defert their native faculties, nor without, at the fame time, deviating from the paths which lead to excellence and immortality. On the other hand, neceffity may fometimes chain down the reluctant fpirit, and the fenfe of honour may remain firm and vivid, although its call can no longer be obeyed; but, on the fuppofition of the freedom of choice and action being on au average footing with the moderate conditions of life, it is unquestionable that the wifh, the conteft for honourable diftinétions, may be regarded as the invari able teft of fuch talents as are defigned by providence to illumine and inftruct mankind. It is not meant, by honourable diftine tions, to imply the acquisition of poffeffion of merely oftentatious, or inappropriate titles, but the acquifition of fuch marked acknowledgment of eminent powers, as may every where fecure the claims of the poffeffor to deference and refpect. Titles and rank bear no effential relation to intrinfic merit, yet are they ftill the agreed fynbols, or, in a manner, the current and legal coin of public efteem. The coin, it is allowed, is often debafed, and often counterfeit; but these are circumftances which produce no alteration in the value of its original ftandard. If diftinctions, then, imply the acknowledgment of fuperior merit, if they reflect back to the mind the fenfation of honour, they must be found to form one of the moit congenial modes of eliciting the native powers of genius. But, they may likewife be confidered as neceflary to the moft falutary exertions of genius. It is defirable, not only to cultivate the genius of our land, but to give to its cultivation a philanthropic tendency, to make it beneficial as well as powerful, and that, while it acquires the force requifite to win admiration, it fhould alfo adopt the modes moft calculated to obtain our affection. Thefe modes it will the moft readily affume, while it looks forward to a return of favourable attention from the minds of thofe, to whom it directs its influence. Merit, compelled to watch and cherish in folitude the germs of internal talent, and uuable finally to refcue its claims from obfcurity, will not, indeed, lofe its powers, nor forfeit its effential title to fuperiority, but it is in danger of eventually affuming an air more favage than benevolent, of diétating rather than perfuading, of deterring inftead of inviting: if urged to conteft by oppofition, it too frequently deferts the paths of inftruction, to obey the impulfes of irritated feelings, derides or fliginatizes what nature would have prompted it to admire, and endeavours to fubvert what it is not allowed to polifh. Every laudable purpofe of fociety, with regard to the arts, is therefore accomplithed by annexing honours to the fuccefsful exertion of talents. Nor is this doctrine new in refpect of the general inftitutions of all civilized nations, for the progrefs of intellectual ftudies. It is, fortunately for learning, new only in refpect to the cultivation of the arts of painting and fculpture; and, unfortunately for us, it is, in this refpećt, newer in England than in any other country in Europe. An Academy of the Arts eftablished by royal favour has, indeed, elevated a certain number from the common mass, and the induftry of its members has fecured them from the defolating profpect of mendicity; but there is no great honour in attaining what it is a difgrace not to avoid; the feat which mediocrity may reach cannot be a ground of diftinction; for other diftinctions are neceffary towards the exaltation of the arts. Let us now enquire what other rewards of honour are open to thofe arts in England. The only one which our fiate acknowledges, is the title of King's Painter, annexed to an office to which the painter is generally advanced, not by public competition, but by private favour, and fo little regarded as an object of fame, that the artift, if he do not difdain, at leaft overlooks the employment; for he hires inferior painters at a cheap rate, to paint the pictures required of hiin, and to enable him to take what he regards as the only refpectable fruits of his office, into his pocket. This office was, some years fince, ludicroufly conferred on the late Sir Jothua Reynolds: I fay ludicroufly, for who but inuft fimile on reflecting that au artift, to whom the fovereign always declined to fit for his portrait, was chofen to convey the refemblance of that very monarch to foreign nations, and to their lateft pofterity? Yet, ridiculous as this circumstance may appear, it was, alas! the only inftance of royal favour which graced the profetional efforts of that molt accomplished painter, either before or after he became, from fecondary views, the titled Prefident of the Academy.-He, to whofe hand nature gave her own truth, and from whofe pencil he borrowed grace, he, by whom Alexander would have chofen, in the polished age of Greece, to tranfmit his image to future ages, ages, abfolved his long career of public admiration, wholly unemployed by the fovereign, whofe reign and country he adorned, This extraordinary, nay, almoft incredible circumftance, leads to the fuller elucidation of the nature of thofe national distinctions, which may be confidered as provocative of talent. Reynolds, with us, was a Knight, and King's Painter; but thele honours were fo far from ferving as a ground of future emulation in his art, that they have merely left a riddle, fcarce to be folved by pofterity, wherefore no picture of an artift fo fignalized, is to be found in any of the various palaces of his lovereign. It is evident, therefore, that the cate of Reynolds, notwithstanding nominal honours, cannot be quoted as an inftance of due diftinction conferred on merit; on the contrary, it may be fafely afferted, that at least half of the opportanity offered by the life of fo illuftrious an artit, to raife the character and general eftimation of Engilth art, was loft to our country for want of proper excitements, whereby his talents might have been fally called into exertion. This inftance is fufficient to explain the views of our enquiry, regarding the influence of honours and rank on the arts. Such honours as empty titles can beftow, by no means appear to conftitute the fpecies of diftinction, which may be fuppofed at once to reward and ftimulate genins. Before the arts can be expected to reach their ultimate degree of elevation in a philofophical land, a more folid and permanent bafis muft fupport the honours to be allotted to them, and they must find their eftablishment on fair and public ground, where their claims may be duly inveftigated, and as duly rewarded. If they be truly denominated liberal arts, it is among the national claffes of liberal ftudy that they must take their station. It is here that they must be taught to feek for diftinction, not from the favour of a partial admirer, or a courtly patron, but from the more exalted fuffrages of learning and patriotifin. It may be the more requifite to infift on this point, on account of fome unjuft prejudices under which the arts of defign evidently labour in this country. The degree of rank or estimation, in which we hold thofe ftudies, is at variance with the terms in which we fpeak of them. We call them liberal arts; but how can that be conttrued liberal which is unconnected with established liberal education, and in which no perfon in the liberat claffes of life would profeffionally engage? The father who would bring his fon up to the practice of phyfic, or the law, will hesitate to make him a painter or a fculptor. Our prefent fyftem of opinions therefore, allows painters to be gentlemen, but will not allow gentlemen to be painters. Men of liberal rank, in their intercourfe with artifts, rather confider them as entitled to their condefcenfion, than as adinitted to their prefence on a footing of equality. Indeed, fo little has the profeffion of a painter been hitherto made the fubject of attention, by the reflecting claffes of fociety, that the mental part of it, and the mechanical, are still spoken of under the fame denomination; and a painter is equally a term expreffive of the man who fills the mind with the awful exhibitions of the Siftine Chapel, and of him who covers the wainscot or the walls of our houfes, to fecure them from the injuries of fmoke and rain. There is, no doubt, a reafon of a more fubitantial nature to be given, wherefore, an English gentleman fhould not confider painting as an eligible employment for his fon, viz. the impoffibility of acquiring wealth by the purfuit of it; and this, as was fhewn in the former part of the queftion, is a fault inherent in its nature. With regard merely to honour, many fituations in life are preferred for our children, which yet we can hardly eftcem more. creditable to the holders. It, certainly is no where thought more honourable, for inftance, to brew than to paint, to fabricate that which eclipfes the intellect than that which enlightens it; but brewing is productive of immenfe opulence, painting of none. Let it not be fuppofed, from this comparison, that the Enquirer, who is an Englishnan, harbours the leaft thought of difrefpect to the patrons and providers of a liquor from which he derives daily comfort. In an enlightened country like our own, every honeft em ployment should fit a man for the most diftinguished general fociety. It is only meant to affert that, in the probability of acquiring opulence, painting cannot and ought not to enter into competition with fuch trades as England difplays. But there is, therefore, the ftronger neceffity for enforcing its claims to reward in another line; and, until this be done, until the various claffification of the arts be farther determined, and their proportional degrees of rank and value afcertained, it will, with refpect to national character, be a magnificent, but vain profufion, to offer medley premiums to the pretenfious pretenfions of merit, or to tempt an encreafe of the number of performances by pecuniary reward. From a confideration of the whole of thefe circumstances, is not the fpecies of honours, requisite for the advance of the arts in England, clearly pointed out to us? Can it be denied that painting, in the prefent view of the nation, demands to have its place afligned to it amongit funilar liberal ftudies of our Universities, and its progreflive steps of cultivation rewarded with fimilar honours? In what manner fuch an arrangement could take place in our colleges, may admit of doubt. The arts would run a rifk of being regarded as immoration, by the fettled cultivation of other long established modes of learning. But if an opportunity fhould ever prefent itself, propitious to the wifhes of the artift, if the structure of a new college fhould be planned, open to any mould of inftitution which the defire of the founder, and the laws of the country may unite to fanétion, within the walls of fuch an edifice would it be extravagant to hope that every latter advancement of focial illumination may affume its just state and privileges? To ftate the whole refult of the queftion: in congenial cultivation, watchful encouragement, and juft, public diftinctions, will be found the true fupports of genius. Such is the real channel of honour, in which the graphic artift, under the fculptors of Italy, or any other modern country, are to the Englith fculptor. Grant, if you will, that fome nice advantage of talents lay on the fide of the foreign artift, would it be, in that cafe, the fpirit of patriotifm, which fhould confent to forfeit the fplendid opportunity of adding ardour to native genius? Would it be her voice, which should invite the attention of the univerfe to our inferiority to our inferiority during a period when the exalted faculties of England were directed by the man, to whofe glory the monument is raised? Or would it add to that glory, to perpetuate, in the very means by which the monument exifts, the record of an infufficient culture of the arts under his ad ministration?-infufficient even to the exhibition of a form, or a feature? Alas! poor Eugland! But are the learned members of the Uni verfity of Cambridge yet unapprized that there exift fcalptors in our own country, who fear no living competitors? The fource of the error, into which a wellintentioned zeal has been led on this occafion, lies in the want of proper acquaintance with the arts, and the whole circumftance contributes to ftrengthen what has been already propofed in this paper, with respect to a National Eftablishment for Painting and Sculp ture. Had thofe arts been matriculated in could not have fallen, in the prefent day, on the colleges of England, fuch an opprobrium our Arts, and on our Universities. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine SIR, CANNOT refift fome obfervations on the philofophic guidance of English patri- what is faid by the author of the atifin, may hope to rival "What e'er of Latian or of Grecian fame Memoirs of the Duke of Richmond : Sounds in the ear of Time;" which I admit in general, to be refpectably written. and fuch are the defirable means of perfecting the ultimate profpects of the Arts in England. relates to the remark on Mr. Fox. That excellent man, the best and greatest and moft didinterefted of our ftatelinen, was in office only from the beginning of February, till his death on the 13th of September following. Coming into office at fuch an arduous crifis; what more, in fo thort a time, could he be expected to do than he performed? What pledge has he deferted? And how has he atchieved little as a practical statefinan? Had he carried nothing but the Refolve in itfclf would have been an achievefor the Abolition of the Slave-trade, that P.S. The writer of this paper has just heard with astonishment, and let him be pardoned if he adds, not without fentiments of indignation, that the Univerfity of Cambridge has fent a commiflion to a foreign artift, for the execution of a ftatue, voted in grateful remembrance of William Pitt. Such a rumour would perhaps be beft received with difbelief; but, if it must be credited, let an Enquirer be allowed to afk, on what ground of public or private duty to our country, is fuch a commiflion founded? Let him afk of the Directors of the learned Colleges, whether, if they were d firous to celebrate the late ilJuftrious statesman of Britain in a funeralment, efpecially all the difcouraging and Eulogy, they would propofe to feek an encomiaft, properly accomplished for the national taik, in the schools of a foreign land? Yet the orators of France and Germany are exactly as far fuperior to the English erator, as impeding circumftances confidered, fufficient to fill the thort career of his adminiftration with a glory worthy of his preceding life; fufficient to have proved the fincerity of his other pledges; if, indeed, מג in fuch an open ingenuous mind, a mind fo alive to freedom and humanity, that fincerity could have been doubted. The negociation for peace-will any doubt his fucerity in that? will any doubt whether it contains great and characteristic features of ability, openness, and conciliating wildom? And what fairer or better qualities of a practical statefinan? It can now only be conjectured how far he would have fucceeded in obtaining a peace, honourable, and which, with reafon, fhould have been fatisfactory, to all parties, had his life been continued fome few months longer. I know from his own hand his unchanged fentiments on the greatet political objects which can concern us and the general interefts. They were the fentiments of his life. I know them by a letter with which he honoured me after he came into office this laft time. I know them by the general tenor of his life, character, and conduct, which he maintained to the laft. The honour of Mr. Fox I regard as a fplendid, ample, imper:fhable part of the honour of the English nation; and of humanity itself. It cannot therefore be but that I must frongly feel any thing which tends, (moft caufelefsly, in my firm opinion,) to diminish the public esteem and affectionate veneration, which, for the fake of the public, ought perpetually to accompany his name and memory. To the Duke of Richmond it is objected that he "recommended univerful juffrage; and, by inducing the correfponding focieties to act on exaggerated principles of reform, brought the idea of reform into difrepute; and tended not a little to render every propofition of reform ob Roxious." Now the fact is, that long before thofe called correfpending focieties exifted, Major Cartwright, whom but to name is his encomium, had recommended univerfal fuffrage: had recommended it with a force of reafoning and facts, more eafy to be encountered by vague objections, than calmly and diftinctly aufwered. Among the friends of that fyftem was to be found that true, and calm, and energetic patriot, Dr. John Jebb; and others, whom death has removed from the phere of human usefulness. The Conftitutional Society had acted upon thefe recommendations. For one, I have never relinquifhed my opinion: that this reform is, in the fprit of our conftitution, the moft practicable, the moft beneficial, were it adopted. I am convinced too, that any plan which does not fo closely approximate to this, as at least to include all householders, will be fhockingly defective in point of juftice, policy, utility, and permanence. All terrors founded upon the example of France, and brough up to bear against this fyftem of reform, are groundlets in point of fact. The reprefentation of France has graduallydwindled to a narrower and a narrower fcale, ti it became evancicent; and the horrors of delpotifm which have overclouded the fair profpects of the Revolution, have originated in caufes quite oppofite toequality and un-equality of reprefenta tion. America, the only part of the globe which can be quoted at all, certainly will not be quoted as an argument againit the rights of universal fuffrage. But were it even true that univerfal fuffrage were not fo fafe and beneficial, the caufe why all degrees and meature of parliamentary reform has been deferted, is not to be fought here; the cause why the mention of parliamentary reform has been brought into the molt unmerited fufpicion and difgrace, is not to be fought here. Thote who dare to open their eyes, ere it be too late, cannot be at a lots where to find it. Partial interests, prejudice, groundlefs and extravagant alarms, apathy, and defpondency, will explain the whole. I have reafon to be convinced, and there are public proofs of it, that the mott early and active friends of univerfal fuffrage would have co-operated with Mr. Flood's, and Mr. Grey's plans. And Mr. Wyvill, whofe diftinguished perfeverance in the caufe of reform ought ever to be remembered with respect, would have extended, and had extended, his views of reform: though he declined going to far as univerfal fuffrage; thinking it inexpedient in the prefent ftate of fociety in this country. Only not precluding gradual reform, nor palling an injurious, unfounded, and at belt unneceffary fentence on the friends of the most extensive reform, that great object might and would have gone on, had not Mr. Pitt chofen, to lay it alide; and not merely to lay it afide, but to abandon it to difcredit, infpicion, and abufe, thrown on thofe who had the conftancy to avow themfelves ftill convinced of the expediency and neceflity of carrying it into effect. This, from him, certainly ought not to have been imaginable. I do not willingly blame the dead; and the only characteristic feature of his administration, administration,in which he perfevered, that I can praife, I moft willingly praife; his adoption of the plan which Lord North, on the fuggeftion of Dr. Price, * and other able men in the other part of the Ifland, loft the folid glory of adopting, the eftablishment of a Sinking Fund. But it is fit to juftify whether the living or the dead, fo far as it can be done on fatis factory grounds, and efpecially when that juftification turns on principles of the utmost importance to the community in general. None, I think, can fufpect the late Duke of Richmond of being led by prejudice, or any unbecoming motive, to ftand forth in fupport of the principle of univerfal fuffrage. That he yielded to clamour or abule, or apprehenfion of the unfitnefs of the times, and ccafed to fupport that, or fome comprehenfive plan of parliamentary reform, feems more diflicult to justify and much to be regretted. Trofton, Your's, &c. February 8, 1807. CAPEL LOFFT. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, AVING received an anonymous and Tierces, by giving to every scale a more decided character. By thus encreafing the effect of modulation, former defects become ufeful ornaments, and prove that nature did not conftitute thefe defects in vain. 5. That modulation would fail, if the new fcales had not a decided difference of charafter, &c. &c. My friend Dr. Clement Smith, of Richmond, in Surry, thinks that the laft fentence in my former letter on this fubject, is rather ambiguous. I had not then time to explain to fully my meaning as I can now, and at the fame time am rappy to answer the queries of Mr. A. Every thinking mulician admits, that different fcales produce different effects; or, in other words have, what Lord Stanhope calls variety of character. This is a general term, applicable not only to poetry, painting, and mufic; but even to inorals, politics, religion, &c. &c. &c. In a musical fenfe, it may be fubdivided into three diftinét claffes, natural, orcheftral, and partitional, and perhaps a further Analytis may throw ftill further light on the fubject. 1. natural I mean that H letter figned ved Lover of Mulic," peculiar eutect which depends folely on dated Strand, January 31, 1807, I take this public opportunity of acknowledging the favour, and imparting my further opinions on the fubject to the author. The defign of this gentleman, who deferves great praife for the clearness and facility with which he writes, and whom I thall venture to diftinguith by the name of Mr. A. (as being the best, and therefore the first writer on the Stanhope Temperament,) is to confute the flimfy objections of Mr. C. 1. Mr. A. fhews, that the third of the fcale of A with three tharps differs from that of the equal temperament, and that Mr. C.'s objections are unfounded. 2. That the dominants of the fame fcale are better, according to Lord Stanhope, than thofe of Kirnberger. This is fo evident, that it needs no comment. 3. That Mr. C. probably never heard the Stanhope fyftem of tuning, and therefore, I ain happy to announce, both from Lord S. himself, and Mr. A. that Mr. Locfchman, No. 82, Newman-ftreet, is employed in the practical method abovementioned. 4. That Lord Stanhope divides and difpofes the natural differences of Quints In his Tract on Givil Liberty, during the American war. the pitch, and confequently on the compafs of the leading melody. This was by the ancient church writers termed Ambitus. 2. By orchestral character, I mean that brilliancy which arifes to the fcales with fharp fignatures, from the open ftrings of the violins, &c. in G, D, A, and E; while the ftopped tonics and dominants of F, B flat, E flat, and A flat, are foft, &c. 3. By partitional character, I mean that more fully defcribed by Lord Stanhope, at page 19, of his pamphlet; and upon which Mr. C. has fo curioufly commented, as Mr. A. fo juftly obferves. I have the fatisfaction of announcing, that Lord Stanhope himfelf, confiders this Analyfis as true, and philofophical; at the fame time we fhall be happy to receive any more complete ideas on the fubject. For myfelf, individually, I can promife that no labour of refearch will be wanting on my part; and that I will take the utioft care, that no prejudice, nor partial view of the fubject, fhall, on any ac count, induce me to thut my eyes against the light of truth. Your's, &c. Feb. 14, 1807, J. WALL CALLCOTT, 7, Upper Grosvenor-street. For |