the bracket at the bottom of the design. In general appearance the plate is like scores of Chippendale plates of the period.
The interesting question of the probable engraver of the plate has arisen, and in a most readable article from the pen of Mr. R. C. Lichtenstein, in the “Curio,” on the Library of Washington, the following opinion is advanced: “It was his [Washington’s] habit as a general rule to write his name on the right-hand corner of the title-page and place inside his book-plate. It has been a matter of uncertainty as to whether that book-plate was engraved in England or in this country. Washington, like other Virginia gentlemen before the Revolution, was in the habit of ordering goods every year from London; but we have searched the various orders to his agents in London, and examined as far as practicable the items of his household expenses, without finding any such item. The strongest argument that can be said in its favor proving it to be American work is the poor heraldry displayed in its coat-of-arms, general make-up, and drawing. It will be noticed that the engraver has placed a wreath under the crown (an absolute heresy), and this, with the faulty drawing of the raven, makes the whole plate a very slovenly piece of work. No engraver with any knowledge of the fundamental laws of heraldry would be guilty of drawing such a coat-of-arms as this. The arms of Washington engraved on his seal and ring, undoubtedly cut in England, are correctly done. It seems more than probable, if the plate had been done in England that the engraver would not have been guilty of making such blunders. We have seen a great many English plates, but have never noticed one bearing these peculiarities. From its general appearance we should say that the plate was made in America somewhere between the years 1777 and 1781.”
Collectors are divided in their opinions upon this question, and although not ready to hazard a guess at the engraver, the present writer believes the plate was engraved in England, and would place the date nearly a decade earlier. As the friend of the Fairfax family, Washington might have had the plate made upon the occasion of their ordering work of the same kind from England, or, indeed, it might have been a gift to him from them, or from some admiring friend. As he was a methodical man, the fact that no entry of an expense for such an article is found in his records may lend color to the presentation theory. As to the errors in heraldry, there is a plate of one Richard Washington, which has all the peculiarities of this plate, and this is signed by Bickham, who was an English engraver of some note. He was a trifle early perhaps to have been the engraver of the George Washington plate, but he may have made the plate which served as a copy for it. But whether the plate was of domestic or foreign make, we know that the copper was in this country, and that impressions were made from it not so very many years ago. The late Mr. Mauran of Newport knew the man who owned this, and it seems that having printed what he deemed a sufficient number of re-strikes from it, this man, fearing lest others would in time get it and make more prints, cut the copper into pieces and going out on a bridge over the Schuylkill River, threw them in! There they may be looked for by any who choose.
The counterfeit of this plate appeared in an auction sale of books, in the city of Washington, about the year 1863. The late Dr. W. F. Poole with Dr. J. M. Toner was present at the sale. The plate was placed in these books for the purpose of getting a higher price for them than could