1760-1783.]

FOUNDATION OF ENGLISH SCHOOL OF PAINTING.

67

historical painter of unquestioned eminence, the name of Hogarth might seem sufficient to have turned the edge of so dull a sarcasm. But Hogarth, however great he was admitted to be as a humourist, was scarcely recognised even by his countrymen as a painter. His fellow-painters regarded him as an interloper, and the fashionable critic pronounced him "rather a writer of comedy with the pencil than a painter." "As a painter," says Walpole complacently, "he has but slender merit.* Indeed, though Hogarth was the true founder of the English school of painting, his example had but little apparent influence upon his contemporaries or immediate successors, and it was no doubt in perfect good faith that Burke, in his eloquent eulogy on Reynolds-written seven-and-twenty years after Hogarth's death-affirmed, and affirmed without contradiction, that "Sir Joshua Reynolds was the first Englishman who added the praise of the elegant arts to the other glories of his country."

But, however it might be in the days of George II., when his successor ascended the throne it must have been evident to all but the most prejudiced, that an English school of painting was in process of formation. Reynolds was already the acknowledged leader in portraiture, and Reynolds was an Englishman, and in no sense a disciple of Kneller; Wilson was strenuously asserting English superiority in landscape painting; and Gainsborough, though practising in a provincial town, was becoming known in the metropolis as a painter both of landscape and portrait, in a style at once thoroughly English and thoroughly original.

But what served most to give consistency to the labours of the artists, and to stimulate their efforts by bringing them distinctly before the public eye, was the foundation of the Royal Academy, with its great annual exhibition of works of art. The establishment of an academy of art had long been a cherished purpose with English artists. As early as 1711 a private academy for the study of art was instituted, with Sir Godfrey Kneller for its president; but after a time, differences arose, and the members separated into two or three adverse parties. At the head of one of these (the English section) was Sir James Thornhill, who, in 1724, opened a new academy at his own house in the Piazza, Covent Garden, which continued till his death in 1734. Hogarth, his son-in-law, having inherited "the apparatus of the academy," proposed to the other society, which held its meetings in Greyhound Court, by the Strand, and was presided over by Moser, the enamel painter, to unite into a single body, and to take a suitable room where thirty or forty persons might draw from the living model. "Attributing the failures of the previous academies," writes Hogarth, "to the leading members having assumed a superiority which their fellow-students could not brook, I proposed that every member should contribute an equal sum towards the support of the establishment, and have an equal right to vote on every question relative to its affairs. By these regulations the Academy has now existed nearly thirty years, and is, for every useful purpose, equal to that in France, or any other." This was the famous "Academy in St. Martin's

"Anecdotes of Painting," iv. 146, 160, ed. 1786.

Paper by Hogarth in Nicholls's Hogarth, i. 293, and in supplement to Ireland's Hogarth; Walpole-"Anecdotes of Painting," v. 253: Edwards-"Anecdotes of Painting,' Introduction, &c.

68

ST. MARTIN'S LANE ACADEMY.

[1760-1783. Lane," so often referred to in the lives of English painters, and to which many of the best artists of this period were indebted for no small portion of their skill in drawing. But these academies, as well as others, like Shipley's, and the Duke of Richmond's, were rather schools for drawing from the living model, or casts from the antique, than institutions such as we are accustomed to associate with the title of academies of art. Several efforts had been made, however, to establish societies of this more ambitious order. Before starting his own private school, Sir James Thornhill had submitted to lord Halifax for the royal consideration, the scheme of a Royal Academy, with apartments for professors, which he proposed to erect "at the upper end of the Mews"and pretty nearly therefore on the site of the present Royal Academy-and which he estimated would only cost 31397.*

A quarter of a century later the project was formally renewed "with the consent, and indeed at the desire, both of artists and lovers of art," by Mr. Gwyn, an architect of reputation, and one of the original members of the Royal Academy. The French Academy was pointed out as the model, though it was added, if an "English Academy of painting, sculpture, and architecture were to be erected, it would be desirable to consult the laws of all similar institutions in Europe.t In 1753 the members of the St. Martin's Lane Academy made an effort to raise their institution to the rank of a "Public Academy for the Improvement of Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture." It was in opposition to this proposition that Hogarth addressed to lord Bute the paper already quoted. Whether from internal opposition, or the apathy of the artists generally, the scheme fell to the ground; as did also a still more pretentious one for an Academy to be incorporated by royal charter, put forth a couple of years later.‡ Meantime the public interest in art was steadily gaining strength. The foundation, in 1734, of the Dilettanti Society, though its attention was directed chiefly to the arts of ancient Greece, had done something to foster the spirit of inquiry among the upper circles of society; and the Society of Arts had done still more to diffuse an interest in art among the middle classes. Failing in establishing an academy, it seems to have occurred to the artists that they might at least copy so much of the French plan as to set up a public exhibition of their works. Accordingly a committee was formed; the great body of artists were appealed to; the Society of Arts proffered the use of their room, and there on the 21st of April, 1760, exactly a hundred years ago, was opened the first public exhibition in London of the works of living artists. The works exhibited were few in number, and the greater part of little worth; but the names of Reynolds and Wilson were among the painters; Roubiliac and Wilton among the sculptors; Woollett and Strange among the engravers, who contributed examples of their skill; and the public crowded in such numbers to the novel spectacle that it was resolved to repeat the experiment next year on a larger scale. The "great room," Spring Gardens, was accordingly hired, and there, in May, 1761, was held the exhibition which was really the progenitor of that which still, every returning May, attracts to itself alike the rank, the beauty, and the intel

* Walpole, iv. 46.

"An Essay on Design: including Proposals for erecting a Public Academy," 8vo. 1749. Edwards; Nicholls; Sir Robert Strange-"On the Rise of the Royal Academy," 8vo. 1775 ; Plan of an Academy," &c., 4to. 1755.

1760-1783.]

EXHIBITIONS OF PICTURES-OF SIGN-BOARDS.

69

ligence of the land. The admission was by catalogues, which, besides serving as guides to the exhibition, were adorned with a vignette by Wale, and a frontispiece and a tailpiece designed by Hogarth and engraved by Grignonthe one symbolising the growth of the arts under the fostering care of Britannia and the benignant influence of the sovereign; the other ridiculing the miserable fate of the decayed "exoticks" which a connoisseur (typified by a monkey in court-suit and ruffles) magnifying glass in hand is vainly watering. Thirteen thousand of these catalogues were sold at a shilling each,-what would one be worth now?

"This exhibition," wrote Johnson to his friend, Baretti," has filled the heads of the artists and the lovers of art. Surely life, if it be not long, is tedious, since we are forced to call in so many trifles to rid us of our timethat time which can never return." Next year, however, the sage we may presume took a less austere view of the matter, for the preface to the catalogue was clothed in his sonorous sentences.

But the great moralist was not alone in thinking that the artists were over exuberant in their enthusiasm. Where the philosopher sighed, however, the wits laughed outright. London was startled by the announcement of a rival exhibition to be held "at the large room, at the upper end of Bow Street, Covent-garden," and which was to consist of "Original Paintings, Busts, Carved Figures, &c., by the Society of Sign-painters," together with "such original designs as might be transmitted to them," the whole being "specimens of the native genius of the nation." The Society was, of course, a myth. The burlesque originated with the famous Nonsense Club, its prime contriver being Bonnell Thornton, under whose superintendence it was really carried out in all its parts. The whim took. It was seen to be a harmless jest, and Hogarth himself, who had contributed some works to the Spring Gardens exhibition, readily lent assistance to the Bow Street parody, by giving a touch with his pencil where effect could be added by it: thus in the companion portraits of the empress, Maria Theresa, and the king of Prussia, we are told that he changed the cast of their eyes so as to make them leer significantly at each other. Indeed the fun was altogether of this order. The apothecaries' sign of "The Three Gallipots" had for its companion "The Three Coffins." No. 16 in the catalogue was entitled "A Man:" while the picture was nine tailors at work. In No. 37, "A Man loaded with Mischief," a fellow was painted carrying on his shoulders a woman, a magpie, and a monkey: a sign still occasionally to be seen on some of the low public-houses around London, and on one in Oxford Street. Some of the jokes were rather broader than would be tolerated now, and some of the journals were disposed to treat the matter seriously; but the laughers carried the day: the jest was enjoyed, and it was not spoiled by repetition.+

Only in London, and at such a time, could an exhibition of this kind have been possible. Although an act had been passed for the removal of such sign-boards as obstructed the public ways, almost every shop still had its sign, and every tradesman strove to render his board more attractive than his neighbour's, if not by beauty of design, by oddity of conception, or some sort of extravagance. A market for ready-made signs was kept in Harp Alley,

Boswell, under June, 1761.

+Chalmers's "Preface to the Connoisseur."

70

ROYAL ACADEMY FOUNDED.

[1760-1783. Shoe Lane. But sometimes commissions for signs were given to painters of established reputation. Wale, for example, who was selected by his brother artists to draw the frontispiece for their exhibition catalogue, who was one of the first members, and subsequently professor of perspective and librarian of the Royal Academy, was not above painting signs; Penny and Catton, both among the first academicians, and the former the first professor of painting, with others of equal standing, at least occasionally employed their pencils in a similar manner. One of Wale's most famous signs was a portrait of Shakspere, which hung across the road at the north-east corner of Little Russell Street, Drury Lane, and which, with its elaborate frame, is said to have cost five hundred pounds. This branch of Art, however, outlived the exhibition but a very few years. A more stringent act was passed for their removal (11th Geo. III.), and sign-boards ceased to swing except over taverns.*

The members of the Spring Gardens society obtained a charter of incorporation and the exhibitions went on with increasing success. But the directors began to assume more authority than the other members were ready to allow. Differences ensued. The directors claimed the right of filling up all vacancies in their number. This the members refused to admit, and at a special meeting sixteen of the directors were ejected. The other eight shortly after resigned. They were all men of position and influence. West, one of their number, was the especial favourite of the king; Chambers was the royal architect; and they felt that if they could obtain the royal patronage they were strong enough to establish a new academy more comprehensive in purpose, but more exclusive in membership than that they had just left. A draft of a constitution and laws was drawn up by Mr. (afterwards sir William) Chambers, with the assistance of West, Moser, and Cotes, and submitted to the king, who entering with great zeal into the project, directed that the new institution should be called the Royal Academy, and placed under his immediate protection and patronage. By the "Instrument of Institution" the society was to consist of "40 academicians chosen from among the most able and respectable artists resident in Great Britain;" 20 associates from whom future academicians were to be selected; and sixassociate engravers. There is to be an annual exhibition of works of art, which is to be open to all artists to contribute works, subject to the approval of a committee of selection. Schools of painting and of drawing from the life and from casts are provided, which are to be open without charge to all students who have acquired proper rudimentary instruction, and who conform to the rules of the institution: and professors are annually to read courses of lectures on the principles of the arts of painting, sculpture, and architecture, and also on anatomy and perspective. Hogarth was dead; but had he been living he would not have joined the infant academy, "considering," as he wrote to lord Bute, "the electing presidents, professors, &c., as a ridiculous. imitation of the foolish parade of the French Academy." Reynolds held aloof from all the preliminary proceedings, and it was not until he was apprised that it was the wish of the king that he should be its first president, and that it was his majesty's intention on his installation into that office to confer upon him the honour of knighthood, that he consented to join the new society. The foun

* Edwards-Introduction, and notice of Wale; Smith's "Anecdotes of Nollekens," &c.

1760-1783.]

ROYAL ACADEMY-FIRST EXHIBITION.

71.

dation of the Royal Academy dates from the 10th of December, 1768; its first exhibition was held at the auction room in Pall Mall, in 1769. The list of the original members is a curious index to the state of art in England at that time. Of the thirty-three whose names are inserted in the first catalogue, eight or nine are foreigners; two are ladies; some are only known as designers and engravers; some were coach and sign-painters-most are mere names now: probably not more than half-a-dozen would be recognised except by the student of the literature of art.

Equally curious is it to compare the first thin, loosely printed catalogue of 16 pages with one of the present day. Besides the thirty-three Academicians, only seventeen non-members contribute. There are in all but 136 entries, and among these some are of engravings, and others of drawings in crayons and "stained drawings." No quotations enliven the dreary lists of 'portraits,' 'flower-pieces,' and 'landskips'; but occasionally the descriptions are as curiously precise as though the painter supposed his picture would be carried for comparison to the very spot it was intended to represent. The fashionable landscape-painter George Barret,-one who was rich whilst Wilson starved-described his performances with the precision of a topographer. On the other hand Wilson has nothing appended to either of his three pictures but the single word a "Landskip." Reynolds sent four pictures, all portraits, and all in classic guise, and Gainsborough had also four pictures. West contributed two compositions. Angelica Kauffman, R.A., had four classical subjects, and Mary Moser, R.A., two "flower pieces."