[34] He bought up great quantities of the copies of his works; and they still remain in possession of his widow. The "Harlot's" and the "Rake's" Progress, in a smaller size than the original, were published, with his permission, by Thomas Bakewell, a printseller, near the Horn Tavern, Fleet-street.
[35] Of the Harlot's Progress I have seen no less than eight piratical imitations.
[36] Lord Gardenston, one of the lords of session in Scotland, on delivering his opinion in the court of session upon the question of literary property, in the cause of Hinton and Donaldson and others, all booksellers, in July 1773 thus introduced the works of Hogarth: "There is nothing can be more similar than the work of engraving is to literary composition. I will illustrate this proposition by the works of Mr Hogarth, who, in my humble opinion, is the only true original artist which this age has produced in England. There is hardly any character of an excellent author, which is not justly applicable to his works. What composition, what variety, what sentiment, what fancy, invention, and humour, we discover in all his performances! In every one of them an entertaining history, a natural description of characters, and an excellent moral. I can read his works over and over, Horace's characteristic of excellency in writing, decies repetita placebit; and every time I peruse them, I discover new beauties, and feel fresh entertainment: can I say more in commendation of the literary compositions of a Butler or a Swift? There is great authority for this parallel; the legislature has considered the works of authors and engravers in the same light; they have granted the same protection to both; and it is remarkable, that the act of parliament for the protection of those who invent new engravings, or prints, is almost in the same words with the act for the protection and encouragement of literary compositions." This is taken from a 4to pamphlet, published in 1774 by James Boswell, esq. advocate, one of the counsel in the cause.
[37] "That Huggins penned the statute, I was told by Mr. Hogarth himself. The determination of Lord Hardwicke was thus occasioned. Jefferys, the printseller at the corner of St. Martin's Lane, had employed an artist to draw and engrave a print representing the British Herring Fishery; and, having paid him for it, took an assignment of the right to the property in it accruing to the artist by the act of parliament. The proprietors of one of the magazines pirated it in a similar size, and Jefferys brought his bill for an injunction, to which the defendants demurred: and, upon argument of the demurrer, the same was allowed, for the reason abovementioned, and the bill dismissed. Hogarth attended the hearing; and lamented to me that he had employed Huggins to draw the act, adding, that, when he first projected it, he hoped it would be such an encouragement to engraving and printselling, that printsellers would soon become as numerous as bakers' shops; which hope, notwithstanding the above check, does at this time seem to be pretty nearly gratified." For this note my readers are indebted to Sir John Hawkins.
[38] "What Caricatura is in painting," says Fielding, "Burlesque is in writing; and in the same manner the comic writer and painter correlate to each other. And here I shall observe, that as in the former the painter seems to have the advantage; so it is in the latter infinitely on the side of the writer: for the Monstrous is much easier to paint than describe, and the Ridiculous to describe than paint. And though perhaps this latter species doth not in either science so strongly affect and agitate the muscles as the other; yet it will be owned, I believe, that a more rational and useful pleasure arises to us from it."
[39] This idea originally occurred in Colley Cibber's Apology. From thence it was transplanted by Lloyd into his celebrated poem intituled The Actor. Lying thus in the way of Garrick, he took it up for the use of the prologue already quoted. Lastly, Mr. Sheridan, in his beautiful Monody, condescended to borrow it, only because it spared him the labour of unlocking the richer storehouse of his own imagination.
I may however remark that Cibber, when he suggested this mortifying reflection, had more reason on his side than some of his successors who have indulged themselves in the same dolorous strain of complaint. To whatever oblivion the celebrated actors of the last age have been resigned, the pencil of Hogarth, Dance, Zoffani, and Reynolds, had left Mr. Garrick not the slightest reason to be apprehensive that, in his own particular case, the art and the artist would alike be forgotten. Meanwhile, let our heroes of the stage be taught to moderate their anxiety for posthumous renown, by a recollection that their peculiar modes of excellence will, at least, be as well preserved to futurity as those of the lords Chatham and Mansfield, whose talents, perhaps, might support an equal claim to perpetuation.
[40] Dr. M. once observed to J. N. in a letter on this subject, "In the 13th chapter I was somewhat puzzled with the flat and round, or the concave and convex, appearing the reverse; till the sun happily shining in upon the cornice, I had a fair example of what he intended to express. The next chapter, with regard to colouring, did not go on quite so smooth; for, if I satisfied him, I was not satisfied myself with his peculiar principles; nor could I relish his laying the blame on the colourmen, &c."
[41] One exception to this remark occurs in the Gentleman's Magazine for 1754, p. 14; where the reviewer of the Analysis observes, that it is "a book written with that precision and perspicuity which can only result from a perfect knowledge of his subject in all its extent. His rules are illustrated by near two hundred figures, engraved by himself; the knowledge which it contains is universally useful, and as all terms of art are avoided, the language will be universally understood. The player and the dancing-master, whom others consider as patterns of just action and genteel deportment, are not less instructed than the statuary and the painter; nor is there any species of beauty or elegance that is not here investigated and analysed.
"A book, by which the author has discovered such superiority, could scarce fail of creating many enemies; those who admit his Analysis to be just, are disposed to deny that it is new. Though in the year 1745, having drawn a serpentine line on a painter's pallet, with these words under it, 'the line of beauty,' as a frontispiece to his prints, no Egyptian hieroglyphic ever produced greater variety of speculation; both painters and sculptors then came to enquire the meaning of a symbol, which they soon pretended to have been their old acquaintance; though the account they could give of its properties were scarce so satisfactory as that of a day-labourer, who constantly uses the lever, could give of that instrument, as a mechanical power. The work, however, will live when these cavils are forgotten; and except the originals, of which it is pretended to be a copy, are produced, there is no question but that the name of the author will descend to posterity with that honour which competitors only can wish to withhold."