seemed in excellent spirits. It was natural that
in taking their seats a little conversation should
take place about the nature of the meeting
which Sir George had been called on to attend.
He remarked, in a sprightly manner, that it
had been a very pleasant séance, and that he and
other spirits had given an immense amount of
information to the company, and had answered
some thousands of questions that had been put
to them, with regard to the relations and friends
of the persons making inquiry, and on many
other important subjects.

"And your answers were all satisfactory to
them?" asks Dr. Waghorn, cheerily.

"Yes," the Ghost replies, "eminently so."

"All accurate, eh?" continues the Doctor.

"No— none of them accurate," is Sir George's
answer; "not one."

"And yet everybody was satisfied?" the
Doctor asks again, with some surprise.

"Yes, perfectly," answers the Baronet. "You
know they never ARE accurate, somehow. That's
the curious part of it. We never can give any
information for that reason. There was a sceptical
gentleman in company the other evening
who seemed very much surprised at that.
Another gentleman, not sceptical, and trying to
convince the sceptical gentleman, asked me if I
had seen his brother who lived in Australia
lately. On my replying that I had, he asked
whether his brother had a mole over his left
eyebrow. I answered in the affirmative. 'There'
said the believing gentleman. 'And has he such
a mole?' asked the sceptical gentleman. 'No,'
replied the believing gentleman. And yet the
sceptical gentleman was not satisfied."

Here the subject dropped, and the business of
the meeting was resumed. The learned Dr.
Waghorn began by asking witness whether he
had any evidence to add to that given on a
former occasion with regard to the pictures in
the National Gallery.

The Eye-witness replied that there was one
little matter which he should like explained.
He found by reference to his notes that a certain
transaction had taken place which he had a
difficulty in understanding. The transaction was
succinctly and lucidly described in a government
report as follows:

"A picture by PALMA VECCHIO, purchased on
the recommendation of Mr. William Woodburn,
for the National Gallery, at the sale of Monsieur
Collot's collection in Paris, in May, 1852, was
ceded to the Marquis of Lansdowne, as appears
from the following extract from the Minutes of
the Trustees, dated the 12th November, 1852:
'Read a letter from Mr. Hamilton of the 31st
July last (1852), communicating to the trustees
the authority of the Lords Commissioners of
the Treasury, for the transfer to the Marquis of
Lansdowne of the picture by PALMA VECCHIO or
GIORGIONE, purchased at Monsieur Collot's sale,
on his lordship paying the amount of the
purchase money into the hand of the Paymaster-
General, to the public account.'"

Professor Waghorn expressed his opinion that
the transaction was quite a simple one. A noble
lord had cast his eye upon a picture intended for
the public, it had caught, his fancy, and so it was
taken away from the public and the noble lord
got it.

Witness begged to ask the learned Doctor
whether he did not think that if the picture in
question was bought for the public, the public
ought to have had it, and that for the authorities
to make that picture over to one of themselves
in that quiet way was not treating the
public with proper respect? It seemed to witness,
that the authorities, in hanging this picture
on Lord Lansdowne's walls, had hung themselves
on the horns of a dilemma. If that
picture were a good one, the country ought to
have had it; while if it were a bad one, it ought
never to have been purchased. Witness put it
to the Jury.

The Jury was unanimously of opinion that
this transaction required explanation.

Professor Waghorn and the ghost of Sir George
Beaumont both requested that this very shocking
discussion might terminate where it was. Let
the evidence be resumed. Professor Fudge had
expressed himself very strongly, on a former
occasion, on the subject of certain works by the
earlier masters of painting; had he any reason
to think that his opinions were shared by other
persons?

Witness had reason to believe that they were.
He had spoken to no one who had not expressed
great dissatisfaction with the recent purchases.
It was a general feeling. Those purchases had
been much ridiculed; and indeed there seemed
some ground for the amusement which certain of
those pictures afforded to the spectator. The
public was divided with regard to them. There
were some persons who never got beyond the
doors of the rooms especially devoted to these
early pictures, but stood there timidly looking
in, and then would go away without examining
them at all. There were others who went
through them, as it seemed, from a sense of
duty, referring from picture to catalogue, and
from catalogue to picture, as quickly as possible,
and checking each off as they got over it.

By a Juryman—No, that was not the way
to look at pictures, at least not to enjoy them.
It was certainly a way of examining a collection
which was very common. It was, however, not
the right way. (Evidence resumed.)

There were other persons who openly objected
to these pictures in set terms, and some who
laughed at them. The last proceeding was
excusable, the saints in some of these pre-Raphaelite
works being singularly calculated to stimulate a
sense of the ridiculous in the spectator. One of
these saints was shown, gravely shaking hands
with a lion; others are obvious muffs, who, when
they want to see anything that is going on, such
as the glorification of some other saint who lived
several centuries afterwards, will neglect the
good front places, and crane their necks over
from distant parts of the background. There
are saints with water on the brain, saints with
hair standing on end, erect upon their toes, nay,
there are, in one picture in the Hall, a toxopholite