Before Ainsworth’s Magazine was published, advertisements were put forth that I, George Cruikshank, was to be the illustrator thereof; and the Artist and the Author then held a consultation as to what tale or romance we were to commence with, and which I was to illustrate; and, well knowing the importance of having an attractive subject for the first number of a work, I then suggested to Mr. Ainsworth my idea of ‘The Miser’s Daughter’’ (the plot of which will be seen in my first letter to The Times upon this subject, and which I had originally intended to have had written by some literary friend, and published it in my ‘Omnibus’). This romance (as I expected), with my illustrations, did attract the public attention, and did to some extent make this magazine a success.
There was published in Ainsworth’s Magazine, No. 2, March 1842, a woodcut of a drawing made by me, at Mr. Ainsworth’s suggestion, of the Author and the Artist, seated ‘in council,’ or conversing together in his library. And surely this looks as if he then considered me something more than a mere illustrator of his magazine.
[Then follows a statement of the final break up of the friendly collaboration of these old colleagues, explaining the Artist’s grievances in connection with Windsor Castle—also contributed to Ainsworth’s Magazine—and the fatal ending of these long associations, when the Author, unaccountably disregarding Cruikshank’s joint interests, elected to sell his magazine to the publishers; this seems to have fairly disgusted the Artist.] Here is his indignant protest:—
So it really appears as if all this gentleman’s promises, like pie-crust, were made to be broken; and as, in this instance, also, there was not any written agreement, the arrangements which he had made, and the engagements he had entered into with me, when I agreed to work with him in his magazine, all broke down, and I, as it were, again ‘thrown overboard’ or ‘left in the lurch.’ And thus ended the second edition of this Author’s extraordinary conduct towards the Artist.
I will not go into the details of how I assisted this Author with head and hand work in these novels, but I did my best to design and suggest.
The foregoing statements will, I think, clearly explain why I have never, since that time (written 1872)—now some twenty-eight years back—given any more original ideas, suggestions, and characters for any other tales or romances for Mr. Ainsworth to write up to; and also why I have never, from that time, illustrated any of this Author’s writings.
I now feel it necessary to inform the public that the usual or ordinary way of producing illustrated novels or romances is, for an Author either to write out, from his own ideas, the whole of the tale, or in parts; the manuscript or letterpress of which is then handed to an Artist to read and select subjects from for his illustrations, or sometimes for the Author to suggest to the Artist such subjects, scenes, or parts as he might wish to be illustrated. And I, being known generally only as an Artist, or illustrator, it would therefore very naturally be supposed that, in all cases, I have merely worked out other men’s ideas. But, if I have the opportunity, I shall be able to show that other men have sometimes worked out my ideas—but this will be for another occasion. And I will now explain that Oliver Twist, The Tower of London, The Miser’s Daughter, etc., were produced in an entirely different manner from what would be considered the usual course; for I, the Artist, suggested to the Authors of these works the original idea or subject—for them to write out—furnishing, at the same time, the principal characters and the scenes; and then, as the tale had to be produced in monthly parts, the Writer or Author, and the Artist had every month to arrange and settle what scenes or subjects and characters were to be introduced; and the Author had to weave in such scenes as I wished to represent, and sometimes I had to work out his suggestions.
And as to Mr. W. Harrison Ainsworth’s ‘singular delusion’ of an artist claiming to be the originator of works which he had merely illustrated, no more absurd or contemptible and rubbishing nonsense could ever be conceived; for no artist could possibly be in his right mind who would make such a claim, and it becomes a serious question as to whether any one who brings forth such nonsense can be in his right mind, and if this Author has really lost his memory, and, as an invalid, is suffering under ‘singular delusions,’ he has my pity and commiseration.
I lay no claim to anything that has originated from the mind of Mr. Ainsworth, or any other man, but where the original idea has emanated from my own mind, that I feel I have a right to claim, and by that right I will stand firm, and I trust that at no distant date I may be able to publish what I have already stated, to show the world how these ideas originated in my mind, and why I wished to place them before the public.
Amongst the many friends who were acquainted with the facts of this case, I may mention the names of T. J. Pettigrew (the eminent surgeon), the Rev. Canon Barham (author of the Ingoldsby Legends), Laman Blanchard, Douglas Jerrold, Albert Smith, Mark Lemon, Gilbert A’Becket, John Leech, Messrs. Bradbury and Evans, Richard Bentley, the publisher of the Miscellany, and many other dear friends, now, to my sorrow, passed away; but there are a few still living who are ready to substantiate my statements one a clergyman of the City of London, an old member of the Society of Antiquaries; another who is a literary man, a member of the Conservative Club; and also a dear and valued friend, who is a member of the Athenæum Club and Deputy Lord Lieutenant of one of our counties. This friend sent a letter to several of the newspapers—one of which was forwarded to me—a copy of which I here insert:—