The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-18 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 18, 1850.

Noble Lord—(Hear, hear)—yet he had told the House
of pensions and superannuations to officers that could net
be removed; and that was but a fraction of the expendi-
ture which the Noble Lord shadowed out. He offered to
Ireland the gracious boon of an annual visit from a be-
loved Sovereign, but he reminded the House that there
must necessarily be an annual vote in addition to the
civil list. [Lord J. RUSSELL—" Not an annual visit, nor
an annual vote."] [Oh then, already the visit was not an-
nual." [Lord J. RUSSELL—" I did not say it was to be an-
nual."] He had no intention to misrepresent the Noble
Lord, but several gentlemen had so understood him. But
an occasional visit, perhaps sudden, perhaps delayed, would
be more expensive than an annual one, regularly pre-
pared for. It might be assumed that the whole expen-
diture of the office of the Secretary of State for Ireland
would be an additional expenditure; was it justifiable in
our present domestic state? Let those well consider it
who represented the ruined middle class, whether they
lived in those bold towns of the north that two or three
years ago were to rule England—(" Hear, hear," from
the Opposition benches)—or in those forlorn counties
which they (the Opposition) represented.—(Hear.) Mr.
Disraeli continued :—I am not aware, from anything
which has happened to-day, that our external circum-
stances are such as to justify increased expenditure.—
(Hear.) I should say, as far as one can form an opinion,
that we should treasure up all that we have ; rather
curtail our domestic expenditure, rather prepare for
coming storms, rather await the hour when increased ex-
penditure may be a necessity, but a necessity to maintain
our national honour and our national safety.—(Hear.)
Whether I look at our position at home or abroad, I
cannot justify to myself a vote that will greatly increase
the public expenditure of the country.—(Hear.) What
will the Committee on Salaries say to this ? Does
the Noble Lord mean to refer the fourth Secretary of
State to it? Perhaps he thinks from experience that it is
a safe tribunal; but " the galled jade may wince,"—even
the patience of a Parliamentary Committee, managed
by a Minister, may he exhausted in a moment of do-
mestic disaster and foreign peril.—(Hear, hear.) But
I know it is almost presumptuous on our part to make
these observations. I know it is impossible to induce
this House by a vote to sanction the disapprobation which
even they probably feel. We cannot endanger the exist-
ence of the present Government. That isisnpossible;
we know it. We have numbers in this House not
contemptible ; we have a party in the country, I believe
tolerably numerous ; but "we have no
practical men
among us," and we feel it. Give us practical men, and
we could govern the country. Give us a Chancellor of
the Exchequer who would break down four times before
Easter in his budget, and we might form an Adminis-
tration—(Laughter)—give us a " practical man" like
that, and even the defunct Tory party might subsist.
—(Laughter.) Give us a " practical Secretary for
the Colonies, that finds only three insurrections in her
Majesty's dominions at the same time; with such a
" practical" Secretary of State we could do wonders.—
(Renewed laughter.) But, above all, give us " a prac-
tical man" for our Secretary for Foreign Affairs ; let
him deprive our Sovereign of all her allies—(Loud cries
of " Hear, hear")—with such " a practical man" we
might form a Ministry.—(Laughter and much cheering.)
Mr. HUME considered that the Hon. Member bad
not formed a corect impressson of the Bill. The House
ought to be jealous of any appointment of a new depart-
ment, but the Hon. Member forgot there was a Secre-
tary for Ireland with a large establishment, which the
Bill would materially lessen, and the only difference was,
that the new Secretary would, with great propriety,
have a seat in the Cabinet. If Ireland became in course
of time as quiet as Scotland, her affairs might be ma-
naged by the Secretary for the Home Department.
The great object he had in view when he desired the
abolition of the Viceroyalty was, that Ireland should
be better managed, and that justice should proceed di-
rect from the centre instead of being governed by a sort
of indirect colonial authority. He thanked the Noble
Lord for having introduced a measure which was a step
towards redressing the grievances of Ireland, but he
trusted all the institutions under which England bad
become so prosperous would be extended to that un-
fortunate country also. Since he first sat in the House,
one of the first objects to which he had directed his
attention was the state of Ireland ; and he had never
failed to urge her condition and to advise prac
tical measures of relief.—(Hear, hear.) He was sorry
that the great injustice which was at the bottom of all
her evils was not removed. Till the dominancy of the
Established Church, which had created two hostile
classes in Ireland, had been put down justice would not
bo done. The Castle of Dublin had been the means of
encouraging discOrd and faction. He had often said, if
he was an Irishman he would be a rebel.—(Laughter.)
Certainly he would have never ceased in his endeavours
to remove her oppressions. The unfortunate state of
Ireland for the last 50 years had been caused by the
administration of which Dublin Castle was the centre,
and he hailed this measure as the first step to remove a
focus of faction, which, by promoting discord, had so
long prevented the prosperity of the country.—(Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER cer-
tainly did not wish to follow the Hon. Member for Buck-
inghamshire into the very wide topics he had broached,
tor if the House came to a general discussion on Irish
questions they would not come to that practical con-
elusion to which his Noble Friend had invited them,
of allowing the Bill to be introduced, so that it might
be printed, and sending it to circulate in Ireland, that
parties there might see its provisions, with which it
was desirable to acquaint them as speedily as pos-
sible. He rose merely for the purpose of correcting any
impression which the speech of the Hon. Member (Mr.
Disraeli) might have made as to the expense of the
proposal—which had not been in any way introduced
by his Noble Friend on the ground of economy, but in
the belief that it would tend to the good government of
Ireland. The lively imagination of the Honourable
Gentleman, which they all so much admired, had how-
ever led him into the strangest notions on the subject of
economy, for, if he had paid the slightest attention to
the estimates on the table, he would have seen that the
result of the measure must tend to a great saving of money
as well as to a great improvement in adminstration. The
honourable Gentlemaa's position was, that the sustitu-
don of a Chief Secretary's office for that of Lord-Lien-
tenant would cost 100,0001. ; but in that assertion his
imagination had soared beyond the limits within which
he usually confined it. He (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) believed there would not be much difference
between the expenses of the Secretary for the Colonies
or of the Home Secretary, and those of the new Secre-
tary for Ireland. Now, the expenses of the Home Secre-
tary's office were in round numbers 26,000/., while the
cost of the Colonial Secretary's office, including postage,
which amounted to a considerable sum, was 37,000/.
per annum. The expenses of the office of Lord-Lieute-
nant and of the present establishment were—salary of
Lord-Lieutenant, 20,000/. per annum; salaries of house-
hold, 6,0001.; expenses of Irish-office, 22,5001.; in all,
48,500/. a year, not to speak of many incidental ex-
penses. So that even if the new office cost as much as
that of the Colonial Secretary there would be a saving
of 10,0001. a year; while if, as he believed, it would not
exceed the expenses of the Home Secretaryship, they
would effect a saving of 112,500/.—(Flear, hear.) He
hoped that, as the question bad now been fully and
fairly discussed, leave would be given to his Noble
iace'and
the people of Ireland
Friend to introduce the Bill.
Mr. LAWLESS denied that the question had been
folly discussed at all. Neither the Right Hon. Baronet
the Member for Tamworth nor the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr.
Gt ot
aucl
hb
eu
dr n)
the was
utmost
to their opinions on this
question. He moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL believed that though the
in his
sp
importance
Irish Members in favour of the Bill might not be in the
a
majority in the House, they had the immense mass of
their fellow-countrymen with them. The Hon. -&lena-
ber for Buckingham had assailed the measure for the
abolition of the office of Lord-Lieutenant, but it would
be seen, by a reference to Hansard, that in 1844 he
called the Irish Administration " the worst Executive in
the world." He had always thought that the existence
of such an office as that of Lord-Lieutenant brought
great blame upon the adminstration of affairs in Ireland,
and he thought that that blame had often been greatly
aggravated by the semi-diplomatic character which that
administration was made to bear. He conceived that
the true principle for the government of Ireland was to
proceed according to the mode of government estab-
lished for Great Britain. It had been justly observed
by the lion. Member for Buckinghamshire, on a former
occasion, that in modern times any civil system whiCh
would not bear discussion was doomed. Now, adopting
that opinion,
• • he came to the conclusion that the Lord-
Lieutenancy of Ireland was doomed.
Colonel SIBTHORP said this was another job. The
change, instead of lessening, would increase expense.
It was another measure of dangerous reform, and he
should therefore cordially support the Hon. Member for
Meath; further, he felt convinced that the visits of the
Queen to Ireland under the present system would be
more advantageous than under the proposed plan.
Colonel DUNNE observed that in the Speech from
the Throne at the opening of the session there was no
reference to this measure, which he thought extraordi-
nary. He could not help also observing that the Noble
Lord in his speech had abandoned the argument of
economy. The motion for the adjournment of the de-
bate he thought ought to be agreed to, in order to give
every Irish Member an opportunity of being heard.
The House then divided, when there appeared—

For the adjournment. ................. :.• 19
Against it ..................... ........ ..• 213
Majority against the adjournment
_194
Mr. M. O'CONNELL thereupon moved that the House
do now adjourn.
party to factious
The(nOs 'wGeOulntMdeArsNtooMd)Atlr
vote
aftlitll,liionuftuhtehhwtteeruho
wasten d pre-
paredo si
escould not support the present. motion.
uel3sldi placell, 41
t
owpipthoosiutti
ovnottion voting,
the introduction
hHtouin .
under Friend
the would
necessitywithdraw
of
retiringt , r else
onfotthbies
Eta
Mr. M. O'CONNELL reminded the House that there
were several gentlemen whose opinions were valued in
Ireland who had not yet had an opportunity of delivering
them.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the opinion of the House
had been very clearly expressed against the adjournment.
be
e wo ul
d
His object in proposing that the Bill should be brought
to• night was that the Bill might go to Ireland in a
printed shape, that time might be had for its considera-
tion, and then that the House should come to the dis-
cussion of the Bill on the second reading, c
g, after opportu-
nity had been given to the constituents of lion. Members
to express their opinions upon it. But if Hon. Gentle-
men persisted in their motions for adjournment he (Lord
J. Russell) should not lose the opportunity which those
Hon. Gentlemen, he thought, gave him of showing the
nature of the opposition which was offered to the intro-
duction of the Bill.—(flear, hear.) The people of Ire-
land would see that if a very considerable time were not
given them before the second reading was moved for con-
sidering the details of the Bill, it was not the fault of
the Government, but of those non. Members.—(Hear,
hear.) With this declaration he would not object to the
Adjournment 9( the House; but if Ho. Gentlemen

moved the adjournment he (Lord J. Russell) would close
with that motion, and would accept it.—(Hear.)
Colonel DUNNE denied that the Noble Lord had any
right to charge the Irish Members with offering a fac-
tious opposition to the Bill. lie had not given them
time to consider the measure and express their senti-
ments upon it. The custom was, when organic changes
were to be proposed, to give notice of them in the
Queen's Speech. The details of the Bill were wholly
indifferent to the Irish people. The question with them
was not whether a fourth Secretary of State or any other
officer was to be appointed, but whether the Lord-Lieu-

tenancy was to be taken away from them. The Bill had
been brought in by surprise—(A laugh)—and the mode
in which the Noble Lord now proceeded had more the
appearance of an order or mandate from a despot than
anything else.

After -a
few words from Mr. REYNOLDS in support of
the motion, and Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL against it,
Lord NAAS put it to Hon. Members opposite whether
the course they were pursuing was either creditable to
themselves or likely to be beneficial to the public.—
(Hear, hear.) He had intended to express his opinions
to-night ; but, being anxious that the Bill should go
to Ireland and be discussed during the Whitsuntide
holidays, he should reserve what be bad to say
respecting the Bill until the second reading.—(Hear,
hear.) The motion for leave to bring in a Bill was
never refused, except under very extraordinary circum-
stanoes.—(Hear.) It had been said that this Bill had
been brought in by surprise, but the House would re-
member that almost before Easter. [Several Hon.
Members—" Before Easter."]—yes, before Easter, the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government gave notice
of his intention to bring in a Bill providing not only for
the abolition of the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland, but
also for the appointment of a fourth Secretary of State.
—(Hear.) He had heard that proposal very much dis-
cussed in Ireland during the Easter recess, and it was
therefore hardly fair to say that sufficient notice had not
been given of the intention of the Government to pro-
pose this measure.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. TAYLOR was also anxious to address the House
on the introduction of this Bill, and he should vote against
the introduction of the Bill. But he could not support
the motion for adjournment.
After a few words from Mr. LAWLESS,
Mr. M. O'CONNELL consented to withdraw his
motion.

The House then di►ided on th• motion that lea►e be
gi►en to bring in the Bill, when the numbers were—
For the motion ... 170
Against it ... ... 17
Majority —153
Lea►e was accordingly gi►en to bring in the Bill.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.

On the motion that the House go into Committee of
Supply,
➢ir. HUME objected to their doing so at that late
hour (one o'clock).
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped the House would not ob-
ject to going into Committee merely for the purpose of
taking such votes as the exigencies of public business
required.
Sir L. O'BRIEN boped the Noble Lord would perse-
vere in going on with the public business, were it only
out of consideration fur those gentlemen who came from
a long distance, and who otherwise would be detained
in town in consequence of the session being protracted
until the summer was nearly over.
Mr. HUME would always object to voting money
after twelve o'clock.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was very desirable that a few votes should be taken that
night, to enable them to carry on the public service.
Colonel SIBTHORP would support the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose. Many things in the estimates re-
quired to be strictly looked after, and, among others, he
wished for some information about the sum expended
on royal palaces. He read in the Times—a paper which
he much respected, though differing from it in many
matters—that they should be satisfied with the statement
given in a return, that no more than 22,000/. had been
expended last year oa the palaces. Was, that, however,
a true return? B• believed it was not.—(Hear, bear.)
It was, no doubt, the sum expended in virtue of the
votes of that House; but there had been -a large sum ex-
pended besides,—viz., the amount supplied by the Woods
and Forests. This was not included; and therefore he
denounced it as an underhand proceeding.
The House then went into Committee, when the fol-
lowing votes were agreed to:-36,0001. (on account) for
charges for civil contingencies; 50,000/. (on account)
towards defraying the expenses of stationery, printing,
Sce., and 50,0001. (on account) towards defraying the
charges for works in the builing of the two Houses of
Parliament.

Mr. OSBORNE asked in what manner the latter sum
was to be applied?

The CIi.A.NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. said
that certain charges were outstanding which it was de-
sirable should be paid forthwith. Ho ' had not the
slightest wish to avoid a discussion on the subject, but
he hoped the Hon. Gentleman would put off the motion
of which he had given notice relating to it till Friday
next, when he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
should be glad that the discussion should take place, as
much misapprehension at present prevailed respecting
this matter.

The House then resumed.
BRITISH NAVAL FORCE AT GREECE.

Mr. COBDEN moved for a return of the British naval
force in the Bay of Salamis and the other waters of
Greece on the Ist day of March, Ist day of April, and
Ist day of May, giving the names of the vessels, with
the numbers of their crews and their complement of
guns. As the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs had told the House that the affairs with Greece
were finished, and that the British fleet had been dis-
persed, he (Mr. Cobden) could not see why the First
Lord of the Admiralty should make any objection to
granting this return. It was a fair argument, on a ques-
tion of economy, to inquire what was the amount of force
which had been put in requisition to settle that really
trifling and contemptible dispute.
Sir F. BARING said he had already stated to the
Hon. Gentleman privately what he must state to the
House if the Hon. Gentleman persisted in his motion--
that, consistently with his duty to the public service, he
could not give the information which the Hon. Gentle-
man required. It was one of the questions hardly agree-
able to discuss in that House, and ho must take upon
himself the responsibility he hadi never yet heard re-
fused to a public servant, to state that he did not think
it consistent with the public service, and for other grave
reasons, to give the information of the amount of force
on a particular station at so late a period as was now
moved for.

Mr. BRIGHT said the Right Hon. Gentleman was
making a great deal of a very little. The House had a
right to know on this occasion where the ships were,
what they were doing, and their number. It was be-
cause the House was allowed to know so little upon these
matters connected with the foreig❑ policy of the country,
which were managed by some hocus pocus at the Horse
Guards, that the country was sometimes on the verge of
great difficulties.
Mr. HUME could not understand why the informa-
tion should be refused.
Mr. COBDEN wanted the return as the record of a
fact which had no reference to our relations with France,
but to show what amount of force in these days diplo-
macy brought to bear to collect 70,000/. or 80,000/. It
was of no use, however, to divide the House, as he be-
lieved there was a majority on the Treasury bench.
The motion was then rejected without a division.
Mr. HAYTER brought in the Lord-Lieutenant (Ire-
land) Bill, which was read a first time and ordered to be
printed.
The House then adjourned, at Two o'clock.

THE ROYAL ACADEMY.
(SECOND NOTICE.)

Another visit to the galleries appropriated to the
Members and Associates of the Royal Academy, with
the-rest of the miscellaneous exhibitors, has enabled
us to afford that attention to many of the productions
not yet noticed by ourselves, which was impracticable
on a first attendance and on its first commemoration.
Several of the more remarkable paintings in the pre-
sent collection are from the hands of the younger
competitors for popularity. Our previous allusions,
therefore, having been almost exclusively directed to
the works emanating from artists of matured reputa-
tion, several of the most striking pictures of the pre-
sent season have remained unnoticed. Hence we are
the more solicitous to revert to a subject for the due
estimation of which one inspection 'would be
as inadequate as a single criticism would
be for the purposes of a correct and
judicious discrimination. How it has occurred that
the more celebrated among the exhibitors are far from
being the most successful is very easy of explanation.
A variety of circumstances have this year conspired
to abstract materially from the energetic endeavours,
and consequently from the customary triumphs, of
the principal Academicians. Several of these circum-
stances we have already enumerated. One of the
most brilliant amongst the number of the Royal Aca-
demicians
has, as we have already intimated, been re-
moved by death. Another has permitted his genius
to assume more than ever a garb of extravagant ec-
centricities. And the demise of Mr. Etty appears to
be not more lamentably irreparable than the extinction
of Mr. Turner's common sense and the abdication of his
sober judgment before the usurping influence of a
diseased and prurient imagination. Vainly, more-
over, do we look for these inimitable bijoux of art in
the composition of which Mr. Mulready seems to have
allied the humorous exactitude of the Dutch school
with the gorgeous colouring of the Venetian ; or for
those masterly embodiments of the poetry of Revela-
tion is the execution of which Mr. Herbert combines
a sympathy at once for the primitive and classic
hardness of Masaccio and Cimabue, and for the
emotional force and elevated sentiment of Da
Vinci and Fra Bartolomeo. Other occupations,
occupations of a more national character, have
in this manner led to the impoverishment of the
walls of the exhibition. In the labours, again, of
Edwin Landseer and. of Daniel Maclise, we find
additional cause for disappointment the former
scarcely compensating by his two small pictures for
the mal-success :of his large and crudely rendered
" Dialogue at Waterloo"; the latter hardly empower •
ing us to forgive his temporary withdrawal from the
loftier regions of artistic emulation by his surprisingly
ingenious realisation of a scene from the " Vicar of
Wakefield." Other evidences of indifferent success
on the part of the Royal Academicians themselves
have been already particularised. In our present
recurrence to the exhibition we shall endeavour to
enumerate some of the more prominent works in the
collection not yet specified.
Foremost among all the pictures in the gallery, to
our thinking, in point of genius, is the grand picture
of " Aholibah" (486), by E. Armitage. In concep-
tion as well as in execution, in colouring as well as in
sentiment, the painting is complete and characteristic.
It is altogether real in conveying to us a sense of an-
tiquity. In every detail it speaks of the east. In
every line and tint it breathes the warmth and the
langour of voluptuousness. The artist has taxed his
ability to the very uttermost to the production of a
work typical of the infamous but beautiful Aholibah,
the concubine in whose history Ezekiel dimly
and darkly prophesied the sins and the ex-
piations of Jerusalem. Nor can we think
with some who have made exceptions to the
composition, that its prevailing/ suggestions are those
of a disgusting sensuality—remembering that, with
the crimes of the sister of Aholla, we associate their
terrible and tremendous punishment ; the Deity
crying aloud to her, towards the close of his
anathemas, "And thou shalt be filled with drunken-
ness and sorrow, with the cup of grief and sadness,
with the cup of thy sister Samaria." The picture is
altogether an extraordinary indication of the genius
of Mr. Armitage. Among the associates several
have this season achieved great things, their
works tending inevitably to the enhancement
of their reputation. Of these perhaps the most
remarkable is the representation of " The messenger
announcing to Job the irruption of the Sabeans "
(389), by P. F. Poole. The mere selection of this
sublime incident from the most sublime poem ever
penned is characteristic of the artist. It explains at
once the sense of his own innate power for the re-
presentation of the tragic, the confidence felt by him
in his capacities, and the height and the amplitude of
his ambition. The effect of the whole picture is
sombre and appalling—the interior of the dwelling
being shaded with those ghastly hues of green
and yellow for which Mr. Poole invariably
betrays such an evident partiality. The first
messenger is announcing the irruption of the Sa-
beans, and lo I while he is yet speaking, there comes
also another. An awful and premonitory dread of
the four calamities, the destruction of his herds, and
of his flocks, and of his camels, and of his offspring,
appears to have already descended upon the head of
the patriarch. His whole aspect is that of horror ;
and the suddenness of the announcement is indicated
most adroitly by the serving boy in the foreground (a
figure wonderfully painted), who is pouring wine
from a atone jar into a flagon. Even through the
first emotion of dismay depicted upon the countenance
of Job we can yet recognize the dawn of that
majestic resignation which is intimated in his affect-
ing history—" Then Job rose up and rent his gar •
meats, and having shaven his head fell down upon the
ground and worshipped, and said, Naked came I out
of my mother's womb and naked shall I return thi-
ther; the Lord gave and the Lord hath taken away;
as it bath pleased the Lord so it is done ; blessed be
the name of the Lord." Without being of a kind
calculated to acquire so large a popularity as his great
picture of " Solomon Eagle," this noble painting of
the messengers appearing to Job will nop fail to raise
Mr. Poole's high repute still higher in the estima-
tion of all judicious and discerning critics. Like
most of his previous productions, the composition of
the picture appears to be somewhat too scattered ;
yet, in spite of this blemish, and of Mr. Poole's mo-
notonous mannerism as a colourist, the work under
consideration is one worthy of his strong and earnest
genius. For the large promise afforded by his con-
tributions to the present collection F. R. Pickersgill
deserves an early and, in many respects, a most eulo-
gistic notice, two of his productions being in their
respective departments eminently meritorious one
scriptural, the other mythological. The former,
" Sampson Betrayed" (16), one of the largest
works in the gallery, portrays the deception
of Dalilah with great power, and with
a sort of breathless animation. The group of females
in the right-hand corner, though scarcely connected
in any way with the occurrence depicted, is perhaps
the most felicitous part of the composition. The
other production alluded to, " Pluto carrying away
Proserpine" (264), is altogether a most exquisite de-
lineation of the rape of Ceres' daughter. The golden
chariot thundering across the meadows of Enna, the
night-black steeds of Pluto, the tawny form of that
divinity himself contrasted with the lovely fairness of
Persephone, the panic of the attendant virgins, the
half-repellant, half-supplicatory attitude of Cyane are
all rendered with exceeding beauty of shape, contrast,
and colouring. The abruptness of the abduction-
roganda non rapienda fait—is indicated most felici-
tously by the dropping of the flowers over the chariot
of Dis. Mr. Pickersgill in this one effusion alone
has revealed powers such as fill us in his regard with
a multitude of brilliant anticipations. AlaY
those
anticipations be duly realised. Another associate,
almost unapproached as an illustrator of mythology, "
_
W. E. Frost, contributes two exquisite works_of_
character to the exhibition. One suggested by a
passage in Milton's Penserose, portrays An-
dromeda" (304), surrounded by the sea nymphs and
prior to the approach of the sea monster. The
other, a more elaborate composition
as the story is told in depicts the
" Disarming of Cupid (15),
the last of the sonnets of Sha ks ere Without being
blind to the numerous beauties
t and merits the last-
mentioned production, we must acknowledge ge our
preference for the smaller of Mr. Frost's present con.
tributions, "Andromeda," displaying, as it does, in
the happiest manner, the more agreeable character-
istics of his genius. A recollection of his previous
achievements alone precludes us from saying that Mr.
Frost has surpassed even himself this season. Yet
with a remembrance of his " Una," of his " Syrens,"
and of bis " Sabrina," we may say that he has at the
least fully sustained his reputation. Mr. Cope's scene
from " King Lear" (39) cannot fail to attract atten-
tion, although we are far tfrom thinking it a work
worthy of an artist so highly distinguished. "Cross-
ing the Brook" (395), a title already, if we recollect
rightly, imortalized by one of the masterpieces of
Turner, has been selected this year as the name of
one of the most charming landscapes ever painted by
J. Linnell. The picture at once arrests no-
tice and extorts admiration. It is a pro-
duction worthy of a countryman of Gainsborough.
A large painting, by T. Cross, represents " The
Burial of the two Sons of Edward IV. in the Tower,
1483," and although abounding in a variety of ex-
pression, all tending to emphasise that dismal event
in our nation's history, it will scarcely be regarded as
satisfactory by those who had their hopes inspired by
the picture of the death of the Lion-hearted Richear
vedr•
One of the most painful productions we have
gazed upon is that by J. E. Millais (518), inivhich,
• h
taking the suggestion from Zecharia
n the shop of
, th
e artist has
represented the youthful Saviour i
Joseph the carpenter. The expression portrayed
is to the
on the face of the Virgin Mother
Sundry grotesque and hu-
, last degree agonizing. were partici',
morons contributions to the gallery
larised in our previous notice or the Royal Academy.
One other we must refeir,sto
,fioTortohelpruurtPhofuser of c0n-
,(525)
damning it—A. Solomon's

being in our estimation too gross to be pleasant.
Another repulsive picture, though repulsive for a very
different reason, is that of "Beatrice Cenci," seeking
protection from the Count, her father. W. Maddox,
the artist, could scarcely have chosen a subject more
unutterably loathsome. From such productions
it is truly delightful to turn to such themes
of beauty and innocence as that embodied
on canvass by R. Tait (538) ; or to the realisation of
Alfred Tennyson's dream of the " Mermaids," by J.
G. Neigh (191) ; or to Frank Stone's sketch (135) of
the same poet'sjilovely creation, " The Gardener's
.Daughter." Smaller effusions of this same character,
illustrating the latest ideas conjured up by the mind
of genius, find their place in the collection. Instance
this " Little Emily" 4341), by Miss Clara Cause, and
the " News of Battle" (490), by T. J. Barker, the
first from Dickens's "David Copperfield," the second
from Aytoun's "Lays of the Scottish Cavaliers." R.
Redgrave, though, as ever, eminently successful, is
scarcely equal to himself in his picture of " Griselda,
dressed by the Court Ladies in her bridal clothes, in
her father's cottage" (233), the subject being scarcely
in his peculiar department. Curiously enough,
there is another embellishment of the same
poem, by another Associate, " Griselde " being this
time represented (312) as setting down her water-
pot on the threshold, and A. Elmore being the illus-
trator. Mr. Elmore has a less pretentious contribu-
tion, more to our liking (525), " The Queen of the
Day," suggested by the "Decameron." It breathes
the very spirit of Boccaccio. Much might be said,
very much in commendation of several of tbe por-
traits scattered through the principal apartment, the
collection for this season in that department of art
being unusually fruitful, and here and there pecu-
liarly meritorious. Notwithstanding the amusement
derived from Mr. Grant's portrait of the " Duke of
Devonshire" (73), the picture in its present effect is
most agreeable, and the likeness of his Grace deci-
dedly felicitous. The portrait of Mr. Brotherton, by
P. Westcott (60), presents all, but the identity of
the Hon. Member for Salford ; that of Sir Charles
Trevelyan (86), by E. U. Eddie, is characterised by
much intellectual force of expression, and that of
Viscount Hardinge (188) by a most admirable
truthfulness. Two other portraits, large and full-
length, are deserving of particular attention,
representing as they do men eminently distin-
guished as citizens of the British metropolis.
Mr. Knight, the Royal Academician, has
.de-
picted " Sir James Duke, Bart., M.P., late Lad
Mayor of the City of London" (182), and the por-
trait would doubtless have been more deserving of
commendation had a less scrupulous and engrossing
regard been paid to the depicting the official robes '
worn by him on the opening of the Coal Ex-
change. The other portrait (240) of a distinguished
citizen is from the hand of Mr. Biagstocke, a
meritorious and very promising artist, and
represents the "Portrait of James Harmer, Esq., of
Ingress Abbey, Kent : painted at tke request
of his numerous friends." In all essential
respects this noble picture is perhaps the
finest portrait in the gallery. Those who ate
qualified to express an opinion must pro-
nounce the likeness to be wonderfully successful, and
the manner in which the various accessories are in-
troduced bespeaks the utmost good taste and
skill on the part of the artist. The dogs are
marvellously well painted, being in no way dis-
paraged in a room adorned by the brush of Landseer.
It may be observed, moreover, that in drawing
and in colour, the whole picture is admirable
for its correctness. The piece of plate in the back-
ground, a present to Mr. Harmer from his fellow-
citizens and friends, forms a sumptuous and appro-
priate decoration. How far appropriate may be seen
by a perusal of the inscription, which runs as fol-
lows :

PRESENTHD TO
JAMES HARMER, ESQ.,

With a Service of Plate, by numerous Citizens and
Friends, on his retirement from the office of Alderman
of London,—as a testimony of the high regard which
his estimable qualities, both public and private, have
acquired for him during a long and useful life, as ii
able, just, and merciful magistrate ; a kind, sincere,
and generous friend and neighbour ; a firm and dis-

interested patriot,—the foe of every abuse, and the

steady supporter of the rights of mankind.
Before passing on to the consideration of other por-
traits, it may be observed, as a significant and cha-
racteristic addition to this very masterly production,
that Mr. Harmer is represented as holding in his hand
some papers, inscribed " Amendment of the Criminal
Code, —a task in happy accordance with the marked
benevolence of his countenance, and truly indicative
of the pervading goodness of his heart.
Mr. Sant's Portrait of the " Duchess of Marl-
borough" (297) assumes a melancholy interest in con-
sequence of her Grace's recent departure. The full
length portrait of "H. H. H. the Duke d'Aumale"
(282), by V. Mottez, portrays the Prince in a strange
fantastic blue velvet hunting dress, that transforms
him into one of the gauntest figures imaginable. " M.
Guizot" (388), by F. R. Say, is the portrait of a great
man, as might be recognized by a glance at that gland
forehead and that thoughtful countenance. We say
this with a full appreciation of M. Guizot's genius,
but, at the same time, without one feeling of sym-
pathy with him as an European statesman. Although
so many productions have been particularised in our
present and in our previous notice of the Royal
Academy, many others, pencil-noted in our catalogue,
are still left unenumerated, and among these one or
two in the octagon apartment.