I wish I could throw light for you on the verb "maroufler," and should like to know what subterranean connection there is, or can be, between it and the word "maroufle" which is, as you say, being interpreted, a "rascal."
At all events, when the moment comes for the operation, I must endeavour to obtain information from France, where the process is in very frequent use.
February 27, 1895.
A contretemps has occurred of which I think I ought to inform you, as it relates to the very interesting subject of grounds and pigments.
Robersons, when they came to roll up my fresco to transport it to the Exchange, found that either the ground or the pigment—probably both, as they are of the same substance—was extremely brittle and cracked right across, cracking at a rather abrupt tangent from the circumference of the circle; so that they immediately struck work, and declined to go any further.
As far as the painting itself is concerned, I do not believe that any serious damage is done, because on re-straining it flat, the cracks are barely perceptible, and probably would not be at all perceptible in situ.
Meanwhile, if any question arises as to the ground, it has occurred to me, and it is on this point I wish to consult you, that the cause may be the substitution of paraffin wax for the ordinary wax hitherto used in Gambier Parry's material, which, though perhaps not absolutely so durable as paraffin, is sufficiently so, and very malleable. One does not see what else could have cracked in that abrupt and sharp manner—certainly not the copal, which has oil in it and is further made supple by the oil of spike. If it turned out that the paraffin was the peccant element, I should be, entre nous, rather glad, because it diminished the facility of the work.
With reference to the cracking of this work Professor Church writes:—