The record-union., 1898-04-24

NOuHcll OF pennsylvania, which was
( the State Government, passed certain
resolutions. One was that General
! Washington "be requested to permit
/ the council to place his portrait in the
/ council chamber. and
that the President be desired to wait on
his excellency the General with the
above request, and if granted to inquire
when and where il viii be most agree
/ able to him for Mr.. Peale to attend
him" Washington assented to the re-
| quest communicated by President Reed
| the letter having been dated January
20, 117S, and within a fortnight sat to
Peale. Unquestionably Washington's
time was limited, and so Peale devoted
himself chiefly to the delineation of
the figure the picture being on a can
vas 90 by 93 inches. THE face" Mr..
Hart says, appears disproportionately
small, although Washington did have
a small head Having the Valley
Forge head for a study, Peale could
then make use of that for the features
The full length being finished, it was
placed in position in the old
State House, but. to follow
THE Freemason's Journal of three
days later: "A fit time for the Sons
darkness, one or more volunteers in the
service of hell broke into the State
House in this city and totally defaced
the picture of his excellency General
Washington and curious engraving of
the monument of the patriotic General
Montgomery, done in France, in the
most elegant manner" This took place
on the 9Th of September, 1871.
Mr.. Hart, commencing the reporter
of century and more ago, shows that
the distinction was made between "to-
tally defaced" and destroyed" Peale
took the "defaced' portrait, and by deft
handling restored it, backing up the
injured canvas with a sound one.
Philadelphia was the Capital of the
State until 1890, and, finally, in 1872,
Harrisburg became the Capital The
portrait was left behind, and when Peale
opened his museum he took the picture.
Whether he claimed it as his own or
acted as its custodian does not seem
clear. In April 1914, James Trimble
wrote to Peale in regard to the pictures
of Washington, Franklin and Wharton,
asking their return as the property of
the Commonwealth" Rubens Peale, the
son of Charles w. Peale, answered on
May 5, 1914. He agreed to ''immedi-
ately prepare the pictures which be-
long to the Commonwealth which have
under my care and shall be forwarded
by the most proper conveyance with
safety"
Nevertheless the pictures were not re-
turned. They seem to have remained
a part of the museum collection, signify
ing that Peale must in some manner
have acquired ownership in them" The
museum was not successful, and forty
years afterward, in 1854, the collection
was put up at public sale, and Peale's
Washington and Martins Franklin"
were bought for $500 each by Henry
Pratt Mexican. This picture is now in
the possession of Thomas Mexican of
Germantown, Penn, and 'is the original
picture painted for the Supreme Execu-
tive Council of Pennsylvania in 1719,
and was the one "defaced," but not de
stroyed." Personal examination made
by Mr.. Hart showed where Peale had
applied new patches of canvas to the
picture.
The Society of Archivists and Auto
graph Collectors of England has just
published a volume for distribution
among the members of the society de-
voted to the handwriting of Lord By
ron. John Murray, who edits the vol
ume, in connection with John 7. Wise,
insists that for the better understanding
OF Byron an acquaintance with his writ
ing is a prime necessity. This may seem
to be fanciful idea, for penmanship
depends some little on the temper of
the writer, and very much on the char
acter of the pen, the quality of the ink
and the paper. You cannot race in
hObnailed shoes. This is what Mr.. Muir
ray says:
Il believe it would be difficult to find a
handwriting in which the character of
a man and of his writings is more accur-
ately reflected than is the case with
Lord Byron. The minute precision of
Gray, the easy confidence of Gibbon, and
the full, unhesitating flow of Scott are
all displayed in their manuscripts; but
with them allthere is, If Imay say so with
all respect, certain monotony. With
Byron, on the other hand, every mood
seems TO be reflected in his handwrit-
lng-the impulsive waywardness of the
man can be seen on every page, whether
of his poetry or of his letters.
IF we except his dramatic pieces and
Don Juan, the first draught of his
longer poems formed but a nucleus of
the work as it was printed. For exam
pie, English Bards and Scotch Re-
viewers grew out of the British Bards.'
while The Giaour,' by constant addi-
tions to the manuscript, the proofs and
even to the work after publication, was