A spacious Gothic gallery made an admirable theatre, and for scenery—there was an excellent substitute, in many a mouldering breadth of ancient tapestry, which represented in horrid guise the direful tale of Herod's Cruelty. By the hour announced for the theatrical début of these unfledged actors, the house overflowed. Though the circumstance is not recorded by either Boswell or Sir John Hawkins, a late celebrated moralist was one of the audience. To the beginning of the fifth act he stayed with more patience than could have been expected; at this time he exhibited evident marks of ennui and lassitude—yawned three times, and attempted to make his exit. The lady of the mansion cut off his retreat with, "'Pon honour, Doctor Johnson, you must not go! How can you think of leaving the theatre when my Dicky is in so interesting a situation?" "Madam," replied the sage, "with the plot of your play I was unacquainted, and have waited thus long in the hope that it would turn out a tragedy; I might then have seen how naturally little Dicky and his dramatic associates would have died! I now perceive that the author will neither introduce aconite nor a bare bodkin, and have no prospect of a pathetic termination but in Herod or some of his tapestry hang-dogs starting into life. Should these murderous ruffians once step upon the stage, all your pretty innocents will most assuredly be put to the sword!"

[228] In the third volume of this work, which was compiled from Hogarth's manuscripts, and published some time after the two which precede it, there is a catalogue of all his prints, and the editor has endeavoured to add a more perfect list of the numerous variations than has been hitherto given to the public.

[229] In a marginal leaf of the late Doctor Lort's Trusler, I found a piece of a newspaper with the following remarks (neither the date nor title of the paper were inserted): "Whether the late extraordinary sums paid for the works of Hogarth at Mr. Gulston's sale are to be regarded on the whole as proofs of our artist's merit, or of extravagance in our modern collectors, I shall not venture to determine; and yet the following statement of the rapid advance in the value of prints from this celebrated master may furnish notices to assist the judgment of your readers:—

"In 1780, Mr. Walpole obliged the world with a fourth volume of his Anecdotes of Painting in England. In this entertaining performance was comprised the first catalogue of Hogarth's pieces. I say the first, for every preceding enumeration of them was defective in the extreme. This was succeeded in 1781 by a publication from the ingenious and accurate Mr. Nichols, who considerably enlarged and amended the list made by his predecessor.

"In the same year, Mr. Bailley's collection, which would now be deemed an imperfect one, was sold at Christie's for £61, 10s. In 1782 it was resold, with some additions, at Barford's for £105.

"In 1785, the late Mr. Henderson of Covent Garden Theatre disposed of his collection, by far less complete than either of the foregoing, for £126.

"In 1786, Mr. Gulston's was sold piecemeal by Mr. Greenwood; and though the condition of all such articles in it, as real taste and common sense would style the most valuable, were very indifferent, the whole series is reported to have brought in upwards of £600.[230] At this auction, the plates now to be particularized were knocked down at the following rates, though taken altogether they were scarce worth the money paid for the cheapest of them:—

Two engravings on plate£4146
Three ditto3100
Small arms of the Duchess of Kendal400
Large ditto600
Arms of Lord Aylmer7100
Arms unknown, with women as terms6100
Two ditto1116
Impression from a tankard1000
Hogarth's shop-bill and another11150
Rape of the Lock; impression from a gold snuff-box
presented to Mr. Pope3300
Scene of Evening, without the girl4086

"Should the celebrity of the delightful mock heroic poem, or the rareness of an imperfect play tending to show that a complete design is not always to be hit at once even by a Hogarth, furnish some apology for the purchase of the two last articles, what excuse can be invented for the collectors who bought the preceding trash on terms so ridiculously high? Of all the trifling works of art, coats of arms must be reckoned the most contemptible. These early productions of our author on silver tea-tables, mugs, and waiters, have no sort of merit to recommend them, nor were ever meant to be impressed on paper (except as in momentary satisfaction to the engraver); for being there reversed, like the prayers of witches, they must be read backwards. Besides, what taste or genius can be manifested in the disposition of a cat's whiskers or a fox's tail; in the emblazonry of a black swan with two necks, or a blue boar with gilded tail? What abilities are requisite for the expansion of an old woman's furred cloak (very pompously denominated a mantle) at the back of a shield, or for inscribing some bright sentence or wretched pun (yclep'd a motto) in Gothic Latin on a ribbon fantastically waved? For the design in which nature and manners are displayed, no praise can be too exalted; but as for his heraldry,—his representation of birds and beasts that never had existence,—

"A dragon, and a finless fish,