tmms-»H

HOGARTH S
LONDON

'¦'¦ti'f'U

?/ HEAT LEY

r»ft''

' YALE >
CENTER for" ^
CBntis(P
¦ Art '

BEQUEST OF
FREDERICK WHILEY HILLES

HOGAETH'S LONDON

' To the student of History, these admirable works must be
invaluable, as they give us the most complete and truthful
picture of the manners and even the thoughts of the past
century. We look and see pass before us the England of a
hundred years ago — the peer in his drawing-room, the lady of
fashion in her apartment, foreign singers surrounding her,
and her chamber filled with gewgaws in the mode of that day ;
the church with its quaint florid architecture and singing
congregation ; the parson with his great wig and the beadle with
his cane ; all these are represented before us, and we are sure of
the truth of the portrait.' — Thackeray's English Humourists.

3^;h?,

4. y/Ja-,

-my ^/i-'t^alt/..

' ^/ly/y^.,;//.

,/

HOGARTH'S LONDON
Pictures of the Manners of the
Eighteenth Century

BY

HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A.

ILLUSTRATED

LONDON
CONSTABLE AND COMPANY LTD.
1909

British C-t
PefereriOj;

TO
AUSTIN DOBSON, Esq., LL.D.
Dear Dobson, — Some thirty years ago or more Dr. John
Percy, P.R.S., the well-known metallurgist and Hogarth col
lector, after referring to the study of Hogarth's works as too
big a subject for one man to deal with, advised me to under
take the division of Hogarth's London. I was pleased with the
suggestion and I set to work to collect materials. This was
before the publication of your first book on Hogarth, a volume
of the greatest interest which has increased in value with each
new edition until it is now the chief authority on the subject.
From various causes I put the work aside, although I did not
relinquish the idea. I have now taken it up again and com
pleted it for publication.
You have done so much towards the elucidation of Hogarth's
life and work that your name has become indissolubly linked
with that of the great artist and satirist. I am therefore
naturally anxious to associate your name with this book, in
which an attempt is made to illustrate a side of Hogarth's art
upon which you have expressed the opinion that it has not
been sufficiently treated. You are so thoroughly master of
this literature that I can scarcely hope to put forward anything
that is not a commonplace to you. It is, however, a true
pleasure to thank you publicly for constant help and to express
my respect and esteem for a friend of many years' standing.
You have delighted generations of readers with poetry and
prose on a variety of subjects which are as illuminating
and convincing as they are charming, and I am proud to range
myself among your admirers, — adding that I am always
sincerely yours, HENRY B. WHEATLEY.
October 1909.

PREFACE
To attempt the illustration of the manners of the
eighteenth century as seen in London by the
greatest graphic delineator of manners that ever
lived, has been my object for several years.
Hogarth was a devoted Londoner, and while
illustrating the manners of Englishmen of his time,
he drew his subjects from the inhabitants of London
with whom he was in daily intercourse. Repre
sentations of streets and buildings in aU parts of
London are to be found in the collection of his works,
and most of these are discussed in this book.
It might be thought that enough has already been
done,^ but I hope it will be found that there is still
room for a book specially devoted to one branch of
Hogarth's work.
I had at first the intention of arranging my
materials in topographical order, but on second
thoughts I felt that this would scarcely be the
fittest manner of treating the subject, because it
' A short note on the literature which has sprung from the study of
Hogarth's works will be found at the end of this book (Chapter xiv.).

viii HOGARTH'S LONDON
was not specially the object of the artist to repro
duce the topographical features of the Town.
Rather is it the general appearance of the streets
and the people that filled the streets that make so
many of his pictures of such extraordinary interest
to us now.
The late Mr. James Hannay well said — ' London
had been much described before the days of which
we are speaking, and especially by the Comic Writers
of Charles the Second's time ; but there is a depth
of philosophical humour in the way that Hogarth
and his contemporaries undertake this task, such as
had not been brought to bear upon it before. From
their era dates town literature and town art.'
Hogarth attained great fame in his own lifetime,
and was the first English artist to be known and
admired abroad. He was, however, admired for one
side of his art, while the other side was neglected.
His engravings were largely bought, but in many
cases his pictures remained on his hands.
The engravings were talked about on every side,
and great anxiety was shown in order to find out
the inner meaning of the plates and the characters
of those who were satirised. Several authors came
forward to give the information the public were
thirsting to obtain.
The first exhibition of his pictures in the year 1814

PREFACE ix
was a revelation to the many who knew him only
from his engravings ; and from that time to this his
fame as a very great painter has continued to in
crease. How great an attraction Hogarth's prints afforded
to the sightseers of London may be seen in the
remarks of the author of a pamphlet, published
in 1748, on The Effects of Industry and Idleness
Illustrated, in which ' the moral of twelve celebrated
Prints lately published and designed by the in
genious Mr. Hogarth ' is set forth. The author went
the round of the print-shops of London, and found
a crowd gathered at all of them, but he was dis
appointed to find that, instead of alluding to the
moral, the crowd gave aU their attention to the re
marks of those who could point out the individuals
from whom the various characters were drawn.
A selection of some of Hogarth's finest pictures
and engravings have here been reproduced as
illustrating the subjects of the different chapters.
In the preface to the valuable Catalogue of the British
Museum Satirical Prints, the late Mr. F. G. Stephens
wrote, ' The Collection of " Hogarths " in the British
Museum is incomparably the largest and most select
in existence ; the same may be said for the copies,
piratical as well as legitimate, which abound in the
national depository.

X HOGARTH'S LONDON
'But with regard to the copies, even the Print
Room and the Library do not contain all the
English examples. ... It may be said that every
nation which has attained Civilisation continues to
produce such copies. In a very large number of
cases these copies bear names differing from those
Hogarth gave.' I have been greatly indebted to the
descriptions in this Catalogue for much information
and for numerous references to the literature of the
time. In conclusion, I wish to express in this place
my cordial thanks to Mr. Austin Dobson for his
valuable suggestions; to the Earl of Portsmouth,
Mr. D' Arcy Power, Mr. George Peachey, Mr. Robert
Grey, Treasurer of the Foundling Hospital, and Mr.
J. L. Spiers, Curator of the Soane Museum, for kind
assistance; and to the Duke of Newcastle, John
Murray, Esq., the Governors of St. George's
Hospital, the President and Council of the Royal
Academy, for allowing their pictures to be repro
duced; and especially to the authorities of the
National Gallery, the British Museum, and the
Soane Museum for assistance in respect to the
reproduction of pictures and engravings.

CONTENTS
Dedication, . v
Pbepace, . vii
CHAPTEK I
INTRODUCTION
Interest of the eighteenth century. Admirers of Hogarth's Engrav
ings. Hogarth a writer of Comedy. Praises of Fielding,
Coleridge, Lamb, and Hazlitt. Acknowledgments of Hogarth's
Merits as a Painter after the Exhibition of his Pictures in 1814.
Increase of this appreciation at the present time. Delineator of
Manners and Illustrator of London Topography. Gay's Trivia.
Hogarth's reason for designing the ' Four Stages of Cruelty.' Char
acteristics of the century. Hogarth as a Moralist. Analysis of the
different chapters of the book. Love of London. London Localities
illustrated by Hogarth, .  1
CHAPTEE II
HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS
Particulars of Hogarth's life. Richard Hogarth, Auld Hogart.
Hogarth's want of Education. Apprenticed to a silver engraver.
Set up in business as an engraver, maker of bookplates, and book
illustrator. First two satirical engravings not successful. Attend
ance at Sir James ThornhUl's School of Painting. Illustrations of
Hudibras. Mary Tofts, the rabbit-breeder. Law case against
Joshua Morris. Hogarth runs away with Thornhill's daughter.
Father reconciled. Acquaintance with Tyers of Vauxhall Gardens.
Objections to Academies. Painted Conversation Pieces. ' Harlot's
Progress.' Important works following that series. Attainment of
success. Prey of pirates. Copyright Act for artists called
Hogarth's Act. His gratitude to Parliament. Attempts in the great
style. Life in Leicester Square. J. T. Smith's absurd condemnation
of Hogarth's character. Hogarth's fame abroad. Troubles in France.
Quarrels with the Connoisseurs. Battle of the Pictures. Sale
of some of his pictures. Marriage a la Mode. Athenian Stuart.

xu HOGARTH'S LONDON
PAGE
' Sigismunda.' Bonnel Thornton's Exhibition of Sign-Paintings.
Enmity of Paul Sandby. Society of Arts. Analysis of Beauty.
Sterne's Praise. Pictorial Satires on Hogarth. Proposed History
of the Arts. ' No Dedication.' ' The Times, No. 1.' Hogarth's own
justification. Quarrel with Wilkes. The North Briton. Portraits
of Wilkes and Churchill, . . . . . 22

CHAPTER III
HIGH LIFE
Resorts of Fashion. 'Lady's Last Stake.' Conversation Pieces.
' Wanstead Assembly.' Wellesley Pole. Portraits and other Con
versation Pieces. Lord Charlemont's friendliness. Mrs. Thrale
(Piozzi). Sir Richard Grosvenor and 'Sigismunda.' Lord
Charlemont's earldom. Scenes in Marriage d. la Mode. The
Wallop family. Dr. Misaubin. Italian Singers and Flute-players.
Turk's Head Bagnio. 'Rake's Progress.' Farinelli. Pope and
Burlington House. ' Taste in High Life,'  92

CHAPTER IV
LOW LIFE
Extracts from the book on Low Life. Betty Ireland. ' Four Times of
the Day.' Tom King's Coffee-House. French Church in Hog Lane.
Chaving Cross. The Cockpit. Art of Self-Defence : Figg Taylor,
and Broughton. Gin Lane and Beer Street. Acts against the sale
of gin, . . .128

CHAPTER V
POLITICAL LIFE
Hogarth not a politician. Bribery and Corruption. Tibson the
Politician. The House of Commons. Lord Lovat. ' The Stage
Coach, or Country Inn Yard.' The Sailor from the Centurion. Four
Pictures of the Election. ' The Times, Plate 1.' Wilkes's attack in the
North Briton. Churchill's Epistle to William Hogarth. Portraits
of Wilkes and Churchill. ' The Times, Plate 2,' . . . . 164

CONTENTS xiii

CHAPTER VI
CHURCH AND DISSENT

PAGE

Want of earnestness in Church and State. 'The Centaur not
fabulous.' Bishops Gibson and Hoadly. Archbishop Herring. ' The
Sleeping Congregation.' Dr. Desaguliers. London Churches.
Johnson and the 'Idle Apprentice.' Kent's Altarpiece. Orator
Henley. 'Enthusiasm Delineated' and 'Credulity, Superstition,
and Fanaticism,' ... . . . 198
CHAPTER VII
PROFESSIONAL LIFE
Law. — ' The Bench.' The Lawyer in Butler's Hudibras. ' Paul before
Felix.' Medicine. — Portraits. Consultation of Physicians. St.
Andr^ and Mary Tofts. Literature. — 'The Distressed Poet.'
Theobald and the Dunciad. Fielding's portrait. Sterne and
Hogarth. Portrait of W. Huggins. Art. — ' The Enraged Musician.'
' The Modern Orpheus,' ... . . . 216
CHAPTER VIII
BUSINESS LIFE
Business Cards and Shop-bills. Book-plates. Funeral tickets. ' In
dustry and Idleness.' Spitalfields Weavers' Workshop. Goodchild's
Marriage. Banquet at Fishmongers' Hall. Trial in the Guildhall.
Lord Mayor's Show. Run upon Child's Bank, and Sarah, Duchess
of Marlborough. ' The South Sea Bubble.' ' The Lottery,' . .244
CHAPTER IX
TAVERN LIFE
Taverns and City Inns. Pontack's. Devil Tavern. The Mitre.
' Midnight Modem Conversation.' Chorus of Singers. The Elephant.
Covent Garden. 'The Frolic' Button's Coffee-House. Old
Slaughter's. Isaac Hawkins Browne. Rummer Tavern. Man
loaded with Mischief. White's Chocolate House, and White's Club, 272
CHAPTEE X
THEATRICAL LIFE
'Laughing Audience.' Beggar's Opera. Benefit tickets for actors.
Portraits of actors : Theophilus Cibber, Garrick as ' Richard iii.'

xiv HOGARTH'S LONDON
PAGE
Portrait of Garrick and his wife. ' The Farmer's Return.' Garrick
and Churchill. Green-room of Drury Lane Theatre. Miss Pritchard.
Fielding's plays. Pasquin ticket. Plays illustrated by Hogarth.
Private Theatricals. Rich's Glory, Chorus of Singers. Burlington
gate. Attack on Masquerades and Italian Operas. Heidegger.
Fielding's condemnation of Masquerades,  302
CHAPTER XI
HOSPITALS
Foundling Hospital. Hogarth's gifts to the Hospital. Pictures at
St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Accuracy of Hogarth's representation
of diseases. London Infirmary. Bedlam. Picture of St. George's
Hospital, . .  360
CHAPTER XII
PRISONS AND CRIME
Incompetence of the watchmen. Magistrates. — Fielding, Saunders
Welch, Sir Thomas de Veil, Sir John Gonson. Prisons. — The Fleet.
Examination of Banibridge. Bridewell. Sarah Malcolm. Elizabeth
Canning. Earl Ferrers. Theodore Gardelle. The Idle Apprentice at
Tyburn. ' Four Stages of Cruelty.' Surgeons' Theatre in Monkwell
Street, . ... 377
CHAPTEE XIII
THE SUBURBS
' March to Finchley.' Tottenham Court. Old Marylebone Church out
side and inside. Executions at Tyburn. Spitalfields. Vauxhall
Gardens. Sadler's Wells. Southwark Fair. Johnson and Mallet
at the Fair. Chiswick, Twickenham, and Cowley, . . . 404
CHAPTEE XIV
LITERATURE OF HOGARTH
Books on Hogarth. Editions of his Works. Pamphlets on the
principal series of his Engravings, .  439
INDEX, . . .  456

LIST OF ILLUSTEATIONS

WILLIAM HOGARTH  Frontispiece
From Charles Townley's Mezzotint of an Original Portrait
begun by Weltdon and finished by Hogarth, 1781. TO FACE PAOE
DESIGN ON A SILVER TANKARD BY HOGARTH 27
Reproduced from S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, i, 77.

SIR JAMES THORNHILL . . 31
From S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, i. 86. The Original
Oil Painting belonged to Mrs. Hogarth, who sold it to S. Ireland,
and it was esteemed by her to be an excellent likeness.
LADY THORNHILL .... 38
From S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, ii. 12.
LIFE SCHOOL AT THE ACADEMY IN PETER COURT,
ST. MARTIN'S LANE  41
From the Original Painting in the possession of the Royal
Academy.
FRONTISPIECE TO 'CATALOGUE OF PICTURES,' 1761 . 57
TAILPIECE TO ' CATALOGUE OF PICTURES,' 1761 . 58
BATTLE OF THE PICTURES, 1745 . . . 59
TIME SMOKING A PICTURE, 1761 ... 63
From Hogarth's Etching. (Subscription ticket for ' Sigis
munda.')

xvi HOGARTH'S LONDON
TO FACE PAGE
A STATUARY'S YARD {The Analysis of Beauty, Plate 1), 1753 82
JOHN THORNHILL (Brother-in-Law of Hogarth) 84
From S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, ii. 14.
MRS. HOGARTH . ... 91
From S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, ii. 4.
' THE LADY'S LAST STAKE,' 1759 . . .103
From the Original Painting in the possession of Mr. J.
Pierpont Morgan.
THE MARRIAGE 1 LA MODE : No. 1, The Contract 110
From the Original Painting in the National Gallery.
THE MARRIAGE A LA MODE : No. 6, The Death of the
Countess .... 120
From the Original Painting in the National Gallery.
THE MAN OF TASTE, 1731 (Burlington Gate) . 125
From Hogarth's Engraving.
TASTE IN HIGH LIFE, 1746 . . 126
MORNING (CovENT Garden) . . . 132
' Four Times of the Day,' 1738. (The scene is reversed in
the Engraving.)
THE COCKPIT, 1759 . 141
From the Original Engraving.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 1730 , i66
By Hogarth and Thornhill. From the Original Engraving,
1803. (A portion of the Picture is omitted.)
THE ELECTION : No. 2, Canvassing for Votes, 1757 . 173
From the Painting in the Soane Museum.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xvii
TO FACE PAGE
' THE TIMES, PLATE 1,' 1762  190
From the third state of the Original Engraving with the
figure of Pitt on stilts, which had previously represented
Henry viii.
THE SLEEPING CONGREGATION, 1736 . . 205
From the Original Engraving.
ORATOR HENLEY CHRISTENING A CHILD . . 212
From S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, i.
' THE BENCH,' 1758  216
From the third state of the Original Engraving.
A CONSULTATION OF PHYSICIANS, 1736 . 223
THE SHRIMP GIRL ... . . 240
From the Painting in the National Gallery.
HEAD OF DIANA  240
From S. Ireland's Etching, 1786, Graphic Illustrations,
i. 170. The Original Sketch in oil was in Ireland's possession.
HOGARTH'S SIX SERVANTS  241
From the Painting in the National Gallery.
THE ENRAGED MUSICIAN, 1741 . . . .242
From the Original Engraving.
HOGARTH'S BUSINESS CARD, 1720 . . . 244
SARAH, DUCHESS OP MARLBOROUGH, AT CHILD'S
BANK . . ¦ • .263
From S. Ireland's Graphic Illustrations, ii. 117. The
Original Painting, which belonged to Ireland, was sold iu
June 1899 at the Forman Sale for £53, lis.
THE INN YARD ('Harlot's Progress,' Plate 1) . . 273
From the Original Engraving. I

xviii HOGARTH'S LONDON
TO FACE PAGE
BURNING OF THE RUMPS AT TEMPLE BAR (Hudibras,
Plate 11), 1726 ....... 276
From Twelve large Prints for Hudibras.
WHITE'S CHOCOLATE HOUSE ('A Rake's Progress,'
No. 6), 1735 .... . . 295
From the Painting in the Soane Museum.
ST. JAMES'S STREET ('A Rake's Progress,' No. 4) . . 298
From the Painting iu the Soane Museum.
THE LAUGHING AUDIENCE, 1733 . . . 303
(Subscription ticket for ' A Rake's Progress ' and ' South
wark Fair.')
SCENE FROM THE BEGGAR'S OPERA, Act 3 . . 305
From the Painting in the possession of John Murray, Esq.
LAVINIA FENTON (Polly Peachum), afterwards Duchess
OF Bolton . ..... 310
From the Painting in the National Gallery.
DAVID GARRICK AND MRS. GARRICK, 1757 . . 327
GARRICK IN THE FARMER'S RETURN, 1762 . . 329
From James Basire's Engraving.
PERFORMANCE OF DRYDEN'S INDIAN EMPEROR AT
MR. CONDUITT'S HOUSE, 1731 . 341
From Robert Dodd's Engraving, 1792.
MASQUERADES AND OPERAS (Burlington Gate), 1724 . 348
From the first state of the Original Engraving.
THE FOUNDLINGS  362
Heading to a power of attorney. The Hospital still possesses
the Original Plate.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xix

TO FACE PAGE

CAPTAIN THOMAS CORAM, 1739 . . .362
From Nutter's Engraving, 1798.
BEDLAM ( ' A Rake's Progress,' No. 8) . 370
Prom the Painting in the Soane Museum.
MICHAEL SOLEIROL WITH ST. GEORGE'S HOSPITAL
IN THE DISTANCE, 1748 . . . . 374
From the Painting in the Hospital.
There is some difficulty as to the spelling of the name, so
that the title on the plate does not exactly agree with this
description, which is probably the most correct.
SCENE IN THE FLEET PRISON ('Bambridoe before a
Committee of the House of Commons'), 1729 . . 389
From the Original Engraving.
BRIDEWELL ('A Harlot's Progress,' Plate 4), 1732 . 393
From the Original Engraving.
THE IDLE APPRENTICE EXECUTED AT TYBURN ('In
dustry AND Idleness,' Plate 11), 1747 . . . 399
From the Original Engraving.
THE MARCH TO FINCHLEY, 1750 . . . .404
From the Original Engraving.
MARYLEBONE CHURCH ( ' A Rake's Progress,' No. 5), 1735 411
From the Painting in the Soane Museum.
SOUTHWARK FAIR, 1733  424
From the Painting in the possession of the Duke of
Newcastle.

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
To those who live in the twentieth century a study
of the manners of the eighteenth century is singularly
fascinating, as that is near enough for its aims to be
understood and its philosophy to be sympathised
with, and yet distant enough to be fresh and piquant
to those of a later age.
It may be said to have been, not so very long ago,
the Cinderella of the Centuries, inasmuch as many
writers have not tired in declaiming against it. Mr.
Frederic Harrison is its most valiant defender, and
completely answers the unmeasured abuse of Carlyle.^
He justly styles it ' the turning epoch of the
modem world,' and asserts that although it was an
age of prose, it was not prosaic. We are just at the
right distance from this period to judge it without
bias. At present the nineteenth century is too
near us to be treated historically. Therefore we
ought to understand the eighteenth century better,
and to admire it in spite of its glaring faults. We
know it better than most other centuries, because
' ' The age of prose, of lying, of sham, the fraudulent bankrupt century,
the reign of Beelzebub, the peculiar era of Cant.'
A

2 HOGARTH'S LONDON
its authors have painted the manners and social Hfe
of their times more minutely than the authors of
previous periods have done theirs. It was specially
a friendly social century, and as we read the pages
of Fielding, Richardson, Boswell, Walpole, Cowper,
Fanny Burney, and Jane Austen we follow the life
of the time in all its phases with breathless interest.
What is most striking in this body of Hterature
is that aU classes are depicted. We never tire of
reading of the men and women who were divided
by artificial barriers into different worlds. What
did Walpole's world know of Johnson's world ?
what did Cowper care for either ?
There was, however, one man who did more than
aU the others put together to help us to under
stand the life of the eighteenth century — at all events
how it was lived by Londoners, for he appeals to
the eye as well as to the intellect ; and that man
was Hogarth. He was seldom absent from London,
and no day passed without his eye finding something
to record— a line if not a picture, perhaps a thumb
nail sketch for future enlargement. Hogarth was
immediately recognised by his contemporaries as a
great pictorial satirist, and it was not long before
his engravings became well known abroad. It has,
however, taken longer for his other great qualities
to be universally acknowledged.
Horace Walpole had a great admiration for
Hogarth, and he was one of the first to set the
fashion of collecting Hogarth's prints. In com-

INTRODUCTION 3
mencing the chapter on this great artist in his
Anecdotes of Painting (vol. iv. 1771), he writes :
' Having dispatched the herd of our painters in oil,
I reserved to a class by himself that great and
original genius, Hogarth ; considering him rather
as a writer of comedy with a pencil, than as a
painter. If catching the manners and follies of an
age living as they rise, if general satire on vices
and ridicules, familiarized by strokes of nature, and
heightened by wit, and the whole animated by
proper and just expressions of the passions be
comedy, Hogarth composed comedies as much as
Moliere ; in his " Marriage a la Mode " there is even
an intrigue carried on throughout the piece. He is
more true to character than Congreve ; each per
sonage is distinct from the rest, acts in his sphere,
and cannot be confounded with any other of the
dramatis personce.'
Carrying on his comparison of Hogarth with the
great French dramatist, Walpole writes : ' Moliere,
inimitable as he has proved, brought a rude theatre
to perfection. Hogarth had no model to follow and
improve upon. He created his art and used colours
instead of language.'
Mr. Austin Dobson has drawn attention to an
article in the Gray's Inn Journal, Feb. 9, 1754,
apparently written by Arthur Murphy, in which
Walpole's description of the painter as a ' writer
of comedy with a pencil' is forestalled. Replying
to Voltaire, who had been accusing the English of a

4 HOGARTH'S LONDON
lack of genius for Painting and Music, the author
of this article wrote : ' Hogarth, like a true genius,
has formed a new school of Painting for himself.
He may be truly styled the Cervantes of his art,
as he has exhibited with such a masterly hand the
ridiculous foUies of Human Nature. . . . He may
be said to be the first, who has wrote Comedy with his
pencil. His " Harlot's Progress," and " Marriage a la
Mode " are, in my opinion, as weU drawn as anything
in Moliere, and the unity of character which is the
perfection of Dramatic Poetry, is so skilfuUy pre
served, that we are surprised to see the same person
age thinking agreeably to his complexional habits
in the many different situations in which we after
wards perceive him.'
Mr. Dobson also quotes from a literary case in
July 1773, when Lord Gardenstone, a Scottish judge,
after defining Hogarth as ' the only true original
author which this age has produced in England,'
went on : ' I can read his works over and over . . .
and every time I peruse them I discover new
beauties, and feel fresh entertainment.'
Fielding was one of Hogarth's greatest admirers.
The first time we find their names united was in 1731,
when Hogarth engraved a frontispiece for Fielding's
Tragedy of Tragedies. In the preface to his first
novel, Joseph Andrews, the novelist takes the
earliest opportunity of introducing a brilliant
criticism of the artist's insight in his OAvn remarks on
the Ridiculous : ' He who should call the ingenious

INTRODUCTION 5
Hogarth a burlesque painter, would, in my opinion,
do him very little honour : for sure it is much easier,
much less the subject of admiration, to paint a man
with a nose, or any other feature of a preposterous
size, or to expose him in some absurd or monstrous
attitude, than to express the affections of men on
canvas. It hath been thought a vast commendation
of a painter, to say his figures seem to breathe ; but
surely, it is a much greater and nobler applause,
that they appear to think.' In Tom Jones the
references to Hogarth are continually occurring as
illustrations of some of the characters.
Three great writers, about the same time, claimed
the highest position in his art for Hogarth:
Coleridge in 1809, Charles Lamb in 1811, and
Hazlitt in 1814. Hazlitt classes Hogarth with
the Comic Writers, and Lamb says : ' His graphic
representations are indeed books. They have the
teeming, fruitful, suggestive meaning of words.
Other pictures we look at — ^his prints we read.'^
Coleridge beautifully expresses his appreciation of
that sense of beauty which many ignorantly denied
to Hogarth. He writes in The Friend (No. 16, Dec. 7,
1809) : ' One of those beautiful female faces which
' A great friend of Charles Lamb was amusingly enthusiastic on
Hogarth's art. This was Martin Burney, son of Admiral James Burney,
and nephew of Dr. Charles Burney. Barry Cornwall (B. W. Procter) in
his Memoirs of Lamb (1866) thus refers to Martin : ' The last time I saw
Burney was at the corner of a street in London, when he was overflowing
on the subject of Raflaelle and Hogarth. After a long and prolonged
struggle, he said he had arrived at the conclusion that Raffaelle was the
greater man of the two.'

6 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Hogarth, in whom the satyrist never extinguished
that love of beauty which belonged to him as a
Poet, so often and so gladly introduces as the
central figure in a crowd of humorous deformities,
which figure (such is the power of true genius !)
neither acts nor is meant to act as a contrast ; but
diffuses through aU, and over each of the group a
spirit of reconciliation and human kindness ; and
even when the attention is no longer consciously
directed to the cause of this feeling, still blends its
tenderness with our laughter ; and thus prevents the
instructive merriment at the whims of nature or
the foibles of our fellow-men from degenerating into
the heart poison of contempt or hatred.'
Walter Savage Landor wrote to John Forster:
' What nonsense I see written of Hogarth's defects
as a colourist. He was in truth far more than the
most humorous, than the most pathetic, and most
instructive, of painters. He excelled at once in
composition, in drawing and in colouring ; and of
what other can we say the same ? In his portraits
he is as true as Gainsborough, as historical as Titian.'
The need of acknowledging the realism of
Hogarth's art is very important for our present
purpose, as half the value of it to us would be lost
if we did not understand the truthfulness of his work.
We have the authority of Walpole for this.
In a letter to Sir David Dalrymple (Lord Hailes),
Dec. 11, 1780, he writes, ' I believe, Sir, that I may
have been overcandid to Hogarth, and that his

INTRODUCTION 7
spirit and youth and talent may have hurried him
into more real caricatures than I specified ; yet he
certainly restrained his bent that way pretty early.' ^
Although so just and fuU of praise, for one side
of Hogarth's art, Walpole was singularly blind to
his merits on the technical side, for he says, ' As a
painter he had but slender merit.' The distinction
of his paintings was strangely ignored in his own time,
and was not generally acknowledged untU 1814,
when fifty of his original pictures were exhibited
at the British Institution. Richard Payne Knight,
the writer of the preface to the Catalogue, ventured
to praise the high qualities of his work, and he
somewhat timidly wrote, ' His pictures often display
beautiful colouring as well as accurate drawing.'
When the public had the opportunity of seeing
Hogarth's original pictures, and were able to
criticise them as distinct from his engravings, they
began to realise that the painter was a great master
worthy to rank with the chief of his predecessors ;
they found that, besides being a writer of comedy
with a pencil, he was a brilliant artist in colour
as well as in draughtsmanship.
During a severe iUness when James Whistler
was httle over twelve years old, he had the oppor-
timity of studjdng a large volume of Hogarth's
engravings. His mother relates that he said on
one occasion, ' Oh how I wish I were well, I want
so to show these engravings to my drawing master,
' Letters, ed. Cunningham, vol. vii. p. 472.

8 HOGARTH'S LONDON
it is not every one who has a chance of seeing
Hogarth's own engravings of his originals,' and
then added, in his own happy way, ' And if I had
not been iU, mother, perhaps no one would have
thought of showing them to me.'
Mr. and Mrs. Pennell remark : ' From this time
until his death Whistler always believed Hogarth
to be the greatest English artist who ever lived,
and he seldom lost an opportunity of saying so.
The long attack of illness in 1847 is therefore
memorable as the beginning of his love of Hogarth,
which became an article of faith with him.' ^
In an article by Mr. Sidney Colvin {Portfolio, iii.
p. 153), Hogarth's high qualities as a painter are
ungrudgingly praised :
' Hogarth, in his best works, catches with a
perfect subtlety the colour of rich or poor apparel,
indoor furniture and outdoor litter, the satin, boAvs,
jewels, ribbons of the bride, the fur coat and hose
and waistcoat of the beau, lace, silk, velvet, broad
cloth, spangles, and brocade, rich carpets, rich
wall hangings, the look of pictures on the wall ;
or, on the other hand, the coarse appurtenances of
the market-place or the street crossing : he catches
them, and their tone and relations in the indoor
or outdoor atmosphere with a perfect subtlety
and sense of natural harmony. And not only so,
but without a school, and without a precedent
(for he is no imitator of the Dutchmen) he has
1 Life of J. M. WJiistler, by E. R. and J. Pennell, 1908, vol. i. p. 21.

INTRODUCTION 9
found a way of expressing what he sees with the
clearest simplicity, richness and directness.'
Sir Walter Armstrong, in his Essay prefixed to
Dobson's folio edition of his Hogarth, has done
fuU justice to Hogarth's claim to a high place as a
painter. He styles him a creator of beauty, a
master of grace and a perfect craftsman, affirming
that his ' supreme achievement as a painter lies
in the completeness with which he gave artistic
expression to ideas which were not essentially
pictorial in themselves.'
Now his position as a painter has been com
pletely established, and we can forgive the ill-
judged remarks of Walpole, in the spirit of which,
by the way, he was supported by the opinion of
many of his contemporaries.
While pointing out Hogarth's high position when
he foUowed his natural bent, we have regretfully
to acknowledge that he had his limits, and it is
necessary to refer to the mistake he made when he
endeavoured to essay a style entirely unsuited to
his genius, although even in his religious subjects
there are merits which have been unfairly overlooked.
Mr. Dobson quotes the painter's extraordinary
utterance respecting the great style of history
painting, where he appears to value the Scripture
scenes at St. Bartholomew's Hospital (1736) more
than such pictures as the * Harlot's Progress.'
Hogarth in his autobiography writes — ' I have
endeavoured to treat my subjects as a dramatic

10 HOGARTH'S LONDON
writer : my picture is my stage, and men and
women my players, who by means of certain actions
and gestures, are to exhibit a dumb show. Before
I had done anything of much consequence in this
walk, I entertained some hopes of succeeding in
what the puffers in books call the great style of
History painting ; so that without having had a
stroke of this grand business before, I quitted small
portraits and familiar conversations, and with a
smile at my own temerity, commenced history
painter, and on a great staircase at St. Bartholo
mew's, painted two Scripture stories, " The Pool of
Bethesda " and " The Good Samaritan," with figures
seven feet high.' ^
It is impossible with any success to compare
Hogarth with other painters, as he stands absolutely
alone. Mr. Dobson writes : ' He was an exceptional
genius, not to be conveniently ticketed off, by any
preconceived theory respecting his race, his epoch,
or his environment.'
We can now pass on to consider Hogarth as a
delineator of manners and an Ulustrator of London
Topography. The manners and morals of a period form com
plex subjects for consideration. In order therefore
to obtain any true understanding of the time, it
is necessary to sort out the various subjects into
classes, and when we have done this we shall find
' Anecdotes of W. Hogarth, written by Himself. Edited by J. B. Nichols.
London, 1833, p. 9.

INTRODUCTION 11
how completely the works of Hogarth cover the
ground in respect to the manners and life of the
eighteenth century. The plan of this work is to deal
with these subjects in separate chapters, but here a
more general view of the whole field may be taken.
The first thing to note is the similarity of aims
among aU classes of Society during a large part of
the century. What has been styled The World
was the pervading influence in the eighteenth
century. Even then there were several Worlds,
but they all had points of contact one with another.
Now in the twentieth century the World has become
too large to hang together, and the one is disinte
grated into the many, aU of these having different
orbits. In the eighteenth century good society
met in London, in Bath, and abroad. Its members
renewed old acquaintanceship at the different
seasons in different places. But we must not
generalise overmuch, for there are shades of difference
which must be accounted for. The literary world
of Johnson was very different from the fashionable
world of Horace Walpole, and there were few points
of contact between them, but there were some.
For our present purpose that remarkable picture
of Old London in Gay's Trivia is a help to the
xmderstanding of our subject, for Gay painted the
very London that Hogarth loved and depicted,
but he only drew the exterior of the streets, while
Hogarth delineated the humours both of the insides
and outsides of the houses.

12 HOGARTH'S LONDON
We ought to understand the eighteenth century
because it has a special fascination for us, although
it has strongly marked features which are often
repulsive. The characteristic qualities are strength and unity
of aims. No period exhibits more remarkably these
qualities, shown at the beginning of the century in
calm chequered by Rebellion, and at the end in the
fire of Revolution. Both of these characteristics
had their evil side, the strength developed into
coarseness, and the unity was largely a unity of
want of refinement. There is no evidence in
Walpole's Letters that the higher classes, who
might be expected to have exhibited good manners
(if not morality) were any better than other classes.
In some respects they were much inferior to the
middle classes. It is always dangerous and unjust
to make sweeping charges against a whole nation,
but all we read and all we see of the eighteenth
century — at aU events parts of it — seem to point it
out as one of the worst-mannered periods in our
history. There is much to disgust us in Hogarth's
pictures of life, but the worst of all are the * Four
Stages of Cruelty,' which are simply appalling in
their atrocity.
The Restoration period is sometimes considered
to be one of the worst in our annals, but there is
some reason to think that after the Revolution
there was exhibited a depth of turpitude in public
and private life that had not been so widespread

INTRODUCTION 13
before. Great intellectual vigour and goodness
within well-defined limits were also distinguishing
features of the age ; among its many faults hypocrisy
was not to be numbered. One of the striking faults
of the century was its hatred of enthusiasm and its
distrust of ideals, yet in studying its history we see
the gradual emergence of a new spirit and a new
life from the dull apathy of the early years to the
burning hopes and faith in the future as exhibited
in the midst of troubles at the end of the century.
In referring to Hogarth's reproduction of the
striking contrasts of his age, Mr. Dobson says :
' He has peopled his canvas with its dramatis
personce, with vivid portraits of the more strongly
marked actors in that cynical and sensual, brave
and boastful, corrupt and patriotic time.'
The truth of Hogarth's pictures of his age has been
acknowledged by all, and by no one more com
pletely than by Horace Walpole, who was one of
the best of judges. Of the painter's interiors he
wrote : ' It was reserved to Hogarth to write a scene
of furniture. The rake's levee-room, the nobleman's
dining-room, the apartments of the husband and
wife in "Marriage a la Mode," the alderman's par
lour, the poet's bedchamber, and many others, are
the history of the manners of the age.' ^
Hogarth is styled a moralist, and in his great work,
the ' Marriage a la Mode,' he is truly that. He has
taken as his subject a hfe-history, which must
' Walpole's Anecdotes of Painting, 1876, vol. iii. p. 7.

14 HOGARTH'S LONDON
have been repeated in every age, but he has treated
it with so much of the power and insight of genius
that he points a moral which we feel to be that of
a drama worthy of the greatest tragic writer. In
the ' Progresses,' and ' Industry and Idleness,' he
also shows himself a moralist, but in a more con
ventional manner.
In some of his other works there is rather too
evident a zest and interest in the incidents of a
vicious life to allow the moral to be so strongly
marked. He was in these more the moralist in the
sense of an exhibitor of manners.
Mrs. Oliphant speaks of his unimpassioned
tragedy, and Mr. Dobson elaborates this point with
his usual insight. He writes : ' He was a moralist
after the manner of eighteenth century morality,
not savage like Swift, not ironical Hke Fielding,
not tender-hearted hke Johnson and Goldsmith ;
but unrelenting, uncompromising, uncompassionate.
He drew vice and its consequences in a thoroughly
literal and business-like way, neither sparing nor
softening its features, whoUy insensible to its
seductions, incapable of fiattering it even for a
moment, preoccupied solely with catching its
fugitive contortion of pleasure or of pain.'
In order to obtain an idea of the chief features of
the manners of the eighteenth century, it has been
thought well to arrange the particulars under
certain headings, which it is hoped will comprise
all that need be discussed in this connection.

INTRODUCTION 15
The headings of the chapters of this book are
the following, and some general remarks may here
be set down, leaving discussion of the various points
for the chapters themselves.
High Life seems at first sight to be outside of
Hogarth's ken, but his knowledge of human nature
helped him to picture correctly a life which he had
not hved. His many portraits were largely chosen
from among the aristocracy, and the foUies of the
upper classes were as patent to the satirist as were
those of men and women in a less exalted sphere.
The picture of the nobleman in the * Marriage a la
Mode' is as successful a portrait as Hogarth ever
painted. The delineation of Low Life, however, was more
congenial to Hogarth's taste, and he gloried in the
humours which were to be found on aU sides: — in
the streets, in the prize-fighter's amphitheatre, in
the cockpit, the prison, and the brothel.
Such a view of the streets of London as we see in
* The Four Times of the Day ' is not elsewhere to be
seen. The dangers of the streets must have been
appalling, and yet Gay, who points out some of
the dangers, apostrophises
' Happy Augusta ! Law-defended town !
Here no dark lanthorns shade the villain's frown ;
No Spanish jealousies thy lanes infest,
Nor Roman vengeance stabs th' unwary breast ;
Here tyranny ne'er lifts her purple hand,
But liberty and justice guard the land ;
No bravos here profess the bloody trade,
Nor is the Church the murd'rer's refuge made.'

16 HOGARTH'S LONDON
There can be little doubt that the inhabitants
of London who walked in the streets after dark
took care to possess means of protection, and those
who were defenceless kept within-doors.
The man of quality had his sword which he could
ordinarily use with skfll, and others were pro
ficient with their fists. Johnson was a powerful
man, and was well able to take care of himself as we
know from several recorded adventures, especially
the one in Grosvener Square when he caught the
man who had stolen his handkerchief and knocked
him down before the thief knew where he was.
Swift paints a sorry picture of the state of the
streets in his description of a City Shower, and Gay
advises the walker to wear strong shoes. It was
evidently a serious matter for men in decent apparel
to walk the streets, for they were subject to the
drippings of roofs as weU as the splashing of passing
carts and coaches :
' When dirty waters from balconies drop.
And dextrous damsels twirl the sprinkling mop.
And cleanse the spatter'd sash, and scrub the stairs ;
Know Saturday's conclusive morn appears.'
The streets were cleansed in the middle ages, but they
were evidently neglected in the eighteenth century.
Political Life is well represented by Hogarth.
He drew the tradesman-politician reading his paper,
and a sitting of the House of Commons ; the Humours
of a Country Election, and the unfortunate print of
'The Times,' which made enemies of some of his

INTRODUCTION 17
former friends and caused much iU-wiU to be poured
out upon the artist.
In Church and Dissent we see the picture of the
deadest time hi the religious life of the country,
when congregations slept and churchman and
dissenter were alike the butt of the wits.
Professional Life is well represented by the
lawyers, the doctors and the soldiers as weU as by
the artists and the authors, but none of these classes
was flattered.
Business Life is seen in Hogarth's shop biUs. In
his pictures the creaking sign-boards are visible on all
sides, and carts and drays lumber along the streets.
This was the time of street cries, and artists
have left us pictures of the men and women follow
ing peripatetic trades, all with their distinctive cries.
Sleep fled from the eyes of the weary when these
commenced their work in the early morning.
' Successive cries the season's change declare.
And mark the monthly progress of the year.
Hark, how the streets with treble voices ring.
To sell the bounteous product of the spring !
Sweet-smelling flowers, and elder's early bud.
With nettle's tender shoots, to cleanse the blood :
And when June's thunder cools the sultry skies,
Ev'n Sundays are profan'd by mackerel cries.' i
The streets were doubtless noisier in the eigh
teenth century than now (although some of us
complain of the present condition of things), and
we are shown in the 'Enraged Musician' how difficult
1 Trivia, Book ti.

18 HOGARTH'S LONDON
was the life of the intellectual worker in the midst of
the turmoil around him. In his Voyage to Lisbon
Fielding declared that to look at this picture was
enough to make a man deaf.
Tavern Life was a special feature of the century,
and here social life flourished. Hogarth has per
petuated the names of many of the London taverns
and coffee-houses which were largely patronised.
Theatrical Life is painted very effectively in
Hogarth's works. The playhouses and many of
the actors, with Garrick at their head, are shown.
The pictures of the Beggar's Opera, which was
said to be the first great popular success known to
the English stage, exhibit to us the audience on the
stage, apparently very much in the way of the actors.
This evil was not done away with altogether until
Garrick made some of his chief improvements.
In Hospitals, which found a true friend in Hogarth,
we obtain a glimpse of the better side of human
nature in the eighteenth century.
Prisons and Crime, on the other hand, show us some
of the worst evils of the age, and the impotence of
the system of police to deal effectively with Crime.
Pickpockets and cheats were found on aU sides.
The Suburbs in the eighteenth century were at
the very doors of the City, although they have long
since been swallowed up. The citizen walked with
his family in the afternoon and evening to the tea-
gardens of Hoxton, Islington, Hampstead, Totten
ham Court and Marylebone, and the humours of these
places are to be found displayed in Hogarth's

INTRODUCTION 19
works. The general effect of the scenes painted by
Hogarth and described by Gay is to impress upon us
the evils of the time, and to leave us unimpressed
by much good which must have existed, although
it is left unnoticed.
London has always exerted a great influence over
its children, for it is a city of unique and indescrib
able charm. The Londoner is spoiled for hving in
other places, and however far he may have wandered,
he is forced eventually to return to London, as the
one place in which life is hved in aU its completeness.
Hogarth was a thorough Londoner. He was born
in Bartholomew Close, lived in London aU his life,
and died in Leicester Square. He is known, with
Londoners like himself, to have made a cockney
tour from London to Sheerness and back again, but
this five-days' trip comprised nearly the whole of his
travels, and his life was spent chiefly between
Leicester Square and Chiswick. From boyhood to
his latest hour he never tired of exhibiting the life
around him, and he may be said to bring that life
before our eyes in a way no other artist before or
since his time has ever done. From the East to the
West, from the North to the South, the London of
Hogarth's day can be traced topographically in his
pictures and sketches.
Mr. Dobson points out the need of a Commentary
to illustrate some of the intricacies of Hogarth's
London Topography,^ and it is hoped that this book
' 'If the chief circumstances of the painter's career should remain
unsupplemented, there will always be a side of his work which must

20 HOGARTH'S LONDON
may to some extent carry out the object he has in
view. It may be well here to set down a short indication
of the extent of the topographical illustrations.
Hogarth's picture of the streets is singularly
vivid, the kennels and the cobbled roads, the creak
ing sign-boards and the oil lamps and the atten
dant inconveniences are aU brought before our eyes.
The traffic, consisting of heavy carts and carriages
and the lighter chairs with their chairmen, made the
art of walking the streets as expounded by Gay in
his Trivia a specially difficult one.
The localities represented in Hogarth's pictures
may be divided into the City, the West End and
Westminster, and the Suburbs; and there is httle
that goes to the making of the Great London of the
eighteenth century which is unrepresented in this
gallery. This London was large in itseK, although
when compared with the London of to-day it may
seem small to us.
Taking the City first, there is the district round
Fleet Street, and that round the Bank. Newgate
is shown in the scene from the Beggar'' s Opera ; the
Old Bailey (' Industry and Idleness,' Plate 10) ;
continue to need interpretation. In addition to delineating the faults and
follies of his tune, he was pre-eminently the pictorial chronicler of its
fashions and its furniture. The follies endure ; but the fashions pass away.
In our day — a day which has witnessed the demolition of Northumberland
House, the translation of Temple Bar, and the removal of we know not
what other time-honoured and venerated landmarks,— much in Hogarth's
plates must seem as obscure as the cartouches on Cleopatra's Needle. Much
more is speedily becoming so ; and without guidance the student will
scarcely venture into that dark and doubtful rookery of tortuous streets
and unnumbered houses — the London of the eighteenth century.'

INTRODUCTION 21
Bridewell in the ' Harlot's Progress,' Fleet Prison in
the ' Rake's Progress ' ; Temple Bar in the eleventh
plate of Hudibras (' Burning of the Rumps ') is Wren's
Bar (1672), of a later date than the scene itself
(1660) ; Hanging Sword Alley, Water Lane, Fleet
Street in ' Industry and Idleness ' ; Chick Lane,
West Smithfield in the same series ; Little Britain
Gate (King's Arms), and the Cock Lane Ghost in
' A Medley.'
Round the Bank we find the Lord Mfiyor's Show
in Cheapside (' Industry and Idleness,' Plate 12),
the Bell in Wood Street (' Harlot's Progress,'
Plate 1), Old London Bridge through the Window
(' Marriage a la Mode,' Plate 6), Fishmongers Hall
(' Industry and Idleness,' Plate 8), the base of the
Monument on Fish Street HiU in the same series,
Plate 6, and Bedlam, Moorfields (' Rake's Progress,'
Plate 8). West of the City there are still more scenes
as in St. Giles's, Soho, Covent Garden, Drury Lane,
St. Martin's Lane, and last and best of aU, St.
James's Street (' Rake's Progress,' Plate 4) — an
admirable view of London's premier street. In the
Suburbs we see Tybm-n in the execution of the Idle
Apprentice at the Triple Tree (Plate 11), Marylebone
Church (' Rake's Progress,' Plate 5), Tottenham
Court in the ' March to Finchley ' and Sadler's
WeUs (Evening). This is only a selection of places
in London represented in Hogarth's pictures and
prints, but it is sufficient to show the wealth of
illustrations which is to be found in the wonderful
variety of his works.

22 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER II
Hogarth's life and works
From one point of view the life of Hogarth may
be said to have been uneventful, but when we con
sider the amount of varied work which he carried on
with a single-minded aim throughout a long life, as
well as the sterling character of the man himself,
which enabled him to carry out aU his undertakings
with decision, we shall find his life fuU of stirring
events and replete with interest.
The main object of this work is to direct special
attention to the illustrations of London life and
manners to be found in Hogarth's work, but in order
to show the relation of this part to the whole, it is
necessary to set down the leading particulars of his
life, and mark his position in the world in respect to
friends and enemies, completing this chapter with a
chronological notice of his most famous productions.
William Hogarth was born in Bartholomew
Close, West Smithfield, on the 10th of November
1697, and baptized on the 28th of the same month
at the parish church of St. Bartholomew the Great. ^
' Hogarth's two sisters — Mary, born Nov. 23, 1699, .and Ann, born Oct.
1701, were baptized — Mary also at St. Bartholomew's on Dec. 10, and Ann
at St. Sepulchre's on Nov. 6.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 23
His father, Richard Hogarth, was the third son
of a yeoman farmer who lived in the vale of
Bampton, about fifteen miles north of Kendal. He
was educated at Archbishop Grindal's Free School
at St. Bees, and afterwards kept a school in his
native county of Westmorland. This proving un
successful, he removed to London.^ He married
Anne Gibbons, and he and his wife were living in
Bartholomew Close when their distinguished son
was born. Afterwards he kept a school in Ship
Court, on the west side of the Old Bailey. The
house, with others, was pulled down in 1862 to make
room for the warehouse of Messrs John Dickinson
and Co., paper-makers, which was built on the site.
He was also employed as a hack writer and
corrector of the press to Mr. Downinge the printer,
'whose acquaintance he probably made when he was
living next door to him in Bartholomew Close. He
appears to have been a man possessed of much out
of the way learning, for he made large additions to
Littleton's Latin Dictionary, but these marginal
additions were never printed, and his interleaved
copy remained in the possession of his son. In 1689
he published Thesaurarium Trilingue Publicum,
a copy of which is in the possession of Mr. Austin
Dobson, and in 1712 was issued his little work
entitled Disputationes Grammaticales.
1 ' He came to London in company with Dr. Gibson, the late Bishop of
London's brother, and was employed as corrector of the press, which in
those days was not considered as a mean employment.'— John Ireland,
Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 6.

24 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Richard Hogarth made scarcely enough to live
upon, and he was able to give his son little or no
education. As his son himself says in his autobio
graphical sketch (John Ireland, 1798), ' My father's
pen, hke that of many other authors, did not enable
him to do more than put me in the way of shifting
for myself.'
There has been much discussion as to the origin
of the family, and some have, with very little cause,
supposed the surname to come from France. There
is a village in Westmorland named Hogarth, but
doubtless the family originally came from Berwick,
or even further north. The name Hoggert has
been found in Scotland as early as 1494, and an
Aberdeen famfly of the name has been traced.
There was a George Hogarth in London in the reign
of Elizabeth. The name was originally pronoimced
hard and the final h was not sounded, as Swift
rhymes it in his satire on the Irish Parhament en
titled 'A Character, Panegyric and Description of
the Legion Club, 1736.' These hnes are more than
interesting as proving this point, and are worth
transcribing in fuU:
' How I want thee, humorous Hogarth !
Thou I hear a pleasant rogue art.
Were but you and I acquainted,
Every monster should be painted ;
You should try your graving tools
On this odious group of fools ;
Draw the beasts as I describe them :
From their features, while I gibe them ;

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 25
Draw them like ; for I assure you.
You will need no car'catura ;
Draw them so that we may trace
All the soul in every face.'
There was httle hkeness between father and son,
but Thomas Hogarth of Troutbeck, an uncle of
WiUiam, known as Auld or Aid Hoggart, was a rustic
dramatist and satirist. He is referred to by Nichols
as an original genius, but his Remains are very
commonplace. Nevertheless some of his Remnants
of Rhyme, selected from an old MS. collection of
his writings preserved by his descendants, were
pubhshed at Kendal as late as 1853.^
From boyhood to his latest hour Wilham Hogarth
devoted himseK to the study of the hfe around him,
and he never tired of exhibiting that life in. his
pictures and engravings. Moreover, to the end he
ceaselessly strove to excel. He himself refers in his
autobiography to this early bent : ' As I had
naturally a good eye, and a fondness for drawing,
shows of aU sorts gave me micommon pleasure
when an infant ; and mimicry, common to all
children, was remarkable in me. An early access
to a neighbouring painter drew my attention from
play ; and I was, at every possible opportunity,
employed in making drawings, I picked up an
acquaintance of the same turn, and soon learnt to
' Professor G. Baldwin Brown, in Appendix iv. to his interesting little
book on Hogarth (1905), quotes one of Aid Hoggart's songs (Momus and
Marina), and says that a selection of Hoggart's poems has been reprinted
by Mr. George Middleton, Ambleside.

26 HOGARTH'S LONDON
draw the alphabet with great correctness. My
exercises when at school were more remarkable for
the ornaments that adorned them than for the
exercise itself.' ^
As a boy he was in the habit of making pencil
sketches on his thumb-nails of whatever struck him.
This practice he continued, and J. Ireland says that
when he came home he copied the sketch on paper
and kept it for future use. He adds, ' Several of
these sketches I have seen, and in them may be
traced the first thoughts for many of the characters
which he afterwards introduced into his works.' ^
His schooldays were soon brought to an end, and
he entered in 1712 into an apprenticeship to EUis
Gamble, a silver-plate engraver in Cranbourne Alley,
which ended about 1718. Mr. Dobson points out
that Gamble was probably a connection of the
Hogarth family, as there is a notice in 1707 of the
marriage of a Sarah Gambell to Edmund Hogarth
in Colonel Chester's London Marriage Licenses,
1521-1869. Hogarth must have done much good work when
in the employment of Gamble, although he himself
refers to his engraving on sUver as causing him to
have to do with ' the monsters ' of heraldry instead
of learning ' to draw objects something like nature.' ^
' John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, 1798, vol. iii. p. 4.
2 Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 12 (note).
^ There is a list of prints of coats-of-arms from those engraved by
Hogarth in John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 369 ; and another
in J. B. Nichols's Anecdotes, 1833, p. 292.

HOS
<OO

Q

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 27
John Thomas Smith in his Life of Nollekens says,
' I am inclined to believe it very possible that some
curious specimens of Hogarth's dawning genius
may yet be rescued from future furnaces,' and he
mentions two silversmiths who collected articles
of the artist's handicraft. Panton Betew, of Old
Compton Street, Soho, was intimate with Hogarth,
and frequently purchased pieces of plate engraved
with armorial bearings by him. Richard Morison,
a silversmith in Cheapside, took off twenty-five
impressions of the coat-of-arms of Sir Gregory Page
engraved on a silver tea-table by Hogarth. These
impressions he not only numbered, but also attested
each by his signature. Morison after taking the
impressions melted the plate, which he had bought
at Sir Gregory's sale. J. T. Smith is wrong in
stating that the engraving was on a large silver dish.
Another of his works was an elegant design engraved
on a large silver tankard used by the members of
the weekly club (of which Hogarth was a member)
held at the Spfller's Head in Clare Market. A copy
of this was given by Samuel Ireland in his Graphic
Illustrations (1794). One of the earliest of Hogarth's
works to be catalogued is a reproduction of
' Sir Plume, of amber snuff-box justly vain,
And the nice conduct of a clouded cane,'
in the Rape of the Loch, taken from the lid of a
gold snuff-box supposed to have been engraved
about the year 1717. How successfuUy Hogarth
engraved the heraldic subjects he undertook, may

28 HOGARTH'S LONDON
be seen from the very fine etching of the arms of
the Duchess of Kendal, mistress of George i.,
also reproduced by Samuel Ireland. In spite of his
success, he felt truly that for him there was no
future in sflver-plate engraving, and in his auto
biography he writes : ' Engraving on copper was, at
twenty years of age, my utmost ambition.' He
probably practised this art whfle he was still with
Gamble, for he engraved a charming little book
plate as well as a bold and effective shopbiU. for his
master.^ An anecdote which John Thomas Smith relates
in his Nollekens comes in at this time, and shows
Hogarth's kindly nature — ' I have several times
heard Mr. Nollekens observe that he frequently
had seen Hogarth, when a young man, saunter
roimd Leicester Fields with his master's sickly
chfld hanging its head over his shoulder.'
Richard Hogarth, then residing in Long Lane,
West Smithfield, died at that place in May 1718.
Soon afterwards his son WiUiam set up in business
for himself. His shop card is inscribed ' W.
Hogarth, Engraver. ApriU y« 23, 1720.' A copy
on which Hogarth had written ' Near the Black
BuU, Long Lane,' was seen by John Ireland. From
this address it might be assumed that he continued
for a time to live with his mother and sisters, but
' The name of ' Ellis Gamble of Leicester Fields, Goldsmith,' is among
the list of bankrupts in 1733 printed in Gentleman's Magazine, vol. iii.
(1733), p. 48.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 29
Nichols's copy {Genuine Works, ii. 20) has the inscrip
tion — ' At y« Golden Ball y^ Corner of Cranborne
AUey, little Newport Street. April y= 29, 1720.'
In the new business which he started by himself
Hogarth began to design and engrave plates for the
booksellers and printsellers, and he continued the
making of book-plates which he apparently com
menced when he was an apprentice of Gamble.
In the preface to the British Museum Catalogue of
the Franks Collection of Book-plates (1903, vol. i.),
it is stated that ' perhaps the most interesting
plates of the eighteenth century are the four engraved
by Hogarth, viz. Gamble ; the two states of the
plate of John Holland, the Herald painter ; George
Lambart {sic) ; and a plate engraved for some mem
ber of the Paulet or Powlett family. The impressions
of the Gamble and Lambart plates are believed to
be unique, and to be the same from which [Samuel]
Ireland made his well-known copies.'
Hogarth's own plate, which consists of a mono
gram of his initials W. H. in a Jacobean frame, is
not here mentioned. The late Mr. Walter Hamilton,
Treasurer of the Ex-Libris Society, adopted and
copied Hogarth's plate as his own, the initials being
the same.
In his autobiography Hogarth writes : ' The
instant I became master of my own time, I deter
mined to qualify myself for engraving on copper.
In this I readily got employment ; and frontispieces
to books . . . soon brought me into the way. But the

30 HOGARTH'S LONDON
tribe of booksellers remained as my father had left
them, when he died ... of an illness occasioned
partly by the treatment he met with from this set
of people ... so that I doubly felt this usage.'
Hogarth found his proper sphere in 1721 when he
produced his two earliest satirical engravings —
' An Emblematical print on the South Sea Scheme,'
and ' The Lottery.' He thus early commenced
what was to be the main feature of his life-work,
but these prints were wanting in the chief merits
of his later productions, which stand easily at the
head of their class. They did not catch the popular
taste, and he continued his work for the booksellers
for some years.
The late Mr. Frederic George Stephens, in the
British Museum Catalogue of Satirical Prints (vol. ii.
p. 15), says, ' Hogarth, the originator of English art
in its modern and current phase, began about 1725
to do for English artistic satire almost as much as
he afterwards did, technically and intellectually, for
English painting. In fact Hogarth created modern
English satire : he needed no help from inscriptions
or textual side of any kind, and after 1725 only
once employed the former ; he drew and there is
no mistaking his meaning.'
Mr. Stephens goes on to refer to the two prints
of 1721 : ' The first work of this designer is,
however, strikingly enough, cumbrous, and its
humour is far-fetched ..." The Lottery" is hardly
less cumbrous, but its humour is spontaneous.'

S-MMES THOPMHILL
Lf h,l /jyS/,,/ari.l fr ar,x ., b^rt ,.,,) in,, ml il'-- j-x

Portrait of Sir James Thornhill.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 31
Hogarth was twenty-eight years of age in 1725,
so that this date fairly coincides with what he
himself says : ' Owing to this and other circum
stances, by engraving until I was near thirty, I
could do little more than maintain myself ; but
even then I was a punctual paymaster.'
He is reported to have said of himself on one
occasion, ' I remember the time when I have gone
moping into the city with scarce a shilling in my
pocket ; but as soon as I had received ten guineas
there for a plate I have returned home, put on my
sword, and sallied out again with all the confidence
of a man who had ten thousand pounds in his
pocket.' The great turning-point in Hogarth's life was
his attendance at the painting-school of Sir James
ThornhiU, in the Piazza at the east corner of James
Street, Covent Garden, which was established in
1724. Hogarth appears from his autobiography
to have been early moved by Thornhill's painting,
which he wished to emulate. He writes : ' I soon
found this business in every respect too limited.
The paintings of St. Paul's Cathedral and Green
wich Hospital, which were at that time going on,
ran in my head, and I determined that silver-plate
engraving should be followed no longer than
necessity obliged me to it.'
From this it became certain that Hogarth would
take the very first opportunity of obtaining the
advantage of instruction from an artist he so much

32 HOGARTH'S LONDON
admired. He is said to have gained the good
graces of his master by ' Masquerades and Operas,
Burhngton Gate,' also called by Hogarth ' The
Taste of the Town ' (1724), in which he attacked the
feeble Kent. This was foUowed in the following
year by the severe satire of Kent's altar-piece at
St. Clement Danes. Kent was the btte noire of
Thornhill, and Hogarth completely sympathised
with him in his dislike. Kent was a bad painter, a
passable architect, and a good landscape gardener.
The plates which Hogarth designed for books
had their merits, but they are distinctly uninterest
ing, and this was probably caused by reason of the
artist not having a free hand, and being interfered
with by the booksellers. In 1726 Hogarth produced
the most important of these in a series of illus
trations to Hudibras, which he specially mentions
in his autobiography as representative items in this
department of his work. He must have been
peculiarly interested in the pleasant task of illus
trating the wonderful poem of so congenial a spirit
as Butler's. The history of these illustrations is a
very curious one, and can only be stated briefly here,
but as we have little or no information besides what
is contained in the books themselves, there are
many points which are difficult to understand.
The whole subject, consisting largely of the relative
chronology of the engravings, the paintings and the
drawings, requires fuU investigation. Hudibras was
flrst published in 1663-64, and the first edition

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 33
' adorned with cuts ' was printed for John Baker
in 1710 with a correct portrait of Butler. In the
following year another edition with plates from the
same designs was issued by R. ChisweU. In 1716
another edition ' adorned with cuts ' was printed
for T. Home [and others]. This contains the
same plates as the previous edition, but they
are somewhat varied, and a correct likeness of
Butler. It is not stated who was the artist who
produced these plates. In 1726 appeared the
edition which was illustrated by Hogarth, printed
for D. Browne [and others]. The plates were
foiuided upon those in the former illustrated editions,
but were considerably altered, and not always for
the better. The portrait which serves as frontis
piece is not that of Butler, but a copy of White's
mezzotint of Jean Baptiste Monnoyer the painter.
This edition was reprinted in 1732 and 1739, and
each of these reprints contains a correct portrait of
Butler. AU these are printed in duodecimo, and
there are sixteen small prints by Hogarth.
Early in the year 1726 (February 24) Hogarth
issued twelve large prints entirely different from the
small ones and of an altogether superior character.
The title-page is as foUows : ' Twelve ExceUent
and most Diverting Prints ; taken from the cele
brated Poem of Hudibras, wrote by Mr. Samuel
Butler. Exposing the VUlany and Hypocrisy of
those Times. Invented and Engraved on Twelve
Copper-Plates by WiUiam Hogarth . . . Printed

34 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and sold by Philip Overton, Printer and Map-
seUer at the Golden Buck near St. Dunstan' s Church
in Fleet street ; and John Cooper in James street
Covent Garden, 1726,' ^ and are humbly dedicated
to WiUiam Ward, Esq., of Great Houghton in
Northamptonshire, and Mr. Allan Ramsay of
Edinburgh. There must be some secret history respecting these
iUustrations of which at present we know nothing.
It is an extraordinary circumstance for Hogarth to
bring out almost simultaneously two sets of iUustra
tions — one published with the text by the bookseUers,
and the other without text by printseUers. It
would seem as if the smaUer set had been in hand for
some time before publication, and the artist being
discontented with it as being mostly an adaptation
of other men's work had set to work on his own
account and with a free hand to produce something
worthier of the great classic of which he might be
truly proud. These twelve larger prints must have
taken a considerable time ' to invent and engrave,'
and their publication can scarcely have been con
sidered as a friendly act by the publishers of the
smaU prints.
They do the greatest credit to Hogarth's invention
and skiU, and form without question the most im
portant piece of work which up to this year, 1726,
he had produced. In some subsequent editions of
' The author possesses a series of the first impressions of these prints
which form a fine (in fact a magnificent) volume.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 35
Hudibras the smaU series of prints were repeated,
and in one at least Hogarth's name is omitted.
The plates were enlarged and slightly varied by
J. Mynde for Dr. Zachary Grey's octavo edition.
Some pictures of incidents in Hudibras attributed
to Hogarth were exhibited at the Winter Exhibition
of the Royal Academy (1908).
Mr. Dobson mentions four series of paintings of
subjects from Hudibras on the authority of J. B.
Nichols {Anecdotes, 1833, pp. 349-50).
1. A set, since sold in November 1872 at the
death of Mrs. Sawbridge, the owner of East Haddon
HaU, Northamptonshire, is supposed to have been
painted by Hogarth subsequent to the issue of the
large series of prints. Mr. Dobson points out that
the proprietor of East Haddon in 1726 was the
WiUiam Ward to whom Hogarth dedicated the
prints, and that therefore it is probable that the
pictures were painted from the prints by com
mission. 2. A set belonging to John Ireland and believed
by him to be Hogarth's originals, but thought by
others to be by Heemskirk. These, Mr. Dobson
informs me, now belong to Mrs. G. E. Twining, of
Dulwich. 3. A set of twelve designs on panel belonging
in 1833 to J. Britton and believed by him to be
Hogarth's. Sk Thomas Lawrence pronounced them
to be by Vandergucht.
4. A set belonging in 1816 to Mr. W. Davies,

36 HOGARTH'S LONDON
bookseUer in the Strand. Attributed to Francis
Le Piper or Lepipre. Several drawings in iUustration
of Hudibras attributed to Hogarth were exhibited
at Whitechapel in 1906. There are also specimens
of the same series at Windsor Castle.^
Three painted sketches iUustrating scenes from
Hudibras, cantos ii. and iii., were lent to the Royal
Academy Winter Exhibition of Old Masters, 1908
(Nos. 97, 98, and 101), by Mrs. Howard Stormont.
In connection with these illustrations, an instance
of Hogarth's familiarity with Hudibras may be seen
in the print of ' Cunicularii or the Wise Men of
Godliman in Consultation ' :
'They hold their Talents most adroit
For any Mystical Exploit.' — Hudib.
which was published in December 26, 1726, at the
time when the mind of the public was much exer
cised by the impostures of Mary Tofts, the rabbit-
breeder. It is referred to here on account of an
interesting fact recorded by John Nichols in his
Biographical Anecdotes (1785, p. 23). ' In the year
1726, when the affair of Mary Tofts, the rabbit-
breeder of Godalming, engaged the public attention,
a few of our principal surgeons subscribed their
guinea a-piece to Hogarth, for an engraving from a
' John Ireland writes {Hogarth Illustrated, 1793, vol. i. p. xxxii.) :
' Seven of the drawings are in the possession of Mr. Samuel Ireland, three
are in Holland ; and two are said to have been in the collection of a person
in one of the northern provinces about twenty years ago, but are now
probably destroyed. Thus are the works of genius scattered like the
Sybill's leaves.'

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 37
ludicrous sketch he had made on that very popular
subject.' Some further notice of this print wiU be
found in Chapter vi. in connection with the prints
' Enthusiasm Delineated,' and ' Credulity, Supersti
tion and Fanaticism : a Medley.'
In 1728 Hogarth found it necessary to go to law
with a tradesman, who refused to pay for work done
for him. The artist in December 1727 agreed with
Joshua Morris, an upholsterer, who kept a shop in
PaU Mall at the sign of the Golden BaU, to furnish
him with a design on canvas, representing the
element of Earth as a pattern for tapestry,
apparently a very intractable subject. Morris
when he received the work was so dissatisfied with
it that he rejected it and refused payment. He
had previously been uneasy on being told that
Hogarth ' was an engraver and no painter.'
Hogarth sued him for the money, and the suit
was tried before Lord Chief- Justice Eyre at West
minster on May 28, 1728. Nichols prints the
defendant's case in his Biographical Anecdotes, and
says that the suit was determined in favour of
Hogarth.^ Mr. Dobson writes : ' As to the fate of
the Element of Earth history is silent. It is not
likely, however, that it was more fortunate than
some of Hogarth's subsequent efforts in the " grand
style." '
1 This is the statement in the third edition (1785). In the second edition
(1782) it is written : ' What was the event of the suit we do not learn, but
it is probable that Hogarth was non-suited.' Between these two dates the
author may be supposed to hate learned the truth.

38 HOGARTH'S LONDON
y One of the artist's witnesses to ability was Sir
James Thornhill, who was interested in his future
son-in-law as a pupU and a critic of his arch-enemy
Kent. Hogarth returned his good offices by gaining
the affections of the painter's daughter. He felt
sure that his suit would not receive the sanction of
ThornhiU, so he took the matter in his own hand,
and running away with his sweetheart was married
at old Paddington Church on March 23, 1729, as
appears by the parish register.
It is supposed that the young couple had the
active sympathy of Lady ThornhiU, and there is
no doubt that it was not long before the pair were
forgiven. In 1730, Hogarth was certainly engaged
with his father-in-law in the production of the weU-
known picture entitled ' The House of Commons,'
which contains portraits of the Speaker Onslow,
Sir Robert Walpole, Sidney Godolphin, Colonel R.
Onslow, ThornhiU and the two clerks.
There is a tradition that Hogarth was engaged at
the time of his marriage in preparing for his first
great series of pictures, ' A Harlot's Progress,'
which are dated 1731. The judicious placing a few
of the sketches in the way of the father-in-law
caused him to exclaim, ' The man who did those can
afford to keep a wife.' For a time Hogarth and his
wife went to live at South Lambeth, but ThornhiU
soon seems to have relented, and we find that at the
time of engraving of the ' Harlot's Progress ' Hogarth
was domiciled in the Piazza with his father-in-law.

a.,,.,M /,„.r'

I.AjiY 'Thornhill

Portrait of Lady Thornhill.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 39
who found the assistance of a competent artist
in some of his pictures of use to him. According to
Nichols, when ThornhiU painted an aUegorical
ceiling, iUustrating the story of Zephyrus and
Flora, at Headley Park, Hants, the figure of a
satyr was put in by Hogarth, some of whose work
is also to be seen in the staircase pictures painted
by ThornhiU at the house No. 75 Dean Street,
Soho. About this time Hogarth appears to have been
initiated into Masonry, probably through the
influence of ThornhiU, who was Senior Grand
Warden in 1728. The dates are rather uncertain,
but Hogarth was certainly a Grand Steward in
1735. Mr, G, W, Speth gives, in a note on the picture of
Night, some particulars of Hogarth's Masonic career.
In the Grand Lodge Register he appears as a member
of the lodge meeting at the ' Hand and Apple Tree,'
Little Queen Street. This lodge was constituted
10th May 1725, met in 1728 at the ' King's Arms,'
Westminster, in 1729 at the ' Vine,' Holborn, and
was erased in 1737. It cannot be determined
whether he remained a member of the lodge tiU
its erasure or at what period he joined it. The
Grand Lodge Register shows that he was also a
member of the' Comer Stone Lodge' in 1731. This
name, however, was not assumed tiU 1779. It
started in its career in 1730 at the ' Bear and
Harrow ' in Butcher Row, and its list of members

40 HOGARTH'S LONDON
shows it has been one of the most distinguished
lodges of the day.^
When Hogarth lived at South Lambeth he
renewed his acquaintance with Jonathan Tyers,
who re-founded VauxhaU Gardens in 1732, and
helped him with advice as weU as more material
services. He presented Tyers with his picture of
Henry vni. and Anna BuUen in 1729, which was hung
in the Rotunda. While preparing for the opening
of the gardens, Tyers became very depressed respect
ing the probable success of his xmdertaking. Hogarth
suggested that the gardens should be opened with a
Ridotto al fresco, which took place on Wednesday,
the 7th of June 1732, and proved a great success.
Several years afterwards he aUowed Francis Hayman
to copy his ' Four Times of the Day.' In consequence
Hayman' s pictures at VauxhaU were often mistaken
for the work of Hogarth.
In return for aU his valuable assistance, Tyers
presented Hogarth with a free pass (gold ticket) to
admit a coachful (six persons) to the gardens. Mrs.
Hogarth had it after her husband's death, and in
1856 it was in the possession of Mr. Frederick
Gye, who bought it for £20. It was subsequently
sold at Sotheby's for £310. The design of the pass
was attributed to Hogarth, but Mr. Warwick Wroth
thinks that probably it was the work of Richard
Yeo. We have now come to the parting of the ways.
' Transactions of the Lodge Quatuor Cm-onati, vol. ii., 1889, p. 116.

¦a¦I

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 41
The artist was beginning to be recognised, but he
was only recognised as ' an ingenious designer and
engraver.' Sir James ThornhiU died on May 13,
1734, and in an obituary notice after a mention of
his only son it is added, ' He left no other issue but
one daughter, now the wife of Mr. Wm. Hogarth,
admired for his curious miniature conversation
paintings.' This is about the earliest mention of the
paintings, and these were soon to be eclipsed by his
briUiant satires which gave him a European reputa
tion. His marriage had stirred him to greater
endeavours, and he had begim to mount the ladder
of success.
On the death of ThornhiU, the properties con
nected with the art school formed by him in a room
built at the back of his house came into the pos
session of Hogarth, and were transferred to the
studio in Peter's Court, St. Martin's Lane, which
RoubUiac had left. ' Thinking,' Hogarth remarks,
' that an academy conducted on proper and moderate
principles had some use, [I] proposed that a number
of artists should enter into a subscription for the hire
of a place large enough to admit thirty or forty
people to draw after a naked figure.' Hogarth did
not approve of the plan adopted by Thornhill of
admitting aU who required admission without pay
ment, and he writes : ' I proposed that every
member should contribute an equal sum to the
establishment, and have an equal right to vote in
every question relative to the society. As to

42 HOGARTH'S LONDON
electing presidents, directors, professors, etc., I
considered it as a ridiculous imitation of the fooUsh
parade of the French Academy.' He adds, writing
in 1762 : ' To return to our own Academy ; by the
regulations I have mentioned, of a general equahty,
etc., it has now subsisted near thirty years, and is,
to every useful purpose, equal to that in France or
any other ; but this does not satisfy.'
Hogarth disapproved of the formation of the Royal
Academy (which was largely formed by the members
of his own society), and ' refused to assign to the
society the property which I had before lent them.
I am accused of acrimony, ill-nature, and spleen,
and held forth as an enemy to the arts and artists.
How far their mighty project wUl succeed, I neither
know nor care ; certain I am it deserves to be
laughed at, and laughed at it has been.'
After his marriage Hogarth had to undertake
work which was likely to be more profitable than
what he had previously been engaged in, so he took
in hand the painting of portraits and conversation
pieces, but these did not pay him so weU as he
expected. He writes in his autobiography : ' I
then married and commenced painter of smaU
conversation pieces, from twelve to fifteen inches
high. This having novelty, succeeded for a few
years. But though it gave somewhat more scope
to the fancy, was stiU but a less kind of drudgery ;
and as I could not bring to act hke some of my
brethren and make it a sort of a manufactory, to be

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 43
carried on by the help of background and drapery
painters, it was not sufficiently profitable to pay the
expences my famUy required. I therefore turned
my thoughts to a stUl more novel mode, viz. painting
and engraving modern moral subjects, a field not
broken up in any country or any age.'
Joseph Mitchell, for whose opera. The Highland
Fair, Hogarth designed a frontispiece, wrote in
1730 'A Poetical Epistle to Mr. Hogarth, an
eminent historical and Conversation Painter,' in
which he introduced this couplet :
' Large families obey your hand ;
Assemblies rise at your command.'
These famUy pictures were styled respectively
Conversations and Assemblies. A Conversation was
a group of persons, generaUy of one family, and an
Assembly was a stUl larger coUection of persons ;
but now that the special meaning of the two words is
lost there has been some confusion in the use of the
terms. Thus the picture which was sold on June 3,
1905, by Messrs. Christie, amongst Lord Tweed-
mouth's coUection, and was exhibited at the Winter
Exhibition of the Royal Academy in 1906 by Mr.
C, Morland Agnew, was catalogued as an Assembly
at Wanstead House, although it was described on
the frame as 'A Conversation.' This picture is
further aUuded to in Chapter in.
Most of these Conversation pieces were painted
within a few years of the painter's marriage.

44 HOGARTH'S LONDON
although it has been difficult to fix the date of many
of them, Samuel Ireland engraved in the Graphic
Illustrations (1799) a ' Conversation in the Manner of
Vandyck,' from a painting which he bought from
Charles Catton, R.A. It was said to be painted by
Hogarth to prove he could do as good work as
Vandyck, a pretension which was disputed by his
colleagues in the Academy of St, Martin's Lane.
Ireland declares that the picture was painted about
1740. He illustrates his narrative by the well-
known and amusing anecdote of John Freke, the
famous surgeon.
' Hogarth one day dining with some friends,
amongst whom was Cheselden, a surgeon of great
eminence, was told, that it had been asserted by
Mr. Freke, a surgeon, in a pubhc company, that Dr.
Greene, the musician, was as eminent and skilful
a composer as Handel. On which Hogarth rephed :
That Freke is always shooting his bolt absurdly:
Handel is a giant in music ; Greene is only a light
Florimel kind of composer. True, said another of
the company, but that same Freke declared you
were as good a portrait-painter as Vandyck, There
he was in the right, adds Hogarth, and so I am, give
me my time and let me choose my subject.'
His composition of these small pictures with
numerous figures taught him the great art of
arranging his materials with skiU — an art which he
can scarcely be said to display in his illustrations of
books except in the case of the plates to Hudibras.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 45
He thus taught himself to become pre-eminent in
the orderly arrangement of a multitude of detaUs
in his pictures, where the less important accessories
are always subordinated to the main theme of the
composition, Hogarth himself admirably describes the ideas
he had formed in his own mind as to the plan of
composition of his great series of moral satires :
' The reasons which induced me to adopt this mode
of designing were, that I thought both writers
and painters had, in the historical style, totaUy
overlooked that intermediate species of subject,
which may be placed between the sublime and
grotesque, I therefore wished to compose pictures
on canvas, simUar to representations on the stage,
and farther hope, that they wiU be tried by the same
test, and criticised by the same criterion, , , ,
Ocular demonstration wUl carry more conviction
to the mind of a sensible man, than aU he would
find in a thousand volumes ; and this has been
attempted in the prints I have composed. Let the
decision be left to every unprejudiced eye ; let the
figures in either pictures or prints, be considered
as players dressed either for the sublime, — ^for
genteel comedy, or farce, — for high or low life, I
have endeavoured to treat my subjects as a
^jramatic wnter ; my picture is my stage, and men
and women my players, who by means of certain
actions and gestures, are to exhibit a dumb show.^
During the period between 1728 and 1735, which

46 HOGARTH'S LONDON
saw his marriage and the death of his father-in-law,
Hogarth did an immense amount of work, both in
painting and engraving, and doubtless much of his
progress in painting was due to what he learned
from his association with ThornhiU,
His time was chiefly employed in the production
of iUustrations to books, conversation pieces, the
six pictures and plates of the ' Harlot's Progress '
(1731-2), and such important pictures and engrav
ings as the ' Committee of the House of Commons
examining Bambridge ' (1729), ' Scene in the Indian
Emperor' (1731), 'Southwark Fair' (1733), and
' A Midnight Modern Conversation ' (1733). These
pictures wiU be considered in later chapters. ' The
Rake's Progress' was imdertaken in 1735, and the
' Four Times of the Day ' in 1738. He had there
fore already proved to the world what a great and
original artist he was, although it was not untU the
year 1745 that he produced his masterpiece — the
six pictures of the ' Marriage a la Mode.'
This was the turning-point in Hogarth's career.
He had been gradually preparing himself for the
position which he knew he was capable of occupying,
and now the world was ready to acclaim him victor.
He exhibited a rare instance of the union of the
man of business with an original genius. He
entirely made his own career by continued progress
and experience, and by so working as to cause
everything to lead to the desired end.
With the briUiant power of original conception,

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 47
but escaping the impetuosity of genius, he was wiUing
to work continuously in the most laborious manner
to perfect himself in whatever he undertook.
Genius has been denied to him by some, but it is
safe either to claim or deny because it is impossible
to define genius. Whatever else it may be,
originality is its very essence, and there never
lived a man with a more original mind than Hogarth.
In his own particular line the world has never seen
his equal, and probably never wUl.
Though success came, it was not unaUoyed.
Annoyance and persecution foUowed the man during
the remainder of his life. The popularity of his
work caused him to become the prey of the pirates
who instantly copied and spoiled the sale of his
original engravings ; for instance, Steevens teUs us
that he had seen eight piratical imitations of the
' Harlot's Progress.' The earliest and best of these,
published by Bowles, contained verses on the
different scenes. Hogarth saw the advantage of
these, and added verses written by Chancellor
Hoadly to the plates of the ' Rake's Progress.'
The evils of this widespread practice of piracy
were so great that it became imperative to take
action in the matter. In concert with George
Vertue, Gerard Vandergucht, Pine, and Lambert,
besides several others, he petitioned Parliament for
leave to bring in a biU to vest in designers and
engravers an exclusive right to their own works
and to restrain the multipljdng of copies without

48 HOGARTH'S LONDON
their consent. Hogarth applied to WiUiam Huggins,
author of the oratorio of Judith, who drafted the
bUl on the statute of Queen Anne in favour of
literary property. It was not satisfactory in
practice, and as Mr. Stephens says, ' gave, although
it did not secure, copyright to artists.' In a cause
which came before Lord Hardwicke in Chancery,
he determined that no assignee, claiming under an
assignment from the original inventor, could take
any benefit by the Act. According to Sir John
Hawkins, Hogarth lamented to him 'that he had
employed Huggins to draw the Act, adding that
when he first projected it, he hoped it would be such
an encouragement to engraving and printseUing
that printseUers' would soon become as numerous
as bakers' shops, which hope, notwithstanding the
above check, does at this time seem to be pretty
nearly gratified.'
In the London Daily Post, June 27, 1735, there is
a special reference to the acts of the pirates.
' Certain PrintseUers in London, intending not only
to injure Mr. Hogarth in his Property, but also to
impose their base imitations on the Publick, which
they being oblig'd to do only [by] what they could
carry away by memory from the sight of the
Paintings, have executed most wretchedly both in
Design and Drawing, as wUl be very obvious when
they are expos'd.'
The ' Rake's Progress ' was printed by Boitard on
one very large sheet of paper, and came out about

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 49
a fortnight before the genuine set. Hogarth's
originals were kept back until ' Hogarth's Act '
(8 Geo. n. cap. 13) received the Royal Assent on
May 15, 1735. His attempt to issue cheap sets in
order to drive out the pirates was not successful.
In spite of the faults of the new Act, Hogarth seems
to have been fairly satisfied with the result as an
improvement upon the previous lawless condition
of things.
He wrote in his autobiography: 'After having
had my plates pirated almost in aU sizes, I in 1735
apphed to Parliament for redress, and obtained it
in so liberal a manner, as hath not only answered
my own purpose, but made prints a considerable
article in the commerce of this country ; there
being now more business of this kind done here,
than in Paris, or any where else and as weU. The
dealers in pictvires and prints found their craft in
danger by what they caUed a new-fangled innova
tion. Their trade of living and getting fortunes by
the ingenuity of the industrious has I know, suffered
much by my interference ; and if the detection of
this band of public cheats, and oppressors of the
rising artists, be a crime, I confess myseU most
guUty.' Hogarth commemorated the passing of the Act by
pubhshing a smaU print with emblematical devices
entitled ' Crowns, Mitres, Maces, etc,' and the foUow-
ing inscription quoted from Nichols's Biographical
Anecdotes :

50 HOGARTH'S LONDON
In humble and grateful acknowledgment
of the grace and goodness of the Legislature
Manifested
In the Act of Parliament for the Encouragement
Of the Arts of Designing, Engraving, &c.
obtained
By the Endeavours, and almost at the sole Expence,
Of the Designer of this Print in the Year 1735 ;
By which
Not only the Professors of those Arts were rescued
From the Tyranny, Frauds, and Piracies
Of Monopolizing Dealers,
And legally entitled to the Fruits of their own Labours ;
But Genius and Industry were also prompted
By the most noble and generous Inducements to exert themselves ;
Emulation was excited,
Ornamental Compositions were better understood ;
And every Manufacture, where Fancy has any concern,
Was gradually raised to a Pitch of Perfection before unknown ;
Insomuch, that those of Great-Britain
Are at present the most Elegant
And the most in Esteem of Any in Europe.
This etching was converted into a receipt for the
subscription to the Election Series, and inscribed
' Designed, Etch'd and Publish'd as the Act directs
by Wm. Hogarth, March 20th, 1754.'
On a scroU is written, ' An Act for the Encourage
ment of the Arts of Designing, Engraving, and Etch
ing, by vesting the Properties thereof in the Inventors
and Engravers, during J;he time therein mentioned.' ^
About this time the engravings of Hogarth began
1 After Hogarth's death his widow was granted (7 Geo. iii. cap. 38) a
further exclusive term of twenty years in the property of her husband's
works. Mr. Stephens remarks respecting this, ' Even " Mrs. Hogarth's
Act," which became law many years after this date, did little more than
declare the wishes of Parliament.' — B.M. Catalogue, vol. iv. p. 55.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 51
to attract crowds around the shop windows which
contained them, and besides these the frequent
satires on the artist were eagerly sought after.
Mr. Stephens writes of a rather later date : ' His
figure was so well known that everybody recognised
it in "A Stir in the City," where he appears in a
crowd before the GuildhaU.' ^
It seems strange, after Hogarth had mastered
the secret of success by a series of carefuUy considered
steps, each of which led him higher on the ladder of
fame, that he should for a time have turned aside
to follow a style of art that was not in accord with
his taste and practice. He makes in his auto
biography a sort of ' Apologia ' for doing this,
although he is far too modest in the opening
sentence as to the importance of the two
' Progresses ' already pubhshed : ' Before I had done
anything of much consequence in this walk, I
entertained some hopes of succeeding in what
the puffers in books caU the great style of history
painting ; so that without having had a stroke of
this grand business before : I quitted small portraits
and familiar conversations, and with a smile at my
own temerity, commenced history painter, and on
a great staircase at St. Bartholomew's Hospital,
painted two Scripture stories, " The Pool of
Bethesda," and " The Good Samaritan," with figures
1 A further proof of Hogarth's popularity is to be seen in the note
of publication of this print, ' Sold by John Smith at Hogarth's Head
opposite Wood Street, Cheapside.'— ^.ilf. Catalogue, vol. iii, p. 911.

52 HOGARTH'S LONDON
seven feet high. These I presented to the Charity,
and thought they might serve as a specimen, to
show that were there an inclination in England for
encouraging historical pictures, such a first essay
might prove the painting more easily attainable
than is generally imagined. But as religion, the
great promoter of this style in other countries,
rejected it in England, I was unwiUing to sink into
a portrait manufacturer, and stiU ambitious of being
singular, dropped all expectations of advantage from
that source, and returned to the pursuit of my
former dealings with the public at large. This I
found was most likely to answer my ptirpose, pro
vided I could strike the passions, and by small
sums from many, by the sale of prints, which I
could engrave from my own pictures, thus secure
my property to myself.'
We here see that Hogarth was not altogether
satisfied with the result. Although he condemns
the attitude of Protestantism towards the inclusion
of religious pictures in churches, he must have felt
that such painting was uncongenial to him. He
did, however, return to the painting of religious
subjects after 1736, for in 1748 he painted 'Paul
before Felix' for the Honourable Society of
Lincoln's Inn ; in 1751 ' Moses brought to Pharaoh's
Daughter ' for the Foundling Hospital, and in 1756
the altar-piece for St. Mary Redcliffe, Bristol.
The latter consists of three compartments: the
centre division, which is much the largest, represents

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 53
the Ascension, and has not been engraved. The
subject of the right compartment is ' The Sealing
of the Sepulchre,' that of the left ' The Three Maries
visiting the Sepulchre.' The two side pictures were
engraved by Isaac Jenner.
Some further remarks will be found in subsequent
chapters on the pictures at St. Bartholomew's and
Foundling Hospitals and at Lincoln's Inn, but as
those at Bristol have nothing to do with London life
a few words respecting them may be added in this
place. Hogarth received £525 for these pictures,
but they have never been favourites, and by some
have been unconditionaUy condemned. They were
presented by the Vestry of St. Mary Redcliffe to the
Fine Arts Academy of Clifton in 1857.
A writer in the Critical Review (June 1756), just
after the completion of the altar-piece, remarks
' that the purchasing such a picture for their church
does great honour to the opulent city for which it
was painted, and is the likeliest means to raise a
British School of Artists,' although he adds, ' It
would be a just subject for public regret if Mr.
Hogarth should abandon a branch of painting in
which he stands alone, unrivaUed and inimitable,
to pursue another in which so many have aheady
exceUed.' Britton in his Historical and Architectural
Essay on Redcliffe Church, 1813, says of the pictures
' they possess much merit, and may be viewed with
advantage by the young artist, but in the forms and
expressions of the figiu-es, and in their attitudes

54 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and grouping, we seek in vain for propriety, dignity
or elegance.' This is too severe a criticism, and the
chief objection to Hogarth's religious pictures is
that they are not conceived with the spirituality
and the lofty aim which we expect in religious
subjects, but we know Hogarth was not capable
of throwing into his work. It is necessary to
remember, however, that few if any painters of the
eighteenth century rose to this height.
Professor Baldwin Brown in his book on Hogarth
has some admirable remarks on this subject. He
writes : ' The blunderers in the matter of historical
painting were not Hogarth or his predecessors,
but the later men of the period after Reynolds, who
took themselves seriously as professed votaries of
the " grand style." . . . Reynolds's own efforts
in the grand style are theatrical and unreal, whUe
Haydon and other men of genius who broke their
hearts over unsuccessful efforts, were stumbling
in the dark with no guidance but a noble ambition.
, , , If Hogarth's work in this style is cold and
uninspired, at any rate it is better than the blunder
ing efforts of some of his successors in the school,'
Hogarth appears to have lived nearly the whole
of his working life in Leicester Square and its
immediate neighbourhood. Although he occasion
ally frequented the lowest haunts of London hfe
for the purposes of his art, he was no Bohemian,
He lived a quiet and respectable life, and kept a
comfortable home for his wife and himself.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 55
John Thomas Smith in his Nollekens absurdly
attacks his moral character, and sets down in his
Table of Contents the entry ' Immorality of
Hogarth,' In justification of this he writes :
' Great as Hogarth was in his display of every
variety of character, I should never think of
exhibiting a portfolio of his prints to a youthful
inquirer ; nor can I agree that the man who was so
accustomed to visit, so fond of delineating, and
who gave up so much of his time to the vices of the
most abandoned classes, was in truth a " moral
teacher of mankind," My father knew Hogarth
weU, and I have often heard him declare, that he
reveUed in the company of the drunken and the
profligate : ChurchiQ, Wilkes, Hayman, etc, were
among his constant companions. Dr. John Hoadly,
though in my opinion it reflected no credit on him,
dehghted in his company ; but he did not approve
of all the prints produced by him, particularly that
of the first state of " Enthusiasm Displayed " {sic)
which had Mr. Garrick or Dr. Johnson seen, they
could never for a moment have entertained their
high esteem of so irrehgious a character,'
It is quite possible to condemn several of Hogarth's
prints without agreeing with this sweeping con
demnation, which contains nothing that can justify
a charge of immorality. The character of the
friends who wUl be specially mentioned later on is
sufficient answer to such an unwarrantable attack.
When a boy, as we have already seen, Hogarth was

56 HOGARTH'S LONDON
apprenticed to Ellis Gamble in Cranbourne Alley,
After living for a short time with his family in Long
Lane, he set up for himself in 1720, apparently at
the corner of Cranbourne AUey by Little Newport
Street, but we have no evidence as to how long he
remained there.
After his marriage he moved about for a time ;
but in 1733 he had taken the house at the south
east corner of Leicester Fields, which was rebuilt a
few years ago.
Here he remained for the rest of his life, with the
viUa at Chiswick as his country house. His widow
remained in the Square after her husband's death.
Taking up again the chronology of Hogarth's life,
we find that after finishing his Scripture pictures
at St. Bartholomew's Hospital he occupied himself
with success in painting portraits. His grand por
trait of Captain Coram at the Foundling Hospital
was painted in 1739, that of Martin Folkes, P.R.S,,
in 1741, and his own portrait in the National GaUery
in 1745, the year of the publication of the ' Marriage a
la Mode,' his masterpiece, which was preceded in 1738
by the ' Four Times of the Day,' the most interest
ing of his London prints. Other great works by him
which should be mentioned here are the ' March to
Finchley' (1750), and the Four Pictures of an
Election (1755). To these must be added the
twelve prints of ' Industry and Idleness ' (1747),
Comparatively early in his career, Hogarth's
prints were known on the Continent ; in fact he was

Frontispiece to "Catalogue of Pictures.'' 1761

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 57
little over thirty years of age when his pictures
were copied on fans and pottery and reproduced
for the benefit of foreigners. The ' Midnight
Modern Conversation ' (1733) was the first English
print to be re-engraved and republished abroad;
and a passage in one of Walpole's Letters to Sir
Horace Mann (Dec, 15, 1748), referring to 'The
Gate of .Calais ' (1749), seems to show that the
Governor and the people about him were acquainted
with Hogarth's fame, and in spite of the satire
enjoyed the humour of his sketches.
Hogarth went to France, and was so imprudent
as to take a sketch of the drawbridge at Calais.
He was seized and carried to the Governor, where
he was forced to prove his vocation by producing
several caricatures of the French ; particularly a
scene of the shore, with an immense piece of beef
landing for the 'Lion d' Argent, the English inn at
Calais, and several hiuigry friars f oUowing it. They
were much diverted with his drawings, and dis
missed him.' This occurrence was immediately
after the Peace of Aix la ChapeUe. There are three
versions of the story, the first by the painter him
self, another in Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes,
and the third as above. ^ Hogarth was ready on aU
1 The original picture of Calais Gate was bought from the painter by the
Earl of Charlemont. It was sold in 1874 for .£945 and formed part of the
Bolckow collection until May 1891, when it was bought by Messrs. Agnew
for 2450 guineas. It was afterwards in the collection of the Duke of
Westminster, who in July 1895 presented it to the National Gallery.
The picture was engraved and published in March 1749, and entitled ' 0
the EoMt Beef of Old England, etc' — Dobson.

58 HOGARTH'S LONDON
occasions to condemn the connoisseurs and those
who advocated 'foreign fashions.' He was con
tented with English Art, but he was not so narrow-
minded as his enemies attempted to prove. He
did not care to waste his time in arguing or answering
his opponents. He launched his thunderbolts and
was satisfied if they took effect.
Soured by the neglect of his pictures, on the sale
of which alone he could not have existed, we cannot
be surprised at his strong opinions adverse to those
who neglected English painters but spent large
sums upon what he was pleased to call the ' Black
Masters.' There is no doubt that these connoisseurs
laid themselves open to his satire, and this was often
exceedingly good, as for instance the taUpiece to
the catalogue of pictures exhibited in Spring Gardens
(1761), when a traveUed Monkey with fine clothes and
an eye-glass is seen watering ' exoticks ' in two pots.
In one of Mrs. Piozzi's anecdotes of Hogarth we
learn how he reaUy felt with respect to the great
masters. He said that Johnson's conversation was
to that of other men like Titian's painting com
pared with Hudson's — ' but don't you teU people
now that I say so, for the connoisseurs and I are
at war, you know ; and because I hate them, they
think I hate Titian, and let them ! '
We have exceUent authority for Reynolds's
contempt of ignorant criticism :
' When they talked of their Raphaels, Correggios, and stuff.
He shifted his trumpet and only took snufif.'

.... h.

0 '^ '¦: '- I

Tailpiece to *' Catalogue or Pictures." 1761.

'The Battle of the Pictures." i745-
Ticket for the auction of "A Rakes Progress" etc.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 59
Hogarth was indignant with and intemperate in
his language towards the connoisseurs from the time
he first began to paint, and it must be aUowed that
he had cause. His first pictorial attack was con
tained in ' The Battle of the Pictures,' prepared in
the beginning of the year 1745, as a ticket for the
sale of his paintings which was arranged to take place
at this time. Above the design is engraved : ' The
bearer hereof is entitled (if he thinks proper) to be a
bidder for Mr. Hogarth's pictures, which are to be sold
on the last day of this month ' (February 1744-5).
It is the old battle between the Moderns and the
Ancients, which fired Swift in the Battle of the Books.
In this print there are at the left of the plate
three rows or battalions of old pictures, true and
false, ready to be sold, and above them there is a
flag with an auctioneer's hammer displayed. The
outside of the saleroom is surmounted by a vane
having the four points of the compass lettered
p, u, f, s. The weathercock is intended as a play
upon the name of the fashionable auctioneer Cock,
of the Piazza, Covent Garden. Some of the ancient
pictures are flying in the air, attacking and injuring
some of Hogarth's works, but the Moderns are not
aUowed to be beaten, and in the end the damage
to each side is about equal. An old ' St. Francis '
injures the modern ' Noon,' and a copy of the
antique mural painting styled 'The Aldobrandmi
Marriage ' makes a serious rent in one of the scenes
in the tragedy of the ' Marriage a la Mode,' but

60 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Hogarth's pictures have their opportunity and are
enabled to injure some of the Black Masters,
If the English painter was mad before the sale,
he must have been madder when he found what
ridiculous prices his pictures fetched.
It is strange that Hogarth, who was business-like
in his work, should be so thoroughly unbusiness-like
in so important a matter as the seUing of his pictures.
He published rules and regulations respecting the
biddings, which must have been singularly irritating
to those who proposed to be purchasers. The
biddings were to remain open from the first to the
last day of February, No person was to bid on
the last day, except those whose names were before
entered in the book. The printed proposals con
clude with this note : ' As Mr, Hogarth's room is but
small, he begs the favour that no persons, except
those whose names are entered in the book, wiU come
to view his paintings on the last day of sale,'
The miserable result of the sale of nineteen of
Hogarth's chief pictures under these absurd con
ditions was the realisation of £427, 7s. Od.
' Harlot's Progress,' six at 14 guineas each,
' Rake's Progress,' eight at 22 guineas,
' Morning,' 20 guineas, .
' Noon,' 37 guineas,
' Evening,' 38 guineas, .
' Night,' 26 guineas,
' Strolling Players,' 26 guineas, £427 7 0

£88

4

0

184

16

0

21

0

0

38

17

0

39

18

0

27

6

0

27

6

0

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 61
At this sale it was announced that the six pictures
of the ' Marriage a la Mode ' would be sold in the
same manner as soon as the plates then being taken
from them should be completed.
The sale was delayed until June 1751, when these
masterpieces were obtained by the highest bidder
for £126 or twenty guineas each, that is, a little
more than the ' Harlot's Progress,' and less than
the ' Rake's Progress,' As the frames, which cost
the painter four guineas each, were included, the
actual receipt was only sixteen guineas each. The
purchaser was Mr. Lane, of Hillingdon near Ux-
bridge, who was the only attendant in Leicester
Square on Jime 6 (the last day of sale), with the
exception of Hogarth himself, and his friend Dr.
James Parsons, It was announced that the highest
written offer was £120, on which Lane offered
guineas, with the expression of a desire that they
should wait until the fixed hour of closure in case a
purchaser wiUing to give more should arrive.
The painter allowed his hatred of the picture-
dealer to injure the value of his property by ruling
that ' no dealers in pictures were to be admitted
as bidders,' thus greatly limiting the possibility of
competition. Surely some of these men would have
had the wisdom to prevent the sale of such precious
works of art at so low a price.
Hogarth satirised the Society of Dilettanti and
' Athenian ' Stuart in his print ' The Five Orders of
Perriwigs as they were worn at the late Coronation,

62 HOGARTH'S LONDON
measured ArchitectonicaUy,' in 1761, which, oddly
enough, is intended to make fun of a book, the first
volume of which was not pubhshed untU the f oUow
ing year, viz. The Antiquities of Athens measured
and delineated by James Stuart and Nicholas
Revett, 1762. The explanation of this anticipation
of the book is given in the History of the Society
(1898), where in a note we read, ' It would appear
that even before the publication of the work, Stuart
had expatiated freely upon its merits and those of
the artists concerned.'
John Ireland quotes from Hogarth's MSS. the
foUowing passage, which shows the object of his
satire : ' It requires no more skiU to take the
dimensions of a pUlar or cornice, than to measin-e a
square box, and yet the man who does the latter is
neglected, and he who accomplishes the former
is considered as a miracle of genius, but I suppose
he receives his honours for the distance he has
traveUed to do his business.' Stuart took aU this
in good part, and was willing that the public should
think that he himself was pleased even with the
adverse criticism of a genius. J. T. Smith in his
Nollekens says his parlour in his house on the
south side of Leicester Square ' was decorated
with some of Hogarth's most popular prints, and
upon a fire-screen he had pasted an impression of
the plate caUed the " Periwigs," a print which Mr.
Stuart always showed his visitors as Hogarth's
satire on his first volume of Athenian Antiquities.'

As StatllesInoulde^iTlto^^'orth_l'''¦/^¦ ">

'Time smoking a Picture." 1761.
Suhsc7'iptiofi Ticket fo7- Sigistnunda.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 63
Horace Walpole, in a letter to George Montagu,
Nov. 7, 1761, referring to a copy of the ' Periwigs,'
which he sent, writes, ' The Athenian head [the
barber's block] was intended for Stuart ; but was
so like, that Hogarth was forced to cut off the nose.'
A curious satire on Hogarth's satire entitled ' A
Sett of Blocks for Hogarth's wigs,' was published in
October 1762.^
To return to the subject of Hogarth's warfare
against the ' Black Masters,' which about this time
became a specially deadly struggle owing to the
personal interests introduced by the malignant
criticism of his painting of ' Sigismunda,' in 1759.
He kept up the feud until his death, for the tail
piece ' Finis ' or ' The Bathos or Manner of Sinking,
in Sublime Paintings, inscribed to the Dealers in Dark
Pictures,' was his last published work (March 3, 1764),
' Time Smoking a Picture ' (1761) was the
subscription ticket for the print of ' Sigismunda,'
which did not appear untU many years after
Hogarth's death.
Time as an aged man seated on a fragment of a
statue, is seen puffing smoke from his pipe against
the surface of a landscape painting on an easel
' Mr. F. G. Stephens gives a very full account of this etching in the
B.M. Catalogue (vol. iv. p. 11), and quotes the Advertisement below the
design. ' In about seventeen years wUl be compleated in six volumes folio,
price fifteen guineas, the exact measurements of the Perriwigs of the
ancients ; taken from the Bustos and Basso EUievos of Athens, Palmira,
Balbec and Kome ; by Modesto, Perriwig-meter from Lagado. N.B. None
will be sold but to Subscribers.' A description of ' a Sett of Blocks ' will
be found in the same catalogue (vol. iv. p. 137).

64 HOGARTH'S LONDON
before him, and near the easel is a large jar of varnish.
Time's scythe is seen to have pierced the canvas,
so that here are figured the various causes for the
dark character of some of the pictures of the old
masters that have been looked upon as giving added
value to them, Mr. Stephens says of the original
print, ' In order to enhance the characteristic
depth of tone in the representation of the picture
on which Time is operating, Hogarth mezzotinted
the landscape, and etched the remainder of the
work. This distinction of parts is not observable
in copies from this print.' ^ This subscription
ticket contains a very effective attack upon the
artist's enemies, who had greatly increased in con
sequence of the painting of ' Sigismunda.'
The story of this picture is so well-known that
any notice of it here must be brief, but as it formed
one of the most important incidents in this quarrel
that embittered Hogarth's later years, the case must
be stated.
We have Hogarth's own narrative of the origin
of the painting of ' Sigismunda weeping over the
heart of her murdered lover Guiscardo,' from
Dryden's version of Boccaccio's story. Sir Richard
Grosvenor urged Hogarth to paint him a picture,
which was undertaken with reluctance, although the
choice of a subject was left to the artist. Having
been disgusted at the high prices paid for the old
masters at Sir Luke Schaub's sale, and especially at
' B.M. Catalogue, voL iv. p. 43.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 65
£400 being reahsed for a picture of ' Sigismimda '
attributed to Correggio, but beheved to be by
Furini, Hogarth chose the same subject and at once
put himself in competition with the Itahan in order
to prove that he could paint a better picture. While
it was being painted the patron expressed himself
pleased with it, but subsequently he changed his
mind in consequence of adverse criticism which was
aroused by the enemies of Hogarth, who himself
expressed himself strongly on the subject. He wrote :
' As the most violent and virulent abuse thrown
on "Sigismunda" was from a set of miscreants,
with whom I am proud of having been ever at war,
I mean the expounders of the mysteries of old
pictures; I have been sometimes told they were
beneath my notice. This is true of them individu-
aUy, but as they have access to people of rank, who
seem as happy in being cheated, as these merchants
are in cheating them, they have a power of doing
much mischief to a modern artist.'
The correspondence between Grosvenor and
Hogarth has been printed in the third volume of
John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, and it does not
do much credit to Sir Richard Grosvenor's courtesy
or good taste. Hogarth fixed the price of the
pictm-e at £400, for which sum the old picture sold,
but he gave Sir Richard the option of refusing it.
He only asked him to make up his mind, as Hoare
the banker wanted a picture painted. In answer
Sir Richard did not give his real reason for being
E

66 HOGARTH'S LONDON
disappointed with the picture, but wrote : ' If he
[Mr. Hoare] should have taken a fancy to the
" Sigismunda," I have no sort of objection to your
letting him have it ; for I reaUy think the per
formance so striking and inimitable, that the
constantly having it before one's eyes would be too
often occasioning melancholy ideas to arise in one's
mind, which a curtain's being drawn before it would
not diminish in the least.'
This letter was not hkely to give much satis
faction to Hogarth, and he settled the matter as
soon as he could by giving the picture to his wife and
desiring her not to seU it for less than £500. What
hurt the painter in this most unfortunate affair was
the disgusting manner in which his enemies de
scribed 'Sigismunda' as a representation of a vile
woman, although they knew weU enough that the
figure was taken from his beloved wife. But if
Wilkes and ChurchiU mixed abuse of the picture with
their attack upon the painter on pohtical grounds,
Robert Lloyd, their friend and his, wrote :
' While Sigismunda's deep distress.
Which looks the soul of wretchedness,
When I [i.e. Time], with slow and soft'ning pen.
Have gone o'er all the tints agen,
Shall urge a bold and proper claim
To level half the ancient fame ;
While future ages yet unknown
With critic air shall proudly own
Thy Hogarth first of every clime,
For humour keen, or strong sublime.
And hail him from his fire and spirit.
The Child of Genius and of Merit.'

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 67
Walpole, who chose to praise the older painting in
extravagant terms and in contrast to abuse Hogarth's
picture most unjustly, adopted the same image
respecting the strange woman in an exaggerated
form. We have the privilege of seeing the picture
in the National GaUery and knowing how ludicrously
untrue Walpole's criticism is : ' Hogarth's per
formance was more ridiculous than anything he had
ever ridiculed.' Hogarth wishing to vindicate his
fame by the production of a good engraving of
the picture, engaged Ravenet to undertake the
work, but afterwards it appeared that Ravenet
was under articles not to work for any one except
Mr. BoydeU for three years then to come, so the
subscription was stopped and the money returned
to the subscribers.'^ The foUowing notice (dated
January 2, 1764) was issued : ' AU efforts to this
time to get the picture finely engraved proving in
vain, Mr. Hogarth humbly hopes his best endeavours
to engrave it himself wiU be acceptable to his friends.'
Under the painter's direction, a drawing in oil
was made by Edward Edwards, A.R.A., and from
this, Basire made an outline ; but it was not until
1793 that Dunkarton's mezzotint was published.
In 1795 appeared Benjamin Smith's engraving.
The vicissitudes of the picture itself are interesting.
Mrs. Hogarth kept it during her lifetime as her
1 In a MS. volume in the British Museum (Add. MSS. 22,394), there is
a list of subscribers' names to a Print of Sigismunda and Guiscardo,
March 2, 1761. Most of the names are struck through with the note
' money returned.' In one or two cases there is a note * money refused,'

68 HOGARTH'S LONDON
husband wished, and at the sale of her effects (1790)
it was bought by Alderman BoydeU for £58, 16s.
It was sold again in 1807 for £420, and was be
queathed to the National Gallery in 1879 by Mr.
James Hughes Anderdon.
In 1762 Bonnel Thornton opened an Exhibition
of Sign Paintings at ' the large Room the Upper End
of Bow Street, Covent Garden, nearly opposite the
Playhouse Passage,' in which Hogarth took some
interest. This was a freak and a joke on the part
of Thornton, but as it gave an opportunity for a
gibe at the buyers of old pictures, Hogarth entered
into the joke with deadly earnest intention. John
Nichols {Biographical Anecdotes) was informed that
Hogarth ' contributed no otherwise towards this
display, than by a few touches of chalk. Among
the heads of distinguished personages finding those
of the King of Prussia and the Empress of Himgary,
he changed the cast of their eyes so as to make
them leer significantly at each other. This is
related on the authority of Mr. Colman.' ^
The catalogue of the Exhibition presents many
evidences of Hogarth's hand both in the notes and
various satirical touches such as ' Portrait of a
justly celebrated Painter, though an Englishman
1 These two portraits are numbered in the Catalogue 53 and 54, but
Nichols is not accurate in the description, which stands thus in the
Catalogue — ' 53, an Original Portrait of the present Emperor of Russia.
54, Ditto of the Empress Queen of Hungary. Its antagonist. Drawn by
Sheerman.' Colman was a good authority for the information, as he was an
intimate friend of Bonnel Thornton.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 69
and a Modern,' or this note, ' N.B. that the merit
of the Modern Masters may be fairly examined into,
it has been thought proper to place some admired
works of the most eminent old masters in this room,
and along the Passage thro' the Yard.' Several
of the paintings are stated to be by Hagarty.
In the St. James's Chronicle for Tuesday, 23rd of
March 1762, there was published a notice of the
forthcoming exhibition : — ' The Society of Sign-
painters are preparing a most magnificent Collection
of Portraits, Landscapes, Fancy Pieces, Flower
Pieces, History Pieces, Night Pieces, Sea Pieces,
Sculpture Pieces, etc. etc., designed by the ablest
Masters and executed by the best Hands in these
kingdoms. The Virtuosi wiU have a new oppor
tunity of displaying their taste on this occasion by
discovering the different stile of the several masters
employed and pointing out by what hand each
piece is drawn. A remarkable cognoscente who
has attended at the Society's great Room with his
glass for several mornings, has already piqued him
self on discovering the famous Painter of the Rising
Sun, a modern Claude Lorraine, in an elegant
Night-piece of the Man-in-the-Moon. He is also
convinced that no other than the famous artists
who drew the Red Lion at Brentford, can be
equal to the bold figures in the London 'Prentice,
and that the exquisite colouring in the piece caUed
Pjramus and Thisbe must be by the same hand
as the Hole-in-the-Wall.'

70 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The public seem to have supposed that the whole
announcement was merely intended as a hoax, but
this soon proved to be a mistake by the opening of
the exhibition in April, The hours of admission
were from nine tiU four. The price of the tickets,
which included a catalogue, was one shiUing, It is
said that the names of the sign-board painters given
in the catalogue were those of the journeymen in
Baldwin's printing office where it was printed.
The exhibition naturaUy created a sensation,
and the newspapers of the day were fuU of corre
spondence respecting this very original show.
Churchill refers to it in his poem of The Ghost
(Book iii.) :
' Of sign-post exhibitions, raised
For laughter more than to be praised,
(Though by the way we cannot see
Why praise and laughter mayn't agree)
Where genuine humour runs to waste,
And justly chides our want of taste.
Censured, like other things, though good,
Because they are not understood.'
The exhibition was an admirable subject for the
pictorial satirists, and the chief of the prints of the
time aUuding to it was ' A Brush for the Sign-
Painters, lustitia Rubweel Inv. et del. Aquafortis
Sculp. Price 6d.,' which was published in April.
In these satires Hogarth and his works occupy
prominent positions. Advantage is taken of
several of the items in the catalogue which bear
some allusion to Hogarth.^
' See British Museum Catalogue, vol. iv. pp. 48-50.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 71
It is unfortunate that we know so little as to
Hogarth's connection with this exhibition. As has
already been pointed out, his hand is to be suspected
in many of the descriptions in the catalogue, but at
the same time he aUowed many aUusions to himself
to appear, which were eagerly taken up by the
critics; thus No. 2 is ' A crooked BiUet formed exactly
in the Line of Beauty,' and No. 5 ' The Light Heart,
A Sign for a Vintner. By Hagarty, [N.B, This is
an elegant Invention of Ben Jonson, who in The
New Inn or Light Heart, makes the landlord say,
speaking of his Sign :
An Heart weighed with a feather, and outweighed too ;
A Brain — child of my one and I am proud on 't.']
This is aUuded to in ' A Brush for the Sign-Painters,'
where there is a signboard on an easel showing a
caricature of Sigismunda bearing the inscription
' The sign of a Heavy Heart,' Below the figure is
a caricature of the ' Line of Beauty,' designated
' A Lame Principle,'
In the King's Library at the British Museum is a
smaU pamphlet strangely printed as foUows, to
form a sort of companion to the exhibition :
First Leaf.
Gentlemen and Ladies | are desired | to tear off this
Leaf, I which | will serve as a Ticket to Introduce | them to
the I London | Printed for W Nichol at the Paper-
Mill, in I St Paul's Churchyard | mdoclxii |
Second Leaf.
Ha ! Ha ! Ha ! | and | in due Time | they | will gain
admission to the I

72 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Third Leaf.
He! He! He!
Pages 7-24 a succession of short paragraphs plentifully
supplied with dashes.
It is impossible not to charge Hogarth with incon
sistency in his action connected with the training
of artists, because although he did great things by
means of his school in St, Martin's Lane, yet he
set himself in opposition to the natural outcome of
his own work in the establishment of an ' Academy
for the Better Cultivation, Improvement and En
couragement of Painting, Sculpture, Architecture,
and the Arts of Design in General,' His opposition
to this scheme set many of his fellow-artists against
him, and of these enemies Thomas and Paul Sandby
were prominent,
Hogarth's reasons for his opposition in this
matter are set out by himself in manuscripts which
were printed by John Ireland in the third volume of
Hogarth Illustrated.
He further stated that ' Many of the objections
which I have to the institution of this Royal
Academy, apply with equal force to the project of
the Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manu
factures, and Commerce, distributing premiums for
drawings and pictures ; subjects of which they are
totally ignorant, and in which they can do no
possible service to the community,'
Hogarth had been a member of the Society, and
chairman of one of the committees; therefore at

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 73
one time he had approved generaUy of its action,
but subsequently he changed his mind, and parodied
the inscription of ' Arts Promoted,' He was quite
consistent, for he had early satirised the Dilettanti
Society, It would be improper to leave this instance
of Hogarth's indiAridualism without notice, but this
is not the place to discuss it fuUy,
By entering fully into Hogarth's quarrel with the
advocates of the Black Masters, we have passed
over the period of the pubhcation of the Analysis
of Beauty, in 1753, which first caused his enemies
to swarm around him and satirise him on his own
ground. It is now therefore time to turn back a few years,
and to point out briefly the position that this
remarkable book occupies in the author's life,
Wilkes chooses in his vindictive remarks to refer to
the Analysis as attributed to Hogarth ; such a
sneer is, as he must have known, perfectly ground
less. Men of learning such as Townley and MoreU
gave what hterary help to the author he required
for the production of his book, not that he himself
was without considerable abUity in expressing in
suitable terms the view he wished to present to
his readers. Hogarth had long thought over the
central idea and drawn the line of beauty in his
own portrait (1745), thus appropriating the symbol
to himself.
The idea was elaborated in his own mind and
grew out of the teaching of the ancient philosophers.

74 HOGARTH'S LONDON
This is seen from a passage in the book itself,
quoted by Mr. Dobson, where Hogarth gives his
version of a story from Pliny : ' ApeUes having
heard of the fame of Protogenes went to Rhodes to
pay him a visit, but not finding him at home asked
for a board, on which he drew a lin^, teUing the
servant-maid, that line would signify to her master
who had been to see him ; we are not clearly told
what sort of a line it was that could so particularly
signify one of the first of his profession : if it was
only a stroke (tho' as fine as a hair as Pliny seems
to think), it could not possibly, by any means,
denote the abilities of a great painter. But if we
suppose it to be a line of some extraordinary quality,
such as the serpentine line wUl appear to be, ApeUes
could not have left a more satisfactory signature
of the compliment he had paid him. Protogenes
when he came home took the hint, and drew a
finer, or rather more expressive line, within it to show
ApeUes when he came again, that he understood his
meaning. He soon returning was weU pleased with
the answer Protogenes had left for him, by which
he was convinced that fame had done him justice,
and so correcting the line again, perhaps by making
it more precisely elegant, he took his leave. The
story thus may be reconcU'd to common sense,
which, as it has been generaUy receiv'd could never
be understood as a ridiculous tale,' Matthew Prior
versified this tale, from which the foUowing lines are
taken :

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 75
' Piqued by Protogenes's fame
From Co to Ehodes Apelles came
To see a rival and a friend,
Prepar'd to censure or commend.
Does squire Protogenes live here 1
Yes, sir, says she, with gracious air.
And court'sy low, but just call'd out
By lords peculiarly devout.
And sir, at present would you please.
To leave your name ? Fair maiden, yes,
Eeach me that board. No sooner spoke
But done. With one judicious stroke,
On the plain ground Apelles drew
A circle regularly true.
Again at six Apelles came.
Found the same prating civil dame,
Sir, that my master has been here.
Will by the board itself appear.
If from the perfect line he found
He has presum'd to swell the round.
Or colours on the draught to lay,
'Tis thus (he order'd me to say)
Thus write the painters of this isle :
Let those of Co remark the style.'
Horace Walpole related the same story in ^des
Walpoliance, and made the line a straight one,
John Ireland printed the foUowing anagram
containing an amusing prediction which he found
among Hogarth's papers in the handwriting of his
friend Townley : — ' From an old Greek fragment.
There was an ancient oracle delivered at Delphos,
which says, " That the source of beauty should
never be again rightly discovered, till a person

76 HOGARTH'S LONDON
should arise, whose name was perfectly included
in the name of Pythagoras ; which person should
again restore the ancient principle upon which aU
beauty is founded.
Uv6dyopa<;, . . PYTHAGORAS.
" Oy ap0, . . Hogarth.''
The Analysis of Beauty was no ordinary book,
although it may have outlived any utility it once
possessed, and it attracted no ordinary attention.
A work which was translated into German, Italian
and French,^ and was praised by such men as Burke,
Lessing and Goethe, must be treated as something
out of the common run. Doubtless Hogarth was
possessed of a brilliant idea and saw its boundless
possibilities, but he had not the phUosophic grasp
of mind to save him from confusion in the present
ment of his case.
Burke's Essay on the Sublime and Beautiful was
first published in 1756, three years after the pubhca
tion of the Analysis, but it contains no aUusion to
the book. In the second edition, published in 1757,
Burke mentions Hogarth's work with approval.
The German translation contained a preface by
Lessing, and the book was enthusiasticaUy welcomed
by him in the Vossische Zeitung in 1754. Mr.
Bosanquet says that in his preface the great German
1 Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 146.
^ CermoM : Zergliederung der Schoenheit, die schwankenden Begriffe
von dem Geschmack festzusetzen, von C Mylius. Berlin, 1754. Italian :
L'Analisi deUa Bellezza, con figure. Livorno, 1761. French: Analyse de
la Beaute de Guillaume Hogarth. Paris an xin (1805).

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 77
authority ' lays his finger on the point of difficulty
in its conception, viz. the question of determining
on general grounds, the degree and kind of
curvatiu-e that constitutes beauty of line.' The
same writer further remarks that 'Hogarth's un
dulating line supplied Goethe with a name for the
tendency which he ranks as the polar opposite of
the characteristic' ^
The French translation, which was made by
Henri Jansen, librarian to TaUeyrand, contains also
a translation of Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes,
and was pubhshed in two volumes. It wUl be seen
that Hogarth had done a considerable thing, but
unfortunately he had made many enemies, and
these men, waiting for the opportunity to attack,
chose the subject of this book as the battle-ground
for which they had long sought. The author,
however, preferred censure to neglect, and cared
little for attacks so long as these did not touch
his private life.
His friends stood by him and lauded his discovery.
Laurence Sterne was one of these, who highly
praised the Analysis in the second volume of
Tristram Shandy, and Bishop Warburton expressed
his opinions in a letter to the author thus : ' I was
pleased to find from the public papers that you
have determined to give us your original and
masterly thoughts on the great principles of your
profession. You owe this to your country, for you
1 History of the Esthetic, 1892, pp. 207-208.

78 HOGARTH'S LONDON
are both an honour to your profession, and a shame
to that worthless crew professing virtu and con-
noisseurship, to whom aU that grovel in the splendid
poverty of wealth and taste are the miserable
bubbles.' Hogarth's enemies — both literary and artistic
critics — ^forgot their manners and good sense.
Benjamin West's opinion of the book is therefore
worth something. He said in answer to J. T.
Smith's question as to his opinion of the Analysis —
'It is a work, my man, of the highest value to
every one studying the Art. Hogarth was a strut
ting, consequential little man, and made himself
many enemies by that book ; but now that most of
them are dead, it is examined by disinterested
readers, unbiassed by personal animosities, and wiU
be yet more and more read, studied, and imder-
stood,' A satirist must expect to be satirised, but Hogarth
was more bitterly attacked than he deserved to be
because, although he was very severe in his satire,
he was never personal except under severe pro
vocation, as in the quarrel with Wilkes and ChurchiU,
The pictorial satires are fuUy dealt with by F. G.
Stephens in the British Museum Catalogue, Some
of these satires were contemptible and produced
by unknown men, but it is speciaUy painful to find
so distinguished a man as Paul Sandby attacking in
so violent and unkind a manner his brother artist,
' Burlesque sur le Burlesque,' published December

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 79
1, 1753, is fuU of violent ridicule of Hogarth's work
and represents various insulting ways of disposing
of the Analysis of Beauty. ' Pugg's Graces etched
from his original Daubing' contains an infinity of
abuse, an item of which is an open book inscribed
' No Salary, Reasons against a Publick Academy,'
1753, and ' Reasons to prove erecting a Publick
Academy without [space] a wicked Design to
introduce Popery and Slavery in to this Kingdom,'
Beneath a figure of a decrepit old man whose person
is ciu-ved to ridicule Hogarth's ' line ' is this
scurrilous inscription :
' Behold a wretch who Nature form'd in spight,
Scorn'd by the Wise ; he gave the Fools delight,
Yet not contented in his Sphere to move
Beyond mere Instinct, and his Senses drove
From false examples hop'd to pilfer fame
And scribl'd nonsense in his daubing name.
Deformity her self his figures place.
She spreads an Uglines on every face.
He then admires their ellegance and grace.
Dunce Connoisseurs extol the author Pugg,
The senseless, tasteless, impudent Hum Bugg.'
Another of Sandby's discreditable productions is
' The Author run mad,' an etching showing Hogarth
in a lunatic asylum, clad in a fantastic dress, wearing
a crown of straw, and holding an ink-bottle as a
crown stuck on his head, one of his legs being bound
with straw, his palette hanging round his neck,
his mahlstick being curved to resemble the ' Line
of Beauty,' ^ Among the multiplicity of references
> Mr. Stephens's description in the British Museum Catalogue of Satires,
vol. iii. p. 894,

80 HOGARTH'S LONDON
to the painter in this plate there is a special attack
on his paintings of religious subjects with this
epigram :
' Shou'd we thy Study'd Labours trace
In search of Beauty — Air or Grace
Are they to us y« Rule 1
Has Phara's daughter got them all 1
Are they in Felix seen 1 or Paul
or at Bethesda's pool 1 '
It is not necessary to describe the whole series of
these deplorable exhibitions of rancour which are f uUy
analysed in Mr, Stephens's British Museum Catalogue,
but astonishment must be expressed that an artist
so capable of appreciating the beauty of the ' March
to Finchley ' could caricature that picture as ' The
Painter's March from Finchly,' or throw mud upon
a man he knew to be an honour to Enghsh art,
and style him a ' Mountebank Painter,' and
inscribe on his print stxch lying words as these :
' This arrogant Quacking Anahst who blinded by
the darkest ignorance of y^ principles of painting,
has spoke so foolishly of the works of y^ greatest
masters — is hereby chaUeng'd to produce one piece
of his either in painting or on Copper plate, that
has y® least grace, beauty or so much knowledge
in Proportion as may be found in common signs in
every street— 0 Will thy impudence is the certain
consequence of thy ignorance.'
Hogarth was not without friends to support him
against these attacks by satirising his opponents,
but he himself did not retaliate, for he was too proud

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 81
to descend to such methods. We have, however,
the good fortune to be able to read in his auto
biography his own admirable expression of the
natural disgust he felt at the unworthy treatment
he had received. He wrote :
' I have been assailed by every profligate scribbler
in town, and told, that though words are man's
province, they are not my province ; and that
though I have put my name to the Analysis of
Beauty, yet (as I acknowledge having received
some assistance from two or three friends) I am
only the supposed author. By those of my own
profession I am treated with stiU more severity.
Pestered with caricatiu-e drawings, and hung up in
effigy in prints ; accused of vanity, ignorance and
envy ; caUed a mean and contemptible dauber ;
represented in the strangest employments and pic
tured in the strangest shapes ; sometimes under the
hieroglyphical semblance of a satyr, and at others,
under the stUl more ingenious one, of an ass,
' Not satisfied with this ; finding that they could
not overturn my system, they endeavoured to
wound the peace of my family. This was a cruelty
hardly to be forgiven ; to say that such malicious
attacks, and caricatures, did not discompose me,
would be untrue ; for to be held up to public
ridicule would discompose any man ; but I must
at the same time add, that they did not much
distress me, I knew that those who venture to
oppose received opinions, must in return have

82 HOGARTH'S LONDON
public abuse: so that feeling I had no right to
exemption from the common tribute, and conscious
that my book had been generaUy well received, I
consoled myself with the trite observation, that
every success or advantage in this world must be
attended by some sort of a reverse ; and that though
the worst writers and the worst painters have
traduced me ; by the best I have had more than
justice done me. The partiality with which the
world have received my works, and the patronage
and friendship with which some of the best characters
in it have honoured the author, ought to excite my
warmest gratitude, and demands my best thanks ;
it enables me to despise this cloud of insects ; for
happily, though their buzzing may tease, their
stings are not mortal.'
In 1753, the date of the publication of the
Analysis of Beauty, most of Hogarth's great works
had been produced, although he had stiU to paint
his fine series of four pictures of the ' Election '
(1755), and the ' Lady's Last Stake ' (1759), so that
his maligners had no excuse in respect to any
incompleteness in the briUiant harvest of the
greater portion of his life. Mr, WiUiam Sandby, in
his account of Thomas and Paul Sandby (1892),
makes the best of Paul Sandby's libels and praises
them highly, but in spite of artistic design they form
a pitiable instance of unjust defamation of a great
man. It is said that Hogarth proposed to draw up a

VgV

:JyiP!W]?

fQ),

A Statuary's Yard. (The Analysis of Beauty, Plate i.) 1753.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 83
succinct history of the Arts in his own time, as a
sort of supplement to the Analysis : some notes for
this were printed by John Ireland in his Hogarth
Illustrated (vol, iii,) in connection with dispersed
portions of autobiography, but nothing continuous
has survived, and nothing to prove the intention of
publication except the weU-known ' No Dedication,'
of which a facsimile wUl be found in John Ireland's
Hogarth Illustrated, 1798 (vol, iii,). The manuscript
(which is in the Morrison Collection of Autographs)
was lent to the Guelph Exhibition (1891) by the
late Mr, Alfred Morrison :
' The No-Dedication ; not dedicated to any Prince
in Christendom, for fear it might be thought an
idle piece of arrogance ; not dedicated to any man
of quality, for fear it might be thought too assuming ;
not dedicated to any learned body of men, as
either of the Universityes or the Royal Society, for
fear it might be thought an uncommon piece of
vanity, nor dedicated to any one particular friend,
for fear of offending another ; therefore dedicated to
nobody ; but if for once we may suppose nobody
to be everybody, as everybody is often said to be
nobody, then is this work dedicated to everybody, —
' By their most humble and devoted
' W. HOGABTH.'
The year 1762 is an ominous date in the life of
Hogarth, for in that year he made the grievous
mistake of producing a political print entitled

84 HOGARTH'S LONDON
' The Times, Plate 1,' in which Lords Chatham and
Temple were satirised and ridiculed, and thus he
made dangerous enemies of two former friends —
Wilkes and ChurchiU.
Hogarth was no politician and had not previously
interfered in politics, of which he knew little or
nothing. Mr. Stephens seems to think he shows
definite opinions in the pictures of the Election, but
there is every reason to believe that he chose the
characters he thought the most effective, without
any bias from his own opinions. One would have
expected sufficient patriotism in Hogarth to save
him from treating Pitt's thoroughly deserved
pension as discreditable to the great statesman,
but it may be that he was one of those who yearned
for peace after ' expensive ' wars. We need take
no account of the turbulent Temple, although he
was greatly admired by Wilkes and Churchill,
It may be* supposed that Bute was ready to pay
liberaUy for the support of Hogarth, which he so
much required, but it is quite incorrect to say that
he received a pension. He had received the
appointment of Serjeant Painter to the King in
succession to his brother in-law, John ThornhUl,
The following lines ' To the Author of the Times '
are quoted in John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated
(vol. iii, p. 216) :
' Why, Billy, in the vale of life.
Show so much rancour, spleen and strife ?
Why, Billy, at a statesman's whistle,
Drag dirty loads, and feed on thistle 1

Portrait of John Thornhill. (Brother-in-law of Hogarth.)

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 85
Did any of the long-ear'd tribe
E'er swallow half so mean a bribe 1
Pray, have you no sinister end.
Thus to abuse the nation's friend 1
His country's and his monarch's glory.'
In his autobiography Hogarth catalogued under
four headings the chief causes of complaint against
him : the first three are too absurd for words and
require no refutation from the painter, although he
condescends to answer them. He writes : ' The
chief things that have brought much obloquy on
me are, first, the attempting portrait painting.
Secondly, writing the Analysis of Beauty. Thirdly,
painting the picture of Sigismunda ; and fourthly,
publishing the first print of the Times,'
Of the last count in the indictment he says :
' The anxiety that attends endeavouring to recollect
ideas long dormant, and the misfortunes which
climg to this transaction, coming at a time when
nature demands quiet, and something besides
exercise to cheer it, added to my long sedentary
life, brought on an illness which continued twelve
months. But when I got weU enough to ride on
horseback I soon recovered. This being at a
period when war abroad and contention at home
engrossed every one's mind, prints were thrown
into the back-ground ; and the stagnation rendered
it necessary that I should do some timed thing, to
recover my lost time, and stop a gap in my income.
This drew forth my print of " The Times," a subject
which tended to the restoration of peace and

86 HOGARTH'S LONDON
unanimity, and put the opposers of these humane
objects in a light, which gave great offence to those
who were trying to foment destruction in the
minds of the populace. One of the most notorious
among them, till now rather my friend and flatterer,
attacked me in a North Briton, in so infamous and
malign a style, that he himseK when pushed even
by his best friends, was driven to so poor an excuse
as to say he was drunk when he wrote it. Being
at that time very weak, and in a kind of slow fever,
it could not but seize on a feehng mind. My
philosophical friends advise me to laugh at the
nonsense of party-writing — who would mind it ?
— but I cannot rest myself :
" Who steals my purse, steals trash ; 'tis something, nothing ;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands :
But he that filches my good name,
Eobs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed."
Such being my feelings, my great object was to
return the compliment, and turn it to some
advantage.' Paul Sandby and others renewed then- caricatures
of Hogarth on account of * The Times, No, 1,' but
these the artist could treat with contempt. It
was the virulent defamation of his moral character
contained in No. 17 of the North Briton by Wilkes,
which embittered his last days. He could neither
forget nor forgive the references to his wife or such
passages as this : ' The pubUc never had the least

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 87
share of his regard, or even good will. Gain and
vanity have steered his little light bark quite
through life. He has never been consistent but to
those two principles.'
Mrs. Hogarth gave Samuel Ireland a worn copy
of this number, which had been purchased by her
husband and carried in his pocket many days to
show his friends.
We cannot but regret that the print of ' The Times,
Plate 1,' was ever published, as it has no particular
merits and the consequences of its appearance
were disastrous. We can understand the disgust
of WUkes and ChurchiU at the position taken by
Hogarth, but nothing can excuse their rancorous
writings. The passage above from the auto
biography is of the greatest interest as expressing
Hogarth's feelings of the necessity of peace, and we
have such confidence in his inherent truthfulness
that we do not doubt that his words describe
correctly his own feelings. Possibly many of the
public held similar opinions.^
Mr. Saunders Welch, who appreciated the delicacy
of Hogarth's feelings, tried to persuade him not to
publish his satirical print against Wilkes and
ChurchiU (' The Times '). He observed ' that the
mind that had been accustomed for a length of
years to receive only merited and uniform applause,
would be ill calculated to bear a reverse from the
bitter sarcasms of adversaries whose wit and genius
I This subject is more fully discussed in Chapter v, on Political Life.

88 HOGARTH'S LONDON
would enable them to retort with severity such an
attack,' Hogarth took his revenge when he drew the
sinister portrait of WUkes and the caricature of
ChurchiU, which have added to the artistic wealth
of the world, and proved that his powers of satire
continued to be as great and briUiant as they had
ever been, but nevertheless the contemplation of
this enmity makes an unhappy ending to the story
of Hogarth's life.
There is little to record of work done after these
wonderful portraits, which gibbeted these men for
all time. The artist was indeed revenged for the
libels of the authors,
Hogarth was broken down although he stUl
worked, and the end came suddenly on October 25,
1764, He was conveyed in a weak condition from
Chiswick to London, and soon after going to bed in
his house in Leicester Square, he died in the arms
of Mrs, Mary Lewis, who was called up to attend
to him. The cause of death was the bursting of
an aneurism. The last thing he did was to write a
rough draft of an answer to an agreeable letter
received from Benjamin Franklin,
The house in Leicester Square has been rebuUt,
and his residence can no longer be seen except in
engravings, but the Chiswick house, thanks to
Lieut, -Colonel Shipway, who bought it in 1902, and
as Mr, Dobson says, preserved it to the nation,^
* It has now been definitely transferred to the Middlesex County Council
{Evening Standard, April 29, 1909).

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 89
can be visited as a museum sacred to the memory
of Hogarth, Not far off is the pleasant churchyard,
with its important-looking monument, upon which
can stiU be read Garrick' s epitaph :
' Farewel, great painter of mankind.
Who reach'd the noblest point of Art,
Whose pictur'd morals charm the mind.
And through the eye correct the heart.
If genius fire thee, reader, stay ;
If Nature touch thee, drop a tear ;
If neither move thee, turn away.
For Hogarth's honour'd dust lies here.'
Garrick submitted his first draft of the epitaph
to Johnson, and the latter rather severely criticised
it in a letter to the former, dated December 12, 1771,
He considered 'pictured morals' a beautiful ex
pression which he wished retained, but he praised
little else. It wUl be seen from the foUowing
emendation by Johnson that Garrick availed him
self of the valued suggestion :
' The Hand of Art here torpid lies
That traced the essential form of Grace ;
Here Death has closed the curious eyes
That saw the manners in the face.
If Grenius warm thee. Reader, stay,
If Merit touch thee, shed a tear ;
Be Vice and Dulness far away !
Great Hogarth's honour'd dust is here.'
Dr, Townley wrote a laudatory inscription to
Hogarth's memory which was printed in the Public
Ledger of November 19, 1764, and wiU be found in
John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated (vol, iii.).

90 HOGARTH'S LONDON
In closing this chapter we may record his chief
characteristics. Rough and unpolished, he had
a kindly heart ; honest and truthful, he did his
duty through hfe. He was considerate to his
friends and thoroughly companionable, fuU of talk
on subjects interesting to him, although, when
Horace Walpole asked him to meet Gray at dinner,
the dUettante found the two men equaUy silent
and unsympathetic.
He was light-hearted, and equal to playing the
fool when with congenial spirits, as he did when on
that memorable Frolic on the Thames and Medway
in May 1732, in the company of John ThornhiU,
Samuel Scott, painter, William TothaU, draper, and
Ebenezer Forrest, attorney.
To his enemies he was ever on his guard, as he
was thoroughly convinced that they were mahgnant,
and therefore dangerous. No doubt he had a good
opinion of himself, but he had reason for this
opinion. This, and a consequential air, are for
givable sins where there are ever present virtues
to counterbalance them, as was certainly the case
in respect to Hogarth.
We know that the charge made by some of his
enemies that he was filled with greed for money
was ridiculously untrue. He was the most indus
trious of men, and his main object was to make
a comfortable home for his wife and himself, and
there is no evidence that he hved extravagantly,
although he was generous.

. "If^'Ro a AH TIT..
f^^u^'f^r X2re/fin^ J'uru 7. 7707

rORTRAIT OF AFrs. HoGAR-| H.

HOGARTH'S LIFE AND WORKS 91
He made his chief income from the sale of his
prints, the sale of some of which was considerable,
but here he was robbed on all sides by piratical
printseUers. He made but httle out of his splendid
paintings, partly because the market price of
Enghsh pictures was not high, but partly on account
of his adopting an ill-judged mode of selling them,
as we have already seen.
He was able to leave Mrs. Hogarth little but the
stock of his plates and engravings, and, living as she
did twenty-five years after her husband, she became
straitened in her means, so that she was glad to
accept a pension of £40 from the Royal Academy.

92 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER III
HIGH LIFE
The popular idea of Hogarth's genius is probably
that he possessed little understanding of High Life,
and that the study of Low Life was his forte. There
is some truth in this, because he delighted to paint
strong exhibitions of character which are more
commonly to be found among classes who do not
hide their feelings. Although it may be said that the
incidents of low life are the chief objects of his
pencil, it is equally true that he took aU human
nature under his charge, and when he did paint
scenes of high life, he showed himself equaUy at
home as in those of low hfe. Nothing finer than
some of the episodes in the ' Marriage a la Mode '
has ever been produced, and in the first picture the
figure of the Earl is superb in his haughty grandeur.
In the ' Rake's Progress ' we see the man's attempt
to shine in so-called good society, but perhaps at
no time in our history were a large portion of the
upper classes so essentially vulgar as in the
eighteenth century.
Although we are delighted with the vivid pictures

HIGH LIFE 93
in the pages of Horace Walpole of those who moved
in the highest circles of society, we are not able
to say that we are edified, Walpole himself was
fastidious, but his records of the proceedings of his
friends prove that their doings must be largely
condemned as being as low in taste as in morals.
There is plenty of evidence of exclusiveness, but
little of refinement.
The fashionable parts of town are shown in many
of Hogarth's pictures, as St, James's Street in the
fourth plate of the ' Rake's Progress,' Lord
Burlington's house in PiccadUly in the ' Taste of
the Town ' and in the ' Man of Taste,' and in St,
James's Park — Rosamond's Pond, Spencer House,
and the Treasury are all pictured by him.
The Park continued to be the resort of Fashion
in the eighteenth, as it had been in the seventeenth
century. It was thronged before dinner between
twelve and two, and from seven till midnight in
the summer. On Sundays the Park was crowded
by another class, who were busy on week-days,
' Taste in High Life ' is pure caricature, but in the
' Lady's Last Stake ' we find an elegant West End
interior quite perfect in its design, with a terrible
story told in a strong but reticent manner. It
exhibits as fine an instance of harmony as any
picture ever painted by Hogarth, Everything is
in keeping, and nothing is exaggerated, WeU might
Horace Walpole write : ' The very furniture of
his rooms describe the characters of the persons to

94 HOGARTH'S LONDON
whom they belong : a lesson that might be of use
to comic authors,' ^
In his Portraits and Conversation Pieces, Hogarth
exhibited High Life from the King (George n,) and
his family downwards. Many of these require some
special notice.
It was in the painting of these that he attained
that dexterity of treatment and brilhancy of com
position, which stood him in good stead in his more
original work. We can therefore trace in these
pictures the growth of the painter's art ; but this
could not have been done before the days of
exhibitions, as the pictures passed into the hands
of those for whom they were painted. We have to
bear this in mind when we feel surprise at the neglect
of the public for Hogarth's eminent powers as a
painter. AU knew the engravings and admired
them, but few were acquainted with the pictures.
The best known of these Conversations is that
styled indifferently the ' Wanstead Assembly,' or ' A
Conversation at Wanstead House,' This, belonging
to Lord Tweedmouth, was sold by auction by Messrs.
Christie on June 3, 1905, when it was bought by
Messrs. Agnew for 2750 guineas. The picture is
thus described in the catalogue :
' An Assembly at Wanstead House. Containing
portraits of Richard Child, first Earl of Tylney,
and many of his friends and relations. Interior of
a saloon : twenty-six fuU-length figures ; on the
' Anecdotes of Painting in England, 1876, vol. iii. p. 7.

HIGH LIFE 95
left [right] a gentleman and two ladies seated at a
table, drinking tea ; in the centre, a party of four
people playing cards ; on the right [left] a girl and
two boys ; one of whom is riding a poodle, the other
ladies and gentlemen stand about, while the servant
lights the candles in a chandelier. Said to be the
earliest known picture by the painter. Painted for
Lord Castlemain m 1728 ' [25 in. by 29^ in.].
The date here given is certainly wrong, for in a
memorandum of Hogarth's with the heading,
' Account taken, January 1, 1731, of aU the pictures
that remain unfinished — half -payment received,'
there is this entry, ' An Assembly of twenty-five
figures, for Lord Castlemaine, August 28, 1729.' ^
The picture must therefore have been finished
after 1731, and the extra figure added. The
painter himself describes the picture in the above
memorandum as an Assembly, but on the old
frame was the inscription : ' A Conversation at
Wanstead House,' This same picture was ex
hibited at the Winter Exhibition of the Royal
Academy, 1906 (No. 20), with a similar description
to that in Christie's Catalogue, but the words ' right '
and ' left ' are as given between brackets in the
above quotation.
J. B. Nichols (1833) describes the picture thus :
— ' The Wanstead Assembly, painted for Lord
Castlemain. This was the first picture that brought
Hogarth into notice. It was exhibited in the British
* John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 23.

96 HOGARTH'S LONDON
GaUery in 1814, and was then the property of
W. Long WeUesley, Esq. It was in the catalogue
of his effects in 1822, but was bought in by the
family.' Elsewhere he writes: 'A beautiful smaU
painting, a family group, was at Tilney House,
Wanstead, and was in the catalogue of Mr. Wel
lesley' s effects in 1822, but was bought in by the
family.' ^
Much confusion has arisen in this case owing to
the fact that a picture described as the ' Wanstead
Assembly' was known to be in the possession of
Mr, William Carpenter of Forest HiU, When he
died he left it to the South London Art GaUery,
and on examination it turned out to be the dance
in the Analysis of Beauty, one of the Happy Marriage
set, and not executed until 1750 or thereabouts,
(Cf. A, Dobson's Hogarth, 1907, pp, 196, 198, 310.)
It may be well to add here a note as to Wanstead
and its proprietors in order to clear up the difficulty
as to the names and titles of the proprietors.
The history of the Manor of Wanstead, Essex
(six miles from Whitechapel Church), commences
before the Norman Conquest, and the manor is
registered in Domesday. Coming to later times,
Pepys visited Sir Robert Brooke at Wanstead House
on May 14, 1665. Two years after this the property
was sold to Sir Josiah Child, the great merchant
and banker, who spent large sums of money upon it,
planting walnut-trees and making fishponds, as
' Anecdotes of William Hogarth, pp. 350, 376.

HIGH LIFE 97
Evelyn, who visited him on March 16, 1682-3,
teUs us in his Diary. Sir Josiah' s son. Sir
Richard ChUd, was created Viscount Castlemaine
in 1718, and Earl Tylney of Castlemaine in 1731,
both titles in the Peerage of Ireland. He it was
who puUed down the old mansion about 1715, and
erected a new Wanstead House from the design of
Colin CampbeU, which was pronounced by con
temporaries to be ' one of the noblest houses not
only in England, but in Europe.' The reception-
rooms were very magnificent, and the waUs hung
with pictures.
It was one of these rooms that is depicted in
Hogarth's painting. On the death without issue of
John, second Earl Tylney, in 1784, the manor passed
to the Earl's sister, from whom it devolved to her
granddaughter, Catherine, the daughter of Sir James
Tylney Long. During Miss Tylney Long's minority
the house was the residence of the Prince de Conde
(father of the Due d'Enghien), and occasionaUy of
Louis xvin. The hand of Miss Tylney Long was
much sought after, and she unfortunately married
a very worthless man — the Hon. WiUiam WeUesley
Pole, who added his wife's name to his own and
became WiUiam Pole Tylney Long WeUesley.
The authors of the Rejected Addresses thought the
names would make a good line, and introduced
them in their first parody — ' Long may Long
TUney WeUesley Long Pole live.' WeUesley Pole
soon dissipated the heiress's wealth, and in June
G

98 HOGARTH'S LONDON
1822 the contents of Wanstead were sold by
auction by George Robins. The sale occupied
thirty-two days, and realised £41,000. No
purchaser for the mansion being found, it was
puUed down and the materials sold. The family
portraits were reserved, but in 1851 these too were
sold by Messrs. Christie and Manson in consequence,
as the catalogue states, 'of the non-payment of
expenses for warehousing room.'
WeUesley Pole was Viscount Wellesley from
1842 to 1845, and in the latter year he succeeded
his father as Earl of Mornington, He died in
poverty on the 1st July 1857, at lodgings in Thayer
Street, Marylebone,
There is considerable difficulty in fixing the date
of these several conversation pieces, but it wUl be
seen from the various pictures of distinguished
families which are known, that Hogarth was weU
patronised when he undertook this branch of work.
A picture of ' The Devonshire FamUy ' was
exhibited at the Guelph Exhibition in 1891 by the
late Duke of Devonshire. The scene is at Chiswick,
and the persons represented are Lady Caroline
Cavendish, WiUiam, fourth Duke of Devonshire,
Lord George Cavendish, and Lord Frederick
Cavendish. The same picture was shown in the
Winter Exhibition of the Royal Academy, 1908.
Mr. Dobson mentions a single portrait of the
fourth Duke, signed ' W. Hogarth, Pinx* 1741,'
which in 1833 was in the possession of the Hon.

HIGH LIFE 99
Charles Compton Cavendish, at Latimers, Bucks.
Another ducal famUy is said to have been painted
by Hogarth. In the Winter Exhibition of the
Royal Academy (1908) was a picture lent by Mr.
C. Newton Robinson and described as the Walpole
family. A picture of the SheUey family belonging to Sir
G, A, C, RusseU, Bart., of SwaUowfield Park, Reading,
contains portraits of Lady SheUey, v/ife of Sir John
Shelley, and sister to HoUes, Duke of Newcastle,
Mr. and Mrs. Richard SheUey, their two daughters
Fanny and Martha Rose (who married Sir Charles
Whitworth), Captain the Hon. William Fitz-
WiUiam, Mr. Richard Benyon, Governor of Fort
St. George, and Mrs. Beard,
A very interesting picture, containing the two
heads of the Fox family and others styled ' A Con
versation,' belonging to the Earl of Ilchester, is at
Melbury House, Dorchester. Starting from the
left, Mr. ViUemain, a clergyman in black gown and
bands, is seen standing upon a chair, rather insecurely-
placed, with a telescope to his eye ; next, sitting at
a table, is Stephen, first Earl of Ilchester, then next
to him is Henry, first Lord Holland, with a plan of
a buUding in his hands. John, first Lord Hervey,
points to the plan, both standing. To the right of
these two is Charles, second Duke of Marlborough
(died 1758), sitting, and to the extreme right is
the standing figure of the Right Hon. Thomas
Winnington. The scene is a terrace by the side

100 HOGARTH'S LONDON
of a river with a large gate at the back. Hogarth
painted a separate portrait of Lord HoUand, which
was exhibited at the Royal Academy Winter
Exhibition, 1908, by Mary Countess of Ilchester.
Hogarth told the subject that he would paint him a
good portrait. Hogarth, in mentioning his appoint
ment in 1757 to the office of Serjeant Painter to the
King, wrote in his autobiography that, as he had to
paint some portraits of the royal family, the position
might be worth to him two hundred per annum.
The picture of ' George ii. and his famUy,' which
belonged to Samuel Ireland, and is now in the
National GaUery of Dublin, is reproduced in his
Graphic Illustrations (vol. ii. p. 137). The portraits
are those of George n.. Queen CaroUne, the Prince
of Wales (Frederick), the Duke of Cumberland,
the Princess of Hesse, etc. The King is much too
youthful in appearance. The Corporation of York
possess a portrait of Queen Charlotte by Hogarth,
who also painted portraits of two Dukes of Cum
berland — WiUiam Augustus (third son of George ii.),
K.G., and Captain-General of the Army (d. 1765) ;
and Henry Frederick (third brother of George in,),
as a boy. He was created K.G. in 1767, and died
in 1790. The former picture is in the Jones
Collection at the Victoria and Albert Museum,
South Kensington ; the latter was exhibited in
1888 by the late Sir Charles Tennant, Bart.
Hogarth also painted separate portraits of many
distinguished noblemen. One of Henry Pelham-

HIGH LIFE 101
Clinton, second Duke of Newcastle, K.G. (1720-94),
was exhibited at the Grosvenor GaUery in 1888 by
Sir John Pender. One of George Parker, second
Earl of Macclesfield, President of the Royal Society,
and a prominent promoter of the change of the
style, was exhibited in 1882 by the Earl of Maccles
field. A picture of Captain Lord George Graham
(who commanded the Diana frigate at the reduc
tion of Quebec) in his cabin, was exhibited in the
Royal Naval Exhibition in 1891.
A portrait of Gustavus Lord Viscount Boyne is
now in the National GaUery of Ireland. One of
Horace Walpole in his youth was exhibited at the
Guelph Exhibition in 1891, and at Whitechapel
by Mr. H. S. Vade Walpole, Another portrait
of Walpole at the age of ten was at Strawberry HiU,
and Mr, Dobson teUs us it belonged in 1856 to Mrs,
Bedford, and in 1866 was bought by Mr, H, Farrer
for £213, 3s, The stated age dates this picture as
painted in 1727, A picture of George WiUiam,
sixth Earl of Coventry, and his wife (the beautiful
Maria Gunning) was exhibited at the Guelph
Exhibition in 1891 by the Earl of Coventry.
Laurence Shhley, Earl Ferrers, was painted by
Hogarth, but as he was executed at Tyburn on May
5, 1760, he does no honoin? to this list.
The two children of Wilham, fourth Lord Byron,
with a dog were painted by Hogarth, and the
picture was originaUy at Newstead. It was sold
in 1870 for £57, 15s. by Lord W. G. Osborne. A

102 HOGARTH'S LONDON
portrait of Frances Lady Byron was exhibited in
1814 by the Earl of Mulgrave, and is now at Lowther
Castle. An engraving, ' W. Hogarth pinx*', I. Faber
fecit,' was published and ' sold by Faber at the
Golden Head in Bloomsbury Square ' in 1736.
Samuel Ireland in the Graphic Illustrations (vol. ii.
p. 102) gives an engraving by T. Ryder from a
sketch of Lady Pembroke made by Hogarth from
recollection about 1740. He gave no particulars
of the drawing, nor any justification for the
attribution. The Lady Pembroke of 1740 must
have been Mary, eldest daughter of Richard, fifth
Viscount Fitzwilliam, who married Henry, ninth
Earl of Pembroke, in 1733.
This is a goodly list of aristocratic patrons (and
possibly there were more that have not been
recorded), which is quite sufficient to prove that
Hogarth had many opportunities of association
with people of high social position. We have no
information as to how cordial the relations between
Hogarth and these patrons may have been, and
it is therefore pleasant to refer to Lord Charlemont's
friendly communications with the painter.
The portrait of Lord Charlemont does not appear
to have been painted for the Earl, as it was in the
possession of Samuel Ireland, who published an
etching made by Joseph Haynes in 1782. ' The
Right Hon. James Caulfield, Earl of Charlemount,'
etc., ' From an Original Portrait by Hogarth in the
possession of Mr. Samuel Ireland,'

^'1

HIGH LIFE 103
The picture entitled ' The Lady's Last Stake,' or
'Picquet,' or 'Virtue in Danger,' aheady referred to,
is one of the artist's most charming works, Hogarth
has himself given an account of its origin : ' WhUe
I was making arrangements to confine myself
entirely to my graver, an amiable nobleman (Lord
Charlemont) requested that before I bade a final
adieu to the pencil, I would paint him one picture.
The subject to be my own choice, and the reward, —
whatever I demanded. The story I pitched upon,
was a young and virtuous married lady, who, by
playing at cards with an officer, loses her money,
watches and jewels ; the moment when he offers
them back in return for her honour, and she is
wavering at his suit, was my point of timoe
' The picture was highly approved of, and the
payment was noble; but the manner in which it
was made, by a note inclosed in one of the foUowing
letters, was to me infinitely more gratifying than
treble the sum,' The first letter was dated from
Mount Street, 19th August 1759, and in it Lord
Charlemont expresses his thanks for the picture,
for which he says ' I am stiU your debtor, more so
indeed than I ever shaU be able to pay.' He also
says : ' I have not been able to wait upon you
according to my promise, nor even to find time to
sit for my picture ; as I am obliged to set out for
Ireland to-morrow,'
The second letter is so pleasing that it must be
copied in extenso.

104 HOGARTH'S LONDON
'Dublin, ^9th January 1760.
' To Mr. Hogarth.
'Dear Sib, — Inclosed I send you a note upon
Nesbitt, for one hundred pounds ; and considering
the name of the author, and the surprising merit
of yowc performance, I am reaUy much ashamed
to offer such a trifle in recompence for the pains you
have taken, and the pleasure your picture has
afforded me, I beg you would think that I by no
means attempt to pay you according to your merit,
but according to my own abUities, Were I to pay
your deserts, I fear I should leave myseU poor
indeed. Imagine that you have made me a present
of the picture, for hteraUy, as such I take it, and
that I have begged your acceptance of the inclosed
trifle. As this is reaUy the case, with how much
reason do I subscribe myself, — Your most obhged
humble servant, Charlemont.'
John Ireland adds to Hogarth's own description
of the picture : ' It may fairly be considered as a
moral lesson against gaming. The clock denotes
five in the morning. The lady has lost her money,
jewels, a miniature of her husband, and the half of
a £500 bank note, which by a letter lying on the
floor, she appears to have recently received from him.
In fine, — aU is lost, except her honour ; and in this
dangerous moment she is represented perplexed,
agitated and irresolute.' ^
1 Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 198 (note).

HIGH LIFE 105
The picture was exhibited at Spring Gardens in
the year 1761, with the title of ' Picquet, or Virtue
in Danger.'
Mrs. Piozzi (Hester Lynch Salusbury, 1741-1821)
asserted that she sat for the portrait of the heroine,
but Mr. Dobson points out that, as her accounts
of the circumstance differed, we cannot consider
them to be conclusive. Doubtless Hogarth did
remark to her when he was painting the picture,
' Take you care, I see an ardoiu" for play in your eyes
and in your heart ; don't indulge it.' When
Abraham Hayward published Mrs. Piozzi's auto
biography, he prefixed an engraving from this
picture to the second volume at the suggestion of
Lord Macaulay.
Lord Charlemont's conduct towards Hogarth
was very different from that of Sir Richard
Grosvenor, who certainly acted meanly in the
rejection of ' Sigismunda,' and the painter himself
aUuded in his autobiography to the contrast. He
writes, in commenting on Lord Charlemont's letters :
' This elevating circumstance had its contrast, and
brought on a train of most dissatisfactory cir
cumstances, which by happening at a time when I
thought myself as it were, landed, and secure from
tugging any longer at the oar, were rendered doubly
distressing.' The acceptance of £100 as ' a noble payment '
for such a picture shows how little grasping the
painter was, and it also iUustrates how largely

106 HOGARTH'S LONDON
he was guided by sentiment. He rated the
' Sigismunda ' at £400 (four times the price of
' Picquet '), because the so-caUed Correggio was
sold for that sum, and because his interest in the
picture increased as the prejudice against it was
increased by the active exertions of his enemies.
The atrocious libels written on the female figure
hurt him the more in that the original of it was his
own wife. Therefore he requested her not to sell
the picture during her lifetime for less than £500,
which he had sufficient experience of the sale of his
pictiu-es to know was the same as to request her to
keep the picture in her own possession for life.
There, however, is something to be said for Sir
Richard Grosvenor who, having been pleased with
" Picquet,' pressed Hogarth with much vehemence
to paint another for him, and received a picture
which was certainly very different in subject.
' Picquet ' remained in the possession of Lord Charle
mont's family at the VUla Marina near Dublin
for many years.
It was sold at Christie's in 1874 for £1585, 10s.,
and is now in the possession of Mr. J. Pierpont
Morgan. Lord Charlemont was a Viscount when his
portrait and this picture were painted, but he was
created an Earl in December 1763. As all lovers
of Hogarth must feel interest in Lord Charlemont,
it wiU interest them to learn, on the authority of
an old edition of Debrett's Peerage, the remarkable

HIGH LIFE 107
reason for this creation — the revival of an order
given by James i. one hundred and forty years
before : ' It appearing from the roUs of the Court
of Chancery that James i. by letters under his sign
manual, dated at Westminster, July 16, 1622,
directed the chief governor of Ireland to cause
letters patent to pass under the great seal, containing
a grant of the dignity of an earl to the first Lord
Charlemont (Toby Caulfield), but which was never
put in execution.' Hogarth's Earl died on August 4,
1799. We now come to consider two of the great series
of pictured morals — the 'Marriage a la Mode,' and
the ' Rake's Progress.'
Some have attempted to show points of connection
between Dryden's comedy of Marriage a la Mode
and Hogarth's pictures owing to similarity of
title, but there is certainly no likeness between the
two. The names of the characters in the play
sufficiently disprove this— Polydamas, Usurper of
Sicily, Leonidas, Argaleon, Hermogenes, Eubulus,
RhodophU, Palamede, Palmyra, Amalthea, Doralice,
Melantha, Philotis, Belisa, Artemis.
It is almost equally difficult to see any hint of
the incidents in the Clandestine Marriage (1766)
in the series of plates illustrating the ' Marriage a
la Mode,' although Garrick in his prologue alludes
very cleverly to the connection :
' To-night, your matchless Hogarth gives the thought,
Which from his canvas to the Stage is brought,

108 HOGARTH'S LONDON
And who so fit to warm the Poet's mind.
As he who pictur'd Morals and Mankind ?
But not the same their characters and scenes ;
Both labour for one end, by different means :
Each as it suits him, takes a separate Road,
Their one great Object, Maeriage-A-la-Mode,
Where titles deign with Cits to have and hold.
And change rich blood for more substantial gold.
And honour'd Trade from interest turns aside
To hazard happiness for titled Pride.'
AU the pictures of the series are of Interiors,
and aU these interiors are of London houses. They
form Hogarth's masterpiece and his chief iUus
tration of High Life.
The foUowing advertisement appeared in the
London Daily Post, AprU 2, 1743: 'Mr. Hogarth
intends to publish by subscription. Six Prints from
Copper-plates engrav' d by the best masters in Paris,
after his own paintings, representing a variety of
Modern Occurrences in High - Life, and caUed
Marriage-d-la-Mode. Particular care wiU be taken,
that there may not be the least objection to the
Decency or Elegancy of the whole work, and that
none of the characters represented shaU be personal.' ^
The engravings were issued at the end of May 1745.
Plates 1 and 6 were engraved by Scotin ; Plates 2
and 3 by Baron ; Plates 4 and 5 by Ravenet.
' Characters and Caricatiu-es,' ' W. Hogarth Fecit
1743,' was the subscription ticket for the ' Marriage.'
1 To the advertisement of April 4 and subsequent issues was added :
' The Heads for the better Preservation of the Characters and Expressions
to be done by the Author.'

HIGH LIFE 109
Under the design is inscribed : ' For a f arthar {sic)
Explanation of the difference betwixt Character
& Caricatura See y^ Preface to Jo'' Andrews.'
This is a reference to that delightful passage where
Fielding repudiates for Hogarth the charge of his
being a Bxu-lesque Painter, and claims that his
figures not only seem to breathe but appear to think.
The prints soon became popular, and the subject
formed the groimdwork of a novel caUed The
Marriage Act, by Dr. John Shebbeare. In 1746
was pubhshed a tract of 59 pages entitled
' Marriage a la Mode : an Humourous Tale in six
Cantos, in Hudibrastic Verse, being an Explanation
of the six prints lately published by the ingenious
Mr. Hogarth. London. . . .'
In the second quarter of the nineteenth century,
the story was dramatised and a broadside com
prising five woodcuts of the scenes was prepared
as a playbUl : ' Davidge's Royal Surrey Theatre.
On Easter Monday, April 1st, and during the week
wUl be presented an Original Pictorial Drama in
five Tableaux entitled the Curse of Mammon ! or
the Earl's son and the Citizen's daughter ! Form
ing a facsimile embodiment of Hogarth's justly
celebrated Pictures : Marriage-a-la-Mode.'
Plate 1.— The Contract.
This picture contains a representation of an
ostentatiously grand saloon, the waUs of which are
covered with paintings. Here the beginnings of the

no HOGARTH'S LONDON
sad drama are at work. The unfinished building
seen from the window with no workmen about shows
that expensive -tastes have exhausted the Earl's
treasury. The attentions of CounciUor Silvertongue
to the bride already appear to be pronounced, and
the young Viscount Squanderfield is too much
engaged with his own thoughts to pay any attention
to the merchant's daughter soon to be his wife.
Hazlitt says of him : ' He is the Narcissus of the
reign of George n. ; whose powdered peruke, ruffles,
gold lace, and patches divide his self-love unequaUy
with his own person, — the true Sir Plume of his day.'
The prominent personage is the Earl, who appears
no more in the drama after this. Racked with the
gout, he is stiU grand in his manner, and he presents
a wonderful picture of a haughty aristocrat. There
is a tradition, although I have not seen it referred to
in any of the books on Hogarth, that this striking
character was drawn from a man with great pride
in his ancestry, which he traced farther back than
the WiUiam Duke of Normandy of the Earl's
pedigree. John Wallop, Baron WaUop of Farleigh
Wallop and Viscount Lymington, had been created
Earl of Portsmouth in 1743, just about the time
Hogarth was engaged upon these pictures, and his
well-known pride of birth might cause Hogarth to
take him as a model. The family of WaUop is
said in Burke's Peerage to have been settled at
WaUop, Hants, at a period antecedent to the
Conquest. The building operations of the Earl

O e

(A -a

HIGH LIFE 111
in the painting may bear some reference to
the fact that the manor-house of Farley, destroyed
by fire in 1667, was rebuilt by Lord Lymington in
1733. If there is truth in this tradition, it shows
forcibly the spirit of Hogarth's work. When he used
a particular person as a representative in his pictures
of a special characteristic, he took care that nothing
else in the picture should bear in any way upon
his family history. Lord Portsmouth's son. Lord
Lymington, married Catherine Conduit, great-
niece of Sir Isaac Newton, the daughter of Mrs.
Barton (afterwards Mrs, Conduit). His son became
the second Earl of Portsmouth, and by this con
nection the Portsmouth family became the repre
sentatives of the great philosopher. The fonrth
Earl was named Newton FeUowes, and the fifth
Earl, Isaac Newton WaUop.
' While the proud Earl of Hollo's race
Points to the peers his pompous parchment grace,
Builds all his honours on a noble name,
And on his father's deeds depends for fame j
The wary citizen, with heedful eye.
Inspects what 's settled on posterity ;
Pours out the pelf by rigid avarice pil'd
To gain an empty title for his child.'
It has been said by some that Lord Tylney was
the original of the Earl, but this seems improbable.
The person delivering the mortgage to the Earl is
supposed to be one Peter Walter, the ' Peter Pounce '
of Fielding's Joseph Andrews.

112 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Plate 2. — The Breakfast Scene.
We have here a very handsome room finely
furnished in the style of the day, although with
signs of confusion left from the rout of the previous
night, and with the lights guttering in their candle
sticks. The apartment is said to be copied from
the drawing-room of No. 5 Arlington Street, where
Horace Walpole was living at this time, and where
he remained until 1779.
Of this Hazlitt wrote : ' The airy splendour of
the view of the inner room in this picture is probably
not exceeded by any of the productions of the
Flemish School.' The husband appears to have
just come home after a night of debauch, for which
he left his wife to attend to her company. Of the
latter Hazlitt writes : ' The expression of the Bride in
the Morning Scene is the most highly seasoned, and
at the same time the most vulgar of the series,' but
adds, ' the figure, face, and attitude of the Husband,
are inimitable.' Francis Hayman, Hogarth's friend
and copyist, is said to have been the model for
the dissipated husband, whose money has evidently
almost come to an end. The poor steward, who can
get no attention to his appeal and has to leave the
room with his unpaid bUls, is a prominent figure in
the scene. There is considerable difference of opinion
among the critics as to this man. The majority
speak of the honesty and simplicity of the old
faithful servant, and others think he is intended for
a hypocritical fellow.

HIGH LIFE 113
' Behold how Vice her votary rewards,
After a night of folly, frolic, cards.
The phantom pleasure flies — and in its place,
Comes deep remorse, and torturing disgrace,
Corroding care, and self-accusing fame ! '
Plate 3. — The Scene with the Quack.
The subject of this picture need not detain us
long, as it has rather to do with low life than with
high life, with which it has only an incidental
connection. The explanations of the commen
tators are very conflicting, and therefore nothing
can be said with certainty as to the meaning of the
particular action although the general idea of the
scene is apparent enough.
Hazlitt' s remarks on the painting of the girl are
as usual most discriminating : ' The young girl
in the third picture, who is represented as the
victim of fashionable proffigacy, is unquestionably
one of the artist's chefs-d'oeuvre. The exquisite deli
cacy of the painting is only surpassed by the felicity
and subtlety of the conception. Nothing can be more
striking than the contrast between the extreme
softness of her person, and the hardened indifference
of her character. The vacant stiUness, the docility
to vice, the premature suppression of youthful
sensibUity, the doU-like mechanism of the whole
figure, which seems to have no other feeling but a
sickly sense of pain — show the deepest insight into
human nature,'
The interest of the picture for us is almost con-
H

114 HOGARTH'S LONDON
fined to its local character, John Ireland, in aUuding
to the misceUaneous contents of the Quack's
Museum, quotes a passage from Garth's Dispensary,
which with justice he thinks might have given
Hogarth some hints for the scene :
'Here mummies lie, most reverently stale.
And there, the tortoise hung her coat of mail :
Not far from some huge shark's devouring head,
The flying fish their finny pinions spread ;
Aloft, in rows, large poppy-heads were strung,
And near, a scaly alligator hung ;
In this place, drugs in musty heaps decay'd,
In that, dry'd bladders and drawn teeth were laid.'
J, T. Smith, in an interesting account of St,
Martin's Lane contained in the second volume of
his Nollekens and his Times, says that the large
room behind No, 96 was the original of the scene
of this picture, although he incorrectly describes it
as a part of the ' Rake's Progress.' ' The house has
a large staircase, curiously painted, of figures
viewing a procession, which was executed for the
famous Dr, Misaubin, about the year 1732 by a
painter of the name of Clermont, a Frenchman,
who boldly charged one thousand guineas for his
labour, which charge, however, was contested, and
the artist was obhged to take five hundred,'
Whether the quack and the big woman in the
picture were taken from Misaubin and his wife may
be doubted, although probably Hogarth took that
doctor as a type.

HIGH LIFE 115
Bramston, in his ' Man of Taste,' contrasts him
with the respectable practitioners : —
' Should I perchance be fashionably ill,
I 'd send for Misaubin, and take his pill.
I should abhor, though in the utmost need,
Arbuthnot, Hollins, Wigan, Lee or Mead ;
But if I found that I grew worse and worse,
I 'd turn off Misaubin and take a nurse.'
Misaubin' s father was a Huguenot clergyman who
preached at the Spitalfields French Church, and
was a weU-known preacher. Fielding says in Tom
Jones, bk. xiii. chap, ii., that the Doctor boasted
that the proper direction for him was ' Dr. Misaubin
in the World.' He is one of four medical men
mentioned in that novel, the others being Syden
ham, John Freke and John Ranby. There is a
miniature of the Doctor and his family by Joseph
Goupy which Smith mentions as being in the pos
session of Mr. Henry Moyley,
John Misaubin, M,D,, licentiate of the CoUege
of Physicians, 25th June 1719, brought a famous
piU into England, by which he made a fortune by
questionable means,
Misaubm died in 1734, but in August 1749 Martha
Misaubin advertised in the London Evening Post
that she continued the making and seUing of Dr,
Misaubin's PUls at her house in St, Martin's Lane,
She affirms 'I am the only person that prepared
them during the Doctor's life and since his death,
nobody else having the secret but myself.' Mr.

116 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Stephens thinks it probable that this was the same
woman as the coarse virago in this picture,^
Plate 4,— The Toilette Scene,
A lady's boudoir and bedroom is represented
in this picture, which is fiUed with a company of
friends assembled at the Countess's levee. The
Earl's coronet, seen on the bedstead, may indicate
that the old Earl is now dead. We are not informed
what was the Earl's title, and it could not well
be Squanderfield, as some commentators seem to
suppose it was, because that was the title of his son.
Viscount Squanderfield. Probably Hogarth was
himself confused in this matter, for the invitations
on the floor are directed to Lady Squander.
The new Countess and Silvertongue (who is
pointing to representations of a masquerade on
the screen), are arranging an appointment at a
masquerade. On the couch where the Counsellor
reclines is a book inscribed Sopha, referring to the
licentious novel by CrebiUon fils which was much
read at this time. Hogarth took the opportunity
of expressing his burning indignation against the
infatuation of the upper classes for the Italian
Opera. The singer at this reception is said to be
Giovanni Carestini,^ the famous coiuiter-tenor, who
* See British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 733.
2 Carestini made his dehut in London on December 4, 1733, and with his
support Handel was able to withstand the opposition of Farinelli. Handel
was very indignant with him on one occasion when he sent back to the
composer the song 'Verdi prati' in the Italian opera Alcina (1735) as not

HIGH LIFE 117
accordmg to Burney was one of the finest Italian
singers ever heard ; he was also a good actor, taU,
handsome, and commanding. He died about 1758.
Some have supposed the figure to be intended for
FarineUi. Behind him is the famous flute-player
Weidemann, who is also the principal figure in the
print of ' The Modern Orpheus,' published in 1807,
from an original sketch by Hogarth in the pos
session of the Marquis of Bute {circa 1745).
Below the engraving is printed in letterpress
the foUowing announcement : ' Speedily wUl be
Published, Inscribed to aU Lovers of Tweedledum
Tweedle, the Art of Playing upon People, or.
Memoirs of the German Flute, interspersed with the
Character of Baron Steeple ; in which the effect
of Harmony wiU be shown in instances of a more
surprizing Nature than any related of Amphion,
Linus, Musseus or the most celebrated Flutists
of Antiquity.
" Music hath charms to wheedle Guineas forth ;
To draw, like Loadstone, Vituals, Drink and Clothes ;
Shirts, Stockings, Hats, Wigs, Rapiers, Shoes and Boots.
I 've read that Misers (griping Sons of Mammon !)
Have, out of Idol Gold, been oft cajol'd.
By Magic Numbers and persuasive Sound." '
Weidemann was, soon after the accession of
George ni., appointed Assistant-Master of Music to
the King under Dr. Boyce, and afterwards Composer
suited to him. Handel ran to the singer's house and addressed him thus :
' You tog ! don't I know petter as yourseluf vaat es. pest for you to sing ?
If you vill not sing all de song vaat I give you, I vill not pay you ein stiver.'

118 HOGARTH'S LONDON
of Minuets at the Court of St, James, and one of
the band of musicians. He died May 24, 1782.^
Mrs, Fox Lane (afterwards Lady Bingley), is
the striking lady in a state of excited admiration
of Carestini' s singing. She was the daughter of
Robert Benson, Baron Bingley, and wife of George
Fox Lane, who was created Lord Bingley of Bingley
in 1762, Mrs, Fox Lane had a perfect passion for
Italian music, and was a zealous friend and patroness
of Madame Regina Mingotti,^ siding with her in her
disputes with Vaneschi, On one occasion she was
earnestly declaiming to the Hon. General Crewe on
the claims of her favourite to universal admiration,
when her listener astonished her by asking, ' And
pray, ma'am, who is Madame Mingotti ? ' ' Get out
of my house,' cried the lady, ' you shaU never hear
her sing another song at my concerts, as long as you
live.' Mingotti performed exclusively at Mrs. Lane's
concerts, so there was no hope for the General. This
anecdote is given on the authority of Dr. Burney.
The gentleman in curl-papers who sits next to
Carestini is said to be Herr Michel, Prussian Envoy.
It is to be hoped that he was a better diplomatist
than his vacant countenance woiUd lead us to expect.
The argument of the fourth canto of the poem on
the ' Marriage a la Mode,' thus sums up this scene : —

1 British Museum Catalogue (F. G. Stephens), vol. iii. p. 591.
2 This famous singer, born 1728 (nee Valentini), married Mingotti, im
presario of the Dresden Opera, and when she came to England retrieved
the fortunes of the Opera.

HIGH LIFE 119
' Fresh honours on the Lady wait,
A Countess now she shines in state ;
The toilette is at large display'd
Where, whilst the morning concert 's play'd.
She listens to her lover's call.
Who courts her to the midnight ball.'
Plate 5.— The Death of the Eari.
The end of the great tragedy is now arrived, and
it takes two pictures to tell the story. The dying
Earl is seen in the centre of the bedroom of the
Tiu-k's Head Bagnio killed by Silvertongue, who is
escaping through the window. This scene is too
serious in itself to aUow of many external references,
and although there are several of these the con
sideration of them need not detain us here. Hazlitt
is not at his best in his criticism of this scene. He
says it is inferior to the rest of the series. 'The
attitude of the husband who is just kUled, is one in
which it would be impossible for him to stand or
even to fall. It resembles the loose paste-board
figures they make for chUdren.' Few wUl agree
with this, and it is weU that we have a briUiant
passage, written with wonderful insight, to set
against it. ' Look on that dying man — ^his body
dissolving, faUing not hke his sword, firm and entire,
but as nothing but a dying thing could f aU, his eyes
dim with the shadow of death, in his ears the
waters of that tremendous river, aU its bUlows
going over him, the life of his comely body fiowing
out like water, the hfe of his soul — who knows what
it is doing ? Fleeing through the open window.

120 HOGARTH'S LONDON
undressed, see the murderer and adulterer vanish
into the outer darkness of night, anywhere rather
than remain : and that guUty, beautiful, utterly
miserable creature on her knee, her whole soul,
her whole life in her eyes, fixed on her dying husband,
dying for and by her ! . . . the night-watch with
their professional faces — the weary wind blowing
through the room, the prelude, as it were, of that
whirlwind in which that lost soul is soon to pass
away. The man who could paint so as to suggest
aU this, is a great man and a great painter.'
This was written by that delightful essayist, Dr,
John Brown, the creator of Rab and his Friends, for
Hugh MUler's Witness in 1846,'
Plate 6. — ^The Death of the Countess.
The last scene is far removed from ' High Life,'
for the unhappy Countess has returned to the
sordid home of her merchant father. She has seen
the last dying speech of her paramour and in despair
has taken laudanum. The caUous father is seen
taking a valuable ring from his dying daughter's
finger. The only bit of feeling is exhibited in the
parting of the poor chUd from her mother. Hazlitt
writes : ' The characters in the last picture, in
which the wife dies, are aU masterly. We would
particularly refer to the captious petulant self-
sufficiency of the Apothecary, whose face and figure
are constructed on the same physiognomical
' Horce Suhsecivce, 1862, pp. 244-5, quoted by Mr. Austin Dobson.

o
2;

a
o

HIGH LIFE 121
prmciples; and to the fine example of passive
obedience and non-resistance in the servant whom
he is taking to task, and whose coat of green and
yeUow livery is as long and melancholy as his face.
. . . The harmony and gradations of colour in this
picture are uniformly preserved with the greatest
nicety, and are well worthy the attention of the
artist.' The point of greatest interest in this
picture in relation to London topography is the
view of the old tumble-down houses on London
Bridge, seen through the window of the room.
This is one of the latest representations of these
houses, as they were aU cleared away about a dozen
years after Hogarth painted this scene.
It is fortunate for the world that these splendid
pictures are in the possession of the nation, so that
every one who wishes can see them at all times.
They bear repeated study, and the tragedy is so
vividly and truly painted that it is impossible not
to feel you are in the presence of a great genius, who
lives again in his great works. John Ireland very
truly says : ' It wiU not be easy, perhaps not
possible, to find six pictures painted by any artist,
in any age or country, in which such variety of
superlative merit is united.'
' The Rake's Progress ' does not, as a whole,
represent High Life as the ' Marriage ' does, but as
Tom RakeweU attempts to obtain an entrance into
the ' inner circle ' it is necessary to take notice of
some of the scenes.

122 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The eight pictures are to be seen at the Soane
Museum, they having been bought by Sir John
Soane in 1802 for £598, 10s. Hogarth originaUy
sold them in February 1745 to Alderman Beckford
for £184, 16s. They were sold at the FonthiU sale
to Colonel FuUarton for £682, 10s. The engravings
were published in Jiuie 1735.
Plate 2, where the Rake is surrounded by artists
and professors at his levee, may be taken as a sort
of pendant to Plate 4 of the ' Marriage ' where
the Countess is surroimded by her friends. The
Rake is well attended by his instructors, some of
whom are identified as characters of the day, while
others remain anonymous. The bravo captain
behind the Rake comes provided with a letter of
recommendation from WiUiam Stab ; a jockey in
front holds on his knee a large silver bowl on which
are engraved a racing horse and its rider and the
inscription ' Won at Epsom, SUly Tom.' The
dancing-master, holding his kit and bow, capers on
the Rake's right; apparently he is a Frenchman,
but it has been affirmed that he was intended to
represent a man named Essex. The fencing-master
displaying his skUl in making a thrust towards the
front of the design was Dubois, a Frenchman, who
was kiUed in a duel fought in Marylebone Fields
on May 10, 1734, by an Irishman also named Dubois.
The man with staves standing between the fencing-
and dancing-masters was Figg the prize-fighter
who died 1734. At the back between the Rake and

HIGH LIFE 123
the dancing-master is Bridgeman, the weU-known
landscape gardener, who holds in his hand a design
which John Ireland does not consider to be worthy
of the man who attempted to 'create landscape,
to realise painting and improve nature,' Hogarth
takes the opportunity of satirising the presenters
of Itahan Opera, so here is another instance of
likeness to Plate 4 of the ' Marriage,'
At the extreme left of the picture is a harpsichord
inscribed ' I, Mahoan fecit,' at which a man is seen
seated ; his back only is presented to the spectator,
but it has been supposed by some to represent
Handel, This, however, is unlikely. Over the back
of the chair on which the musician sits a long scroU
of paper extends on the floor, which is inscribed :
' A list of the rich Presents Signer FarineUo the
Italian Singer condescended to accept of y^ English
NobUity and Gentry for one Night's performance in
the opera of Artaxerxes.' The last of the presents on
the list is ' A Gold Snuffbox chac'd with the Story of
Orpheus charming y" Brutes, by T, Rake-weU Esq,'
On the floor near the end of the scroU is an
engraving representing FarineUi seated on a
pedestal, and with an altar between his feet on
which two hearts are burning ; many ladies are offer
ing burning hearts to the popular idol. In Plate 4
we see the Rake arrested on his way to Court, and
the picture contains an admirable view of St. James's
Street with the Palace at the foot. This street
was the very centre of High Life in London, and it

124 HOGARTH'S LONDON
stiU remains its most distinguished street. Its
position is unrivalled, and even now it has a httle
of the air of the eighteenth century left, although
some tall new houses at the PiccadiUy end have
completely ruined the restful sense of proportion
that once existed.
Plate 4, and Plate 6, representing the gaming
at White's Chocolate House, and the commencement
of the fire that destroyed the buUding, are more
fully dealt with in Chapter ix. on Tavern Life. The
other pictures have little to do with High Life, and
a notice of Plate 5, the Marriage in Marylebone
Church, wiU be found in Chapter xin. (Suburbs) ;
one on Plate 7, the Fleet Prison, in Chapter xn.
(Prisons and Crime), and on Plate 8, Bedlam, in
Chapter xi. (Hospitals).
Hogarth made three satirical designs on what
he considered (often truly), the perverted taste in
High Life. The first in 1724, caUed ' Masquerades
and Operas,' also styled ' Taste of the Town,' which
contains the gate of Burlington House, PiccadiUy
(described in Chapter x., Theatrical Life). The
second in 1731, ' The Man of Taste,' or, 'Burlington
House ' ; and the third in 1742, ' Taste in High Life.'
' The Man of Taste ' (also caUed ' Taste a la Mode ')
contains the best view in existence of the old wall
and gate of Burlington House cleared away in 1866.
It is a sort of three-sided satire on Burlington,
Kent, and Pope. Against Lord Burlington because
he patronised Kent, and against Pope because he

'The Man of Taste." 1731. (Burlington Gate.)

HIGH LIFE 125
satirised the Duke of Chandos under the name of
Timon in his Moral Epistle (iv.) to Burlington on
the false taste of magnificence.
On the engraving is the foUowing explanation :
A P. a Plasterer white-washing and bespattering [Pope].
B Any body that comes in his way.
C Not a Dukes Coach as appears by y^ crescent of one
corner [Duke of Chandos 's coach].
D Taste [The pediment so marked].
E A standing proof [statue of Kent between recum
bent figures of ' Raphael Urb.' and ' Mil Angelo '].
F A Labourer [Earl of Burhngton].
The plate is said to have been suppressed, but it
was reproduced as a frontispiece to a pirated edition
of the first issue of the poem ' Of Taste,' which was
described as ' A Miscellany on Taste.'
Pope never referred to Hogarth publicly, but he
complained to friends, and he was evidently afraid
of the satirist.
Nichols, however, in Biographical Anecdotes, refers
to a copy of this piratical edition having the following
inscription written inside the book : ' Bo'' this
book of Mr. Wayte, at The Fountain Tavern, in the
Strand, in the presence of Mr. Draper, who told me
he had it of the Printer, Mr. W. Rayner. — J. Cosins.'
He says Cosins was an attorney, and as Pope was
desirous on aU occasions to make the law the engine
of his revenge, he supposes this attested memoran
dum was intended for the purposes of a prosecution.
' Taste in High Life ' was painted in ridicule of

126 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the craze of the day for outre costumes and the
coUection of gimcracks of aU kinds. Miss Edwardes
of Kensington, an immarried lady of great fortune,
had been sharply satirised in Society for her
oddities, and she thought that by employing Hogarth
to perpetuate the absurdities of the dress worn by
the most exalted personages of her time she would
have ample revenge.
The picture represents a room furnished in the
extreme of fashion, the chief figures being a lady
and gentleman extravagantly dressed and ' gushing '
over the beauties of some old china. The man has
a saucer in his hand, and the woman a cup. The
beau represents the Earl of Portmore in the dress
he wore at the Birthday Drawing-Room of 1742.
A monkey in the front of the picture is dressed like
a gentleman of the period. The little black boy is
said to be taken from Ignatius Sancho whose
portrait in later life was painted by Gainsborough,
The woman who is playing with the black boy is
said to represent a courtesan of the day. On the
waU, among a large coUection of pictures, Desnoyers
the great opera dancer is seen pirouetting,
Hogarth received sixty guineas from Miss
Edwardes for the picture, which was bought by
Mr, Birch at the sale of her effects for five guineas.
It belonged to Mr, John Birch, surgeon, of Essex
Street, Strand, son of the former proprietor, when
it was engraved by Samuel PhiUips in 1798, He
exhibited it in 1814, The picture was sold at the

'1=-

1 fci

^

HIGH LIFE 127
M'Murdo sale m July 1889 for £225, 15s,, and is
now in the possession of Mr, Fairfax Murray,
As this picture was painted to the order of another,
the painter took little interest in it and would not
aUow it to be engraved. An engraver managed
surreptitiously to obtain sight of the picture and
published a print of it at the price of sixpence,
The publication was advertised in The General
Advertiser of May 24, 1746. ' On Monday next
wUl be published an entertaining new Print, called
" Taste in High Life " (a companion to Taste a la
Mode), from an incomparable Pictvtre of Mr.
Hogarth's (designed by a lady lately deceased)
proving beyond contradiction, that the present
pohte assemblies of Drums, Routs, etc., are mere
exotics and the supporters of such and other
Divertissemens modernes a parcel of Insects, To
be had at Mr, Jar vis's Print-shop in Bedford
Court, Covent Garden, and the PrintseUers of
London and Westminster,'

128 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER IV
LOW LIFE
Low Life is exhibited in its many phases in a large
number of Hogarth's pictures, and so universaUy
has the pubhc opinion been directed to this side of
the artist's art that we find an anonymous writer
dedicating to Hogarth his work on ' Low Life,'
which we have Mr, Dobson's authority for saying
was first published in May 1752 (a second edition
in November 1754, and a third in 1764),^ and
attributing the idea of its publication to his pictures
of ' The Four Times of the Day,' painted and
engraved in 1738,
' 'Low-Life : or One half the World, knows not how the Other half lives,
being a critical account of what is transacted by People of almost all Rehgions,
Nations, and Circumstances, in the Twenty-four hours between Saturday
Night and Monday Morning. In a true description of a Sunday, as it is
usually spent within the Bills of Mortality. Calculated for the Tenth
[Twenty-first] of June. With an Address to the ingenious Mr. Hogarth.
'  Let Fancy guess the rest.' — Buckingham.
' London : Printed for the Author, and sold by T. Legg, at the Parrot and
Crown in Green Arbour Court in the Little Old Baily,' etc. [n.d.] [Price
one shilling.]
The third edition. ' London : Printed for John Lever, at Little Moorgate,
next London Wall near Moorfields, 1764 ' [Price one shilling and sixpence].
8vo, pp. viii., 103.
The change of the date on the title-page of the third edition from the
tenth to the twenty-first is of interest on account of the change in the
calendar which took place between the publication of the two editions.

LOW LIFE 129
This remarkable book attracted the attention of
Thackeray, Dickens, Sala {Twice Round the Clock,
1859), and others, and it requires some special
notice here, as it contains a curious illustration of
the habits of the Londoners of Hogarth's day. Sir
Walter Besant in his London in the Eighteenth
Century, has a chapter on Low Life entitled ' Twice
Round the Clock.' He wisely remarks that the reve
lations of the book must be accepted with caution,
as the frequent is usuaUy made to appear to be the
universal. Moreover, the author assumes the garb,
which he wears somewhat awkwardly, ' of the
moralist that deplores and the Christian who
exhorts.' With this caution we can proceed to
consider the author's revelations as they occur.
In the dedication to Hogarth we read : ' I say
that this essay owes its existence partly to your
works. And who wUl not believe me, when I direct
them to those four pieces of yours, caUed "Morning,"
" Noon," " Evening," " Night " ? and where are
many things made visible to the eye in the most
elegant colours, which are here only recorded. But
these I must leave the judicious Reader to
compare.' We are told that in the first hour from 12 to 1 a.m.
' The Salop man in Fleet Street shuts up his Beggar's
Coffee-house,' and hackney coachmen are full of
employment about Charing Cross, Covent Garden,
and the Inns of Court, carrying to thek respective
habitations such people as are either too drunk or
I

130 HOGARTH'S LONDON
too lazy to walk. Later on, the watchman cries
' 'Past four o'clock ' at half an hour after three.
About this time the beggars go to the parish nurses
to borrow poor helpless children at fourpence a day
each. The keepers of she-asses about Brompton,
Knightsbridge, Hoxton and Stepney are getting
ready to run with their cattle aU over the town to
be milked for the benefit of sick and infirm persons.
From seven to eight people are seen ' wishing the
comphments of the season, it being Whit Sunday.'
About this time ' the whole cities of London,
Westminster and the Borough of Southwark are
covered by a cloud of smoak, most people being
employed in lighting fires.'
The accoimt of the doings during the dark hours
is fuU, and shows how dangerous the streets of
London were at night, and sometimes in the
day-time, owing to the incompetence and, in
many cases, to the corruptibUity of the old watch
men. Being Sunday morning, some of the early risers
were off to the suburbs to breakfast at Sadler's WeUs,
but the larger number of the people waited tUl the
afternoon and walked to the fields of Islington which
were then fiUing with oxen and calves, sheep and
lambs, placed there to be ready for Monday morning
market at Smithfield. More wiU be found about
these suburban resorts in the chapter on Suburbs.
At the end of Low Life, there is an advertisement
of * The Secret History of Betty Ireland, 6th edition,

LOW LIFE 131
price 6d.,' with these laudatory lines on this
woman :
' Eead Flanders Moll, the German Princess scan,
Then match our Irish Betty if you can ;
In Wit and Vice she did them both excel
And may be justly called, a Nonpareil.'
In the Newgate Calendar a print caUed ' Betty
Ireland's Dexterity' is borrowed from the woman
stealing the watch in Plate 3 of the ' Rake's Progress.'
Ttirning from the foUower to the originator, we
can now consider the particular points of ' The Four
Times of the Day,' which series is of the greatest
interest for our present purpose as it illustrates
London streets in three of the pictures and the
suburbs in ' Evening.' Although the engravings
from the original paintings were published in 1738,
the pictm-es remained on Hogarth's hands until 1745,
when they were sold by the artist's ill-advised system
of auction for ridiculously low prices.
' The Fom" Times of the Day ' were exhibited in
1814, and Mx. Dobson teUs us that 'Night' and
' Morning ' (shown in the Winter Exhibition of the
Royal Academy in 1885), belong to the Hursley
Park Trustees, and were originaUy purchased by Sir
WiUiam Heathcote for £27, 6s. and £21. ' Noon '
and ' Evening ' belonged to the Dtike of Ancaster,
who bought them for £38, 17s. and £39, 18s.
respectively ; they are now in the possession of the
Earl of Ancaster at Grimsthorpe Castle, Lincolnshire,
In the advertisement of the sale of pictures

132 HOGARTH'S LONDON
{Daily Advertiser, February 6 and 19, 1745), it is
stated that they were ' AU of them his own original
Paintings, from which no other copies than the
Prints have ever been taken.' Hogarth allowed
Francis Hayman to reproduce the four pictures for
Jonathan Tyers to ornament VauxhaU Gardens,
but we have not the exact date when this was done.
Mx. Dobson says that ' Evening ' and ' Night ' were
StiU there in 1808,
' Morning,' — The first picture presents an admir
able view of Covent Garden Market on a cold winter
morning, although some of the detaUs are not quite
correctly depicted in the engraving, so that Lord
Archer's house (long afterwards Evans's) appears
to stand on the south rather than on the north side
of the church. The hour, as appears by the church
clock, is 7,55, and the old maid foUowed by her
shivering page is proceeding to attend the early
morning service,
John Ireland refers to this lady as ' this withered
representative of Miss Bridget AUworthy,' but the
remark is misleading as Fielding's novel was not
published until 1749, It was Fielding who
borrowed from Hogarth and drew Miss Bridget in
words in accordance with the portrait of her in
' Morning.' He writes : ' The lady, no more than
her lover, was remarkable for beauty. I would
attempt to draw her picture ; but that is done already
by a more able master, Mx. Hogarth himself, to
whom she sat many years ago, and hath been

'Morning" (Covent Garden.) " Four Times of the Day." 1738.

LOW LIFE 133
lately exhibited by that gentleman in his print of a
Winter's Morning, of which she was no improper
emblem and may be seen walking (for walk she doth
in the print) to Covent Garden Church, with a
starved footboy behind, carrying a prayer-book.' ^
Another story told by John Nichols is that this
figure was taken either from an acquaintance or
relation of Hogarth. ' At first she was weU enough
satisfied with her resemblance ; but some designing
people teaching her to be angry, she struck the
painter out of her wiU, which had been made con
siderably in his favour.' Such are the troubles
of the Satirist.
Cowper was struck by this figure, and faithfuUy
expounded it in eighteen lines of Truth commencing :
' Yon ancient prude, whose wither'd features show
She might be young some forty years ago.
Her elbows pinion'd close upon her hips,
Her head erect, her fan upon her lips.
Her eyebrows arch'd, her eyes both gone astray
To watch yon am'rous couple in their play.'
The church, which forms the principal object in
the east end of the picture, represents Inigo Jones's
original church. This building was entirely de
stroyed by fire on September 15, 1795, and was
rebuilt by Thomas Hardwick, architect, on the plan
and in the proportions of the original.
'Tom King's Coffee-House,' a notorious resort
of the most unruly of the London rakes, forms a
1 Tom Jones, book i. chap. xi.

134 HOGARTH'S LONDON
prominent feature in the picture. Tom King was
a native of West Ashton in Wiltshire and a scholar
at Eton, who early began his ignoble career. In
the account of the boys elected from Eton to King's
CoUege, Cambridge, given by Harwood {Alumni
Etonensis), he writes : King ' went away (1713)
scholar in apprehension that his fellowship would
be denied him, and afterwards kept that coffee
house in Covent Garden which was caUed by his
own name.' At the date of this picture Tom King
probably had been succeeded in the possession
of this place of entertainment by his widow, MoU
King, who became notorious. In October 1737 was
published a print entitled ' A Monument for Tom
K-g,' Fielding frequently referred to King's Coffee-
House. J. T. Smith places the shed, for it was
little more, opposite to Tavistock Row, now cleared
away for new market buildings with one side in
Tavistock Street, and not in front of the church
where, as IVlr. Dobson says, Hogarth has by artistic
licence placed it. Smith's localisation is corro
borated by the view in ' Tom K — g's : or the
Paphian Grove, with the various Humours of
Covent Garden &c., the second edition to which is
added, a Dedication to IMrs. K — g . . . London
1738.' In this little book there is a portrait of IMrs. Mary
K — g opposite to the dedication. In the author's
apology we are told : ' I have no private antipathy

LOW LIFE 135
to any person who may suppose himself to be here
satyriz'd ; my sole design being to expose a place
that has flourish'd for some years, either to the
shame of our laws or the scandal of our Magistrates.'
It is not clear whether this low place of entertain
ment, which must have been a scandal even in a
scandalous neighbourhood, was ever changed in
its position. The author of this 'Mock Heroic
Poem ' thus describes the Market :
' Where a wide area opens to the sight
A spacious Plain quadrangularly right,
Whose large Frontiers with Pallisado's bound,
From Trivia's filth inshrines the hallow'd ground :
In which Pomona keeps her fruitful court,
And youthful Flora with her Nymphs resort.'
Stacie wrote : ' Noblemen and the first beaux after
leaving court would go to her house in fuU dress
with swords and in rich brocaded sUk coats, and
walked and conversed with persons of every de
scription. She would serve chimney-sweepers,
gardeners and market people in common with her
lords of the knighted rank.'
MoU King was not aUowed much longer to con
tinue in her evU courses, and as we read in a news
paper cutting of May 24, 1739, 'Yesterday Mary
King, mistress of King's Coffee House, Covent
Garden, was brought to the Kling's Bench Bar to
receive judgment, when the Court committed her
to the King's Bench prison, Southwark, tiU they took
time to consider of a punishment adequate to the

136 HOGARTH'S LONDON
offence.' We read further in the Weekly Miscellany,
June 9, 1739 : 'Monday, Mrs. Mary Kmg of Covent
Garden was brought up to the King's Bench bar
at Westminster, and received the following sentence,
for keeping a disorderly house ; viz. to pay a fine of
two hundred pounds, to suffer three months imprison
ment, to find security for her good behaviour for
three years, and to remain in prison tiU the fine be
paid.' This punishment may be said to have
finished her career. She retired to Haverstock
Hill and built three houses, in one of which she died
on the 17th of September 1747. Nancy Dawson,
the hornpipe dancer, lived here for a time.^ The
three houses remained until a few years ago and
were known as MoU King's Row.
After this woman's death a book was published
entitled ' Covent Garden in Mourning, a Mock
Heroick Poem, containing some Memoirs of the late
Celebrated MoU King.'
There was at Strawberry HUl a large drawing
of the interior of Tom King's by Captain Laroon
which Walpole bought from the artist. Another
interior will be found in an engraving by Bickham
jun. entitled ' The Rake's Rendez-vous, or the
Midnight Revels. Wherein are delineated the
Various Humours of Tom King's Coffee House in
1 Nancy Dawson made her first appearance at Drury Lane Theatre on
Sept. 23, 1760. She died May 27, 1767, and is buried in the burial-
ground of St. George's, Bloomsbury, at the back of the Foundling Hospital.
A portrait of her, attributed to Hogarth, was sold at the Johnson sale in
1898 for .£13, 13s.

LOW LIFE 137
Covent Garden,' which is a plagiarism of the Tavern
Scene in the ' Rake's Progress.'
In Boitard's ' Morning Frolic in Covent Garden '
Laroon is seen brandishing an artichoke. Captain
Montague seated on the top of Bet Careless' s sedan,
which is preceded by Little Casey. Justice Welsh
said that Captain Laroon, his friend Montague, and
their constant companion. Little Casey, were the three
most troublesome of aU his visitors at Bow Street.
In the distance to the left of the picture is seen
the quack Dr. Rock exhibiting his medicines for
sale and expatiating on their virtues. John Ireland
says that this was considered to be a striking likeness
of the man, who made a practice of attending the
market every morning.
'Noon.' — This picture does not properly come
under the heading of Low Life, as it represents in
vivid colours the issuing out of the congregation from
the French Church in Hog Lane, afterwards Crown
Street and now a part of Charing Cross Road.
This district was the centre of a foreign quarter, and
the church was well attended. It had previously
been occupied as a Greek church, and there is stiU a
Greek inscription over the west door, to the effect that
the temple was created by the Greeks in 1677. An In
dependent chapel succeeded the French chapel, and
the buUding is now the Anglican Church of St, Mary,
The church is set back from the road, but additions
have been made which front Charing Cross Road,

138 HOGARTH'S LONDON
St, Giles's Church is seen in the distance; and
on the whole this is one of the best of Hogarth's
pictures of the London streets and fuU of humorous
incidents, especiaUy the despair of the poor boy
who has just broken his dish, containing the
Sunday's dinner from the baker's, by setting it
down too smartly on a post,
' Evening ' wiU be found referred to in the chapter
on the Suburbs (xiii.)
' Night,' — This, the last of the four pictures, repre
sents the congested condition of the narrow part
of Charing Cross, at a time of rejoicing, before it was
opened out to Whitehall, and the neighbourhood of
St, Martm's Church, This is the night of the 29th
of May, as wiU be seen by the oaken bough on the
barber's pole and the oak leaves fixed in some of
the hats of the passers-by. The principal window
is fuUy iUuminated with taUow candles, and there
is a bonfire in the middle of the road.
The overturned coach, with its frightened
passengers, occupies a prominent position in the
picture. There is a tradition that the cause of the
disaster was the Earl of Sahsbury (James, fourth
Earl: 1713-1780), whose hobby it was to drive
coaches. Walpole describes him as driving the
Hatfield stage, but this may only be a figure of
speech. The conveyance is generaUy referred to
as the Salisbury Flying Coach, but this may merely
be some confusion with the name of the noble

LOW LIFE 139
driver. Pope alludes to him in the Dunciad (book
IV. U. 587-8) :
' From stage to stage the licens'd Earl may run,
Pair'd with his fellow-charioteer, the sun.'
On either side of the road are the Rummer Tavern
and the Cardigan's Head. The former was an old-
established place of entertainment, and was kept
in 1685 by Samuel Prior, the tmcle of Matthew
Prior. (It was at the Rhenish Wine Office in Canon
Row that the Earl of Dorset found the young poet
reading Horace.) In the distance is seen the statue
of Charles i.
The intoxicated freemason in the front of the
picture who is being led to his home by the tyler
of his lodge has been identified as Sir Thomas
De VeU, the magistrate. This incident was fuUy
discussed at a meeting of the Lodge Quatuor Coronati
on the 3rd May and 8th November, 1889. Brother
G. W. Speth aUuded to it in a paper on the Founda
tion of Modern Freemasonry, and Brother W.
Harry Rylands read a paper on Hogarth's Picture
' Night ' at the latter date.^ Both writers are wiUing
to agree to the popular ascription to Sir Thomas
De VeU. Mx. Speth writes: 'The badge [of the
freemason] was a huge plain white apron, such as the
drunken W.M. and the tavern waiter or Tyler are
begirt with in Hogarth's weU-known picture.' He
cannot find that any lodge met at the Cardigan's
* Transactions of the Lodge Quatuor Coronati, vol. ii. 1889, pp. 90, 116,
146.

140 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Head previous to the date of the engraving, but
from 1739 to 1742 a lodge, which was constituted
15th April 1728 and erased in 1743, held its meetings
at the ' Earl of Cardigan's Head,' Charing Cross.
Mr. Speth gives excellent reasons for believing that
the figure with the lantern was intended for a tyler
and not, as most commentators suppose, a waiter.
' The dress and wig are not those of a menial, and
the masonic apron rather points also to a contrary
conclusion. The sword under the arm at once
suggests a Tyler, and distinct resemblance may be
traced between Hogarth's picture and an engraved
portrait dated 1738 of " Montgomerie, garder to y®
Grand Lodge," or as we should say. Grand Tyler.
The cut of the coat sleeve and arrangement of the
linen are also identical in both plates. What more
consonant with aU we know of Hogarth than the
supposition that the Grand Tyler having issued
an engraving of himself in 1738, the very year of
Hogarth's plate, he should seize the first oppor
tunity of caricaturing it ? '
Mi. Rylands enters very fuUy into the various
points of the picture, more especiaUy of the topo
graphy, but it is difficult to come to any definite
conclusion as to the matter. He satisfactorUy
disproves Mx. Speth' s suggestion that the scene
v/as laid in Hartshorn Lane (afterwards Northumber
land Street). It probably looks towards Charing
Cross from the opening to Whitehall. Hogarth
was not very particular as to these details.

o

a:

LOW LIFE 141
The remarkable engraving of ' The Cockpit ' is
one of Hogarth's most vivid iUustrations of the
manners of his time. It was pubhshed in 1759, and
is therefore one of his latest works. In 1747 he was
invited by a writer of verses in the Gentleman's
Magazine of that year to take the Cockpit as a
subject for his art :
' Come, Hogarth, thou whose art can best declare
What forms, what features, human passions wear.
Come with a painter's philosophic sight.
Survey the circling judges of the fight.
Touch'd with the sport of death, while every heart
Springs to the changing face, exert thy art ;
Mix with the smiles of Cruelty at pain,
Whate'er looks anxious in the lust of gain ;
And say, can aught that 's generous, just, or kind.
Beneath this aspect, lurk within the mind.' ^
Cock-fighting is a very ancient game, and as ' the
sport of kings' cockpits have been attached to
palaces, the one at WhitehaU gave its name to the
CouncU Chamber in St. James's Park. In the
seventeenth century London was fiUed with cock
pits, but the most famous was the Royal Cockpit,
which stood in Dartmouth Street near the top of
Queen Street. The winding stone steps leading from
Birdcage Walk to the site of the buUding stiU exist,
and continue the name as Cockpit Steps. Mr. W. B.
Boulton in his Amusements of Old London gives
an advertisement of this place from one of the
news sheets of 1700.
' At the Royal Cockpit, on the south side of St.
' John Nichols, Biographical Anecdotes (1785), p. 368.

142 HOGARTH'S LONDON
James's Park, on Tuesday the 11th of this instant
February, wiU begin a very great cock match, and
wiU continue aU the week, wherein most of the
considerablest cockers of England are concerned.
There wUl be a battle down upon the pit every day
precisely at three o'clock, in order to have done
by daylight. Monday the 9th instant March wiU
begin a great match of cock-fighting between the
gentlemen of the city of Westminster and the
gentlemen of the city of London, for six guineas
a battle and one hundred guineas the odd battle,
and the match continues aU the week in Red Lion
Fields.' It is the Royal Cockpit which is supposed to be
the scene of Hogarth's engraving. The buUding
was taken down in 1816, as a renewal of the lease
for the old purpose was refused. The cock-fighters
removed to the Cockpit Royal in Tufton Street,
Westminster, which remained untU the year 1828.
A few years afterwards the game was prohibited
by Act of Parliament (5 and 6 Wm. iv. cap. 59).
Mr. Boulton, who gives a learned account of
cock-fighting, highly praises Pepys' s word-picture
of his single visit to a cockpit (Dec. 21, 1663). He
writes : ' We think this wonderful plate [by Hogarth]
may be placed by the side of Mr. Pepys' s vivid
description of his visit to Shoe Lane as one of the
best presentments of the humours of the cockpit
existing. The same "celestial spirit of anarchy"
animates the other classic representation of a cock

LOW LIFE 143
match by Thomas Rowlandson which appeared in
the Microcosm of London some sixty years later.'
The expression ' celestial spirit ' used above is a
quotation from Dr. Martin Sherlock's Letters to a
Friend at Paris referred to by John Ireland : ' It is
worth your while to come to England, were it only
to see an Election and a Cock-match. There is a
celestial spirit of anarchy and confusion, in these
two scenes that words cannot paint, and of which
no countryman of yours can form even an idea.'
Ireland adds to this : ' Mr. Sherlock is perfectly
right in his assertion, that neither of these scenes
can be described by words ; but where the writer
must have faUed, the artist has succeeded, and the
Parisian who has never visited England may, from
Mr. Hogarth's prints, form a tolerably correct idea
of the anarchy of an election, and the confusion of a
Cockpit.' We have seen in the case of Samuel
Pepys that it is not necessary for the writer to f aU
in the description of a cock-fight. It is a ciirious
coincidence in Sherlock's remarks that, though he
means two things when he speaks of an Election
and a Cock-match, the word election was a recog
nised term in ' cocking.' Election is the act of
choosing, and ' in the election of a fighting cock,
there are four things principaUy to be considered,
and they are shape, colour, coin-age, and sharp heel.'
The number of known characters, most of them
taken from the life, in this picture gives great value
to this representation of a scene fuU of the wildest

144 HOGARTH'S LONDON
excitement. The worst quahties of human nature
are discovered in the company consisting of all
classes, and on every man's face is seen the exhibition
of the greed of gain.
An ornamentation at the foot of the design
represents an oval medaUion containing the figure
of a crowing cock ; on the ground of the medaUion
is inscribed ' Royal Sport.' This medaUion is
named ' Pit ticket,' and represents a token of
admission to witness a cock-fight.
The engraving represents a cockpit, as seen by
artificial light dturing a combat between two fowls.
This is interesting, as the advertisement quoted
above speaks of the fight as taking place by dayhght.
The central figure is that of a blind man who occupies
the central position. This was intended for Lord
Albemarle Bertie, second son of Peregrine, second
Duke of Ancaster. This gambler is also seen in the
' March to Finchley ' as an attendant at a boxing
match. The figure of the stout nobleman with the
star and riband has not been recognised, but is
evidently a portrait. The reflection on the table is
the shadow of a man who has been drawn up to the
ceiling as a punishment for having made bets for
more money than he can pay. John Ireland
quotes from the second canto of a poem entitled
' The Gamblers ' the following illustrative notes :
' By the Cockpit laws, the man who cannot, or wiU
not pay his debts of honour, is liable to exaltation
in a basket.' — ' Stephen's exaltation in a basket,

LOW LIFE 145
and his there continuing to bet, though unable to
pay, is taken from a scene in one of Hogarth's
prints, humorously setting forth, that there are
men whom a passion for gaming does not forsake,
even in the very hour that they stand proclaimed
insolvents.' Mr. Dobson gives a further iUustrative quotation
from ' Another Occasional Letter from Mr. Cibber
to Mr. Pope ' (1744) — ' As the merry mob at a Cock-
match hoist up a cheat into the basket, for having
lost a bet he was not able to pay.'
John Ireland says the scene is probably laid at
Newmarket, but adds : ' This is mere conjecture,
but from Jackson the hump-backed jockey, and some
other sedate personages who are present, I think
it is more likely to be designed for that place than
any other.' On the waU hung the royal arms,
and a fuU-length portrait of Nan Rawlings, a famous
cock-feeder, weU known at Newmarket, also known
as Deptford Nan and Duchess of Deptford.
The prominence of the royal arms is a strong
argument in favour of the supposition that the
scene was taken from the Royal Cockpit, which is
reported to have been founded by Charles ii.
Hogarth was interested in pugUism and the Art
of Self-Defence, which, however brutal it may be
considered, was found by many in the eighteenth
century to be a very useful accomplishment at a
time when little protection could be expected from
the watchmen in any possible street frays. Some

146 HOGARTH'S LONDON-
who remember how well Samuel Johnson could use
his fists when occasion called may think it unfair
to place prize-fighters in a chapter on Low Life,
but at all events the exhibitions of pugUism come
fairly under that heading, even if they were generaUy
supported by those who are usuaUy supposed to
belong to High Life. James Figg, who died on the
7th December 1734, was much appreciated as a
model by Hogarth, who introduced him into
the Rake's Levee (Plate 2) and the ' Midnight
Modern Conversation.' The most important is the
figure in the corner of the picture of Southwark
Fair, where Figg, bald-headed, seated on a pony, is
seen starting to ride through the Fair. It was the
practice of a great Master of Defence to ride through
the City preceded by trumpets and drums and
colours flying. Figg kept a great tUed booth on
the Bowling Green, Southwark, during the time of
the Fair. There was a performance daily at noon,
which closed at four. He established himself at the
corner of WeUs Street and Castle Street near the
Oxford Road, and buUt a wooden structure on a
piece of waste ground there.
Samuel Ireland published in his Graphic Illus
trations (vol. i. p. 89) a copy by A. M. Ireland of an
etching by Simpson of Hogarth's drawing for Figg's
business card. Mr. Dobson notes that an original
impression in the possession of Mr. Fairfax-Murray
is from the Bessborough CoUection. The in
scription below figures on a stage preparing for

LOW LIFE 147
an encounter, and spectators around, reads as
foUows : 'James Figg
Master of y^ Noble Science of Defence
on ys right hand in Oxford Road
near Adam and Eve Court teaches Gentle
men y® use of y® small back sword &
QuarterstafE at home & abroad.'
This was the first London School of Arms, and Figg
is caUed the ' Atlas of the Sword ' in Captain John
Godfrey's Useful Art of Defence, 1747.
Dr. Bjrrom wrote - Extempore Verses upon a Trial
of SkUl between the two great Masters of Defence,
Messieurs Figg and Sutton,' which are printed in
Dodsley's Collection of Poems (vol. vi. p. 286). They
commence thus :
' Long was the great Figg by the prize-fighting swains.
Sole monarch acknowledg'd of Mary-bone plains.
To the towns, far and near, did his valour extend.
And swam down the river from Thames to Gravesend ;
Where liv'd Mr. Sutton, pipe-maker by trade,
Who, hearing that Figg was thought such a stout blade,
Resolv'd to put in for a share of his fame.
And so sent to challenge the Champion of Thame.'
The end is a complete victory for Figg.
' Though Sutton, disabled as soon as he hit him.
Would still have fought on, but Jove would not permit him,
'Twas his fate, not his fault, that constrain'd him to yield.
And thus the great Figg became lord of the field.'
Samuel Ireland says that EUis, an artist who
imitated the style of Hogarth in smaU conversations,
painted a portrait of Figg which was engraved by

148 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Faber in mezzotint, and published by Overton in
1731. Mr. Dobson mentions a painting of Figg by
Hogarth which belonged to S. Ireland, and was
bought in 1801 by Mr. Vernon for eleven shUlings,
from which smaU sum it may be guessed that it is
not a genuine work. J. P. Malcolm publishes an
advertisement containing a chaUenge of Matthew
Masterson and Rowland Bennet to James Figg, and
Figg's acceptance of the chaUenge. He also notes
that ' in December 1731 Figg and Sparks contended
with the broadsword at the French or Little Theatre
in the Haymarket before the Duke of Lorrain,
Count Kinski, and many persons of distinction.'
In one of the papers of the day we are told that
' the beauty and judgement of the sword was
delineated in a very extraordinary manner by
those two champions, and with very little bloodshed.' ^
Samuel Ireland prints an advertisement of an
encounter ' At Mr. Figg's Great Room at his house,
the sign of the City of Oxford in Oxford Road . . .
the Nobihty and Gentry wiU be entertained (for
the last time this season) in a most extraordinary
manner with a select trial of skiU in the Science of
Defence, by the four following masters,' viz. WUliam
Holmes and Felix MacGuire against Figg and
Edward Sutton.
Chetwood in his History of the Stage relates the
ingenious way in which Figg supplied himself with
1 Malcolm's Anecdotes of the Manners and Customs of London during the
Eighteenth Century (1810), vol. ii. p. 176.

LOW LIFE 149
shirts at the expense of others. He told Chetwood
that he had not bought a shirt for years. It was
his practice when he fought in his Amphitheatre,
to send round to some of his scholars to borrow a
shirt for the ensuing combat. As most of the young
nobility and gentry were in his train, he obtained a
good many fine shirts from his admhers, the return
of which was not accepted by the lenders, as they
saw the cuts in the one Figg wore, and each man
supposed this to be what he lent. Among Figg's
chief pupils was George Taylor, or George the
Barber, as he was caUed, who succeeded his master in
the occupation of the amphitheatre in the Oxford
Road. Captain Godfrey treats Taylor as a link
between Figg, who was mainly a swordsman, and
John Broughton, whose fame rested on his eminence
as a pugihst.
Taylor was very successful and opened an
additional amphitheatre — ^the Great Booth, Tot
tenham Court.
There are two plates engraved by Richard Livesay
from the original sketches of Hogarth ' in the
CoUection of Mr. Morrison.' They are entitled:
' George Taylor the PugUist wrestling with Death '
(1) In which Taylor who was celebrated for his
skiU in giving ' a back fall ' has overthrown Death
and kneels on the chest of the skeleton. (2) ' George
Taylor the Pugilist overcome by Death' is here
seen lying on his back and stiU grasping the wrists
of his conqueror, who stoops over him. The two

150 HOGARTH'S LONDON
sketches were afterwards sold to the Marquis of
Exeter. Taylor died on February 21, 1750, and
was buried in Deptford churchyard. These prints
were published on March 1, 1782, by R, Livesay,
' at Mrs, Hogarth's, Leicester Fields, London.'
John Broughton (1705-1789), was apprenticed
to a Thames waterman, and when at work on his
own account generaUy plied at Hungerford Stairs.
A quarrel and successful fight with a brother
waterman is said to have settled his future em
ployment as a pugilist. He attached himself to
George Taylor's booth in Tottenham Court Road
and remained there until 1742, when he quarrelled
with Taylor. He set up a new amphitheatre in
Hanway Yard on the 10th March 1743, and was
acknowledged as the founder of the Prize-ring,
and the head of his profession. He formed a code
of riUes which were accepted and remained without
verbal alteration imtU 1838. Taylor acknowledged
himself to be beaten by Broughton, and joined his
rival's establishment in Hanway Yard.
Broughton opened an Academy of Boxing in
the Haymarket and invented boxing-gloves, or
' mufflers ' as he caUed them. His advertisement of
these novelties is quoted by Mr. Boulton from the
Advertiser of February 1747,
' Mr, Broughton proposes with proper assistance
to open an academy at his house in the Haymarket
for the instruction of those who are wiUing to be
initiated in the mystery of boxing, where the whole

LOW LIFE 151
theory and practice of that truly British Art, with
all the various blows, stops, cross buttocks, etc.,
incidental to combatants will be fuUy taught and
explained ; and that persons of quality and dis
tinction may not be debarred from entering into
a course of these lectures, they wiU be given with the
utmost tenderness and regard to the delicacy of
the frame and constitution of the pupil, for which
reason mufflers will be provided that will effectu-
aUy secure them from the inconveniency of black
eyes, broken jaws and bloody noses.'
This school was attached to a public-house kept
by Broughton, the sign of which was a portrait of
himself. The house was opposite the Haymarket
Theatre. Mr. Dobson mentions a portrait of
Broughton by Hogarth which was exhibited in
1817 by Lord Camden. It afterwards belonged to
Mr. H, R, Willett, at whose sale in 1869 it was sold
for £75, 12s, There is a version at Lowther Castle
(Earl of Lonsdale),
Less than two months after Taylor's death,
Broughton was defeated and his career ended.
He met a Norwich butcher named Slack, who was a
pugilist of some note although he treated him with
disdain, and when a meeting was arranged for 11th
AprU 1750, he had every confidence in his own
success, Broughton started weU, but suddenly
Slack made a jump and dealt his opponent a pro
digious blow between the eyes which blinded him.
Broughton' s patron the Duke of Cumberland, who

152 HOGARTH'S LONDON
had backed him to the amount of ten thousand
pounds, was mad with excitement and caUed out :
' What are you about, Broughton ? You can't
fight ; you 're beat,' Broughton replied : ' I can't
see my man, your Highness ; I 'm blind, not beat.
Let me see my man, and he shaU not gain the day,'
Slack pursued his advantage and pummeUed the
blinded man into submission ' under fourteen
minutes,' ^
After this unfortunate occurrence Broughton
retired on a smaU competence to Walcot Place,
Lambeth. He died on the 21st January 1789, and
was bm-ied at Lambeth Church ; the paU-bearers by
his own request consisted of certain noted pugUists.
In the second volume of his Graphic Illustrations
Samuel Ireland includes a sketch of Broughton and
Slack fighting, which he says was intended ' as a
card of admission to a great contest of skUl,'
but he gives no information as to its being
the work of Hogarth; and although there is no
improbabUity in the artist doing something for
Broughton, it is rather unlikely that so late as 1750
he should compose a ticket of this kind. Mr. Dobson
merely mentions it, and does not say anything
further respecting it. The description of the fight
is not very good, and as Slack was only a common
place boxer with a provincial reputation it is rather
absurd to speak of the ' two immortal heroes of the
pugilistic art.'
1 W. B. Boulton's Amusements of Old London, 1901, vol, ii. p. 91.

LOW LIFE 153
In the years 1750-51 Hogarth must have been
very busy with his remarkable series of prints
speciaUy iUustrating some of the most flagrant
evUs in the Low Life of his time. Gin Lane and
Beer Street are of the utmost importance as
exhibiting the appearance of the streets of London.
The Four Stages of Cruelty are almost too horrible
for representation, and they belong more properly
to a later chapter on Prisons and Crimes (xn.).
The announcement of the publication of these
prints was made in the General Advertiser for
February 13, 1750-51, as foUows : ' On Friday
next wUl be publish'd. Price P. each. Two
large prints design' d and etch'd by Mr. Hogarth,
caU'd Beer-Street and Gin-Lane. A number wUl
be printed in a better manner for the curious at
Is. 6d. each. And on Thursday foUowing wUl be
pubhshed. Four Prints on the subject of Cruelty.
Price and size the same. N.B. — As the subjects
of these Prints are calculated to reform some
reigning vices peciUiar to the lower class of people
in hopes to render them of more extensive use, the
Author has published them in the cheapest manner
possible. To be had at the Golden Head in Leicester-
fields, where may be had aU his other works.'
Beer Street is usuaUy put before Gin Lane, as in
this advertisement, but elsewhere Hogarth himself
gives the foUowing account of their origin : ' When
these two prints were designed and engraved, the
dreadful consequences of gin drinking appeared

154 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in every street. In Gin Lane every circumstance of
its horrid effects is brought to view in terrorem.
Idleness, poverty, misery and distress, which drives
even to madness and death, are the only objects
that are to be seen : and not a house in tolerable
condition but the PaAvnbroker's and Gin shop.
Beer Street, its companion, was given as a contrast,
where that invigorating liquor is recommended, in
order to drive the other out of vogue. Here all is
joyous and thriving. Industry and joUity go hand
in hand. In this happy place the Pawnbroker's is
the only house going to ruin ; and even the small
quantity of porter that he can procure is taken in
at the wicket, for fear of farther distress.'
G. Steevens supposes that Hogarth received his
first idea for these prints from a pair by Peter
Breughel, commonly caUed Breughel d'Enfer to
distinguish him from his brother John, known as
Breughel de velours. Of the two pictures referred
to, ' the one is entitled La Gfrasse, the other La
Maigre Cuisine. In the first aU the personages
are weU-fed and plump ; in the second they are
starved and slender. The latter of them also
exhibits the figures of an emaciated mother and
child, sitting on a straw mat upon the ground,
whom I never saw without thinking on the female,
etc., in Gin Lane. In Hogarth the fat Enghsh
blacksmith is insulting the gaunt Frenchman, and
in Breughel the plump cook is kicking the lean one
out of doors. Our artist was not unacquainted

LOW LIFE 155
with the works of this master.' If this be true, it
shows the remarkable power Hogarth possessed
of imbuing any idea he took from others with his
own special character.
Gin Lane consists of Hogarth's representation of
a street in that part of St, GUes's known as the
Rookery, and cleared away in the middle of the
nineteenth century for the new junction of Oxford
Street with Holborn, known as New Oxford Street,
The foremost figure is too horrible for pictorial art.
It represents a miserable diseased woman, in
tattered and scanty clothing, who sits at the top
of a fiight of stone steps, and, drunk with gin, lets
the chUd she is suckling faU from her arms over the
rail in the area. On the steps below her is an
emaciated being, little more than a skeleton, who
retaUs gin and baUads, but now is in a dying con
dition. This miserable creature is said to have
been painted from nature after one whose cry was
' Buy my baUads, and I 'U give you a glass of gin
for nothing.'
The steps lead to a gin-cellar, over the doorway
of which a large sign like a gin measure and
inscribed ' Gin Royal ' is suspended. Over the
doorway is written :
' Drunk for a Penny,
Dead drunk for two pence.
Clean straw for nothing.'
Mr. Stephens refers to The Old Whig of February
26, 1736, for the statement that a strong-water shop

156 HOGARTH'S LONDON
had lately been opened in Southwark with the
inscription on the sign which Hogarth fifteen years
afterwards used on his print.
The Rev. James Townley's verses are engraved
below the design :
' Gin, cursed fiend ! with fury fraught.
Makes human race a prey :
It enters by a deadly draught.
And steals our life away.
Virtue and Truth, driven to despair,
Its rage compels to fly,
But cherishes, with hellish care.
Theft, murder, perjury.
Damn'd cup ! that on the vital preys,
That liquid fire contains !
Which madness to the heart conveys
And rolls it thro' the veins.'
Gin or ' HoUands ' is said to have been brought
to England by WUliam in. It was cheap and
was sold in the streets, so that the demorahsation
caused by this facUity of purchase was grievous
and widespread. The Middlesex magistrates in
sisted on the necessity for legislation, and the first
Gin Act was passed in 1729. By this Act a new
and additional excise duty of five shiUings per
gaUon was put upon gin and other compounded
spirits, and the retailer was to pay £20 a year for a
licence, hawking about the streets being prohibited.
The Act was quite ineffectual, and led to the invention
of new forms of spirit, one being caUed in derision
' Parliament Brandy.' A satire on gin-drinking

LOW LIFE 157
designed by Heemskirck and engraved by Toms
was published about 1730. The Act was repealed
in 1733 on the plea that, while doing no good, it
checked the sale of barley to the distUlers. This
repeal was disastrous in its effects, and the almost
universal orgy was terrible.
Another attempt to mitigate the evU was made
by Sir Joseph JekyU, Master of the RoUs, and the
second Gin Act was passed in 1736. The prohibition
led to riots, and it was found that the law could not
be put in force.^ As the 29th September 1736, the
day on which the ' act for suppressing Geneva '
was to come into operation approached, the
retailers in gin put their signs in mourning, and
made a parade of mock ceremonies for Madame
Geneva's lying in state and her funeral.
Mr. Stephens quotes from the Grub Street Journal,
the London Daily Post, the Daily Advertiser, and
the Daily Journal particulars of the tumults that
resulted.^ The foUowing are specimens : ' Mother
Gin lay in state yesterday at a distUler's shop in
SwaUow Street near St. James's Church ; but to
prevent the Ul consequences from such a funeral,
a neighbouring justice took the undertaker, his men
and all the mourners into custody.' — ' Yesterday
morning double guard mounted at Kensington ;
at noon the guards at St. James's, the Horse Guards
and WhitehaU were reinforced, and last night about
1 Sidney and Beatrice Webb, History of Liquor Licensing in England
from 1700 to 1830. 1903.
2 British Museum Catalogue of Sati/res, vol. iii. p. 192.

158 HOGARTH'S LONDON
300 life guards and horse-granidier guards paraded
in Covent Garden, in order to suppress any tumult
that might arise at the going down of Gin.' — ' A
party of foot-guards was posted at the house of
Sir Joseph JekyU, Master of the RoUs.'— ' Two
soldiers with their bayonets fixed were planted at
the little door next Chancery Lane in case any
persons should offer to attack the house . . . which
the mob had tumultuously surrounded.' — ' Several
persons were committed, some to prison and some
to hard labour, for publickly and riotously
publishing. No Gin, No King.'
In the year 1736 a large number of pamphlets on
the subject were published, far too numerous to
record here. Two of them may be mentioned —
' The Life of Mother Gin ... by an Impartial
Hand,' and ' The Deposing and Death of Queen Gin
... an Heroic Comi-Tragical Farce written by
Jack Jiuiiper a DistiUer's Apprentice, just turn'd
Poet, as it is acted at the New Theatre in the Hay
market.' The Act of 1736 was repealed in 1743,
largely owing to the action of Lord Sandys. Lord
Hervey made three orations against the repeal.
Sir Charles Hanbury WUhams wrote two poems
to ridicule both Lord Sandys and Lord Hervey.
One of these is printed in The Foundling Hospital
for Wit : ' Deep, deep in S  's blund'ring Head,
The new Gin Project sunk :
0 happy Project ! sage, he cry'd.
Let all the Realm be drunk.'

LOW LIFE 159
On June 25, 1751, the royal assent was given to
another BiU for restricting the sale of spirituous
liquor, and in the foUowing September an engraving,
' The Funeral Procession of Madam Geneva, Sept'
29, 1751,' was published.^ Hogarth's 'Gin Lane'
was not published untU February 1, 1751-2, but a
drawing in Indian ink in the British Museum (' The
Gin Drinkers, or the Gin Fiend ') is supposed to be
a tracing from a scarce print ascribed to Hogarth
and dated 1736. This statement, however, must be
taken on the authority of Mr. Stephens,^
It is interesting to remember that Fielding pub
lished his most valuable Enquiry into the Causes of
the late Increase of Robbers, etc, in January 1751,
shortly before the appearance of ' Gin Lane,' and in
the second section of this book (' Of Drunkenness,
a second consequence of Luxury among the Vulgar '),
although he does not specially refer to Gin Acts,
he strongly argues that nothing but complete
prohibition of poisonous spirits ' wiU extirpate so
stubborn an evil,' He concludes the chapter thus :
' But if the difficulty be reaUy insuperable, or if
there be any pohtical reason against the total
demolition of this poison, so strong as to countervaU
the preservation of the morals, health and beings,
of such numbers of his Majesty's subjects, let us
however in some measure, palliate the evU, and
lessen its immediate iU consequences, by a more
1 British Museum Catalogue of Satires, vol iii. p. 808.
2 Ibid., voL iii. p. 217.

160 HOGARTH'S LONDON
effectual provision against drunkenness than any
we have at present, in which the method of con
viction is too tedious and dilatory. Some little
care on this head is surely necessary ; for though
the increase of thieves, and the destruction of
morality, though the loss of our labourers, our
saUors and our soldiers, shoiUd not be sufficient
reasons, there is one which seems to be unanswerable,
and that is the loss of oxa gin-drinkers ; since
should the drinking this poison be continued in its
present height during the next twenty years, there
wUl, by that time, be very few of the common
people left to drink it.'
Another Act relative to the distUleries was in
contemplation in 1759, and an anonymous letter
to Hogarth was found among his papers in which
he was urged again to take part in the fray :
'December 12, 1759.
' Sm, — When genius is made subservient to pubhc
good, it does honour to the possessor, as it is ex
pressive of gratitude to his Creator by exerting itself
to further the happiness of his creatures. The
poignancy and delicacy of your ridicule has been
productive of more reformation than more elaborate
pieces would have effected. On the apprehension
of opening the distiUery, methinks I hear aU good
men cry Fire ! — it is therefore the duty of every
citizen to try to extinguish it. Rub up then
Gin Lane and Beer Street, that you may have the

LOW LIFE 161
honour and advantage of bringing the two first
engines to the fire ; and work them manfuUy at
each corner of the building, and instead of the paltry
reward of thirty shiUings aUowed by Act of Parha
ment, receive the glorious satisfaction of having
extinguished those fierce flames which threaten a
general conflagration to human nature, by pouring
hquid fire into the veins of the now brave Britons,
whose robust fabrics wiU soon faU in, when these
dreadful flames have consumed the inside timbers
and supporters. — I am. Sir, yours, etc.,
' An Englishman.' ^
There is stUl the companion picture, ' Beer
Street,' to be considered. The sentiment of this is
the popular one of the glorifying our national drink,
which when pure is weU worthy of its great fame,
for porter has been caUed the ' British Burgundy.'
Townley's lines on this print are as follows :
' Beer, happy product of our isle,
Can sinewy strength impart ;
And wearied with fatigue and toil,
Can cheer each manly heart.
Labour and art, upheld by thee,
Successfully advance ;
We quaff the balmy juice with glee,
And water leave to France.
' J. Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 353 (note). This letter or
other suggestions seem to have caused Hogarth to draw attention to his
prints, as The Public Advertiser, December 13, 1759, has the following
announcement : ' By Desire. This day are republished Price Is. each,
Two prints drawn and engraved by Mr. Hogarth call'd Beer Street and
Gin Lane ' (British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 818).
L

162 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Genius of health, thy grateful taste,
Rivals the cup of Jove ;
And warms each English generous breast,
With liberty and love.'
As in Gin Lane the pawnbroker's house is the
handsome building, so in Beer Street it is the only
one falling to decay.
The scene is thus described by Mr. Stephens :
' A street in London, with the steeple of a church
visible over the tops of some of the houses, and near
the middle of the design ; this structure being
decorated with a flag, and formed in a peculiar
manner, was probably intended for the steeple of
St. Martin's in the Fields, Westminster. The day
was an anniversary of the birth o:^ George n.
[October 30], the flag-hoisting being a practice in
the so-caUed " royal parish " of St. Martin's, a
practice familiar to Hogarth as a resident in Leicester
Square.' The sign-painter is said to have been intended for
John Stephen Liotard, a portrait-painter of merit,
but there is little likeness in face, as Liotard grew a
long beard when he traveUed in the Levant and
was in consequence known as ' The Turk,' He hved
at the ' Two YeUow Lamps ' in Golden Square.
Two fishwomen are seated on the pavement in the
front of the picture ; one reads from a broadsheet on
which is printed ' A New BaUad on the Herring
Fishery by Mr. Lockman.' John Lockman, known
as ' The Herring Poet,' was a friend of Hogarth, who

LOW LIFE 163
designed for him the frontispiece to the first volume
of his Travels of Mr. John Gulliver (1731). This
plate is entitled 'GuUiver presented to the Queen
of BabUary.' Lockman was secretary to the British
White Herring Fishery Company.
At the right-hand corner of the engraving is a
porter drinking his beer, who has just set down
his load, a large basket directed ' For Mr. Pastern
the Trunk Maker m PaiUs C*^ Y^,' which is fiUed
with books the artist had a dislike for, such as
HiU on Royal Societies, Turnbul on Ant[ient]
Painting, Lauder on MUton. The mountebank HUl
and the forger Lauder deserved their position. Dr.
George Turnbtdl had been too laudatory of the
Black Masters to please the artist.
Fielding's Causes of the late Increase of Robbers
contains so much information and is so fuU of
valuable suggestions for the correction of the
rampant evUs of Low Life that it may be recom
mended as a useful help to the inteUigent study of
Hogarth's works.

164 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER V
POLITICAL LIFE
Hogarth was in no sense a politician, and aU his
interests in the political life of his time were centred
in the remarkable scenes which were acted in periods
of excitement continuaUy occurring, and the inci
dents which he introduced in his pictures as iUus
trations of the manners of eighteenth-century
men and women. Whatever private opinions he
may have had, he was unable to resist the represen
tation of striking humours even when they were
exhibited by his own friends. He was a friend of
demagogues, as weU as of those whose opinions were
of a diametricaUy opposite character. At no time
in our history were party pohtics so thoroughly
unsatisfactory as they were in the middle of the
eighteenth century. Walpole with his strong hand
had passed away, and parties had divided into
personal cliques. The division of Whigs and Tories
was of little meaning, because the former had become
so triumphant during the reigns of George i. and
George n. that the condition of the Tories was
almost hopeless unless they joined with some of
the discontented Whigs. There were plenty of

POLITICAL LIFE 165
Tories in the coimtry, but they had httle pohtical
interest on account of their possible connection with
Jacobites. Bribery and corruption had eaten into the hearts
of aU parties, and in consequence a man Uke WUliam
Pitt stood out as a name to conjure with because it
stood for political purity.
Hogarth's picture of ' The Pohtician,' who repre
sented one Tibson, a lace dealer in the Strand, read
ing with absorbed attention a copy of the Gazetteer,
a paper which supported Sir Robert Walpole, was
painted about the year 1730. An etching by
J. K. Sherwin from the picture was not published
until 1775, when Mrs. Hogarth issued it.
The painter gave the picture to Theodosius
Forrest, son of one of his companions of the Five
Days' Tour of 1732, It belonged successively to
Peter Coxe, W, Davies, bookseUer, and George
Watson Taylor, At the sale of the latter' s property
in 1832 it was bought by Count Woronzow for
thirty guineas.
The picture represents a man seated in a chair
and wearing a broad-brimmed hat, who has taken a
lighted candle from the candlestick on the table
before him. Holding the candle in his right hand,
he does not notice that the flame had set light to the
projecting brim of his hat.
There is an anecdote of Bishop Bximet, who took
precautions to prevent a similar accident which
Hogarth may have known. The Bishop is said to

166 HOGARTH'S LONDON
have made a hole in the broad brim of his hat and
passed his pipe through it so that he could puff and
write simultaneously,^
The picture of the House of Commons, painted
in 1730 by Hogarth with the help of his father-in-
law. Sir James ThornhiU, is of great interest, giving
us as it does an authentic view of the Old Chamber
of the Lower House of Parliament, with striking
portraits of Sir Robert Walpole and Speaker Onslow,
ThornhiU himself, Sydney Godolphin, the father of
the House, Sir Joseph JekyU and Colonel Onslow,
with Mr, Edward Staples, clerk, and Mr. Aiskew,
clerk-assistant. The picture is in the possession of
the Earl of Onslow. It was engraved by A. Fogg
and 'pubhshed Nov. 1, 1803, by E. Harding, No.
100 PaU MaU.'
The portrait of Simon Eraser, twelfth Lord Lovat
(1746), must be aUuded to in a chapter on Pohtical
Life, as that Jacobite intriguer was mixed up with
many of the troubles which made the supporters of
the Hanoverian dynasty uneasy. He was said to
have united the manners of a wUd Highland chieftain
and general ruffian, with occasionally those of an
educated gentleman. He was very wary, and cared
little for the dangers of others if he were able to
save his own skin. He had to give in at last in spite
of all his cunning, and he was taken prisoner after
CuUoden. The Westminster Journal (June 28, 1746)
contains the following notice of the capture : ' We
' Rett's Flowers of Wit, 1814, vol. i. p. 45.

iS's_it

Uo tk'-HiMJit ¦:.\)oii"'-C}avJ L''h:Jorp„

//Of '¦!¦: (If .'-K''.

"The House of Commons.'' 1730,
Painted by Hogarth and Sir James Thornhill.

POLITICAL LIFE 167
have advice that Lord Lovat was actually taken in
a little Cabbin, dress' d in an old woman's habit
a spining, and three Lords with him ; and that he
was taken by an officer who had received intelligence
of his lodging and habit at a little distance from
where he was found.'
Mr. Stephens describes two engravings of this
incident entitled respectively ' The Beautiful
Simone ' and ' Lord Lovat a spinning,' ^
Lovat was carried in a litter to Fort WiUiam,
and from thence by easy stages to London, When
he reached St, Albans he was attended by Dr,
Webster, a physician of the town, for an alleged
sickness, Webster invited Hogarth to St, Albans
to take a likeness of the prisoner at the White Hart
Inn, It is stated that when, on August 14, Hogarth
was introduced to Lovat the latter was being shaved,
and he rose to welcome the painter, kissing him
in the French manner. Owing to this embrace
Hogarth received some of the soap-suds on his face,
and he did not accept the salute with much satisfac
tion. There is some doubt as to the original sketch from
which the etching was made. There is one at the
National Portrait GaUery which was purchased by
the Trustees in June 1866, and another was, in 1879,
in the possession of Mr, Henry Graves of Pall
MaU, and purchased by him for £31, The original
drawing was said, in the Illustrated London News of
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 601.

168 HOGARTH'S LONDON
AprU 30, 1859, to be then in the possession of Lord
Saltoun, Lovat was not executed until 9th April 1747,
Four smaU prints of Lord Lovat's trial were pub
lished by W, Birch, Hampstead Heath, August 1,
1791, These were from sketches belonging to
Horace Walpole, One of these, in Indian ink and
vermilion, is in the Print Room of the British
Museum, having been purchased in August 1842
(Dobson). A mezzotint entitled ' Lovat's Ghost on
Pilgrimage ' was published on June 15, 1747, but it
is doubtful as a work of Hogarth. Samuel Ireland
affirmed that this was given to him by Dr. J. Webster,
who had it from Hogarth with an assurance that it
was his own design.^
' The Stage Coach, or Country Inn Yard ' (1747)
must be mentioned here on account of its connection
with the general parliamentary election of that year,
and its interest as the precursor of the famous series
of the ' Election ' (1754). It can also be compared
with the first scene of the tragedy of the ' Harlot's
Progress ' (1731-2), which takes place in a London
inn yard. The engraving of the inn yard shows,
in the foreground, the coach ready to start on its
journey, with the traveUers seated and grouped
around. The fat woman entering requires to be
pushed in order to pass through the door. The
two men on the roof look as if they might easily roU
off on the occurrence of a sudden jolt. They are
* British Museum Catalogue of Satires, voL iii. p. 636.

POLITICAL LIFE 169
an Enghsh saUor and a French lackey, not very
congenial companions. In the 'basket' is an old
woman smoking a pipe and completing the picture
of the preparations for what is likely to be a very
uncomfortable journey, such as we read of in the real
istic novels of the time. The fat hostess in the bow
window of the bar of the house, which projects into
the yard, adds to the general uproar by vociferating
and vigorously ringing a beU. The sailor's bundle
is labelled '  of the Centurion.' This was the
name of the ship in which the famous Anson sailed
from Portsmouth on September 18, 1740, with four
other vessels of war, and gained many successes
in his attacks upon the Spaniards. He was made
Rear- Admiral of the Blue and took command of a
fleet which left Plymouth AprU 9, 1747, and included
the Centurion, a fifty-gun ship with three hundred
men on board, then under the command of Captain
Denis. In the action off Cape Finisterre on May 3
the Centurion began the battle, but in the course of
the fight its maintopmast was shot away. Captain
Denis dropped out of the fight for a time in order to
refit, and having done so returned to action and took
part in the capture of the enemy's vessels. He
brought news of the victory to England, and in
consequence the Admiral was raised to the peerage
as Baron Anson, ^
Commander Charles Robinson, R,N., in his inter
esting volume on The British Tar in Fact and Fiction,
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 669.

170 HOGARTH'S LONDON
1909, writes respecting this : ' The best example of
the saUor of his period to be found in Hogarth's
moral dramas in pictorial form is the figiu-e seen on
the top of a coach in " The Stage Coach in a Country
Inn Yard," This sailor has just returned to England
in the Centurion. He has been round the world
with Anson, and is on his way home,'
At the back of the engraving (which was published
on June 26) is seen a procession of men armed with
sticks, some of the men carry a large effigy of a
baby holding in one hand a chUd's rattle and in the
other a hornbook, A flag is carried behind the
chair in which the figure sits and is inscribed ' No
Old Baby,' This refers to the cry used by the
opponents of the Hon, John Child Tylney, Viscoimt
Castlemaine, and afterwards Earl Tylney, who stood
as candidate for the county of Essex as the opponent
of Sir Robert Abdy and Mr, Bramstone, At the
election a man was placed on a bulk with an infant
in his arms and exclaimed as he whipped it, ' What,
you little child, must you be a member ? ' Child
Tylney was at this time only twenty years of age.
There are three states of the plate : (1) in which the
flag afterwards occupied by ' No Old Baby ' has no
inscription ; (2) in which those words appear ; (3) in
which they have been obliterated. On the waU of the
house is the sign, a picture of an angel at fuU length,
under which is inscribed ' The Old Angle In. Tom
Bates from Lundun.' The gaUeries in the inn yard
are fiUed with spectators.

POLITICAL LIFE 171
Before dealing somewhat fuUy with the splendid
series of four pictures of ' The Election ' (1754), a
slight reference must be made to the election of
1734, which was largely fought on the opposition
party's cry of ' No Excise,' An etching was
published in this year entitled ' Sir Robert Fagg
bribing a Woman,' which has been attributed to
Hogarth, It shows an old man sitting on horseback
holding a purse in one hand offering a piece to a
young woman, who stands at his horse's head with
a basket of eggs on her arm and laughs at him,
Fagg was a weU-known man in his day and interested
in horse-racing. He was member for Steyning,
Sussex, and is stated to be one of the audience in
Hogarth's picture of the ' Beggar's Opera,' There
is a reference to him in Bramston' s ' Art of Politicks' :
' Leave you of mighty interest to brag,
And poll two voices like Sir Robert Fagg.'
The baronet died on September 14, 1740,
In 1734 was also published a print in three divisions
entitled ' The Humours of a Country Election,'
and John Nichols hints that Hogarth may have
borrowed the idea of iUustrating the election of
1754 from this outcome of the election of 1734,
Mr, Stephens gives a fuU account of the old print,
which certainly contains some points of resemblance
in idea, if not in expression,^
Hogarth's four pictures are of the greatest interest
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 23.

172 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and illustrate the manners of the time in a very
remarkable degree. They are fine examples of the
artist's best manner of painting, and are to be seen
in an exceUent state of preservation at Sir John
Soane's Museum in Lincoln's Inn Fields. The
incidents of all the scenes are in low comedy, but
Hogarth has raised his treatment of these incidents
with such distinction that they become instances
of high comedy, with perhaps the exception of the
first picture. In passing, it may be remarked that
the pictures contain beauties of which the engravings
give but little idea.
Garrick with great judgment bought the pictures
for the ridiculously smaU price of two hundred
guineas. At Mrs. Garrick' s sale in 1823, Soane
bought them for £1732, 10s.
In justice to Garrick it is necessary to give the
particulars of the purchase. Mr. Dobson, quoting
from Gait's Life and Works of West, 1820, pt. ii, 17,
gives an account of the disposal of the pictures.
Hogarth arranged that they should be raffled for,
with two hundred chances at two guineas the stake.
Among a few subscribers, Garrick was the only one
who appeared. Much mortified, Hogarth insisted
that Garrick ' should go through the formality of
throwing the dice,' but for himself only. The
actor for some time opposed the irritated artist,
but at last consented. On returning home he
despatched a note to Hogarth stating that he could
not persuade himself to remove works so valuable

POLITICAL LIFE 173
and admired without acquitting his conscience of
an obligation to the painter, and to his own good
fortune in obtaining them, and knowing the humour
of the person he addressed, and that if he sent a
cheque for the money it would in aU probabUity
be returned, he informed Hogarth that he had
placed to his credit at his banker's two hundred
guineas, which would remain there at his disposal or
that of his heirs, if it were not accepted by himseK.^
Garrick was very proud of these pictures and
preserved them with care. When he was in Italy
with his wife, he wrote to his man conjuring him to
take care of them, and to keep them out of the
sun.* The parliamentary election foUowing the dis
solution of April 8, 1754, was a noteworthy one.
The Jews Naturalisation BiU, passed in June 1753,
greatly increased the unpopularity of Henry
Pelham, and after his death, in order that his
successors might the better be able to face the
election, the Act was repealed. There were, how
ever, many other cries against the administration,
and its members fought at a great disadvantage,
while the opposition — the True Blue Interest — ¦
were more than ever jubilant and hopeful of success.
The election for Oxfordshire was marked by a
more animated conflict than what took place else
where. Some of the incidents in that contest
« Dobson's William Hogarth, 1907, p. 120.
* J. Knight's David Garrick, 1894, p. 203.

174 HOGARTH'S LONDON
survive in Hogarth's pictures. Although London
is not the scene of these election incidents they are
true to the manners of the eighteenth century both
in country and town, so that we may be aUowed
to consider the pictures as representing what also
occurred in London,
The engraving of these elaborate pictures occupied
a considerable time, Plate 1, dedicated to the
Right Hon, Henry Fox, was published on February
24, 1755 ; Plate 2, to Sir Charles Hanbury WUliams,
on February 20, 1757 ; Plate 3, to Sh Edward
Walpole, on February 20, 1758 ; and Plate 4, to Su-
George Hay, Judge of the Prerogative Court and
the High Court of Admiralty, on January 1, 1758-9,
Hay was an intimate friend of Hogarth, and pos
sessed several of his paintings. He was a highly
esteemed judge, praised for his enhghtened judg
ment by Thurlow, The first plate was engraved
entirely by Hogarth, the second entirely by C.
Grignion, the third by Hogarth and Le Cave, and
the fourth by Hogarth and F, Aviline.
There is a folio volume, lettered 'Subscribers'
names for Four Prints of Election, March 19, 1754,'
in the British Museum (Add, MSS, 22,394), The
list is headed by the names of H.R.H. the Prince
of Wales and H.R.H. the Princess Dowager of
Wales. We can now deal more particularly with
the incidents of the different pictures.
Plate 1, ' An Election Entertainment,' discovers
a large room in a country inn in which members

POLITICAL LIFE 175
of one of the political parties ^ are holding a lively
debauch not unlike in general effect that represented
in the ' Midnight Modern Conversation ' (1733).
One of the candidates, a young man, sits at the head
of the table (Richard Slim), and on his left is an
elderly man, his feUow candidate (Sir Commodity
Taxem). A flag on which is inscribed ' Liberty and
Loyalty,' is fixed at the back of the latter's chair.
The younger candidate was said to be taken from
Thomas Potter, the very clever but worthless son
of Archbishop Potter, although this has been denied
by others, probably with truth. Hogarth told
George Steevens that there was only one portrait
in the picture ; this was Sir John ParneU, nephew of
the poet Thomas ParneU, who desired to be put
in because he was so generaUy known that the
introduction of his face would be of service to the
artist in the sale of prints in Dublin. He is seen
diverting the company by showing a face drawn
with a burnt cork upon the back of his hand, while
he sings the song entitled ' An old woman clothed
in grey.' Mr. Dobson refers to Angelo' s Reminis
cences (1830, ii. 425) to show that this was the way
in which the song was usually sung.
' It shows how impartial Hogarth is in his satire on the humours of the
election that there is a difference of opinion among authorities as to which
party is represented in this picture. John Ireland says that the company
consists of the friends of the Court party, while Dr. Trusler expresses no
doubt that ' the present are tories under false pretences.' The ' Poetical
Description' said to be written under 'Mr. Hogarth's sanction and in
spection ' contains no hint either way. The painter was content to direct
impartial attention to the humours of both parties.

176 HOGARTH'S LONDON
John Nichols refers to a pamplilet in which another
of the characters is identified.^ This is the portly
clergyman sitting at the table who, having taken
off his wig with one hand, is rubbing his bald head
with the other. The writer of the pamphlet says
this was the Rev. Dr. Cosserat, and he deals not
over tenderly with ' the Doctor represented sitting
among the freeholders and zealously eating and
drinking for the sake of the New Interest.'
The incidents in this riotous scene are so numerous
and appeal so vividly to the eye that it is only
necessary to refer to a few of them. Stones and
brickbats are supposed to be thrown in at the open
window by the opponents outside ; one of these stones
strikes the lawyer, comiting up the votes, on the
forehead so that he faUs back over his chair, but the
compliment is vigorously returned by those inside.
In the tobacco tray is a paper of Kirton's best, and
a slip from the Act against bribery and corruption
has been torn to hght pipes with. Kirton was a
tobacconist who kept a shop near St. Dunstan's
Church, Fleet Street, and impaired his circumstances
as weU as ruined his constitution by wasting his
time on the Oxfordshire election of 1754. On the
butcher with pro patria on his cap and his wounded
companion in the front of the picture, John Ireland
found among his papers the foUowing note by
* 'The Last Blow, or an unanswerable Vindication of the Society of
Exeter College, in reply to the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Kmg, and the Writers
of the London Evening Post, 1755,' 4to, p. 21.

POLITICAL LIFE 177
Hogarth : ' These two patriots, who, let what party
wUl prevaU, can be no gainers, yet spend their time,
which is their fortune, for what they suppose right,
and for a glass of gin lose their blood, and sometimes
their hves, in support of the cause, are, as far as I
can see, entitled to an equal portion of fame with
many of the emblazoned heroes of ancient Rome :
but such is the effect of prejudice, that though the
picture of an antique wrestler is admired as a grand
character, we necessarily annex an idea of vulgarity
to the portrait of a modern boxer. An old black
smith in his tattered garb is a coarse and low being ;
strip him naked, tie his leathern apron round his
loins, chisel out his figure in freestone or marble,
precisely as it appears, he becomes elevated, — and
may pass for a phUosopher, or a Deity,' ^
The one of these two men who is having gin
poured upon his head is said to have been painted
from Teague Carter of Oxford, a fighting man or
' bruiser.' Another weU-known character was the
blind violinist who represents a woman caUed
' Fiddling Nan,' who frequented the neighbourhood
of Oxford.
The elector's arms on the wall, ' A chevron, sable
between three guineas, or,' with the crest of a gaping
mouth and motto ' Speak and Have,' are quite ap
propriate to the evident sentiments of most of those
present at this entertainment. The various election
cries are curious, like the inscription on the flag
^ Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 361.
M

178 HOGARTH'S LONDON
thrown down on the floor, ' Give us our eleven days '
— a shocking appeal to the ignorance of the populace
against the valuable Act passed 1752 for the altera
tion of the Style in accordance with the Gregorian
Calendar.
' When the country folk iirst heard of this Act,
That old father Style was condemned to be rack'd.
And robb'd of his time, which appears to be fact.
Which nobody can deny ;
It puzzl'd their brains, their senses perplex'd.
And all the old ladies were very much vex'd,
Not dreaming that Levites would alter our text ;
Which nobody can deny.'
Outside the window is seen a cavalcade in the
street foUowing an effigy of the Duke of Newcastle,
on the breast of which is inscribed ' No Jews.' The
flags have these mottoes — ' Liberty and Property
and No Excise,' ' Marry and Multiply in spite of
the Devil and the [Court],' aUuding to the Marriage
Act of 1753.
Plate 2. — Canvassing for Votes.
In the viUage street of Guzzledown are seen in the
foreground two places of entertainment : on the left
hand an inn of some importance with the sign of the
Royal Oak, and on the right hand the Porto BeUo
alehouse. At a table in front of the latter house
the village cobbler and the barber are engaged in a
discussion as to the taking of PortobeUo by Admiral
Vernon in the year 1739 with six ships only. The
barber is distinguished by the implements of his
trade on the ground, and the cobbler by a pair of

Thu Ei.KcnoN. No. 2. (Canvassing fok Votes). 1755.

POLITICAL LIFE 179
shoes on the table by his side. The barber, to iUus-
trate his argument, has broken from the stem of his
pipe six pieces which he has arranged crescent- wise on
the table, and points to this arrangement with the
stump of his pipe. The cobbler appears to have
won the bet, as he draws the stakes to himself.
Over the doorway is a signboard with a painting of
ships at sea and the name [Por]tobeUo. On the
barber's pot of beer is inscribed the o^vner's name,
' John HiU at the Porto BeUo.' Admiral Vernon
became so popular owing to his great victory that his
head was painted on a large number of the signposts
of the country, and at the next general election in
1741 was elected for three different constituencies.
In front of the bow window of the bar of the Royal
Oak is seen the candidate talking to two ladies in
the balcony. A kneeling porter offers him a letter
addressed to Tim Partitool, Esq.
Part of the sign of the inn is obscured by a large
show cloth, at the foot of which is ' Punch, Candidate
for Guzzledo-vm.' On the cloth two subjects are
painted, which are divided horizontaUy near the
middle. On the upper picture the Horse Guards
and the Old Treasury building are represented.
The lower picture displays the destiny of the money
taken from the Treasury; in the upper picture
Punch is seen trundling a wheelbarrow with one
hand, while with the other he ladles out coins. In
the barrow are two bags of money, respectively
labeUed 9000 and 7000, Two men with hats in

180 HOGARTH'S LONDON
their hands eagerly meet Pimch and catch the coin
he scatters. An old hunchbacked woman holds out
her hand for a bribe. These pictures were intended
to advertise the puppet show to be seen later in the
inn yard. On one of the boxes set down by the
porter previously mentioned is inscribed ' Piuich's
Theatre, Royal Oak Yard.'
In describing the upper picture of the show cloth
the commentators seem to have gone too far in
their guesses as to Hogarth's meaning. J. Nichols
writes : ' The height of The Treasury is contrasted
with the squat solidity of The Horse Guards, where
the arch is so low, that the State Coachman cannot
pass through it with his head on ; and the turret on
the top is so drawn as to resemble a beer-barrel.
Ware the architect very gravely remarked, on this
occasion, that the chief defect worUd have been
sufficiently pointed out by making the coachman
only stoop. He was hurt by Hogarth's stroke of
satire.' John Ireland repeats this story, but Dr.
Trusler, who wrote earlier, says nothing about Ware
or the contrast between the Horse Guards and the
Treasury. Both these buildings were reaUy designed
by Hogarth's enemy Kent. The Horse Guards was
buUt in 1751-53 by John Vardy, after a design
furnished by WUliam Kent. The Old Treasury, a
stone building stiU fronting the Horse Guards
Parade, was erected in 1733 from Kent's design for a
much more extensive front. The explanation of the
intrusion of Isaac Ware's name by Nichols and

POLITICAL LIFE 181
Ireland under the impression that he was the
architect of the Horse Guards is to be found in the
life of Ware in the Dictionary of National Biography.
' In 1751-2 and again in 1757-8 he was employed as
draughtsman at a salary of £100 on the building of
the Horse Guards from Kent's designs.'
There is stUl to be mentioned the Crown Inn,
which is inscribed ' The Excise Office.' Trusler notes
that in country places the excise office was generaUy
held at pubhc-houses. A crowd of men are assembled
before this buUding with the intention of sacking it.
Stones are thrown at the windows, and the landlord
fires a blunderbuss which wounds one of the crowd.
Another man, determined to destroy the sign of the
Crown, has bestridden the beam which supports it,
and saws the beam, forgetting that he must faU
with it. At the back of the picture there is a rising
ground with trees and fields, and on the ridge is a
viUage with a church.
We leave for the last a notice of the group of three
men (a countryman between the hosts of the rival
inns who both put coins into his hands) in the centre
of the picture, which, without demanding the special
attention of the spectator, forms the very pivot of
the scene and gives a harmony to the whole, which
presents a perfect marvel of pictorial composition.
It has been said that the idea of Reynolds's picture
of ' Garrick between Tragedy and Comedy ' was
taken from this elegant group, but this seems to be a
rather far-fetched suggestion. John Ireland writes :

182 HOGARTH'S LONDON
' I am tasteless enough to prefer this to " Garrick
between Tragedy and Comedy." From Hogarth
the hint was indisputably taken, but exquisite as is
the face of Thalia (and it is perhaps not to be par
alleled in any other picture) the countenance of the
actor from the contention of two passions has
assumed a kind of idiotic stare of which our honest
farmer has not an iota. In the true spirit of Falstaff
he says, or seems to say : " D' ye think I do not
know ye ? Ha ! ha ! ha ! he ! he ! he ! " "
The remarkable circumstance about this is that
the charm of this group is entirely due to the artist's
innate conception of beauty as the persons them
selves, although true to life, are commonplace, with
no pretence to charm.
Plate 3. — Polling at the Hustings.
We have here the election poUing-booth set up
in a meadow near the bank of a river which is crossed
by a substantial bridge. The platform of the booth
is approached by a fiight of wooden steps. In the
front is a voter, imbecUe in body and mind. A man
in a laced cocked hat is eagerly whispering into the
voter's ear. It wiU be seen that on one of the man's
legs there is a manacle. In his pocket is seen
' The 6th Letter to the [People of England],' which
proves that the man was the notorious Dr. Shebbeare,
who was condemned by Lord Mansfield to the piUory
for this treasonable letter. It was reported that he
' Hogarth Illustrated, vol. ii. p. 113.

POLITICAL LIFE 183
frequently said in the public coffee-house that he
would have a piUory or a pension. He had both,
for Lord Bute gave him the latter. The reserve
voters, consisting of the blind and the halt, are
being brought to the booth, and on the top of the
steps a dying man wrapped in a blanket is carried
by two porters. None of these horrors appear to be
exaggerated, for any dangers would be risked to
get a vote, John Ireland relates that Dr, Barrowby
persuaded a dying man that, being much better, he
might venture with him in his chariot to the hustings
in Covent Garden, to poU for Sir George Vandeput,
The unhappy voter took his physician's advice, and
in less than an hour after his return, expired. In
the midst of aU these realistic incidents a bit of
aUegory seems somewhat out of place — in the
right corner of the picture Britannia's state coach
is seen in a dangerous condition, while the coachman
dropping his reins plays cards with the footman on
the box. Britannia's attempts to attract their
attention by puUing the check-string are quite
unheeded. Plate 4. — Chairing the Members,
We have here a street in a country town where the
road passes between a brook and the wall of a church.
At the back of the picture is a buUding with a belfry
on the roof, the pediment of which contains the
royal arms. On the right are two houses ; the one at
the back apparently has been wrecked by the mob ;

184 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the front one is fuU of life ; it is supposed to be the
committee room of the defeated candidate at his
lawyer's house. Many persons are at the window,
and three cooks bearing dishes are seen entering the
door. A blind and bearded fiddler leads the mob, fol
lowed by a bear carrying a monkey with a carbine
over its shoulder which is accidentaUy discharged,
to the imminent danger of the chimney-sweeps on
the churchyard waU. This is said to aUude to an
incident which actuaUy occurred at the Oxfordshire
election of 1754. A mob attempted to throw a post-
chaise into the river, when Captain T  , who was
in the carriage, shot a chimney-sweeper who was a
ringleader in the assault, and his foUowers dispersed.
The captain was tried and acquitted. Now comes
the new member borne aloft on a chair by four
strong men. A countryman in charge of a sow and
her litter strikes the head of one of the bearers at
his back with his flail. The bearer staggers and the
member, terrified and in danger of faUing, clutches
the arms of the chair as his hat flies from his head.
A young lady on the waU of the churchyard, one of
the spectators of the procession, faints at the sudden
ness of the accident. A crowd foUows the first
member, amongst which is the second member,
whose shadow only is seen on the side of the building
at the back.
The goose hovering over the chaired member is
said to be intended as a parody of the eagle above

POLITICAL LIFE 185
the laurelled helmet of Alexander in Le Brun's
picture of the ' Battle of the Granicus.' The little
fat member previously dubbed Punch is generally
supposed to be a vivid representation of the intrigu
ing manager of the Leicester House party — Bubb
Dodington (afterwards Lord Melcombe), although
he does not seem to have had anything to do with
this election. This is another instance of the
generality of Hogarth's satire, which was never
aUowed to be completely personal. Dodington's
figure was too grotesque to be passed by, and his
head was used as the first in the second row of
the ' Five Orders of Periwigs.' Hogarth does not
appear to have had any prejudice against the man
himself — in fact, he may have felt some interest in
him on account of his connection with Sir James
ThornhUl. George Bubb Dodington (1691-1762)
spent £140,000 in completing a magnificent mansion
begun by his uncle, George Dodington, at Eastbury
in Dorsetshire, of which Vanbrugh was architect.
ThornhiU painted a ceUing there in 1719, and subse
quently represented Weymouth in Parliament as
Dodington's nominee. Dodington's name does not
stand high in political history ; he has been taken as
the representative jobber of his day, partly owing
to the fuU particulars of corruption given in his
Diary. There is therefore aU the more reason why
any incident in his career that does him credit should
be recorded. He showed great courage when, on
the 22nd of February, 1757, he made a strong speech

186 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in the House of Commons against the execution
(or rather judicial murder) of Admiral Byng. The
milestone at the extreme right of the picture is
inscribed ' xix miles from London ' — another attempt
to confuse the locality of the Election,
The inscription on the sun-dial fixed on the church
contains an atrocious pun. There are two words,
' We must,' and ' die aU ' (dial) is inferred.
Special reference is made in the second chapter of
this book to the deadly quarrel between Hogarth
and Wilkes near the end of the artist's life, but its
political character must be more fuUy described in
the present chapter,
Hogarth was the aggressor by reason of his
publication of ' The Times, Plate 1,' which was a
satire strongly in favour of Lord Bute and against
Pitt, Temple and Wilkes, One cannot be sur
prised at Wilkes's anger, but the way he exhibited
this anger was quite inexcusable, and is difficult
to understand, as Wilkes was naturaUy a placable
man. These are some of the vitriolic words in No.
17 of the North Briton published on Saturday,
September 25, 1762, which is entirely devoted to
Hogarth : ' We aU titter the instant he takes up a
pen, but we tremble when we see the pencU in his
hand.' ' I need only make my appeal to any one of
his historical or portrait pieces which are now con
sidered as almost beneath criticism.' Then foUows
a ridiculous and unkind condemnation of ' Sigis
munda.' ' He never caught a single idea of beauty,

POLITICAL LIFE 187
grace or elegance, but on the other hand he never
missed the least flaw in almost any production of
nature or of art. This is his true character. He
has succeeded very happily in the way of humour,
and has miscarried in every other attempt. This
has arose in some measure from his head, but much
more from his heart. After "Marriage a la Mode,"
the public wished for a series of prints of a happy
marriage. Hogarth made the attempt, but the
rancour and malevolence of his mind made him
very soon turn with envy and disgust from objects
of so pleasing contemplation, to dweU and feast a
bad heart on others of a hateful cast, which he pur
sued, for he found them congenial, with the most
unabating zeal and unrelenting gaU.'
Wilkes must have been ashamed of what he had
written, as Hogarth said he was, and he wrote no
more abuse. In his preliminary note for a reprint
of the ' Epistle to WiUiam Hogarth ' in the coUected
edition of ChurchUl's Poems, he writes with a
certain amenity, although he does not express
regret for what ChurchiU wrote : ' Mr. Hogarth
had for several years lived on terms of friendship
if not intimacy with Mr. Wilkes. ... A friend wrote
to him, that Mr. Hogarth intended soon to publish
a political print of the Times, in which Mr. Pitt,
Lord Temple, Mr. ChurchiU and himself were held
out to the public as objects of ridicule. Mr. Wilkes
on this notice remonstrated by two of their common
friends to Mr. Hogarth that such a proceeding

188 HOGARTH'S LONDON
would not only be unfriendly in the highest degree,
but extremely injudicious ; for such a pencil ought
to be universal and moral, to speak to aU ages and
aU nations, not to be dipped in the dirt of the
faction of a day, of an insignificant part of the
country, when it might command the admiration
of the whole. An answer was sent, that neither
Mr. WUkes nor Mr. ChurchiU was attacked in the
Times, though Lord Temple and Mr. Pitt were, and
that the print would soon appear. A second
message soon after told Mr. Hogarth that Mr.
Wilkes would never think it worth his whUe to take
notice of any reflections on himself ; but when his
friends were attacked he found himseK wounded
in the most sensible part, and would as weU as he
could revenge their cause ; adding that if he thought
the North Briton would insert what he should send,
he would make an appeal to the pubhc on the very
Saturday foUowing the publication of the print.'
ChurchUl's poem is fuU of unjust and Ul-bred
abuse. The earlier part is poor stuff tiU we come
to line 309, where the direct attack upon Hogarth
commences, and then it becomes strong. Here is
a bitter line :
' He had desert, and Hogarth was his foe.'
The vituperation now is in f uU swing :
' When Wilkes, our countryman, or common friend.
Arose his king, his country to defend :
What could induce thee, at a time and place.
Where manly foes had blush'd to shew their face.

POLITICAL LIFE 189
To make that efifort which must damn thy name
And sink thee deep, deep in thy grave with shame ?
Did virtue move thee 1 No, 'twas pride, rank pride,
And if thou hadst not done it, thou hadst died.'
Again :
' Oft have I known thee, Hogarth, weak and vain.
Thyself the idol of thy awkward strain,
Through the dull measure of a summer's day.
In phrase most vile, prate long, long hours away.
Whilst friends with friends all gaping sit, and gaze
To hear a Hogarth babble Hogarth's praise.
But if athwart thee interruption came
And mention'd with respect some ancient's name.
Some ancient's name who in the days of yore.
The crown of art with greatest honour wore.
How have I seen thy coward cheek turn pale,
And black confusion seize thy mangled tale !
How hath thy jealousy to madness grown.
And deemed his praise injurious to thy own }
Then without mercy did thy wrath make way
And arts and artists all became thy prey.'
ChurchUl returned to his abuse in his last poem.
Independence (published late in September 1764),
where he parries the attack in Hogarth's caricature
of him as the Bruiser and, accepting the figure of a
Bear, draws a spirited description of himself ending
thus : ' A subject met with only now and then.
Much fitter for the pencil than the pen ;
Hogarth would draw him (Envy must allow)
E'en to the life, was Hogarth living now.'
In spite of ChurchiU taking the painter's death for
granted, he did not die tUl four weeks later, and the
poet only survived him nine days. It is very
distressing that these unfortunate circumstances

190 HOGARTH'S LONDON
should have arisen from the publication of a print
which has no particular merit and very little interest.
' The Times, Plate I. Designed & Engraved
by W. Hogarth. Published as the Act directs
Sept. 7, 1762,'
This engraving represents a street in London,
most of the houses on one side of which are in flames,
A house on the other side called the Temple Coffee-
House (in aUusion to Earl Temple) is occupied by
firemen, who direct water from syringes, at a fireman
who is aiming at the burning globe on one of the
buildings. In the middle of the space in the fore
ground is the fire-engine of the Union Fire Office
(distinguished by its emblem of the double hand-in-
hand), worked by one of their firemen. The
figure of Pitt on stilts with a pair of beUows in his
hand is seen blowing up the flame in opposition to
the fireman's attempt to extinguish it. Hanging from
his body is a large round object inscribed £3000
per annum. This is most probably intended for a
miUstone with a hole in the middle through which
is drawn a rope that passes over Pitt's neck,^
Nichols caUs this a Cheshire cheese, and says
that it refers to what Pitt said in Parliament — ' that
he would rather live on a Cheshire cheese and a
shoulder of mutton than submit to the enemies of
Great Britain,' John Ireland justly observes that,
' In the two first states of the print Pitt was considered as a tyrant and
made to represent Henry viii., but in the third state (the published
plate) the figure of Henry viii. was altered to a direct portrait of Mr. Pitt.
(Stephens, British Museum Catalogue, vol. iv. p. 191.)

"The Times. Plate i." 1762. (Third state.)

POLITICAL LIFE 191
as he never saw a cheese with a hole bored through
the middle, he ventures to pronounce it a miUstone,
which, by the way, the doggerel writer quoted by
Nichols also does.
The Highlander (Lord Bute) who helps to supply
water in buckets from the spring to the fire is driven
into by a man with a wheelbarrow loaded with
waste paper described as Monitors and North Britons.
These are to help increase the fire, and the man is
trying to destroy the waterpipe with his wheel
barrow. The man is said to be intended for the
Duke of Newcastle, One of the signs to the left of
the picture is the Newcastle Arms ; this is to be
superseded by the sign of the Patriot's Arms dated
1762, which is being hoisted up a ladder. The
arms consist of four clenched fists in direct
opposition to each other. These are introduced
here in contrast with the double hand-in-hand of
the Union Office. John Ireland notes that Hogarth
seems to have had a strong antipathy to the politics
of this year. In later impressions of Plate 8 of the
' Rake's Progress ' wiU be found a halfpenny with
the same date, ' in which Britannia is represented in
the character of a maniac, with disheveUed hair.'
As the year is speciaUy distinguished on the
Patriot's Arms, so the month of August is marked
by the introduction of the treasure wagon marked
Hermione. This treasure contained in twenty
wao-ons passed through the streets of London in its
way to the Tower on the 12th of that month. It

192 HOGARTH'S LONDON
was seen entering St. James's Street by the King
and his Court from the windows of St. James's
Palace, a large company being present, as George
Prince of Wales was born on that day.
The Hermione, a Spanish register ship, which left
Lima on the 6th January bound for Cadiz, was taken
on the 21st May off Cape St. Vincent by three English
frigates and carried into Gibraltar. The introduc
tion of this treasure of immense value into the picture
is a heavy asset for Pitt's party against aU that is
figured against it. There are many more points
that might be added to this description, for the
incidents included are innumerable.
The two figures in the garret of the Temple Coffee-
House were intended to represent Hogarth's former
friends and present enemies, WUkes and ChurchUl.
Ireland says that previous to pubhcation the faces
were altered and adds : ' If Hogarth must be so
unmercifuUy abused for what he inserted, he is
entitled to some credit for what he erased. I hope
this blot in his original design wiU not be considered
as an additional blot on his escutcheon.' In
considering this plate of ' The Times,' which presents
so many points open to severe criticism, one cannot
but feel astonishment that two such men as WUkes
and ChurchiU should so thoroughly have mis
managed their attack upon Hogarth. They neither
touch the question at issue nor attempt to show
where he is wrong. Instead of this, they merely
abuse, and abuse in a particxUarly truculent and

POLITICAL LIFE 193
objectionable manner, which must have disgusted
any respectable person who read their prose and verse.
They exaggerate some of his faults, but the greater
portion of their words are not only untrue but the
exact opposite of the truth. When ChurchiU saw
the portraits of himself and Wilkes he most certainly
must have known how untrue were these words :
' Thy feeble age ! in which, as in a glass.
We see how men to dissolution pass.
Thou wretched being, whom, on reason's plan
So changed, so lost, I cannot call a man.
What could persuade thee, at this time of life.
To launch afresh into the sea of strife ?
Better for thee scarce crawling on the earth.
Almost as much a child as at thy birth.
To have resign'd in peace thy parting breath.
And sunk unnoticed in the arms of Death.'
Hogarth's triumphant answers to WUkes and
ChurchiU were his portraits of them, which show
the painter at his best in all his original vigour and
versatihty. The portrait of ' John Wilkes, Esq.,
drawn from the Life, and Etch'd in Aquafortis by
WiU"" Hogarth,' was pubhshed on May 16, 1763.
It can scarcely be considered as a caricature, and
WUkes himself acknowledged that he was daily
becoming more like it. The etching was very
rapidly made, for Hogarth did not draw the portrait
untU May 6th, when WUkes was brought before
Lord Chief-Justice Pratt (afterwards Lord Camden)
at Westminster. ChurchiU was very indignant at
the artist sktUking behind a screen, as he expressed it,
N

194 HOGARTH'S LONDON
' The Bruiser, C, ChurchiU (once the Rev^ !)
in the character of a Russian Hercules, regaling
himseK after having kill'd the Monster Caricatura
that so sorely call'd his Virtuous friend, the Heaven
born Wilkes,' was published on August 1. For this
caricature Hogarth took the copper-plate on which
was engraved (1749) his own portrait from the picture
now in the National GaUery, and erasing nearly aU
the work, leaving the dog and part of the curtain
and palette, he drew the poet as a bear with a staff
marked N,B, for North Briton, and covered with
knots inscribed Lye 1, 2, 3, etc. In the fourth
state of the plate a framed picture representing
a tomb simUar to that of Newton in Westminster
Abbey, with Pitt reclining in place of Newton,
concealed part of the palette.
The production of these plates was an act of
revenge, and instances of revenge are not pleasant
to contemplate, but it certainly was just. The two
men made their mark in the history of the eighteenth
century and are not likely to be forgotten, but it
may truly be said that they wiU be remembered
more owing to Hogarth's caricatures than by their
own writings. Sandby renewed his attacks upon
Hogarth, and other caricaturists of less abUity
made fun of ' The Times ' and its designer, but it is
scarcely worth while to deal with these here because
their very existence was lost sight of by Hogarth in
his indignation against the two writers.
Soon after ' The Times, Plate 1 ' was published

POLITICAL LIFE 195
' The Times, Plate 2 ' was prepared, probably in the
same year 1762, but the sky and some parts of the
plate were never finished. It is not easy to under
stand the intended object of the design. The
general idea seems to be to represent a state of peace
as Plate 1 showed a state of tumult and disorder.
Mr. Stephens describes the plate fuUy and writes,
' It is certain that whatever might have been the
direction of the satire in " The Times, Plate 1," it
was opposed in more than one direction by the sequel
to that design.' ^ Hogarth was wisely dissuaded by
his friends from pubhshing the print, and Mrs.
Hogarth, knowing the reasons urged to her husband,
adhered to the same resolution. At her death only
one impression had been taken, and that had been
sold to Lord Exeter for ten guineas, AU the property
was left to Mrs, Lewis, Hogarth's cousin, and she
sold the plate to Alderman BoydeU, who struck off
prints from it in 1790 : ' Designed & engraved by
W, Hogarth. Published May 29, 1790, by J. & J.
BoydeU, Cheapside, & at the Shakespeare Gallery,
PaU MaU, London.'
John Ireland writes of Mrs. Hogarth's decision:
' In withholding this print from the public she acted
prudently, in attempting to describe it, I may be
thought to act otherwise.' In a large open space
among buUdings, the centre of which is a platform
smrounded by a trench, the sides of which are
supported by a brick wall, is a statue of George iii.
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iv. p. 197.

196 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in his coronation robes. The base of the statue is
inscribed A. Ramsay del*, and as the plummet may
be taken as a guide to the squareness of the drapery,
we may believe this to be a satirical reference to the
portrait painter. The pedestal occupies the centre
of the platform to indicate that here is the fountain
of honour. A Scotch gardener, supposed to be Lord
Bute, controls the passage of water in the pipe that
supplies the fountain and nourishes the roses and
oranges. The other gardener, supposed to be
Henry Fox, afterwards Lord HoUand, casts away
the old-fashioned plants.
On the left of the plate is a representation of the
House of Commons, with Sir John Oust, the Speaker,
in the chair. Various members of the House of
Lords are also present. On the right of the plate are
two figures in the piUory. ' Conspiracy,' ' M^ Fanny '
refers to the fraud of the Cock Lane Ghost. The
other figure is marked as Wilkes and the word
' Defamation ' is inscribed on the top of the pUlory.
On the roof of a building which stands prominently
forward are many workmen hoisting a huge palette
marked ' Premium,' and having a sheaf of painters'
brushes stuck in the thumbhole. This is intended
to represent the Society of Arts, but the buUding is
entirely imaginary, as the Society did not occupy
a buUding of importance untU they removed to the
Adelphi in 1774. At this time they had apartments
in Beaufort BuUdings. In the distance is seen the
steeple of the new church of St. Mary le Strand.

POLITICAL LIFE 197
StUl further back is the Chinese pagoda in Kew
Gardens, designed by Sir WiUiam Chambers, and to
the left Somerset House, then in course of construc
tion, and also the work of Chambers.
On 27th September 1762 was published an etching
intended as a sequel and rejoinder to ' The Times,
Plate 1.' It is entitled ' The Times, Plate 2,' and
must not be confused with Hogarth's Plate 2, which
was not published until 1790, and therefore unknown
to the pubhc in 1762. In the middle of a large open
space among houses Hogarth is seen standing in a
pUlory. There are aUusions to the incidents brought
into Hogarth's Plate 1, but one of the best is the
Patriot Arms, shown to be two hands clasped and
enclosing a sword and an olive branch.
In this chapter we have obtained a fair insight into
the pohtical life of the eighteenth century, but it is to
be feared that most of the methods of politicians are
seen to be coarse and revolting.

198 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER VI
CHURCH AND DISSENT
HoaAETH was keenly alive to the existence of a
widespread immorality throughout the country
during his lifetime, and set himself to reform the
world by satire of some of the worst evils which
were open to the day. He also realised the want
of earnestness in religious life, but he was equaUy
opposed to a religious revival, and could only see
evil in the great movement of Wesley and Whitefield
which helped to reform the world as the Coming of
the Friars did, for a time at least, in a former age.
The main cause of the evils of the day was a want
of earnestness in Church and State, or in other words
the universal dread of enthusiasm — a feeling which
overlooked the fact that enthusiasm, tempered it is
true by judgment, is the moving spirit of the world.
Many of the great men of the eighteenth century
were moved to do their fine work by enthusiasm,
but they caUed the moving force by another name.
TaUeyrand's constant cry Pas de zele may some
times be a useful caution, but naturaUy it has a
deadening effect upon the soul.
In the middle of the eighteenth century Dr.

CHURCH AND DISSENT 199
Edward Young, the weU-known author of Night
Thoughts, wrote a book on the manners of his time
which was long a popular work. It was entitled
' The Centaur not Fabulous, in six Letters to a
Friend on the Life in vogue.' He found ' as in the
fabled centaur the Brute runs away with the Man,'
and reviewing the Life then lived showed how
Infidelity and Pleasure degraded the men and
women. He then by preaching the dignity of
man paints the centaiu^'s restoration to humanity.
No characteristic of at least a portion of the
eighteenth century was more marked than the
deadness or somnolence of the Church. The stabihty
of the Hanoverian dynasty during a dangerous time
made it necessary for the Ministry to choose the
governors of the Church from men of the same
pohtical opinions as themselves. The High Church
party were supposed to be too intimately connected
with nonjurors and Jacobites to be treated as safe
men for office, and the field was thus limited so
that it was often difficult to discover proper persons
to fiU the office of Bishop. The Broad Churchmen
or Latitudinarians were mostly lifeless in their
beliefs, whUe highflyers such as SachevereU were
equaUy unspiritual. However, it is unwise to
condemn the clergy generaUy, for such names as
those of TiUotson, StiUingfleet, and Tenison must
not be forgotten on the other side.
It is interesting to mark the difference between
the government of the Church in the seventeenth

200 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and eighteenth centuries respectively. In spite of
the dissoluteness of the Court, the appointments to
bishoprics in the reign of Charles n. seem to have
been carried out conscientiously, and many very
distinguished men sat upon the episcopal bench,
who were the superiors of such men as Gibson and
Hoadly, who both find a place in the Hogarth
gaUery. In the eighteenth century many of the
Bishops were haughty and inactive, although there
were a few exceptions as Thomas Herring, Arch
bishop of Canterbury, whose portrait was painted
by Hogarth. He was a strong Whig and zealous for
the Hanoverian djoiasty. He was colourless as a
theologian, but the practical side of religion appealed
to him, and he did his utmost to improve the
religious feeling of his age. He was certainly more
popular than Gibson and Hoadly, who were con
stantly caricatured in the pictorial satires of the
day. Herring was Bishop of Bangor in 1737, and
Archbishop of York in 1743. In the northern
archbishopric he took a prominent part in pre
parations against the rebeUion of 1745. As Arch
deacon Coxe writes in his Life of Horatio Lord
Walpole : ' He exerted himseK with great zeal in
favour of government ; having convened a pubhc
meeting in his diocese, he made a sensible and
animated speech, obtained a subscription to a
considerable amount, and contributed to raise and
embody volunteers and other corps of troops, who
performed essential services against the rebels.'

CHURCH AND DISSENT 201
The younger Horace Walpole writing to Sir Horace
Mann (Oct. 4, 1745) was even more laudatory. He
said : ' Dr. Herring has set an example that would
rouse the most indifferent ; in two days after the
news arrived at York of Cope's defeat (at Preston
Pans), and when they every moment expected the
victorious rebels at their gates, the Bishop made a
speech to the assembled county, that had as much
true spirit, honesty and bravery in it as ever was
penned by an historian for an ancient hero,'
A pictorial satire was published entitled ' The
Mitred Champion; or the Church Mihtant,' which
consists of a fuU-length portrait of the Archbishop
in a haK-clerical, haK-mUitary costume, armed with
a drawn sword, and wearing an officer's cocked and
laced hat instead of his own mitre, which lies on the
ground at his feet. He is marching at the head of a
company of armed clergymen, who carry the royal
standard of England. The Archbishop cries,
' Religion ! Liberty ! my Country ! ' His lieu
tenant, who marches on the right of the company,
says, ' King George and y^ Church of England for
ever,' ^
This may be caUed a satire, but it is reaUy little
more than a representation of what actuaUy occurred
by putting words into action. The artist who de
signed the satire evidently approved of the action,
and the lines engraved on the print are distinctly
laudatory and end thus :
' F. G. Stephens, British Museum Catalogue of Satires, vol. iii. p. 508.

202 HOGARTH'S LONDON
' Our Civil Eights, and Sacred Worship shall
Never a sacrifice to Bigots fall.
But as our Birthright we '11 secure enjoy
While Herring can his Sword and Eloquence employ.'
Hogarth's portrait of Herring is dated in this same
year 1745, and was engraved as a heading to the
Archbishop's published speech at York, 24th Sept.
1745. The portrait was engraved subsequently by
B. Baron and was published in 1750.
It is said that Herring did not admire the portrait,
and an uncomplimentary epigram was made at the
time : ' Lovat's hard features Hogarth might command,
A Herring's sweetness asks a Reynolds' hand.'
Herring became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1747,
and a copy of Hogarth's picture at York is included
in the gaUery of Lambeth Palace.
Bishops Gibson and Hoadly were leaders of two
different parties, and were both objects at which
numerous satires were aimed. The latter was the
leader of the Low Church party, and the former
of a new High Church party dissociated from the
Jacobites and equaUy loyal to the Hanoverian
dynasty as the other party. Gibson is ridiculed
in an engraving published in 1736 and entitled
' Tartuff's Banquet (or Codex's Entertainment),'
the design of which is ascribed to Hogarth, but the
ascription is doubtf vU. The engraving by G. Vander
gucht is described by Mr. Stephens as showing the
interior of a dining-room where a sleek divine is

CHURCH AND DISSENT 203
seated at table with three lean clergymen. The
only person provided with a knife and fork is the
sleek divine. Mr. Stephens says that this figure was
previously supposed to be intended for Orator
Henley, until he showed that it was aimed at Dr.
Edmund Gibson, weU known as ' Codex ' from his
great work entitled Codex Juris Ecclesiastici
Anglicani (1713). In another satirical print
entitled ' The Parallel ; or Laud & C[o]d[e]x
compared,' published also in 1736, Britannia is
shown seated and holding her spear ; she rests her
hand upon the British royal shield, and by pointing
to medaUion portraits of Archbishop Laud and
Bishop Gibson, indicates their characters to be
equally autocratic and overbearing. Two years
before he had been satirised in an engraving entitled
' The State Weathercocks,' and here he possesses
a feUow-sufferer in Bishop Hoadly. Gibson was
supposed to be ambitious of succeeding Archbishop
Wake in the Primacy, but he died Bishop of London.
In the verses attached to the engraving we read :
' Eor gold Pastorius will exchange his soul.
See how to La[mbe]th he does turn his face ;
And views the Pa[la]ce with a sly grimace ;
'Tis true, indeed, Pastorius pants for grace.
This right-hand Man of Sidrophel's ^ first troop.
This party -tool to anything will stoop;
Say black is white and white does black appear.'
The writer attacks both sides with equal injustice ;
and later on Hoadly, who had been Rector of St.
> Sir Robert Walpole.

204 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Peter le Poer, Bread Street, from 1704 to 1720, is
satirised for tergiversation.
' Whate'er the R  r of St. P  r P  r

By dint of Argument maintained before,
The B[isho]p to reform the sinful age
Mounted with intrepidity the stage,
Benhada did with Benhada engage.
In publick, but yet mildly, he disputes.
And all his former Arguments refutes :
If he no Kingdom in this World can have,
Close to the Steeple's pinnacle he 'U cleave.'
The last two lines refer to the text of the Bishop's
sermon at Court, ' My kingdom is not of this world.'
It was this sermon which occasioned the famous
Bangorian Controversy. In 1709 the House of
Commons voted an Address to Queen Anne ' that
she would be graciously pleased to confer some
dignity in the Church upon him [Hoadly] for his
eminent services to the Church and State.' This
unusual appeal had no effect, but Mrs. Howland, a
rich widow, presented him to the rectory of Streat-
ham, ' to show that she was neither afraid nor
ashamed to give him that mark of regard at that
critical time.' Promotion came with the next reign,
but Hoadly continued to hold both these Uvings
after he became Bishop of Bangor, which diocese
he never visited. He was successively Bishop of
Hereford, Salisbury, and Winchester, and died at
the latter city AprU 17, 1761.
Hoadly and his famUy were great friends of
Hogarth, who painted the Bishop's portrait in

T ^ g^

-•-^ '

fe

^5

IT'
' « k. *¦
^^Biu;"*^
-1 '
.1*.-
ir^-*^ "  xvr ^. r -'ill v-^x.^
The Sleeping CoNGREGATiON. 1736.
CHURCH AND DISSENT 205
coUaboration with the first Mrs. Hoadly {nee
Sarah Curtis). This is now in the National Portrait
GaUery. Hogarth has left a sad picture of the deadness of
pubhc services in the eighteenth century in his
' Sleeping Congregation ' (1736). If common sense
was so predominant that enthusiasm and zeal were
treated as objectionable, how was the preacher to
attract his congregation without the exhibition of
some vivid interest in his theme ? The preacher in
Hogarth's picture looks as if he would have been
duU in any age, but ChurchiU the poet was fuU of
life and vigour, yet even he could not fix the atten
tion of his audience.
' I kept those sheep.
Which for my curse, I was ordain'd to keep.
Ordain'd alas ! to keep through need, not choice.
Whilst sacred dulness ever in my view
Sleep at my bidding crept from pew to pew.'
We are told that Sir Roger de Coverley would
suffer none to sleep in church but himseK. ' The
Sleeping Congregation ' is referred to in Vincent
Bourne's Conspicillum. The droning preacher has
been supposed to represent the Rev. John TheophUus
Desaguhers, F.R.S. (1683-1744), but there is reason
to doubt this assumption as the head of the preacher
does not resemble the portrait of Desaguliers by
Hyssing. He was extremely short-sighted and his
personal appearance unattractive, by reason of
being short and thickset, with irregular features, so

206 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the general appearance of the man may have been
copied. Desaguliers was a man of science of some distinc
tion and held in high esteem by Newton. He
received the Copley medal of the Royal Society in
1742, and his lectures on physics were popular. In
theology he only printed a thanksgiving sermon
preached before George i. at Hampton Court in 1716,
In the advertisement of the print it is stated that
it represents the interior of a church in the country
— ' A print representing a sleepy congregation in a
country church ' ; but Mr, Stephens points out that
in ' one of the windows is emblazoned in stained glass
an escutcheon resembling that of the City of London,
thus suggesting it is a city church,'^
Desaguliers was Rector of Whitchurch or Little
Stanmore, Middlesex, from 1715 untU his death in
1744, He initiated Frederick Prince of Wales into
Freemasonry at a special lodge held at Kew on the
5th October 1737. Hogarth painted a portrait of a
Mrs. Desaguhers, wife of General Thomas Desagu
liers, which Mr. Dobson says is a beautiful head.
It is possible to be too critical of the methods of the
men of the eighteenth century, and Sir Walter Besant,
after taking a careful survey of the Church of that
time in London, wrote that ' the chief reason for
caUing the time of George ii. a dead time for the
Church seems to be, so far as London is concerned,
that its clergy were not like our own.' He analysed
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 204.

CHURCH AND DISSENT 207
the services in every London church in 1732, and
found that daUy services were general. He also con
sidered that there was no more immorahty among
the middle classes than at any other time.
The names of several London churches represented
in Hogarth's pictures may be set down here, St.
Paul's, Covent Garden, occupies a prominent position
in ' Morning,' and the French Church, Hog Lane, in
' Noon,' with St. GUes's in the background. St.
George's, Bloomsbury, in ' Gin Lane,' and the in
terior of old Marylebone Church in the fifth plate of
the ' Rake's Progress,' and St. Martin's in ' Industry
and Idleness,' Plate 2. This last is only a sugges
tion, but it is a probable one.
Mr. Stephens writes : ' The church represented . . .
is probably that of St, Martin's in the Fields, West
minster, in respect to the architecture of which, and
that of the print, there are several resemblances.
The probabUity of this being the case is strengthened
by the fact that a royal crown surmounts the chan
delier, which is pendant from the roof in the design.
St. Martin's in the Fields is the so-caUed royal parish
of Westminster, The design and the church differ,
however, in many respects ; the architectural char
acteristics of the former are seemingly due to a rough
sketch of the features of the latter, not to an inten
tion on the part of Hogarth to represent this, or any
particular church.' ^
It is but fair to refer to this as a very complete
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 678.

208 HOGARTH'S LONDON
contrast to the ' Sleeping Congregation,' showhig a
service in which the congregation is thoroughly
interested. Plate 3 of the same series shows the exterior of
another church and ' the Idle 'Prentice at play in
the churchyard, during Divine Service.' Respecting
this Mr. Stephens writes : ' The churchyard has not
been identified, but it must have been in or near the
City of London, as appears by the escutcheon over
the door. There are points of resemblance between
Hogarth's picture and the churches of St. Michael,
Crooked Lane, and St. Paul, ShadweU.' ^
BosweU supplies us with a delightful anecdote of
the audacity of Topham Beauclerk, which must ever
associate Samuel Johnson with the Idle Apprentice
in the mind of aU readers.
' Johnson was some time with Beauclerk at his
house at Windsor. . . . One Sunday, when the weather
was very fine, Beauclerk enticed him, insensibly, to
saunter about aU the morning. They went into a
churchyard in the time of divine service, and
Johnson laid himseK down at his ease upon one of
the tomb-stones. Now, sir, (said Beauclerk), you
are like Hogarth's Idle Apprentice.'
The Church of St. Clement Danes, in the Strand,
must be added to this hst. It is not, however, on
account of a representation of the church, but of a
scathing satire on the altar-piece by Kent which
once stood in this church. Hogarth's contempt for
1 British Museum Catalogue, p. 682.

CHURCH AND DISSENT 209
Kent as a painter is weU known, and he seldom
lost an opportunity of publishing it.
It has sometimes been supposed that Hogarth's
engraving caused the removal of the original picture ;
but this is a mistake, as the popular feeling against
the altar-piece seems to have been caused partly by
pohtical feelings and partly from the strong dislike
to the admission of pictures in chm-ches. Hogarth
took the opportunity of showing the absurdity of
the drawing itseK, and he declared that he neither
'parodied ' nor ' burlesqued,' but produced a fair and
honest representation of a contemptible performance.
The explanation of the plate is as foUows : ' This
Print is exactly engraiv'd after y" Celebrated Altar-
peice in St. Clement's Church, which has been taken
down by order of y^ Lord Bishop of London (as 'tis
thought) to prevent disputs and laying of wagers
among y** Parrishioners about y** artists meaning in
it. For publick satisfaction here is a particular
explanation of it humbly offerd to be writ under
y" Original that it may be put up again, by which
means y^ Parish' es 60 pounds, which they wisely gave
for it, may not be entirely lost.
1st. 'Tis not the Pretender's wife and children,
as our weak brethren imagin.
21y. Nor St. Cecilia, as the Connoisseurs think,
but a choir of angeUs singing in Consort.'
[Below are letters from A to K as references to the
points of the picture.]

210 HOGARTH'S LONDON
A violently-written pamphlet on Kent's picture,
entitled ' A Letter from a Parishioner of St. Clement
Danes, to the Right Reverend Father in God
Edmund [Gibson], Lord Bishop of London, occasion'd
by his Lordship's causing the picture over the altar
to be taken down. With some observations on the
use and abuse of Church Paintings in general, and
of that picture in Particular,' was published on
September 10, 1725.
The author writes : ' And of all the abuses your
Lordship has redress' d, none more timely, none more
acceptable to aU true Protestants than your last
injunction to remove that ridiculous, superstitious
piece of Popish foppery from our Communion table :
this has gain'd you the applause and goodi-will of aU
honest men, who were scandalized to see that holy
Place defiled with so vile and impertinent a representa
tion. To what end or purpose was it put there, but
to a^ront our most gracious Sovereign by placing at
our very altar, the known resemblance of a Person,
who is wife of his utter enemy and Pensioner to the
Whore of Babylon ? When I say the known re
semblance I speak not only according to my own
knowledge, but appeal to all mankind who have seen
the Princess Sobieski or any picture or resemblance
of her.' The author further refers to ' a continual
hurly burly of loiterers from all parts of the Town to
see our popish Raree Show.'
When the picture was removed from the church it
was placed in the old vestry-room of the parish, and

CHURCH AND DISSENT 211
was occasionaUy taken to the Crown and Anchor
Tavern in the Strand for exhibition at the music
meetings of the churchwardens of the parish.
Of the regular dissenting ministers Hogarth has
taken little or no note. Some of these were men
of repute, but as a rule the worship in the Chapel
was as dull as that in the Church and a 'revival'
was required equally in both.
John Henley, of St. John's CoUege, Cambridge,
known as Orator Henley (1692-1756), was a dissenter
in that he broke off his connection with the Church
because he considered that he was not appreciated,
but he had nothing in common with any of the
Nonconformist bodies.
He was pompous, but with a ready wit and an
effective elocution, and about 1726 he rented a
large room over the market-house in Newport
Market, and registered it as a place for religious
worship. He then, by advertisements in the papers,
invited aU persons to come and take seats for two
pence apiece, promising them diversion under the
titles of Voluntaries, Chimes of the Times, Rounde
lays, CoUege Bobs, etc. Great numbers of people
flocked to witness his buffooneries, until at last these
were put an end to by a Presentment of the Grand
Jury of Middlesex in January 1729.
Henley then removed to Portsmouth Street, Clare
Market, where he was more careful in the entertain
ment he provided. He caUed his chapel the Oratory,
and every Sunday he preached a sermon in the

212 HOGARTH'S LONDON
morning and delivered an oration in the evening on
some special theological theme, and lectured on
weekdays, sometimes Tuesdays, Wednesdays and
Fridays, on other subjects.
The crowd of persons of aU classes who flocked to
his lectures was so great that he had to obtain more
commodious quarters, which he foimd in the old
Lincoln's Inn Fields Theatre in Bear Yard, Vere
Street. Pope has pictured for us the Orator in his ' gUt tub ':
' Embrown'd with native bronze, lo ! Henley stands,
Turning his voice, and balancing his hands.
How fluent nonsense trickles from his tongue !
How sweet the periods, neither said, nor sung !
Still break the benches, Henley ! with thy strain.
While Sherlock, Hare, and Gibson preach in vain.'
Samuel Ireland gave two engravings of Orator
Henley in the first volume of his Graphic Illustrations.
One, Henley christening a child, he says is from a
sketch in oil which he bought from Mrs. Hogarth,
and supposes to have been painted by Hogarth
about the year 1745. At Ireland's sale. May 6, 1797,
it was sold or bought in for three guineas. It
afterwards came into the possession of Payne Knight,
and with the whole of his coUection was bequeathed
to the British Museum. Mr, Stephens says of the
sketch, ' It is in perfect condition, painted with
Hogarth's characteristic skill and fine sense of
female beauty, and on a piece of canvas which was
originally of a slightly greenish brown,' ^
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 630.

[— 7EJ-

Oi,i/i,i HK.\/.KY i/in/l,Hii,g a t'liUd .
,¦/,/„/ /,j ¦ l.,,„ '¦ /r,/,„„/ /„„„ ,,„ I'rj,,,:,/. //,/,/ ,/, IV_,,, /„.,/„-/„/¦„.„ , /yUdCIRTH.

Orator Henley christening a child.

CHURCH AND DISSENT 213
The other is the ' Oratory Chappel,' which Ireland
says ' exhibits a true portrait of that place of which
no other has come within our knowledge.' There is
no doubt that this was not the work of Hogarth,
although it is interesting in itseK. Stephens says of
the original that it is supposed to be a forgery by
PoweU, although it has ' W. Hogarth fee* ' at one
corner of the print.
Stephens thus describes the print : ' This etching
shows Orator Henley preaching in a chapel ; his
clerk is armed with a club. One side of the pulpit
is decorated with a medaUion of an imp resembling
an owl. On the top of the sounding board is a
dancing dog, in Scotch plaid, holding a board
inscribed " Pohticks and Divinity." The floor is
covered with men standing or sitting, and more or
less attentively hstening to the Orator ; one man
reads from a newspaper, another addresses Henley,
although the latter is in the heat of his discom^se.
The gaUery is filled with men who are shouting and
brandishing clubs. Over them is written, "It is
written my house shaU be caUed y® house of prayer,
but ye have made it a den of thieves." In a pew
marked " Pens for y** Doctors Friends, etc," is a very
rough-looking group, described thus on the pew :
"Butcher Frenchman Scot and Tory,
Join to rob Britain of its glory." ' ^
Another engraving of ' The Oratory,' showing
' Henley in fuU canonicals addressing a few persons
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 621.

214 HOGARTH'S LONDON
who are standing below,' by George Bickham, has
been attributed falsely to Hogarth.^
Ireland says that Henley frequently made Pope
the object of his satire, which caused the poet to
gibbet him in the Dunciad. George Alexander
Stevens of the Lecture upon Heads was a perpetual
nuisance to the Orator, who prosecuted him for
breeding riots in the chapel.
Henley was continuaUy at loggerheads with the
ministry, and on one occasion he parodied the text
of Dr. Croxall with some effect.
This Doctor preached a sermon on the 30th June
1730 before the House of Commons from the text,
' Take away the wicked from before the King, and
his throne shaU be estabhshed in righteousness.'
This gave so much offence to Sir Robert Walpole
that he prevented the thanks of the House being
presented to the preacher. Henley was so pleased
with this that he posted the foUowing lines as a
subject for his next address :
' Away with the wicked before the King,
And away with the wicked behind him ;
His throne it will bless
With righteousness.
And we shall know where to find him.'
This chapter may be concluded with a short notice
of Hogarth's two prints, ' Enthusiasm Dehneated '
(n.d., published 1795), and ' Creduhty, Superstition,
and Fanaticism : a Medley ' (March 15, 1762).
^ British Museum Catalogue, vol. ii. p. 746.

CHURCH AND DISSENT 215
' Enthusiasm Dehneated ' appears to be intended
as a general satire upon the evils of superstition.
Its object is explained in an advertisement on the
plate : ' The intention of this Print is to give a lineal
representation of the strange effects of literal and
low conceptions of Sacred Beings, as also of the
Idolatrous tendency of Pictures in Churches and
Prints in Rehgious Books, etc' The plate was
dedicated to the Archbishop of Canterbury, but was
never published. Only two impressions are in
existence : both belonged to John Ireland, and now
one is in the British Museum and the other in the
possession of Mr. Fairfax Murray.
At the end of his hfe Hogarth took the copper-plate
which had been discarded and altered the whole
scheme of the design completely, so as to satirise the
Methodist and Evangehcal revival and the popular
foUies of his own day. Almost every figure was
altered, some more and some less. The result was
the print entitled ' Creduhty, Superstition, and
Fanaticism.' The most uninteUigible alteration is
the introduction of Mary Tofts in the later plate to
replace the figure of Mother Douglas in the original
one. The Tofts imposture took place in 1726 before
the date of the original plate, and was almost forgotten
in 1762. The two prints are reproduced in John
Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, and are placed opposite
each other for purposes of comparison,

216 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER VII
PROFESSIONAL LIFE
One of the Professions — ^the Clerical — is dealt with
in the previous chapter. In this we have to consider
the Law, Medicine, and the Army, as weU as later
additions to the Professions — Art and Literature.
Physic is fuUy represented in Hogarth's works, so
also is the Law, Soldiers find little place there, and
Art and Literature can hardly claim much dis
tinction, as exhibited in the ' Enraged Musician ' of
the first or the ' Distressed Poet ' of the second class.
Law. — The engraving of ' The Bench ' was first
published on the 4th September 1758, In the first
state above the heads of the four judges is seen a
wall on which is painted the Royal arms of England
with the motto ' Semper eadem,' the escutcheon being
partly obliterated by the shaft of a column at the
left of the picture. In the second state the
escutcheon has been obliterated and replaced by a
row of heads, eight in number, as examples of
caricature. The shaft remains, and causes a curious
effect to the caricature of an apostle which is partly
in front and partly behind the column.
The four judges are supposed to be sitting on the

¦'/7//r,r ,l,r /,„r,//,, „,„, /„¦„ //„„/.. .,„.,-.- ,/,r„ll„//,, ./,//r„,,l //,„„ fll.-ira,
//,r.,„rr,„.„„l/,,,:;,/:«„.U,,ml'„„.,l„/m,/«r„„/, .//„¦ ,¦„„¦/,„/,
.,„. ',„/,^ ,///„ „„,„/./,.,:,/„r/.. „'/„./, „„//, „,,,, Jr,,m ,¦/' ,'„.,l,„/:. ,
¦ '„-l/,„ti„/„r/, /,'„.,.,:/ /„/,»r.,r.-.rll/,r,,n,„J«/ 

 "¦'¦¦¦¦'/¦'¦  '
¦ /:,/„/>, If/ rfif<,<rr.< t/>f ,ifmf'../ , '//if/.',
,/,/ /,¦ U /,.!,,//,/ ,/,i-r../rJ,',

Un:,„„f/-//U/.:
•I ,.'/i//f/ii/i/r</
/¦rr„„..,,/,;-;>„..

. //„ir l/,„l/,„l/, „ /„„/„,„;/ l„ ,/„.;/i''f,<,,!„./. if,,,,,,, ^ .„,„//„ /; „ ¦ '/„r,i« ,-/U'",i,- "<"/ „„/,r,:l„, }' „,r/,r,f„,
/,,,,,,/,./Wi,,n,f 1^1,,,, ./¦l'/,,//:/:,,-lJ,fr,,r/,,-'r/,,,,-/,,ii/-,,/iir/,,/,/ii-/,,r/, ,/,,/¦«/ /¦,,/r/i/ All,/,,,,. ¦/,/f,i,y,N
.i.,„„;//„/„-„.,../.,/;„,,i,//„/-,/,/.f.i,;,„f:Y;,;,„f„t/,fr.,„„/l,;//,f/r,i/:,r„, .„„:/,„ /i^nir,,/ A;^,/,„/,/„„r,
,.,„„///,f„/„/-,/,/,/ //„„„¦.,/,,„„„„/ Cnr^cxmi-i-r^ ,./V,f.,r /i„„.' „¦,//„„//, „U, /,. ,,,„„/ ,i-,f/,l/',..„,„ /
,v/.,.v ,/;,r.'l.lf„.i ,y /'/¦/,'/.¦ „r'.,oi,i„r/, „„'rr/ir,/r,/ l/ini,rJ,i/Jrr,i.,.d„l l/lri, iii// „,„„¦,¦„/„//,/ ,„/n;/„,r.„.„„
/!,,,,/, ¦yl"n'„ ill,/ Y',ir„//t/,f /i,t»i,;,r,;,.,,'//',r/.' ,yi/,r/i,.,/„;,„i7/'/r ,„„„„fr,/\'mi>ca\\u-'in\^ i/iir//i/ i/r/i,,,,/,-.
//„-.;,f„r,-c „r'„/r „ ,,,/r/ ,it /','r„/,'/i ,/ ,;, !:,r/,,r., rn,,,//,/ ,ri//, „,i ,i ..,;l ,/ . /i,r,,7i/„ ¦/, ,„ „/-/rr/., „A.,-/„/t/,/ rr -

,///„ /:,.,/„„„ i,/-/r
;//,/„¦///, i„i,/.
lAfi'r //„l„'f
C'.Ti-iicnturn ,'/ a r/rt,,.

„,,¦/, ,„ //„-,/ /„,„/. .f(ii-t'>/'ei'/',,rrr'/ f/,r „,,-rr /f'li.f./f , ,i f/,f,'/ //„/„/, //,r ,//r„/,
/'Wr.' ,,.,it/i/,;'/ ''/nii;.''/rrntriii/'f.r II /,',,i"ii,i C'.Ti-iicnturn ,¦/ n rrrlinii •'/!„/, i,,i ¦
hr.if.;,//,/ „¦/,„/, r,;,.i,,.lr,/ ,„i/,i/ if „¦ /'ri,i//i/ /irr/ir,„f,fi,/„, ¦ llrni, ,i,l/,„.
„,f,/6uo-c 1/ I.I ,/,y/eri-,i//'r„m f/,, fiiri'ijimiii . „,ij .¦ii/m/if; ii„l/,,,i„ „,„
,ii//i,ic.ii/',i ¦ '¦ii/i,rr.n//f/ir/,i,,-/,i i/ii/iii/i i,i„„ U iii ol/if-r ri.i/if,l- ,i/ir.
I linin . . ///,„::/^uy /-r m/tWn ,;;„,ii,;, //'/„„ Oulri-. . /„ 11,11/ /i„/r „., 1
/ii/./rV/Zi'mi ;/m„/U Tl' /¦!¦ . •¦¦ l/i/it/mrl OTOrti. t „/ii,/, 1; „// l/i,,/ -• *' /.- "

l/'0-lll/llif~ ff
:¦/,/ H.i'i/ /t> f/,f

 . - . •. wu,.i. .  v^  -
."' t/i^t/'nff Onfre, f i./,i,/, i.> /•// //.-/ '¦• /'¦ /.
•Hlirr I-/ Cliaractcr

/,¦

./- t';ii7iC(Lllirmg: l/iir/i'i/ i/r/ii-i,,/,!,.
/,„„/,/„,/, II, ii/./rr/.i „/..i./„/f/,/
I/,,,:;, ,//,„„ ,///,,.',
-r.//i,if .J/riii/i „/ ¦
L/\i/ ,'„rr 1/ Ui/,'//,^:'-r,;,i,
l/iiiii l/if i-.i,i,/f,„,r,/
,/i'rf- ,/„,/ t.,„,-'j./',,/l,rili/
'//i...i:.,.,ii.{:;,.„,,„/f
,„/,r..,„,.,/ /¦,/'//„„, i;.„l....

¦/,„,/„

''/"¦¦ i

'/triiii/u I'/,,,/, /,.

"The Bench." 1758.
From the third state of the original engraving.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 217
Bench of the Court of Common Pleas. The chief
figure, a portly personage who is seen reading through
his eyeglasses from notes made in a book held in his
left hand. This was intended to represent Sir
John WiUes (born 1685), Chief Justice of the Court
of Common Pleas, a man of great learning and
abUity, but httle esteemed on account of the gross-
ness of his manners and morals. He hoped to be
Lord ChanceUor in succession to Lord Hardwicke,
but he had to content himseK with being the first
of three Commissioners for the Great Seal (1756-7).
He was offered the ChanceUorship in the Duke of
Newcastle's and Pitt's administration, but he
stipulated for a peerage which was refused, and Sir
Robert Henley was appointed Lord Keeper instead.
Horace Walpole teUs an anecdote of WUles, which
shows the kind of man he was. A grave person came
to reprove the judge for the scandal he gave, observ
ing that the world talked of one of his maidservants
being with chUd. WUles said: 'What is that to
me ? ' The monitor answered : ' Oh ! but they say
it is by your lordship.' ' And what is that to you ? '
was the reply.
The next figure is Henry Bathurst (son of Sir
AUan Apsley, first Earl Bathurst), born 1714,
Justice of the Common Pleas 1754, and Lord
ChanceUor in 1771. He succeeded his father as
Earl Bathurst in 1775, and died in 1794. He was
an amiable man, but not so companionable as his
father. It is reported on one occasion when the

218 HOGARTH'S LONDON
son retired from a convivial party that Lord
Bathurst said, ' Now, my good friends, since the old
gentleman is off, I think we may venture to crush
another bottle.' The third figure is the Hon.
WiUiam Noel, born 1695, who is caUed by Horace
Walpole ' a pompous man of little solidity.' On
the trial of Lord Lovat in 1746, he was one of the
managers for the House of Commons. He became
a Justice of the Common Pleas in March 1757, and
continued in that Court tUl his death on December
8, 1762. Both Bathurst and Noel are pictured
asleep. The fourth judge who is shown in profile to the
left of WUles is Su- Edward Clive, born 1704. He
was made a Baron of the Exchequer in 1745, and
remained in that Court nearly eight years. He was
removed to the Common Pleas in January 1753.
He resigned in 1770, and died in 1771. Sir
Edward dive's brother George was the husband of
Kitty Chve, the famous actress.
The row of caricature heads added in the second
state of the plate, already referred to, strengthen
the portrayal of the difference between ' Character,
Caricature and Outre,' which Hogarth had
previously indicated in 1743, when he published
' Characters and Caricaturas ' as the subscription
ticket for the ' Marriage a la Mode.' The neglect
of this distinction by others was a constant source
of annoyance to him, as he hated to be treated as a
caricaturist. He himself said with regard to this

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 219
print of ' The Bench ' — ' I have ever considered the
knowledge of character, either high or low, to be
the most sublime part of the art of painting or
sculpture ; and caricature, as the lowest ; indeed as
much so as the wUd attempts of chUdren, when
they first try to draw : yet so it is, that the two
words, from being similar in sound, are often con
founded. When I was at the house of a foreign
face-painter, and looking over a legion of his
portraits. Monsieur, with a low bow, told me that
he infinitely admired my caricatures ! I returned his
conge and informed him that I equally admired his.'
The original picture differed from the print some
what. It was the property at one time of Sir
George Hay, and afterwards of Mr. Edwards. It
was exhibited by Mr. Fairfax Murray at the Winter
Exhibition of the Royal Academy, 1908.
The representation by Hogarth of the Lawyer
in Butler's Hudibras must be mentioned here, as
his character is so differently treated in Hogarth's
two sets of iUustrations :
' To this brave man, the Knight repairs
For counsel in his Law affairs.
And found him mounted in his Pew,
With Books and Money plac'd, for shew.
Like Nest-eggs to make Clients lay.
And for his false opinion pay :
To whom the Knight, with comely grace
Put off his hat, to put his case.'
In the duodecimo edition of Hudibras (1726) the
Lawyer is represented as sitting on a settle and

220 HOGARTH'S LONDON
writing at a desk in a corner of a room in front of a
window, and with three shelves of books above
his head. In the large series of engravings published
by Hogarth without a text, the Lawyer is seen sitting
in state on a sort of throne in a handsome apartment.
In front of the Lawyer's desk sit two clerks busUy
engaged in writing. At the side of the room is a
large bookcase fiUed with important-looking books.
In front of the bookcase, and at the right-hand side
of the picture, is a handsomely carved figure of
Justice holding her scales.
The picture of ' Paul before Felix,' which
Hogarth painted for the decoration of the old
Lincoln's Inn Hall in 1748, is stiU to be seen in
the new buUdings of Lincoln's Inn HaU, Thomas,
Lord Wyndham, Lord Chancellor of Ireland,
1726-39, who died in 1745, left a legacy of £200 for
the decoration of the HaU, and Hogarth obtained the
commission through the instrumentahty of Lord
Mansfield, Mr, Dobson gives in his book a f acsimUe of
Hogarth's letter respecting the proposed position of
the picture in the haU, with his sketch of the de
sign of the frame. This letter was found among
the archives of the Society of Lincoln's Inn, The
receipt is as follows : 'July them, 1748.
' Reced of Jn° Wood Esq, Treasurer of the Hon"®
Society of Lincoln's Inn by the hands of Rich*^
Farshall Chief Butler to the Said Society the sum of
two hundred pounds being the Legacy given by the

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 221
late Lord Wyndham to the Said Society laid out
in a picture drawn by Mr, Hogarth, According to
order of CouncU Dated the 27th day of June last,
William Hogarth,'
' £200,
This picture was engraved and published in 1752,
and in the previous year was prepared ' Paul before
Felix Burlesqued.' ' Design'd and scratch'd in the
true Dutch taste, by Wm. Hogarth,' to serve as a
receipt for subscriptions to two prints to be published
at the same time, viz. ' PaiU before Felix,' and
' Moses brought before Pharaoh's Daughter.' These
receipts were not originaUy intended for sale, but
they were given to subscribers and to Hogarth's
friends, who begged them. The beggars became so
numerous that the designer after a time resolved
to part with none except at the price of five shillings
each. What could have induced Hogarth to burlesque
his own picture, which was aheady too much of a
caricature, it is almost impossible to understand.
The orator TertuUus who was retained against
St. Paul is said to represent Dr. King, Principal of
St. Mary HaU, Oxford.
Leigh Hunt, in ' The Town,' described the serious
' Paul before Felix ' as ' Hogarth's celebrated
faUure.' Medicine. — Hogarth painted the portraits of
several weU-known physicians and surgeons, or

222 HOGARTH'S LONDON
introduced them into his works. The portrait of
Thomas PeUett, M.D., President of the Royal CoUege
of Physicians, 1735-39, was exhibited at Whitechapel
(Georgian England) in 1906 by Mr. W. C. Alexander.
The painting was engraved by Charles HaU and
published June 1, 1781, by J, Thane, PeUett and
Martin Folkes (whose portrait was also painted by
Hogarth), were joint editors of Sir Isaac Newton's
Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms (1728), The
College possesses a portrait of PeUett by Dahl,
The portrait of Sir Caesar Hawkins, Bart,, by
Hogarth belongs to the Royal CoUege of Surgeons,
and was exhibited by the CoUege at Whitechapel
(Georgian England) in 1906,
CromweU Mortimer, M,D,, was a man of consider
able importance in his day, a friend of Sir Hans
Sloane, and Secretary of the Royal Society from
1730 untU his death in 1752, He was very un
popular with members of his own profession. In
the Gentleman's Magazine, 1780, p. 510, he is styled
' an impertinent assuming empiric' The portrait of
Mortimer, engraved by Rigou, from a sketch by
Hogarth, is a severe satire, and probably some of the
artist's professional friends suggested the need of
some such satire, Mr. F. G. Stephens says that the
date and immediate occasion of this print is not
apparent, but he supposes that the circulation of
Mortimer's letter, 1744, caused its publication. The
letter was subsequently pubhshed in the Gentleman's
Magazine, November 1779, and is described as ' the

.'//^/- C oinp an)^ ^Uuder takers
yS^a^Y^ ^f-i/'/^, ,f» VrmaS. fii-o-fuf. /vftivv^/yy Quack-Head5 €>/" tA^Jr-c^^xt/ & ja Cane Heads (??; Conful-
yi/-/Ai J^a^i<:/<i /j'/rt/? --/¦'/¦/,¦ ./"rtv;./. (^^ A^/'S/XvcAr 4fcMru^t.er.x{£Ae^ rt-^.-fl- J)cim-J)oct«ri,j^/<wM*
i/V/-- ./ic.'?i€/, e^- ('."•^ C-ineNcids r^'.y.z.';/ <y' e/ie- tA/?vA;t/?i-£^y:rt /uii-ifi^ /'^/ic (Site c^ur/ta^i^, ^-

n-anAf f/u-l/)^rr.r. An/.' o/rA.- /p./<v'rA<

'// i?A rfO^ . ^//ifetv '

'/'¦

: fAieJlx^TL^J^axxt^yief'yui/cJi^Wie-f'i^'^uA-./A^Cf^a^^rit. 

Et PLurima ^oxlu luui^o ,

.i/^zc*: J^ penc/;

A Consultation of Physicians. 1736.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 223
plan of Dr. Mortimer's present method of practice.'
In it specifics for every disease are recommended.^
The original drawing in bistre was in the Standly
CoUection. Hogarth seems to have been in doubt as to the
exact object of his biting satire on some of the
healers of men when he gave his gaUery of medical
heads the double title of ' The Company of Under
takers, or a Consultation of Physicians.' The title
of the etching was originaUy intended to be ' Quacks
in Consultation,' and it was so advertised. This
was first pubhshed on March 3, 1736, and the foUow
ing burlesque heraldic description is engraved below
the design : ' The Company of Undertakers
Beareth Sable, an Urinal proper between 12 Quack-
Heads of the Second and 12 Cane Heads or consultant.
On a chief Nebula, Ermine, one compleat Doctor
issuant, chekie, sustaining in his Right Hand a Baton
of the Second. On his Dexter and Sinister sides two
Demi-Doctors, issuant of the second and two Cane
Heads issuant of the third ; The first having one eye
couchant, towards the Dexter Side of the Escocheon ;
the second faced per pale proper and gules, guardent.
With this motto — Et Plurima Mortis Imago.'
The three half-length figures in the upper portion
of the shield are intended to represent Mrs. Mapp
in the centre, ChevaUer Taylor on her right, and Dr.
Joshua Ward, or ' Spot ' Ward, on the left.
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 541.

224 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Sarah Mapp, the bone-setter or shape mistress,
was a woman of masculine habits who distinguished
herself by some extraordinary cures. Her father, a
man named WaUin, was also a bone-setter settled at
Hindon in Wiltshire, but his daughter quarreUed
with him and wandered about the country caUing
herself Crazy SaUy. She married HUl Mapp, a servant
of Mr. Ibbetson, mercer, Ludgate HiU, on August 11,
1736, but the husband ran away soon after the mar
riage, taking with him one hundred and two guineas.
Mrs. Mapp set up a carriage and four, and the
newspapers were fuU of her doings in this year 1736.
A mare was named after her, and Mrs. Mapp's plate
for ten guineas was run for at Epsom ; but her career
was a short one, for she died in Seven Dials in
December 1737 in great poverty.
John Taylor (1703-1772) appears to have been an
ocuhst of distinction who exhibited great skUl as an
operator, but he chose to advertise himself and act
generally as a charlatan. Dr. Johnson said of him
that he was ' an instance of how far impudence
would carry ignorance.' He studied surgery under
the great WiUiam Cheselden at St. Thomas's Hospital,
and practised for some time at Norwich. He then
traveUed through the country and abroad, and was
known as Chevalier Taylor. He early obtained a
recognised position by his appointment as oculist
to George n. in 1736. He published a vain-glorious
account of himseK and his adventures in 1761, and
died in a convent at Prague in 1772.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 225
John Ireland says that he saw Taylor once at
Shrewsbury, and he recognised the hkeness in
Hogarth's drawing. He also teUs some good anec
dotes of him which show his ready wit. On one
occasion when he was enumerating the honours he
had received from the different princes of Europe,
and the orders with which he had been dignified by
innumerable sovereigns, it was remarked that he
had not named the King of Prussia. ' I suppose,
sir, he never gave you an order ? ' ' You are
mistaken, sir,' replied the Chevalier ; ' he gave me
a very peremptory order to quit his dominions.'
On his return from a tour on the Continent he met
a working man who, addressing him with great
famUiarity, was repulsed with a frown, and ' Sir,
I reaUy don't remember you.' ' Not remember me !
Why, my goodness, doctor, we once lodged in Round
Court ' [out of Bow Street, Covent Garden]. ' Round
Court, Round Court ! Sir, I have been in every
court in Europe, but of such a court as Round Court
I have no recoUection.' ^
Joshua Ward (1685-1761) was a quack doctor, but
it is said that he was a quack of genius. In 1717 he
was returned Member of Parliament for Marlborough,
but by a vote of the House of Commons he was
declared not duly elected. It is supposed that he
was mixed up with his brother John Ward in the
troubles connected with the South Sea Bubble, as he
left England rather abruptly. During his exile he
' Hogarth Illustrated, vol. ii. p. 285 (note).
P

226 HOGARTH'S LONDON
acquired his knowledge of medicine and chemistry,
and then he became a Roman Catholic.
About the year 1733 he began to practise medicine.
Ward's famous drop was first made known in
England, 1731-2, by Sir Thomas Robinson ('long Sir
Thomas '), whose zeal was ridiculed in verse by Sir
Charles Hanbury WiUiams :
' Say, knight, for learning most renown'd.
What is this wondrous drop 1
Which friend ne'er knew nor can be found.
In Grah'ms or Guerney's shop.'^
Horace Walpole affirms that ' the Duke of New
castle dragged poor Sir Thomas into light and ridi
cule.' Ward when caUed in to attend on George
n. for an affection of his hand, was successful in
curing the disease. ' In lieu of a pecuniary com
pensation [he] was, at his own request, permitted to
ride in his gaudy and heavy equipage through St.
James's Park, an honour seldom granted to any but
persons of rank ; besides this, the King gave a com
mission to his nephew, the late General Gansel.'
In 1748 when the Apothecaries' Act was passed
to restrain unqualified persons from compounding
medicines, a special clause was inserted exempting
Ward by name.
Fielding paid a high tribute to Ward's kindness
and sagacity in his Introduction to the Journal of a
Voyage to Lisbon (1755). He wrote : ' Obligations to
Mr, Ward I shall always confess ; for I am con-
1 Worhs, 1822, vol. ii. p. 1.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 227
vinced that he omitted no care in endeavouring to
serve me, without any expectation or desire of fee
or reward. The powers of Mr. Ward's remedies
want, indeed, no unfair puffs of mine to give them
credit ; and tho' this distemper of the dropsy stands,
I beheve, first in the list of those over which he is
always certain of triumphing, yet possibly, there
might be something particular in my case, capable of
eluding that radical force which had healed so many
thousands.' Ward was generous to poor patients, and was very
popular in consequence. He prided himseK on the
sad loss his death woiUd be to the poor. Pope made
an iU-natured reference to this : ' Ward try'd on
Puppies, and the Poor, his Drop.' Ward ' left the
receipts for compounding his medicines to Mr. Page,
member for Chichester, who bestowed them on two
charitable institutions which have derived consider
able advantage from the profits attending their
sale.' ^ Ward made a fortune by his sulphuric acid
patent, 1749, and it is to his improvement in the
production of this important substance that he owes
the posthumous honour of having his truculent-look
ing statue by Carlini preserved in the haU of the
Royal Society of Arts.
Of the dozen heads below the great trio there is
little to be said. John Ireland af&rms that many of
them are unquestionably portraits, but there is no
advantage in trying to discover what must at least
1 J. Ireland, Hogarth Hlustrated, vol. ii. p. 288 (note).

228 HOGARTH'S LONDON
be extremely doubtful. Mr. Stephens's remarks
upon these are very much to the point : ' Of the
other doctors represented below the nebulous
dividing line, each wears a big wig and carries a
cane with a large head. AU but two of them hold
their canes at or near their nostrils ; some affect
an air and expression of prof oundity of thought ;
some smeU at the heads of their canes, thus Ulus-
trating the original purpose of the gold heads, to
hold a pomander or disinfectant. The urinal
referred to in the engraved description is in the hands
of the quack in the centre of the composition. He
is a fat feUow and holds the vessel, which is fiUed
with liquor, in the palm of his left hand ... he
has tucked his cane under his arm. Below this
man, or in front of him, two other quacks are pre
tending to study the liquor through their eye
glasses. These heads are said to comprise portraits
of Dr. Bamber and Dr. Pierce Dod. This is ex
tremely improbable, as these were not considered to
be quacks, and were eminent in their profession.' ^
The notorious quack John Misaubin, M.D. (who
died in 1734), has already been described in
Chapter ni. (High Life) in connection with the
third plate of the ' Marriage a la Mode.' It has also
been suggested that the two Doctors quarreUing in
the fKth plate of the ' Harlot's Progress ' represent
Misaubin and Joshua Ward. Another quack in
high places was Nathaniel St. Andre, who made a
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 209.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 229
criminal blunder by supporting the gross imposture
of Mary Tofts, the rabbit-breeder. In connection
with this ' Cunicularu, or the Wise Men of Godhman
in Consultation,' attributed to Hogarth, has already
been mentioned. The reference-table below the
design of this print describes the figure lettered
A as ' The Dancing Master, or Praeturnatural
Anatomist.' This is St. Andre, who is shown with
a fiddle under his arm in aUusion to his having
originaUy been a dancing-master. He was a
native of Switzerland, who is supposed to have
joined with this business that of teaching the French
and German languages, in the knowledge of which
he was a proficient. He afterwards studied under a
surgeon of eminence, and was so fortunate as to be
appointed in 1723 anatomist to the Royal house
hold. He was also surgeon to Westminster Hospital
(then a dispensary), and delivered public lectures
on anatomy, although apparently he was an un
qualified practitioner. He was living at this time
in Northumberland Court, Strand.
Queen Caroline was determined that a thorough
investigation should be made of the story that Mrs.
Mary Tofts, an iUiterate woman of Godalming, had
produced rabbits instead of children. St. Andre
went to Godalming and was deceived by what he
saw. Sir Richard Manningham, Dr. Douglas, Dr.
Mowbray and Mr. Howard, surgeon of GuUdford,
expressed themselves satisfied of the truth of the
miracle. Tofts's imposture was so outrageous, that

230 HOGARTH'S LONDON
it could not have been carried out unless she had
received considerable assistance. The nurse and
Howard must, one would think, have been in
coUusion. The others may have only been foolish.
The cheat was at length discovered by Sir Thomas
Clarges, and the deluded medical men were over
whelmed with disgrace. St. Andre was particularly
unfortunate, as he had been held in considerable
favour by George i., but after this exposure, although
he retained his office, he neither received a salary
nor returned to Court again.
George Steevens wrote a very severe account of
St. Andre in Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes, which
was answered, but not very successfuUy. The
answer with a reply by Steevens was added to the
Anecdotes, and the remarks on St. Andre occupy a
rather disproportionate part of the book. John
Nichols seems to have considered that his coUeague
was rather too severe, but there can be no doubt
St. Andre was a worthless character even if he did
not murder his friend in order to marry the widow,
a crime of which he was accused.
St. Andre married Lady Elizabeth Moljmeux
after the death of her husband, Samuel Moljmeux,
secretary to George Prince of Wales (afterwards
George ii.). She is said to have left the house with
St. Andre on the night her husband died. In con
sequence she was dismissed from attendance upon
Queen Caroline. St. Andre was weU off during her
lifetime, but he died poor in 1776 at the age of ninety-

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 231
six. A portrait of Mary Tofts was painted by
Laguerre and engraved by Faber. ' She has a rabbit
in her lap, and displays a countenance expressive
of the utmost vulgarity.' This woman died in
January 1763 at Godalming.
Reference has aheady been made in the pre
vious chapter to Hogarth's late introduction of
Mary Tofts into his ' Credulity, Superstition and
Fanaticism ' (1762).
This monstrous imposture created some stir
abroad, and a print was published entitled 'Mr. Petit,
a French Surgeon sent from Paris to Dr. Meagre to
take an exact account from him of y® Preternatural
Delivery of Rabbits,' etc. Dr. Meagre is meant to
represent St. Andre.^
There is little about the Army in Hogarth's works
except in the case of the contrast of the English
and French soldiers, and the rabble disorder of the
' March to Finchley ' which, although it is one of his
finest pictures, was rather unfortunate in that it
excited the displeasure of the King.
Literature. — The one picture in iUustration of
Literature by Hogarth is the spirited and charming
' Distressed Poet,' which can scarcely be caUed a
satire, as one's sympathy is entirely with the unfor
tunate poet and his pleasant and industrious wife.
This picture is the more interesting if it be true
that it was intended to aUude to the troubles of
1 British Museum, Catalogue, vol., ii. p. 640.

232 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Lewis Theobald, the highly respected commentator
on Shakespeare, for one of whose plays, Perseus
and Andromeda, 1730, Hogarth designed two IUus
trations, But this point wiU be again referred to
later on. The picture is a vivid representation of a
garret in a Grub Street house, which we are told in
Johnson's Dictionary was ' much inhabited by
writers of smaU histories, dictionaries and small
poems.' Pope made his Dunciad the standard
epic of this place. However much we may admire
Pope as a poet, we cannot but feel disgust at his
rancorous attack upon his poorer brethren. It is
therefore a satisfaction to find Hogarth continuaUy
satirising the poet, who was too afraid of the artist
to reply to him. ' The Distrest Poet ' was ' Invented
Painted Engraved and Publish'd by Wm Hogarth
March the 3^, 1736. According to Act of Parha
ment, Price 3 ShiUings,' and was afterwards re
issued with some alterations on ' Decem^'^'' the 15.
1740.' The poet sits at a table by the window engaged in
writing ' Poverty, a Poem,' but disturbed by the
wrangling mUkwoman. In front of him is a book
inscribed ' Bysshe ' (intended for Bysshe's Art of
Poetry, a once famous rhymers' manual). On the
floor is the Grub Street Journal and the poet's sword.
Above his head is an engraving of Pope thrashing
Curll and crying out ' Veni, vidi, vici, 1735.' On a
shelf below this are four books and three tobacco
pipes. In the middle of the room sits the poet's

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 233
comely wKe mending a pair of her husband's
breeches, and at her feet the poet's coat on which a
cat, with her kittens, has made herseK comfortable.
Hartley Coleridge comments on the central figure
and writes, ' The poet's wife is perhaps the most
lovable figure that ever Hogarth drew ; while the
milkwoman has as little mUkiness about her as if
she had been suckled on blue ruin [i.e. gin] and
brimstone.' ^ Mr. Dobson asks if Goldsmith was
thinking of this engraving when in 1758 he described
himseK to his friend Robert Bryanton as ' in a garret
writing for bread and expecting to be dunned for a
milk-score ' ?
Mr. Stephens explains the curious object over the
mantelpiece as ' a circular mirror surrounded by
eight smaUer ones,' which seems to be a complete
explanation.^ John Ireland describes it as ' a dare
for larks ! '
Below the design an extract from the Dunciad
(1729) is engraved :
' Studious he sate, with all his books around,
Sinking, from thought to thought, a vast profound !
Plung'd for his sense, but found no bottom there ;
Then writ and flounder'd on, in mere despair.'
In the second state of the print (1740) the title of
the poem is changed from Poverty to Riches, the
engraving of Pope thrashing CurU replaced by a
view of the gold mines of Peru, and the library on the
shelf is reduced to two volumes. Pope's lines are also
' Essays and Marginalia, 1851, vol. ii. p. 217.
2 British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 213.

234 HOGARTH'S LONDON
omitted. The original pictiu*e was given by Hogarth
to Mrs. Draper, a midwife, at whose death it was sold
to Mr. Ward for five guineas. Lord Grosvenor gave
fourteen guineas for it at Ward's sale, and it is now in
the possession of the Duke of Westminster,
It was George Steevens who, being unable to find
a portrait of Theobald to add to those of the chief
Shakespearian commentators, copied the ' Distrest
Poet ' for one of these. Although Steevens is a very
doubtful authority, there is plausibility in this, and
two reasons given for associating Theobald with
Hogarth's picture have much force.
The quotation from the Dunciad just referred to is
not from the final form of the poem, but is taken from
the edition of 1729, where Theobald stands for the
hero before he was pushed aside that CoUey Cibber
might take his place. The passage commences :
' In each, she marks her image full exprest.
But chief in Tibbald's monster-breeding breast.'
Afterwards ' Bayes's ' replaced ' Tibbald's ' in the
second line,
Hogarth left out the most offensive of Pope's
allusions, and only printed what suited his purpose
in illustration of his design.
Another point is that the earhest of Theobald's
productions was ' The Cave of Poverty, a Poem,'
which bears a striking likeness to the title of what
the ' Distrest Poet ' is writing. The alterations
made in the second state are significant if we sup
pose that Hogarth was wishful to obliterate any hint

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 235
of an aUusion to a praiseworthy author who was no
dunce, but an editor of far superior merit to Pope,
and thus evoked the venomous poet's ire.^
Hogarth's severe satire on Pope has already been
aUuded to, and it was not likely ever to have been
forgiven by the poet, but the latter had a wholesome
fear of the painter, and did not venture to retaliate.
But the chief literary portrait by Hogarth is that of
Fielding, who was one of the artist's most ardent
admirers. It is strange that we should have no
first-rate portrait of so distinguished a man as the
author of Tom Jones and the foremost magistrate of
his time. It is satisfactory that what we have is
due to his friend Hogarth. There is a curious
history respecting this portrait which was engraved
by James Basire from Hogarth's pen-and-ink sketch
prepared as a frontispiece to the edition of Fielding's
works published by Andrew MUlar in 1762. Arthur
Murphy gave an explanation of the origin of the
portrait in the LKe prefixed to the first volume. He
wrote : ' After Mr. Hogarth had long laboured to try
if he could bring out any likeness of him from images
existing in his own fancy, and just as he was despair
ing of success, for want of some rules to go by in the
dimensions and outlines of the face, fortune threw
the grand desideratum in the way. A lady with a
pair of scissors had cut a profile, which gave the
1 A reprint of the original Dunciad (1729) which relates to Theobald
will be found in Nichols's Literary Illustrations (vol. ii. pp. 716-728), In
the same volume, pp. 745-747, are remarks by W. Richardson on the con
nection of Theobald with the 'Distrest Poet.'

236 HOGARTH'S LONDON
distances and proportions of his face sufficiently to
restore his lost ideas of him. Glad of an opportunity
of paying his last tribute to the memory of an author
whom he admired, Mr. Hogarth caught at this out
line with pleasure, and worked, with aU the attach
ment of friendship, till he finished that excellent
drawing which stands at the head of this work, and
recaUs to all, who have seen the original, a corre
sponding image of the man.' This is a high tribute
to the likeness. Mr. Dobson says that the lady
mentioned by Murphy was Miss Margaret Colher,
daughter of Arthur CoUier the metaphysician, who
accompanied Fielding and his wife to Lisbon in 1754.
Mr. Knight in his LKe of Garrick writes that the
story of Garrick making up his face as Fielding for
Hogarth to paint was narrated in Paris, and caused
some incrediUity. Garrick in order to convince the
most sceptical once more personated Fielding, and
his personation won instant recognition. This story
forms the basis of a comedy entitled Le Portrait de
Fielding (1800), by M. de Segur.
Neither George Steevens nor John Ireland would
allow the truth of either of these stories. Steevens
says in Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes : ' Our
Roscius, however, I can assert, interfered no farther
in this business than by urging Hogarth to attempt
the likeness, as a necessary adjunct to the edition
of Fielding's works. I am assured that our artist
began and finished the head in the presence of his
wife and another lady. He had no assistance but

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 237
from his own memory, which on such occasions was
remarkably tenacious.'
John Ireland {Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 291)
says much the same. ' These are trifling tales to
please children, and echoed from one to another,
because the multitude love the marvellous. , , .
Hogarth . . . sketched this froni memory.'
These denials seem to be too sweeping. It is
quite possible that the artist was helped by a
silhouette — in fact a portrait entirely from memory
is scarcely likely to be a profile, and the accentuation
of the appearance of the nose reminds one of a
silhouette. Moreover, it is scarcely likely that
Murphy invented the story which he so particularly
relates. John Ireland says that the ' etching is so nearly
a f acsimUe of the original, that when it was brought
home Hogarth mistook it for his own drawing,
which, considering of no value, he threw in the fire,
whence it was snatched by Mrs. Lewis, though not
before the paper was scorched.'
There is an engraving ' from a miniature in the
possession of Miss Sophia Fielding ' in Nichols's
Literary Anecdotes (vol. iii. p. 356), but this is evi
dently taken from Hogarth's portrait.
Another great novelist, Laurence Sterne, was
friendly with Hogarth, and praised the Analysis of
Beauty in the second volume of Tristram Shandy.
'Such were the outlines of Dr, Slop's figure, which —
if you have read Hogarth's Analysis of Beauty, and

238 HOGARTH'S LONDON
if you have not, I wish you would — you must know
may as certainly be caricatured, and conveyed to
the mind, by three strokes as three hundred.'
This compliment doubtless induced Hogarth to
design the frontispiece to the novel, containing a
portrait of Dr. Burton of York, the Jacobite
physician and antiquary in the character of Dr.
Slop, which appears in the second volume of Tristram
Shandy. He designed another frontispiece for the
fourth volume.
Mr. Dobson refers to a letter sold at Sotheby's in
November 1891. 'It was addressed by Sterne to
Mr. Berenger of Suffolk Street, and begged him to go
to Leicester Fields, and persuade Hogarth (" How-
garth," he caUs him) to make a drawing, to clap at
the front of my next edition of Shandy.' . . . ' The
loosest sketch in Nature of Trim's reading the
sermon to my Father w"^ do the business — and it
w'^ mutuaUy iUustrate his [Hogarth's] System and
mine ! ' ^
Hogarth painted or sketched portraits of his
literary friends as T. MoreU (engraved 1762), the
Hoadlys, etc., which have already been aUuded to.
The portrait of WiUiam Huggins, a translator of
Ariosto and Dante, was engraved by Major in 1760
for the Dante, but was not published, as Huggins
died in July 1761, There is a pencil drawing of the
translator with a bust of Ariosto in the Royal
CoUection, WiUiam Huggins of Headly Park,
1 Dobson's William Hogarth, 1907, p. 258.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 239
Hants, was the son of John Huggins, warden of the
Fleet and a great friend of Hogarth, who employed
him to draft the bUl to vest in designers and en
gravers an exclusive right to their own works
(Act 8, Geo. n. cap. 13), and Hogarth also
designed the frontispiece to Huggins' s oratorio of
Judith (1733), In the official catalogue of the
Art Treasures and Industrial Exhibition at Brad
ford, 1870, No, 109 is described as a portrait of Dr,
Johnson painted by Hogarth and contributed by
the late Marquess of Ripon (then Earl de Grey
and Ripon), There is no other record of a portrait
of Johnson by Hogarth, and it would be interesting
to know more of this picture.
Art. — ^Pictorial art was a subject so near to
Hogarth's heart that it naturally pervades the whole
scheme of this book, and need not be mentioned in a
division of it. He was chiefly interested in girding
at connoisseurs for the neglect of British Art, and
did not as a rule introduce his coUeagues and rivals
into his works. He painted Bonamy showing a
picture, and portraits of James Gibbs the architect
and Michael Rysbrach, sculptor.
One of the cleverest of his satires on the con
noisseurs wiU be seen in the taUpiece which he
produced for the Catalogue of the Exhibition of
Pictures which was held in 1761. In the frontispiece
to this same Catalogue he was not so succesful, as
his humour is lost in the elaboration of the allegory.

240 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Mention may be here made of three picttu-es which
have nothing to do with London Topography, but
need some notice as good examples of the variety
and wide range of Hogarth's pictorial power. The
first of these is the beautiful group of heads repre
senting his six servants, which was added to the
National GaUery quite recently. We have httle
information respecting this triumph of portraiture,
and we are therefore unable to give the names of
the individuals forming the group.
The marveUous oil sketch of the ' Shrimp-girl '
was added as lately as 1884, and is a great addi
tion to the National GaUery. The critic Richard
Muther uses strong words of praise when he caUs it
' a masterpiece to which the nineteenth century
can hardly produce a rival.' This picture was
engraved in 1781 by Bartolozzi.
The head of Diana here reproduced is of special
interest as an iUustration of Hogarth's sense of
female beauty. We have no further information
respecting the original than that it belonged to
Samuel Ireland in 1794. The engraving was
published by him in his Graphic Illustrations (i. 170),
with the following interesting anecdote respecting
it : ' Mr. Garrick chanced to visit Hogarth one
morning, when the artist was engaged in his painting-
room ; and being about to retire hastUy from the
door. Old Ben Ives, the servant, caUed out to him,
to beg he would step back, as he had something to
shew him, that he was sure would please ; and then

The Shrimp Girl.
From the original painting in the National Gallery.

Head of Diana.
Refrrodticed from S. Ireland's etching from an original sketch in oil by Hogarth.

Hogarth's Six Servants.
From the original painting in the National Gallery,

Professional life 241
taking him into the parlour, exclaimed in raptures,
" There, sir ! there 's a picture ! they say my
master can't paint a portrait, and does not know
what true beauty is ; there is a head, that I think
must confound and put aU his enemies to the blush." '
One would be glad to know if Ben Ives was one of
those represented in the group of servants,
Hogarth advertised that the prints of the
' Distressed Poet ' and the ' Enraged Musician '
would be foUowed by a third on Painting. It is not
known K this was reaUy contemplated or was merely
the notification of a possibility. There is nothing
extant to guide us in forming an idea as to how the
subject would be treated.
An advertisement in the London Daily Post
(November 24, 1740) announces: 'Shortly wiU be
published, a new Print, caU'd The Provoked
Musician. Designed and Engraved by Mr. WiUiam
Hogarth ; being a Companion to a Print, represent
ing a Distressed Poet, published some time since,
to which wUl be added a Third on Painting, which
wUl compleat the set ; but as the subject may
turn upon an affair depending between the L — d
M — r and the Author it may be retarded for some
time.' ' The Enraged Musician ' is one of Hogarth's most
interesting prints. The arrangement of the mis
ceUaneous coUection of discordant noises which the
artist has coUected together is perfect, dominated
as the whole picture is by the charming milkmaid in
Q

242 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the centre of the picture. At the same time the
musician at the open window gives the key to the
effect of the riot of confused soiuid that, as we
have said, caused Fielding to write in his Journal of
a Voyage to Lisbon that the picture is 'enough to
make a man deaf to look at.'
As to the musician who was used as a model, a
great amount of ingenuity has been expended, and
the foUowing names have been put forward : Signer
Cervetto, a bass player at the theatres ; and Mr.
John Foster, a player on the German flute when a
boy ; and Castrucci, a viohnist of repute ; but there
appears to be more authority for supposing the
figure was taken from Michael Christian Festin, who
was known to Hogarth and related the circumstances
of the interruption of his studies which have been
added to by the artist.
George Colman wrote a musical entertainment for
the Haymarket Theatre founded on this picture,
the music for which was composed by Dr. Arnold,
' The Modern Orpheus,' which was etched by D,
Smith from an original sketch in the possession of
the Marquis of Bute and published in 1807, is a satire
on the performances of the celebrated flautist, C.
Weidemann, who is introduced into the fourth plate
of the ' Marriage a la Mode.' The engraving dis
covers a street where a man is walking and plapng
on a flute, while he is attended by an enraptured
audience. An effect of his music is to compel legs
of mutton and other objects to move towards him

"The Enraged Musician." 1741.

PROFESSIONAL LIFE 243
through the air. In the distance stand Sir Robert
Walpole and George n., the latter speaking in delight
to the former, whUe coins issue from his pocket and
pass to that of Weidemann.
This engraving was reproduced in the Genuine
Works (Nichols and Steevens, 1817, vol. in.), but Mr.
Dobson is doubtful as to the genuineness of 'The
Modern Orpheus ' as actually the edsign of Hogarth.
We know that Hogarth had a high opinion of
Handel in spite of his connection with the hated
Italian opera. Some one suggested that the player
on the harpsichord in Plate 2 of the ' Rake's
Progress ' was intended for the great composer, but
this is most improbable. Mr. Felix Cobbold, M.P,,
is in possession of an oil painting of Handel by
Hogarth, which was engraved by Charles Turner in
1821. This engraving is dedicated ' To the Noble
men, Directors and Patrons of the Antient Music,'
but it is not stated in whose possession the picture
then was.
There are other portraits of Handel attributed
to Hogarth, but there is no definite information
respecting them.

244 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER VIII
BUSINESS LIFE
The subject of Business Life is intimately asso
ciated with Hogarth's first start in business by
himself, and we have his own card as an engraver
(which has already been aUuded to) to guide us as
to the date of the various business cards which have
been attributed to him. The charming card —
' W, Hogarth Engraver ' — in an elegant border after
the manner of CaUot is dated 1720, and most of the
other cards can probably be placed about the same
date. It is a question difficult, or rather impossible,
to settle whether Hogarth prepared the book-plate
and shop-biU for EUis Gamble before he left the
service of that goldsmith, or after he had set up his
own business, in the immediate neighbourhood of
his old master's shop.
The shop-biU representing an angel with a very
large palm branch in her left hand is a bold and
spirited production. Beneath the figure is inscribed
Gamble's name and description in English and
French. The English inscription to the left is as
foUows :

Hogarth's business card. 1720.

BUSINESS LIFE 245
Ellis Oamble
Goldsmith,
at the Golden Angel in
Cranboum-Street,
Leicester - Fields,
Makes, Buys db Sells all
sorts of Plate, Rings, tfc
Jewells die.
Samuel Ireland says of this biU : ' Whether by
accident or design we know not, but he [Hogarth]
has given to the right hand of the angel a finger too
much. A redundancy of the same kind, we observe
in his print of The Sleeping Congregation, where
he has intentionaUy added a joint more to the thigh
of the Angel, than is usuaUy found in the works
of Nature. The original of this print is become
extremely scarce, and although an early production,
and without name or date, has yet established itself,
in the minds of the most scrupiUous connoisseur,
as a genuine work of Hogarth.' ^
Hogarth's book-plates have aheady been aUuded
to, but it seems necessary to mention again the
delightful httle book-plate which Hogarth made for
Gamble. This goldsmith must have been a superior
man if he possessed a sufficient number of books to
require book-labels.
Respecting the Lambert (engraved Lambart)
plate Samuel Ireland writes: 'Hogarth's great
intimacy with George Lambert, the landscape-
painter, for whom the annexed coat-of-arms was
1 S. Ireland, Graphic IllusWations, vol. i. 1794, pp. 7-8.

246 HOGARTH'S LONDON
engraved by him as a book-plate, is weU known ;
the design is simple, and the execution masterly ;
yet the principal motive for introducing it here is,
that the original is a unique print. This circum
stance is the more extraordinary as I am informed
by Mr. Richards, secretary to the Royal Academy,
and who was a pupU of George Lambert, that it was
stuck in all his books ; and that his Ubrary consisted
of seven or eight hundred volumes.' ^
Samuel Ireland reproduces a shop-bill of WiUiam
Hardy engraved in the manner of CaUot from a
unique copy with a corner torn off. He adds that
the original was given to him ' as an early per
formance of Hogarth's by his friend the late Mr,
Bonneau, who received it from him as a very early
production,' ^ The inscription is as foUows :
war Hardy
Goldsmith
and Jeweller in Ratcliff highway
near Sun Tavern Fields
Sells all sorts of
Gold and Silver Plate die.
In the Genuine WorJcs (vol, iii,) is reproduced a
shop-bUl of a Soho goldsmith which presents the
interior of a shop with figures and a furnace in the
left-hand corner. The inscription is :
Peter De La Fontaine, Goldsmith
At the Golden Cup in Litchfield Street
Soho. Makes and Sells aU sorts of Gold and Silver
Plate, Swords, Rings, Jewells, &c., at ye lowest prices.
' Graphic Illustrations, vol. i. p. 115. ^ Ibid., vol. i. p. 3.

BUSINESS LIFE 247
The shop-biU of Hogarth's two sisters is of great
interest, but must be placed a few years later in
date than those aheady described, as Mary and
Ann Hogarth did not commence business untU the
year 1725, Samuel Ireland writes : ' The originality
of this print has never yet been doubted, even by
the most scrupulous ; its ornaments are bold and
animated ; and the masterly though careless touch
of the graver justly gives it a claim to approbation ' ^
Mr, Dobson notes that there is an impression of the
original bUl in the British Museum, The design
of the interior of a shop of the period is of much
value, and is of rather imposing proportions. The
inscription is as foUows :
Mary & Anne Hogarth
from the old Frock-shop the corner of the
Long Walk facing the Cloysters, Removed
to y^ King's Arms joyning to y^ Little Britain-
gate, near Long Walk. Sells y" best tfe most Fashi
onable Ready Made Frocks, sutes of Fustian,
Ticken cfe Holland, stript Dimmity ds Flanel
Wastcoats, blue and Canvas Frocks and bluecoat Boys Dra^\
Likewise Fustians, Tickens, Hollands, white
stript Dimitys, white ds stript Flanels in y^ piece,
by Wholesale or Retale, at Reasonable Rates.
Mrs. Holt's shop-bUl, also reproduced by Samuel
Ireland in his Graphic Illustrations (vol. i, p, 17) is
of considerable interest, and the design shows much
originality of invention although its ascription to
Hogarth has been doubted,
* Gi-aphic Illustrations, vol. i. p. 16.

248 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Ireland writes thus of this shop-biU : ' The
following print is selected as a farther specimen of
the early talent of Hogarth in the line of his pro
fession, , , , This print, though intended merely
as a shop-bUl, is put together with no smaU degree
of knowledge in the ordinary affairs of commerce
in our quarter of the globe. Mercury, the god of
merchandize and gain, whether lawfuUy or un
lawfully obtained, is here judiciously placed in the
midst of the scene of action : he seems assiduous
in executing the orders of the civic figure, who
represents Florence the capital of Tuscany, and who
is pointing to a jar of oil, one of the principal articles
of Commerce of that country. This fair city seems
pouring its richest treasures into the lap of Britain,
as we may coUect from the arms of England seen at
the stern of the vessel, which they are busUy loading.
Nor has Hogarth forgot to introduce [at the four
corners of the design] the other principal states
of Italy, Naples, Venice, Leghorn and Genoa, as
equaUy emulous to trade with our city of London,
the great emporium of Etu-ope,' The inscription
is as foUows : AT MRS. HOLTS,
Italian Ware House
at y^ two Olive Posts in y" Broad part of the Strand almost
opposite to Exeter Change are sold all Sorts of Italian Silks as
Lustrings, Sattins, Padesois, Velvets, Damasks,
&c.
Fans, Legorne Hats, Flowers Lute da Violin Strings,
Books of Essences, Venice Treacle, Balsomes,
die.

BUSINESS LIFE 249
And in a Back Warehouse all Sorts of Italian
Wines, Florence Cordials, Oyl, Olives, Anchovies,
Capers, Vermicelli, Bolognia Sausidges, Par
mesan Cheeses, Maple Soap,
dsc.
This description is very instructive. A particular
kind of grocer's shop was formerly styled an Italian
warehouse, and the name is not entirely unused now.
This shows that in the original Italian warehouse
there were two departments — the silk mercer's and
the wine merchant's and grocer's.
Samuel Ireland has reproduced something much
more doubtful than anything already described,
and that is what he caUs a ' Design for a Shop-biU.'
The picture represents a room with several persons
in different positions ; one, supposed to be Hogarth
himself, is showing a portrait of St, Luke with his
ox and book, inscribed ' W. Hogarth Painter.' Ire
land gives Charles Catton, R.A., as his authority for
supposing that Hogarth for a time worked as a sign-
painter, and he reproduces the two sides of a sign
for a Paviour which he attributes to Hogarth.
These were painted on a thick piece of mahogany
that had been divided by a saw before they came
into the possession of Ireland. They are interesting
illustrations of London streets with paviours at
work mending the roads. In the background of
one side is a rough sketch of the Dome of St. Paul's.
There is another shop-biU — that of ' Richard Lee
at y® Golden Tobacco RoU in Panton Street near

250 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Leicester Fields ' — which is entirely different from
those which have been previously described.
It is reproduced by Samuel Ireland in his Graphic
Illustrations from an original in his possession, which
he supposed to be unique. There is one in the
British Museum which is dated circa 1730, and
described by Mr, Stephens as foUows : ' It is an
oblong enclosing an oval, the spandrels being occu
pied by leaves of the tobacco plant tied in bundles ;
the above title is on a frame which encloses the oval.
Within the latter the design represents the interior
of a room, with ten gentlemen gathered near a round
table on which is a bowl of punch ; several of the
gentlemen are smoking tobacco in long pipes ; one
of them stands up on our right and vomits ; another,
who is intoxicated, lies on the floor by the side of a
chair ; a fire of wood burns in the grate ; on the waU
hang two pictures . . . three men's hats hang on
pegs on the waU,' ^
Ireland expresses the opinion that this engraving
contains the germ of the idea which at a later
period was developed by Hogarth in a ' Midnight
Modern Conversation,'
Mr, Dobson, however, doubts the ' shop-bUl '
being the work of Hogarth, and he suggests that the
design is based upon the ' Midnight Modern Conversa
tion,' This is probable, but it is but fair to Ireland
to quote what he says as to its authenticity. ' This
little print is so very like the other early works of
' British Muse^im Catalogue, vol. ii. p. 728.

BUSINESS LIFE 251
Hogarth both in the style and manner of engraving,
as weU as the ornaments and even the writing that
is round it, as to place its authenticity out of all
question. A farther proof might be urged if neces
sary. It is totaUy unlike the manner of his con
temporaries ; amongst whom it stood in such a
degree of repute as to induce them repeatedly to
copy it : three of these copies are now before us, and
so Ul executed as to be deemed mere servile imita
tions.'^ Nearly aUied to Shop-bUls are Undertakers'
Funeral Tickets, one of which was the work of
Hogarth. A reproduction from the scarce original will be
found in Ireland's Graphic Illustrations. It repre
sents the front of a London church, where a funeral
party is about to ascend the steps. The paU over
the coffin is surmounted by plumes and enriched by
coats-of-arms. The mourners (men and women)
foUow in pairs. Below the design is the inscription :
' You are desired to accompany y^ Corps of from
h late Dwelling in to
on next at of the Clock in the Evening.
Perform 'd by Humphrey Drew, Undertaker, in King
Street, Westminster.'
Samuel Ireland only knew of three copies of the
original engraving, the one which he reproduced,
one belonging to Horace Walpole on which he wrote
' W. Hogarth sc' This is now in the British
¦ Graphic Illustrations, vol. i. pp. 12-13.

252 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Museum.^ The third copy is in the Royal Collec
tion. This funeral ticket is a gloomy-looking thing as is
natural, but is also, as might be expected, very
superior to those then in general use. Mr. John
Ashton, in a chapter on Death and Burial in his
Social Life in the Reign of Queen Anne, reprints one
of these Invitations to a Funeral, the ornaments
round which are Time, skeletons, skulls, cross-bones,
pick-axe and shovel, shroud, etc.
When the funeral was in the evening the mourners
were usually supplied with wax tapers. These
sometimes excited the cupidity of the roughs who
were always to be found in case of public gatherings.
An advertisement in the Daily Gourant for September
30, 1713 (quoted by Mr. Ashton) shows what might
be expected : ' Riots and Robberies. Committed
in and about Stepney Churchyard, at a Funeral
Solemnity, on Wednesday the 23rd day of September;
and whereas many Persons, who being appointed to
attend the Funeral with white Wax lights of a
considerable value, were assaulted in a most violent
manner, and the said white Wax lights, taken from
them. Whoever shall discover any of the Persons,
guilty of the said crimes, so as they may be convicted
of the same, shall receive of Mr. WUliam Prince, Wax
Chandler in the Poultry, London, Ten shining.^ for
each person so discovered,' etc. It may be mentioned
that at this time it was the custom to make a
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. ii. p. 725.

BUSINESS LIFE 253
distinction in the mourning for the married and the
unmarried ; thus white and black was used for maids
and bachelors. In the fine engraving of the west
front of Covent Garden Church (St. Paul's) drawn
by Paul Sandby, R.A., and engraved by E. Rooker,
will be noticed the funeral of an unmarried girl,
where the women mourners are in white and the men
wear white sashes.
The instructive series of twelve plates of ' Industry
and Idleness,' illustrating the Adventures of an In
dustrious and an Idle Apprentice, is full of information
respecting the progress of business hfe in London,
and in this chapter we shaU have to deal almost
entirely with the Industrious Apprentice as the Idle
one has little to do with business.
Hogarth's design in producing these plates is
described by himself in a paper published by John
Ireland in his Hogarth Illustrated (vol. i. p. 185).
' Industry and Idleness exemplified, in the conduct of
two feUow 'prentices : where the one by taking good
courses, and pursuing points for which he was put
apprentice, becomes a valuable man, and an orna
ment to his country : the other by giving way to
idleness, naturally falls into poverty, and ends
fataUy, as is expressed in the last print. As the
prints were intended more for use than ornament,
they were done in a way that might bring them
within the purchase of whom they might most
concern ; and lest any print should be mistaken, the
description of each print is engraved at top.'

254 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The General Advertiser for Saturday, October
17, 1747, contains the foUowing announcement:
' This Day is publish'd. Price 12s, Design'd and
Engrav' d by Mr, Hogarth. Twelve Prints caU'd
" Industry and Idleness," shewing the advantages
attending the former and the miserable effects of
the latter, in the different Fortunes of Two Ap
prentices. To be had at the Golden Head in
Leicester Fields, and at the Print-shops. There are
some printed on a better paper for the curious at
14s. each set, to be had only at the Author's in Lei
cester Fields. Where may be had aU his other works,'
The moralists of the eighteenth century paid little
attention to fine distinctions and drew the difference
between good and evil with the clearest-cut contrast.
It was this that induced Thackeray to express his
sympathy with Tom Idle, who he thought never had
a chance in life.
Commentators have found considerable likeness
in the story of Hogarth's prints to the plot of the old
play. Eastward Hoe, by Ben Jonson, Chapman and
Marston (1605), and in the year 1751 it was revived at
Drury Lane for Lord Mayor's Day. This alteration
was not successful, but another made by Mrs. Lenox
and caUed Old City Manners was favourably received.
There is sufficient justification for caUing attention
to the likeness, although there does not seem much
probability that Hogarth should seek for so very
evident a story in an old play. Golding (Goodchild)
marries Touchstone's (West's) daughter and becomes

BUSINESS LIFE 255
a magistrate, when QuicksUver (Idle) is brought
before him as a criminal.
The first plate shows the interior of a weaver's
workshop in Spitalfields. Francis Goodchild is
seen working busUy whUe Tom Idle is sleeping. In
front of the latter on the loom is a quart pot which
has engraved upon it ' Spittle Fields.' The door of
the room has been opened by the master of the
apprentices, who caUs to the sleeper and threatens
him with his stick. In the fotu"th plate Goodchild
has been transferred to the office, and his master is
seen leaning affectionately upon his shoulder. The
master extending his right hand points to the looms
in the background ' as if he intended to give the
apprentice control in his place.' John Ireland
writes : ' A partnership, on the eve of taking place,
is covertly intimated by a pair of gloves upon the
writing-desk.' The position of the gloves indicates
the clasping of hands, and the London Almanac
on the side of the desk is headed by a design above
the calendar of Industry taking Father Time by the
forelock. A city porter at the left of the plate is delivering
stuffs from BackweU HaU, addressed to ' Mr. West.'
These two plates give an exceUent iUustration of a
business establishment in Spitalfields where the
silk trade once fiourished in London.
In Plate 6 the Industrious Apprentice out of his
time obtains the fulness of his reward for good
conduct by marrying the daughter of his master

256 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and becoming a partner in the firm. In the first
state of the plate Hogarth made the mistake of
placing the junior partner's name first on the sign,
but ' GoodchUd and West ' of the first state became
' West and Goodchild ' in the second state.
Mr. Stephens thus describes this plate: 'The
engraving shows part of a street in London, near
the Fire Monument, the Pedestal of which appears
in the middle distance with part of an inscription
thus : "In remembrance  of Burning tf Pro
testant City by the treachery of the Papish Faction
In  year  of our  Lo — d 1666." A band
of musicians, including a butcher who performs
on a cleaver with a bone, and his companion,
another such performer, are assembled before a
house to celebrate in their noisy way the wedding
of the Industrious 'Prentice with the daughter of his
Master, Mr. West. . . . The musicians appear to
be making a great noise, their instruments are
mostly drums . . . One of the drummers has ap
proached a window of the house of Messrs. West and
Goodchild ; the lower sash of this window is pushed
up and the Industrious 'Prentice appears there,
holding a teacup in one hand whUe with the other
he gives a coin to the drummer, who bows obsequi
ously and has taken off his hat. Goodchild wears
his dressing-gown and cap, having put aside his coat
and wig on returning home from the church after
his marriage to Miss West. The bride is seen in
the interior of the room, with a patch on her fore-

BUSINESS LIFE 257
head . . sipping her tea and looking very happy.
The door of the house is open and a footman,
wearing a shoulder-knot, stands on the threshold,
pouruig a plateful of broken victuals into the apron
of a woman, who kneels on the step to receive the
alms ; a chUd's face appears at the shoulder of the
woman.' ^
John Ireland identifies the cripple to the left of
the picture holding a broadside of the baUad of
' Jesse or the Happy Pair ' as ' a man known by
the name of PhUip in the Tub, who had visited
Ireland, and the United Provinces, and in the
memory of many persons now living [1793] was a
general attendant at weddings.' ^
The abstract of the monstrous inscription on the
Monument given above is not correct, in that the
inscription occupied four sides of the plinth and
therefore could not aU be seen at one view. The
offensive words were not the original inscriptionj
but were added at the time of the terror caused by
the so-called Popish plot. They were obliterated
in the reign of James n., recut after the Revolution,
but finaUy erased by an Act of Common Council,
January 26, 1831.
Pope was imusuaUy accurate when he wrote the
lines :
' Where London's column, pointing at the skies.
Like a tall bully lifts the head and lies.'

• British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. pp. 693-694.
2 Hogarth Hlustrated, vol. i. pp. 198-199.
E

258 HOGARTH'S LONDON
In Plate 8 we find Goodchild grown rich and become
Sheriff of London, dining at one of the City Com
panies' haUs. John Ireland describes the Banquet
ing HaU as the GuildhaU, but this is clearly a
mistake, and the whole-length figure of Sir WUliam
Walworth in a niche between the windows proves
that this is intended for the old hall of the Fish
monger's Company which was built by Edward
Jerman, the City Surveyor, after the Great Fire. The
present haU, built 1831-33, is not on the site of the
old haU, but in an improved position formed in con
nection with the opening for the new London Bridge.
The imposing beadle in his state gown stands at
the entrance door with a letter in his hand directed
' To the Worship " Fra " Goodchild Es. Sher 
Londo — ,' which has been delivered by a messenger
who, bareheaded and holding a hat in his hand,
awaits an answer. The principal seats are occupied
by the Sheriff and his wife, and a number of ladies
are seen sitting at the feast.
This picture is of great interest as showing the
manners at table in the eighteenth century. AU
the dishes were put on at once and no wine was
placed upon the table. A black waiter is seen
handing it round. Sir Walter Besant says that a
writer in 1790 notes the fact that it had only lately
become the fashion to put wines upon the table,
and that the new custom was then very far from
being general. The dinner at the time of this print
was in the daytime, and the company retired to]_the

BUSINESS LIFE 269
gardens, which were generaUy attached to the
various haUs, for dessert and wine.
The trees in the garden are seen through the
windows in this plate.
It was not untU weU on into the nineteenth
century when an improved system of service and
better manners among the guests became general.
In Plate 10 the two former feUow-apprentices
are brought together again under most painful
circumstances. GoodchUd having become an Alder
man sits as a magistrate in the GuildhaU, when
Idle is brought before him as a criminal. The
clerk is busUy writing on a paper addressed ' To
the Turnkey of Newgate,' a warrant for the com
mittal of Thomas Idle to Newgate on the charge of
having murdered the man whose plunder was shown
in Plate 9 referred to in the Chapter on Crime.
The appearance of the prisoner is abject. Mr.
Stephens says of the man next him who is swearing
on the book : ' The man in the knitted cap and
having the patch over one of his eyes, appears as a
witness against his accomplice and stands next to
him in the character of a " King's evidence,"
swearing to the truth of his deposition by placing
his left hand on the book held by an attendant of
the court, who stands within the bar. This attendant
has one of his hands behind his back, into that hand
a slatternly woman is secretly placing a piece of
money. This act of bribery is performed in order
that the official may be induced not to notice that

260 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the witness uses his left instead of his right hand in
attesting his oath on the book. An assertion that
an oath taken in this fashion was not binding on the
swearer was frequently made by the vulgar before,
at, and since the period in question.' ^
The concluding Plate (12), in which Francis
Goodchild is seen to have reached the summit of his
ambition as Lord Mayor of London, contains a view
of the greatest interest from a topographical point of
view. It is a briUiant representation of the west end of
Cheapside. Looking southwards across St. Paul's
Churchyard, we see the eastern extremity of the
cathedral. In front a balcony projects from the
first floor of a house at the corner of Paternoster Row.
In the balcony are several personages, including
Frederick, Prince of Wales, and his wife Augusta
under a canopy of state. As to the persons attendant
on royalty we have no information, with the ex
ception of ' the lady in profile with a French cap,
lappet and cloak' to the extreme right of the
balcony, and we have Horace Walpole's authority
for saying that this figure is intended for the Countess
of Middlesex, Mistress of the Robes. ^ The front of
the balcony is decorated with two pieces of tapestry,
the subjects of which have not been recognised.
The right of using these balconies was often
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. pp. 708-709.
2 This information is given in a MS. note in a copy of the first edition of
Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes, 1781 (p. 109), in the author's possession,
which originally belonged to Horace Walpole who annotated it.

BUSINESS LIFE 261
reserved, and John Ireland refers to Wood's Body of
Conveyancing, in which book (vol. u. p. 180) there is a
London lease ; one of the clauses gives a right to the
landlord and his friends to stand in the balcony
* during the time of the shews or pastimes, upon the
day commonly caUed Lord Mayor's day.'
The favourite place for royalty to see the show
was at Bow Church, but it is recorded that Frederick,
Prince of Wales, on a previous occasion, wished to see
it privately and he entered the city in disguise. He
was discovered by some members of the Saddlers'
Company, and was requested to occupy the Com
pany's stand. He accepted the invitation and soon
afterwards became a saddler.
The old Seldam or shed which was made by order
of Edward in. on the north side of Bow Church for
the purpose of accommodating the royal party on
the occasions of shows and processions, was after
wards superseded by the balcony. In September
1677 Charles n. had advice at Newmarket that the
Fifth Monarchy men had a design to murder him
and the Duke of York on Lord Mayor's day in this
balcony. The crowded scene of Hogarth's plate is fuU of
interesting detaUs which it is needless to particularise
here, although there is one which requires special
attention as it helps to complete the series and
causes us to remember the connection between the
two apprentices. At the right-hand corner of the
engraving is an emaciated boy, a hawker of broad-

262 HOGARTH'S LONDON
sides, who holds a paper on which is printed, ' A f uU
and true account of y" Ghost of Tho. Idle which — '
We have, however, Chaucer's authority for the
fact that every apprentice who is idle and neglects
his proper duties does not necessarily come to the
violent end of Hogarth's Idle Apprentice.
' A prentis whilom dwelled in our citee.
At every bridale wolde he sing and hoppe ;
He loved bet the taverne than the shoppe ;
For whan ther eny Eiding was in Chepe,
Out of the shoppe thider wold be lepe ;
Til that he had al the sight yseyn,
And danced wel he would nat come ageyn.'^
The passages from the Bible which are attached to
the several plates of ' Industry and Idleness ' were
selected by Hogarth's friend, the Rev. Dr. Arnold
King. John Nichols obtained this information from
Dr. Ducarel.
There are a series of drawings by Hogarth for the
engravings of ' Industry and Idleness ' in the Print
Room of the British Museum. Some of these are
first thoughts, freely sketched ; others represent more
developed studies ; others, again, are the final designs
made for transfer to the copper. The description of
these is very interesting (see Binyon's British
Museum Catalogue of Drawings by British Artists,
vol. ii. p. 316). There are also drawings for two
subjects which were not engraved, viz, ' The In
dustrious 'Prentice when a Merchant giving Money
1 The Coke's Tale.

barlow /ad/i'

.S'l-i'iii' n!' 'I '-'Ji tl iikli'rf //i>//.'-r 111 /7~-l,.5.
Fuh. for S. Irelatid Jfav l./J(fg.

Sarah, Duchess of Mari.uorgugh, at Child's Bank.

BUSINESS LIFE 263
to his Parents,' and ' The Idle Apprentice stealing
from his Mother,' ^
There is a very interesting tradition connecting
Hogarth with sketches of the run upon Child's
Bank, which was stopped with the help of Sarah,
Duchess of Marlborough, but the accounts of this are
so confused that it is difficult to obtain a satisfactory
solution, A plain statement may help to draw
attention to the subject and end in an explanation
being suggested,
Samuel Ireland pubhshed in the second volume
of his Graphic Illustrations (1799) an engraving by
Barlow from a small picture in oil by Hogarth in his
possession, which he entitled ' Scene at a Banking
House in 1745,' Mr, Dobson says that the picture
was bought at Ireland's sale in 1801 by George
Baker for £3, 10s, At Baker's sale in 1825 it fetched
£60, 18s, It was sold again in June 1899 at Forman' s
sale for £53, lis,
Ireland's account of the picture is shortly as
foUows : ' The figure in the chair was intended for
Sarah, the celebrated Dutchess of Marlborough,
This circumstance is corroborated by the Ducal
coronet on the back of the chair, which is supported
by two boys. The figures represented in a sitting
posture, are the principals of the banking-house of
Mess" Child and Co., who seem amply prepared to
discharge aU the demands pressing upon them. . . .
1 Hogarth's original intention was to call the Idle Apprentice ' Thomas
Fowler."

264 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The wealth of the house is aUegoricaUy represented
by the bags of gold, which are piled over each other
in the background of the picture.'
Ireland then relates the circumstances of the run
upon the bank and relief supplied by the Duchess of
Marlborough, which he says he obtained from an
authority not to be doubted. In 1745, owing to the
Jacobite Rebellion, Bank of England notes were at a
considerable discount, while the notes issued by
Child's Bank and that of Hoare and Co. maintained
their credit and circulated at par. The directors of
the Bank of England attempted to injure the credit
of Child's Bank by coUecting their notes with the
intention of pouring them in for payment on the same
day. The Duchess heard of this plot and informed
Messrs. Child, at the same time supplying them
' with a sum of money more than sufficient to answer
the amplest demand ' that could be made upon them.
The scheme was carried out, and the Bank of England
was paid in its own paper to its own very great loss.
This story breaks down owing to Ireland having
overlooked the fact that the redoubtable Duchess
Sarah was not alive in 1745, she having died in
October 1744.
The late Mr. HUton Price, partner in ChUd's Bank,
gave an altogether different account of this ' run '
in his octavo volume entitled Ye Marygold, 1875.
He wrote : ' ChUd's Bank was saved from a run in
1689 by Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough (then Lady
Churchill), who collected among her friends as much

BUSINESS LIFE 265
gold as she was able, which she brought down to the
bank in her coach. Hogarth made a spirited sketch
of the Duchess's coach stopping at Temple Bar, and
another sketch of her Grace appearing in the bank
foUowing porters carrying bags of gold. No entry
in the books of the firm respecting this, but there is
no reason to doubt the fact.' ^
We are not told where these sketches of Hogarth's
are to be found ; and if they were made by him, they
must have been drawn from a relation of the events
and not from sight, as the painter was not then born.
In 1902 Mr. HUton Price published a larger book
on the same subject, entitled The Marygold by Temple
Bar (4to). He there repeats what is quoted above,
and adds an account of the run or ' push,' as it was
then caUed, made upon ChUd's from John Francis's
History of the Bank of England. Francis gives
Samuel Ireland as his authority, but adds some
figures, and to some extent gets over the difficulty
of the Duchess Sarah's death by dating the affair
about 1745. He says that Child's ' got scent of the
plot ' and ' applied to the celebrated Duchess of
Marlborough who gave them a single cheque of
£700,000 on their opponents.' Francis, whUe giving
aU this information, expresses the opinion that it is
difficult to believe that any body of men could act
so disgraceful a part.
Mr. Price adds that ' no entry of the above can be
met with in the books of the firm, but we think it
' F. G. H. Price, Ye Marygold, 1875, p. 17 (privately printed).

266 HOGARTH'S LONDON
worth mentioning as we have no reason for doubting
it, these and other stories being mostly founded to a
certain degree on facts.' It is to be hoped that some
further facts may come to light which wUl settle the
particular points of a story which is of interest both
in the life of the Duchess of Marlborough and in that
of Hogarth.
There are two more publications of Hogarth which,
to a certain extent, belong to business life, although
they are both instances of gambling in its worst
form, viz. the ' South Sea Bubble ' and the ' Lottery.'
Both are dated 1721, and they form Hogarth's
earliest contributions to pictorial satire. In the
preface to the second volume of the British Museum
Catalogue of Prints and Drawings (satires) it is said :
' The most numerous, the richest, and most varied
series of satires in this Catalogue is that on the
catastrophe of the South Sea Company and its aUies
the Mississippi and West India Companies, which
begins with " The Bubblers Medley," and concludes
with but few intervals in the sequence of entries
with Hogarth's early work, " An Emblematical
Print on the South Sea Scheme," comprising about
one hundred entries which describe not fewer than
two hundred and fifty distinct designs.'
The ' South Sea Bubble ' print represents a fancy
London street at the foot of the Monument, the
pedestal of which is decorated with statues of two
foxes, emblematical of the directors of the South Sea
Company, and inscribed : ' This Monument was

BUSINESS LIFE 267
erected in memory of the destruction of this
City by the South Sea in 1720.'
In the centre of the print is a roundabout worked
by South Sea directors and carrying persons of
various grades — a Scotch nobleman, with his ribbon,
an old woman, a shoeblack, a divine and a wanton,
who chucks the last under the chin as he laughs at
her. On the top of the machine is a goat with the
label ' Who 'U Ride.' A crowd of women rush into
a building, the gable of which is surmounted with
horns ; over the door is written, ' Rafjleing for
Husbands with Lottery Fortunes in Here.'' ^
In the extreme right corner of the print is a figure
lying exhausted or dead, which is labeUed Trade.
This is one of Hogarth's early prints in which he
foUowed the prevalent custom of using labels and
letters to inform the spectator as to what is intended.
D is Honesty, stretched upon a wheel, whose hmbs
are being broken by G — Seh-Interest. F, a man
with a dagger and mask, is flogging E — Honour
fastened to a piUory. In front of the roundabout
are three men, one of whom is said to be intended
for Pope. Respecting this group it is said in a note
by a friend contributed to Nichols's Biographical
Anecdotes : ' That Pope was silent on the merits of
Hogarth (as one of your readers has observed) should
excite little astonishment, as our artist's print on
the South Sea exhibits the translator of Homer is no
very flattering point of view. He is represented
1 British Museum Catalogue, vol. ii. p. 590.

268 HOGARTH'S LONDON
with one of his hands in the pocket of a fat personage,
who wears a horn-book at his ghdle. For whom this
figure was designed, is doubtful. Perhaps it was
meant for Gay, who was a fat man, and a loser in the
same scheme.'
If these two figures were intended for Pope and
Gay, their relative sizes can be iUustrated by some
lines in Pope's poem of The Challenge (1717) :
' At Leicester Fields a house full high.
With door all painted green.
Where ribbons wave upon the tie
(A milliner I mean) ;
There may you meet us three to three.
For Gray can well make two of me.'
The widespread misery caused by the Bubble
Companies, chief of which was the South Sea
Company, is so weU known that it is unnecessary to
expatiate upon it here. In spite of all this know
ledge, it comes as a shock to find so many men
distinguished in the State, literature, science, and
even trade, who were mixed up in the scandals
caused by this madness for gambling. Gay's stock
given to him by Young Craggs was once worth
£20,000. He was urged to seU, but he waited for a
higher price, and even when importuned to seU so
much as would make him sure of ' a clean shirt and
a shoulder of mutton every day,' he stUl delayed
tUl he lost all. Pope was more fortunate, as his
stock was worth at one time between twenty and
thirty thousand pounds, and he was one of the

BUSINESS LIFE 269
lucky few who had ' the good fortune to remain
with half they imagined they had ' (letter to Atter-
bury). The learned Nonconformist di'\Tne, Samuel
Chandler, D.D., F.R.S. (a fine portrait of whom, by
M. Chamberlain, is in the possession of the Royal
Society), in early life was ruined by the loss of his
wife's fortune, and was forced to open a bookshop.
A grandfather of Edward Gibbon was a Commis
sioner of Customs and a director of the South Sea
Company. He was deprived of his whole fortune
by the House of Commons, but the historian teUs
us in his autobiography that his grandfather lived
to make another fortune which he bequeathed to his
son. The South Sea Company was formed in 1711 with
the object of trading with Spanish America, but it
was a swindle pure and simple. It was worse than
Law's Mississippi Scheme, because England had very
hmited rights of trading with South America, while
France possessed Louisiana. The verses engraved
below the design are sad doggrel, and respecting
them Nichols writes in his Biographical Anecdotes :
' It may be observed, that London always affords a
set of itinerant poets, whose office it is to furnish
inscriptions for satirical engravings. I lately over
heard one of these unfortunate sons of the Muse mak
ing a bargain with his employer. " Your print,"
says he, " is a taking one, and why don't you go to
the price of a half-crown epigram ? " From such
hireling bards, I suppose, our artist purchased not a

270 HOGARTH'S LONDON
few of the wretched rhimes under his early perform
ances ; unless he himself be considered as the author
of them.'
The last line of the inscription is ' Guess at the
rest, you find out more,' and it has been said
that seems ' to imply a consciousness of such
personal satire as it was not prudent to explain.'
' The Lottery ' (1721) is quite one of the least
interesting of Hogarth's productions, and does not
need much description.
Mr. Stephens describes the print as representing
' the interior of a large room with figures, having
various meanings, placed upon a raised platform.
In the centre is a pedestal of three stages, on the
topmost of which is a female figure representing
National Credit holding a church in her right hand,
and resting her cheek on her left hand, the elbow
of which is placed upon the summit of a pUlar ; on
the next or middle stage sit Apollo and Justice with
their appropriate emblems. The former points out
to Britannia, who sits on the lowest stage of the
pedestal, a picture which hangs on the waU behind
them. . . . On our right of the platform is Fortune,
a naked woman, blinded and standing on a wheel, in
the act of putting her hand into a great lottery
wheel or circular rotatory box which is placed on the
side of the platform.'^
There is a description or explanation added to the
design by the artist himself; and, as Nichols says
* British Museum Catalogue, vol. ii. p. 597.

BUSINESS LIFE 271
in his Biographical Anecdotes, ' Had not Hogarth,
on this occasion, condescended to explain his own
meaning, it must have remained in several places
inexplicable.' The corrupting influence of lotteries
on the public, more particularly as they were
arranged by the State, was considerable, and so far
was a good subject for the satirist, but the subject is
too confined to aUow of a broad and interesting
treatment.

272 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER IX
TAVERN LIFE
The eighteenth century was essentiaUy a pleasure-
seeking period. The men met nightly in taverns
and coffee-houses for social converse, and often for
gaming and other amusements. There was then a
greater mixture of classes than in later times, and
here aU ranks met on equal terms. This doubtless
became irksome to some, and in order that persons
of similar tastes should be able to meet together
without mixture with uncongenial spirits Clubs
were formed.
These meetings had been general in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries, but coffee-houses
increased greatly in the reign of Queen Anne, and
stiU more so in the times of the Georges. References
to many of these are found in Hogarth's works,
but doubtless he frequented many more than we
have authority to mention. Nowhere could the
great satirist find more ample material for his
pencU than in the taverns and coffee-houses of
London. In the City mention may be made of the BeU Iim
in Wood Street, Cheapside, Pontack's Head in

A Harlot's Progress." Plate i. The'Inn Yard.

TAVERN LIFE 273
Abchurch Lane, the DevU, and the Mitre in Fleet
Street, the Bible in Shire Lane, and the Elephant in
Fenchurch Street.
In Covent Garden the Bedford Coffee-House in
the Great Piazza, the Bedford Arms in the Little
Piazza, Button's in RusseU Street, the Rose Tavern
in Brydges Street, and Tom King's in the Market.
In Clare Market the SpUler's Head, in Gerrard
Street, Soho, the Turk's Head, intimately associated
with Samuel Johnson, the Feathers in Leicester
Square, and the Rummer at Charing Cross.
The first plate of the ' Harlot's Progress ' shows
us one of the old inn yards so common in the
eighteenth century at which the lumbering York
wagon has just arrived. The sign of the BeU is
seen by the door, and John Ireland informs us that
this was situated in Wood Street, Cheapside. It is
scarcely possible that Hogarth intended the poor
clergyman on his half -starved horse to be the girl's
father. If he had been such, he could not have
aUowed his daughter to faU into the hands of the
brazen procuress, who is named as the notorious
Mother Needham of Park Place, St. James's. This
woman in 1731 (three years before the pubhcation
of the ' Harlot's Progress) was committed to the
Gatehouse for keeping a disorderly house, and was
so iU-used by the populace during her exposure in
the piUory that she died shortly afterwards. In
the doorway of the iim is her employer. Colonel
Chafteris, attended by his confidant, John Gourlay.

274 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The very name of Charteris is a synonym for un
mitigated viUainy, and no more withering condemna
tion of a human being has ever been written than
Arbuthnot' s epitaph on ' Francis Chartres, who
with an inflexible constancy, and inimitable uni
formity of life, persisted in spite of age and
infirmities, in the practice of every human vice,
excepting prodigality and hypocrisy. His insatiable
avarice exempted him from the first ; his matchless
impudence from the second.'
This London inn-yard, taken in conjunction with
the more lively and exciting ' Stage Coach or
Country Inn Yard ' (1747), gives us an exceUent idea
of the humours and troubles of traveUing in Hogarth's
day. Pontack's eating-house in Abchurch Lane was
the most expensive and esteemed resort of the
fashionable world from the Restoration to about the
year 1780. Misson, the French refugee, did not
greatly esteem our mode of living, but he made an
exception in the case of Pontack's. He says in his
Travels, ' Those who would dine at one or two
guineas per head are handsomely accommodated
at our famous Pontack's,' The place was noted
for its wine, and Swift (Journal to SteUa) says :
' Pontack told us, although his wine was so good,
he sold it cheaper than others ; he took but seven
shillings a flask. Are not these pretty rates ? '
A tract entitled ' The Metamorphoses of the Town
or a view of the Present Fashion ' (1730), shows

TAVERN LIFE 275
the position of Pontack's as the chief resort of
extravagant epicures. Among the items in the biU-
of-fare of a guinea ordinary figure ' a ragout of
fatted snails,' and ' chickens not two hours from the
sheU,' '
The site of this ordinary was occupied before the
Great Fire by the White Bear, but on the rebuilding
a Frenchman, described by Evelyn as M. Pontack,
the son of the President of Bordeaux, owner of a
district whence are imported to England some of
the most esteemed claret, was encouraged to establish
a tavern with aU the novelties of French cookery.
Pontack was somewhat of a character, weU read in
philosophy, but chiefly of the rabbins, exceedingly
addicted to cabalistic fancies and ' an eternal
babbler.' He set up as his sign the portrait of his
distinguished father. Pontack's portrait is intro
duced in the third plate of the ' Rake's Progress ' as
having been put up in place of that of Julius Csesar.
In the early years of the Royal Society the
FeUows dined at Pontack's, and this shows that the
phUosophers at that day had a taste for good
living. Mrs. Susannah Austin, who kept the
Pontack's Head in Hogarth's day, married William
Pepys, banker in Lombard Street, at St. Clement's
Church on January 15, 1736.
' Perhaps Bramston was thinking of this when he wrote in his Man of
Taste, 1733,— ' Dishes I chuse though little, yet genteel.
Snails the first course, and Peepers crown the meal ! '
' Peepers ' are young chickens (Dobson's De Libris, 1908, p. 35 and notes).

276 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The famous DevU Tavern in Fleet Street, so
intimately associated with Ben Jonson, is sho-wn in
Hogarth's iUustration of Hudibras (Part iu. canto 2)
entitled ' Burning the Rumps at Temple Bar ' :
' That beastly rabble — that came down
From all the garrats — in the Town,
And Stalls and Shop-boards, — in vast swarms
With new chalk'd Bills, — and rusty arms,
To cry the Cause — up heretofore,
And bawl the Bishops— out of door ;
Are now drawn up — in greater Shoals,
To roast — and broil us on the Coals.
And all the grandees — of our Members
Are Carbonading — on the Embers ;
Knights, citizens and burgesses —
Held forth by Rumps — of pigs and geese.
That serve for characters — and badges
To represent their personages.
Each bon-fire is a funeral pile.
In which they roast and scorch and broil.
And ev'ry representative
Have vow'd to roast — and broil alive.
And 'tis a miracle we are not
Already sacriiic'd incarnate.
For while we wrangle here and jar,
W are grilly'd all at Temple-bar.
Some on the sign-post of an alehouse
Hang in effigy, for the gallows.
Made up of rags to personate
Respective Officers of State.'
Although the third part of Hudibras was not
published untU 1678, six years after Wren's Temple
Bar was built, Hogarth would have been more
correct if he had dra-wn the old bar which existed
until the Great Fire of 1666 ; as the depicted scene
occurred when that bar still stood on its old site.

¦ Hudibras." Plate ii. 1726. Burning of the Rumps at Temple Bar.

TAVERN LIFE 277
He could have seen a figure of the timber bar in
HoUar's seven-sheet map of London, but it is
perhaps too much to expect such rigid accuracy
from the artist. He painted what he saw.^
The original sign of the Devil Tavern represented
St. Dunstan puUing the Devil by the nose, and
probably originated from the house being situated
opposite to St. Dunstan's Church. At the time the
tavern was in chief repute, the DevU may be said to
have been the more popular of the two personages,
and his name formed a sufficient designation. At
the latter end of the eighteenth century the house
feU on e-vU days, and its history and briUiant associa
tions were not sufficient to save it from decay.
Messrs. Child the bankers, who occupied the next-
door house (which in James the First's reign was a
public ordinary with the sign of a Marygold),
purchased in 1787 the freehold of the DevU, and
added the premises to their own.
Close by was the Mitre, to which tavern Hogarth
invited to dinner his friend Dr. Arnold King, who
selected the texts for the series of prints of the two
apprentices. John Nichols reproduced this drawing
on the engraved title to his Biographical Anecdotes,
and describes it as follows : A specimen of Hogarth's
propensity to merriment on the most trivial occasions
is observable in one of his cards requesting the
company of Dr. Arnold King to dine with him at the
1 The history of Hogarth's diflerent illustrations of Hudibras is very com
plicated, and some notes on the subject will be found in the second chapter-

278 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Mitre. Within a circle, to which a knife and fork
are the supporters, the -written part is contained. In
the centre is drawn a pye, with a mitre on the top of
it ; and the invitation of our artist concludes with
the foUowing sport on three of the Greek letters —
to Eta Beta Pi. The rest of the inscription is not
very accurately spelt. A quibble by Hogarth is
surely as respectable as a conundrum by Swift.'
The complete inscription is : ' Mr. Hogarth's
comp*^ to Mr. King and desires the Honnor of his
company at dinner on thursday next to Eta Beta Py.'
In a note Nichols gives the information that the
original is now (1782) in Park Place in the possession
of Dr. Wright. Some persons had doubted the
existence of the card. The Mitre was a favourite
sign, and many celebrated houses with this name
were to be found in different parts of London. The
two most famous were situated in Cheapside and
in Fleet Street. The latter after many vicissitudes
ceased to exist, and the site (No. 39 Fleet Street)
was added to the banking house of Messrs. Hoare in
1829. This tavern was frequented (among other
celebrities) by Ben Jonson, Samuel Pepys, and
Sam.uel Johnson. Hogarth also appears to have
found in it a convenient resort.-^
The Royal Society and the Society of Antiquaries
' In London, Past and Present it is asserted, largely on the authority
of T. 0. Noble and R. H. Burn {London Trade Tokens) that Johnson's
Mitre was a later house situated in Mitre Court, Fleet Street ; but my
friend Dr. Philip Norman, Treasurer of the Society of Antiquaries, has
kindly given particulars which force me to the conclusion that this opinion
is untenable.

TAVERN LIFE 279
were in the habit of dining there. Of the latter
Ca-wthorn -wrote :
' Some Antiquarians, grave and loyal.
Incorporate by Charter Royal,
Last -winter on a Thursday night were
Met in full senate at the Mitre.'
' A Midnight Modern Conversation ' (1734) is one
of Hogarth's first-rate performances, in which eleven
persons are brought together in various stages of
intoxication. There have been many conjectures as
to the scene of these orgies — two places have been
suggested — ^the St. John's Coffee-House in Shire
Lane and the Bible in the same place. The landlord
of the latter was a bookbinder named Chandler who
worked for Hogarth, John Ireland teUs us this, and
adds that the conjecture is founded on the strong
resemblance of the man with a nightcap to Chandler,
who was very deaf. At the same time he himself
was inclined to pronounce the man from his conse
quential manner to be a justice of the peace. The
clergyman who is seen ladling out the punch is said
by Sir John Hawkins to be intended for Orator
Henley, but this has been disputed, and Dr. Johnson's
dissolute kinsman — Parson Ford — has been named
by some for the ' honourable ' post. Doubtless all
the characters introduced are taken from the life,
but it was only occasionaUy that Hogarth was
personal in his satire, and he seldom named his
subjects, as aUuded to in the verses under the print :
' Think not to find one meant resemblance there.
We lash the vices but the persons spare.'

280 HOGARTH'S LONDON
His annotators were not so reticent, and attempted
to name aU the persons in his pictures, often without
much probabUity. In this picture, besides those
already mentioned, one of the characters is said to
represent Kettleby, a blatant advocate, and another
John Harrison the tobacconist, who sold papers of
tobacco at the taverns he frequented. In this
picture there is a paper inscribed ' Freeman's Best.'
James Figg has also been named as one of the
company, but this is very doubtful. John Ireland
says that he was told that the original picture was
found in an inn in Gloucestershire, and ' is now (1793)
in the possession of J, Calverley, Esq, of Leeds,'
The engraving was very popular in France and
Germany as weU as in England, and was transferred
to pottery and to fans, Mr. Dobson mentions
several copies — one, which had previously belonged
to Lord Chesterfield, was exhibited at Richmond in
1881 by the late Mr. Henry George Bohn ; another
was sent to the Guelph Exhibition in 1891 by Mrs.
Morrison, of BasUdon. There is a version in Lord
Leconfield's gallery at Petworth, and another is
referred to by Mr. J. Wade in the Athenceum
(September 24, 1881).
' A Chorus of Singers ' (1733) was the subscription
ticket for ' A Midnight Modern Conversation.'
John Ireland reports that ' On the 22nd of March
1742 for the benefit of Mr. Hippisley, was acted at
Covent Garden theatre, a new scene, caUed a Modern
Midnight Conversation taken from Hogarth's print,

TAVERN LIFE 281
in which was introduced Hippisley' s Drunken Man,
with a comic tale of what reaUy passed between
himseK and his old Aunt at her house on Mendip
HUls, in Somersetshire.'
Samuel Ireland includes in his Graphic Illustrations
(ii. 105) a portrait of John Hippisley as Sir Francis
Gripe in the Busy Body, which shows the distortion
on the actor's face caused by an accidental bum in
his youth. This portrait is not generaUy accepted
as Hogarth's work, and as it is signed as engraver by
Sykes, who was weU known as a forger, it must be
considered as more than doubtful,
Hogarth's name is associated by tradition with the
Elephant Tavern in Fenchurch Street, The original
house, named the Elephant and Castle, existed long
before the Fire of London and was situated on the
north side of the street between the Mitre and the
Angel. The house was rebuUt soon after the Fire,
and had a long life until 1826, when it was puUed
down. Tradition reported that Hogarth in his early
days of poverty hved at the Elephant, and ran in
debt to the landlady. In order to wipe out his
hea-yy score he is supposed to have painted on the
waUs of the tap-room four pictures. These repre
sented Fenchurch in the eighteenth century, a Parish
Club scene, the Humour of Harlow Bush Fair, and
the Hudson Bay Company's Porters going to dinner.
When the building was condemned many persons
flocked to the Elephant to see the supposed Hogarth
pictures. A picture dealer bought the pictures and

282 HOGARTH'S LONDON
had them carefuUy transferred from the waUs to
canvas. They were exhibited in Pall MaU, but it is
understood that experts were by no means convinced
that they were Hogarth's work.^
Covent Garden must have been a happy hunting-
ground for Hogarth, and he doubtless knew every
inch of the place where aU classes met, and where the
manners of the society rakes were as bad as those of
the lowest classes. First must be mentioned the
Bedford Arms Tavern where Hogarth and several
friends held a club, a few members of which in 1732
agreed together to go for a short tour in the Isle of
Sheppey, and on their return the journal of their
travels was read to the members of the club coUected
at the tavern. The original MS. with its iUustra
tions is preserved in the British Museum.
Its title is ' An Account of what seem'd most
remarkable in the Five Days perigrination of the five
foUowing persons viz* Messieurs TothaU, Scott,
Hogarth, Thornhill & Forrest. Begun on Saturday
May the 27th 1732 and Finish'd on the 31st of the
same month.' Of these men WUliam TothaU was
the son of an apothecary in Fleet Street, who after
many vicissitudes became a wooUen-draper and
earned a competence ; Samuel Scott was the exceUent
painter known as the English Canaletto ; John
ThornhiU was the brother-in-law of Hogarth; and
¦¦ In a highly fanciful article in the Builder of Sept. 9, 1875, the scene of
the meeting of the Parish Club is suppoted to be the original of the ' Mid
night Modern Conversation,'

TAVERN LIFE 283
Ebenezer Forrest was an attorney who lived in
George Street, Adelphi. On the ninth iUustration
by Hogarth — a comical figure of Nobody, a head and
two legs — is -written by Forrest the foUowing iUustra
tion : ' I think I cannot better conclude than with
taking notice that not one of the Company was
unemployed, For Mr. ThornhiU made the map, Mr.
Hogarth and Mr. Scott all the other drawings, Mr.
TothaU was our Treasurer which (tho' a place of
the greatest Trust) he faithfuUy Discharg'd, & the
foregoing Memoirs was the work of E. Forrest.'
This was a most amusing freak, and the account
contains much curious matter. When the party
stopped at Rochester ' Hogarth and Scott . . .
played at hop-scotch in the Colonnade under the
Town HaU.' This is almost exactly opposite the
BuU Hotel.
The headpiece representing a sort of human torso
by Hogarth, is said to be representative of the journey
which ' was a short tour by land and water, back
wards and forwards without head or taU.'
The traveUers sent the manuscript of theh tour
to the Rev. W. Gostling, a minor canon of Canterbury
and author of A Walk in and about Canterbury.
He wrote an imitation in Hudibrastic verse with
additions of his own, twenty copies of which were
printed in 1781 by John Nichols, who afterwards
added it to his Biographical Anecdotes (second edition,
1782). The original was published in 1782 by
Richard Livesay, who lived in Mrs. Hogarth's house

284 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in Leicester Square. Two other members of the
Club had their portraits drawn by Hogarth, viz.
Gabriel Hunt about 1733, and Benjamin Read about
1757. These were engraved by Livesay in 1781.
The original drawings hung for many years on the
waUs of the club-room, and afterwards came into the
possession of Theodosius Forrest, son of the author
of the Five Days' Peregrination. He gave them
to Mrs. Hogarth, who afterwards presented them to
the Marquis of Exeter. It is said that Read came
one night to the Bedford Arms after a long journey
and fell asleep there. Hogarth was about to leave
the club, but, struck by his friend's appearance, he
exclaimed ' Heavens ! what a character ! ' and took
the portrait immediately, without sitting do-wn.
The Bedford Arms was situated in the Little Piazza
on the east side of the square, which was cleared
away and only partiaUy rebuUt.
The Bedford Coffee-House, in the Great Piazza
near the entrance to the theatre, was another haunt
of Hogarth's ; and John Nichols was told by a friend
that, being once there with the painter, he observed
him to draw something with a pencU on his naU.
Inquiring what had been his employment, he was
shown the countenance (a whimsical one) of a person
who was then at a short distance off.
In Tavistock Street Richard Leveridge the singer
kept a famous house of entertainment. Hogarth
engraved a frontispiece to ' A CoUection of Songs,
with the Musick, by Mr. Leveridge ' (1727). Captain

TAVERN LIFE 285
Coram was very poor in his later days, and a pension
of a little over one hundred pounds a year was raised
for him at the instigation of Sir Sampson Gideon and
Dr. Brocklesby by voluntary subscription. On
Coram' s death in 1751 that pension was transferred
to Leveridge, who at the age of ninety had scarcely
any other prospect than that of parish relief.^
The Rose Tavern in RusseU Street and Brydges
Street, Covent Garden, was next door to Drury Lane
Theatre, and afterwards, when that was enlarged
by Garrick in 1776, was cleared away and the site
added to that of the theatre. The Rose had a bad
name as the resort of the worst characters of the
town both male and female, who made it the head
quarters of midnight orgies and drunken broils where
murderous assaiUts were frequently occurring among
the buUies of the time. It stood pre-eminent among
the dangerous houses in the neighbourhood. We
learn this from Dryden and ShadweU and other
dramatists of the seventeenth century, and it had not
improved in the eighteenth century. In the ' Rake
Reformed,' 1718, we read :
' Not far from thence appears a pendant sign.
Whose bush declares the product of the vine.
Where to the traveller's sight the full-blown Rose
Its dazzling beauties doth in gold disclose.
And painted faces flock in tallied cloaths.'
It is supposed that the night scene in the tavern
where Thomas RakeweU is surrounded by women of
the to-wn (' Rake's Progress,' Plate 3) is laid at the
1 John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 54.

286 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Rose. On the rim of the large pewter dish on which
the female posturist was about to perform is in
scribed ' John Bonvine at the Rose Tavern Drury
Lane.' The porter of the Rose, known as Leather-
coat, was a notorious man, and is supposed to be the
bearer of the dish. Fielding makes this man a
principal character in his highly-objectionable Covent
Garden Tragedy, although he names him Leather-
sides. It is amazing that such a play could have
been acted even in the eighteenth century, and that
so distinguished an actress as Miss Raftor (after
wards Mrs. Clive and the ' Clivey Pivey ' of Garrick)
should have demeaned herself by taking a part in it.
Leathercoat was a remarkably strong man, and
for a pot of beer he would lie down in the street and
aUow a carriage to pass over him. ' After his death
he was dissected by Dr. Hunter, and the appearance
of muscular strength was extraordinary, both in
form of the muscles and in the remarkable processes
of bones into which they were inserted,' ^
In spite of its evil repute, some of us are apt to feel
a special interest in the tavern from the mistaken idea
that ' sweet Molly Mog ' of the Rose was a waitress
here. Her charms happily bloomed in a purer air.
The delightful baUad we owe to John Gay —
' The schoolboy's desire is a play-day.
The schoolmaster's joy is to fliog ;
The milkmaid's delight is May-day,
But mine is sweet Molly Mog ' —
' Lmdon Chronicle, Aug. 26-29, 1806.

TAVERN LIFE 287
was -written at the Rose Inn at Wokingham, in
Berkshire, the landlord of which was John Mog,
the father of MoUy. Mr. Stander of Arborfield,
who died in 1730, is said to have been the enamoured
swain to whom the baUad aUudes,
It is a curious fact that such taverns as the Rose
in Covent Garden were fairly respectable resorts in
the daytime, and we learn from the historian
Gibbon that on January 19, 1763, the night of the
production of MaUet's tragedy of Elvira, he and his
father went to the Rose on their way to the play
house. They met MaUet and about thirty friends,
dined together and then went to the pit, ' where we
took our places in a body, ready to silence all opposi
tion. However, we had no occasion to exert our
selves.' Tom King's Coffee-House (after his death known
as MoU King's), described by Arthur Murphy as
' well-known to aU gentlemen to whom beds are
unkno-wn,' was one of the institutions of Covent
Garden, It occupies an important position in
Hogarth's ' Morning,' but it is needless to say more
about it here as it is fuUy described in Chapter m,
(Low Life).
Night houses were common enough in Covent
Garden, and probably the death scene of the Earl
of Squanderfield in the fifth plate of the ' Marriage
a la Mode ' took place in one of them. On the floor
of the room is a biU inscribed ' The Bagnio,' with a
cut of the Turk's Head.

288 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The ' Marriage ' series was engraved by Ravenet,
and John Nichols says that the background of Plate
5 was the work of Ravenet' s wife. This is, however,
a mistake, and Charles Grignion, who knew Ravenet
intimately, told John Ireland that Mrs. Ravenet
could not engrave. ' Concerning the background of
this print, Ravenet had a violent quarrel with
Hogarth ; who thinking the figures in the tapestry,
etc., too obtrusive, obliged him to bring them to a
lower tone (without any additional remuneration),
a process that must have taken him up a length of
time, which no man but an engraver can form an
idea of.'^
Samuel Ireland published in the first volume of
his Graphic Illustrations (1794) four engravings of
characters at Button's Coffee-House, taken from
drawings in Indian ink in his possession, which
he attributes to Hogarth. Ireland says that he
purchased the originals ' (with three of the original
drawings of Hudibras) from the executors of a
Mr. Brent, an old gentleman, who was for many
years in habits of intimacy with Hogarth.' He
dates the drawings as ha-ving been made in 1720,
which is possible, although Addison, who is figured
in one of the drawings, died in 1719. Horace
Walpole appears to have seen the drawings and
to have named one of the figures in Plate 3 as
that of Count Vi-\riani, and George Steevens does not
seem to have doubted the genuineness of the draw-
1 Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 345.

TAVERN LIFE 289
ings.^ The originals are now in the Print Room of
the British Museum, Button's Coffee-House was
on the south side of RusseU Street, Dryden made
WiU's the great resort of the wits, and Addison
lorded it at Button's, which house was founded by
Daniel Button in 1713, the year in which Addison's
great reputation was confirmed by the success of
Cato. James Moore Smythe, -writing to Teresa
Blount on August 13, 1713, says, ' The wits are
removed from WUl's over the way.'
Pope said that Button had been a servant of
Addison's, but Johnson affirmed that he was a
servant in the Countess of Warwick's famUy. We
must remember that he did not marry the Countess
until three years after he had become a constant
habitue of Button's. Johnson's further statement
that when Addison suffered any vexation from the
Countess, ' he withdrew the company from Button's
house ' is incredible, and no one who loves Addison
can for a moment believe in such an instance of
littleness. Plate 1 contains a portrait of Daniel Button
repulsing a mendicant.
Plate 2. — ^Martin Folkes, afterwards President of
the Royal Society, whose portrait Hogarth painted ;
and Addison.
Plate 3, four figures : the one in the centre is Dr.
Arbuthnot, and the one to the right Count Viviani.
Walpole says that this Florentine nobleman
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. ii. p. 567.
T

290 HOGARTH'S LONDON
showing the triumphal arch at Florence to Prince
San Severino, assured him and insisted upon it, that
it was begun and finished in twenty-four hours.
Walpole writing to Mann on AprU 27, 1753, says,
' If you could send me Viviani with his invisible
architects out of the Arabian tales I might get my
house ready at a day's warning.' Viviani was a
constant attendant at coffee-houses.
Plate 4, four figures : the left-hand one. Dr. Garth
(died 1719), and the middle one Pope, who was a
frequent visitor at Button's. He said that he met
Addison there almost every day.
These sketches of coffee-house frequenters are
fuUy described in Binyon's British Museum Cata
logue of Drawings of British Artists (vol. ii. p. 321).
The cataloguer says : ' These drawings are un
doubtedly by Hogarth, but that is aU that can be
said with certainty about them. The assertions of
a man of such unscrupulous creduhty as Samuel
Ireland must be weU sifted. In the first state of his
engravings from these sketches he made the date
1730, and this is perhaps about the actual date to
which they belong, although it is probably nearer
1740. But while publishing them as drawings of
1730, he boldly claimed to recognise in them portraits
of Addison and of Garth, who both died in 1719.
The famous circle at Button's broke up on Addison's
death, and Pope quarrelled with Addison and his
coterie in 1713.'
These drawings are here criticaUy discussed for

TAVERN LIFE 291
the first time, with the result that we may accept
them as Hogarth's, but must reject most of the
ascriptions. It is to be hoped that further evidence
respecting them may be found, so that we may
know who it was that Hogarth sketched.
Old Slaughter's Coffee-House was one of Hogarth's
most favourite haunts ; it was conveniently near his
home, and it was largely the resort of his most
intimate friends. A club of artists and literary men
met regularly twice a week, and here authors, painters
and sculptors were in the habit of showing any work
they had produced before it was exhibited to the
public. On these occasions the merits of the special
work were discussed among the members, and pos
sibly its demerits also.
Highmore, Roubihac and Jonathan Richardson
were among Hogarth's feUow-members ; so also was
that curious character. Dr. Mounsey, the physician
to Chelsea Hospital, who, when he met Fanny
Burney there, asked if she was the Queen's Miss
Burney. I once possessed a letter from Mounsey to
Garrick which was endorsed by the latter ' One of
Mounsey's long lying epistles.'
Samuel Ireland says that Dr. Johnson and Isaac
Hawkins Browne were members also, and relates an
anecdote on the authority of Highmore of Johnson's
remarkably retentive memory, which is not recorded
in BosweU.
On one occasion at the club Browne ' entertained
the company with a recital of his excellent Latin

292 HOGARTH'S LONDON
poem, De Animi Immortalitate ; this recital met with
great applause from the parties present, and was
accompanied by a strong wish on the part of some of
them, to be favoured with the whole or extracts from
it ; to which Mr. Browne replied that he could not
comply with their request, as he had no copy of it.
Dr. Johnson, who had listened with great attention
during the recital, sent the next morning a manu
script of it to the author, which he had coUected from
his memory.' ^
This coffee-house was estabhshed by Thomas
Slaughter in the year 1692 on the west side of St.
Martin's Lane three doors from Newport Street.
Slaughter continued to be landlord for nearly fifty
years, and was an attendant at the club. In 1741 he
was dead, and his business was carried on by
Humphrey Bailey, About 1760 another coffee
house caUed ' New Slaughter's ' was estabhshed in
St, Martin's Lane, and the original house came to be
caUed ' Old Slaughter's,' a name which it retained
untU it was demolished in 1843 to make way for the
new opening into Leicester Square,
' The Complicated Richardson,' in ridicule of
Jonathan Richardson and his son, is so exceedingly
coarse, and unkind as well that one can only hope that
the engraving in the first volume of Graphic Illustra
tions (p, 118) is a forgery, Highmore says that
Hogarth made a sketch, but finding that it hurt the
' The poem in two books was published in 1754. See Graphic Illustra
tions, vol. i. p. 121.

TAVERN LIFE 293
feelings of Richardson, ' he threw the paper in the
fire and there ended the dissatisfaction.' ^
The Rummer Tavern at Charing Cross is intro
duced into the picture of ' Night ' (' Four Times of
the Day '), which is said to represent the annual
rejoicing on the night of the 29th of May,
This was a famous place of entertainment kept in
the reign of Charles n, by Samuel Prior, uncle of
Matthew Prior, who was apprenticed to him and did
not like the business, as is seen from his poems. The
Prior famUy ceased to be connected with it in 1702,
and the tavern was burnt down in 1750, A fuU
account of the incidents in the picture of ' Night '
wiU be found in Chapter iv. (Low Life).
At a tavern in Oxford Street, The Man loaded with
Mischief, there was a painted sign attributed to
Hogarth, and an engraving of this was exhibited in
the window. It represented a man carrying a
woman, a magpie and a monkey, the woman with a
glass of gin in her hand. This house was numbered
414, but some years ago the painted sign was re
moved and the name of the public-house was cut
down to The Mischief. The house is now numbered
53, and the sign is the Shamrock. The sign had been
so often renewed that if it was originaUy painted by
Hogarth little of his work can have remained to our
day. The last place of entertainment to be mentioned
is the most important of aU, viz. White's Chocolate-
1 Graphic Illustrations, vol. i. p. 120.

294 HOGARTH'S LONDON
House in St. James's Street. Clubs were established
at most of the coffee-houses and taverns, but these
were only given accommodation, and the houses
where they were held continued to be free to the
public who paid their fees. The clubs often moved
from house to house, but the club at White's became
so important that in course of time it drove out the
public altogether and retained the house for itself,
becoming a proprietary club. This occurred in
1765, twenty years after the publication of the
' Rake's Progress,' two of the plates of which
relate to White's. The history of White's has been
found a very complicated and difficult one to recount
by the different -writers on London topography, but
the Hon. Algernon Bourke has now made it clear, by
a thorough investigation of the books of the Club, and
the memoirs of the men of the time, in his most
interesting volumes entitled The History of Whitens
(1892). He writes : ' When at the end of the seven
teenth century a company of gentlemen founded the
club at White's by drawing up a few simple rules
to regulate their private meetings at the Chocolate-
House, there were few clubs in existence, and none
that have survived to the present day. Clubs then,
were either assemblies of men bound together by
strong political feeling like the October ; smaU groups
of philosophers and rhetoricians who met to discuss
abstract theories of ethics like the Rota ; or bands of
choice spirits, such as those whose very questionable
doings found a historian in Ned Ward of the London

< ^

TAVERN LIFE 295
Spy. Club life as we know it, began with the estab
lishment of White's nearly two centuries ago, a,nd
during those two centuries White's has seen the
origin of every other institution of its own kind
existing to-day, and the development of club life
into its huge modern proportions.'
White's Chocolate-House was opened in 1693 by
Francis White at a house on the site of Boodle's
Club (No. 38 St. James's Street). Francis White
removed the Chocolate-House in 1697 to the site of
the present Arthur's Club (69 and 70) on the opposite
side of the street. About this time the Old Club
was founded. White died in 1711, and his widow
succeeded him as proprietress, John Arthm- suc
ceeded Madam White as proprietor in 1725.
On AprU 28, 1733, White's at four o'clock in the
morning was entirely destroyed by fire, with two
houses adjoining. ' Young Mr. Arthur's wife leaped
out of a window two pair of stairs upon a feather bed
without much hurt.'
The King and Prince of Wales came from St.
James's Palace, and stayed above an hour encourag
ing the firemen and people to work at the engines.
The King ordered twenty guineas among the firemen
and others, and five guineas to the guard. The
Prince ordered the firemen to receive ten guineas.
This was the fire, the commencement of which is
seen in Plate 6 of the ' Rake's Progress.' Here, as
John Ireland -writes, every one present is so engrossed
by his own situation that the flames, which are

296 HOGARTH'S LONDON
sufficiently visible, are disregarded, and it needs the
entrance of the watchman crying ' Fire ' to draw
attention to the serious danger in which aU the
company are placed. The Rake is seen kneeling in
the front of the picture imprecating vengeance on
his own head. He has puUed off his -wig and dashed
it on the floor in a frenzy of rage and despair at the
loss of his fortune. The loss of his aU drives him to
the Fleet Prison in the next plate, to be foUowed in the
last one by his incarceration in Bedlam as a hopeless
maniac. J. B. Nichols points out that in the original
sketch in oU belonging to Mrs. Hogarth the Rake is
sitting, and not, as in the finished picture, on his
knees. The scene in the sixth plate shows how misceUane
ous was the company gathered together at White's.
By the fire is a highwayman, -with a horse pistol and
black mask in a skirt pocket of his coat. He wears
long horseman's boots with spurs and a large riding-
coat, and carries a hat under his arm. He is so
engrossed in his thoughts that he observes nothing
that is going on around him, and he does not observe
the boy by his side, who endeavours to attract atten
tion to the glass of liquor which he carries on a tray.^
In connection with this we may quote Farquhar's
Beaux Stratagem (act iii. sc. 2), where AimweU says
to Gibbet, who is a highwayman, ' Pray, sir, ha'nt
I seen your face at WiU's Coffee-House ? ' ' Yes, sir,
and at White's too,' answers the highwayman.
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 155.

TAVERN LIFE 297
It would appear that some of the frequenters of the
Club, not satisfied with the possibUities of gambling
in the club-room, searched for further opportunities
in the public room. The figure in the background
who is giving his note of hand to a usurer is said to
represent ' Old Manners,' brother to the Duke of
Rutland, who is reported to have been the only
person of rank of his time who amassed a consider
able fortune by the profession of a gamester.
White's was always the headquarters of gaming,
and Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, in the time of his
ministry never passed the house ' without bestowing
a curse upon that famous academy, as the bane of
half the Enghsh nobUity.' ^ On the left of the picture
is a richly-dressed nobleman borrowing from a
moneylender, who is writing in a memorandum book
' Lent to lA Cogg 500^.' On the waU above the
highwayman is a card bearing the royal arms and an
inscription, ' R Justian, Card-maker to his Maj[esty]
— ^royal famUy.'
As an instance of the serious losses of members of
the aristocracy by gaming, John Ireland relates that
a Lord C  lost in one night thirty-three thousand
pounds to General Scott. He was warned of his
probable complete ruin by three ladies dressed as
witches at a masquerade. He was much struck by
the warning, and vowed never to lose more than one
hundred pounds at a sitting, and by keeping his vow
he retrieved his fortime !
' Swift's Essay on Modern Education. Works (Bell's edition), vol. xi. p. 53.

298 HOGARTH'S LONDON
After the fire the Club and Chocolate-House were
removed to Gaunt' s Coffee-House on the west side
of the street and two doors from the end of the street
and Cleveland Row, This removal is announced in
the Daily Post of May 3 : ' This is to acquaint aU
noblemen and gentlemen that Mr, Arthur ha-vdng
had the misfortune to be burnt out of White's
Chocolate-House is removed to Gaunt' s Coffee-House,
next the St, James's Coffee-House in St, James's
Street, where he humbly begs they will favour him
with their company as usual,'
The fourth plate represents St, James's Street -with
the palace in the background closing the vista ; the
clock on the gateway indicates the hour as 1.40 p.m.
The time of the year is shown by the Welshman on
the right of the picture wearing a large leek, which
fixes the day as the 1st of March (St. Da-vid's Day).
He also carries a muff. The fact that it was the
anniversary of St, David is only an incident; the
reaUy important event connected with March 1 then
was that it was Queen Caroline's birthday and there
fore a Court day. The Rake overwhelmed with
debt is apparently proceeding to Court, and -with
the blinds of his sedan-chair drawn hopes to escape
the bailiffs who are in search of him. He is,
however, stopped, and the faithful woman (Sarah
Young) whom he deserted sets him at liberty
by paying the present demand. The lamp-cleaner
behind the Rake is so much interested in the
arrest that he pours the oil from his can over

^

i^

TAVERN LIFE 299
the lamp to the inconvenience of any one beneath
him, Hogarth appears to have made alterations in the
plate after the fire, as in the second state he indicated
the site of Gaunt' s Coffee-House with a label marked
Black's, and speciaUy points to it by means of a
flash of lightning. In this second state a group of
gambling boys take the place of the shoeblack who
steals the Rake's cane.
The posts which marked the edge of the pavement
in most of the London streets are seen in this picture.
John Ireland (i. 43) aUudes to this in a note on this
plate. ' On new paving the streets soon after his
present Majesty's accession [George m.] they were
removed. During the short time of Lord Bute's
administration an English gentleman reprobated the
idea of making a Scotch pavement in the vicinity
of St. James's. Being asked by a North Briton,
who was present, how he or any other Englishman
could reasonably object to even Scotchmen mending
their ways in the neighbourhood of a palace ? " We
do not object to your mending our ways," replied
the other, " but you have taken away all our posts." '
In 1736 the Club was removed to the premises
rebuilt on the site of the present Arthur's Club.
Robert Arthur succeeded John Arthur as proprietor.
In 1753 a little book was published entitled ' The
Polite Gamester ; or the Humours of Whist : a
dramatick satyre as acted every day at White's
and other coffee houses and assemblies.' Mr. Bourke

300 HOGARTH'S LONDON
quotes from this : ' In the Club at White's being a
select company above stairs, where no person of what
rank soever is admitted without first being proposed
by one of the Club.' Mr. Bourke says that this is the
last mention of the Chocolate-House which he has
found, and he adds ' there is little doubt that the
Chocolate-House was extinguished on the removal of
the Clubs [Old and New] to the present buUding in
1755.' It is interesting to notice in The History of Whitens
that, although so great stress is laid upon the im
portance and greatness of the Club, the historian is
proud to iUustrate his book with two plates from the
' Rake's Progress,' in order to show its interest is
enhanced by the fact that Hogarth saw fit to make
it the subject of his satire.
This chapter contains some misceUaneous notes
on tavern life in London in the eighteenth century,
but it may be weU to show succinctly how the hfe of
the man of the world was daUy spent. Pope has
told us how Addison apportioned his day :
' Addison's chief companions, before he married
Lady Warwick (in 1716) were Steele, BudgeU,
Philips, Carey, Davenant and Colonel Brett. He used
to breakfast with one or other of them at his lodgings
in St. James's Place, dine at taverns with them, then
to Button's, and then to some tavern again, for
supper, in the evening, and this was the usual round
of his life.' ^
' Spence's Anecdotes, ed. Singer, 1829, p. 196.

TAVERN LIFE 301
This does not seem to leave much time for work or
study, but such a hfe was general.
A distinction continued to be made between
taverns and coffee-houses, but the latter seem to
have encroached very largely upon the pri-vUeges of
the former. Taverns did not seU coffee, but coffee
houses occasionaUy did pro-vide dinners.

302 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER X
THEATRICAL LIFE
Hogarth was quite at home at the theatre, and he
was weU acquainted with many actors, so that we
find sufficient materials from his pencil to help us to
form a very accurate idea of the theatre in the
eighteenth century. In fact a very large number
of his engravings bear upon the various phases of
theatrical fife, so that the present chapter has gro-wn
to be one of the longest in the book.
The pleasures of aU classes were catered for with
eagerness by a large number of persons who made
their li-vdng by the frivolity of the people. Probably
at no period of our history were the various forms of
dissipation more generaUy sought after by large
numbers of the population of great cities than in the
first half of the eighteenth century. The satirical
representation of some of the many features of this
life was speciaUy agreeable to Hogarth, who found
on aU sides an endless exhibition of character suited
for his particular purpose. Two of his pictures give
us a vivid representation of the interior of a play
house of his time, viz. the ' Beggar's Opera ' (1728)
and the ' Laughing Audience ' (1733).

"The Laughi.ng Audience.'' 1733.

THEATRICAL LIFE 303
The ' Laughing Audience ' was at one time styled
' A Pleased Audience at a Play.' It was used as the
subscription ticket for ' Southwark Fair ' and a
' Rake's Progress.' Below the design the foUowing
form of receipt was engraved : ' Rec<i of
Half a guinea being the first Payment
for Nine Prints, 8 of which represent a Rake's
Progress and the 9th a Fair, which I Promise to
Deliver at Michaelmas next on receiving One Guinea
more, the Print of the Fair being Deliver' d at the
time of Subscribing.'
There are three varieties of this inscription : the
above is in the first state ; in the second ' when
finish'd ' is substituted for ' at Michaelmas next,' and
the price was raised after the subscription was closed.
Hogarth fiUed in the receipt himself.
After this etching had served its purpose as a
subscription ticket it was issued separately as a
distinct print.
The original picture belonged to Richard Brinsley
Sheridan in 1814, when it was exhibited at the
British Institution. In 1832 it realised twenty
guineas at G. Watson Taylor's sale, and in 1848
forty-nine guineas, when were sold the effects of
Richard Sanderson of Belgrave Square. In the
engraving a part of the orchestra, pit, and boxes are
represented. The heads of three musicians are
shown in the orchestra, and eleven men and women
sit in the pit. The latter are the only persons in the
audience who seem to be enjoying the performance,

304 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and the expressions of their faces are varied and f uU
of humour. The figures in the boxes are too much
interested in their own concerns to pay attention to
what is going on upon the stage. Two points are
worthy of special attention, one being the iron spikes
on the wooden barrier between the orchestra and the
pit. This awkward protection was also common
to French theatres untU a serious mishap caused its
abohtion. A young English nobleman -visiting Paris
near the end of WiUiam the Third's reign, had a
quarrel at the opera with a French gentleman and
pitched him bodily from the box tier into the
orchestra. In his faU the Frenchman was impaled
upon the spikes. After this the management cleared
them away from the barrier. In ChurchUl's earher
days in London, when he was gathering materials for
his Rosciad, he sat in the front row of the pit, and
it was noticed that he grasped the spikes on the
partition between the orchestra and pit. Arthur
Murphy, in his ' Ode to the Naiads of the Fleet
Ditch,' described how ChurchiU used to sit
' In foremost row before th' astonish'd pit.
And grin dislike.
And kiss the spike.
And twist his mouth and roll his head awry.'
In those days ChurchUl was a somewhat unclerical
fop with ruffles, leathern breeches, and gold-laced hat.
The other point for notice is the mode of hghting,
which must have been very inefficient. Candles in
sconces will be seen in front of the boxes.

'3

•1^

>l

THEATRICAL LIFE 305
This picture shows the front of the house, that of
the ' Beggar's Opera ' gives us a representation of the
stage of the period.
The picture which represents the scene of Lucy
and Polly -wrangling over Macheath, and appealing
to their respective fathers, as represented in the third
act, is said to have been painted for Rich, the
manager, in 1729. Another picture of the same scene
was painted in the same year for Sir Archibald
Grant ; this afterwards came into the possession of
Mr. WiUiam Huggins, at the sale of whose effects it
was bought by Dr. Monkhouse of Queen's CoUege,
Oxford.^ John Ireland says that the frame had a
carved bust of Gay on the top, which proves that this
is the picture now in possession of Mr. John Murray
who lent it to the exhibition in the Whitechapel Art
GaUery, 1906, and to the Royal Academy Winter
Exhibition, 1908,
At the sale of Rich's pictures in 1762 the first-
mentioned picture was purchased by the Duke of
Leeds for £35, 14s,, and it is now in the possession of
the present Duke, It was not engraved untU 1790,
when it was undertaken by WiUiam Blake and
published by Messrs. BoydeU.^ Another picture was
in the possession of Mr. Louis Huth.
The Beggar'' s Opera was -written by Gay in 1727 on
the suggestion by Swift that a Newgate Pastoral
would be effective. Although Gay took the hint so
' John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated, 1793, vol. ii. p. 330.
2 J. Ireland says that it was ' engraven by Mr. Tew.' Hogarth Illus
trated, vol. ii. p. 328. U

306 HOGARTH'S LONDON
far as to choose his characters from the dangerous
classes, he reaUy threw his work into the form of a
parody of Italian opera, which, for a time, he caused
to be less popular than it was before he figured as the
Orpheus of highwaymen. John Ireland relates that
an Itahan he knew ' concluded an harangue calcu
lated to throw Gay's taste and talents into contempt
with " Saire, this simple signer did tri to pelt mi
countrymen out of England with lumps of pudding " "^
(one of the tunes used by Gay).
The Beggar^s Opera was first offered to CoUey
Cibber for Drury Lane Theatre, but was refused by
him. It was then accepted by John Rich (son of
Christopher Rich), and brought out at Lincoln's Inn
Fields Theatre on January 29, 1728. It was not
only Cibber who was doubtfiU of success, for, accord
ing to BosweU, the Duke of Queensberry said, ' This
is a very odd thing, Gay ; it is either a very good
thing or a bad thing.' At its first appearance success
was not certain for some time after the opening of
the play. Pope and a party of Gay's friends at
tended the first night ' in very great uncertainty of
the event,' untU they overheard the Duke of ArgyU
in the next box say, ' It wiU do, it must do. I see it
in the eyes of them.' Pope told Spence that this
gave them aU ease of mind, ' for that duke (besides
his own good taste) has a particular knack, as any one
living, in discovering the taste of the pubhc. He
was quite right in this as usual,'
' Hogarth Illustrated, vol. ii. p. 328.

THEATRICAL LIFE 307
Macklin was present at the first representation,
and from him we learn that success was doubtful
until the opening of the second act, when, after the
chorus song of ' Let us take the road,' the applause
was as luiiversal as unbounded. Others affirm with
more probability that success was assured rather
when PoUy sang her pathetic appeal to her parents :
' Oh ponder well ! be not severe ;
To save a wretched wife ;
For, on the rope that hangs my dear.
Depends poor Polly's life.'
There were several circumstances that went to
make the play a success, (1) It was a thoroughly
Enghsh production, so that those who resented the
popularity of Italian opera were whole-hearted in
their support of the Beggar'' s Opera. (2) AU the wits
of the day supported and assisted the author. (3) The
bitter satire levelled at Sir Robert Walpole and his
ministry was eagerly taken up by his many enemies.
The minister was not a coward, however, and he
attended the performance. The foUowing anecdote
of what happened is related in Baker's Biographia
Dramatica : ' Being in the stage boxes at its first
representation, a most universal encore attended the
following air of Lockit, and aU eyes were directed
on the minister at the instant of its being repeated :
"When you censure the age.
Be cautious and sage.
Lest the courtiers offended should be ;
If you mention vice or bribe
'Tis so pat to all the tribe.
Each cries — That was levelled at me.''

308 HOGARTH'S LONDON
' Sir Robert, observing the pointed manner in which
the audience applied the last line to him, parried the
thrust by encoring it with his single voice, and thus
not only blunted the poetical shaft, but gained a
general huzza from the audience.'
In addition to these causes of success we must
remember that the play had great merits, was quite
fresh, and the songs and music were sufficiently
pretty not only to carry it triumphantly through the
longest run that the Enghsh stage had ever known up
to that date, but also to continue it as a stock piece
for considerably more than a century.
Not being an experienced playwright Gay did not
introduce his songs untU about the middle of the
play. This had to be remedied, so the wits set to
work to help their coUeague and produced a series
of additional songs. ' Virgins are like the fair
flower in its lustre,' was written by Sir Charles
Hanbury WiUiams ; ' The gamesters and lawyers
are jugglers alike,' by WiUiam Fortescue, Master of
the RoUs ; ' When you censure the age,' by Swift,
and ' The modes of the court so common are grown,'
by Lord Chesterfield.^
It was originaUy intended that no music should
accompany the songs, as the junto of wits objected to
it. Music was, however, tried at a rehearsal, and the
Duchess of Queensberry (Gay's kind patroness) was
so strongly in favour of introducing an orchestra
that she settled its adoption. This was not large, as
Lady Townshend {European Magazine, 1800, vol. xxxvii. p. 25).

THEATRICAL LIFE 309
it consisted only of three or four fiddles, a hautboy,
and an occasional drum. Dr. Pepusch arranged and
scored the notes.
Henry Angelo in his Reminiscences claims for Pope
the success of the Beggar^ s Opera, on account of his
having contributed the most satirical hits at the
Court. He wrote :
' And the statesman, because he 's so great
Thinks his trade is as honest as mine.'
These lines stood in Gay's MS. :
'And there's many arrive to be great
By a trade not more honest than mine.'
Also Pope contributed these lines in the song of
Macheath :
' Since Laws were made for every degree.
To curb vice in others as well as in me,
I wonder we hadn't better company
Upon Tyburn tree.'
The question must often have been asked. What
was the meaning of the title of the Beggar's Opera ?
This was answered in the original edition, when in
the Introduction a beggar offers his opera to the
players. He says :
' The piece I own was originally writ for the cele
brating the marriage of James Chanter and Moll
Lay, two most excellent baUad singers. I have
introduced the similes that are in aU your celebrated
operas : the SwaUow, the Moth, the Bee, the Ship,
the Flower, etc. Besides I have a prison scene.

310 HOGARTH'S LONDON
which the ladies always reckon charmingly pathetic.
As to the parts, I have observed such a nice imparti-
ahty to our two ladies, that it is impossible for either
of them to take offence.'
This was not considered a good beginning, and
was perhaps wisely struck out.
The parts of the Beggar and the Player are left in
at the end, and therefore they appear to come from
nowhere. The Player complains that the play has
an unhappy ending, which is against aU precedent, so
the Beggar says that can be easily changed. ' So
you rabble there — run and cry, A Reprieve ! Let the
prisoner be brought back to his wives in triumph.'
Macheath returns, and the opera ends happUy with a
dance. We aU know the saying that the success of
the Beggar'' s Opera made Gay rich and Rich gay ; but
it did more than this, for it made the fortunes of the
two principal actors who had not pre-viously been
possessed of much fame.
Lavinia Fenton (1708-1760) made her first ap
pearance on the stage in 1726 as Monimia in
Otway's Orphans at the New Theatre in the Hay
market. John Rich was so much struck with her
appearance as Cherry in the Beaux' Stratagem that
he tempted her away from the Haymarket with the
' magnificent ' offer of 15s. per week.
When shortly afterwards he was arranging for the
presentation of the Beggar's Opera, in order to secure
the services of Miss Fenton for the principal female
character, he doubled her salary. She appeared as

Lavinia P'enton (Polly Peachum), afterwards Duchkss of Bolton.
From the Oi-iginal paintiitg in the Natiojial Gallery.

THEATRICAL LIFE 311
PoUy Peachum on the opening night, January 29,
1728, and at once became the idol of the to-wn. On
June 19 the opera was played for the sixty-second
and last time that season, when she made her last
appearance on the boards of a theatre, so that her
career as an actress was a short one. She was
succeeded in the character of PoUy by Miss
Warren. Charles Paulet, thhd Duke of Bolton, said that he
was first captivated by PoUy's song, ' Oh, ponder
weU,' which has already been aUuded to as the
turning-point in the success of the performance.
The Duke was a constant attendant at the theatre,
and after the first season he took Miss Fenton from
the stage and she remained his mistress for twenty-
three years. Soon after the death of the Duchess,
from whom he had been separated for many years,
the Duke married La-vinia at Aix in Provence (on the
20th of September 1751). She was highly thought of
in her new sphere, and the famous Dr. Joseph
Warton gave her a high character.
' She was a very accomplished and most agreeable
companion, had much wit, good strong sense, and
a just taste in polite literature. Her person was
agreeable and weU made, though I think she could
never be called a beauty. I have had the pleasure of
being at table with her, when her conversation was
much admired by the first characters of the age,
particularly old Lord Bathurst and Lord GranviUe.'
Hogarth's portrait of her, now in the National

312 HOGARTH'S LONDON
GaUery, is a fine work, and gives a pleasing idea of
the charming actress.^
Gay wished his friend Quin to take the part of
Macheath, but that great actor had no taste for the
part, for which he felt he was unfitted, although he
had a good ear for music and was famous for singing
baUads with ease. He did, however, drudge through
two rehearsals, but at the close of the second Tom
Walker was observed behind the scenes humming
some of the songs in a tone and manner that attracted
notice. Quin laid hold of this circumstance to get
rid of the part, and exclaimed : ' Ay, there is a man
who is more qualified to do you justice than I am.'
Walker was caUed on to make the experiment, and
Gay, who instantly saw the difference, accepted him
as the hero of his piece.
Walker was an indifferent musician and knew httle
of music scientificaUy, but he could sing a song in
good baUad time. He had a speaking eye and
admirable action; the ease and gaiety of his style was
very marked. He showed great judgment in his
treatment of the character which he created and
made as great a success as Lavinia Fenton did in
PoUy. He did not make Macheath a to-wn beau or a
gentleman, but his manner, deportment, and voice
1 This picture was in the possession of Samuel Ireland who published an
engraving of it by C. Aposteel in 1797. It faces p. 49 of Graphic Illustra
tions, vol. ii. The picture was bought by Mr. WDliam Seguier at Ireland's
sale in 1801 for £6, 7s. 6d., and was afterwards in the collection of Mr.
George Watson Taylor. He exhibited it in 1814, and at his sale it fetched
£6% 10s. It was purchased for the National Gallery in 1884 from Sir Philip
Miles's collection for 800 guineas.

THEATRICAL LIFE 313
aU partook of the roughness and simplicity of the
character. Walker was not famous before the
opportunity of his life occurred, but he had made his
mark in his profession. His Macheath, however,
obhterated aU remembrance of his former successes.
Barton Booth saw Walker playing Paris in a droU
named The Siege of Troy, and at once recommended
him to the management of Drury Lane. Da-vies teUs
us that his Bajazet and Hotspur had hardly been
rivaUed, and that his Falconbridge was better than
that of Garrick, Sheridan, Delane, and Barry, which
indeed is high praise.
In the same year that he gained his great fame as
Macheath he brought out at Lee and Harper's booth
in Bartholomew Fair a sort of imitation of the
Beggar's Opera entitled the Quaker'' s Opera.
During the run of the Beggar'' s Opera and for many
years afterwards Walker was more in requisition with
the pubhc than the highest performers on the stage.
To have spent an evening with him at the tavern was
a feather in the town buck's cap, and not to know
him personally off the stage was reckoned a piece of
gross incuriosity. His portrait was set in every
print-shop, and aU the fashionable fans and screens of
the day represented some scene between him and
Lavinia Fenton as Macheath and PoUy.
This popularity was his ruin, as he gave way to
intemperance and lost his memory, with the conse
quence that he was discharged from the London
stage. He attempted to recover his character and

314 HOGARTH'S LONDON
went to Ireland to change the scene, but bad habits
were too deeply fixed, and he died in Dublin in great
wretchedness in 1744.
Mrs. Egleton was the original Lucy Lockit, and she
shared with PoUy much of the appreciation of the
public. She had been much admhed as a good
comic actress before she undertook this part.
John Hippisley was the original Peachum, a char
acter dra-wn after Jonathan Wild. He was weU
known for his acting of many of Shakespeare's low
comedy characters, and his representation of Fluellen
was considered an artistic performance. Da-vies de
scribes him as a comedian of lively humour and droll
pleasantry. There is a portrait of him at the Garrick Club
attributed to Hogarth.
John HaU was the original Lockit. He was a
dancing-master before he took to the stage, and he
was not much known until he acted this character,
but by it he acquired a great reputation.
Mrs. Martin was the original Mrs. Peachum, and
she also took the character of Diana Trapes.
To return to Hogarth's picture after this digression
respecting the chief actors and actresses. It repre
sents Macheath in the centre of the stage -with Lucy
on the left pleading for him to her father Lockit, and
PoUy on the right pleading to Peachum.
Hogarth has given us a good representation of the
stage of the theatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields, and no
other picture of the interior of this old playhouse

THEATRICAL LIFE 315
is known. It shows how inconvenient it must have
been to have a crowd of fashionable loungers seated
on the stage and leaving little room for the actors.
This was a bad old custom which continued for many
years in spite of protests. A royal proclamation of
Queen Anne, dated November 15, 1711, forbade the
practice, but no notice was taken of the prohibition.
' Whereas we are informed that the orders we have
already given for the reformation of the stage by not
permitting anything to be acted contrary to religion
or good manners, have in great measure had their
good effect we proposed and being further desirous
of reforming aU other indecencies and disorders of the
stage, our -wUl and pleasure therefore is, and we do
hereby command that no person of what quahty
soever shaU presume to stand behind the scenes, or
go upon the stage either before or during the acting
of any opera or play, and that no person go into
either of our houses for opera or comedy without first
paying the established prices for their respective
places.' OriginaUy the portion of the audience who were
aUowed on the stage sat about in chahs, but here, in
1728, we find that the visitors were confined in boxes
or pews.
It was Garrick who cleared away from the stage
every one but the actors.
On the right hand of the stage we see the Duke of
Bolton (who sits in front) giving aU his attention to
Polly ; next to him is Major Paunceford, and then in

316 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the foUowing order Sir Robert Fagg, M,P,, Rich the
manager. Cock the auctioneer, and Gay the author.
On the left-hand side is Lady Jane Cook, Anthony
Henley, Lord Gage, Sir Conyers d'Arcy, and Sir
Thomas Robinson,
The lights on the stage consisted of candles set
round hi a hoop of tin sockets. This mode of lighting
continued tiU Garrick's return to the stage in 1765,
when he introduced side lights, invisible to the
audience. In the same year (1728) Hogarth produced a plate
entitled ' The Beggar's Opera Burlesqued,' of which
there are five states. Under the design are engraved
the foUowing four lines :
' Brittons attend — view this harmonious stage,
And listen to those notes which charm the age :
Thus shall your taste in sounds and sense be shown.
And Beggar's Op'ras ever be your own.'
The design is rather confused and difficult of
comprehension. It shows a representation of the
Beggar's Opera and a rehearsal of an Itahan opera.
The characters of the former are drawn with the
heads of different animals, as PoUy with a cat's ;
Lucy with a sow's ; Macheath with an ass's ; Lockit,
Peachum and Mrs. Peachum with an ox, a dog, and
an owl respectively.
It is not clear why Hogarth burlesqued the char
acters in this way, as he evidently wished to point
out the inferiority of the Italian opera.
Mr. F. G. Stephens explains this as follows :

THEATRICAL LIFE 317
' At our left are the boxes of a theatre, and on the
right is a scene at the Italian Opera, where a female
singer is surrounded by noblemen offering homage
and presents ; this, by the motto at the top of the
plate " et cantare pares et respondere paratse," seems
to be held out as worthy of equal estimation with the
satirical representation of The Beggar's Opera, which
occupies the left of the design.' ^
A copy from Hogarth's print was published in
1735 with the title ' The Opera House or the Italian
Eunuch's Glory, Humbly Inscribed to those Generous
Encouragers of Foreigners and Ruiners of England.'^
The dangerous tendency of the Beggar's Opera has
been the subject of a considerable amount of dispute.
Dr. Herring, preacher at Lincoln's Inn and after
wards Archbishop of Canterbury, ' censured it as
giving encouragement not only to vice but to crimes,
by making a highwayman the hero, and dismissing
him at last unpunished.' On the other side Swift
defended the opera against the attacks of his f eUow
Churchmen. Sir John Fielding, the Bow Street magistrate, tried
to stop the performance on more than one occasion,
but unsuccessfuUy. He once told Hugh KeUy that
ever since the first representation of this piece there
had been on every successful run a proportionate
number of highwaymen brought to the office, as he
1 British Museum Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires, vol. ii.
p. 670.
2 British Musev/m Catalogue, vol. iiL p. 95.

318 HOGARTH'S LONDON
would show him by the books any morning he took
the trouble to look over them. KeUy had the
curiosity to do so, and found the observation to be
strictly true.^
About the year 1772 Fielding sent letters to the
managers of Drury Lane and Covent Garden urging
them not to perform the Beggar'' s Opera, as it tended
to increase the number of beggars. Garrick, not
having any good singers, expressed his approval of
the magistrate's suggestion ; but Colman was not so
complacent, and sent this answer : ' Mr. Colman's
compliments to Sir John Fielding, he does not think
his the only house in Bow Street where thieves
are hardened and encouraged — and -wiU persist in
offering the representation of that admirable satire
the Beggar's Opera.' (Lee Lewes's Memoirs.)
John Ireland corroborated Sir John Fielding's
judgment by cases which came under his own
observation. ' With three instances that I had an
accidental opportunity of seeing, I was very forcibly
impressed. Two boys, under nineteen years of age —
children of worthy and respectable parents — fled
from their friends, and pursued courses that threat
ened an ignominious termination to theh lives.
After much search they were found engaged in
midnight dissipations, and in each of their pockets
was the Beggar's Opera.'
The third case was more conclusive. ' A lad of
seventeen, some years since tried at the Old BaUey,
* European Magazine, Jan, 1800, vol. xxxvii. p. 26.

THEATRICAL LIFE 319
for what there was every reason to think his first
offence, acknowledged himseK so dehghted -with the
spirited and heroic character of Macheath, that on
quitting the theatre, he laid out his last guinea in the
purchase of a pair of pistols, and stopped a gentleman
on the highway.' ^
It wUl be remembered that Dr. Johnson took a
different view both in conversation and in writing.
In his Life of Gay {Lives of the Poets), after referring to
Dr. Herring's condemnation and the observation 'that
after the exhibition of the Beggar's Opera, the gangs of
robbers were evidently multiplied,' Johnson writes :
' Both these decisions are surely exaggerated. The
play, like many others, was plainly written only to
divert, without any moral purpose, and is therefore
not likely to do good ; nor can it be conceived,
-without more speculation than life requires or admits,
to be productive of much e-vU. Highwaymen and
house-breakers seldom frequent the playhouse, or
mingle in any elegant diversion ; nor is it possible
for any one to imagine he may rob with safety,
because he sees Macheath reprieved upon the stage.'
BosweU teUs us that Johnson expressed the opinion
that more influence had been ascribed to the play
than it in reality ever had, and he added, ' At the
same time I do not deny that it may have some in
fluence by making the character of a rogue f amUiar
and in some degree pleasing ! Then coUecting him
self as it were, to give a heavy stroke : There is
* Hogarth Illustrated, vol. ii. p. 324.

320 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in it such a labefactation of aU principles as may
be injurious to morality.'
This discussion on the influence of the Beggar's
Opera was a favourite one with BosweU, and he had
made coUections for the purpose of publishing a
quarto volume. Mr. Percy Fitzgerald says that it is
supposed that his many visits to Newgate, attending
on convicts, etc., were made with a view to this
publication. One can hardly expect any instance of a bad
influence to foUow a performance of the opera in the
present day, but in a time when highwaymen were
admired as heroes by persons of weak and Ul-
regulated minds it was likely to have an evU effect.
Samuel Ireland mentions benefit theatre tickets
for three of the actors in the Beggar's Opera, which he
attributes to Hogarth, viz, for Walker, MUward, and
SpiUer, The one ' For the benefit of Mr, WaUier,'
represents the same scene in the play as Hogarth
painted which has aheady been described. It is
not, however, a copy, but an enthely different treat
ment of the five chief characters. Below is the
inscription : ' Theatre Royal Covent Garden, Pitt,'
The etching is signed ' W, Hogarth in*, J, Sympson
Jun. sculp.' The original is in the Royal CoUection.
S. Ireland published a copy ' A. M. Ireland sculp* ' in
his Graphic Illustrations (vol. i. p. 58).
J. B. Nichols {Anecdotes of W. Hogarth, 1833, p. 300)
quotes the foUowing MS. note by W. Richardson
(printseller. Strand), in the Graphic Illustrations : ' A

THEATRICAL LIFE 321
palpable fiction ; Sjnnpson etched much better.
See the frontispiece to Ned Ward's Works. PoweU' s
daughter brought me this, -with a few common
prints, for sale. She asked for them 15s. I said
" Why do you ask me so much for such trumpery?"
She said there was one of Hogarth's worth a good
deal more. She then sold them to N, Smith, May's
BuUdings, who sold this print to S, Ireland for eight
guineas — a proof that neither of them was possessed
of much real judgement in Hogarth's works,'
This is a very interesting piece of information, but
Nichols is not inclined entirely to agree with Richard
son's decision.
The benefit ticket for MUward represents a scene
from the Beggar's Opera, in which that actor re
presented the Player who disputes with the Beggar,
the supposed author of the play. The inscription is :
' Theatre Royal, Lincolns Inn Fields, Tuesday AprU
23, A Bold Stroke for a Wife w**" Entertainments
for y^ Benefit of M'' MUward,'
John Nichols {Anecdotes, 1785, p, 423) refers to this
benefit ticket, and -writes : ' This careless but spirited
engraving has more of Hogarth's manner than
several other more laboured pieces which of late have
been imputed to him. Let the connoisseur judge,'
The date of MUward' s benefit is not positively
recorded, but it must have been after 1728 and before
1733, Mrs, Centh-vre's play, A Bold Stroke for a
Wife, was first performed in 1718. Ireland etched a
copy of the original print which was published by

322 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Motton and Co. in 1788, and another impression was
issued in the Graphic Illustrations (vol. i. p. 98).
James SpUler, who sustained the character of
Mat o' the Mint, was reduced to a state of great
distress soon after the first success of the Beggar's
Opera. The ticket for his benefit is mentioned by
John Nichols and J. B. Nichols. The former describes
it as a ' beautiful little print,' and the latter expressed
the opinion that ' this is immeasurably superior to aU
the other tickets both in design and execution. It
makes one suspect aU the rest to be not by Hogarth.'
{Anecdotes of Hogarth, 1833, p. 299.) Samuel Ireland
etched a copy from the original print in 1788 ; subse
quently it was included in the Graphic Illustrations.
The ' print represents a large balance, suspended in
the open space before a prison on the one hand, and
on the other a tavern, in front of which is the sign of
the " Sun." A leg of mutton hangs before the ad
joining house, which is thus probably indicated to
be that of SpiUer himself. Entwined -with the beam
of the balance is a label with " For the benefit of
SpUler." Under the beam stands SpUler, eagerly
seUing tickets for his benefit at the theatre in
Lincoln's Inn Fields to several gentlemen.'^
SpiUer was a publican in Clare Market, where a
club was held of which Hogarth was a member.
The original sign was the BtUl and Butcher, but on
Laguerre painting SpUler's portrait, which he pre
sented to the Club, it was changed to the SpiUer's
' British Museu,m Catalogue of Satires, vol. ii. p. 677.

THEATRICAL LIFE 323
Head. This was the scene of a picture by Hogarth
caUed ' Oysters ; or St, James's Day.' ^
SpiUer's last appearance on the stage was on
January 31, 1729, He died on February 7 foUowing,
aged thhty-seven years, and was buried at the
expense of Rich the manager in the churchyard of
St, Clement Danes, He was a favourite of the
pubhc, but intemperance was the bane of his career.
Hogarth produced several portraits of actors, and
he must have had a varied acquaintance with the
players at the different theatres, but his associations
were more intimate with the actors of the chief
theatre — Drury Lane.
Joe MUler took his benefit as Sir Joseph Wittol in
Congreve' s Old Bachelor at Drury Lane on AprU 25,
1717. There is a theatre ticket for this occasion
representing a scene in the third act of this play.
Samuel Ireland attributes this to Hogarth, and
suggests that it was designed about the time of the
publication of the ' Rake's Progress ' (1735).^
It is generaUy believed to be a forgery, and W.
Richardson supposes the forger to have been Powell.
S. Ireland also gives a copy of a ticket for the
benefit of Fielding, author of the Mock Doctor, which
occurred on AprU 20, 1732.' Theophilus Cibber
fiUed the part of the Mock Doctor, and the scene
represented in the picture contains a portrait of him-
This is not accepted as a true work of Hogarth.
1 Dobson's Hogarth, 1907, p. 218.
2 Graphic Ilhistrations, vol. i. p. 128. ' Ibid., p. 104.

324 HOGARTH'S LONDON
'A just View of the British Stage, or three Heads are
better than one. Scene Newgate, by M. D[e]v[o]to '
(1725), has been attributed to Hogarth, but it is
of very doubtful authenticity. Devoto was scene-
painter at Drury Lane, Lincoln's Inn Fields, and
Goodman's Fields. This print is called in Walpole's
Catalogue, ' Booth, WUks and Cibber contri-ving a
Pantomime.' In 1733 Theophilus Cibber produced at Drury
Lane a short grotesque pantomime entitled The
Harlot's Progress, or the Ridotto al Fresco, founded on
Hogarth's pictures. It was printed with a dedica
tion to the painter. The tract is very rare, and
some copies contain portraits of Hogarth and Cibber,
the latter in his favourite character of Pistol,
In this same year Theophilus Cibber promoted a
quarrel between the manager of Drury Lane and
some of the actors, which caused a secession of the
latter to the Haymarket, John Laguerre, the scene-
painter, produced an interesting etching on the
subject entitled 'The Stage Mutiny,'^ which is
worthy of special mention here because Hogarth
used the design on a show-cloth in his representation
of Southwark Fair, Laguerre was a friend of
Hogarth, who obtained his services as a witness in
his action against Joshua Morris, He is said also to
have designed a benefit ticket for him.
The manager of Covent Garden Theatre was glad
to have a laugh at his rivals, and in 1734 a tragi-
' Q^s. British Musetim Catalogue of Satires, vol. ii. p. 794.

THEATRICAL LIFE 325
comi-farcical opera caUed The Stage Mutineers, or a
Playhouse to be Let, was produced with some success.
The pit ticket for Fielding's benefit, already
aUuded to, brings the names of Fielding and Theo
philus Cibber in conjunction in 1732, but in the
following year they are found on different sides.
Fielding considered that Highmore, the manager,
was Ul-used, and he stuck to the fortunes of Drury
Lane Theatre. He has been said, on little authority,
to be the author of the 'Apology for the Life of Mr.
The. Cibber, being a Proper Sequel to the Apology
for the Life of Mr. CoUey Cibber, Comedian,' in
which the actor is unmercifuUy sathised in a vein
of sustained hony. We must now pass on to notice
the friendship of Hogarth and Garrick, which is in
every way pleasing to the admirers of both men, for it
is said that they never had a misunderstanding. Mr.
Joseph Knight, in his valuable Life of Garrick (1894),
gives us several glimpses of their mutual relations.
On one occasion it had been hinted to Garrick that
he had been remiss in his visits to Hogarth. In
consequence of these hints he -wrote a very agreeable
letter of which this is the concluding part :
' If Mrs. Hogarth has observed my neglect I am
flattered by it, but if it is your observation woe
betide you !
' Could I foUow my own wishes I would see you
every day in the week, and not care whether it was
in Leicester Fields or Southampton Street, but what

326 HOGARTH'S LONDON
with an indifferent state of health and the care of a
large family [Drury Lane Theatre], in which there
are many froward chUdren, I have scarce half an
hour to myself. However, since you are gro-wn a
polite de-vU, and have a mind to play at lords and
ladies, have at you. I wiU certainly caU upon you
soon ; and if you should not be at home I wUl leave
my card. — Dear Hogarth, yours most sincerely,
' D. Garrick.' ^
Hogarth painted Garrick as Richard ni. in 1746
for Mr. Duncombe of Duncombe Park, and he was
proud of receiving two hundred pounds for the picture,
which he observed in his Autobiography, ' was more
than any English artist ever received for a simple
portrait.' It stiU remains in the possession of Mr.
Duncombe' s descendant, the Earl of Feversham.
The picture was engraved by Hogarth and Charles
Grignion. The latter informed John Ireland ' that
Hogarth etched the head and hand, but finding the
head too large he erased it, and etched it in a second
time, when seeing it wrong {sic) placed upon the
shoulders, he again rubbed it out, and replaced it as
it now stands, remarking, "I never was right untU I
had been -wrong." '
On October 21, 1746, Hogarth sent a sketch of
Garrick and Quin to a member of a hterary society
at Norwich, styled the Argonauts. He -wrote,
' S"", If the exact figure of M"" Quin were to be
reduc'd to the size of the print of M"" Garrick it
' Knight's David Garrick, p. 157.

David Garrick and Mrs. Garrick. 1757.

THEATRICAL LIFE 327
would seem to be the shortest man of the two,
because M' Garrick is of a taUer proportion.'
A f acsimUe of this letter was pubhshed in 1797 by
Laurie and Whittle, and a print of the two figures is
included in Hogarth's works, ^
The portrait of Garrick writing the prologue to
Foote's comedy of Taste, with Mrs, Garrick behind
him taking the pen from his hand, is interesting on
account of the anecdote connected with it. The
actor found fault -with the picture. Hogarth, in a
fit of irritation, drew his brush across the face of
Garrick, and the picture remained in his possession
tiU his death, Mrs, Hogarth sent the portrait to
Garrick after the painter's death. At Mrs, Garrick's
sale in 1823 the picture was bought by Mr, Edward
Hawke Locker of Greenwich Hospital for £75, lis,
Mr. Locker sold it to George iv., and it is now
at Windsor, Mr, Austin Dobson, who gives this
account, quotes from Mr, F. G, Stephens {Grosvenor
Gallery Catalogue, 1888) the corroboration of
Hogarth's supposed action: 'The eyes of Garrick
being coarsely painted, Ul-drawn, and evidently by
another hand than Hogarth's, attest the truth of
this story,' It is related by Murphy that Hogarth
saw Garrick in Richard III. on one night, and on the
foUowing night in Abel Drugger. He was so much
struck that he said to the actor, ' You are in your
element when you are begrimed with dirt or up to
your elbows in blood.'
1 British Museum Catalogue of Satires, vol. iii. p. 618.

328 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Garrick is said to have aUowed himself to be
drawn as a rustic whose height is being taken by a
recruiting sergeant in Plate 2 of the ' Invasion.'
He -wrote the descriptive verses to the two prints,
twelve lines each. The verses are :
Plate 1, ' France.'
' With lantern jaws, and croaking gut.
See how the half-starv'd Frenchmen strut.
And call us English dogs !
But soon we '11 teach these bragging foes.
That beef and beer give heavier blows.
Than soup and toasted frogs.
The priests inflam'd with righteous hopes.
Prepare their axes, wheels and ropes,
To bend the stiff-neck'd sinner !
But should they sink in coming over.
Old Nick may fish 'twixt France and Dover
And catch a glorious dinner.'
Plate 2, ' England.'
' See John the soldier. Jack the Tar,
With sword and pistol arm'd for war,
Should Mounseer dare come here !
The hungry slaves have smelt our food.
They long to taste our flesh and blood.
Old England's beef and beer !
Britons to arms ! and let 'em come,
Be you but Britons still, strike home.
And lion-like attack 'em ;
No power can stand the deadly stroke,
That 's given from hands and hearts of oak.
With Liberty to back 'em.'
In 1762 Hogarth drew an exceUent frontispiece
for Garrick's successful interlude of The Farmer's

Garrick in "The Farmer's Return.'' 1762.

THEATRICAL LIFE 329
Return from London, which was dedicated to the
artist ' as a faint testimony of the sincere esteem
which the -writer bears him.'
Forster, in his Life of Goldsmith, among some
disparaging remarks on BosweU, relates the foUow
ing improbable story: 'The youthful Scot . . .
had seen Garrick in the new farce of the Farmer's
Return, and gone and peeped over Hogarth's shoulder
as he sketched little David in the Farmer, hitting
off in haK a dozen minutes with magical facUity of
pencU, a likeness that was held to be marvellous '
(vol. i. p. 295).^
Garrick and his -wife went to Italy in 1763. From
Savoy he wrote to his man George, bidding him
' take care of Hogarth's pictures and keep them out
of the sun by which they might be spoUt.' ^
A little later, when ChurchUl was -writing his
Epistle to William Hogarth, Garrick wrote to ' The
Bruiser ' with admhable loyalty though without
success :
' I must entreat of you by the regard you profess
to me that you don't tilt at my friend Hogarth before
you see me. ... He is a great and original genius,
I love him as a man and reverence him as an artist,'
In connection -with the history of Drury Lane
1 To the recent Fasciculus J. W. Clark dicatus, Cambridge, 1909 (pp.
406-422), Mr. Sidney Colvin contributed a learned and very interesting
study of Hogarth's original sketch for The Farmer's Beturn, now in the
possession of the Hon. Mrs. A. E. Gathorne- Hardy. It originally belonged
to Mr. H. P. Standly, afterwards to Mr. William Mitchell. Mr. Colvin's
paper includes a facsimile of Hogarth's pen-drawing.
* Knight's David Ga/rrick, 1894, p. 203.

330 HOGARTH'S LONDON
there are two pictures of the green-room attributed
to Hogarth which claim our special attention. Both
were exhibited at the Whitechapel Art GaUery in
1906, No, 50, ' Garrick in the Green Room,' lent by Mr,
J, E, Reiss,^ and No, 70, ' Green Room, Drury Lane,'
lent by the late Sir Charles Tennant, ' Garrick in
the Green Room ' is the title of a picture which was
discovered early in the nineteenth century and
purchased for a few shiUings, It was ' engraved in
mezzotinto by WiUiam Ward Jan, 1, 1829,' for the
possessor, James Webb Southgate, who published
it at 22 Fleet Street. George Daniel -wrote a
description of the picture, also published in 1829, and
entitled ' Garrick in the Green Room ! a Biographi
cal and Critical Analysis of a Picture.'
The key given of the persons represented is as
foUows : 1, Mr. Beard ; 2, Mr. Baddeley ; 3, Mrs.
Garrick ; 4, Mr. Woodward ; 5, Unkno-wn ; 6,
Gentleman Aickin ; 7, Mr. Macklin ; 8, Gentleman
Smith ; 9, Mrs. Yates ; 10, Mrs. Abingdon ; 11,
Mr. Hogarth ; 12, Mr. O'Brien ; 13, David Garrick ;
14, P. Garrick. This is a distinguished party, and
the figures are arranged in a weU-grouped picture,
but one would like to know more of its history before
accepting it as an undoubted original. One would
have expected that such coUectors of Hogarthiana as
Walpole, Nichols, the two Irelands, and Trusler
would have heard of the picture from Mrs. Hogarth
^ This picture was exhibited in 1880 by Mr. Samuel Addington.

THEATRICAL LIFE 331
if they had not seen it themselves. J. B. Nichols
expressed his doubt as to its authenticity, although
he considered it a carefuUy-painted picture. He
-writes : ' I cannot believe it to have been painted
by Hogarth. It is not unlikely to be a French
painting, with alterations adapted to the English
market.' 1
There does not appear to be any good reason for
the latter suggestion.
Of the picture styled ' The Green Room, Drury
Lane,' we know even less than we do of ' Garrick in
the Green Room.' We have neither information as
to the date of the picture, nor of how or where it
was discovered.
The catalogue of the Whitechapel GaUery contains
a very strongly- worded eulogy of the picture, and the
writer places it in the very front rank of Hogarth's
work. He writes : ' A magnificent work, unequaUed
for briUiance among the painter's achievements. The
grave lighting is magical in its arresting power ; the
way this light seems to come and go, now discovering
and now obscuring the objects, means illumination
profoimdly understood, and the result is a picture
inevitable and mysterious as life itself.' I do not
question this statement respecting the technique,
although it appears somewhat exaggerated, and I
should not have quoted this criticism if I had found
any earlier description of the picture in the literature
of Hogarth's work.
1 Anecdotes of W. Hogarth, 1833, p. 314.

332 HOGARTH'S LONDON
As a picture it is certainly much inferior in interest
to the ' Garrick in the Green Room.' The figures are
fewer and not so representative of ' Old Drury.'
The picture is reproduced in Mr. Austin Dobson's
folio Hogarth (Heinemann), and the names of the
persons represented are there given, as they appear
on the frame. They are : Miss Pritchard, Mrs. Prit
chard, Barry, Fielding, Quin, and Lavinia Fenton.
The figures between Barry and Quin are in the back
ground and are very indisthict ; one is said to be
intended for Fielding, and the other is unnamed.
Two points in the picture which are worthy of
special attention are the portraits of Quin and Lavinia
Fenton. The former is a mere caricature and quite
unworthy of Hogarth, who knew the actor weU and
painted his portrait more than once. Lavinia
Fenton seems out of place in this green-room, as she
never had any connection -with Drury Lane, and she
was not hkely to be a frequenter of a green-room
after 1728 when she finaUy left the stage.
In deahng with the authenticity of the picture the
first thing to find out is the supposed date of the
scene represented. A clue to this seems to present
itself in the presence of Mrs. Pritchard and her
daughter. Miss Pritchard made her debut at Drury Lane as
Juliet to Garrick's Romeo in 1756. Her appearance
caused a great sensation, but she was not able to
keep up her high reputation. We may therefore
take the year 1756 as the date of the picture, and if

THEATRICAL LIFE 333
we do so we cannot but be astonished at the absence
from the green-room of Drury Lane of Garrick
himseK and of such stars as Mrs. Cibber and Kitty
Clive, not to mention the names of Woodward,
Palmer, and Mossop.
Of those persons who are represented. Fielding
had been dead two years in 1756 ; Quin was sixty-
three years of age, and had retired from the stage
five years before ; Lavinia Fenton was forty-eight,
and, moreover, was the widowed Duchess of
Bolton.^ Having referred to that great actress, Mrs.
Pritchard, one of the mainstays of Drury Lane
Theatre, we cannot resist the temptation of inserting
here an anecdote from an old magazine, which places
her in a pleasing light.
' Mrs. Pritchard, in one of her summer rambles
went with a large party to see the Beggar's Opera at
a remote country town, where it was so mangled as
to render it almost impossible to resist laughing at
some of the passages. Mrs. Pritchard perhaps might
have indulged this too much, considering one of her
profession ; however she escaped unnoticed tiU after
the end of the performance, it was necessary for her
and company to cross the stage to go to their carriages
— the oiUy musician who fiUed the orchestra hap
pened likewise to be the manager, and having no
1 I have no wish to dispute the authenticity of this picture, but until we
know more of its history and pedigree it seems necessary to set down the
apparent difficulties in the way of accepting it as an undoubted work of
Hogarth.

334 HOGARTH'S LONDON
other way of sho-wing his revenge, he immediately
struck up the opening tune —
" Through all the employments of life.
Each neighbour abuses his brother."
' This had such an effect on Mrs. Pritchard that she
felt the rebuke, and threw Crowdero a crown for his
wit, as weU as a tribute of her o-wn humUiation.' ^
Passing from Drury Lane to the Haymarket we
have to take note of some of Fielding's successes in
which his friend Hogarth was interested.
Fielding's version of Moliere' s Medecin Maigre lui,
which he caUed The Mock Doctor, or The Dumb Lady
Cured, has already been aUuded to because it was
acted at Drury Lane.
Fielding's first play. Love in Several Masques, was
performed at Drury Lane in February 1728, and on
publication the author acknowledged in his preface
the kindness of Wilkes and Cibber the managers.
His Tom Thumb, a Tragedy (in two acts), was
brought out at the Haymarket in 1730. In the foUow
ing year Fielding enlarged it into three acts. It was
published in 1731 with the foUowing title : Tragedy
of Tragedies, or the Life and Death of Tom Thumb
the Great . . . with the annotations of H. Scriblerus
Secundus. London, J. Roberts, 1731.' Hogarth de
signed a frontispiece (1731) for this book, which was
engraved by G. Vandergucht.
This is an exceUent burlesque -written on the same
principle as The Rehearsal. The scene between
1 European Magazine, 1800, vol. xxxvii. p. 26.

THEATRICAL LIFE 335
Glumdalca and Huncamunca is a parody of the
meeting between Octavia and Cleopatra in Dryden's
All for Love. Swift told Mrs. PUkington that he had
only laughed twice in his life, and one of the occasions
was when he saw Tom Thumb kiUing the ghost. ^
This, however, was omitted after the first edition of
the piece.
On the 3rd of May 1732 the play was transferred
to Drury Lane, and was acted on that day for the
beneflt of WiUiam Rufus Chetwood, the weU-known
prompter and bookseUer in Covent Garden.
The authenticity of the ' Pasquin ' ticket for the
benefit of the author, Henry Fielding, has been
doubted, but many wUl agree with Mr. Dobson when
he -writes : ' There is a doubt whether this is reaUy the
work of Hogarth, but the strokes at political morality
in that " dramatic satire on the times " would have
been so much to the taste of the artist who later
designed the inimitable Election Prints, that one is
inclined to give him the benefit of any uncertainty.'
Moreover, Hogarth was so great a friend of Field
ing that to assist him at his benefit was just what he
woidd be glad to do.
Mr. Stephens gives a description of this ticket, and
a facsimUe of it by A. M. Ireland wUl be found in
the first volume of his Graphic Illustrations. ' The
design represents a stage scene, the background
1 ' Mrs. Pilkington's memory served her imperfectly, since it is not Tom
Thumb who kills the ghost, but the ghost of Tom Thumb which is killed by
his jealous rival. Lord Grizzle ' (Dobson's Fielding, 1907, p. 22).

336 HOGARTH'S LONDON
comprising a colonnade from the respective wings of
which a tight-rope is stretched. On this rope dancers
are performing and holding their balancing poles ;
an ape sits astride of the rope on our right,' ^
The inscription on the ticket is ' The Author's
Benefit Pasquin, At y® Theatre in the Haymarket,'
On S. Ireland's copy is written in Fielding's hand
writing, ' Tuesday, AprU 25th, Boxes.'
The success of the Beggar's Opera is the first in
stance of a long run on the English stage, and Field
ing's Pasquin, eight years afterwards (1736), had
almost as long a one. It contained severe satirical
reflections on the Ministry, which were greatly ap
preciated by the audience. The Government, natur
aUy, did not appreciate the satire, and in consequence
they passed the Licensing Act by which the number
of playhouses was limited and the liberty of the stage
was restrained. As Mr. Cyril Maude says in his
Records of the Haymarket Theatre, it is indhectly to
the little theatre in the Haymarket that Mr. George
Bedford enjoys ' his enviable position of Examiner of
Plays.' The scene of action shown in the ticket is at the
conclusion of the fifth act, where the Queen of
Common Sense is stabbed by Firebrand, and the
Queen of Ignorance declares to Harlequin, his aUies,
and to Squeekaronelli that she wUl be to them aU a
most propitious queen.
Samuel Ireland says in his Graphic Illustrations
1 British Museum Catalogue of Satires, vol. iii. p. 186.

THEATRICAL LIFE 337
that he had a larger print on this subject from a
design by Hogarth that includes aU the characters
in the piece ; in a corner of which Pope appears to be
quitting the theatre, and by the label issuing out of
his mouth is exclaiming, ' There is no whitewashing
this stuff.' ^
This is very suspicious, and the larger print
mentioned is certainly a forgery, for Hogarth did
not use labels containing speeches at this date. It
may be remarked, however, that Pope was said to
have been present at one of the performances.
Some verses were written on seeing ' Mr. Pope at the
Dramatic Satire caU'd Pasquin.' The satirists of the
time were busy with making fun over the ' iUegiti-
mate ' drama of the period, and Hogarth was to the
fore with his ' Masquerades and Operas,' etc., which
wUl be referred to later in this chapter.
In this year, 1736, was issued an engraving
entitled ' The Judgment of the Queen o' Common
Sense. Address'd to Henry Fielding, Esq"". A Sathe
on Pantomimes, and the professors of Divinity, Law
and Physic' This is described by Mr. Stephens as
' representing the stage of a theatre, with an alcove
in the background on which, raised a step above the
floor, stands a crowned female, the Queen of Common
Sense, who holds in her right hand a weU-fUled purse,
and in her left hand an halter. On her right kneels
a gentleman, Henry Fielding, offering to the Queen
a piece of paper inscribed Pasquin ; to him she is
1 Graphic Illustrations, vol. i. p. 131.
Y

338 HOGARTH'S LONDON
giving the contents of the purse ; the halter she
extends to her left, and its extremity is in the hand of
a harlequin, who is capering on the stage in front of
the design.' The description is too long to copy
here. Below the design are engraved some verses
commencing :
' With bounteous hands y* Queen of Common Sense,
Appears her honest favours to dispence.
On Pasquin's Author show'rs of Gold bestows.
And Hamlet's Ghost the impartial Poet shows
Tho' Shakespear's merit in his bosom glows.' ^
The last production of George Colman, the elder,
was acted at the Haymarket in 1789. It was a
slight musical interlude of little merit entitled, Ut
Pictura Poesis, or The Enraged Musician. As its
title indicates, it was founded upon Hogarth's
celebrated picture.
Hogarth painted several portraits of actors which
are of interest, such as those of Lavinia Fenton,
aheady aUuded to as in the National GaUery, Quin
and WUliam Bullock. There are two portraits of
Peg Woffington in a reclining position at the Garrick
Club, one by Hogarth and the other by Mercier.
Hogarth's picture was sold by Henry Angelo to
Charles Matthews. The one by Mercier is the more
pleasing picture.
Among the books iUustrated by Hogarth are
several plays for which he designed frontispieces.
Two of these have already been referred to, viz.
"^ British Museum Catalogue of Satires, vol. iii. p. 200.

THEATRICAL LIFE 339
Fielding's Tom Thumb (1731), and Garrick's Farmer's
Return (1762).
Others are ' The Humours of Oxford, a Comedy.
By a Gentleman of Wadham CoUege ' [Rev. James
MiUer], 1729, which was acted at Drury Lane.
' The Highland Fair, or The Union of the Clans,
an Opera. Written by Mr. [Joseph] MitcheU,' 1731,
also acted at Drury Lane. Fielding teUs us in The
Covent Garden Journal (No. 19) an amusing anecdote
of the dulness of the author :
' A certain comic author produced a piece on Drury
Lane stage caUed The Highland Fair, in which he
intended to display the comical humours of the
Highlanders ; the audience, who had for three nights
together sat staring at each other, scarce knowing
what to make of their entertainment, on the fourth
joined in an unanimous exploding laugh. This they
had continued through an act ; when the author,
who unhappily mistook the peals of laughter which
he heard for applause, went up to Mr. WUks, and
with an air of triumph, said, " Deel o' my sal, Sare,
they begin to tank the humour at last." '
' The Lawyer's Fortune, or Love in a Hollow Tree,
a Comedy,' 1705, is somewhat of a curiosity. It
was -written when its author, WiUiam Grimston, was
only thirteen years of age, and was never acted
except by a stroUing company of actors at Windsor.
The author was in 1719 created Baron of Dunboyne
and Viscount Grimston in the Peerage of Ireland.
He was unfortunate in the strong opposition of the

340 HOGARTH'S LONDON
old Duchess of Marlborough, when he contested
successfuUy the borough of St. Albans. He had
attempted to suppress his play, but the Duchess
reprinted it in order to make him ridiculous.
Lord Grimston was apparently an estimable man,
but the wits were against him. Alluding to his
residence at Gorhambury Pope -wrote :
' Shades that to Bacon could retreat afford.
Become the portion of a booby Lord.'
And Swift, attacking him for his unfortunate play,
said : ' The leaden crown devolved to thee.
Great poet of the Hollow Tree.'
Hogarth's frontispieces to these three plays were
aU engraved by Gerard Vandergucht,
The frontispiece to Henry Carey's Chrononhoton-
thologos (1734) is attributed to Hogarth, but this
attribution is very doubtful, and it has not received
a favourable reception.
' The Tragedy of Chrononhotonthologos. Written
by Benjamin Bounce. London. Printed by J,
Suckburgh.' The engraving represents a scene in a prison-ceU,
There is a picture in existence representing a scene
from Dr, Benjamin Hoadly' s Suspicious Husband.
This belonged to Mrs, Hoadly in 1782,
Dr, John Hoadly, the younger son of Bishop
Hoadly, had a private theatre in his house. Few
visitors were aUowed to leave untU they had ex
hibited their powers here as amateur actors, Hogarth

'^ 'I
z ;'
o a

THEATRICAL LIFE 341
was one of Hoadly's failures, for when he performed
with Garrick and Hoadly in a parody of the scene in
Julius CcBsar, where the ghost appears to Brutus, he
entirely forgot the few words he had to recite. The
host was not to be disappointed, so to help his friend
he had the verses written in large letters on the paper
lantern which the ghost carried in his hand when on
the stage, Hogarth designed a playbiU with char
acteristic ornaments which was preserved but not
engraved, Hogarth was interested in two instances of private
theatricals. He painted a picture of the perform
ance of Dryden's Indian Emperor, or the Conquest of
Mexico at Mr, Conduit's house, and designed a ticket
for an entertainment at Cliefden, given on August 1,
1740, before the Prince and Princess of Wales, that
being the birthday of their daughter the Princess
Augusta, The picture of the fourth scene of the
fourth act of the Indian Emperor is preserved at
HoUand House.
John Conduit was the Master of the Mint in suc
cession to Sir Isaac Newton, whose niece (Mrs.
Catherine Barton) he married. Their only child
(also Catherine), who acted in this piece, married
on the 8th of July 1740 Viscount Lymington, the
eldest son of the first Earl of Portsmouth, who died
before his father, and his son succeeded the first
Earl in the title. The eldest sons of this noble
family have usuaUy borne the name of Newton.
The four characters on the stage are : 1, Cortez,

342 HOGARTH'S LONDON
acted by Lord Lempster ; 2, Cydaria, by Lady
Caroline Lennox ; 3, Almeria, by Lady Sophia
Fermor ; 4, Alibeck, by Miss Conduit.
Hogarth appears to have continued his acquain
tanceship with Lady Lymington from her chUdhood.
There is a tradition that he was proud to be aUowed
to draw figures from her, and that she was so
obliging as to sit to him for the Viscountess in the
' Marriage a la Mode.'
The audience included in the picture are : 5, the
Duke of Cumberland ; 6, Princess Mary ; 7, Princess
Louisa ; 8, Lady Deloraine ; 9 and 10, her daughters ;
11, Duchess of Richmond ; 12, Duke of Richmond ;
13, Earl of Pomfret ; 14, Duke of Montague ; 15,
Tom HiU or Captain Poyntz ; 16 (on the stage). Dr.
Desaguliers. The picture was engraved by Robert Dodd, and
published by J. and J. BoydeU in 1792. There is a
key-plate in John Ireland's Hogarth Illustrated
(ii. 331).
Leslie in his Handbook for Young Painters (1855,
p. 151) praises this picture very highly. He -writes :
' Three girls and a boy are on the stage, and seem to
be very seriously doing theh best ; but the attitude
and expression of one little ghl in a front seat
among the audience, is matchless. She is so entirely
absorbed in the performance, that she sits bolt up
right, and wUl sit, we are sure, immovably, to the
end of the play, enjoying it as a chUd only can, and
much the more because the actors are children.'

THEATRICAL LIFE 343
The ticket for the performance of Thomson and
MaUet's Masque of Alfred, written by command of
the Prince of Wales, and performed in the gardens of
Cliefden House in 1740, has had more than one date
given to it. It consists of an oval with the two
figures of Hymen and Cupid in the foreground, and a
view of a handsome mansion (Cliefden) in the back
ground. When originaUy acted, the chief character of the
Masque was the Hermit, taken by Quin, Alfred by
MUward, the Earl of Devon by MiUs, Corin by
Salway, Eltruda by Mrs. Horton, and Emma by Mrs,
Clive, MaUet remodeUed the Masque, making Alfred
the chief character, when it was acted at Drury Lane
in February 1751, Garrick took Alfred, Berry the
Hermit, Lee the Earl of Devon, Miss Bellamy
Eltruda, and Mrs, Bennet Emma, The play was
re-vived at Drury Lane in October 1773, when
Reddish played Alfred,
John Nichols (in his Biographical Anecdotes, 1785,
p, 436), says that the ' print was intended as a ticket
for Sigismunda, which Hogarth proposed to be raffled
for. It is often marked with ink 21, 2s, The number
of each ticket was to have been inserted on the scroll
hanging down from the knee of the principal figure.
Perhaps none of them were ever disposed of. This
plate however must have been engraved about 1762
or 3, Had I not seen many copies of it marked by the
hand of Hogarth, I should have supposed it to have
been only a ticket for a concert or music-meeting.'

344 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The suggested date is much too late, but the guess
as to a ticket is a shrewd one,
J, B. Nichols says that the ticket was used as a
receipt for the Election Prints as weU as for ' Sigis
munda.' The subscription for the latter was 10s. 6d.
and that for the former two guineas. Mr. Standly
had a copy on which is written ' N" 12 ' in the scroU,
and under the print ' Election Entertainment 21 2s
Wm. Hogarth.'^
No copy of the original ticket (1740) is registered,
but 1748 is given as the date of the reprint by John
Ireland.^ Hogarth was greatly interested in everything that
tended towards the amusement of the people, and he
had many opportunities of understanding the history
of the theatre. He was weU acquainted with actors,
and he was the honoured friend of three of the great
managers of the chief theatres of London.
Of Garrick at Drury Lane little further need be
added. The Haymarket, at which Fielding presided
for a time, was the smaU theatre which was super
seded by the present buUding in 1821.
Fielding's fame wiU ever live in English literature
on account of his immortal novels. His plays
occupy five octavo volumes of the most modern
edition of his works,^ but his fame cannot be aug-
' Anecdotes of W. Hogarth, 1833, p. 334.
2 Hogarth Illustrated, Supplement, p. 349.
^ Complete Works of Henry Fielding. New York : Printed for Sub
scribers only by Croscop and Sterling Company, and published in England
by W. Heinemann. 16 vols. 8vo.

THEATRICAL LIFE 345
mented by them. Although his Tom Thumb and
Pasquin are productions of great power and were
highly successful on the stage, they do not affect the
truth of the general verdict that his genius naturaUy
tended to narrative rather than to the dramatic.
John Rich, the manager of Lincoln's Inn Fields
and introducer of pantomimes, was successful, and
wiU ever be remembered for his production of the
Beggar's Opera. His theatre was the third and last
house to bear the name of Lincoln's Inn Fields.
In December 1732 Rich removed to Covent Garden
Theatre, which was built for him. There is a print
entitled ' Rich's Glory, or his Triumphant Entry into
Covent Garden,' which is attributed to Hogarth, but
is of very doubtful authenticity. It is, however, an
interesting iUustration of Hogarth's London.
Although the works of Hogarth, already alluded
to in this chapter, are sathical, the actors at the
ordinary theatres were acceptable to him because
they were English and theh performances racy of the
soU. The most intense prejudice in Hogarth's
nature was a hatred of the introduction of foreign
customs into this country, and Italian opera excited
his keenest displeasure as he considered it an un
welcome exotic. He satirised the great Italian
singers who were the fashion, and thus displayed his
national prejudice. We are, however, grateful, be
cause his sketches help us to understand the intense
feeling exhibited in favour of and against the Italian
opera which forced itself upon the country, and in

346 HOGARTH'S LONDON
the end became an established institution. Before
treating of Hogarth's attitude towards this branch
of the stage, reference must be made to his altogether
admirable ' A Chorus of Singers ; or, the Oratorio.'
This was reproduced in small by George Cruik-
shank for Major's edition of Trusler (1831), but the
later artist cannot be said to have done justice
to his original, although his ' Four Groups of
Heads,' given in that book, are exceUent in them
selves. The original print was used as the subscription
ticket for ' A Midnight Modem Conversation.'
Below the design is engraved a form of receipt :
' Reed of
Five shiUings being the whole Payment for a Print
caU'd the Midnight Moddern Conversation which I
Promise to Deliver on y^ P* of March next at farthest.
But Provoided the number aheady Printed shaU
be sooner Subscribed for, then y^ Prints shaU be
sooner Delivered & time of Delivery wUl be
advertiz'd,' In the British Museum copy the blank spaces are
fiUed in, probably by Hogarth, thus : 'December 22'^,
1732,' and ' M' Tho, Wright,' In the second state
of this plate the word ' Provoided ' is corrected to
' Pro-vdded.' The print represents a rehearsal of ' Judith : an
Oratorio or Sacred Drama.' The author of this was
Hogarth's friend, WiUiam Huggins, and the com
poser of the music was WiUiam Defesch. Some of

THEATRICAL LIFE 347
the editors of Hogarth supposed the composer to be
Handel, and stated absurdly enough that the con
ductor was intended for the great composer himself,
whose portrait he did at one time paint. ^
Huggins was painted by Hogarth and his portrait
was engraved. An original of the ticket has been
spoken of, and Bishop Luscombe bought such a
picture in Paris. Sir WiUiam Knighton told the
Bishop that Hogarth's picture had belonged to the
Dukes of Richmond, and had been in their house in
Paris untU the fhst Revolution, since which time it
had not been heard of.^
Besides this design, Hogarth prepared a frontispiece
for the Oratorio when Huggins published it in
1733. In his Autobiography Hogarth writes : ' But here
again I had to encounter a monopoly of printseUers,
equaUy mean, and destructive to the ingenious ; for
the first plate I published, called The Taste of the
Town, in which the reigning foUies were lashed, had
no sooner begun to take a run, than I found copies of
it in the printshops, vending at half price, while the
original prints were returned to me again ; and I was
thus obliged to sell the plate for whatever these
pirates pleased to give me, as there was no place of
sale but at their shops.' ^
1 A portrait of Handel was engraved by C. Turner and published in
1821 (see Chapter vii., Professional Life).
2 Notes and Queries, First Series, vol. vii. p. 484.
5 For further particulars respecting Hogarth's fight with the pirates see
Chapter ii.

348 HOGARTH'S LONDON
John Ireland -writes respecting this : ' The print
here alluded to, I apprehend to be that now entitled
the smaU Masquerade Ticket or Burlington Gate,
published in 1724, in which the foUies of the town
are very severely satirised, by the representation
of multitudes, properly habited, crowding to the
Masquerade, Opera, pantomime of Doctor Faustus,
etc, while the works of our greatest dramatic -writers
are trundled through the streets in a wheel-barrow,
and cried as waste paper for shops,' ^
This plate, also named ' Masquerades and Operas,'
is very interesting from its richness of detail. In
the background is the entrance gate of Burlington
House, surmounted by a statue of Kent standing
between two reclining figures of Michael Angelo and
Raphael, It is quite possible to understand Hogarth's
hatred of Kent, who was a contemptible painter set
up as a rival to Sir James ThornhiU, although he had
some merit as an architect and a landscape gardener.
In the front are three figures looking up at the gate :
these are the Earl of Burlington, accompanied by
his architect, Colin CampbeU, and another person
who, as Mr, Stephens says, has been ' erroneously
called his lordship's postilion,' We can understand
Hogarth's feeling towards Burlington, although we
may judge that it was unjust. The inscription on
the gate ' Academy of Arts ' is prophetic, for the
enlarged Burlington House is now the home of the
Royal Academy of Arts, which did not then exist,
1 Hogarth Illustrated, 1798, vol. iii, p. 16.

o OH

c

THEATRICAL LIFE 349
In the foreground on the left is the home of Masquer
ades, John Ireland notes that the leader of the
figures hurrying to a masquerade crowned with a cap
and beUs and a garter round his right leg, has been
supposed to be intended for George the Second, who
was very partial to these nocturnal amusements, and
is said to have bestowed a thousand pounds towards
their support. The purse with the label £1000,
which the satyr holds immediately before him, gives
some probabUity to the supposition,
Heidegger, the great promoter of masquerades, is
seen looking out of a window. Of him there will be
more to be said later on, A show-cloth hanging from
the front of the building is inscribed ' Opera,' It
represents the famous singers Berenstadt, Senesino,
and Cuzzoni, To the right are three figures kneeling ;
the foremost, the Earl of Peterborough, a prominent
supporter of the opera, exclaims, ' Pray accept
£8000.' Cuzzoni is seen raking in the gold which
the Earl pours out of a purse. A signboard next to
the show-cloth is inscribed ' The Long Room.
Faux. Dexterity of Hand.' Fawkes was a famous
mounteback of the time, who gave entertainments at
Bartholomew Fair and elsewhere. His portrait will
be found in Caulfield's Portraits, etc., of Remarkable
Characters. To the right of the plate opposite to the masquer
ade building is the theatre where Rich performed his
pantomimes. A crowd is seen rushing into a colon
nade over which is a harlequin pointing to a show-

350 HOGARTH'S LONDON
cloth representing the head of a devil, which is
inscribed ' Dr. Faustus is Here.'
The pantomime entitled The Necromancer, or
Harlequin Doctor Faustus was brought out at
Lincoln's Inn Fields in 1723, and was so great a
success that Rich's rival managers were forced to
imitate his example.
It wiU be seen from this description that there
was but little of topographical accuracy in the
introduction of these different buUdings in one
picture. The print entitled ' Berenstat, Cuzzoni
and Senesino ' has been the cause of a considerable
amount of dispute. It represents the stage of a
theatre at the performance of the opera of Julius
Ccesar, the three singers taking the characters in
the following order : Juhus Caesar, Cleopatra, and
Mark Antony, and a child representing the train-
bearer of Cleopatra. This is nothing but a caricature,
and it has been supposed not to be Hogarth's work.
Mr. Stephens points out that under the Duchess of
Portland's copy is -written ' This print of Senesino,
Berenstadt and Cuzzoni was given me by Vanderbank
the younger' s mother. He drew it from seeing it at
the opera.' The chief reason for belie-ving it to be
the work of Hogarth is the fact that he repeated the
three figures in his picture of ' Masquerades and
Operas,' aheady described, but this is not a very
strong argument, as Hogarth imitated other artists'
work in some of his pictures ; as, for instance, we have
seen that he copied Laguerre in ' Southwark Fair.'

THEATRICAL LIFE 351
John Ireland replaces the name of FarineUi for
that of Berenstadt, but this necessitates our dating
this print after 1734, when FarineUi came to England,
and this is not very probable, as the 'Masquerades
and Operas ' was produced in 1724. Ireland also
says that the characters are Ptolemy, Cleopatra, and
Julius Csesar, from Handel's opera Ptolomeo, which
was first performed in 1728.^
A picture of FarineUi seated on a pedestal lies on
the floor in the second plate of the ' Rake's Progress.'
A print entitled ' A Sathe on Cuzzoni, FarineUi and
Heidegger ' has been attributed to Hogarth, but it is
beheved to be the design of Dorothy, Countess of
Burlington, who is said to have had it etched by
Goupy. In Mr. Stephens's Catalogue of Satirical
Prints in the British Museum there are notices of
several sathical prints connected with the celebrated
Itahan singers by others than Hogarth.
The opera dancers were not overlooked, and
Hogarth produced in 1742 a print in ridicule of Des
noyers, the dancing-master, and Signora Barberini,
under the title of ' The Charmers of the Age.' An
original print was in the Strawberry HUl CoUection.
It was re-engraved by R. Livesay, and published by
him in 1782 at Mrs. Hogarth's.
At the Whitechapel Exhibition, 1906, a picture
entitled ' A Pantomime BaUet on the English
Stage (about 1750),' attributed to Hogarth, was
lent by Mr. Charles E. Newton Robinson. It
1 The print is reproduced in Hoga/rth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 255.

352 HOGARTH'S LONDON
is an interesting picture, but the ascription is
doubtful. As has aheady been noticed, the fashion for
masquerades in connection with the foreign intro
duction of opera became very general, and the
fosterers of these entertainments were in many
instances the same persons.
There is no doubt that very great evUs were caused
by the public welcome of masquerades, and therefore
Hogarth's attacks upon them did him credit.
Reference has already been made to the print of
' Masquerades and Operas,' or the smaU Masquerade
Ticket (1724). The large Masquerade Ticket was
published in 1727 at the price of one shilling. This
is engraved as a frontispiece to the thhd volume of
Hogarth Illustrated from the original print given to
John Ireland by Sir James Lake. There is a fuU
description by Ireland, and also one in Mr. Stephens's
British Museum Catalogue.^ The print shows the
interior of a large room which serves as a vestibule
to the chamber where the masquerade is held. A
multitude of grotesque characters press towards the
door. It is not necessary to describe fuUy the
surroundings of the place which are aU indicative of
the orgies performed there. The head of the high
priest of the mysteries, the renowned Heidegger, is
placed on the front of a large dial, fixed lozenge
fashion at the top of the print. The baU of the
pendulum is labeUed nonsense. On the minute
• Vol. ii. p. 661.

THEATRICAL LIFE 353
hand is written impertinence, and on the hour
hand wit.
Recumbent on the upper line of this print and
resting against the sides of the dial the lion and the
unicorn are seen lying on theh backs, and this
parody of the royal supporters is supposed to aUude
to George n.'s patronage of masquerades.
John James Heidegger was a remarkable man.
He was the son of the Swiss pastor of Zurich, and
came to England at the age of about fifty, after
having lived a Bohemian life for some years in almost
every capital in Europe. In 1713 he was manager of
the Opera House in the Haymarket. Again in 1728
he was connected with Handel in the same venture.
He was appointed by George n. Master of the Revels,
and in his attempts to introduce masquerades he
was supported by the King.
For some years great opposition to this form of
amusement was set in motion by the more sober
portion of the population. On January 6, 1726, a
sermon was preached at Bow Church by the Bishop
of London before the Society for the Reformation
of Manners, which created a great effect. Futile
attempts were made to obtain an Act of Parliament
for the suppression of masquerades, but a royal
proclamation against the evils produced by them
was published.
In 1729 a Middlesex Grand Jury presented
Heidegger ' as the principal promoter of vice and
immorality.' In spite of aU this opposition there

354 HOGARTH'S LONDON
was no abatement of the evU, and the only concession
to the popular outcry was to change the name of a
masquerade to a Ridotto.
Bramston in his Man of Taste aUudes to this :
' Thou Heidegger, the English taste has found.
And rul'st the mob of quality with sound ;
In Lent if Masquerades displease the town.
Call 'em Eidottos, and they still go down.
Go on. Prince Phiz, to please the British nation.
Call thy next Masquerade a Convocation.'
The name ' Prince Phiz ' refers to Heidegger's
ugliness, which was so patent to aU that he himself
made a jest of it. Mrs, Delany describes him as
' the most ugly man that ever was formed,' Fielding
introduces him as Count Ugly in the puppet show
caUed The Pleasures of the Town at the end of The
Author's Farce.
The Count speaks :
' I disdain
O'er the poor ragged tribe of bards to reign.
Me did my stars to happier fates prefer,
Sur-intendant des plaisirs d'Angleterre ;
If Masquerades you have, let those be mine.
But on the Siguier let the laurel shine.'
When asked, ' Hast -written ? ' he answers :
' No, nor read.
But if from dulness any may succeed.
To that and nonsense I good title plead.
Nought else was ever in my masquerade.'
He was, however, a highly successfiU man, and
starting with nothing he soon made about five
thousand pounds a year. He was a member of

THEATRICAL LIFE 355
White's exclusive club, and entertained George n.
at his house at Barn Elms,
John Nichols gives an anecdote which shows the
careless humour which caused him to succeed in this
country, ' Being once at supper with a large company, when
a question was debated, which nationalist of Europe
had the greatest ingenuity ; to the surprise of all
present, he claimed that character for the Swiss, and
appealed to himself for the truth of it, " I was born
a Swiss," said he, " and came to England without a
farthing, where I have found means to gain £5000
a year, and to spend it. Now I defy the most able
Englishman to go to Switzerland, and either to gain
that income or to spend it there in eating and
drinking," '
A slight pencil sketch entitled ' Heidegger in a
Rage ' {circa 1740) belonged to John Ireland, who
engraved it in the third volume of his Hogarth
Illustrated. The ascription is untenable, but the
well-known anecdote of Heidegger's confusion which
is here represented is just such an incident as would
appeal to the humour of Hogarth, The sketch is
now in the Print Room of the British Museum, and is
described by Mr. Stephens in his Catalogue (vol, iii,
p, 360), Mr. Binyon catalogues it under PhUip
Mercier' s name.^
1 This little sketch (a black-chalk drawing) belonged to John Ireland who
inserted a facsimile of it by J. Mills in his Hoga/rth Illustrated, 1798, vol.
iii. p. 323. He attributed it to Hogarth on little or no evidence, but
having been given this authority it has been treated as one of his works.

356 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Heidegger would never aUow any portrait of
himself to be taken, and he managed to evade
George n.'s expressed wish that he should be painted.
What could not be obtained by fah means was
undertaken by a ruse. The Duke of Montagu, who
was a prince of practical jokers, succeeded where
others had faUed. He invited Heidegger to make
one of a choice party at the Devil Tavern. The rest
of the company, aU chosen for their powers of hard
drinking, were in the plot, and a few hours after
dinner the Swiss Count was carried out of the room
dead drunk. A daughter of Mr. Salmon, the wax
work maker, was in attendance, and took a model
from the unconscious man's face, from which she
was ordered to make a cast in wax, and colour it to
nature. The Duke bribed Heidegger's valet to give him
information as to the clothes his master would wear
at the next masquerade. A man of a similar figure
was found, and with the help of the mask was made
up into a striking reproduction of the Master of the
Revels. George n. was apprised of the plot and he promised
to be present with the Countess of Yarmouth. On
the King's arrival Heidegger at once bade the band
play ' God save the King,' but no sooner was|his
The drawing was purchased for the British Museum in 1858. Mr.
Laurence Binyon says that it was originally attributed to Philip Mercier
(1689-1760), and as that ascription is doubtless correct it is described
under his name in his Catalogue of Drawings by British Artists in the
Department of Prints in the British Museum (vol. ii. p. 326 ; vol. iii.
p. 102).

THEATRICAL LIFE 357
back turned than the impostor with a fine assump
tion of the voice and manner of the true master
ordered the Jacobite song ' Charlie over the Water '
to be struck up. Heidegger then raged, stamped
and swore, commanding the continuation of ' God
save the King.' Immediately he retired the im
postor returned and ordered the band to resume
' Charhe.' The musicians thought theh master was
drunk, but dared not disobey the order. All this
confusion caused an uproar, and the courtiers who
were not in the plot were in dismay. Some of the
officers of the guard who attended the King wished
to turn the musicians out of the gaUery, but the
Duke of Cumberland interposed. The Duke then
told Heidegger that the King was in a violent
passion and advised him to go instantly and make
an apology. At the same time he told the impostor
to do the same. When the two met Heidegger
stared, staggered, grew pale and could not utter a
word. Montagu then explained the situation, but
Heidegger swore that he would never attend any
public entertainment if the waxwork-maker did not
break the mould, and melt down the mask before his
face. Samuel Ireland contributed to the second volume
of his Graphic Illustrations an etching by Le Coeur
(1797), from a slight sketch by Hogarth, entitled
' IU Effects of Masquerades.' The picture speaks for
itself, but Ireland gives a rather fiorid description of
it which may be condensed.

358 HOGARTH'S LONDON
A husband called away to the country for a short
time left his young wife with her sister. During his
absence the two ladies resolved to go to a masquerade,
the wife adopting the dress of a gaUant and the sister
acting as his betrothed. All went well, and they
returned home. The husband unexpectedly foUowed
them, and rushing with impatience to his wife's
apartment saw on the floor the clothes of a man.
Imagining that he had fuU proof of his wife's in
constancy he stabbed both sisters in a frenzy of
revenge. The picture shows the fatal ending and
the man's remorse. A not very probable story,
unless he was completely blinded by passion.
Mr. Dobson notes that the picture belonged to Mr.
Peacock of Marylebone Street. There is stUl another
picture of a masquerade attributed to Hogarth,
which was engraved in 1804 by T. Cook, ' from an
original picture painted by Hogarth in the coUection
of Roger Palmer, Esq.' It is described as ' Royal
Masquerade, Somerset House.' There are several
masquerades recorded as having been held at
Somerset House ; thus one, in 1716, which is amus
ingly described in the Freeholder, and the more
famous one in 1749, when the scandalous Ehzabeth
Chudleigh (afterwards Duchess of Kingston) ap
peared so thinly clothed that the Princess of Wales
thought it expedient to throw a thick veU over her
maid of honour. Horace Walpole told Mann in one
of his letters that ' Miss Chudleigh was Iphigenia, but
so naked you would have taken her for Andromeda.'

THEATRICAL LIFE 359
It is difficult to fix the date of the masquerade
shown in this picture, as the figures are not very
accurately described in J. B. Nichols's Anecdotes,
1833, p. 287 ; but perhaps this does not matter, as
it is very doubtful if Hogarth had anything to do
-with the painting of it.
In concluding this long notice of masquerades and
Hogarth's strong feeling as to the evils connected
with them, it wiU be appropriate to quote from
Fielding, who was capable of giving an unbiassed
opinion. He writes : ' I cannot dismiss this head,
without mentioning a notorious nuisance which hath
lately arisen in this town ; I mean, those balls where
men and women of loose reputation meet in dis
guised habits. As to the masquerade in the Hay
market, I have nothing to say ; I think reaUy it is a
sUly, rather than a vicious, entertainment ; but the
case is very different with those inferior masquerades ;
for these are indeed no other than the temples of
drunkenness, lewdness, and aU kinds of debauchery.'^
1 An Enquiry into the Causes of the late Increase of Bobbers, etc., 1751
(Section i.).

360 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER XI
HOSPITALS
The subject of the present chapter is one that shows
Hogarth on his best side, and exhibits instances of
his great charity and kindness of heart. After many
struggles and much hard work he succeeded in
obtaining a competence, but he does not appear to
have been at any time what we may caU a rich man.
In spite of this he was munificent in his presenta
tions to the Foundling and St. Bartholomew's
Hospitals, and of both these institutions he was made
a governor. The Foundling is not what one now under
stands by a hospital, but as in the case of Christ's
Hospital, the term is unalterably attached to it.
The Foundhng Hospital is one of the most interest
ing institutions in London, and at the same time the
very form and body of the eighteenth century at its
very best pervades the buildings and the gardens. A
continued sense of responsibUity in respecting the
tradition of its originators united with a proper
determination to keep it abreast of the times has
been the great aim of the management. The rooms
are fiUed with works of art, and as the delighted

HOSPITALS 361
visitor passes through them he feels that a shrine
has been reserved for the good men who founded
and fostered the Hospital — Coram, Hogarth, Handel,
and many others. It is the earliest home of repre
sentative English pictorial art, and it possesses a
proud claim to distinction as one of three places in
London where Hogarth may be seen at his best.
The National GaUery contains the ' Marriage a la
Mode ' and many other fine pictures, the Soane
Museum the ' Rake's Progress ' and the ' Election,'
and the Foundhng Hospital the grand portrait of
Captain Coram, the ' March to Finchley,' and ' Moses
brought to Pharaoh's Daughter.' The contents of
the rooms and the beauty of the gardens glorify the
plain old building, and as we look around our eyes are
satisfied and our minds are fuU of thankfulness that
no imp of mischief has been aUowed to put into
the minds of the governors a wish to replace the
delightful old buildings by some important-looking
new structure without charm or association.
May the rural beauties of the Foundling Hospital
in the midst of London long remain an oasis in a
barren land ! The house where Hogarth lived for so
many years in Leicester Square has been rebuUt, and
few of the places associated with him stUl exist, so
that the Foundling Hospital, which he so often
-visited, is of special interest in connection -with his
fame, and the more so that his memory is specially
cherished there, and the riUers are proud of what he
did for the institution. The Foundling Hospital

362 HOGARTH'S LONDON
was founded by Captain Thomas Coram in 1739, the
date of the charter in which Hogarth figures as ' a
Governor and Guardian.' Its first home was in
Hatton Garden, and the arms in an heraldic shield
which Hogarth designed were placed over the door
of this house. ^ The engraving of the arms was
published in 1781, and is described as being engraved
from the original in the possession of the Earl of
Exeter. The artist also designed the pleasing
heading to a Power of Attorney for coUecting
subscriptions, the plate of which is stUl in the
possession of the Hospital. It represents Coram
with the charter under his arm and a mother kneeling
to him, while a beadle, bearing a mace and carrying
a chUd in his arms, is leading the way to the door of
the Hospital, around which are congregated many
children. A viUage church is seen to the left in the
distance, and the sea with ships on it in the middle
of the design.
Hogarth was busy with work for the Foundling in
1739-40, for in May of the latter year he presented the
noble fuU-length portrait of the founder, which is so
well known from the numerous engravings, but the
painting itseh requires to be seen by any one who
wishes to obtain an adequate idea of Hogarth's great
merits as a portrait painter. Although there are
several good portraits in the gaUery, one of them by
' Hogarth's original draft for these arms will be found in the Genuine
Works (vol. iii. p. 139). The arms are a naked child, the crest a lamb, and
the motto ' Help.' The supporters are ' Nature ' and ' Britannia.'

•do CtU to /i//ur//i tAcje j/'/'eJf///.i j/ur//

t9i/0'^/f /.I j/;-f //,,-/// ,1 //,/ /.-N'/,r ( (i/>.i/</,rfi/a'// f/ir r/r/i/orn/-/y (<i.jf c/ /7ri<i/'- l//////f/:.> n/
' \ai>/>/'r// f////r//Y// i/.f///^i:iy.h'.<.;/f.-'J^'/,:fhr/f//<-'/tJi//^/ucrf/r/^/^-/uirt//i/ /'/'t/u-/rj:'/lr -
nfif.i, aiif/ /nir///,/ hy. /(',J \ktm{ VTimitrr /mrim/ y^/,'///- Ij'^'Joy ,>/fK/i'/>cr l'3Q,
rii/i.>/i////.-</ II ¦ /.'<<>,/ Y _yi'/d/i'/; u/i,/ (I'r/.'uni/r, /'//t/it-. I lunr i-/ The (in\-criior.s antl
Guardians of the Hf)Ipil::il tor the ilaiiitenance and Education of ex[)ofed and de -
fcrted young Cliildreii;-//'//;:-/ ((tr/Jf/'(!//{y// hi /ifJ/jy t //t/jowcra/ rp /rir/rr Cv//////^ Mf/'/za'
/f/f,:i ''/ '{/// <;>//i/'.i/.'i,>ni!/,-^ A f^)/i?/^ ii'/io .i/ui// f(>fi/rf7>tffi^i>ii>arr/.i ,' ri ,// j/i/ *--\.<f/ii'//.i//i//(/
t/tt- .>a/>irfK\\h^.^S^<X<CK-^-^i.i. ffa/i.ih//r>?'t/h-/'r//.-/ ^//imr .•fffn/.i/rW nn'/i/i/n/ ,>n t/it .ii'r/,/
r/"i>i/. ^// //',/,;', -y.-^tUf) /v/ . ^f'/.> ¦',//./ €\SS.'XitX z/m///iY/ t<>Mr .'I//'/ f i'//'i'/'i///<'// i7//(/ ///ivr
./i/<ri/.u'/u/////^-f/////z/r'^yi^'//Y/-/'i'a//^//(7r/z^\'//r//jy,-/:ieVL-^ r^//Air//////r>//,i,n/fiy/^f> n.iA i7/?r7 rio/iY r>/rif/r>rr///// I'/./l/.'- //,yr.'/y.' ynf}r/.////'ji-rt.i, .'ar/i
.. //i'//(f.i fi.i.i/iri// /¦// fi/i i/j/iKio/t ('fi'^4 f:ii'/i.i,.X'i'//n\<J^ '•///!( /.¦ If//'/ /i'/f-.'/'o/i .(,>;////,/ >ui'.' (f/ii/
o//a-rJoc(ffff.> /t rrf}/trf/'/{/tv/ a//^ y/r<//fTh- f/n-:'^h/y.>iy/t\' ti/^e^^ HxiOWVC M/z/" Y/'e
(/li-.Ki/r/ C/m-fn/cr.i .^////f/rf//<i/i.i /¦>///// rcf// i'/-u/r'i/ I'/Y//, i//r/7^/'//i/////y<-'. '///,// n/y n^
///¦(•<///// //rj/rr t/u- It/ca/.'i S'/Z/r/v/^'/^. '/-////¦/// o^.io r.rrf//f/il it
//ffM.-S?(iVC /n/ / irt/(f rft/ii\></fiLyi''/rt-r^-ari/i-{/ to //j.,iat//('/-f '.i-y ^'//////i'/ ///.'^j! //i//^^
./'/;.<(¦///.> Ol) aa//i-(/rf' •:i <-a/i//<v/// ///--Jf/u/ i'^' /^t/Z-t
. i///:'i/-//i//i'/i.i ff/ti/ /,' /tiif'r,- //fit//,-/-<^ •-i'//ir/:.if/r// ///i'///,.> //.i.iArf// /¦// n// yJ/</-jo/i i/z-jy^-/'-
,'i'//,i,./>i'i/fi:>_ A'/' ///•/{ •--• (('/¦//o/-i//i-,(i'//i//'f/w'i:i ^' i>l/i<-/--A'a<'^/i.i. /-I i-<>////7/-i//-y/ <¦¦<// i/f-//^>r//u-
_/>///'/'.v.' /7/i'/'i'.i/f/y,''f''u//f.> //'!///. I///// rr//// ii// r4>//iY//i<'/i/ .</iit'i/.//ir ///mi/r.) .ip (ii//i'r/r</
/t/N/'/un/r.i/.t///(> f^//f ,'/>a///.- i>/'(''//i/fii/ii//i>r //if ///, ////^' (''¦/¦//.¦/¦ii//,'/i . , //////"//
¦4tC<//f/ //>r//if.i<r//ir f<> ('f/j'. //Y,i///ri / /i>/- ////¦/////<¦ /iV/z^/.'/ri/f/Ai/tr/// ////¦ //a ///,'.> n/ me
{<>//f/7/'(tk>r.i,(.rcf/// .if/rA n.i .i/n// i/i'-Hn- Iti/r o>/uY'i/rf/,ir/n/ /// // a/ f (/.<,//-• t/i. if rf ////¦'///.///.>
f}///i/,//f (rr(/f///ri//f'if/u.ifi/(///fiiYj//or.i '<.'6'//4!/-i/(/i//.i ///ti/p /Yr/i^/>/f//^/wi/ ////// /(' ////w/-'
^/ h /'//.'/ //y//f'r/' /y<w////.i c'A'//y// .:i:'i//y/i/i//i>//-'-0//'i'// f/ /n/- /-<>///' (<'//i f/i<///. ^m/ //r

'"/f

O./)// Off/i/rt/ //ir .iritr/ yii'/r/i/i/.i ^ O'/n /////i/i.i.

'The Foundlings." 1739.

""¦¦ "'" "'' o'--n!'l%&^^jM

Captain Thomas Coram. 1739.
Froi7i A^titicrs engraving, jygb.

HOSPITALS 363
Reynolds, this picture dominates its surroundings,
and proves itself pre-eminent as a work of art of
which all Englishmen may be proud.
The Hospital was opened on March 25, 1741, for
the reception of nineteen boys and eleven girls.
The fhst boy was named Thomas Coram and the
first girl Eunice Coram, after the Captain and his
wife. In an account of the opening in the Gentle
man's Magazine (vol. xi. p. 163) it is said that ' the
orphans received into the Hospital were baptised
there — some nobUity of the first rank standing god
fathers and godmothers. . . . The most robust boys
being designed for the sea service, were named
Drake, Norris, Blake, etc., after our most famous
admhals.' The house in Hatton Garden was only a temporary
residence, and a very advantageous purchase of
fifty-six acres of land in Lamb's Conduit Fields was
made from the Earl of Salisbury for £6500. It is
believed that there was a good-humoured contro
versy as to price. The hospital would only give
£5000, and the Earl asked £7000. He offered to
take off £500, but he would not budge a jot from
his price of £6500. However, he aUowed it to
be understood that as he was an admirer of the
charity he would be pleased to subscribe £500. As
there was more land than was required for the
buUdings and ground, the unused portion was let
on building leases, which has produced a valuable
source of income to the institution.

364 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The new ground was laid out and the building was
designed by Theodore Jacobsen, architect. The
west wing was completed in December 1746, and the
chapel in 1747, in the vaults under which the founder
was buried, pursuant to his own deshe. Coram died
at his lodging near Leicester Square on March 29,
1751. When the new building was ready for occupation
an annual dinner was instituted. Many artists had
foUowed the lead of Hogarth in painting and pre
senting works to the Hospital, so that the rooms
became a fashionable lounge as being a sort of head
quarters of British art.
Mr. Dobson says regarding the annual dinners:
' The assembled painters were accustomed to com
memorate the landing of WiUiam the Third, using for
their loyal libations a fine old white and blue dragon
china punch bowl, generaUy described as Hogarth's,
which is stiU carefuUy preserved in one of the cases
of the Court room, and is beautifuUy copied in Pye's
Patronage of British Art.' In iUustration of this
there is an interesting entry in Stukeley's Diary:
' November 4, 1752. Dined at the annual feast at
the Foundling Hospital : Present : Judge Taylor
White, treasurer ; Hayman, WUls, Hogarth, Hudson,
Scot, Brown, Dalton, painters ; RoubUiac, statuary ;
Pine, engraver; Houbraken, Jacobsen, the archi
tect of the house, etc., a cozen of my late friend,
ChanceUor Stukeley.'
The fine picture of ' The March to Finchley,' one

HOSPITALS 365
of the painter's masterpieces, was disposed of by
pubhc lottery, and owing to Hogarth's generosity
in giving the unsold tickets to the Foundling
Hospital it came into the possession of that institu
tion. The result is announced in the General Advertiser
of May 1, 1750, as foUows : ' Yesterday Mr.
Hogarth's subscription was closed. Eighteen hundred
and forty-three chances being subscrib'd for, Mr.
Hogarth gave the remaining hundred and sixty-
seven chances to the Foundling Hospital ; at two
o'clock the Box was open'd, and the fortunate chance
was Number 1941 which belongs to the said Hospital ;
and the same night Mr. Hogarth delivered the
Picture to the Governors.'
J. B. Nichols in his Anecdotes of W. Hogarth (1833,
p. 360) quotes a very improbable story from the
Gentleman's Magazine for November 1832 (p. 390),
which is too late in date to be of any value, but
must be noted as he refers to it in his book : 'A lady
was in possession of the fortunate number, and
intended to present it to the infant institution ; but
some persons having suggested that a door would be
open for scandal were any of her sex to make such
a present, it was given to Hogarth, on the express
understanding that it should be presented in his own
name.' John Ireland says that Hogarth acquainted the
Treasurer ' that iE the Trustees thought proper they
were at liberty to dispose of the picture by auction,'

366 HOGARTH'S LONDON
but afterwards he changed his mind and requested
that they would not dispose of it.^
This Hospital holds a remarkable position in the
history of British art through the liberality of our
painters. John Nichols quotes from Sir Robert Strange's
Inquiry into the Rise and Establishment of the Royal
Academy of Arts in London, 1775, the author's opinion
as to the origin of the Academy : ' The donations in
painting which several artists presented to the
Foundling Hospital, first led to the idea of those
Exhibitions which are at present so lucrative to our
Royal Academy, and so entertaining to the publick.
Hogarth must certainly be considered as the chief of
these benefactors.' *
Mr. Dobson -writes (p. 62 n.) : 'To complete the
record of Hogarth's connection with the Foundhng
Hospital, it may here be added that his patronage
of the institution took the practical form of watch
ing over the welfare of some of the children, who
in accordance with custom were put out to nurse.
In a case in the cotu-t room is stiU to be seen his
discharged account for the keep, etc., at Chiswick,
of two little girls, Susan Wyndham and Mary
Woolaston, who, when he died, were sent back to
the Hospital by his widow.'
The Hospital was not only distinguished for its
gallery of pictures, but through the liberality of
1 Hogarth Illustrated, vol. ii. p. 134.
2 Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes (1782), p. 247.

HOSPITALS 367
Handel it was a gathering-place for musicians and
lovers of music. The great composer frequently
performed his Messiah in the chapel, and as he
engaged most of the performers to contribute theh
assistance gratis, the profits to the charity were
very considerable. These performances were gener
aUy crowded, and in the notices the audience were
desired to leave at home — the ladies theh hoops and
the men their swords. Handel bequeathed the score
of the Messiah to the Hospital.
Hogarth's presentation of two large pictures to St.
Bartholomew's Hospital took place before his gifts
to the Foundling Hospital ; they are dated 1736.
He was so weU acquainted with Smithfield and its
neighbourhood that he must early have been
interested in the Hospital.
' The Good Samaritan ' (16 ft. 9 in. by 13 ft. 8 in.)
and ' The Pool of Bethesda ' (20 ft. 3 m. by 13 ft.
8 in.) on the grand staircase were painted gratuitously
by Hogarth, and for this generosity he was made a
Governor of the Hospital. The subjects are sur
rounded with scroUwork painted at Hogarth's
expense by his pupUs. These pictures are very
uninsphing, particularly ' The Good Samaritan,' but
the painter does not appear to have been dissatisfied
with the result, although he acknowledged that they
did not suit the taste of the public at large. The
pictures were not engraved until after his death, but
were published by John BoydeU in 1772.
They have, however, an interest for us which has

368 HOGARTH'S LONDON
not been speciaUy alluded to by -writers on Hogarth.
Dr. Norman Moore has made a particular study of
the pictures from a medical and surgical point of view,
with the remarkable result that that accomplished
student is able to praise the correct dehneations of
disease by the great painter. He says : ' The Good
Samaritan employs the method of treating a wound
by pouring oil into it which was in use tUl the time of
Ambroise Pare ; while the Physicians wUl admhe in
the painting of the Pool of Bethesda the accurate
representation of the distribution of psoriasis on the
weU-rotmded limbs of one patient, the contrast of
hypertrophy and atrophy on the left of the picture,
the wasted figvire with malignant disease of the liver
and the rickety infant.'
Dr. Leonard Mark, in an interesting address on
' Art and Medicine ' (1906), has given more fuUy the
views of Dr. Moore on the subject with the addition
of his own observations. He says the tradition at
the Hospital is that the woman with patches of
psoriasis on both knees and on her right elbow, who
turns her face away from the Saviour, is a portrait of
a courtesan named Wood who lived at the time in
the City, Gout, acute melancholia, cancer of the
liver, and abscess of the breast are aU represented in
the picture. He adds : ' The last two female figures
represent the two different forms of consumption
that used to be talked of. The extremely emaciated
woman is clearly a case of very advanced phthisis.
The other one with the red cheeks, the thick lips,

HOSPITALS 369
the short, thick nose, represents the strumous or
scrofulous type. In the front there is a woman
with bandaged feet.' Dr. Mark says further :
' Hogarth has been very successful in representing
sufferers, and no doubt had excellent opportunities
for choosing his subjects from patients in the
hospital.' This is a singularly interesting illustration of the
care with which Hogarth worked on his paintings.
Doubtless he was not contented with observing the
cases in the wards, but consulted the physicians and
surgeons of the Hospital. If he had not done so he
would scarcely have escaped some rebuke from the
authorities of to-day. John Freke (1688-1756), a
svirgeon of St. Bartholomew's, we know to have been
a friend of the painter from the weU-known anec
dote told to Nichols by John Belchier, F.R.S., the
surgeon.^ Hogarth designed a ticket for the ' London
Infirmary for relieving sick and diseased manu
facturers, seamen, etc.,' with the arms of the Duke
of Richmond as President, which was engraved by
T. Ramsay. It was used as a certificate for pupils in
surgery and anatomy. The background was after
wards altered to a view of the Infirmary. It was
engraved on a large scale in an oval by C. Grignion,
1745. It is not known whether this was done in the
way of business or was a gift to the institution.
The London Hospital was originaUy instituted in
^ See cmte, p. 44.
2 A

370 HOGARTH'S LONDON
1740 in Prescot Street, Goodman's Fields, but it soon
outgrew the accommodation there provided, and a
new site was purchased ' in an ahy situation near
the Mount in Whitechapel Road,' and the first stone
of the new hospital was laid on June 10, 1752.
The last scene (Plate 8) of ' A Rake's Progress '
contains a remarkable picture of the horrors of
the great madhouse known as Bedlam, which was
situated in Moorfields, on the south side of what is
now Finsbury Square. The original hospital stood
in Bishopsgate Without on the site of the North
London and Great Eastern Railway Stations in
Liverpool Street. It was originaUy founded as ' a
Priory of Canons with brethren and sisters ' in 1246
by Simon Fitzmary, one of the sheriffs of London.
On the petition of Sir John Gresham, Lord Mayor,
Henry vni. gave in 1547 the building of the dissolved
priory to the City of London in order that it might
be converted into a hospital for lunatics. In 1557
the management was given to the governors of
Bridewell Hospital.
The old building escaped the Great Fhe, but being
found to have become very dilapidated and quite
inadequate for its purpose, a new one was built in
Moorfields from the designs of Robert Hooke, which
was finished in July 1676. Like its predecessor it
was open as an exhibition, payment being made for
admission. There were ' spacious and agreeable
walks ' in front of the building, which became a
favourite promenade. At one time the Hospital

'A Rake's Progress/' No. 8. {Bedlam.
From the original painting in the Soane Mifseinn.

HOSPITALS 371
' derived a revenue of at least £400 a year from
the indiscriminate admission of visitants.' An iUus
tration of the practice is seen in Hogarth's picture,
where two fashionable and weU-dressed women
(apparently a lady and her maid) are seen in the
background, their frivolity being singularly out of
place in such a scene of terror. In 1770 it appeared
at last to have dawned upon the inteUigence of the
authorities that the introduction of -visitors ' tended
to disturb the tranquiUity of the patients.' In May
1775 Johnson and BosweU -visited the Hospital, but
in July 1784 Cowper -writing to Newton speaks of
the custom having been abolished. He -writes : ' In
those days when Bedlam was open to the cruel
curiosity of hohday ramblers I have been a visitor
there. Though a boy, I was not altogether insensible
of the misery of the poor captives nor destitute of
feeling for them. But the madness of some of them
had such a humorous ah, and displayed itself in so
many whimsical freaks, that it was impossible not to
be entertained, at the same time that I was angry
with myself for being so.'
Hogarth's picture of the interior of a room in
Bedlam is one of the most valuable of his iUustrations
of London Life, which gives a terrible picture of the
sufferings of the poor afflicted patients.
The wealth and variety of physiognomical display
in this picture is extraordinary, and it might be made
the subject of a volume of illustrations and comment.
The main incident of the Rake in the foreground is

372 HOGARTH'S LONDON
appalling in its reality, while the faithful Sarah
Young, who, after aU her iU-usage, is present at
the last to soothe her dying lover by her tears and
self-devotion, helps to humanise the whole scene.
John Ireland makes some just remarks on the
preposterous comment of the Rev. WiUiam Gilpin
on the presence of this ill-fated woman. ' The
Reverend Mr. Gilpin, in his elucidation of these eight
prints, asserts that this thought is rather unnatural,
and the moral certainly culpable ! With the utmost
deference for his critical abilities, I must entertain
a different opinion. We have many examples of
female attachment being carried still farther. If it
be culpable to forgive those who have despitefuUy
used us, to free those which are in bonds, to visit
those which are in prison, and to comfort those
which are in affliction, what meaning have the
divine precepts of our holy religion ? ' ^
Respecting the Rake himself GUpin appears to
have affirmed that ' the expression of the principal
figure is rather unmeaning.' In answer to this
Ireland refers to the opinion of John Hamilton
Mortimer, A. R.A. We are told that Mortimer was
once requested to delineate several of the Passions as
personified by Gray. One of the subjects proposed
was ' Moody madness, laughing wild, amid severest
woe.' The instant this line was read to him, he
opened a portfolio, took out the eighth plate of the
' Rake's Progress,' and pointing to the principal
* Hogarth Illustrated, 1793, i. 61.

HOSPITALS 373
figure, exclaimed, ' Sir, if I had never seen this print,
I should say it was not possible to paint these
contending passions in the same countenance.
Having seen this, which displays Mr. Gray's idea
with the faithfulness of a mirror, I dare not attempt
it. I could only make a correct copy ; for a devia
tion from this portrait in a single line would be a
departure from the character.'
In the ceU out of the principal room is seen a
reclining figure with a cross leaning against the waU.
Ireland says that it is designed from one of the stone
figures of Madness by Caius Gabriel Cibber, which
formerly stood on the outer gates of the Hospital,
and are now preserved in the Victoria and Albert
Museum at South Kensington. J. B. Nichols refers
to a painthig by Hogarth, ' A View of Bethlehem
Hospital,' exhibited in 1814 by Mr. Jones {Anecdotes
of William Hogarth, 1833, p. 364). The Hospital
was removed to St. George's Fields in 1815, and it
stUl remains there.
In Low Life (1764), aheady referred to, we read
under Hour xiii., from twelve till one o'clock on
Sunday noon : ' The nurses of Bethlehem Hospital,
carrying the appointed messes in wooden bowls, to
the poor people under their care, and putting by the
best part of it for theh ancient relations and most
intimate friends, who are to come and visit them in
the afternoon.'
In Hour i., from twelve o'clock on Saturday night
to one o'clock on Sunday morning, we are told of

374 HOGARTH'S LONDON
' the unhappy Lunaticks in Bethlehem Hospital in
Moorfields, rattling their chains and making terrible
out-cry, occasioned by the Heat of the weather
having too great an effect over theh rambling
brains.' We also read of some disagreeable things
done by nurses and ' women caUed Watchers in
Hospitals,' which need not be quoted here.
The Governors of St. George's Hospital possess a
picture of the building at Hyde Park Corner with
a portrait on horseback of Michael, the son of the
last Count Soleirol, a Huguenot, who fled to Eng
land on account of his religion. It was exhibited
at Whitechapel (Georgian England) in 1906, No. 26,
the horseman being described as ' Count Solacio,'
the name given to him by a -writer in Notes and
Queries, sixth series, i. 125.
In 1713 Michael Solehol, the son of John and
Jeanne, was born at Monteile [?], and was subse
quently naturalised in England.
The picture was presented to the Hospital in 1870
by Mr. Charles Hawkins, F.R.C.S., perhaps the
' C. H. ' of Notes and Queries, who was Treasurer of
St. George's Hospital, 1865-70. The following par
ticulars are obtained from a letter of Mr. Robert
F. D. CampbeU, engineer and surveyor, a descendant
of the Count, who sold it to Mr. Hawkins, which is
preserved in the Minute Book of the Hospital.^
1 I am greatly indebted to Mr. George Peachey, who has kindly com
municated this information to me. The engraving here given is taken from
the original picture, which does not appear to have been previously repro
duced.

Count Soliraul, with St. Georce's Hospitai, in the iusiaxce.
From the original I'aintin^ In the J lospital.

1741..

HOSPITALS ,375
The view of the Hospital and Hyde Park is merely
a background for the portrait of the horseman
painted by Hogarth. Michael Soleirol was the
proprietor of the Cocoa Tree Club, originally in PaU
MaU and afterwards in St. James's Street, and was
friendly with Steele, Addison, and others connected
with the Spectator. It has even been hinted that
he -wrote himself an occasional contribution. The
picture is said to have been painted at the expense
of the club, and a sum of sixty guineas was voted and
paid to Hogarth. Apparently he only painted the
figure, as the horse was the work of John Sartorius
(father of Francis Sartorius and, according to the
Dictionary of National Biography, the first of four
generations of animal painters) ; and the view was
by a thhd artist whose name is not recorded. The
horse is a portrait, as also is the dog named Rose.
Mr. Peachey says that the only signature he can
discover on the picture is ' J. S. 1748.' The proprietor
of the Cocoa Tree had four daughters, and one of
them married Mr. Burke. Mrs. Burke had two
sons and one daughter, Maria, who married James
O'Brien. The eldest daughter of the latter, Eliza
beth Helen, married a Mr. CampbeU. The picture
came into the possession of Mr. O'Brien in the early
part of the nineteenth century, and he gave it to
Mrs. CampbeU. She bequeathed it to her son,
who sold it to Mr. Hawkins, so that the history
of the picture is fuUy traced. Mr. R. F. D.
CampbeU says that two of the daughters of Soleirol,

376 HOGARTH'S LONDON
proprietor of the Cocoa Tree Club, were either
brought up by Hogarth or lived at his house. They
survived to a considerable age, as they did not die
until a period between the years 1812 and 1820.
These ladies affirmed that the picture was very much
approved of on account of its accuracy, in respect to
the representations of the man, the horse, the dog
and the -view. The pose of the rider was said
to be a faithful representation of his resolute ah
and mien.

PRISONS AND CRIME 377

CHAPTER XII
PRISONS AND CKIME
Crimes of violence were common in the eighteenth
centiu-y, and at few times in our history was Society
coarser and more depraved than dm?ing a portion of
the period when there was httle or no fear of public
odium on account of Ul-conduct. The Court, during
the reigns of George i. and n., did not set a good
example to those who are apt to foUow persons in
high places.
Criminals figure largely in Hogarth's works, and
those in authority whose duty it was to bring
criminals to justice were sometimes little behind
those whom they condemned. The system by which
magistrates were appointed and governed was not
satisfactory, but the magistrates seem to have been
vigilant, and graduaUy a better system grew up.
It is evident that in the eighteenth century people
did not depend upon the protection of the police.
The watchmen were quite incompetent and unable to
keep the roughs in order. The men of the day
therefore took the matter in their own hands and
made themselves capable of carrying out theh own
means of protection by instruction in the use of the

378 HOGARTH'S LONDON
sword or of theh fists. Watchmen were either feeble
old men, or if they were of any use they often received
pay from the housebreakers to keep out of the way.
The author of Low Life makes this special charge :
' Watchmen taking fees from House-breakers for
liberty to commit burglaries within theh beats, and
at the same time promise to give them notice, if
there is any danger of theh being taken — or even
disturbed in theh vUlainies.'
Gay's Trivia contains a description of the watch
men's less criminal venality. To understand the
picture it is needful to remember that the watch
consisted of watchmen with staves and lanterns led
by a constable, who carried a staff but not a lantern.
The scene scarcely differed in any respect from the
immortal one in which Dogberry and Verges figured.
' Yet there are Watchmen who with friendly light
Will teach thy reeling steps to tread aright ;
For sixpence will support thy helpless arm,
And home conduct thee, safe from nightly harm ;
But if they shake their lanthorns, from afar
To call their brethren to confed'rate war
When rakes resist their power ; if hapless you
Should chance to wander with the scowring crew ;
Though fortune yield thee captive, ne'er despair.
But seek the constable's consid'rate ear ;
He will reverse the watchman's harsh decree,
Moved by the rhet'ric of a silver fee.
Thus would you gain some fav'rite courtier's word.
Fee not the petty clerks, but bribe my Lord.'
Ned Ward gives a vivid sketch of the constable's
authority when a ' strayed reveUer ' is said to be
drunk. ' My friend puts his hand in his pocket,

PRISONS AND CRIME 379
plucks out a shiUhig. Indeed, Mr. Constable, says
he, we teU you nothing but the Naked Truth. There
is something for your Watch to drink. We know it
is a late hour, but hope you wUl detain us no longer.
With that Mr. Surly Cuff dhects himself to his right
Janizary : Hem hah, Aminadab, I believe they are
civil gentlemen ; Ay, ay, said he. Master you need
not question it ; they don't look as if they had fire
baUs about 'em. WeU gentlemen you may pass ;
but pray go civUly home. Here CoUy, light the
gentlemen down the hiU, they may chance to
stumble in the dark and break theh shins against
the Monument.'
Of the more capable officers of the law the
vocation of a bailiff or catchpole or a sheriff's officer
was considered infamous by Englishmen, and in
consequence of this a large number of them were
Dutchmen or Flemings.
Three active magistrates were associated with
Hogarth, viz. Saunders Welch, Sir Thomas de Veil,
and Sir John Gonson. The first was a personal friend
of the painter, the other two were introduced in-
cidentaUy into his pictures ; but the greatest magis
trate was Henry Fielding, who, with his brother and
successor Sir John Fielding, did more than any one
else at this period to improve the police and the
administration of justice. The novelist worked for
this improvement both as a magistrate and a writer.
Fielding was appointed a justice of the peace
for Westminster, in December 1748, and moved to

380 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Bow Street to a house belonging to the Duke of
Bedford. In the dedication of Tom Jones to George Lyttelton
(afterwards Lord Lyttelton) Fielding seems to refer
to this appointment. He -writes : ' Lastly, it is owing
to you that the history appears what it now is. If
there be in this work, as some have been pleased to
say, a stronger picture of a truly benevolent mind
than is to be found in any other, who that knows you,
and a particular acquaintance of yours, wiU doubt
whence that benevolence hath been copied ? The
world wUl not, I believe, make me the compliment
of thinking I took it from myself. I care not : this
they shaU own, that the two persons from whom I
have taken it, that is to say, two of the best and
worthiest men in the world, are strongly and zeal
ously my friends. I might be contented with this,
and yet my vanity wiU add a thhd to the number ;
and him one of the greatest and noblest, not only in
his rank, but in every public and private virtue.
But here, whilst my gratitude for the princely bene
factions of the Duke of Bedford bursts from my heart,
you must forgive me reminding you that it was you
who first recommended me to the notice of my
benefactor.' Fielding was shortly afterwards qualified to act for
Middlesex, and on May 12, 1749, he was unanimously
chosen Chairman of Quarter Sessions at Hicks' s HaU.
His charge to the Westminster Grand Jury on June
29, 1749, was published, and is weU worth reading

PRISONS AND CRIME 381
now. In it he said, ' The fury after licentious and
luxTwious pleasures is grown to so enormous a height,
that it may be called the characteristic of the pre
sent age.'
Fielding's Enquiry into the Causes of the late
Increase of Robbers, etc., with some Proposals for
remedying this growing Evil, is a practical and most
interesting book which had a great effect. Sir John
Fielding, who was blind from birth, was associated
with his brother as assisting magistrate for three or
four years, and succeeded him in office on his death
in 1754. He carried on Henry Fielding's plan for
breaking up bands of robbers and died in 1780.
Sir Walter Besant {Eighteenth Century) refers to a
scandalous book published in 1755 and entitled,
' Memoirs of the Shakespear's Head in Covent Garden,
by the Ghost of Shakespear,' one chapter of which ' is
devoted to the most venomous delineation of Henry
Fielding in his official capacity. That there should
be no possible mistake as to the person intended, he
is mentioned by name without any disguise at aU.'
One of the most discreditable chcumstances con
nected with the eighteenth century was the very exist
ence of such an unmitigated scoundrel as Jonathan
Wild, and the scathing sathe The Life of Mr. Jonathan
Wild the Great will keep the recoUection of this mis
creant alive. Fielding did honour to an office which
sadly wanted it. He was partly paid in fees, and he
said himself that his appointment did not bring him
in, ' of the dhtiest money upon earth,' £300 a year.

382 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Saunders Welch, a magistrate of Westminster,
was a great friend of Fielding, and saw the last of
him when he set forth on his voyage to Lisbon.
The novelist wrote in his Journal, ' By the assistance
of my friend Mr. Welch, whom I never think or speak
of but with love and esteem, I conquered this diffi
culty.' This was when he was getting into the vessel
at Rotherhithe. When they were at Gravesend,
Monday, July 1, 1754, he says, ' This day Mr. Welch
took his leave of me, after dinner.'
Welch was also a friend of Johnson, and in a letter
from the latter to him when at Rome, dated February
3, 1778, we learn the doctor's feelings towards him :
' Dear Sir, — To have suffered one of my best and
dearest friends to pass almost two years in foreign
countries without a letter has a very shameful
appearance of inattention. But the truth is that
there was no particular time in which I had anything
particular to say ; and general expressions of good
wiU, I hope our long friendship is grown too solid to
want.' Welch's second daughter Mary was married to
Joseph NoUekens, R.A., and it is said that Johnson
had serious thoughts of marrying her, and jokingly
observed on one occasion, ' Yes, I think Mary would
have been mine if little Joe had not stepped in.'
If this were so, and J. T. Smith is correct in his
character of Mrs. NoUekens, we may consider Johnson
as happy in his escape. It was partly through

PRISONS AND CRIME 383
Johnson's influence that Welch obtained two years'
leave of absence to visit Italy for his health.
BosweU teUs a very amusing and instructive
anecdote of Johnson's power of simple speech, when
he found it necessary. In his ' eager and unceasing
curiosity to know human life in all its variety ' he
attended Welch's office for a whole winter ' to hear
the examinations of the culprits, but he found an
almost uniform terror of misfortune, wretchedness
and profligacy.' Sir Joshua Reynolds happened to
be present at an examination of a little blackguard
boy. ' Welch, who imagined he was exalting himself
in Dr. Johnson's eyes by using big words, spoke in a
manner that was utterly uninteUigible to the boy ;
Dr. Johnson perceiving it, addressed himself to
him, and changed the pompous phraseology into
colloquial language. Sh Joshua Reynolds, who was
much amused by this procedure, which seemed a kind
of reversing of what might have been expected from
the two men, took notice of it to Dr. Johnson as they
walked away by themselves. Johnson said that it
was continuaUy the case ; and that he was always
obliged to translate the justice's sweUing diction
(smiling) so that his meaning might be understood
by the vulgar, from whom information was to be
obtained.' It speaks well for the character of Welch that he
possessed three such distinguished friends as Hogarth,
Fielding, and Johnson. He wrote an exceUent de
scription of the ' March to Finchley ' in Christopher

384 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Smart's publication The Student. Hogarth and
Welch differed on some points in the article, but very
amicably, and the former is said to have observed,
' I generally thought with the author of this paper,
and whenever I differed from him I have found reason
to take shame to myself.'
Miss (Anne) Welch said that ' when Mr. Hogarth
advertised the sale of his pictures without reserve,
her father, apprehensive of the event, mentioned his
intention of bidding for them on his own account, as
he knew Mr. Hogarth woiUd not permit a fictitious
bidding. To this Mr. H. strenuously objected, and
with great earnestness intreated him not to attempt
it ; " for," said Mr. Hogarth, " you are known to be
my friend ; I have promised to seU my pictures
without reserve, and your bidding wiU ruin my
reputation with the public, as it wiU be supposed I
have broke my word and the pictures were bought
in." ' ^
J. T. Smith, in Nollekens and his Times, teUs us
that Welch was born at Aylesbury, educated in the
workhouse of that town, and apprenticed to Mr.
Clements, the trunkmaker at the corner of St. Paul's
Churchyard. For some years he was a grocer in
Queen Street, Bloomsbury (now Museum Street).
Smith does not tell us how Welch's improved
fortunes came about, but he states that WUham
Packer of Great Baddow, Essex, and many other
venerable persons, recoUected 'seeing him as High
^ S. Ireland, Graphic Illustrations, vol. i. p. 157.

PRISONS AND CRIME 385
Constable of Westminster dressed in black, with a
large nine-story George n.'s wigy highly powdered,
with long flowing curls over his shoulders, a high
three-cornered hat, and his black baton tipped with
silver at either end, riding on a white horse to Tyburn
with the malefactors.' Hogarth painted (it is said
in a quarter of an hour) a portrait of Welch in a short
wig, which is engraved and published in S. Ireland's
Graphic Illustrations (1794). Welch was popular on
account of the justness of his actions and his kindness
to the poor.
The questionable honour was done him of taking
his portrait as the sign of a low public-house in
Dyot Street, Bloomsbury. A story is told that in
1766 he went unattended into Cranbourne AUey to
queU the riotous meetings of the journeymen shoe
makers there who had struck for an advance of
wages. One of the crowd recognised him and he
was at once mounted on a beer barrel, when the
men patiently listened to his expostulations. He
quieted the rioters, and prevaUed on the master
shoemakers to grant an additional amount to the
workmen's wages,
Sh Thomas de Veil (1684-1746) was a most un-
popiUar magistrate. John Ireland said that he
' raised himself from the rank of a common soldier
to a station in which he made a considerable figure,'
and he was ' both inteUigent and active.' ^ Mr.
Dobson writes of him : ' Sir Thomas De Veil was an
> Hogarth Illustrated, vol. iii. p. 260 note.
2B

386 HOGARTH'S LONDON
able but not very worshipful Justice of the Peace for
London and Westminster, and a predecessor of Henry
Fielding at Bow Street.' His figure in the picture of
' Night ' as a drunken Freemason is f uUy described
in Chapter iv. (Low Life).
Fielding's comedy. The Coffee-House Politician, or
the Justice caught in his own Trap, 1730, contains an
exposure of Justice Squeezum's unmitigated vUlainies,
and Squeezum is believed to represent de Veil.
So weU was this man known among the dangerous
classes that it is said an elegy published on his death
went through nine editions, and that there was
hardly a thief or a harlot who did not buy a copy.
John Ireland has a note in the first volume of his
Hogarth Illustrated to the effect that ' on the resigna
tion of Mr. [Charles] Horatio Walpole in February
1738 de VeU was appointed Inspector-General of the
imports and exports, and was so severe against
retailers of sphituous hquors, that one AUen headed
a gang of rioters for the purpose of puUing do-wn his
house, and bringing to a summary punishment two
informers who were there concealed. AUen was
tried for this offence, and acquitted, upon the jury's
verdict declaring him lunatic' There is a life of
de Veil in the Gentleman's Magazine, 1747, p. 562,
and Memoirs of the Life and Times of Sir Thomas de
Veil were published in the same year. Mr. Stephens
says that the justice in the picture of ' A Woman
swearing a ChUd to a grave Citizen ' is intended to
represent Sir Thomas de VeU,

PRISONS AND CRIME 387
The magistrate in Plate 3 of the ' Harlot's Pro
gress,' who apprehends the heroine, is intended to
represent Sh John Gonson, who gained the name
of the 'harlot-hunting justice.' The introduction
of this figure conduced to the success of the prints.
Nichols relates, in the Biographical Anecdotes, an
interesting anecdote respecting this plate. ' At a
board of Treasury which was held a day or two after
the appearance of that print, a copy of it was shewn
by one of the lords as containing among other
exceUencies a striking likeness of Sh John Gonson.
It gave universal satisfaction ; from the Treasury
each lord repahed to the print shop for a copy of it,
and Hogarth rose completely into fame. This anec
dote was related to Mr. Huggins by Christopher
Tilson, Esq., one of the four chief clerks in the
Treasury, and at that period under secretary of
state. He died August 25, 1742, after having enjoyed
the former of these offices fifty-eight years. I should
add however that Sh John Gonson is not here intro
duced to be made ridiculous, but is only to be
considered as the image of an active magistrate
identified.' In The Lure of Venus, or a Harlot's
Progress, by Captain Breval, under the name of
Joseph Gay, Gonson is speciaUy mentioned in the
thhd canto :
' Sir John and all his myrmidons appear'd,
With clubs and staves equipt, a numerous Herd,
The surly Knight intrepid, led the van.'
Gonson' s charges to juries were very energetic, and

388 HOGARTH'S LONDON
frequently referred to in the newspapers of the time.
Pope aUudes to ' the storm of Gonson's lungs.'
Prisons. — ^Newgate is supposed to be represented
in the scenes from the ' Beggar's Opera,' but the
only two prisons actuaUy pictured by Hogarth are
the Fleet and BrideweU. The painting of the
Committee of the House of Commons examining
Bambridge is one of the greatest importance as
a record of the attempted reformation of the long-
continued enormities permitted in ancient prisons.
There is every reason to beheve that in giving
way to his abominably cruel nature Bambridge
was foUowing the precedent set by former Wardens
of the Fleet. In the Calendar of State Papers
(Domestic, 1619-23) there is note of a letter from
Rookwood to Sh Clement Edmondes (August 2,
1619), in Avhich it is stated that ' the Warden has
put into the dungeon caUed Boulton's Ward, a place
newly made to exercise his cruelty, three poor men,
Pecke, Seager and Myners, notwithstanding the
express command of the CouncU that they should be
favourably dealt with tUl further orders, they are
starving from want of food.' In the spring of 1727 a
Committee of the House of Commons was appointed
to inquire into the management of Debtors' Prisons,
and they brought to light a series of extortions and
cruelties which would have been considered incredible
were not the evidence so incontrovertible. When the
Committee paid their first and unexpected visit to

Scene in the Fleet Prison. (Committee of the House of Commons examining Bambridge)
1729.

PRISONS AND CRIME 389
the Fleet Prison, they found Sh WiUiam Rich con
fined in a loathsome dungeon and loaded with irons
because he had given some slight offence to Bam
bridge. It was reported that a poor Portuguese, who
had been manacled in a filthy hole for months, on
being examined, supposed from something that was
said that Bambridge might return to his post, and
was so overcome with fear that he fainted and
blood started out of his mouth and nose.
The picture was painted in 1729 by Hogarth for
Sh Archibald Grant of Monymusk, a member of the
Committee, and it is suggested that Hogarth may
have obtained facilities for painting the picture
through the good offices of Sh James ThornhiU, who
was also a member of the Committee.
The Committee appointed February 25, 1728-9,
' to examine the state of the gaols within the King
dom ' was a large one. John Nichols gives in
Genuine Works, vol. iii. (1817), the following as the
principal members : James Oglethorpe, Esq., Chair
man ; The Right Hon. the Lords Finch, Morpeth,
Inchiquin, Percival, Limerick; Sh Robert Sutton,
Sh Robert Clifton, Sh Abraham Elton, Sir Edward
KnatchbuU, Sh Humphrey Herries, Hon. James
Bertie, Sh Gregory Page, Sh Archibald Grant, Sir
James ThornhiU, Gyles Earle, Esq., General Wade,
Humphrey Parsons, Esq., Hon. Robert Byng,
Edward Houghton, Esq., Judge Advocate, Captain
Vernon, Charles Selwjni, Esq., Vetters CornwaU,
Esq., Thomas Scawen, Esq., Francis Child, Esq.,

390 HOGARTH'S LONDON
William Hucks, Esq., Stampe Brookshank, Esq.,
Charles Withers, Esq., John La Roche, Esq., Mr.
Thomas Martin. Many attended daily, and some
of them twice a day.
In the foreground of the picture a prisoner explains
the mode by which his hands and neck were fastened
together by metal clasps. Some of the Committee
are examining other instruments of torture in which
the heads and necks of prisoners were screwed, and
which seem rather to belong to the dungeons of the
Inquisition than to a London debtors' prison.
The chairman (General Oglethorpe) is seen in an
arm-chair at the head of the table. Sh Andrew
Fountaine is on the chairman's left, and Lord
Percival behind him. The prominent figure seated
to the right of the table, examining the instrument of
torture worn by a prisoner, is Sh WiUiam Wyndham.
The man to the left addressed by the chahman is
Bambridge.^ Hogarth gave his oil sketch for the picture to
Horace Walpole, who greatly appreciated it. At the
' This picture and the ' Beggar's Opera ' both belonged to Sir Archibald
Grant and afterwards passed into the possession of William Huggins, son
of the (at one time) Warden of the Fleet. Nichols thinks it probable that
Huggins bought the pictures in 1731 when Sir Archibald was expelled
from the House of Commons owing to an irregularity connected with the
financial affairs of a Corporation for Kelieving the Poor. Both pictures
possessed a similarity in the ornamentation of the frames. The frame of
the ' Committee ' was surmounted by a bust of Sir Francis Page with a
halter round his neck, that of the 'Beggar's Opera' has a bust of Gay
above. The picture of the ' Committee ' at the National Portrait Gallery
has no bust on its frame, but Mr. John Murray's picture of the ' Beggar's
Opera ' is still ornamented with Gay's bust.

PRISONS AND CRIME 391
Strawberry HiU sale it fetched £8, 5s., and now it is
in the possession of Mr. Fairfax Murray. Walpole
described this in his Anecdotes of Painting :
' The scene is the Committee ; on the table are the
instruments of torture. A prisoner in rags, half
starved, appears before them ; the poor man has a
good countenance, which adds to the interest. On
the other hand is the inhuman gaoler [Bambridge],
It is the very figure that Salvator Rosa would have
drawn for lago in the moment of detection. VUlainy,
fear and conscience are mixed in yellow and livid on
his countenance ; his lips are contracted by tremor,
his face advances as eager to lie ; his legs step back
as thinking to make his escape ; one hand is thrust
precipitately into his bosom, the fingers of the other
are catching uncertainly at his button holes. If
this was a portrait, it is the most striking that ever
was drawn ; if it was not it is stiU finer.'
John Huggins purchased the Wardenship of the
Fleet (a patent office) from the Earl of Clarendon
for £5000. The term of the patent was for his own
and his son's life, but his son WiUiam Huggins
having no wish to take upon himseU the responsi
bility of such an office, John Huggins, in August
1728, sold it to Thomas Bambridge and Dougal
Cuthbert for the same amount he paid for it.
Huggins, no doubt, had much to answer for ;
but Bambridge managed to better such instructions
as he had received, and bring things to a crisis within
a year. The late G. A. Sala, in his little book on

392 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Hogarth, draws a sort of distinction between the two
men. He says Huggins' s chief delight was to starve
his prisoners unless they were rich enough to bribe
him, but Bambridge's genius lay more towards
confining his victims, charged with fetters, in under
ground dungeons, with the occasional recreation of
attempting to pistol and stab them. The moneyed
debtors both rascals smiled upon. Both Bambridge
and Huggins were declared ' notoriously guilty of
great breaches of trust, extortions, cruelties, and
other high crimes and misdemeanors.' They were
sent to Newgate, and Bambridge was disqualified
by Act of Parliament from enjoying the office of
Warden of the Fleet.
John Nichols, in a note on p. 19 of his Biographical
Anecdotes, says that Mr. Rayner in his Reading on
Stat. 2 Geo. ii., chap, xxxii., whereby Bambridge was
incapacitated to enjoy the office of Warden of the
Fleet, has given the reader a very chcumstantial
account, with remarks on the notorious breaches
of trust, etc., committed by Bambridge and other
keepers of the Fleet Prison. For this pubhcation see
Worral's Bibliotheca Legum, by Brooke (1777), p. 16.
The picture painted for Sh Archibald Grant after
wards passed into the possession of WUliam Huggins
of Headly Park, Hants, at whose death in 1761 it was
purchased by the Earl of Carhsle. It was exhibited
in 1814, and in 1892 it was presented to the National
Portrait GaUery by the present Earl.
The seventh plate of ' A Rake's Progress ' (Prison

"A Harlo|-s Pkogkess. I'i.ai'I'. 4. (Bkihewell.) 1732.

PRISONS AND CRIME 393
Scene) represents the interior of a stone ceU in the
Fleet where RakeweU is confined after his ruin in a
gambling-house (White's), as seen in Plate 6. Sarah
Young f aUs into convulsions and is attended by three
persons. At RakeweU' s side stands his one-eyed
wife, with clenched fists, vehemently denouncing
him. The man sits helpless, bewildered, and de-
spahing amid the overwhelming troubles that have
faUen upon him.^ He is in the first stage of that
madness that has f aUen upon him in the eighth and
last scene.
The Fleet Prison was burned down in the Great
Fhe of 1666, rebuilt four years later ; destroyed in
the Gordon Riots 1780, and rebuilt in 1781. It was
finaUy taken down in 1844.
The fourth plate of the ' Harlot's Progress '
exhibits a scene in BrideweU, in which the peculiar
features of that miserable place are shown. Men
and women are beating hemp under the eye of a
savage taskmaster, and a lad, too idle to work, is
seen standing on tiptoe to reach the stocks, in which
his hands are fixed, whUe over his head is -written,
' Better to work than stand thus.' The harlot is the
principal figure standing at the left of the picture
handsomely dressed in a flowered brocade petticoat.
She is about to beat with a hea-vy maUet a thick
hank of oakum which lies before her on a large
wooden block ; very little of her work has been
performed, and the warder who stands beside her
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 162.

394 HOGARTH'S LONDON
angrily points to the state of the oakum and, holding
a rattan, is about to beat his prisoner.
The flogging at Bridewell is described by Ned
Ward in his London Spy. Both men and women
were whipped on theh naked backs before the
Court of Governors. The president sat with his
hammer in his hand, and the culprit was taken from
the whipping-post when the hammer feU. The caUs
to knock, when women were flogged, were loud and
incessant : ' O good Sir Robert, knock ! Pray, good
Sh Robert, knock ! ' This became a common cry of
reproach among the lower orders, to denote that a
woman had been whipped as a harlot in BrideweU.
As a specimen of the atrocious manners of the time
it may be noted that it was one of the sights to see the
women flogged.
John Ireland quotes a paragraph from the Grub
Street Journal (1730) to show that there is no
exaggeration in respect to the dress of the harlot.
Here one Mary Moffat is described ' as beating hemp
in a gown very richly laced with silver.'
As a corroboration of the fact that Sh John
Gonson was the magistrate who apprehended the
harlot and committed her to BrideweU is seen, in
the hanging figure drawn in chalk on the waU, with
the inscription over it, ' Sh J. G.' Mr Stephens
expresses the opinion that this print was used as a
plea for the amelioration of the treatment of these
unfortunates in the prisons,^
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. Ixi.

PRISONS AND CRIME 395
BrideweU continued for many years to be used as a
' house of correction,' but on the erection of the City
Prison at HoUoway in 1863 the materials of the
BrideweU Prison were sold by auction and cleared
away in the foUowing years.
Hogarth made portraits of such criminals as Mary
Malcolm (1733), Elizabeth Canning (1753), Lord
Ferrers (1760), and Theodore Gardelle (1761).
Those miscreants, Francis Charteris and Mother
Needham, who are represented in the first plate of the
' Harlot's Progress,' have been already mentioned in
Chapter ix. (Tavern Life).
A highwayman is among the company at White's
in the sixth plate of the ' Rake's Progress,' and in the
third plate of the ' Harlot's Progress ' the wig-box of
James Dalton, another notorious highwayman, is
seen among the misceUaneous contents of the harlot's
room, when she is about to be apprehended by Sir
John Gonson.
Sarah Malcolm, a laundress in the Temple, was
executed in March 1733 at the Fetter Lane end of
Fleet Street, opposite Mitre Court, for three murders,
viz. Mrs. Lydia Duncomb and her two servants,
Elizabeth Harrison and Ann Price, living in Tanfield
Court, Temple. When she sat to Hogarth for her
portrait in the condemned cell she had, according to
Walpole, put on red to look the better. When he
was at work the painter said to Sir James ThornhiU,
' I see by this woman's features that she is capable of
any wickedness.'

396 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The portrait was painted for Horace Walpole, who
gave Hogarth five guineas for it. It was sold at the
Strawberry Hill sale in 1842 to Charles Khkpatrick
Sharpe for £24, 3s.
Hogarth painted another portrait, — a whole
length (the original being three-quarters), which was
in the possession of Joshua BoydeU in 1793. An
engraving of this is to be found in John Ireland's
Hogarth Illustrated (vol. ii.). It was exhibited in
1814 by the Earl of Mulgrave.
She was twenty years of age when she was executed,
and therefore a fine portrait of a comely middle-aged
woman exhibited by Sir Frederick Cook, Bart., at
the Winter Exhibition of the Royal Academy (1908)
cannot well be a portrait of the murderess.
A portrait of Elizabeth Canning, painted in prison,
belonged to the Earl of Mulgrave in 1833. The
extraordinary case of this woman's false swearing
produced a great public excitement. She fuUy de
scribed her aUeged abduction and Ul-treatment, and
on her false statement Mary Squires, a gypsy, and
Susannah WeUs were indicted. Being found guUty
Squires was condemned to death, and WeUs to be
branded and imprisoned for six months. The case
is not likely to be forgotten, for one reason, that
Fielding was deceived by the woman and wrote a
pamphlet in her favour, entitled A Clear State of
the Case of Elizabeth Canning, 1733. Sir Crisp
Gascoyne, the Lord Mayor, was convinced of the
fraud, and succeeded in obtaining the pardon of

PRISONS AND CRIME 397
Squhes. Canning was brought to trial in 1754 and
found guUty of perjury. She v/as transported to
New England, but was afterwards released, and a
subscription being raised for her she became a
schoolmistress. She married a Quaker and lived tiU
1773. The public feeling was aU along strongly in
favour of Canning, and Gascoyne suffered much
obloquy from his labours in bringing her to justice.
The fuU-length portrait of Lawrence Shirley, Earl
Ferrers, the murderer, who was executed in 1763,
was exhibited at Whitechapel (Georgian England)
1906, by Mr. Frederick M. Cutbush of The Hobby,
Maidstone. A portrait of Theodore Gardelle, engraved by
S. Ireland, wiU be found in his Graphic Illustrations,
1794. The sketch was by Mr. Richards, and only
touched on by Hogarth. GardeUe was born in
Geneva in 1721, and only arrived in London from
Paris in 1760. He found employment as a miniature
painter, and lived in Leicester Square at the house
of a Mrs. Anne King. He murdered her in a brutal
manner and concealed her body. He was arrested
on the 27th of February 1761, and was executed at
the corner of Panton Street, Haymarket, on the
foUowing 4th of AprU. His body was hung in chains
on Hounslow Heath.
We have aheady dealt in Chapter vin. (Business
Life) with the incidents of the life of the Industri
ous Apprentice, who was Hogarth's favourite, which
are all of the greatest interest. The incidents of the

398 HOGARTH'S LONDON
life of the Idle Apprentice, naturaUy, come under
the heading of crime, but they need not detain
us long. The artist was not careful to mark his
fall with the same elaboration, and in consequence
it seems to be too violent. Plate 3, where the Idle
Apprentice is seen at play in the churchyard, is one
of the best of the series. Plate 5 shows him sent to
sea, and contains a view of a reach in the Thames
known as Cuckold's Point in the distance, and three
vessels off that promontory ; the pathetic element of
the picture centres in the poor widowed mother, who
is weeping over the sad state of her son, and fUled
-with horror at his recklessness. In Plate 7 Tom Idle
returned from sea is in a garret with a prostitute.
In Plate 9 he is betrayed by this woman. The ceUar
in which he is found is said to have been a notorious
place caUed Blood Bowl House, Blood Bowl AUey,
Fleet Street, afterwards known as Hanging Sword
AUey, Whitefriars.^ The latter appears always to
have been the official name, and the former to have
been only the popular name. Dickens refers to
Hanging Sword AUey in Bleak House ; Mr. Marks, in
his Tyburn Tree, gives an account of the robbery of
Mr. or Captain George Morgan by James Stansbury
and Mary his wife. He -writes : ' The case is very
1 In Chapter viii. (Business Life) there is a notice of a series of drawings
by Hogarth for the engravings of ' Industry and Idleness ' in the Print
Room of the British Museum. Mr. Dobson points out that in the sketch
for Plate 7 a rat is added, and there is a sword in place of the petticoat
over the bed, and he suggests that probably this is intended to indicate
that the garret was in Hanging Sword Alley, the scene of the cellar in
Plate 9. (See W. Hogarth, 1907, p. 250, note.)

'Industry and Idleness." Plate ii. 1747. (The Idle Apprentice executed at Tyburn.)

PRISONS AND CRIME 399
interesting as having furnished to Hogarth the
moti-ve of one of his prints in the series of " The
Effects of Industry and Idleness." ' Captain Morgan
going home in the early hours of the morning of
JiUy 17, 1743, seeing a lady in the street, feared for
her safety and gaUantly offered to escort her home.
He was taken into a house where he was robbed
and assaulted. The house in Hanging Sword AUey,
Fleet Street, bore an execrable reputation, in vhtue
of which it was known as ' Blood Bowl House.' At
the trial Mary Stansbury asked a witness, ' Have I
not let you go aU over the house, to see if there were
any trap-doors as it was represented ? ' The witness
Sharrock replied that he had looked aU over the house
and saw no trap-door. It wUl be recoUected that
in Hogarth's print the body of a murdered man is
being thrust through a trap-door. The same witness
spoke of the house as ' Blood Bowl House.' Stans
bury asked him how he came to know of the Blood
Bowl, to which Sharrock replied that he had seen it
in the newspapers. Mr. Marks adds that he had
been less fortunate ; he had not found accounts in
contemporary newspapers referring to the name
or to the trap-door.
Plate 10, where Tom Idle is brought up before
his former comrade, now an Alderman of London,
in the Court-house at GuUdhaU, has aheady been
referred to. We now come to Plate 11, the finest
picture of aU, in which Idle is executed at Tyburn.
This is the best view of Tyburn in existence, and

400 HOGARTH'S LONDON
gives a vivid picture of the scenes which were con
stantly occurring. The Rev. Mr. Gilpin -wrote :
' We seldom see a crowd more beautifully managed
than in this print,' and he is quite right. The
composition, in spite of innumerable details, is
thoroughly harmonious. Mr. Marks gives this as
the best illustration of the Triple Tree in 1747 in his
interesting work on Tyburn Tree, which is a monu
ment of weU-planned research and by far the best
authority on the subject.
Like the ' March to Finchley,' the picture of the
execution of the Idle Apprentice is admhably ar
ranged and the figures grouped with aU Hogarth's
remarkable facility. In the background are seen
the hills of Hampstead and Highgate.
An execution was made the occasion of regular
holiday-making and a round of diversions. It was
one of the sorriest sights to be seen in the eighteenth
century, and naturally the vivid dehneator of the
manners of the century painted the scene. Neverthe
less the very thought of such orgies taking place on
the occasion of the ignominious death of a human
being fiUs one with horror, and sorrow for the
brutality of our ancestors.
The ' Four Stages of Cruelty ' (1751) are the most
painful and repulsive of Hogarth's works, and one's
fhst impulse is to pass them by, but this cannot be
done. The atrocities of Tom Nero seem to be too
horrible for representation, but the artist had his
reasons for his work. He remarks : ' The leading

PRISONS AND CRIME 401
points in these, as weU as the two preceding prints
(i.e.- ' Beer Street ' and ' Gin Lane ') were made as
obvious as possible in the hope that theh tendency
might be seen by men of the lowest rank. Neither
minute accuracy of design, nor fine engraving were
deemed necessary, as the latter would render them
too expensive for the persons to whom they were
intended to be useful. And the fact is, that the
passions may be more frankly expressed by a strong
bold stroke, than by the most delicate engraving.
To expressing them as I felt them I have paid the
utmost attention, and as they were addressed to
hard hearts, have rather preferred leaving them
hard, and giving the effect, by a quick touch, to
rendering them languid and feeble by fine strokes
and soft engraving ; which require more care and
practice than can often be obtained, except by a
man of a very quiet turn of mind. . . . The prints
were engraved with the hope of in some degree
correcting that barbarous treatment of animals the
very sight of which renders the streets of our Metro-
pohs so distressing to every feeling mind. If they
have had that effect and checked the progress of
cruelty, I am more proud of haAdng been the author,
than I should be of having painted RaffaeUe's
Cartoons.' ^
We may pass by the Fhst Stage in which Tom
Nero is shown as one of the boys in St. Giles's Charity
School. In the Second Stage he is a hackney coach-
1 Anecdotes of William Hogarth, by J. B. Nichols, 1833, pp. 64-5.
2 C

402 HOGARTH'S LONDON
man. The scene is laid at the gate of Thavie's Inn,
Holborn. The longest shiUing fare in London was
from that Inn of Chancery to Westminster, and the
foreground of the picture is occupied by four lawyers
in wigs and gowns who have clubbed theh three
pence each for the hackney coach No. 24, T. Nero,
driver, to carry them to Westminster HaU. The
coach comes to a stop from the horse having f aUen
on its knees, broken its legs and overthrown the
vehicle. The driver beats the horse on its head
with the butt of a whip.
John Ireland says with respect to this scene :
' A man taking the number of the coach is marked by
traits of benevolence, which separate him from the
savage ferocity of Nero, or the guUty terror of these
affrighted lawyers.'
' Cruelty in Perfection ' shows Nero as a prisoner
brought to view the body of his murdered mistress.
The last scene, ' The Reward of Cruelty,' requires
some fuUer comment, although it is singularly
repulsive. The scene of the dissection of Tom Nero takes
place in the theatre of the Barber-Surgeons Company
in MonkweU Street. It was buUt in 1636-7 after the
design of Inigo Jones. It was restored imder the
direction of the Earl of Burhngton in 1730-1, and
puUed do-wn in 1783. It has been supposed by some
that the dissecting theatre represented the Surgeons'
HaU in the Old BaUey, and there is this reason for
the opinion that the surgeons separated from the

PRISONS AND CRIME 403
barbers in 1745. Although this was the case, the
surgeons had not a dissecting theatre ready, and it
was necessary for a time to continue at the old
theatre. The first Court of Assistants of the
Surgeons Company was held at theh new theatre in
the Old Bailey in August 1751, but it was not untU
1753 that the first Masters of Anatomy were selected
and the first dissections were undertaken in accord
ance with the Act of 1752.
Mr. Marks gives in his Tyburn Tree an illustration
of the body of a murderer dissected according to the
Act of 1752, which is inscribed ' The Body of a
Murderer exposed in the Theatre of the Surgeons' Hall
Old BaUey.' This is a different building from that
represented in Hogarth's print, which has two
windows at the back that are not seen in the other
engraving. John Ireland suggests that the President
in the Chah much resembles the eminent surgeon
John Freke.

404 HOGARTH'S LONDON

CHAPTER XIII
THE SUBUBBS
The suburbs of Hogarth's day have now become an
integral part of the town, and in some cases almost its
heart. Marylebone and Tyburn were in his time
country vUlages, and in the Evening Post of March 16,
1715, we read that ' On Wednesday last, four gentle
men were robbed and stripped in the fields between
London and Marylebon.'
The New Road (now the Marylebone, Euston and
PentonvUle Roads) was formed in 1756 through a
rural district, and aU north of the road was country.
The Duke of Bedford, who then hved on the north
side of Bloomsbury Square, unsuccessfuUy opposed
its construction on the ground that the dust created
by the traffic would completely spoU the gardens at
the back of his mansion.
Tottenham Court Road was quite rural untU the
beginning of the nineteenth century, and on the east
side of the road there was an extensive farm.
Hogarth has immortahsed the upper part of the
road where it joins the Hampstead Road, and the
turnpike was placed in one of his finest pictures,
presented by the artist to the Foundling Hospital,
and known as ' The March to Finchley.'

<
s

THE SUBURBS 405
After the Jacobite rising in 1745 a camp was
formed at Finchley, and the Foot Guards represented
in this picture, who had been hurriedly recaUed from
the Low Countries and Germany, are bound for
Scotland and on theh way to the camp.
Mr. Stephens gives a very full description of the
incidents in the picture in his Catalogue of Satires in
the British Museum (vol. iii. p. 512).
The two public - houses form the prominent
features in the picture, viz. the Adam and Eve on
the west side and the King's Head on the east
side. The Adam and Eve stUl stands at the corner
of the Hampstead and Marylebone Roads, and the
King's Head was only taken down in the summer
of 1906 in order to aUow of the widening of the
Hampstead Road. The Adam and Eve was originally
the manor-house of the prebendal manor of TothiU,
TotenhaU, or Tottenham Court, described in Domes
day and originaUy appertaining to the Dean and
Chapter of St. Paul's. The first notice of it as a place
of public entertainment is contained in the books of
the parish of St. Giles's in the Fields under the year
1645, when Mrs. Stacye's maid and two others were
fined a shiUing apiece 'for drinking at TottenhaU
Court on the Sabbath daie.' Ben Jonson, however,
appears to aUude to the place at a rather earlier date,
when he makes Quarlous say to Win- Wife in Bar
tholomew Fair, 1614, ' Because she is in possibUity to
be your daughter-in-law, and may ask your blessing
hereafter when she courts it to Totnam to eat cream.'

406 HOGARTH'S LONDON
The tea-gardens were for many years a popular
resort, and here on May 16, 1785, Vincent Lunardi
effected the second descent from his baUoon.
In course of time the gardens lost theh credit and
became the resort of highwaymen and footpads,
when about 1811 the music-room was abolished, the
skittle-grounds destroyed, and the gardens dug up for
the foundation of the present Eden Street, a name
more appropriate to the association with Adam and
Eve than to the beauty of the situation.
Under the signboard of the inn is inscribed
Tottenham Court Nursery, in aUusion to the boxing-
booth at which the celebrated pugUist Broughton
exhibited his prowess. In the background beneath
the signboard are two combatants. John Ireland
says that a little feUow of meagre frame who joins in
the fray is a portrait of a weU-kno-wn man usuaUy
styled Jockey James. 'Jockey had a son who
rendered himself eminent by boxing with SmaUwood,
and many other athletic pugilists. The French
pyeman, grenadier and chimney sweeper are also
taken from the life, and said by those who recoUect
their persons, to be very faithful resemblances of the
persons intended.' ^
Lord Albemarle Bertie, who is the chief character
in the picture of the ' Cockpit,' is also introduced into
the ' March to Finchley.' John Nichols informs us
that the chimney-sweeper and one of the young
fifers were hired by Hogarth, 'who gave each of
' Hogarth Hlustrated, vol. ii. p. 139 (note).

THE SUBURBS 407
them half a crown for his patience in sitting whUe his
likeness was taken.' ^
The King's Head on the opposite side of the road
has a sign of the portrait of Charles n., but the house
that has lately been destroyed had the head of
Henry vin. On the roof of the King's Arms is a
meeting of cats, which is intended to give a key to the
character of the women who fiU every window of the
house and are presided over by the infamous Mother
Douglas. This picture, which represents a scene of confusion
and disorder, is a triumphant example of Hogarth's
supreme power in the arrangement and grouping of
his characters.
Arthur Murphy in an article in the Gray's Inn
Journal draws attention to the dramatic power of the
picture, and to the genius of Hogarth in speaking
dhectly to the spectator by means of the eye alone —
he, at least, uses a universal language : ' The aera
may arrive, when, through the instabUity of the
English language, the style of Joseph Andrews and
Tom Jones shaU be obliterated, when the characters
shall be unintelligible, and the humour lose its
relish ; but the many personages which the manner-
painting hand of Hogarth has caUed forth into mimic
life wiU not fade so soon from the canvas, and that ad
mhable picturesque comedy. The March to Finchley,
-wUl perhaps divert posterity as long as the Foundling
Hospital shaU do honour to the British nation.'
' Biographical Anecdotes, p. 246.

408 HOGARTH'S LONDON
An account of how the picture came into the pos
session of the Foundling wUl be found in Chapter xi.
(Hospitals). Hogarth wished to dedicate the print of his great
picture to George n., and arrangements were made
for the King to see the painting. The incident of
its reception by the man who hated ' bainting and
boetry ' is too well known to be repeated here in its
entirety. Suffice it to say, that George n. ended his
inspection of the picture with the indignant speech,
' What ! a bainter burlesque a soldier ? he deserves
to be bicketed for his insolence ! Take his drum-
pery out of my sight.' ^
Hogarth was so chagrined that in revenge he
inscribed the engraving to Frederick the Great, the
King of Prussia, as ' an encourager of Arts and
Sciences.' The ' March to Finchley ' was engraved
by Luke SuUivan, who is described by John Ireland
as foUows : ' SuUivan was so eccentric a character
that while he was engraving this print Hogarth held
out every possible inducement to his remaining at his
house in Leicester Square night and day, for if Luke
quitted it, he was not visible for a month. It has
been said, but I know not on what authority, that
for engraving it he was paid only one hundred
pounds.' ^
Mr. Austin Dobson refers to the ' March to
Finchley ' as SuUivan' s masterpiece as an engraver.
' Hogarth Hlustrated, vol. ii. p. 133.
^ Ibid., vol. iii. p. 353.

THE SUBURBS 409
He also teUs us that SuUivan was the angel in ' Paul
before Felix.'
Mr. Stephens enumerates nine states of the plate,
and adds that the engraver's outhne in pencU is in
the Print Room of the British Museum.
The States 1 to 6 are as foUows :
1. The etching in the British Museum.
2. The finished plate without -writing below (very
rare). 3. Inscribed ' Painted by WUl"" Hogarth &
Pubhsh'd Dec^^ 30 1750. According to Act of
Parliament. A Representation of the March of the
Guards towards Scotland, in the year 1745. To his
Majesty the King of Prusia, an encourager of Arts
and Sciences ! This Plate is most humbly dedicated.
Engrav'd by Luke SuUivan.'
4. The first part of the inscription is changed to
' Painted & Pubhsh'd by WUl'" Hogarth Dec^^ 30
1750.' 3 and 4 constitute what is caUed ' the Sunday
print,' because it was found that the 30th December
1750 feU on a Sunday.
5. The date is altered to Dec^'' 31st.
6. The dedication line stopped out, preparatory
to correcting the error in speUing the word ' Prussia.'
In States 3, 4, 5 and 6 the word ' Prussia ' has been
engraved with one ' s ' only, another ' s ' has been
added above the fine, but without a caret, with a
pen and ink.^
' British Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. p. 517.

410 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Respecting this John Nichols -writes : ' I have
been assured that only twenty-five were worked off
with this literal imperfection, as Hogarth grew thed
of adding the mark ~ with a pen over one S, to supply
the want of the other. He therefore ordered the
inscription to be corrected before any greater number
of impressions were taken. Though this chcum-
stance was mentioned by Mr. Thane, to whose ver
acity and experience in such matters the greatest
attention is due, it is difficult to suppose that
Hogarth was fatigued with correcting his own
mistake in so smaU a number of the first impressions.
I may venture to add, that I have seen, at least, five
and twenty marked in the manner already described ;
and it is scarce possible, considering the multitudes
of these plates dispersed in the world, that I should
have met with aU that were so distinguished.' ^
With regard to No. 6 John Ireland wrote : ' I have
an early impression of this print, in which the dedica
tion to the King of Prussia does not appear, and it
might pass for a proof. On inquhy I find that upon
one of Hogarth's fastidious friends objecting to its
being dedicated to a foreign potentate, he replied,
" If you disapprove of it you shaU have one without
any dedication," and took off a few impressions,
covering the dedication with fan paper.' ^
7. The speUing of ' Prussia ' is corrected, and the
foUowing addition below the engraver's name :
' Biographical Anecdotes, 1782, p. 243 (note).
2 Hogarth Illustrated, vol iii. p. 353.

Marylebone Church. (*'A Rake's Progress." No. 5.) 1735.
Fro7n the original painti^ig in the Soane Muscion.

THE SUBURBS 411
' Retouched and Improved by Wm. Hogarth, re-
publish'd June 12th 1761.'
Respecting this inscription John Nichols -writes :
' The improvements in it, however, remain to be
discovered by better eyes than mine.' ^
8. Mr. Stephens says the plate has been worked
on by another and less skilful hand.
9. Much worked on and used for James Heath's
edition of Hogarth's works.^
The subscription ticket for the ' March to
Finchley ' represents a trophy of military weapons,
tools and musical instruments used in war (bagpipes,
etc.) designed and engraved by Hogarth.
The interior of old Marylebone Church (originally
built in the year 1400) is seen in the fifth plate of the
' Rake's Progress,' which was published in 1735.
The church was then nearing the end of its days, for
in 1741 it was puUed down and the old church now
in High Street, Marylebone, was built on its site.
The Bishop of London of the day gave orders that
aU the old tablets should be fixed as nearly as
possible in theh former places, and the inscription
on the front of the gaUery pews in the picture is still
to be seen.
The great Francis Bacon was married in Hogarth's
church in 1606, and Sheridan was married to Miss
Linley in the stiU standing church in 1773. John
• Biographical Anecdotes, 1782, p. 243.
' Mr. Stephens's description of the nine states is given in the British
Museum Catalogue, vol. iii. pp. 517-18.

412 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Ireland says that in Hogarth's time Marylebone
Church was at such a distance from London that it
became the favoured resort of those who deshed to
be privately married. The Rake would naturaUy
not wish to show his deformed wife before a large
audience. A great change was about to take place
in the relative position of the suburbs to the to-wn,
for at the end of the eighteenth century London had
joined Marylebone. Ireland notes that whUe at the
date of the Revolution (1688) ' the annual amount of
the taxes for the whole parish was four and twenty
pounds ; in 1788 the annual amount was four and
twenty thousand.' ^ There are three sathical points
in the pictm-e which should be noted. The Com
mandments are broken and the Creed is destroyed by
the damp, but the thhd is the most striking — ^the
poor-box is covered -with a cobweb, so that alms
giving evidently had been neglected. Ireland sug
gests that the broken Commandments ' probably
gave the hint to a lady's reply, on being told that
thieves had the preceding night broken into the
church, and stolen the commimion plate and the
Ten Commandments. " I can suppose," added the
informant, " that they may melt and seU the plate ;
but can you divine for what possible purpose they
could steal the Commandments ? " " To break
them, to be sure," replied she ; " to break them." ' ^
The Rev. WiUiam GUpin points out that the church
* Hogarth Hlustrated, vol. i. p. 46 (note).
^ Ibid., vol. i. p. 47 (note).

THE SUBURBS 413
is too smaU, and that it is divided disagreeably down
the centre ; but he was answered that, although he
is right in his criticism, Hogarth painted what he
saw. A dog making friends with a one-eyed comrade is
said to be drawn from the painter's favourite Trump.
The outside of Marylebone Church is supposed to
be represented in the Thhd Stage of 'Cruelty,' or
' Cruelty in Perfection,' where the vile Tom Nero is
taken prisoner for the murder of the girl who trusted
in him and robbed her mistress for his sake.
' To lawless love, -when once betray'd
Soon crime to crime succeeds ;
At length beguil'd to theft, the maid
By her beguiler bleeds.'
There is httle of the church to judge from, and it
may, as some suggest, represent old St. Pancras
Church. The scene of the * Idle Apprentice at Play in the
Churchyard during Divine Service ' (Plate 3) has not
been identified, but it is either in London or the
suburbs. Mr. Stephens, as previously noted, sug
gests that there are points of resemblance to the
churches of St. Michael, Crooked Lane, and St. Paul,
ShadweU. The parish beadle in the background,
dressed in his gown and gold-laced hat, as weU as the
shield bearing the arms of the City of London over
the door, seem to point to its being a City church.
Mr. Austin Dobson -writes : ' There is no more
eloquent stroke in the whole of Hogarth than that by

414 HOGARTH'S LONDON
which the miserable player at " haKpenny under the
hat," in Plate 3, is shown to have but a plank between
him and the grave.'
Tyburn was an extreme western suburb of London,
and executions took place there for many centuries.
The last person executed at Tyburn was John Austin
on November 3, 1783, and although the executions
before Newgate remained for many years a gross
scandal, the scenes exhibited there never equaUed in
atrocity those which continuaUy occurred at Tyburn.
Tyburn gallows was a triangle in plan, ha-ving three
legs to stand upon. The Elizabethan -writers con
stantly aUuded to it and used it often in an idealised
form, as Bhon in Love's Labour 's Lost :
' Thou mak'st the triumphery, the corner cap of society,
The shape of Love's Tyburn, that hangs up simplicity.'
The Triple Tree first came into existence in 1571
at the execution of Dr. John Story, and Hogarth's
picture (referred to in the last chapter) of the execu
tion of the Idle Apprentice shows it not long before
its abolition. It was fixed in the open space at the
end of Edgware Road, formed by the junction of
the roads near where the Marble Arch now stands.
Between June 18 and October 23, 1759, the old
triangular gaUows, in use for nearly two hundred
years, was removed, and the new movable gaUows
superseded it. This was ordinarUy set up near the
union of Bryanston Street and Edgware Road.
The site of the fixed gallows was afterwards occupied

THE SUBURBS 415
by the toU-house of the turnpike removed from the
east corner of Park Lane.^
Spitalfields, situated in the east of London between
Bishopsgate and Bethnal Green, has been the
favoured home of the silk weavers since the French
Protestant refugees settled in this country after the
iniquitous revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685.
This suburb is the scene of the fhst plate of the
' FeUow Apprentices at the Looms,' where Thomas
Idle is asleep and the cat on the floor is playing with
his shuttle, whUe Goodchild is busily engaged in his
proper occupation.
The two chief places of entertainment of eighteenth-
century London were Ranelagh and VauxhaU
Gardens. To the first Hogarth does not appear to
have made any aUusion, although he must have been
an attendant of the Gardens. The Rotunda was a
favoured scene of the masquerades arranged by the
famous Heidegger, about which something has been
said in a former chapter. Ranelagh flourished from
1742 to 1803, but no traces of it exist now. The site
is included in Chelsea Hospital Garden, between
Church Row and the river to the end of the hospital,
the roadway, and the barracks.
Hogarth was intimately connected with Jonathan
Tyers and VauxhaU Gardens. Although he did not
make any sketch of them, or introduce them into any
of his pictures, he suggested theh decoration by
paintings, and helped that object forward.
» Alfred Marks, Tyburn Tree, pp. 69, 70, 249.

416 HOGARTH'S LONDON
South Lambeth (which included VauxhaU) was
considered to have a pleasant climate, and many
Londoners went there in the summer for change of
ah. Hogarth married in 1729, and soon afterwards
went with his wife to South Lambeth. In 1733 he
settled in Leicester Fields. When he was in the
country he made the acquaintance of Tyers. Vaux
haU Gardens had a long hfe, for we know that it
was a favourite resort in the time of Samuel Pepys,
although its real period of success was inaugurated
by Tyers, who took a lease of the place in 1728, and
eventuaUy acquhed the freehold of the original
Gardens and of some acres of land which he added to
them. For a time he did httle with the place untU
in 1732 he started his famous Ridotto al fresco.
There is a tradition that Tyers was becoming thed
of his venture when he took Hogarth into his con
fidence, with the result that on the painter's ad-vice
steps were taken which assured the success of the
Gardens, There is no definite authority for this, and
it seems strange that Hogarth, who was so violent an
opponent of Heidegger's masquerades, should have
suggested their adoption at VauxhaU. It may be,
however, that his objection was chiefly to the close
rooms of the Opera House, and that he saw no harm
in a modified form of the same amusement in the
fresh ah. We do know, however, that Hogarth was
a friend to Tyers, and enthusiastic in the support of
his friend's management of VauxhaU Gardens.
On Wednesday, June 7, 1732, Tyers held his first

THE SUBURBS 417
grand Ridotto al fresco, the price of admission to
which was one guinea. About four htindred of the
elite of London Society came in boat-loads from town,
and Frederick, Prince of Wales (who continued a
patron of the Gardens tUl his death) came down the
river from Kew in his barge.
Thus set in the prosperity of the Gardens which
continued weU into the nineteenth century. Then
came a time of decay and a discreditable old age
ending in 1859.
For a century the Gardens fiUed a distinguished
place in Enghsh life — the novelists and the essayists
are fuU of its glories ; the letter-writers also, for is
not Horace Walpole's description of the supper-party
at Vauxhall, of which the writer. Lady Caroline
Petersham, and the ' PoUard ' Ashe were the princi
pal characters, one of the most brUhant and delightful
pages in the correspondence of that most charming of
gossips ?
Mr. Warwick Wroth teUs us that ' when Tyers
leased the Gardens there was in the dweUing-house a
" Ham room," so that this famous VauxhaU viand
must have been already in request. The thinness of
the slices was proverbial. A journal of 1762, for
instance, complains that you could read the news
paper through a shce of Tyers' s ham or beef. A
certain carver, hardly perhaps mythical, readUy
obtained employment from the proprietor when he
promised to cut a ham so thin that the slices would
cover the whole garden like a carpet of red and
2 D

418 HOGARTffS LONDON
white.' ^ It was considered unsafe to carry a plateful
of ham from one box to another in case the slices
were blown away.
There must have been a long succession of these
ham-cutters, for Thackeray speaks of ' almost in
visible slices of ham,' and a friend of the -writer's teUs
how his father enlarged on the wonderful perform
ances of this artist.
Why was it that these Gardens kept up theh
character for so long a period of time ? It was
because the respectable classes continued to visit
them, and theh presence kept the vicious in order.
Families went there in glass coaches or boats and
kept together the whole evening. The novehsts are
full of the dangers attending those who strayed and
found themselves unprotected in the dark walks.
Mr. W. B. Boulton writes : ' During the height of
theh vogue there was a certain etiquette at the
Gardens ; ladies came in f uU evening dress, and the
men walked bareheaded, with their hats under theh
arms. A stately promenade of the main walks of the
garden was usuaUy a function which began the
delights of the evening for the more fashionable of
the company. Then foUowed the concert, invariably
composed of sixteen pieces, songs alternating with
instrumental performances — the songs of a very
sentimental cast — the sonatas and symphonies for
the band being often of a higher musical quality.
Tyers, however, engaged the finest voices of his day
' The London Pleasure Gardens, 1896, p. 299.

THE SUBURBS 419
to warble the tender ballads for which the place was
famous ; and men like Thomas Lowe and Vernon,
and lady singers like Mrs. Arne, Miss Stevenson, Miss
Wright, Mrs. Baddeley and Mrs. WeichseU, no doubt
supplied the charm which the songs themselves — aU
about Strephon and Delia and Cupid — seem to lack
to-day.' ^
To return to Hogarth. He painted for one of
the larger saloons the picture of Henry the Eighth
and Anne Boleyn, which was engraved by the artist
himself and published in 1729. He is said to have
drawn the King from Frederick, Prince of Wales,
and Anne Boleyn from the Prince's mistress, Anne
Vane.
'Yet Vane could tell what ills from beauty spring.'
This was not one of the pictures sold in 1841 at
the sale of movable property in the Gardens. Hogarth
aUowed his ' Four Times of the Day ' to be copied by
Hayman. At the sale just referred to, five pictures
attributed to Hogarth were sold at the prices here
noted : ' Drunken Man,' £4, 4s. ; 'A Woman pulling
out an Old Man's Grey Hahs,' £3, 3s. ; ' Harper and
Miss Raftor (afterwards Mrs. Clive), as Jobson the
Cobbler and his Wife Nell in Coffey's farce of the
Devil to Pay,' £4, 4s. ; ' The Happy Family,' £3, 15s. ;
' Children at Play,' £4, 1 Is. 6d. Whether any of these,
or any part of them, were by Hogarth it is impos
sible to say. Mr. Dobson states that the picture of
* Harper and Mrs. Clive ' is attributed to Hayman
' The Amusements of Old London, 1901, vol. ii. p. 27.

420 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in L. Truchy's contemporary print from the paint
ing. Certainly they were in a bad condition from
constant exposure ; the canvas was nailed to boards,
and little remained of any beauty they once may
have possessed. The free pass presented by Tyers
to Hogarth, which now belongs to Mr. Fahfax
Murray, has already been referred to. (See ante,
p. 40.)
In the eighteenth century tea-gardens were to be
found aU over the suburbs, and the author of an
article in an old magazine estimated that the
number of visitors to these gardens every Sunday
amounted to at least 20,000, and the money spent
in the course of the day on refreshments to about
£25,000. In fine weather these gardens were not
large enough to accommodate aU the people that
came out of the town for entertainment, and the
fields around were also crowded.
Hogarth has taken Sadler's WeUs, or rather the
New River opposite Sadler's WeUs, as the subject of
' Evening.' This place was opened in 1684, in which
year was published, by Dr. Thomas Guidott, a
pamphlet setting forth the virtues of the medicinal
water ; and for a time the gardens were styled New
Tunbridge Wells, but the latter designation was
given up when the Islington Spa took the additional
name of ' New Tunbridge WeUs.' The natural
confusion between Islington WeUs and Sadler's WeUs
shows how close to each other these tea-gardens were
placed.

THE SUBURBS 421
Sadler, who gave his name to the gardens, made
the most of the virtues of the waters, so that Epsom
and Tunbridge WeUs found them to be a formidable
rival, and a pamphlet was published in the interest of
the country wells protesting against the horrid plot
to injure them. This may have had some effect, for
the Clerkenwell Gardens went out of fashion for a
time ; but in the eighteenth century the water-
drinking was discontinued and the Gardens became
a favourite resort of the Londoners.
Hogarth's picture was engraved in 1738, and is
described as foUows by Mr. F. G. Stephens in his
British Museum Catalogue (vol. iii. p. 268) : ' This
engraving represents a rural suburb on the north side
of London, with the entrance to a building marked
" Sadler's Wells " over the porch, a covered gateway
in the garden waU on our left ; on our right, nearer
the foreground, is a public-house with a sign, com
prising in an oval medallion a portrait of " S' Hugh
Midleton." Through a window open in the side of
the house a party of men appear within, smoking
most energeticaUy. The background is a landscape
including two cottages, one of which has a pendent
signboard, and hiUs and trees.'
The buUding at Sadler's WeUs was at this time a
music house ; and it was not turned into a theatre
untU later in the century, although misceUaneous
entertainments of rope-dancing and tumbling took
place in the old house.
The rural character of the Gardens continued for

422 HOGARTH'S LONDON
many years, and the man and his wife who are
walking in the heat along the road one would expect
to be eager to rest themselves under ' the shady
trees ' in a scene which is enthusiastically described
in a ' New Song on Sadler's WeUs, 1740 ' :
' These pleasant streams of Middleton
In gentle murmurs glide along,
In which the sporting fishes play
To close each wearied Summer's day.
And Musick's charms in welling sounds
Of mirth and harmony abounds ;
While nymphs and swains with beaux and belles
All praise the joys of Sadler's Wells.
The herds around o'er herbage green
And bleating flocks are sporting seen.
While Phcebus with its brightest rays
The fertile soil doth seem to praise.'
Mr. Wroth, who quotes this song, adds : ' As late as
1803 mention is made of the taU poplars, graceful
wiUows, sloping banks and flowers of Sadler's Wells.'^
The man and his wife and chUdren in the fore-
gromid of the picture are in fact turning theh backs
on Sadler's Wells. The artist goes out of his way
to show contempt for the unfortunate husband by
making the horns of the cow behind fit upon his head.
John Ireland says of them : ' It is not easy to
imagine fatigue better delineated than in the ap
pearance of this amiable pair. In a few of the earliest
impressions, Hogarth painted the man's hands in
blue, to shew that he was a dyer, and the woman's
face in red to intimate her extreme heat. The lady's
* London Pleasure Gardens, 1896, p. 45.

THE SUBURBS 423
aspect at once explains her character ; we are certain
that she was born to command. As to her husband,
God made him, and he must pass for a man ; what his
wife has made him, is indicated by the cow's horns,
which are so placed as to become his own. The hope
of the family, with a cockade, riding upon papa's
cane, seems much dissatisfied with female sway. A
face with more of the shrew in embryo than that
of the girl, is scarcely possible to conceive.' ^
Mr. Stephens describes three states of the plate.
Of the first, three copies only are known ; in this
the figure of the scolding girl does not occur, nor the
inscription over the door of ' Sadler's Wells.' On
the margin of the copy in the Print Room of the
British Museum is the following MS. note : ' This
proof was deliver'd by Mr. Baron to Mr. Hogarth,
& it being told him, this boy has no apparent cause
to wimper {sic) he put in his sister, threatening him to
deliver his gingerbread King, now he put in Cause.
The character Hogarth altered where he is crying.'
Also ' Engrav'd by M. Baron price 5 ShiUings.' ^
It is worthy of mention that, although the New
River is only indicated by a few lines in the fore
ground, yet its object is clearly indicated by a piece
of wooden piping on the bank, such as was used
to convey the water to the waterworks and houses.
Although Southwark was not strictly a suburb,
Hogarth's great picture, ' A Fah, the Humours of a
' Hogarth Hlustrated, vol. i. p. 142.
2 Catalogue of Satires in the British Musewm, vol. iii. p. 269.

424 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Fair,' which presents one of the finest of his arrange
ments of a crowd, naturaUy comes in for notice in this
chapter. Walpole refers to it as Bartholomew Fair,
but this is a mistake on his part by reason of his
confusing the two fairs.
Southwark Fah was caUed also Our Lady Fair, and
St. Margaret's Fair. It was held in the highway of
the borough, and in the courts and inn-yards between
the Tabard and the church of St. George the Martyr.
It was one of the three great fahs of importance
described in a Proclamation of Charles i. as ' unto
which there is usuaUy extraordinary resort out of aU
parts of the kingdom.' The others were Bartholomew
Fah, and Sturbridge Fah near Cambridge. Our
Lady's Fair was of considerable antiquity, and liberty
to hold it on September 7, 8, 9 was granted to the
City of London by the charter of 2 Edward iv.
(November 2, 1462). It had probably been held
informaUy long before this. Although the time
aUowed by charter was only three days, the fah
continued, like other fahs, for fourteen days. The
amusements of Southwark Fah were much the same
as those at St. Bartholomew's, and the booth pro
prietors moved from one to the other, but at South
wark the acrobat and rope-dancer were the most
popular among the performers.
Pepys went to Southwark Fah on September 21,
1668, where he saw a puppet-show and was much
interested in Jacob HaU's dancing on the ropes —
' mightily worth seeing.' He asked HaU ' whether he

THE SUBURBS 425
had ever any mischief by falls in his time. He told
me " Yes, many, but never to the breaking of a
hmb." He seems a mighty strong man.' Rather
later than this, but before Hogarth's time, WUliam
Joyce, a strong man, exhibited here. Ward describes
him as ' the Southwark Sampson, who breaks
Carmen's Ribs with a hug, snaps Cables like Twine
Thread, and throws Dray Horses upon theh backs,
with as much ease as a Westphaha Hog can crack a
Cocoa Nut.' When he exhibited before WiUiam ni. he
lifted 1 ton and 14^ lbs, of lead, tied a very strong rope
round himself to which was attached a strong horse,
and although the horse was whipped it faUed to
move him ; the rope he afterwards snapped like
packthread. ' We are credibly inform' d that the
said Mr. Joyce puU'd up a tree of near a yard and a
half chcumference by the roots at Hampstead on
Tuesday last in the open view of some hundreds of
people, it being modestly computed to weigh near
2000 pounds weight.' ^
When Hogarth painted his picture, which was in
1733, the Fah was nearing its end, for in 1762 it was
suppressed. The engra-vdng, although dated 1733 —
' Invented, Painted and Engrav'd 1733 ' — ^was not
printed and issued untU June 1735, having been kept
back for the purpose of securing the protection
afforded by the Act of Parliament known as
Hogarth's Act.
In the London Evening Post for June 3 and 14,
' J. Ashton's Social Life m the Reign of Queen Anne, 1882, vol. i. p. 267.

426 HOGARTH'S LONDON
1735, it was announced that the nine prints (' A
Rake's Progress ' and ' Southwark Fah ') were ' now
printing off and wiU be ready for delivery on the
25th instant. N.B, — Mr, Hogarth was, and is,
obliged to defer the publication and delivery of the
aforesaid Prints tiU the 25th of June in order to
secure his property, pursuant to an Act lately passed
both Houses of Parliament to secure aU new-invented
prints that shall be published after the 24th instant,
from being copied without the consent of the
proprietor, and thereby preventing a scandalous and
unjust custom (hitherto practised with impunity) of
making and vending base copies of Original Prints to
the manifest injury of the Author, and the great dis
couragement of the Arts of Painting and Engraving,'
" Southwark Fair ' is one of the most valuable
of Hogarth's pictures as a -vivid representation of
a phase in the life of his times, and one in which
he must have been unusuaUy interested, as he has
fiUed it with an immense amount of detail. He was
most careful in representing the different groups,
but the topography is not very clear — in fact, some
critics have expressed doubts as to the locality.
Pervading the whole scene there is so general a
feeling of varied life and action that it has been
described as ' painted noise.' Hogarth's amazing
power in harmonising the misceUaneous groups into
one consistent whole is here displayed in an equal
degree to that in the case of the ' March to Finchley.'
The chief figure in the centre group of the picture

THE SUBURBS 427
is a buxom young woman beating a drum to draw an
audience for the entertainment with which she is
connected. She is deservedly admhed by the men
around her, and moreover she is a worthy repre
sentative of the painter's favourite style of beauty.
Samuel Ireland teUs that ' the heroine of this print
... is a portrait of whom Mrs. Hogarth gave me
the foUowing particulars, that H. passing through the
fair, on seeing the master of the company strike her
and otherwise use her ill, he took her part and gave
the feUow a sound drubbing ; whether this chastise
ment arose from a liking to her person or respect for
the sex we know not, but it is certain that she was
the kind of woman for whom he entertained a strong
partiality. A proof of this may be adduced in many
of his works ; where he has occasion to introduce a
good-looking female he has generaUy given us a form
not unlike hers, and it must be confessed that her face
and figure seem to be of that attractive quality which
wUl never fail to gain admirers in this country.' ^
Mr. Stephens, after quoting this passage, adds
that ' the strongest proof of this figure exhibiting
something not remote from Hogarth's ideal of
English beauty is to be found by comparing the
model's aspect and physique with the like in his
portrait of Mrs. Hogarth.' ^ A striking scene is
being acted at the left of the picture, where an insecure
scaffolding has given way, and the actors are falling
' Graphic Illustrations, 1794, vol. i. pp. 110-11.
2 British Museum Catalogue of Satires, vol. ii. p. 836 (note).

428 HOGARTH'S LONDON
in confusion. A lantern hanging beneath the stage
is inscribed ' Ciber and Bullock,' and ' The FaU of
Bajazet.' John Ireland tells us that a booth was built in the
year that this picture was painted (1733) ' for the use
of T[heophilus] Cibber, Bullock and H. HaUam, at
which the tragedy of Tamerlane, with the FaU of
Bajazet, intermixed with the Comedy of the Miser,
was actuaUy represented.' ^
We thus see that Hogarth transferred Cibber' s
booth from St. Bartholomew's to Southwark,
although it is possible that Cibber may (as was com
mon then) have removed from Smithfield to South
wark Fair. The show-cloth above the scaffolding is
a copy of ' The Stage Mutiny,' etched by John
Laguerre, which has aheady been referred to in
Chapter x. (Theatrical Life). This represents the
secession of some actors from Covent Garden under
the leadership of Theophilus Cibber.
In the middle of the picture but in the background
is one of the chief booths ornamented with a show-
cloth on which the Trojan Horse is painted with
an inscription announcing The Siege of Troy is here.
This was a droU written by Elkanah Settle. Beneath
the show-cloth is a company rehearsing some parts
of the play. A lantern affixed to the booth is
inscribed ' Lee and Harper's Great Booth.' Mr.
Stephens quotes an advertisement from The County
Journal, or The Craftsman, September 8, 1733 :
' Hogarth Illustrated, 1793, vol. i. p. 72 (note).

THE SUBURBS 429
' At Lee and Harper's Great Theatrical Booth, on
the Bowling Green behind the Marshalsea in South
wark during the Fah, wiU be performed that cele
brated DroU, which has given such entire satisfaction
to all that ever saw it,' etc., etc. The entertainments
are not the same as are shown in the picture, but
Hogarth gave the correct representation of the booth
quite up to date. In a later advertisement notice is
given of ' a Grotesque Pantomime Entertainment
caU'd, The Harlot's Progress or The Ridotto al
Fresco,' which was performed at Lee's booth. This
was a piece by Theophilus Cibber, first acted in
April 1733 at Drury Lane.
In connection with The Siege of Troy, J. Ireland
quotes the foUowing interesting information from
Victor's eulogium on Boheme the actor : ' His first
appearance was at a booth in Southwark Fair, -which
in those days lasted two weeks, and was much
frequented by persons of aU distinctions, of both
sexes. He acted the part of Menelaus, in the best
droll I ever saw caUed the Siege of Troy.' ^
To the right of the Trojan Horse are show-cloths
representing Adam and Eve, and the puppet-show
of Punch wheehng Judy into the jaws of destruction.
At the extreme right of the picture is an alehouse
with the sign of The Royal Oak, and chequers over
the door. On a paper lantern is -written, ' Royal
Wax Worke,' and ' The Whole Court of France is
here,' and at an open window above is a dwarf
1 -Victor's History of the Theatres (1761), vol. ii. p. 74.

430 HOGARTH'S LONDON
drummer and a little wax figure. Below hangs a
show-cloth, and a juggler stands in front with a bird
in his hand. This was a famous performer named
Fawkes, who is said to have acquired £10,000 by his
dexterity of hand. He is introduced into the print
of Masquerades and Operas, already aUuded to in
Chapter x. (Theatrical Life). Mr. Stephens refers to
James Caulfield's Portraits, Memoirs, and Characters
of Remarkable Persons (1819, vol. ii. p. 65), where
there is a portrait of Fawkes standing at a table, and
in the act of shaking balls from a bag. Below this
is a representation of three men tumbling, one of
them being like the tumbler painted on the show-
cloth of Hogarth's picture. Fawkes died May 25,
1731, so that according to strict chronological
accuracy he should not have been included in a
drawing taken in 1733.
In this representation of all the fun of the fair we
find two weU-known performers on the rope. To
the left of the Trojan Horse is the celebrated Violante,
and to the right of the church is a rope fixed from the
tower of St. George's Church to the Mint, which is
out of the picture. The performer on this rope was
Cadman, or Kidman as he is named by John Nichols.
Cadman later came to a sad end by attempting
a similar feat of flying across the Severn at Shrews
bury. The unfortunate man was buried at that
town, and on his tombstone were these lines inscribed:
' No, no, a faulty cord being drawn too tight.
Hurried his soul on high to take her fiight.
Which bid the body here beneath, good-night.'

THE SUBURBS 431
A similar performance took place at St. Martin's
in the Fields when an acrobat descended a slack rope
from the steeple of the church to the Royal Mews,
which stood on the site of the present National
GaUery. There is some doubt whether this feat was
due to Cadman or Violante. John Nichols and John
Ireland both give the credit to Cadman, but later
-writers say it was Violante. If we consult Walpole's
Letters we shaU find that the doubt is unsolved.
Walpole, writing to Sir Horace Mann respecting
balloons (December 2, 1783), says : ' Very early in
my life I remember this town at gaze on a man who
flew down a rope from the top of St. Martin's steeple ;
now late in my day, people are staring at a voyage to
the moon. The former Icarus broke his neck at a
subsequent flight : when a similar accident happens
to modern knights errant, adieu to air-baUoons.'
John Wright, in editing Walpole, wrote : ' On the
1st of June 1727, one Violante, an Italian, descended
head-foremost by a rope, with his legs and arms
extended, from top of the steeple of St. Martin's
Church, over the houses in St. Martin's Lane ^ to the
furthest side of the Mews, a distance of about three
hundred yards, in haK a minute. The crowd was
immense, and the young princesses, with several of
the nobility, were in the Mews.' Here is a definite
statement, but it wiU be noticed that Walpole says
that the rope-flier subsequently broke his neck,
' It must be remembered that at this time St. Martin's Lane, instead of
stopping, as now, at Chandos Street, passed the church and led to the Strand
opposite Northumberland House.

432 HOGARTH'S LONDON
and he would therefore probably be thinking of
Cadman. John Nichols records that the latter apphed to a
bishop for permission to fix a line to the steeple of
his cathedral church. The prelate replied that the
man might fly to the church whenever he pleased, but
he should never give his consent to any one's flying
from it.
The Weekly Miscellany for AprU 17, 1736, notices
that ' Thomas Kidman, the famous flyer, who has
flown from several of the highest precipices in
England, and was the person who flew off Bromham
steeple in Wiltshhe, when it feU down, flew on
Monday last, from the highest of the rocks near the
HotweUs at Bristol with fireworks and pistols ; after
which he went up the rope, and performed several
surprising dexterities on it, in sight of thousands of
spectators, both from Somersetshhe and Gloucester
shire.' It wUl be seen from this that Nichols had
authority for his form of the man's name, viz.
Kidman. One figure of special importance at the Fah is
James Figg, the ' Master of the Noble Science of Seh-
Defence,' who, sitting complacently on his horse and
holding his sword with the point upwards, is seen at
the extreme right of the picture. His booth is round
the corner, and he is about to ride through the fah to
gather those sightseers who are deshous of witnessing
a fight between himself and some other professor of
the art. He has his coat off and his bare head is

THE SUBURBS 433
covered with black patches, indicating the scars left
from former combats. A fuUer description of James
Figg wiU be found in Chapter iv. (Low Life).
We have now considered the more important of the
incidents iUustrated in this remarkable picture of
Southwark Fah, but it is so rich in the iUustration of
London life that more might be added. Sufficient
for our purpose has, however, been said, and those
who wish for a complete account of the picture can
refer to Mr. Stephens's fuU description in the British
Museum Catalogue (vol. ii. pp. 832-9).
Other amusement-providers might have been
introduced into the picture had there been room,
such as Timothy Fielding, the actor (often confused
with Henry Fielding, the author), who had a booth
in the Fair. Greater actors, such, among others, as
PoweU, Booth, and Mackhn, were introduced to the
stage in these public and by no means select scenes.
As to the visitors, many men of distinction have
figured here, and John Ireland teUs an anecdote of
Samuel Johnson on one occasion visiting the Fah in
company -with MaUet,
' When the Doctor first became acquainted with
David MaUet, they once went -with some other gentle
men to laugh away an hour at Southwark Fah, At
one of the booths where wild beasts were exhibited
to the wondering crowd, was a very large bear, which
the showman assured them was catched in the
undiscovered deserts of the remotest Russia. The
bear was muzzled, and might therefore be approached
2E

434 HOGARTH'S LONDON
with safety, but to all the company, except Johnson,
was very surly and ill-tempered : of the philosopher
he appeared extremely fond, rubbed against him, and
displayed every mark of awkward partiality, and
subdued kindness. " How is it," said one of the
company, " that this savage animal is so attached
to Mr. Johnson ? " " From a very natural cause,"
replied Mallet, " the bear is a Russian philosopher,
and he knows that Linnaeus would have placed him
in the same class with the English moralist. They
are two barbarous animals of one species." ' ^
Johnson never liked MaUet, and if this anecdote
is true it is not probable that after this outrageous
expression of contempt Johnson had any further
intercourse with the man whose name was introduced
into the Dictionary as an iUustration of the word alias.
J. B. Nichols in his Anecdotes of William Hogarth
says that the picture was sold in 1746 at the sale of
Mrs. Edwards's effects for £19, 8s. 6d. It was after
wards at Valentines, Ilford, Essex, and was sold in
1797 and again in 1800, but the price it reahsed is
not mentioned. Nichols says that the picture was
destroyed in the fire at Colonel Thomas Johnes's
mansion at Hafod on March 13, 1807; but this is a
mistake, for it was saved from the fire, and after Mr.
Johnes's death Hafod having come into the posses
sion of the Duke of Newcastle, his son exhibited the
picture at the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition,
1857. In the catalogue of that famous exhibition
' Hogarth Illustrated, 1793, vol. i. p. 89 (note).

THE SUBURBS 435
there is the following note : ' Painted in 1733.
Formerly at Valentines in Essex, afterwards the
property of Johnes of Hafod (the translator of
Froissart), from whom it passed with the Hafod
estate to the father of the present possessor.'
Johnes himself lent it to the Exhibition of
Hogarth's Works at the British Institution in 1814.
Here ends the notice of Hogarth's pictures of the
suburbs, but there are three pictures that may be
mentioned here. Chiswick and Twickenham may be
treated as suburbs, although some may think Cowley
is too far from town to be mentioned in this chapter.
Mr. Dobson gives the foUowing notice of Hogarth's
etching of Mr. Ranby' s house at Chiswick : ' There is
a copy in the British Museum without the -writing,
but with the manuscript title " A view of Mr.
Ranby the Surgeon's house. Taken from Hogarth's
window at Chiswick." It is there dated 1748.'
John Nichols writes : ' This view, I am informed,
was taken in 1750 ; but was not designed for sale.' ^
It was ' publish'd as the Act dhects by Jane
Hogarth at the Golden Head, Leicester Fields, 1st
May 1781.'
Mr. Dobson mentions the picture of 'Garrick's
VUla ' in his list of paintings of uncertain date, and
there are some further particulars in J. B. Nichols's
Anecdotes (p. 368) as foUows: 'Garrick's viUa by
Lambert, with figures of Mr. and Mrs. Garrick by
Hogarth, was bought by Colnaghi at Gwennap's sale
' Biographical Anecdotes, 1782, p. 341.

436 HOGARTH'S LONDON
April 5, 1821, for £7, 17s. 6d., and a companion to
the above, a vUla near Blackheath, was bought in
the same sale by Adams for £3, 3s.'
Samuel Ireland has given, in the second volume of
his Graphic Illustrations (1799), a pretty engraving
of a ' Garden Scene at Cowley, the residence of the
late Thomas Rich, Esq.,' ^ which he dedicated to
Abraham Langford, the auctioneer, the possessor of
the picture. Cowley is situated near Uxbridge, and
not far from Hillingdon, the residence of Mr. Lane the
original purchaser of the Marriage a la Mode. Cowley
has also an interesting association with the great actor
Barton Booth, the original ' Cato ' in Addison's play
of that name, who was buried there. Two weU-
kno-wn streets in Westminster, Barton and Cowley
Streets, were named after the actor, who possessed
property in Westminster, Rich the manager, aheady
referred to in Chapter x,, died at an advanced age
in 1761, and Ireland supposes that the picture was
painted about the year 1750, It contains portraits
of Rich and his wife, and Mrs, Cock to the left of
the picture, and to the right are portraits of three
men. Cock, the auctioneer, is admiring a picture
held up by a servant and explained by Hogarth
himself. Ireland describes the picture at the time of
the publication of his book as in as fine preservation
as when it left the easel. At the Garrick Club
there is a small picture by Hogarth of John Rich
and his family.
' This is a blunder made by Samuel Ireland. It should be John Eich.

THE SUBURBS 437
We here come to the end of these desultory
chapters on the associations of Hogarth with the life
of his time. I trust that something has been done
to elucidate the most interesting incidents of the
London of the eighteenth century, which he did so
much to make five in his pictures, and also to prove
by examples the enormous labour devoted by the
artist to his work. The more we study the outcome
of Hogarth's life the more we must admire his single-
minded devotion to his studies. It was some time
before he found his place, but when he did so he
ever pressed forward, labouring hard in taking pains,
which, with ordinary ability, in the end always
achieves success. He was, however, guided through
aU this hard labour with the sphit which we caU
genius — a something we know exists but which we
cannot weU define. This genius is sometimes attri
buted by enthusiastic admirers to those who have it
not ; but every one who studies the life and work of
this great man, to one side of whose large heart and
mind this book is devoted, must know that it existed
in no smaU measure in WiUiam Hogarth.
A trivial anecdote sometimes teUs more of the
life of the subject than others apparently of more
importance. Such is one related by John Ireland :
' Hogarth never played at cards, and whUe his wife
and a party of friends were so employed he occasion
aUy took the quadrUle fish, and cut upon them scales,
fins, heads, etc., so as to give them some degree of
character. Three of these little aquatic curiosities

438 HOGARTH'S LONDON
which remained in the possession of Mrs. Lewis, she
presented to me, and I have ventured to insert them
as a TaUpiece.'^ This corroborates what is other
wise evident in every incident of the painter's hfe —
that he never was idle.
The fame of Hogarth sprang into life immediately
the public had the opporttinity of admhing his
engravings and seeing what a wealth of meaning
there was crowded into the designs, but it has taken
many generations to arise and pass away before the
world has awakened to the undoubted fact that he
was one of the greatest painters of the modern school.
That position he has now attained, and he can
never lose it whUe the love and understanding of art
stiU exist in our land.
' Hogarth Illustrated-, vol. iii. p. 377.

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 439

CHAPTER XIV
LITERATUEE OF HOGABTH
Mb. AtrsTiN Dobson has compUed so comprehensive
' A Bibliography of the Principal Books, Pamphlets,
etc., relating to Hogarth and his Works ' that it
woiUd be useless to attempt to form a new one.
Those who want to know all the hterature of Hogarth
must consult his volume. It seemed, however, ad-
-visable to say a few words as to the authorities which
wiU be of most use to the student of Hogarth's
works. Fhst, Mr. Dobson's William Hogarth is indispen
sable. This was originaUy published in 1879 and
since that date has gone through several editions,
being continuously improved and enlarged. The
last edition (1907) is published at the smaU price of
six shiUings ; it is fuUy iUustrated and has an
exceUent index, supplying the reader with the infor
mation it contains in a thoroughly handy form.
The most important contemporary account of
Hogarth's Pictures and Engravings is the Biographi
cal Anecdotes of William Hogarth ; and a Catalogue
of his Works Chronologically Arranged, with Occa-
sionol Remarks, published by John Nichols, 1781,

440 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Nichols himself explains the origin of this book in his
Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century, 1812
(vol. iii. p. 9), as a note on the reference to Trusler's
Hogarth Moralized (1768) : ' Of this great, this inimit
able Artist, I had (more than thirty years ago) col
lected some materials with a view to an article in the
first edition of these Anecdotes. But my inteUigence
(aided by the acute and elegant criticism of the late
George Steevens, Esq.) was so greatly extended
beyond the hmits of a note, that I formed from them
a separate publication, intituled, " Biographical
Memoirs {sic) of WiUiam Hogarth, 1781," which by
the indulgence of the publick, arrived at a second
edition in 1782, and to a thhd in 1785 ; and at a
distance of 25 years, ha-vdng been revised and new
modeUed, was again re-pubhshed in two handsome
quarto volumes, iUustrated with CLX. beautiful
Plates m 1810 ' [1808-10].
In the Library of the British Museum is a thin
volume of sixty-four pages, bound in russia and
lettered. Anecdotes of Hogarth, a Fragment. At the
beginning is the foUowing MS. note by Isaac Reed :
' This imperfect Pamphlet is curious as being the
fhst Essay towards the Life of Hogarth, About
half a Dozen were printed and aU destroyed except
this copy. Whoever wiU take the pains of compar
ing this with the published one wUl observe some
very material alterations. See particularly P, 22
where the severe reflections on Mr, Walpole were
almost whoUy omitted. That part of the Pamphlet

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 441
was -written by Mr, Steevens, much of the rem[ainder]
by myself, some by Mr, Nichols and many correc
tions by other hands, I°- Reed,'
The paragraphs aUuded to are offensive remarks
to prove that Walpole is ' unfortunate in his attempts
to expose the indelicacy of the Flemish painters by
comparing it with the purity of Hogarth,'
The foUowing note on page 23, which was modified
in the pubhshed work, is interesting :
' Might we not however, on this occasion com
pare the manner of the Artist with that of his
Biographer, who talks of " eyes red with rage and
usquebaugh," and of a " maudlin strumpet's fingers
blooded by the sheep's heart designed for her dinner."
It is whispered (we know not with how much truth)
that even the dehcacy of Mrs. H. was shocked by this
description, and that she returned no thanks for the
volume that contains it, when it was sent to her as a
present by its author.'
Nichols, in the Genuine Worhs of William Hogarth
(vol. i. p. 437), referring to Reed's note, writes :
' Preparatory to the Fhst Edition, an impression of
only twelve copies was printed for the purpose of
obtaining correct information from those who were
best able to communicate it.' He further expresses
surprise that Reed shoiUd have -written as he did.
' The above note (the more curious as Mr. Reed was
always extremely averse to his name appearing in
print),' etc. etc.
The author of this book possesses Horace Walpole's

442 HOGARTH'S LONDON
copy of the first edition which is embeUished with one
of his bookplates (containing a view of Strawberry
HUl) and annotated with his manuscript criticisms.
The printed note in Reed's fragment was only
partiaUy Omitted, and the paragraph beginning ' It
is whispered ' is retained. Opposite this, on page
44 of the first edition, Walpole inserted a ' Copy of
my letter sent with the 4th vol. of my Anecdotes of
Paintmg to Mrs. Hogarth, to which she returned no
answer. — H. W.'
The letter is as foUows : —
' Mr. Walpole begs Mrs. Hogarth's acceptance of
the Volume that accompanies this letter, and hopes
she wiU be content with his Endeavours to do justice
to the genius of Mr. Hogarth. If there are some
Passages less agreeable to her than the rest, Mr.
Walpole -wiU regard her disapprobation only as
marks of the goodness of her heart and proof of her
affection to her Husband's memory — but she wUl,
he is sure, be so candid as to aUow for the Duty an
Historian owes to the Public and himself, which
obliges him to say what he thinks ; and which when
he obeys, his Praise is corroborated by his Censure.
The first page of the Preface wiU more fuUy make his
Apology ; and his just Admiration of Mr. Hogarth,
Mr. W. fiatters himself, wiU, notwithstanding his
Impartiahty, stiU rank him in Mrs. Hogarth's mind
as one of her Husband's most zealous and sincere
Friends.' The original letter is in the British Museum Library.

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 443
The second edition of the Biographical Anecdotes
(greatly enlarged) was published in 1782. Mr.
Austin Dobson possesses Nichols's o-wn copy of this
edition fiUed with the MS. corrections and addenda
subsequently inserted in the third edition of 1785.
A slip pasted at the beginning is inscribed : ' This
Vol. belongs to Mr. Nichols, Prmter, Red Lion
Passage, Fleet Street. G[eorge] S[teevens].'
There is a copy of the third edition (1785)
with a large number of MS. notes, in the British
Museum (Add. MSS. 27,996), in which the latest
note is dated 1819.
' The Genuine Works of William Hogarth ; hlus
trated with Biographical Anecdotes, a Chronological
Catalogue, and Commentary. By John Nichols and
George Steevens,' 2 vols. 4to, 1808-10, and vol. hi.,
1817, is practicaUy a fourth edition of the Biographi
cal Anecdotes greatly enlarged, and with the addition
of plates engraved by T. Cook from the original
pictures or proof impressions of the original engrav
ings. These books are full of valuable information, and
the original compilation of the Anecdotes has a curious
history. The idea of the book was enthely John
Nichols's, but he was considerably assisted by the
Shakespearean commentator George Steevens, with
great advantage to the literary value of the book,
but with considerable injury to its amenity. Nichols
was himself a courteous and considerate man, but
Steevens was reckless in assertion and determined to

444 HOGARTH'S LONDON
have his own way. Therefore if Nichols desired the
help of his friend he was forced to take it in what
ever form Steevens was inchned to present it. Two
iUustrations of Steevens' s venomous character may
be here given.
On page 30 of the third edition he goes out of his
way to make a spiteful remark respecting Nicholas
Hardinge, Joint Secretary of the Treasury, which
was singularly untrue. He is referring to an
' elegant Sapphic Ode,' by Benjamin Leveling, and
adds : ' His style, however, appears to have been
formed on a general acquaintance with the language
of Roman poetry ; nor do any of his effusions
betray that poverty of expression so conspicuous
in the poems of Nicholas Hardinge, Esq., who writes
as if Horace was the only classic author he had ever
read.' Hardinge, a friend of Nichols's master Bowyer,
was educated at Eton and became a FeUow of King's
CoUege, Cambridge. Nichols says of him : ' At
Eton and Cambridge he had the fame of the most
eminent scholar of his time ; and had very singular
powers in Latin verse, perhaps inferior to none since
the Augustan Age.'^
The brutal aUusion to Mary Lewis (Mrs. Hogarth's
cousin and executrix) on page 114, where she is
likened to the old maid in Hogarth's 'Morning,'
is so disgraceful that the author is forced to bear
some of the obloquy attached to its appearance in
' Literary Anecdotes, vol. v. p. 339.

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 445
his book. Steevens died July 1800, and when Nichols
was free to deal with his text as he wished these
references were expunged. John Nichols is held in
so high esteem by aU literary men that we cannot
but regret that he aUowed such a scandalous attack
as that on Mary Lewis to be printed. Steevens's
character was, of course, weU kno-wn, as may be seen
by the observation of two distinguished men.
When Lord Mansfield remarked that one could
only believe half of what Steevens said, Johnson
retorted that the difficulty was to tell which half
deserved credence. If the coUector possesses a set
of the original plates of Hogarth's Works he is
fortunate, but the fame of the artist has been sadly
dimmed by the large number of worn impressions of
his plates in chculation.
George Steevens collected the first and best
impressions of Hogarth's plates, and also the last
and worst of re-touched plates, so that the con
trast between them might be seen, and the good
ones might gain by comparison with the common
ones. Those, therefore, who cannot obtain the best
impressions of the original plates wiU be wise to
content themselves with the three volumes of the
Genuine Works, pubhshed by John Nichols, 1808-17,
especiaUy in large paper, as in this form the im
pressions are better than in the smaU paper.
John Bowyer Nichols, son and successor of John
Nichols, pubhshed in 1833 a very useful handbook

446 HOGARTH'S LONDON
to the study of Hogarth, entitled, ' Anecdotes of
William Hogarth, Written by Himself ; with Essays
on his Life and Genius, and Criticisms on his Works,
selected from Walpole, Gilpin, J. Ireland, Lamb,
PhiUips, and others. To which are added a Cata
logue of his Prints, Account of their variations and
principal copies ; Lists of Paintings, Drawings, etc.,'
1833. The next book of importance in the literature of
Hogarth, after Nichols's Biographical Anecdotes, is
John Irelabiid's Hogarth Illiostrated (2 vols. 8vo, 1791,
and Supplement, 1798, vol. hi.), which contains a
large amount of valuable matter. The Supplement
contains Hogarth's autobiography. The first and
second volumes were reprinted in 1793, The whole
work was reprinted in 1806 and 1812.
The plates are too small to be of much use as
pictures, although they are useful for identification.
This is, however, a valuable work, fuU of important
information, and -written with much discrimina
tion and some authority; but it sadly needs an
index. John Ireland was originally a watchmaker in
Maiden Lane, Covent Garden, and was employed by
Messrs. BoydeU to produce this book.^ He fre
quented the Three Feathers Coffee-House, and was a
friend of John** Henderson the actor.
' Graphic Illustrations of Hogarth, from Pictures,
^ The third volume is described as ' Published March 1798 for John
Ireland, Poet's Comer, Palace Yard, Westminster.'

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 447
Drawings and Scarce Prints in the possession of
Samuel Ireland, Author of this work,' is a book of
considerable interest, and contains much useful
information respecting Hogarth, as well as many
illustrations not elsewhere to be found.
Knowing Samuel Ireland's character and his
connection with the Shakespeare forgeries of his son
William Henry Ireland as we do, it is impossible not
to feel considerable doubt respecting the genuineness
of many of his ascriptions. It would be of much
value if some authority would make a searching
investigation as to all the plates that do not occur
in other books on Hogarth. This would help the
student greatly, and would doubtless, in many
instances, restore confidence in the iUustrations to
this book. Mr. Laurence Binyon's valuable ' Cata
logue of Dra-wings by British Artists, etc., preserved
in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the
British Museum,' contains references to such of the
originals of the engravings as are in the British
Museum.^ There is no index to S, Ireland's book.
The ' Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British
Museum : Division I, Political and Personal Satires,'
with full and most elaborate descriptions by the late
Mr, Frederic George Stephens, forms a most valu
able help to the study of a large number of Hogarth's
works, but it is not so weU known to the public as it
deserves to be, I am greatly indebted for much
information contained in it which I have been able
1 Volume ii. (1900), pp. 316-26.

448 HOGARTH'S LONDON
to utilise, as wiU be seen from many notes in this
book. Mr. Dobson writes of this Catalogue : ' These
volumes are, in truth, as far as the subject comes
within their scope, a vast storehouse of Hogarth
iana, not to be safely neglected by any student of
Hogarth's work and epoch.' ^ Having mentioned
the books that are positively necessary to the
Hogarth coUector, we may return to make a rapid
survey of the general literature of the subject.
The first book referred to in Mr. Dobson's Bibho-
graphy is ' Three Poetical Epistles. To Mr. Hogarth,
Mr. Dandridge, and Mr. Lambert, Masters in the
Art of Painting. Written by Mr. MitcheU,' 1781 ;
which is of considerable interest, as Hogarth is caUed
in the Epistle to him, ' Shakespeare in Painting.'
This is dated June 12, 1730, just before Hogarth had
begun his triumphant career as social satirist by the
publication of ' The Harlot's Progress.' The first
commentator on Hogarth was Jean Rouquet, a
Swiss of French extraction, settled in England as an
enameller, who published in 1746 ' Lettres de
Monsieur . . . . a un de ses Amis a Paris pour lui
expliquer les Estampes de Monsieur Hogarth.' In
this pamphlet the two ' Progresses,' ' Marriage,'
' The Hogarth items will be found in volumes ii., iii., and iv. Vol. ii.
(1873), No. 1722, first entry of Hogarth's 'South Sea Scheme' ; No. 2012,
' Mr D  s ye Oritick,' the last. Vol. iii. (pts. 1, 2, 1877), 2018, ' The
CompKcated E  n,' first entry ; 3743, ' Sir Francis Dashwood,' the last.
Vol. iv. (1883), 3808, 'Frontispiece to the Catalogue of Pictures,' the first ;
4106, ' Finis,' the last.

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 449
and nine other prints are described. Walpole says
that it was drawn up for the use of Marshal BeUeisle,
who was then a prisoner in the Round Tower at
Windsor Castle; but Steevens, in Nichols's Bio
graphical Anecdotes, corrects this statement by
saying that it was the ' Description du Tableau de
M. Hogarth, qui represente la Marche des Gardes a
leur rendezvous de Finchley, dans leur route en
Ecosse,' published a few years later, -which alone
was the letter intended for the Marshal. Steevens
also states that the Letters (1746) were ' certainly
suggested by Hogarth, and drawn up at his im
mediate request ' ; and he further says : ' He
[Rouquet] was hberaUy paid by Hogarth for having
clothed his sentiments and iUustrations in a foreign
dress. This pamphlet was designed, and continues
to be employed, as a constant companion to all
such sets of his prints as go abroad.' ^
Rouquet also printed in 1755 another work
entitled L'J^tat des Arts en Angleterre, in which he
aUudes to Hogarth's pictures. It was not until
after Hogarth's death that the notorious Dr. Trusler
compUed the pretentious commentary which he con
tributed to the first coUection of Hogarth's Works^
issued m 1766-68.
Hogarth Moralized is a foolish attempt to point out
not the phUosophy of the painter's art, but that
which is on the surface and evident to the most
unimaginative of observers. The constant reprint
1 Biographical Anecdotes, ed. 1785, p. 103.
2 F

450 HOGARTH'S LONDON
of his vapid remarks has lowered the value of much
of the literature of Hogarth, and the unfortunate
circumstance of a cadging bookmaker having by a
bit of sharp practice become the fhst to publish a
popular edition of these masterpieces has given his
commonplace criticism a certain amount of vogue.
One can only imagine how much disgust Hogarth
himself would have felt if he had had the misfortune
to live to see the publication of this book.
It was issued in fourteen parts at varied prices,
and the cost of the bound volume was one pound
sixteen shiUings.
George Steevens gives in Biographical Anecdotes
(1785, p. 105) the foUowing notice of the book:
* Hogarth Moralized wiU ... in some smaU degTce (a
very smaU one) contribute to preserve the memory of
those temporary circumstances, which Mr. Walpole
is so justly apprehensive wiU be lost to posterity.
Such an undertaking, indeed, requires a more inti
mate acquaintance with fleeting customs and past
occurrences, than the compiler of this work can
pretend to.' In a note the history of the work is
thus given : ' The Rev. John Trusler engaged -with
some engravers in this design, after Hogarth's death,
when they could carry it into execution with im
punity. Mrs. Hogarth, finding her property would
be much affected by it, was glad to accept an offer
they made her, of entering into partnership with
them ; and they were very glad to receive her,
knowing her name would give credit to the publica-

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 451
tion, and that she would certainly supply many
anecdotes to explain the plates. Such as are found
in the work are probably aU hers. The other stuff
was introduced by the editor to eke out the book.
We are informed, that when the undertaking was
completed, in order to get rid of her partners, she
was glad to buy out theh shares, so that the whole
expense which fell on her amounted to at least
£700.' Mr. Dobson quotes from Mrs. Hogarth's own
advertisement of the first number of Hogarth
Moralized in the London Chronicle for August 16-19,
1766, where she says that she has ' engaged a Gentle
man to explain each Print, and moralize on it in such
a Manner as to make them as weU instructive as
entertaining.' For those who deshe a fah selection of Hogarth
literature a good copy of the first edition of Hogarth
Moralized is worth adding to theh coUection, as is
also Major's beautiful edition, 1831, 1841. There is
a special interest in Major's edition in that it contains
George Cruikshank's woodcut copies of the four
groups — ' The Laughing Audience,' ' The Company
of Undertakers,' ' The Oratorio,' and the ' Public
Lecture.' It is therefore possible to compare our
two great satirical artists.
The first coUection of Hogarth's Works in atlas
foho was the Original Works, published by BoydeU
in 1790. The next coUection was almost con
temporaneous with the publications of John and

452 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Samuel Ireland, and emanated from Germany. It
was in octavo and was commenced in 1794, being
continued for some years. This was ' G. C. Lichten-
berg's ausfiihrliche Erklarung der Hogarthischen
Kupferstiche, mit verkleinerten aber voUstandigen
Copien derselben von E. Riepenhausen,' published at
Gottingen.^ Then came ' Hogarth Restored. The Whole Works
... as OriginaUy published. Now Re-engraved by
Thomas Cook. . . . London (G. and J. Robinson),'
1802. Atlas foho.
The Genuine Works, aheady referred to, were
published in three volumes, dated respectively 1808,
1810, and 1817. 4to.
The Works were published in two volumes 8vo by
Thomas Clerk, London (R. Scholey), 1810.
Another edition of the Works, ' from the original
Plates restored by James Heath, Esq., R.A.,' was
published in 1822 in atlas folio: 'Printed for Baldwin,
Cradock & Joy, Paternoster Row, by J. Nichols &
Son.' This has continued to be re-issued and
reprinted untU there is little pleasure to be obtained
from looking at the worn plates.
Several quarto editions of Hogarth's re-engraved
works have been published. One of these is worthy
of special mention, as it contains a very interesting
Introductory Essay by James Hannay, entitled
' Hogarth as a Sathist.' This is ' The Complete
* An article on Lichtenberg and Hogarth was published in the Foreign
Quarterly Review (No. xxxii., 1836).

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 453
Works of William Hogarth : in a series of one hundred
and fifty steel Engravings. . . . London : Richard
Griffin and Company.' The book is undated, but Mr.
Dobson supposes it to have been published in 1860.
The descriptive letterpress is not of much value, as
it consists of Trusler's vapourings and some rather
odd imaginings of E. F. Roberts.
Another edition, ' reproduced from the Original
Engra-vings in permanent Photographs,' was pub
lished by BeU and Daldy in 1872 in two volumes
quarto. The last foho edition of Hogarth's Works is the
special issue in 1902 of Mr. Austin Dobson's Memoir
by Mr. Heinemann as one of his art monographs.
This handsome volume contains a large number of
photogra-vures from the original pictures.
There is a considerable literature of pamphlets
(mostly catchpennypublications) containing accounts
of the various series of engravings by Hogarth, of
some of which the foUowing is a list : —
Harlot's Progress. The Lure of Venus ; or a
Harlot's Progress. An Heroi-Comical Poem by
Mr. Joseph Gay [Captain John Durant Breval], 1733.
Rake's Progress. Explanation of the Eight Prints
copied from the Originals by Thomas Bakewell,
PrintseUer, Fleet Street, 1735 (broadside).
The Rake's Progress, or the Humours of Drury
Lane, a Poem. (J. Chettwood), 1735.
Marriage a-la-Mode : an Humorous Tale, in six
Cantos. (Weaver Bickerton), 1746.

454 HOGARTH'S LONDON
Industry and Idleness. The Effects of I. and I.
IUustrated, , , . Being an Explanation of the
Moral of Twelve celebrated Prints. (C. Corbett,
1748.) Gin Lane, etc. A Dissertation on Mr. Hogarth's
Six Prints lately publish'd, -viz. Gin Lane, Beer-
street, and the Four Stages of Cruelty. . . . (B.
Dickinson), 1751.
An Election. A Poetical Description of Mr.
Hogarth's Election Prints, in four Cantos. Printed
for T. Caslon and sold by J. Smith, at Hogarth's
Head in Cheapside, 1759.
Roast Beef of Old England. A Cantata. Taken
from a celebrated Print of the Ingenious Mr. Hogarth.
(John Smith), n.d.
Enraged Musician. Ut Pictura Poesis ! or the
Enraged Musician. A Musical Entertainment
Founded on Hogarth. Written by George Colman.
T. CadeU, 1789.
In the fhst two volumes of the Cornhill Magazine
(1860) George Augustus Sala contributed a series of
nine interesting articles on Hogarth as Painter,
Engraver and Philosopher, which were republished
as a book by Smith, Elder and Co. in 1866. There is
a good deal of conjecture and not much new matter,
but the book is weU worth reading.
Mr. Dobson's Bibliography fUls thhty-five pages
of his work, and contains a fuU description of a large
number of books and pamphlets as weU as references
to a.rticles in reviews and magazines.

LITERATURE OF HOGARTH 455
In spite of the magnitude of this literature, there
is stUl no absolutely exhaustive account of aU
Hogarth's engravings and theh various states. A
reprint of the entries in Stephens's British Museum
Catalogue, with a description of aU those engravings
which do not come under the division of Sathes
added, would be of great value ; it would, however,
be a work of considerable labour.
A rigid examination of some of the pictures
attributed to Hogarth which have no authenticated
history is also much requhed, and a search for
painted portraits by Hogarth is imperative. There
seems to be good reason for the belief that there are
stUl many in priva,te hands which have not yet been
registered.

456

HOGARTH'S LONDON

INDEX

• Academy of Arts,' or Burlington
Gate, 348.
Addison at Button's, 289 ; how he
apportioned his day, 300.
Apelles and Protogenes, story of, 74.
Argonauts, a literary society at Nor
wich, 326.
Argyll (Duke of), prophesies the
success of the Beggar's Opera,
306.
Arlington Street, No. 5, scene of the
Breakfast Scene of the ' Marriage k
la Mode,' 112.
Armstrong (Sir Walter), on Hogarth's
high qualities as a painter, 9.
Arthur's Club, 299.
Arts, Society of, Hogarth first a
member, and then opposed to its
action, 72.
' Assemblies ' and ' Conversations '
distinguished, 43.
Balconies used for observing Lord
Mayors' shows, 260.
Bambridge (Thomas), examined be
fore a Committee of the House of
Commons, 388 ; members of the
Committee, 389.
Barber - Surgeons Hall, Monkwell
Street, dissection theatre, 402.
Bathurst (Lord Chancellor), 217.
' Battle of the Pictures,' 59.
Beauty, Analysis of, 73.
Bedford Arms Tavern, Little Piazza
(Hogarth's club), 282, 284.
Bedford Coffee-House, Great Piazza,
284.
Bedlam, picture of (Plate 8 of ¦ A
Rake's Progress '), 370 ; ill-con
sidered criticism of Rev. W.
Gilpin, 372 ; view of the hospital
by Hogarth, 373.

' Beer Street ' and ' Gin Lane,' 401 ;
advertisement of publication, 153.
Beggar's Opera, illustrated by
Hogarth, 305 ; its history, 306 ;
songs in it by various wits, 308 ;
meaning of the title, 309 ; dispute
on its dangerous tendency, 317;
benefit theatre tickets supposed to
be by Hogarth, 320.
Beggar's Opera Burlesqued, 316.
Bench (the), Hogarth's engraving,
216.
' Berenstadt, Cuzzoni and Senesino,'
350 ; the print believed to be by the
Countess of Burlington, 351.
Bertie (Lord Albemarle), frequenter
of cockpits, 144, 406.
Betew (Panton), collected specimens
of Hogarth's silver-work, 27.
Bible (the), in Shire Lane, 279.
Binyon's British Museum Catalogue
of drawings by British artists
referred to, 262, 290.
Black Masters, Hogarth's abuse of
them, 58, 63.
Blake's (William) engraving of the
Beggar's Opera, 305.
Blood Bowl Alley, Fleet Street,
398.
Boheme the actor, at Southwark
Fair, 429.
Boitard's ' Morning Frolic in Covent
Garden,' 137.
Bolton (Duke of) marries Lavinia
Fenton, 311.
'Bonamy showing a picture,' by
Hogarth, 239.
Bonvine (John), of the Rose Tavern,
Drury Lane, 286.
Boswell's interest in the discussion on
the dangerous tendency of the
Beggar's Opera, 320.

INDEX

457

Boulton's (W. B.) Amusements of
Old London, quoted, 141.
Bourke's History of White's, 300.
Boyne (Gustavus Viscount), portrait
by Hogarth, 101.
Bridewell, scene of the fourth plate
of the 'Harlot's Progress,' 393;
flogging of men and women, 394.
Bridgeman, the landscape gardener,
introduced into 'A Rake's Pro
gress,' 123.
Brooke (Sir Robert), at Wanstead
House, 96.
Broughton (John), founder of the
Prize Ring and inventor of boxing
gloves, 150 ; portrait of him by
Hogarth, 151; boxing -booth at
Tottenham Court, 406.
Brown's (Dr. John) criticism of the
dying Earl in the fifth scene of
'Marriage k la Mode,' 119.
Browne(IsaacHawkius),atSlaughter's Coffee-House, 291.
Bullock (William), portrait by
Hogarth, 338.
Burlington House, 124, 348.
Burnet (Bishojj), andhis hat, anecdote,
165.
Burney (Martin), his appreciation of
Hogarth, 5 (note).
Business Life, 17, 244-271.
Bute (Earl of), supported by Hogarth,
190-
Butler's Hudibras, Hogarth's illus
trations to, 32-36.
Button (Daniel), portrait of him, 289.
Button's Coffee-House, characters at,
288.
Byron (Frances Lady), portrait by
Hogarth, 102.
Byron (fourth Lord), his children
painted by Hogarth, lOL
Cadman or Kidman, acrobat at South
wark Fair, 430.
Calais Gate, painting of, 57.
Canning (Elizabeth), portrait by
Hogarth, 395, 396.
Carestini (Giovanni), introduced in
the Toilette Scene of the ' Marriage
4 la Mode,' 116.
Carlyle's abuse of the eighteenth
century, 1.

Carter (Teague), of Oxford, a fighting
man, 177.
Castlemaine (Viscount), at Wanstead
House, 97.
Castrucci, supposed original of
' Enraged Musician,' 242.
Catalogue of Exhibition of Pictures
in 1761 ; Hogarth's frontispiece
and tailpiece, 239.
Centurion (The), sailor from, in the
the 'Country Inn Yard,' 169.
Cervetto (Signor), supposed original
of ' Enraged Musician, ' 242.
Character and Caricatura, distinction
between, 218.
Charlemont (Earl of), portrait by
Hogarth, 103; 'The Lady's Last
Stake' painted for him, 103;
Hogarth's appreciation of his
friendship, 103 ; origin of his
Earldom, 107.
Charlotte (Queen), portrait by
Hogarth, 100.
' Charmers of the Age,' 351.
Charteris (Colonel Francis), 273,
395.
Child (Sir Josiah), proprietor of
Wanstead House, 96.
Child's Bank, picture of a run upon
it stopped by Sarah, Duchess of
Marlborough, 263.
Child Tylney, satires against, when
he was candidate for Essex, 170.
Chiswick, Hogarth's house at, 88.
' Chorus of Singers, or the Oratorio,'
346.
Chrononhotonthologos, frontispiece
attributed to Hogarth, 340.
Church and Dissent, 17, 198-215.
Churches of London in Hogarth's
jjictures, 207.
Churchill (Charles), at the theatre,
304 ; his quarrel with Hogarth,
186; Hogarth's portrait of him as
the Bruiser, 88, 194.
Cibber (Theophilus), as the Mock
Doctor, 323 ; his pantomime of The
Harlot's Progress, 324.
Clarges (Sir Thomas), discoverer of
Mary Toft's cheat, 230.
Clive (Sir Edward), 218.
Clubs in the eighteenth century,
294.

458

HOGARTH'S LONDON

' Cockpit ' (the), good illustration of
the ancient game, 141.
Coleridge (Hartley), on the 'Dis
tressed Poet,' 233.
Coleridge (S. T.), criticism of
Hogarth, 5.
Colman's (George) answer to Sir
John Fielding's condemnation of
the Beggar's Opera, 318.
Colvin (Sidney), on Hogarth's high
qualities as a painter, 8 ; on original
sketch for the Farmer's Beturn, 329
(note).
Conduitt (John), Master of the Mint,
341.
' Conversation in the manner of Van
dyck ' by Hogarth at Vauxhall,
44.
Conversation pieces bj' Hogarth, 41-
94.
Coram (Capt.), pension provided for
him, 285 ; portrait by Hogarth,
362.
Cosserat (Rev. Dr.), in the first
picture of the 'Election,' 176.
Covent Garden, 282 ; Church, 133 ;
Market, 132.
Coventry (Earl and Countess of),
portraits by Hogarth, 101.
Cowper on the old maid in ' Morn
ing,' 133.
Cr6billon's Sopha alluded to, 116.
' Crowns, Mitres, Maces, etc.,' 49.
Croxall's (Dr.) text of his sermon
before the House of Commons,
214.
Cruikshank's (George) copies of
Hogarth's ' Chorus of Singers,' etc.,
346.
Cumberland (Henry Frederick, Duke
of), portrait by Hogarth, 100.
Cumberland (William Augustus, Duke
ot), portrait by Hogarth, 100 ; his
brutality towards Broughton, 151.
' Cunicularii, or the Wise Men ot
Godliman,' 36.
Dalton (James), highwayman, 395.
Daniel's (George) description of
' Garrick in the Green Room,' 330.
Dawson (Nancy) 136 (note).
De la Fontaine (Peter), his shop-
bill by Hogarth, 246.

Desaguliers (Rev. John Theophilus),
205.
Desaguliers (Mrs.), portrait by
Hogarth, 206.
De Veil (Sir Thomas), as a drunken
Freemason, 139, 386 ; an unpopular
magistrate, satirised by Fielding
as Justice Squeezum, 386.
Devil Tavern in Fleet Street, 276.
Devonshire family, portrait by
Hogarth, 98.
Devoto, scene-painter at Drury Lane,
324.
Diana, head of, 240.
' Distressed Poet,' 231.
Dobson (Austin), dedication of this
book to, V. ; on Hogarth's excep
tional genius, 10; on Hogarth as
a moralist, 14 ; bibliography ot
Hogarth, 439; opinion that Hog
arth's London Topography requires
a commentary, 20.
Dodington (George Bubb), Lord Mel
combe, the Punch of the Election
Series, 185.
' Drury jjane. Green Room,' 330.
Dryden's Indian Emperor, or the
Conquest of Mexico, acted by
children at Mr. Conduitt's house,
341.
Dubois, the fencing-master in "A
Rake's Progress,' 123.
Dunciad, Theobald as the hero, 234.
' Earth,' subject for design by Hog
arth, 37.
Edwardes (Miss), of Kensington,
126.
Egleton (Mrs.), the original Lucy
Lockit iu the Beggar's Opera,
314.
Eighteenth century, interest of, 1,
11.
Election (the), four pictures described,
171; their sale, 172.
Elephant and Castle in Fenchurch
Street, 281 ; supposed pictures by
Hogarth, 281.
' Euraged Musician,' 17 ; the founda
tion of musical interlude, by George
Colman the elder, 338.
Enthusiasm, dread of, in the eigh
teenth century, 198.

INDEX

459

'Enthusiasm Delineated,' compared
with ' Credulity, Superstition, and
Fanaticism,' 214.
Excise office at the Crown Inn,
181.
Executions at Tyburn, 414.
Faoo (Sib Robert), 171.
Farinelli satirised, 123, 350.
Fawkes the j uggler, 430.
Fenton (Lavinia), her great success
in the Beggar's Opera, 310 ; her
portrait at the National Gallery,
311 ; in the 'Green Room, Drury
Lane,' 332.
Ferrers (Earl), portrait by Hogarth,
395-397.
Festin (Michael Christian), supposed
original of the ' Enraged Musician,'
242.
Fielding (Henry), one of Hogarth's
greatest admirers, 4, 18 ; Hogarth's
portrait of him, '230 ; miniature,
237 ; Bridget Allworthy from the
Old Maid in 'Morning,' 132;
successes at Drury Lane, 334 ;
plays, 344 ; benefit tickets, 323,
325, 335 ; great success of Pas
quin, 336; its satire offends the
Ministry, who in consequence
passed the Licensing Act, 336 ;
Tom Thumb, a Trage'ly, frontis
piece by Hogarth, 334 ; Peter
Pounce in Joseph Andrews, 111 ;
allusion to Dr. Misaubin in Tom
Jones, 115 ; praise of Joshua
Ward, 226 ; introduction of
Leathercoat into the Covent
Garden Tragedy, 286 ; Fielding as
a police magistrate, 379 ; Enquiry
into the Causes of the Increase of
Bobbers, 163, 381; deceived by
Elizaibeth Canning, 396.
Fielding (Sir John), carried out the
plans of his brother, 381 ; condemns
the tendency of the Beggar's Opera,
317.
Fielding (Timothy), at Southwark
Fair, 433.
Figg (James), the prize-fighter in 'A
Rake's Progress,' 123 ; his busi
ness card, 147 ; his feats, 147 ;
at Southwark Pair, 432.

' Finis,' or ' The Bathos or Manner of
Sinking,' 63.
Fishmongers Hall, banquet at, 258.
Fleet Prison, 388 ; scene of 7th plate
of 'A Rake's Progress,' 392.
Folkes (Martin), portraits, 289.
Ford (Parson), in 'A Midnight
Modern Conversation,' 279.
Forrest (Theodosius), possessor of
drawings for 'Five Days' Pere
grination, ' 284.
Foster (John), supposed original of
' Enraged Musician,' 242.
Foundling Hospital, 360 ; annual
dinners, 364 ; presentation by
Hogarth of ' March to Finchley,'
' Moses brought to Pharaoh's
Daughter,' and portrait of Coram,
361, 362, 364.
' Four Stages of Cruelty,' 400.
' Four Times of the Day,' 131.
Fowler (Thomas), Hogarth's original
name for the Idle Apprentice, 263
(note).
' Fox Family,' picture containing
portraits of first Earl of Ilchester,
and first Lord Holland, 99.
'Freeman's Best,' 280.
Freemasonry, Hogarth a mason, 39 ;
Thornhill a grand warden in 1728,
39 ; Hogarth grand steward in
1735, 39; Sir Thomas Veil in
' Night,' 139.
Freke (John), his opinion of Hogarth,
44.
Funeral tickets, 252.
Furniture (eighteenth century), illus
trated by Hogarth, 13.
Gamble (Ellis), probably a connec
tion of the Hogarth family, 26 ;
bookplate and shopbill, 28, 29,
244.
Gamester (Polite), 299.
Gaming at White's, 296.
Gardelle (Theodore), portrait by
Hogarth, 395, 397.
Gardenstone (Lord), his description
of Hogarth as a true original
author, 4.
Garrick (David), as Richard ill.,
326 ; price paid for the picture,
326 ; as a Rustic in Plate 2 of

460

HOGARTH'S LONDON

Garrick — continued.
' Invasion,' 328 ; in the Farmer's
Return, sketch by Hogarth, 328 ;
purchase ot the four pictures of
'The Election,' 172; his care of
the pictures, 329 ; portrait of him
with Mrs. Garrick, 327 ; Hogarth
irritated because Garrick did not
like the picture, 327 ; Garrick
making up his face for Hogarth to
paint a portrait of Fielding, 236 ;
Garrick's close friendship with
Hogarth, 325 ; ' Garrick in the
Green Room,' 330; epitaph on
Hogarth, 89 ; Samuel Johnson's
suggested alterations, 89 ; Gar
rick's Villa, painting with figures,
by Hogarth, 435 ; sketch of Garrick
and Quin, 326.
Garth (Dr.), portraits, 296.
Gascoyne (Sir Crisp), 396.
Gaunt's Coffee-House, 298.
Gay's (John) losses iu the South Sea
Bubble, 26S ; Trivia as a help to
the study of Hogarth's works, 1 ) ;
Beggar's Opera, 18 (see Beggar's
Opera).
George II. and family, picture by
Hogarth, 100.
Gibbon and his father at the Rose
in Covent Garden, 287.
Gibbs (James), the architect, por
trait by Hogarth, 239.
Gibson (Bishop), satires on, 202.
Gin Lane and the Gin Acts, 153, 401.
Gonson (Sir John), the ' harlot-hunt
ing Justice,' 387, 394.
Gostling (Rev. W.), his paraphrase of
the 'Five Days' Peregrination,'2S3.
Gourlay (John), 273.
Graham (Captain Lord George), por
trait by Hogarth, 101.
Grant (Sir Archibald), 390 (note).
Grimston (Viscount), satirised for a
comedy written when he was
thirteen years of age, 339.
Grosvenor (Sir Richard), and the
picture of 'Sigismunda,' 105.
GuUdhall, Idle brought before Good-
child, 259.
Hall (John), the original Lockit in
the Beggar's Opera, 314.

Ham-cutting at Vauxhall, 417.
Hampstead Road, scene of the
' March to Finchley,' 404.
Handel, supposed introduction into
Plate 2 of the ' Rake's Progress,'
123 ; Messiah performed at Found
ling Hospital, 367 ; portrait by
Hogarth, 243.
Hanging Sword Alley, Whitefriars,
398.
Hardy (William), his shopbill by
Hogarth, 246.
' Harlot's Progress,' 38.
Harpsichord introduced into the
second picture of 'A Rake's Pro
gress,' 123.
Harrison (Frederic), defender of the
eighteenth century, 1.
Harrison (John), the tobacconist,
280.
Hawkins (Sir Caesar), portrait by
Hogarth, 222.
Hayman (Francis), the original of the
husband in ' Marriage a Ii Mode,'
112; his pictures at Vauxhall mis
taken for Hogarth's, 40.
Haymarket Theatre, 344.
Hazlitt's remarks on the 'Marriage
ali Mode,' 110, 112, 113, 119.
Heidegger (John James), the pro
moter of masquerades, 349 ; in a
rage, 355.
Henley (Orator), satires on, 211; in
the ' Midnight Modern Conversa
tion,' 279.
Hermione, wagons containing the
treasure from the, in the streets
ot London, 191.
Herring (Archbishop), on the dan
gerous tendency of the Beggar's
Opera, 317 ; his portrait by Hog
arth, 200 ; his boldness at the
time of Rebellion ot 1745, 200.
High Life, 15,92-127.
Highland Fair, an opera, frontispiece
by Hogarth, 339.
Highwayman at White's, 296.
Hippisley (John), the original
Peachum in the Beggar's Opera,
314 ; portrait at Garrick Club,
314; drunken man, 281 ; portrait
as Sir Francis Gripe, 281.
Hoadly (Bishop), satires on, 202.

INDEX

461

Hoadly's (Dr. John) private theatre,
340.
Hoadlys, portraits of the, by Hog
arth, 238.
Hogarth family, origin of, 24 ; pro
nunciation of the name, 24.
Hogarth (Anne), William's mother,
23.
Hogarth (Mary and Ann), shopbill by
their brother, 247.
Hogarth (Richard), William's father,
23 ; his literary work, 23 ; died in
1718, 28.
Hogarth (Thomas), or 'AuldHoggart,'
his songs and poems, 25.
Hogarth (William), a great pictorial
satirist, 2 ; 'a writer of comedy
with a pencil,' 3 ; Fielding denied
that he was a burlesque writer, 5 ;
his love of beauty, 6 ; truthfulness
of his work, 6 ; his merits as a
painter, 7 ; his mistake in trying
' the great style of history paint
ing,' 9 ; as a delineator of the
manners and life of the eighteenth
century, 11 ; as a moralist, 13 ;
a thorough Londoner, 1 9 ; his life
and works, 22-91 ; his education,
25 ; his pencil sketches as a boy,
26 ; apprenticed to Ellis Gamble,
26 ; specimens of his silver-plate
engraving, 27 ; carried Gamble's
child, 28 ; engraved book-plates,
29 ; earliest satirical engravings,
30 ; his shop card, 28, 244 ; his
addresses, 28 ; supposed to have
been a sign painter for a time,
249 ; attendance at Sir James
Thornhill's painting school, 31 ;
acquaintanceship with him, 38 ;
his illustrations of books, 32 ; ot
Hudibras, 32-36 ; married Jane
Thornhill, 38 ; removed to South
Lambeth, 38 ; reconciliation with
Thornhill, 38 ; living with Thorn
hill in the Piazza, 38 ; a Free
mason, 39 ; grand steward, 1735,
39 ; friendship with Jonathan
Tyers, and interest in Vauxhall
Gardens, 40 ; his free pass, 40 ;
first mention of his Conversation
pieces, 41, 42 ; foundation of Art
school in Peter's Court, St. Martin's

Lane (removed from the Piazza),
41 ; his ' Conversation in the
manner of Vandyck ' at Vauxhall,
44 ; the plan of composition ot his
moral satires, 45 ; his great success,
46 ; prey to pirates who copied his
engravings, 47 ; ' Hogarth's Act '
(1735) to protect artists, 47 ; his
gratitude to Parliament for pass
ing the Act, 50; popularity of his
engravings, 51 ; pictures for St.
Bartholomew's Hospital, 51 ; ' Paul
before Felix ' for Lincoln's Inn,
52 ; altar-piece for St. Mary Red
cliffe, Bristol, 52 ; critical opinions
on his religious pictures, 53 ;
settled in Leicester Fields, 56 ;
fame of his works abroad, 56 ; his
indiscretion in painting ' Calais
Gate,' 57 ; sale of his pictures at
ridiculously low prices, 60 ; sale of
the 'Marriage & la Mode,' 61;
trouble over the sale ot ' Sigis
munda,' 65 ; publication ot the
Analysis of Beauty, 73 ; portraits
of his six servants, 240 ; anagram
of his name, 75 ; his protest against
unfair attacks upon him, 81 ; his
proposed history ot the Arts,
83; the 'No-Dedication,' 83; his
ill-omened print, 'The Times,
Plate 1,' 83, 84 ; his explanation
of reasons for publishing it, 83 ;
his death, 88 ; Garrick's epi
taph, 89 ; his character, 90 ; ap
pointment of Serjeant Painter,
100 ; value ot the office, 100 ;
sales ot his pictures, 132 ; freedom
from party prejudice, 175; quarrel
with Wilkes and Churchill, 186 ;
' Account of the Five Days' Pere
grination,' 282 ; his un successful at
tempt to act on the amateur stage ,
341 ; munificence towards Found
ling Hospital, 366 ; truthfulness of
his pictures painted for St. Bartho
lomew's Hospital, 368 ; engraved
fish for cards, 437 ; Genuine Works,
by John Nichols and George
Steevens, 443 ; folio editions of
Hogarth's works, 451 ; smaller
editions, 452 ; pamphlets on the
various series of Hogarth's en-

462

HOGARTH'S LONDON

graviugs, 453 ; literature of Hog
arth, 439-455.
'Hogarth's wigs. Sett of Blocks for,'
63.
Holland (Henry, first Lord), portraits
by Hogarth, 99, 100.
Holt's (Mrs.) shopbill by Hogarth,
247.
Horse Guards in the second picture
of the Election Series, 180.
Hospitals, 18, 360-376.
' House of Commons,' picture painted
by Hogarth and Thornhill, 38, 166.
Hudibras, Hogarth's illustrations to,
32-36.
Huggins (John), purchased the War
denship of the Fleet from the Earl
ot Clarendon, 391 ; sold it to
Thomas Bambridge and Dougal
Cuthbert, 391.
Huggins (William), portrait by Hog
arth, 238, 346.
Hunt (Gabriel), portrait by Hogarth,
284.
Idle (Tom), scenes in his life, 397.
' Industry and Idleness,' object de
scribed by Hogarth, 253 ; adver
tisement, 254; Industrious Appren
tice, 253 ; Idle Apprentice, 398 ;
(original in Eastward Hoe), 254;
earliest original sketches tor the
series iu the British Museum,
262.
Inn yards represented in first plate
of 'Harlot's Progress' and the
'Stage Coach,' 273.
Introduction. 1-21.
Ireland (Betty), Secret History ot,
130.
Ireland's (John) Hogarth Illustrated,
446.
 his agreement with Sir John
Fielding's condemnation of the
Beggar's Opera, 318.
Ireland (Samuel), Graphic Illustra
tions of Hogarth, 446 ; man of un
scrupulous credulity, 290.
Italian Opera introduced into Eng
land, 345.
Ives (Ben), his praise to Garrick of
his master's portrait painting,
241.

Johnson (Samuel), his suggested
emendations to Garrick's epitaph
on Hogarth, 89 ; likened to the
Idle Apprentice by Topham Beau
clerk, 2(i8; friend of Saunders
Welch, 382 ; in love vrith Mary
Welch (afterwards Mrs. Nollekens),
382 ; sat on the Bench with
Welch and made Welch's fine
language intelligible to those
examined, 383 ; visit to Southwark
Fair in company with David
Mallet, 433 ; Mallet's rudeness to
him, 433 ; at Slaughter's Coffee-
House, 291 ; opinion of the Beg
gar's Opera, 319 ; portrait attri
buted to Hogarth, 239.
Judith, rehearsal of, 346 ; frontis
piece for the Oratorio, 347.
Kendal (Duchess of), her arms en
graved by Hogarth, 28.
Kent (William), Hogarth's satires,
124, 180, 208, 348 ; abuse of him
a bond of sympathy between
Hogarth and Thornhill, 38.
Kettleby in a ' Midnight Modern
Conversation,' 280.
Kidman (Thomas), at Southwark
Fair, 430.
King (Dr. Arnold), selected the
mottoes from the Bible for 'In
dustry and Idleness,' 262, 277.
King's (Tom) Coffee-House, 133,
287; Moll King, succeeded her
husband as keeper of Tom King's
Coffee-House, 133, 287.
Kirton, the tobacconist, 176.
Knight (Richard Payne), his praise of
Hogarth's painting, 7.
'Lady's Last Stake,' by Hogarth,
103.
Laguerre's ' Stage Mutiny,' 324.
Lamb (Charles), criticism of Hogarth,
5.
Lambert (George), his bookplate by
Hogarth, 245.
Lambeth (South), a summer resort,
416.
Landor (Walter Savage), his opinion
ot Hogarth as a great painter,
6.

INDEX

463

Lane's (Mr.) purcnase of the 'Mar
riage k la Mode,' 61.
Lane (Mrs. Fox), afterwards Lady
Bingley, 118.
Laroon (Captain), in Covent Garden,
137.
' Laughing Audience,' 303.
Lawyer in Hudibras, Hogarth's two
engravings, 217.
Lawyer's Fortune, a comedy, fron
tispiece by Hogarth, 339.
Leathercoat, porter at the Rose, 286.
Lee (Richard), tobacconist, his shop
bill supposed to be the original of
a ' Midnight Modern Conversation,'
250.
Leicester Square, Hogarth's bouse in,
88.
Leveridge (Richard), in Tavistock
Street, 284 ; Coram's pension
transferred to him, 285.
Lincoln's Inn Fields Theatre, 314.
Liotard (J. S.), the sign painter in
' Beer Street,' 162.
Literature of Hogarth, 439-455.
Livesay (Richard), 283.
Lloyd (Robert), his praise of Hogarth,
66.
Lockman (John), ' the Herring Poet,'
Hogarth's friend, 163.
London, streets of, 11, 15 ; their
dangers, 16, 130.
London Infirmary, ticket for, 369 ;
title changed to London Hospital,
370.
London Topography ot Hogarth
requires a commentary, 19.
Lord Mayor's Day in Cheapside, 260.
'Lottery' (the), print by Hogarth,
30, 266, 270.
Lovat (Simon Lord), portrait by
Hogarth, 166 ; sketches at his trial,
168.
Low Life, 15, 128-163.
' Low Life ; or One Half the World
knows not how the Other Half
lives,' 1752-64, 128, 373.
Lymington (Lady), great-niece of
Newton, acted when a child at her
father's house in Dryden's Indian
Emperor, 341 ; her sitting for the
Viscountess in the ' Marriage k la
Mode,' 342.

Macclesfield (Earl of), portrait by
Hogarth, 101.
Magistrates introduced into Hogarth's
works, 379.
Malcolm (Sarah), portraits by Hog
arth, 395, 396.
' Man loaded with Mischief,' 293.
'Man of Taste' (or ' Taste k la Mode '),
124.
Manners (Old), brother to Duke of
Northumberland, 297.
Mapp (Mrs. Sarah), 223.
'March to Finchley,' 364, 404,
408.
Marlborough (Sarah, Duchess of),
supposed to have stopped a run
upon Child's Bank, 263.
' Marriage k la Mode,' description ot
the series, 107-122 ; dramatised,
1 10 ; sale of the pictures, 61.
Marrow-bones and cleavers at Good-
child's marriage, 256.
Martin (Mrs.), the original Mrs.
Peachum in the Beggar's Opera,
314.
Marylebone Church, interior repre
sented in the fifth plate of 'A
Rake's Progress,' 411; marriages
of Bacon and Sheridan, 411 ; out
side in the Third Stage of 'Cruelty,'
413.
Masquerade (large) ticket, 362.
 (small) ticket on ' Burlington
Gate,' 348.
 (Royal), ' Somerset House,' 358.
Masquerades, ill effects ot, 357 ; and
operas (or 'Taste of the Town'),
32, 124.
Mercier (Philip), probable designer of
' Heidegger in a Rage,' 355.
Michel (Herr), Prussian Envoy, in
' Marriage a la Mode,' 118.
Middlesex (Countess ot). Mistress ot
the Robes, 260.
'Midnight Modern Conversation, ' sub
scription ticket, 279, 346.
Miller (Joe), his benefit theatre ticket,
323.
Mingotti (Madame), ' boomed ' by
Mrs. Fox Lane, 118.
Misaubin (John, M.D.), the Quack of
the 'Marriage k la Mode,' 114,
228.

464

HOGARTH'S LONDON

Mitchell's (Joseph) Three Poetical
Epistles, 448 ; described Hogarth in
l730 as an eminent historical and
conversation painter, 43.
Mitre (the), in Fleet Street, 277 ;
not in Mitre Court, 278 (note).
' Modern Orpheus,' 242.
Mog (Molly), ot the Rose at Woking
ham, 287.
Moliere compared with Hogarth, 3-4.
Monument, inscription on, 257.
Morality, respective, of the seven
teenth and eighteenth centuries,
12.
MoreU (T.), portrait by Hogarth,
238.
Morison (Richard), collected speci
mens ot Hogarth's silver-work, 27.
' Morning,' view of Covent Garden
Market, 132.
Morris (Joshua), upholsterer, 37 ;
lawsuit with Hogarth, 37.
Mortimer (Cromwell, M.D.), portrait
by Hogarth, 222.
Mounsey (Dr.), 291.
Murphy (Arthur), his criticism of
Hogarth, 3, 407.
Musician (Enraged), 241 ; advertised
in November 1740 as the 'Pro
voked Musician,' 241.
Needham (Mother), 273, 395.
New River represented iu ' Evening,'
420, 423.
Newcastle (Henry, second Duke ot),
portrait by Hogarth, 101.
Newgate represented in scene from
the Beggar's Opera, 388.
Nichols's (John) Biographical Anec
dotes, 439 ; annotated copies, 442,
443.
Nichols (J. B.), Anecdotes of Hogarth,
445.
'Night' (Charing Cross), 138.
Noel (Justice WiUiam), 218.
' Noon ' (French Church in Hog Lane),
137.
North Briton, No. 17, savage attack
on Hogarth by Wilkes, 86, 186.
Opera (Italian), satirised by Hog
arth, 123, 345.
Opera Dancers, 35 1 .

Oxford, Humours of, a comedy,
frontispiece by Hogarth, 339.
Parliamentary Election of 1734,
171 ; of 1754, 173.
ParneU (Sir John ), his portrait in the
flrst picture of ' The Election,' 175.
' Paul before Felix,' painted for Lin
coln's Inn Hall, 220.
Peepers = young chickens, 275.
PeUett (Thomas, M.D.), portrait by
Hogarth, 222.
Pembroke (Mary, Countess of), por
trait by Hogarth, 102.
Pepys's visit to a cockpit, 142,
Periwigs, Five Orders of, 61.
Philip in the Tub, a cripple who
attended weddings, 257.
' Picquet, ' or ' Virtue in Danger, ' by
Hogarth, 103.
Piozzi's (Mrs.) anecdotes of Hogarth,
58 ; supposed to be the original
of the lady in ' Picquet,' 105.
Pitt (WiUiam) (1) and the Cheshire
cheese, 190.
Police, insufficiency of, in the eigh
teenth century, 377.
Polite Gamester, 299.
Political Life, 16, 164-197.
Pontack's Eating-House in Abchurch
Lane, 274.
Pope (Alexander), at Button's, 290 ;
satirised by Hogarth, 124, 232,
234 ; contributions to the Beggar's
Opera, 309 ; losses in the South
Sea Bubble, 268 ; Pope and Gay
supposed to be represented in Hog
arth's ' South Sea Bubble,' 267.
PortobeUo, Admiral Vernon and the
battle of, 178 ; alehouse, 178.
Portsmouth (John Wallop, first Earl
of), possible original of the Earl iu
the 'Marriage k la Mode,' 110.
Posts in the streets of London, 299.
Potter (Thomas), 175.
Powell, maker of Hogarthian forg
eries, 323.
Price's (Hilton) Ye Marygold re
ferred to, 264, 265.
Prior (Samuel), 293.
Prisons and Crime, 18, 377-403.
Pritchard (Miss), in the 'Green
Room, Drury Lane,' 333.

INDEX

465

Pritchard, Mrs., in the ' Green Room,
Drury Lane,' 332.
Professional Life, 17, 216-243.
Puppet shows at Southwark Fair,
429.
Quack's Museum in Garth's Dis
pensary, 115.
Quin, intended to personate Mac
heath, but renounced the char
acter, 312; portrait by Hogarth,
338 ; portrait in the ' Green Room,
Drury Lane,' 332.
 and Garrick, sketch of, 326.
Rake's Prooress ' described, 122-
124.
Ranby's house at Chiswick, Hogarth's
etching, 435.
Ranelagh Gardens, 415.
Ravenet and Ravenet's wife as en
gravers for Hogarth, 288.
Read, Benjamin, portrait by Hogarth,
284.
Rich, John, manager of Lincoln's Inn
Fields Theatre, 345.
'Rich's Glory, or his Triumphant
Entry into Covent Garden,' 345.
 garden at Cowley, 436.
 picture of Rich and his family
at the Garrick Club, 436.
Richardson, the Complicated, 292.
Rochester, Hogarth and Scott played
at hop-scotch there, 283.
Rock, Dr., in Covent Garden, 137.
Rose Tavern iu Russell Street, bad
reputation of, 285 ; scene ot Plate
3 of ' Rake's Progress,' 285.
Rouquet, Jean, ' Lettres k un de ses
amis a Paris pour lui expliquer
les Estampes de M. Hogarth,' 448.
Royal Academy, formation of, dis
approved of by Hogarth, 42, 72.
Rummer Tavern at Charing Cross,
293.
Rysbrach, Michael, sculptor, portrait
by Hogarth, 239.
Sadler's Wells, 420.
St. Andr^, Nicholas, 228 ; married to
Lady Elizabeth Molyneux, 230.
St, Bartholomew's Hospital, Hogarth
presents two large pictures, ' The

Good Samaritan,' and ' The Pool
of Bethesda,' 51, 367.
St. David's Day, 298.
St. George's Hospital, picture of the
building with portrait on horse
back ot Michael Soleirol, 374.
St. Giles's Church, 138.
St. James's Street, represented in ' A
Rake's Progress,' 124; alterations
in, 299.
St. John's Coffee-House in Shire
Lane, 279.
St. Martin's Lane, room at No. 26
the original of the Quack's residence
in 'Marriage a la Mode,' 114.
Salisbury (James, fourth Earl of),
driver of coaches, 138.
Sandby's (Paul) rancorous satires on
Hogarth, 78, 86.
Seldam or shed made by order of
Edward iii. on the north side ot
Bow Church, 261.
Shebbeare, Dr., 182.
Shelley family, picture by Hogarth,
99.
Sherlock's (Martin) Letters to a
Friend in Paris, 143.
' Shrimp-girl,' by Hogarth, 240.
'Siege of Troy,' by Elkanah Settle,
428, 429.
' Sigismunda,' Sir Richard Gros
venor's refusal of the picture, 65 ;
malignant criticism of, 63, 65, by
Walpole, 67 ; delay in engraving
the picture, 67 ; in the National
GaUery, 67.
Sign Paintings, Exhibition of, pro
moted by Bonnel Thornton, assist
ed by Hogarth, 68 ; Humours of
the Catalogue, 68.
' Sir Plume ' in the Rape of the Loch,
engraved on the lid of a gold snuff
box, 27.
Slack overcomes Broughton in a box
ing match, 151.
Slaughter's (New) Coffee - House,
292.
 (Old) Coffee-house, 291 ; club
of artists held there, 291.
'Sleeping Congregation,' picture of
the deadness of public services, 205.
Smith (John Thomas), quoted, 27,
28.

2G

466

HOGARTH'S LONDON

Soleirol (Michael), 374.
'South Sea Bubble' described, 30,
266.
Southwark Fair, 424 ; anecdote re
lating to the young woman beating
a drum, 427.
Spikes (iron), between the orchestra
and pit in theatres, 3.
SpiUer (James), original Mat o' the
Mint in the Beggar's Opera, 322.
SpiUer's Head, club held there,
322.
Spitalfields, in the series of ' Industry
and Idleness,' 255, 416.
' Stage Coach, or Country Inn Yard,'
168.
' Stagp Mutiny,' by Laguerre, 428.
Steevens (George), his use of the
' Distressed Poet ' as a portrait ot
Theobald the Shakespearean com
mentator, 234 ; his venomous re
marks iu Nichols's Biographical
Anecdotes, 445.
Stephens (Frederic George), Cata
logue ot Prints and Drawings in
the British Museum Satires, 30,
447.
Sterne (Laurence), praises the Analy
sis of Beauty in Tristram Shandy,
77, 237 ; frontispieces for Tristram
Shandy by Hogarth, 238.
Stir (A) in the City, 51.
Street cries, 17.
Stuart (Athenian), satirised by
Hogarth, 61.
Suburbs of London, 18, 404-438.
Swift's lines on ' humorous Hog
arth,' 24.
Tankard (Silver), used by members
of the Club held at the SpiUer's
Head, 27.
'Taste in High Lite,' 125.
' Taste of the Town,' 32, 347.
Tavern Life, 18, 272-301.
Taylor (George), successor to Figg at
the Amphitheatre in Oxford Road,
149.
Taylor (Chevalier John), 223.
Temple Bar and the ' Burning of the
Rumps,' 276.
Temple Coffee-House in 'The Times,
Plate 1,' 192.

Thavies Inn, Holborn, 402.
Theatrical Life, 18, 302-359.
Theobald (Lewis), the supposed
original of the 'Distressed Poet,'
232.
Thomson and Mallet's Masque oj
Alfred, ticket for performance at
Cliefden, 343.
Thornhill (Sir James), Hogarth's
admiration of, 31 ; witness for
Hogarth, 38 ; a grand warden in
1728, 39 ; death, 41 ; his art
school removed from the Piazza to
Peter's Court, St. Martin's Lane,
41.
Tibson (Christopher), original of ' The
Politician,' 165 ; 387.
' Time Smoking a Picture,' 63.
Times (The), Plate 1, 186.
 Plate 2, by Hogarth, left un-
pubhshed until 1790, 195 ; re
joinder to Plate 1, not to be con
fused with Hogarth's engraving,
197.
Titian, Hogarth's appreciation ot, 58.
Tofts (Mary), ' the Rabbit Breeder,'
36, 216, 229.
TothiU, TotenhaU, or Tottenham
Court, 405.
Townley's (Dr.) laudatory inscription
to Hogarth's memory, 89.
Treasury (the), in the second picture
of the Election Series, 180.
Trusler's Hogarth Moralized, 449 ;
Mrs. Hogarth's advertisement re
specting this book, 451.
Turk's Head Bagnio, death of the
Earl in the ' Marriage k la Mode,'
119.
Tyburn, execution at, 399.
 GaUows (the Triple Tree), 414 ;
position, 414.
Tyers (Jonathan), refounded Vaux
haU Gardens in 1732, 40.
Tylney (Earl), at Wanstead House,
97 ; supposed by some to be the
original of the Earl in the ' Mar
riage k la Mode,' 111.
Undertakers, The Company of, or
a Consultation of Physicians, 223.
Undertaker's funeral ticket by
Hogarth, 251,

INDEX

467

Vauxhall Gardens, Hogarth's in
terest in them, 40, 415, 419.
Violante, acrobat at Southwark Fair,'
430.
Virtue iu Danger,' by Hogarth,
103.
Viviani (Count), as a romancer, 288,
289, 290.
Walker (Tom), his great success as
Macheath, 312; other characters
undertaken by him, 313.
Walpole (Horace), denies Hogarth's
merits as a painter, 7 ; letter to
Mrs. Hogarth, 442 ; one of the
first to collect Hogarth's prints, 2 ;
portraits by Hogarth, 101.
Walpole (Sir Robert), at the perform
ance of the Beggar's Opera, 307.
Walpole family, picture by Hogarth,
99.
Walter (Peter), supposed original of
the Steward in the Breakfast
Scene of ' Marriage k la Mode,'
111.
' Wanstead Assembly,' 43, 94.
 Manor of, 96.
Warburton's (Bishop) praise of the
Analysis of Beauty, 77.
Ward (Dr. Joshua), 223 ; his famous
drop, 226.

Ware (Isaac), 180.
Watchmen, venality of, 378.
•Weidemann the flautist, 117.
Welch (Saunders), 382 ; praised by
Fielding, 382 ; friend of Johnson,
382 ; just ' and kind, therefore
popular, 385 ; public-house named
after him, 385 ; tried to persuade
Hogarth not to publish ' The Times,
Plate 1,'87.
Wellesley-Pole (William), afterwards
Earl of Mornington, 97.
West's (Benjamin) opinion of the
Analysis of Beauty, 78.
Whistler (James), his opinion that
Hogarth was the greatest English
painter that ever lived, 8.
White's Chocolate House, 124', 293;
fire at, 295; head-quarters of
gaming, 296.
Wilkes's attack upon Hogarth in the
Nor'h Briton, 86 ; his quarrel with
Hof/arth, 185; portrait by Hogarth,
88, 193.
WiUes (Lord Chief -Justice), 217.
Woffington (Peg), portrait by Hogarth,
338.
Young's Centaur not Fabulous,
199..

Printed by T. and A. Constablk, Printers to His Majesty
at the Edinburgh University Press

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08867 2614

'-',',"

.i>^ V > '^S^W