ture? If it be not worth the student's pains to study this whole, how is it more worth them to copy the parts of a picture? It must, no doubt, be allowed, that, as some pictures possess great happiness of composition, but have little to recommend them in any single incident, there are also others, which, although brilliant and even enviable in particulars, do not exhibit the comprehensive intellect of a master in the composition. But are all the pictures which the patrons send to their gallery, unfortunately of this latter description? The patrons, not being professors, may very reasonably doubt, whether they are or not; but why should not the student, whose business it is to acquire knowledge in this respect, be left to his own choice, to copy that which he judges to be most useful?

The imitation of the works of her masters, by making companions, as they are termed, to certain specified pictures of the collection, may be dismissed as nugatory.

The sale of pictures is an act of charity,

to be extolled as such.

But, taking the whole of these advantages into view, and, for a moment, lay-, ing aside the highly honourable gratification derived from the sight of multitudes almost miraculously fed, let us enquire, "Can the production of works in the fine arts be forwarded by the same methods of encouragement as other manufactures? And, will the mere use of the palet, &c. and pencils make a painter?" If not, may it not be feared that the ready sale, so freely set on foot at the British Gallery, may be more likely to promote pictures than painting? And conceiving, as has been stated, that the real object in view is to promote the progress of painting towards the most elevated state of which it is capable, if the institution were to be regarded as having reached the extent of its plan proposed for that purpose, might one not, without hesitation, assert that it had proceeded on erroneous grounds; and may it not in our vulgar phrase, be said to have begun at the wrong end? For, does it not appear to presume the scientific foundations of painting and sculpture to be already adequately laid in the country, and that nothing is wanting but to excite diligence and dexterity by the offer of reward?

"Let rewards", it is said; "be sufficient, and the point is carried: patrons will make painters." It would be truly illiberal to ascribe these sentiments, if

they exist in the elevated patrons of the British Institution, to any improper consciousness of superior station, and they will be more fairly construed to indicate the voice of Hope. But, will the benevolent hopes of the patrons be in this instance realized? It is undeniable, that patronage will produce painters; but the question is, will the present patronage produce painters of the highest class? Will it not be discovered, in process of time, perhaps unfortunately at too late a moment, that the groundwork of science, so essentially requisite to excellence in the arduous pursuit, is wanting, and that it is in vam to solicit the dexterity of the hand, where there has been no previous adequate information of the mind?

But if there be any error in the statement just made, of the probable effects of the British Institution on painting or sculpture; if the hopes of a productive sale will really elicit genius, or what is the same thing, induce such a cultivation of intellect as to bring forth the fruits of genius, we have only to wish, that, taking into consideration the degraded state into which critics declare our poetry to be sunk, another British Institution may be opened for the promotion of that art also, and a sale offered for the productions of numerous bards, who are now filled with poetic fire, and whose conceptions are nevertheless in danger of being extinguished by neglect?

As a lover of every species of moral advancement, I would, in particular plead for the active prosecution of such a project in respect to a class of poetry, in which there are so many perversely pleasant sufferers-I mean the drama; of which (as before observed) all sound and staunch critics every day protest that our stage never bore so disgraceful records as in modern days. Will not some charita ble association call forth the sleeping genius of the drama, by conditions of sale, equally advantageous with those offered to the muse of painting? Then, if there be power in patronage, will the lost honours of our lyre and mask be restored, and England once more boast a Dryden and a Shakespeare.

"Absurd!" cries Draco-"Is it not sufficiently notorious that the emoluments to be gained by successful dramatists are actually large enough to satiate the most unconscionable of the irritable race? And yet, where are our Congreves, our Wy. cherleys, our Massingers, our Southernes, our Vanbrughs, and our Rowes?" This reflection is so obvious and glaring, that

it never fails to excite indignation in the mastiff critics of our theatrical prizes, who, unlike to the benevolent genius of the British Institution, employ their utmost endeavours to avert the public from the authors and the works of their own day; pitiable in their mischief, because unconscious, that while they strive, as vainly as basely, to rob the labourer of his hire, the inalice they diffuse may prove a poison to ingenuous effort, and prevent the maturity of that talent, whose absence they affect to deplore. But some other opportunity will serve for noticing the errors of critics: patrons are at present on the canvass.

It has been sarcastically remarked that, as the pamters can now gain ample remuneration for their labour at the British Gallery, nothing remains for them but to shew that the want of patronage was their onl deficiency, and to prove, by the immediate production of the most elevated works, that their abilities were at all times more ready than the occasion for exerting them.

Such a remark might naturally enough have been made by a journalist, whose winged destiny permits him to assign only so many ininutes to each successive subject, before the printer enters the room to convey his thoughts to the press: but to a less busy, or less rapid enquirer it is obvious, that many painters in England, before the establishment of the British Gallery, did indeed want victuals, who could not paint without them; and that, now that they can get food, they will paint. But, was food all that was wanting in them? Will the amplest maintenance at once inspire refined knowledge? And is eating the only thing requisite to rouse and elevate diligence to professional eminence?

So far then, the designs of the British Institution may be considered as imperfect, or, to speak more candidly, as immature; for, as experience is the great instructor, why should not a hope subsist, that the admirable perseverance, evinced in the prosecution of its plan, will finally lead to the best and greatest effects?

But it is time to proceed. If such an incompetent knowledge and estimation of painting subsists in the minds of the enlightened and superior classes of society, let us turn our attention for a moment to the vulgar judgment on the arts, and observe what a confused chaos is there the consequence of those higher erro-:

neous sources,

Is it absurd to say that, within the walls of the great city of London, there will scarcely be found more than one individual of a thousand, perhaps of ten thousand, who has the least solicitude concerning painting, sculpture, or feels the least concern whether they exist, or are annihilated in the country?

It is not designed to infer that, in this respect, the citizens of London are neg lectful of a known duty, but that they are unapprized of the existence of any duty, with regard to the cultivation of the arts. Did they feel their cultivation to be incumbent on them, the Enquirer is proud to think (as one advantaged by the friendship of many among them), there is not a city in the world that would more strenuously concur in promoting their advancement. But what reson can they have for supposing the fine arts to form a necessary object of public attention? The government of England scarcely takes notice of their existence, sets no example of their promotion; and the citizens of London, as they emulate, so they follow in this point the steps of government without a question. The citizens of London are too industriously provident for the welfare of future generations, too busily planning the increase and perpetuity of England's wealth, too hospitably attentive to the warmth and plenty of their generous boards, and too socially communicativo of the joyous moments of relaxation, to seek any further refinement of delight, or to feel any great earnestness to enquire whether any such exist. This sequacious disposition of the city of London, is discernible in the only instance, in which the state has afforded assistance to one of the arts of design, by the monuments which have been raised to the heroes fallen in the defence, or to the statesmen renowned in the service, of their country. The city consequently raises statues and monuments to heroes and statesmen; ask her why? She points to Westminster Abbey and St. Paul's.

The judgment of the vulgar without the walls of the city is next to be noticed. There the arts, painting, sculpture, are in the mouths of every one. The two first mentioned, indced, have engrossed to themselves the very name of the arts; and if you mean that those words should be understood in their more general sense, you find it necessary to explain yourself accordingly.

But, observe the difference of the judgment, that has arisen from the un

digested

digested opinions every where circulated respecting those two arts, when compared with that which is formed of others, included in the usual course of public education.

Poetry, it may be observed, is so well understood, that it's just degrees are readily ascertained, and appropriate praise is bestowed on every production of merit, that issues from the press. We know how to fix the just degree of Cowper, of Cumberland, of Rogers, of Walter Scott, and of Hayley; and although we do not boast an age surpas sing all other epochs of poetry, we should bear with indignation that every puny wit of France, or rhymer of Italy, was indisputably superior to the poets just mentioned.

In painting, precisely the reverse happens in all points. We declare that painting is now at the highest point of general advancement, to which it has ever arrived in England, (and I believe we declare it with truth); but if you are bold enough, dare to mention an individual living painter, who is to be compared with an accredited master of a foreign school! And, in sculpture, was not lately the supposed superiority of a modern artist of Venice-but a trace to retort on that subject. It is not the legitimate purpose of enquiry to stir up hostile sensations. Fortunately, the amiable genius of Canova preserved the honour of our University: with the candour and temperate judgment, which no less than his professional abilities, adorn the first sculptor of his country; he declined the splendid task proposed to him, and with it (if report be true) the additional offer of three hundred pounds per annum, annexed as a condition of his residing amongst us, contented with the patronage of his own powerful Mæcenas, Much has been said, and is daily said, in the general circles of conversation, of the great encouragement now-a-days given to the arts; and while the disposition of such as continue to speak in this manner, seems so favourably bent to believe and hope, they know not what, it may not be useless to them to inquire, of what kind is this encouragement? What has been stated in relation to the highest actual example of public patronage, will in a great measure answer the question. An institution, founded on the most generous intentions towards the arts, directs its laudable efforts to the patronage and remuneration of younger students, and of less aspiring, or less

affluent practitioners, who choose to enter the lists of the establishment. To such alone its benefits can be extended; for as to any great work of an artist of settled eminence, it hitherto appears to be a point wholly beyond the scope of the Institution: a cabinet picture, an enamel, or a flower-piece, is eagerly seized by some ready purchaser, while a Venus by Nollekens, or a Daniel in the Lions Den, by Northcote, may go to the gallery and return to their homes as freely, and with as little interruption, as the artists and the directors think fit.

Beyond this scene of limited patronage, in what form does encouragement appear? When West, now is father of the English school, announced the completion of his classic work, of the Death of Nelson, and when it was known that it might be seen at his house, inmense crouds of spectators instantly flocked thither, who thronged his painting-room, passages, door-ways, the very street in which his house is situated, in order to obtain a view of so interesting a public work. The crouds of visitants continued for many weeks: it seemed impossible to satiate a just and general curiosity, and the picture was at length removed to the engraver's.

Many, in this numerous assemblage. conceived, no doubt, that they wore shewing encouragement to the art and the artist, by their presence; and, as far as the tribute of politeness, and the attention of curiosity denote encouragement, they certainly were so; but is it not almost passing belief that, of all this extraordinary croud, no one individual should be found sufficiently wealthy, or sufficiently sensible of the merits by which he was attracted to the house, to become a candidate for the possession of a treasure capable of affording such extensive delight? Yet this, if report may be trusted, is the case even to the present moment; and a picture, the best record of one of the most deeply affecting, and most nationally important events which our history contains, would have been to this hour uncalled for, and would not have existed, if the professional ardour of the painter and the engraver bad been as inactive, as the public patronage of established merit in the fine

Macklin, indeed are over, and their example is vanished without bequeathing either stimulus or knowledge, to suc ceeding Mæcenases; yet Stothard, Fuseli, and after them an innumerable train of minor historic painters, have derived the greater part of their employment from sources of a similar kind The nobility of the land purchase the books, to which the engravings from their pictures are annexed, and are content to be their patrons at second hand.

Such, on the whole, is a sketch of the inadequate state of public knowledge, and public attention, with respect to the arts of painting and sculpture. That there is a growing expression of desire towards them, discoverable in a large part of the public, no one can reasonably doubt; but it is desire unmatured, unformed, unauthorized. We judge as yet but of their surface. Of their nature, their properties, their constitutional growth and progress, it may without scruple be asserted, that we are, in this country, ignorant; if not wholly, at least too much so, to hope for any summary accomplishment of their highest excel lences. The foundations of these must be laid in general, solid, regular, and permanent study. They are not superficial; they do not lie in the hand; they will never start out of ignorance. Their seeds are sown by the immediate hand of Providence; but their maturity is neither a gift nor an inspiration beyond the ordinary processes of nature.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

SIR,

Net vates only, but grammatici form the genus irritabile.

A

UTHORS in general are like the Archbishop in Gil Blas; they court criticism, but are displeased if it does not confer unqualified praise upon them.

Of this we had an instance in your last Number, (p. 141, &c.) in the letter of Mr. Grant. I had read the observations of the British Critic on his Latin Institutes, and had in consequence of that character purchased the book. Wishing for information on the subject of Latin Grammar, I did not object to the Author's adoption of materials from other writers. This was, in my opinion, a recommendation of the book.

Dissimilar must be the object of the critic. He is bound by his office to detect plagiarisms, whether they affect the authenticity of the writer or not. Hav