibited at the second special exhibition of National Portraits, South Kensington Museum, London, 1867, page 104, No. 449. Collection of Lady Wilmot Horton, in whose hus¬ band’s family it had remained from the time it was painted. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788J Miss Isabel Howland. Half length. Seated, turned slightly to the left ; nearly full face, eyes directed toward the specta¬ tor. Flower-figured dress; black velvet neck¬ lace with pearl ornaments, pearl earrings; on the hair, done high, a cap. Painted oval. Canvas 25^ W. x 30 H. 26 Engraved 1877, by J. Scott in "Engravings from the works of Thomas Gainsborough,” published by Henry Graves & Co., London, No. 78. Mentioned in Armstrong’s "Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 198. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1877, No. 41. Exhibited at Grosvenor Gallery, London, 1885, No. 125. Previously owned by Sir George Beafcmont, Bart. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 17. Portrait of Lady Hylton. Half length; full face, eyes directed slightly to the left. Plum-coloured dress, white fichu. Gray powdered hair, loose curls falling down on her shoulders. Painted oval. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. This portrait has never been exhibited. Purchased from Lord Hylton, the present head of the Jolliffe family. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 18. Lady Innes. Three-quarters length. Standing, turned half-way to the right, also the face; eyes directed toward the spectator. In her left hand she holds a rose-bud, right arm hanging down by her side, hand holding a fold of her robe. Blue taffeta 27 dress, trimmed with lace; narrow black velvet band round her throat, and small white plume in her hair. Landscape background with roses on the left. Canvas 28J6 W. x 40 H. Probably Sarah, daughter of Thomas Hodges of Ipswich, first wife of Sir William Innes, Eighth Bart. A work of the Ipswich period, hitherto unrecorded in works on Gainsborough. Exhibited at the “English Master’s” Exhibition at M. Knoedler & Co., London, 1911, No. 7. Innes Collection, 1876. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788 ) Major (Afterwards General) Johnston, of Hawley's Dragoons. Full length; scarlet coat, green breeches. Lean¬ ing against a tree in a landscape. The following inscription is painted on the pic¬ ture: “Colol. James Johnston. Married the Lady Henrietta Cecilia West, daughter of John, First Earl of De Lawarr.” Canvas 60 W. x 90 H. Mentioned in “Horace Walpole’s Letters” (Cun¬ ningham), pp. 24-5, in a footnote: “He was a great favourite with the fair sex, and was in¬ deed so handsome and fashionable at this time that Gainsborough requested him as a great favour to sit to him for his portrait in order to bring himself into vogue—which he did—and 28 20 . after the picture had been exhibited a consider¬ able time, the artist made Major Johnston a present of it, and it is now in the possession of Sir Alexander Johnston.” Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 198. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788J Mrs. King. Dark hair, blue satin dress, lace fichu, pearls in¬ terlacing hair and dress. Painted at Bath in 1770 (according to Sir Walter Armstrong). Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. Dorothea, daughter of the Rev. Spence; married in Dublin, in 1759, Captain James King (who died in November, 1771) ; died at Bath in 1774, and was buried in the church at Swords, Co. Dublin. She was a sister of the Rev. William Spence, sometime Rector of St. Stephen’s, Dub¬ lin, and also of Whitehaven, Cumberland. Purchased from the family in 1912. 29 GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 21. Mrs. Kinlock. Half length; full face, eyes directed toward the spectator, low-neck yellow dress. Brown hair, dressed high. Dress and hair ornamented with pearls. Painted oval. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. Mrs. Isabella Kinlock was wife of David Kinlock, of Gourdie. Loaned to the National Gallery, Scotland. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 198. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 22. Miss Linley and Her Brother. Half length; Miss Linley in low dress, turned to the right, but with head looking out at specta¬ tor. Her brother, in red. with his head at her shoulder. Painted in 176S. Canvas 25 W. x 27*4 H. Elizabeth Ann (Eliza), elder daughter of Thomas Linley, the musical composer; born, 1754; sang with her sister, afterwards Mrs. Tickell, at the concerts established by her father at Bath; mar¬ ried privately to Richard Brinsley Sheridan, the celebrated dramatist and parliamentary orator, in 1772, at Lisle, whither she had travelled with 30 the intention of entering a convent; an accom¬ plished singer and remarkable for her beauty, she retired from the stage, and died in 1792. Her brother, Thomas Linley, violinist and com¬ poser, was born in 1756; leader of the orches¬ tra and solo-player at his father’s concerts at Bath, in 1773, and at the Drury Lane Oratorios, 1774; was drowned through the capsizing of a pleasure boat in 1778. Engraved 1868 by G. H. Every in “Engrav¬ ings from the works of Thomas Gainsborough,” published by Henry Graves & Co., London, No. 82. Reproduced in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” London, 1899, opposite page 20. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 199. Mentioned in Mortimer Menpes’ and James Greig’s “Gainsborough,” London, 1909, page 96. Exhibited at the second special exhibition of National Portraits, South Kensington Museum, London, 1867, page 164, No. 758, by the Count¬ ess Delawarr. Exhibited at New Gallery. Exhibited at Grafton Galleries “Fair Children” Exhibition, London, 1895, No. 127. Exhibited at Messrs. Agnew’s, London, 1913, No. 2. Collection of Lord Sackville, Knole Park, Seven- oaks. 3i GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 23. Edmund Morton Pleydell. Three-quarters length. Standing; nearly full face; leaning left arm on back of Chippendale chair. Plum-coloured velvet coat. Open win¬ dow on left. Green curtain background on the right. Canvas 41 W. x 50 H. Previously owned by a member of the family, England. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; 24. Mrs. Provis. Half length; turned slightly to the right, nearly full face, eyes directed toward the spectator. Yellow low-neck dress, trimmed with gold and yellow beads; gray scarf, with gold fringe, hanging over her left shoulder. Her dark hair done high, and ornamented with a string of beads. Painted oval. Signed and dated 1766. Canvas 24 W. x 29 H. Mrs. Provis, nee Anne Pigott, wife of William Provis, Esq., of Shepton Mellet and the Cres¬ cent Batto was one of the most celebrated resi¬ dents of that city during the time that Gains¬ borough lived there. Previously owned by a lady, England. 32 25 - GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788; Mrs. John Taylor. Half length ; turned slightly to the right; face and eyes directed slightly to the left. Low-neck yellow satin dress with pearls on the sleeves and front of bodice. Pale blue and gold sash around her waist. Powdered hair with trans¬ parent gauze veil falling over right shoulder. Painted oval. Canvas 25 W. x 30 H. Her name was Sarah, eldest daughter of Samuel Skey, of Spring Grove, Worcester, and mar¬ ried, 1778, John Taylor, of Bordesley Park and Moseley Hall, Birmingham. Reproduced in the illustrated catalogue of a Loan Collection of portraits, Birmingham, 1903, No. 2 7 - Reproduced as frontispiece in “The Burlington Magazine,” Vol. Ill, 1903, oposite page 117. Exhibited at the exhibition of a Loan Collection of portraits, Birmingham, 1903, page 29, No. 27. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Gainsborough,” Lon¬ don, 1899, page 203. Mentioned in “The Burlington Magazine,” Vol. Ill, 1903, page 124. Collection of John Taylor, Esq., Birmingham. Collection of George W. Taylor, Esq. 33 26. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788,) Portrait of a Gentleman. In scarlet coat, light blue vest, trimmed with sil¬ ver braid, white stock and powdered hair. Painted oval. Canvas 24^ W. x 29 H. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788J 27. A Pastoral Landscape With Figures and Cattle. In the foreground a pool, on the far side of which a thick forest is closing the whole scen¬ ery, under the trees some sheep and two cows with the shepherd boy. To the left a boy and a girl seated. A mountainous background is seen on the left between the trees. Canvas 59 W. x 47 H. Mentioned in Mortimer Menpes’ and James Greig’s “Gainsborough,” London, 1909, page 176. Collection of Lord Delawarr, 1857. Collection of Capt. F. H. Huth, England. 34 28. GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788) A Grand Landscape. A hilly and wooded landscape. From the distance flows a creek to the foreground, where it forms a waterfall. At the foot of the fall a horseman is watering his horse. From the wooded pass at the right comes a flock of sheep. In the middleground to the left a group of cows, and more to the right a woman walking towards a bridge. In the distance are visible outlines of hills. Canvas 62^2 W. x SIVa H. Collection of J. Gillotte, 1872. Collection of Sir Horatio Davies, M.P., Late Lord Mayor of London. 35 29 - TURNER (1775-1851) The Pilot Boat. Agitated sea. Man in boat on left hails with his red cap the nearest of two smacks. Beyond on right, man-of-war at anchor. Low coast lone in distance. Burst of light from broken, stormy sky falls on greyish-green sea in fore¬ ground and on boat. Signed “J. M. W. Turner, R.A.,” and painted be¬ tween 1805 and 1810. Canvas 48 W. x 36 H. Reproduced in Frederick Wedmore’s “Turner and Ruskin,” London, 1900, Vol. I, opposite page 132. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 230. Mentioned in A. J. Finberg’s “Turner’s Sketches and drawings,” London, 1910, page 52, as fol¬ lows: “Turner has summed up these exper¬ iences of his in a group of absolutely unrivalled sea-pieces. Pictures like Mr. F. H. Fawke’s ‘Pilot hailing a Whitstable Hoy,’ Mr. G. J. Gould’s ‘The Nore,’ Mr. P. A. B. Widener’s ‘Meeting of the Thames and Medway,’ and Lady Wantage’s ‘Sheerness,’ seem to me be¬ yond all question the most glorious pictures of the sea ever painted.” Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1866, No. 156. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1906, No. 77 - Collection of Fred H. Fawkes, Esq., Farnley Hall. 36 TURNER (1775-1851; Fishing Boats Entering Calais Harbour. In the middle foreground two fishing boats, sail¬ ing into the harbour with a fresh breeze, the brown sails in fine form against the dark low¬ ering clouds; seething water, well lighted, is in the wake of the boats, and a black surging wave rises on the left. Ships and buildings in the left distance beyond the pier; to the right a beacon. Canvas 38 W. x 28 H. Engraved by Turner himself (W. G. Rawilson, “Turner’s Liber Studiorum,” London, 1906, page 132, No. 55). Reproduced in “The Burlington Magazine,” Vol. XI, 1907, page 399. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 229. Mentioned in MacColl’s “Nineteenth Century Art,” Glasgow, 1902, page 190. Mentioned by C. J. Holmes, in “The Burlington Magazine,” Vol. XI, 1907, page 397. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1884, No. 53 - Exhibited at Guild Hall, London, 1892, No. 94. Exhibited at the Loan Exhibition of the Coates Collection at Lawrie & Co., London, 1893, No. 28. Exhibited in the International Exhibition, Glas¬ gow, 1901, No. 80. Collection of Henry Drake, London. Collection of Archibald Coates, Paisley. 37 TURNER (1775-1851; The Harbour of Dieppe. 3 1 - View, looking towards the town; the harbour is thronged with boats, on which are numerous figures; a market is being held on the quay on the right; blue sky, with clouds. Warm even¬ ing light. Canvas 88 J 4 W. x 68 *4 H. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 221. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1825, No. I 5. 2 -. Exhibited at Messrs. Agnew’s, London, 1903. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1910, No. 112. Collection of James Wadmore, 1854. Collection of John Naylor, Esq., Leighton Hall. TURNER (1775-1851; 32. Cologne : Arrival of a Packet Boat, Evening. Calm rosy twilight. Slanting rays of evening light from right, over the walls of town. Tow¬ er of St. Martin rises above them in centre. In front the heavily built packet boat from Diis- seldorf. Above the distant bridge, to left the Siebengebirge, and the church of Deutz in ex¬ treme left. 38 Canvas 88J 4 W. x 69 H. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 220. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1826, No. 7 2 - . Exhibited at “The Art Treasures of the United Kingdom” Exhibition, Manchester, 1857, No. 224. Collection of James Wadmore, 1854. Collection of John Naylor, Esq., Leighton Hall. TURNER (1775-1851; 33. Rembrandt's Daughter Reading a Love Letter. In an interior a white-dressed girl seated on the edge of a bed, with her left arm thrown over the back of a crimson-damask chair; in her right she holds a letter which she is reading. Entering the room behind the chair is the painter, with a palette and brushes in his left hand; his wife follows him. In the background a canvas on which is inscribed “Rembrandt.” The room is lighted from an unseen window on the left. Canvas 35^ W. x 47^4 H. The general scheme is taken from Rembrandt’s “Pothiphar’s Wife,” in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum at Berlin, Catalogue with all illustra¬ tions, 1911, part II, page 187, No. 828 H. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, pages 57, 85, 119, 227. 39 34- Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1827, No. 166. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1877, No. 261. Collection of Ayscough Fawkes, Esq., Farnley Hall. Collection F. Hawkesworth Fawkes, Esq., Farn¬ ley Hall. TURNER (1775-1851; The Wreckers. The high coast of Northumberland is seen in the right distance; in the middle distance Dunstan- borough Castle. A steamboat assisting a ship off shore. Numerous figures in the foreground dredging wreckage on shore. Stormy sky with gleams of sunshine. Painted in 1834. Canvas 48 W. x 36 H. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 207. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1834, No. i?9-. Exhibited at British Institute, London, 1836, No. 53- Exhibited at the Royal Jubilee Exhibition, Man¬ chester, 1887. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1891, No. 21. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1896, No. 128. 40 Collection of Elhanan Bicknell, Esq. Collection of Sir John Pender, Bart., London. Collection of the Duke of Northumberland, Warksworth Castle. TURNER (1775-1851; 35. Venice. Looking across the canal. S. Giorgio and the Dogano to right. Shipping with bright col¬ ored right and left. Brilliant afternoon light. Canvas 48 W. x 36 H. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 234. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1834, No. T 75-. Collection of H. McConnell. Collection of John Naylor, Esq., Leighton Hall. 4i 36 - TURNER (1775-1851; The Colliers. View on the river Tyne. On the right numerous vessels, some taking in coal by torchlight; on the left other vessels moored along the shore; full moon among white clouds reflected along the centre of the pale green water. Signed “J. M. W. T.” Canvas 48 W. x 35^ H. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 223. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1835, No. 24. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1887, No. H- Collection of H. McConnell, Esq. Collection of John Naylor, Esq., Leighton Hall. TURNER (1775-1851; 37. Pluto Carrying Off Proserpine. View of a mountainous landscape with a castle on a hill in the middle distance, and a water¬ fall on the left of it. In the foreground on the left Pluto carrying off Proserpine; on the right a tree. Other figures on the left. Warm even¬ ing sky. The artist is said to have borrowed the scenery of Sicily, with its mountains and water-falls for this subject. 42 Painted in 1839. Canvas 48^ W. x 36^ H. Mentioned in Armstrong's “Turner,” London, 1902, pages 121 and 227. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1839, No. 2 , 6 °. Exhibited at Guild Hall, London, 1892, No. 112. Exhibited at Royal Academy, London, 1896, No. 28. Exhibited at Guild Hall, London, 1899, No. 35. Collection of Mr. Wetherall. Collection of Edward Chapman, Esq., London. TURNER (1775-1851; 38. Italy: Bridge in the Middle Distance. Wide landscape with water and long line of arched bridge, divided by groups of tall stone pines. Figures on slope in foreground. Painted between 1840 and 1845. Canvas 45^ W. x 35 % H. Very similar in composition to the well-known drawing in sepia called “Bridge in Mid-Dis¬ tance, Sun between trees,” bequeathed by Turn¬ er to the National Gallery; this was engraved in mezzotint by Charles Turner for the “Liber Studiorum,” 1808, Plate XIII. Mentioned in Armstrong’s “Turner,” London, 1902, page 223. Exhibited at Messrs. Agnew’s, London, 1913. John Graham Collection. Bicknell Collection. cTWessrs. M. Knoedler* & Co. have at their disposal expert restorers. High class framing RESTORATION OF WORKS OF cART IS A MATTER REQUIRING THE GREATEST DISCRETION. We METH¬ ODS AND SUITABILITY OF EACH RESTORER VARYING IN RELATION TO THE WORK OR RASTER RE¬ QUIRING RESTORATION.