mankind." Oh, Mr. Carr, Mr. Carr! that
MICHEL ANGELO was a nasty bequest. The
Conversion of St. Paul, by HERCULES OF
FERRARA, was another nasty one. It was
unfeeling again of Carr———

Sir George Beaumont:—The Rev. Mr. Carr.

It was unfeeling of the Rev. Mr. Carr to
leave to a country that had done him no injury
the two DOMENICHINOS—St. George and the
Dragon, and St. Jerome and the Angel. Nor
was it easy to see how we had brought the Ecce
Homo of LUDOVICO CARACCI upon ourselves.
It is not contended that we did not deserve
these pictures, but why of the Rev. Mr. Carr?
There was a great name of a Venetian painter,
one of the greatest that the world knew; how
absurd to have that name of TINTORETTO
represented in such a country as this by that sketch
of St. George and the Dragon! This, again, was
Carr. But there was no end to Carr.

Dr. Waghorn called the witness to order.
Let the evidence be proceeded with.

Witness found the name of another public
benefactor on the books of the National Gallery
as having bequeathed a large and terrific collection.
This was Lt.-Col. Ollney, who let loose
upon us in 1837 a perfect avalanche of
indifferent art. The Ruins and Figures of the
great PANINI, the Palace of Dido by STEINWYCK,
the Cornelia of PADOVANINO, the Moonlight of
the illustrious WILLIAMS, came to the country
from this gallant lieutenant-colonel. Ah, Heaven!
had those pictures been left to him by
some previous Ollney, or did he buy them out
of his pay, or did he, in the sack of some foreign
town, receive them as his portion, and leave them
—out of spite—to the country which assigned
them to him? Yet the bequests of Ollney are
more cheery than that of Forbes, Esq., who
made over to us just one gem, an Allegory, by
ANGELICA KAUFFMANN, and there ended.

Dr. Waghorn thought witness was carrying
his views to an excess. Witness appeared to
him to like nothing.

Sir George Beaumont gave it as his opinion
that ANGELICA KAUFFMANN was a great and
gifted creature, and that if there were one thing
in which she excelled more remarkably than
another, it was Allegory, in which invigorating
phase of Fine Art she was indeed at home.

Witness bowed to the opinion of the accomplished
Ghost who had last spoken. He, however,
must protest against the remark which
had fallen just now from the lips of the learned Dr.
Waghorn. He (witness) appealed to the Jury
whether he had not spoken in terms of high
admiration of many works hanging on the walls
of the National Gallery? There was one donation
to the country— in addition to that of
Mr. Vernon, which, not being in the National
Gallery, could not claim any part of their
consideration during the present investigation
—there was one gift of which he could not
speak in terms too high. It consisted of two
magnificent pictures: one, of Sunrise by the
Sea-shore: the other, of the Building of Carthage.
They were the work and the bequest
of TURNER, and were left in a kind of hopeless
attempt to conquer the prejudice which exists
in the majority of minds in favour of the old
painters, and the insane belief in their universal
superiority to the new; a belief which,
if it was not shaken by these pictures, must
be indeed deeply rooted. Let any person with
the use of his eyes, compare these pictures with
the CLAUDES among which they were placed.

Dr. Waghorn and Sir George Beaumont both
attempting to speak at once, the preference
was naturally given— the superiority of mind
over matter being an established thing— to the
accomplished Ghost, who proceeded to say that:
He had now lived (or rather he had died) to see
the day when impiousness, audacity, and free-
thinking, had attained their climax. He had
heard the gentleman to whose evidence the
Jury had been listening, and who, he begged to
say, was a very young gentleman, to give his
opinions in the confident manner in which he
enunciated them— he had heard that young
gentleman speak in a manner which would have
made his flesh, if he had had any, creep. He
had heard names which he had been accustomed
to mention— ay, and to hear mentioned— with
hushed breath, spoken lightly, flippantly,
disparagingly, and the owners of those names
criticised as if they were mere ordinary mortals.
Here was a young man coming forward, unshaved,
and with no neckcloth to speak of————

Professor Waghorn begged the accomplished
Ghost to take notice that the majority of the Jury
was characterised by the same peculiarities.

Sir George Beaumont begged pardon of the
Jury; he had lived in days when men shaved and
wore stocks; that was a period, also, when they
believed things that were told them on authority,
and did not presume to lift up their voices
to give expression to private opinion. Had
veneration ceased to exist for anything? Had
reverence and razors gone out together? He (the
accomplished Ghost) had heard the names of
the CARACCI and of GUIDO spoken of in
disparaging terms; he had heard it assumed that
RAPHAEL himself could sometimes paint a bad
picture; and now he was to hear the glories of
CLAUDE— CLAUDE, the idol of his youth, the
worship of his manhood, the stay of his declining
years— spoken of as likely to suffer by comparison
with certain works by the late MR. TURNER,
a clever gentleman, whom he had had the pleasure
of knowing, but whom he could not hear
spoken of in the same breath with a master like
CLAUDE LORRAINE. Did witness remember that
MR. TURNER was a modern artist, and CLAUDE
an. old master? And was not that enough?

Dr. Waghom was heard to murmur that it
was enough.

The Eye-witness said, on the other hand,
that it was not enough. He was of opinion
that there were masters of the olden time who
excelled masters of the new time; but there
were also some masters of this day whose
performances threw into the shade those of some
masters of the day for which the accomplished
gentleman who had just spoken had expressed