CHAPTER VII.

THE JOURNAL OF A VOYAGE TO LISBON.

In March 1753, when Fielding published his pamphlet on Elizabeth

Canning, his life was plainly drawing to a close. His energies indeed

were unabated, as may be gathered from a brief record in the

_Gentleman's_ for that month, describing his judicial raid, at four in

the morning, upon a gaming-room, where he suspected certain highwaymen

to be assembled. But his body was enfeebled by disease, and he knew he

could not look for length of days. He had lived not long, but much; he

had seen in little space, as the motto to _Tom Jones_ announced, "the

manners of many men;" and now that, prematurely, the inevitable hour

approached, he called Cicero and Horace to his aid, and prepared to meet

his fate with philosophic fortitude. Between

_"Quem fors dierum cunque dabit, lucro

Appone,"_

and

_"Grata superveniet, quae non sperabitur, hora,"_

he tells us in his too-little-consulted _Proposal for the Poor_, he had

schooled himself to regard events with equanimity, striving above all,

in what remained to him of life, to perform the duties of his office

efficiently, and solicitous only for those he must leave behind him.

Henceforward his literary efforts should be mainly philanthropic and

practical, not without the hope that, if successful, they might be the

means of securing some provision for his family. Of fiction he had taken

formal leave in the trial of _Amelia_; and of lighter writing generally

in the last paper of the _Covent-Garden Journal_. But, if we may trust

his Introduction, the amount of work he had done for his poor-law

project must have been enormous, for he had read and considered all the

laws upon the subject, as well as everything that had been written on it

since the days of Elizabeth, yet he speaks nevertheless as one over

whose head the sword had all the while been impending:--

"The Attempt, indeed, is such, that the Want of Success can scarce be

called a Disappointment, tho' I shall have lost much Time, and

misemployed much Pains; and what is above all, shall miss the Pleasure

of thinking that in the Decline of my Health and Life, I have conferred

a great and lasting Benefit on my Country."

In words still more resigned and dignified, he concludes the book:--

His enemies, he says, will no doubt "discover, that instead of intending

a Provision for the Poor, I have been carving out one for myself,

[Footnote: Presumably as Governor of the proposed County-house.] and

have very cunningly projected to build myself a fine House at the

Expence (_sic_) of the Public. This would be to act in direct Opposition

to the Advice of my above Master [i.e. Horace]; it would be indeed

Struere domos immemor sepulchri.

Those who do not know me, may believe this; but those who do, will

hardly be so deceived by that Chearfulness which was always natural to

me; and which, I thank God, my Conscience doth not reprove me for, to

imagine that I am not sensible of my declining Constitution.... Ambition

or Avarice can no longer raise a Hope, or dictate any Scheme to me, who

have no further Design than to pass my short Remainder of Life in some

Degree of Ease, and barely to preserve my Family from being the Objects

of any such Laws as I have here proposed."

With the exception of the above, and kindred passages quoted from the

Prefaces to the _Miscellanies_ and the Plays, the preceding pages, as

the reader has no doubt observed, contain little of a purely

autobiographical character. Moreover, the anecdotes related of Fielding

by Murphy and others have not always been of such a nature as to inspire

implicit confidence in their accuracy, while of the very few letters

that have been referred to, none have any of those intimate and familiar

touches which reveal the individuality of the writer. But from the

middle of 1753 up to a short time before his death, Fielding has himself

related the story of his life, in one of the most unfeigned and touching

little tracts in our own or any other literature. The only thing which,

at the moment, suggests itself for comparison with the _Journal of a

Voyage to Lisbon_ is the letter and dedication which Fielding's

predecessor, Cervantes, prefixes to his last romance of _Persiles and

Sigismunda_. In each case the words are animated by the same

uncomplaining kindliness--the same gallant and indomitable spirit; in

each case the writer is a dying man. Cervantes survived the date of his

letter to the Conde de Lemos but three days; and the _Journal_, says

Fielding's editor (probably his brother John), was "finished almost at

the same period with life." It was written, from its author's account,

in those moments of the voyage when, his womankind being sea-sick, and

the crew wholly absorbed in working the ship, he was thrown upon his own

resources, and compelled to employ his pen to while away the time. The

Preface, and perhaps the Introduction, were added after his arrival at

Lisbon, in the brief period before his death. The former is a semi-

humorous apology for voyage-writing; the latter gives an account of the

circumstances which led to this, his last expedition in search of

health.

At the beginning of August 1753, Fielding tells us, having taken the

Duke of Portland's medicine [Footnote: A popular eighteenth-century

gout-powder, but as old as Galen. The receipt for it is given in the

_Gentleman's Magazine_, vol. xxiii., 579.] for near a year, "the effects

of which had been the carrying off the symptoms of a lingering imperfect

gout," Mr. Ranby, the King's Sergeant-Surgeon [Footnote: Mr. Ranby was

also the friend of Hogarth, who etched his house at Chiswick.] (to whom

complimentary reference had been made in the Man of the Hill's story in

_Tom Jones_), with other able physicians, advised him "to go immediately

to Bath." He accordingly engaged lodgings, and prepared to leave town

forthwith. While he was making ready for his departure, and was "almost

fatigued to death with several long examinations, relating to five

different murders, all committed within the space of a week, by

different gangs of street robbers," he received a message from the Duke

of Newcastle, afterwards Premier, through that Mr. Carrington whom

Walpole calls "the cleverest of all ministerial terriers," requesting

his attendance in Lincoln's-Inn Fields (Newcastle House). Being lame,

and greatly over-taxed, Fielding excused himself. But the Duke sent Mr.

Carrington again next day, and Fielding with great difficulty obeyed the

summons. After waiting some three hours in the antechamber (no unusual

feature, as Lord Chesterfield informs us, of the Newcastle audiences), a

gentleman was deputed to consult him as to the devising of a plan for

putting an immediate end to the murders and robberies which had become

so common. This, although the visit cost him "a severe cold," Fielding

at once undertook. A proposal was speedily drawn out and submitted to

the Privy Council. Its essential features were the employment of a known

informer, and the provision of funds for that purpose.

By the time this scheme was finally approved, Fielding's disorder had

"turned to a deep jaundice," in which case the Bath waters were

generally regarded as "almost infallible." But his eager desire to break

up "this gang of villains and cut-throats" delayed him in London; and a

day or two after he had received a portion of the stipulated grant,

(which portion, it seems, took several weeks in arriving), the whole

body were entirely dispersed,--"seven of them were in actual custody,

and the rest driven, some out of town, and others out of the kingdom."

In examining them, however, and in taking depositions, which often

occupied whole days and sometimes nights, although he had the

satisfaction of knowing that during the dark months of November and

December the metropolis enjoyed complete immunity from murder and

robbery, his own health was "reduced to the last extremity."

"Mine (he says) was now no longer what is called a Bath case," nor, if

it had been, could his strength have sustained the "intolerable fatigue"

of the journey thither. He accordingly gave up his Bath lodgings, which

he had hitherto retained, and went into the country "in a very weak and

deplorable condition." He was suffering from jaundice, dropsy, and

asthma, under which combination of diseases his body was "so entirely

emaciated, that it had lost all its muscular flesh." He had begun with

reason "to look on his case as desperate," and might fairly have

regarded himself as voluntarily sacrificed to the good of the public.

But he is far too honest to assign his action to philanthropy alone. His

chief object (he owns) had been, if possible, to secure some provision

for his family in the event of his death. Not being a "trading

justice,"--that is, a justice who took bribes from suitors, like Justice

Thrasher in _Amelia_, or Justice Squeez'um in the _Coffee House

Politician_,--his post at Bow Street had scarcely been a lucrative one.

"By composing, instead of inflaming, the quarrels of porters and beggars

(which I blush when I say hath not been universally practised) and by

refusing to take a shilling from a man who most undoubtedly would not

have had another left, I had reduced an income of about L500 a year of

the dirtiest money upon earth to little more than L300, a considerable

proportion of which remained with my clerk." Besides the residue of his

justice's fees, he had also, he informs us, a yearly pension from the

Government, "out of the public service-money," but the amount is not

stated. The rest of his means, as far as can be ascertained, were

derived from his literary labours. To a man of his lavish disposition,

and with the claims of a family upon him, this could scarcely have been

a competence; and if, as appears not very clearly from a note in the

Journal, he now resigned his office to his half-brother, who had long

been his assistant, his private affairs at the beginning of the winter

of 1753-54 must, as he says, have "had but a gloomy aspect." In the

event of his death his wife and children could have no hope except from

some acknowledgment by the Government of his past services.

Meanwhile his diseases were slowly gaining ground. The terrible winter

of 1753-54, which, from the weather record in the _Gentleman's_, seems,

with small intermission, to have been prolonged far into April, was

especially trying to asthmatic patients, and consequently wholly against

him. In February he returned to town, and put himself under the care of

the notorious Dr. Joshua Ward of Pall Mall, by whom he was treated and

tapped for dropsy. [Footnote: Ward appears in Hogarth's _Consultation of

Physicians_, 1736, and in Pope--"Ward try'd on Puppies, and the Poor,

his Drop." He was a quack, but must have possessed considerable ability.

Bolingbroke wished Pope to consult him in 1744; and he attended George

II. There is an account of him in Nichols's _Genuine Works of Hogarth_,

i. 89.] He was at his worst, he says, "on that memorable day when the

public lost Mr. Pelham (March 6th);" but from this time, he began, under

Ward's medicines, to acquire "some little degree of strength," although

his dropsy increased. With May came the long-delayed spring, and he

moved to Fordhook, [Footnote: It lay on the Uxbridge Road, a little

beyond Acton, and nearly opposite the subsequent site of the Ealing

Common Station of the Metropolitan District Railway. The spot is now

occupied by "commodious villas."] a "little house" belonging to him at

Ealing, the air of which place then enjoyed a considerable reputation,

being reckoned the best in Middlesex, "and far superior to that of

Kensington Gravel-Pits." Here a re-perusal of Bishop Berkeley's _Siris_,

which had been recalled to his memory by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox, "the

inimitable author of the _Female Quixote_," set him drinking tar-water

with apparent good effect, except as far as his chief ailment was

concerned. The applications of the trocar became more frequent: the

summer, if summer it could be called, was "mouldering away;" and winter,

with all its danger to an invalid, was drawing on apace. Nothing seemed

hopeful but removal to a warmer climate. Aix in Provence was at first

thought of, but the idea was abandoned on account of the difficulties of

the journey. Lisbon, where Doddridge had died three years before, was

then chosen; a passage in a vessel trading to the port was engaged for

the sick man, his wife, daughter, and two servants; and after some

delays they started. At this point the actual _Journal_ begins with a

well-remembered entry:--

"_Wednesday, June 26th_, 1754.--On this day, the most melancholy sun I

had ever beheld arose, and found me awake at my house at Fordhook. By

the light of this sun, I was, in my own opinion, last to behold and take

leave of some of those creatures on whom I doated with a mother-like

fondness, guided by nature and passion, and uncured and unhardened by

all the doctrine of that philosophical school where I had learnt to bear

pains and to despise death.

"In this situation, as I could not conquer nature, I submitted entirely

to her, and she made as great a fool of me as she had ever done of any

woman whatsoever: under pretence of giving me leave to enjoy, she drew

me to suffer the company of my little ones, during eight hours; and I

doubt not whether, in that time, I did not undergo more than in all my

distemper.

"At twelve precisely my coach was at the door, which was no sooner told

me than I kiss'd my children round, and went into it with some little

resolution. My wife, who behaved more like a heroine and philosopher,

tho' at the same time the tenderest mother in the world, and my eldest

daughter, followed me; some friends went with us, and others here took

their leave; and I heard my behaviour applauded, with many murmurs and

praises to which I well knew I had no title; as all other such

philosophers may, if they have any modesty, confess on the like

occasions."

Two hours later the party reached Rotherhithe. Here, with the kindly

assistance of his and Hogarth's friend, Mr. Saunders Welch, High

Constable of Holborn, the sick man, who, at this time, "had no use of

his limbs," was carried to a boat, and hoisted in a chair over the

ship's side. This latter journey, far more fatiguing to the sufferer

than the twelve miles ride which he had previously undergone, was not

rendered more easy to bear by the jests of the watermen and sailors, to

whom his ghastly, death-stricken countenance seemed matter for

merriment; and he was greatly rejoiced to find himself safely seated in

the cabin. The voyage, however, already more than once deferred, was not

yet to begin. Wednesday, being King's Proclamation Day, the vessel could

not be cleared at the Custom House; and on Thursday the skipper

announced that he should not set out until Saturday. As Fielding's

complaint was again becoming troublesome, and no surgeon was available

on board, he sent for his friend, the famous anatomist, Mr. Hunter, of

Covent Garden, [Footnote: This must have been William Hunter, for in

1754 his more distinguished brother John had not yet become celebrated.]

by whom he was tapped, to his own relief, and the admiration of the

simple sea-captain, who (he writes) was greatly impressed by "the heroic

constancy, with which I had borne an operation that is attended with

scarce any degree of pain." On Sunday the vessel dropped down to

Gravesend, where, on the next day, Mr. Welch, who until then had

attended them, took his leave; and, Fielding, relieved by the trocar of

any immediate apprehensions of discomfort, might, in spite of his

forlorn case, have been fairly at ease. He had a new concern, however,

in the state of Mrs. Fielding, who was in agony with toothache, which

successive operators failed to relieve; and there is an unconsciously

touching little picture of the sick man and his skipper, who was deaf,

sitting silently over "a small bowl of punch" in the narrow cabin, for

fear of waking the pain-worn sleeper in the adjoining state-room. Of his

second wife, as may be gathered from the opening words of the _Journal_,

Fielding always speaks with the warmest affection and gratitude.

Elsewhere, recording a storm off the Isle of Wight, he says, "My dear

wife and child must pardon me, if what I did not conceive to be any

great evil to myself, I was not much terrified with the thoughts of

happening to them: in truth, I have often thought they are both too

good, and too gentle, to be trusted to the power of any man." With what

a tenacity of courtesy he treated the whilom Mary Daniel may be gathered

from the following vignette of insolence in office, which can be taken

as a set-off to the malicious tattle of Walpole:--

"Soon after their departure [i.e. Mr. Welch and a companion], our cabin,

where my wife and I were sitting together, was visited by two ruffians,

whose appearance greatly corresponded with that of the sheriffs, or

rather the knight-marshal's bailiffs. One of these, especially, who

seemed to affect a more than ordinary degree of rudeness and insolence,

came in without any kind of ceremony, with a broad gold lace upon his

hat, which was cocked with much military fierceness on his head. An

inkhorn at his button-hole, and some papers in his hand, sufficiently

assured me what he was, and I asked him if he and his companions were

not custom-house officers; he answered with sufficient dignity that they

were, as an information which he seemed to consider would strike the

hearer with awe, and suppress all further inquiry; but on the contrary I

proceeded to ask of what rank he was in the Custom house, and receiving

an answer from his companion, as I remember, that the gentleman was a

riding surveyor; I replied, that he might be a riding surveyor, but

could be no gentleman, for that none who had any title to that

denomination would break into the presence of a lady, without any

apology, or even moving his hat. He then took his covering from his

head, and laid it on the table, saying, he asked pardon, and blamed the

mate, who should, he said, have informed him if any persons of

distinction were below. I told him he might guess from our appearance

(which, perhaps, was rather more than could be said with the strictest

adherence to truth) that he was before a gentleman and lady, which

should teach him to be very civil in his behaviour, tho' we should not

happen to be of the number whom the world calls people of fashion and

distinction. However, I said, that as he seemed sensible of his error,

and had asked pardon, the lady would permit him to put his hat on again,

if he chose it. This he refused with some degree of surliness, and

failed not to convince me that, if I should condescend to become more

gentle, he would soon grow more rude."

The date of this occurrence was July the 1st. On the evening of the same

day they weighed anchor and managed to reach the Nore. For more than a

week they were wind-bound in the Downs, but on the 11th they anchored

off Hyde, from which place, on the next morning, Fielding despatched the

following letter to his brother. Besides giving the names of the captain

and the ship, which are carefully suppressed in the _Journal_,

[Footnote: Probably this was intentional. Notwithstanding the statement

in the "Dedication to the Public" that the text is given "as it came

from the hands of the author," the Journal, in the first issue of 1755,

seems to have been considerably "edited." "Mrs. Francis" (the Ryde

landlady) is there called "Mrs. Humphrys," and the portrait of the

military coxcomb, together with some particulars of Fielding's visit to

the Duke of Newcastle, and other details, are wholly omitted.] it is

especially interesting as being the last letter written by Fielding of

which we have any knowledge:--

"On board the Queen of Portugal, Rich'd Veal at anchor on the

Mother Bank, off Ryde, to the Care of the Post Master of Portsmouth

--this is my Date and yr Direction.

"July 12 1754.

"Dear Jack, After receiving that agreeable Lre from Mess'rs Fielding and

Co., we weighed on monday morning and sailed from Deal to the Westward.

Four Days long but inconceivably pleasant Passage brought us yesterday

to an Anchor on the Mother Bank, on the Back of the Isle of Wight, where

we had last Night in Safety the Pleasure of hearing the Winds roar over

our Heads in as violent a Tempest as I have known, and where my only

Consideration were the Fears which must possess any Friend of ours, (if

there is happily any such) who really makes our Wellbeing the Object of

his Concern especially if such Friend should be totally inexperienced in

Sea Affairs. I therefore beg that on the Day you receive this Mrs.

Daniel [Footnote: It will be remembered that the maiden-name of

Fielding's second wife, as given in the Register of St. Bene't's, was

Mary Daniel. "Mrs. Daniel" was therefore, in all probability, Fielding's

mother-in-law; and it may reasonably be assumed that she had remained in

charge of the little family at Fordhook.] may know that we are just

risen from Breakfast in Health and Spirits this twelfth Instant at 9 in

the morning. Our Voyage hath proved fruitful in Adventures all which

being to be written in the Book, you must postpone yr. Curiosity--As the

Incidents which fall under yr Cognizance will possibly be consigned to

Oblivion, do give them to us as they pass. Tell yr Neighbour I am much

obliged to him for recommending me to the Care of a most able and

experienced Seaman to whom other Captains seem to pay such Deference

that they attend and watch his Motions, and think themselves only safe

when they act under his Direction and Example. Our Ship in Truth seems

to give Laws on the Water with as much Authority and Superiority as you

Dispense Laws to the Public and Examples to yr Brethren in Commission.

Please to direct yr Answer to me on Board as in the Date, if gone to be

returned, and then send it by the Post and Pacquet to Lisbon to

"Yr affect Brother

"H. FIELDING

"To John Fielding Esq. at his House in

"Bow Street Covt Garden London."

As the _Queen of Portugal_ did not leave Ryde until the 23d, it is

possible that Fielding received a reply. During the remainder of this

desultory voyage he continued to beguile his solitary hours--hours of

which we are left to imagine the physical torture and monotony, for he

says but little of himself--by jottings and notes of the, for the most

part, trivial accidents of his progress. That happy cheerfulness, of

which he spoke in the _Proposal for the Poor_, had not yet deserted him;

and there are moments when he seems rather on a pleasure-trip than a

forlorn pilgrimage in search of health. At Ryde, where, for change of

air, he went ashore, he chronicles, after many discomforts from the most

disobliging of landladies (let the name of Mrs. Francis go down to

posterity!), "the best, the pleasantest, and the merriest meal, [in a

barn] with more appetite, more real, solid luxury, and more festivity,

than was ever seen in an entertainment at White's." At Torbay, he

expatiates upon the merits and flavour of the John Dory, a specimen of

which "gloriously regaled" the party, and furnished him with a pretext

for a dissertation on the London Fish Supply. Another page he devotes to

commendation of the excellent _Vinum Pomonae_, or Southam cyder, supplied

by "Mr. Giles Leverance of Cheeshurst, near Dartmouth in Devon," of

which, for the sum of five pounds ten shillings, he extravagantly

purchases three hogsheads, one for himself, and the others as presents

for friends, among whom no doubt was kindly Mr. Welch. Here and there he

sketches, with but little abatement of his earlier gaiety and vigour,

the human nature around him. Of the objectionable Ryde landlady and her

husband there are portraits not much inferior to those of the Tow-wouses

in _Joseph Andrews_, while the military fop, who visits his uncle the

captain off Spithead, is drawn with all the insight which depicted the

vagaries of Ensign Northerton, whom indeed the real hero of the

_Journal_ not a little resembles. The best character sketch, however, in

the whole is that of Captain Richard Veal himself (one almost feels

inclined to wonder whether he was in any way related to the worthy lady

whose apparition visited Mrs. Bargrave at Canterbury!), but it is of

necessity somewhat dispersed. It has also an additional attraction,

because, if we remember rightly, it is Fielding's sole excursion into

the domain of Smollett. The rough old sea-dog of the Haddock and Vernon

period, who had been a privateer; and who still, as skipper of a

merchant-man, when he visits a friend or gallants the ladies, decorates

himself with a scarlet coat, cockade, and sword; who gives vent to a

kind of Irish howl when his favourite kitten is suffocated under a

feather bed; and falls abjectly on his knees when threatened with the

dreadful name of Law, is a character which, in its surly good-humour and

sensitive dignity, might easily, under more favourable circumstances,

have grown into an individuality, if not equal to that of Squire

Western, at least on a level with Partridge or Colonel Bath. There are

numbers of minute touches--as, for example, his mistaking "a lion" for

"Elias" when he reads prayers to the ship's company; and his quaint

asseverations when exercised by the inconstancy of the wind--which show

how closely Fielding studied his deaf companion. But it would occupy too

large a space to examine the _Journal_ more in detail. It is sufficient

to say that after some further delays from wind and tide, the travellers

sailed up the Tagus. Here, having undergone the usual quarantine and

custom-house obstruction, they landed, and Fielding's penultimate words

record a good supper at Lisbon, "for which we were as well charged, as

if the bill had been made on the Bath Road, between Newbury and London."

The book ends with a line from the poet whom, in the _Proposal for the

Poor_, he had called his master:--

"--hic finis chartaeque viaeque."

Two months afterwards he died at Lisbon, on the 8th of October, in the

forty-eighth year of his age.

He was buried on the hillside in the centre of the beautiful English

cemetery, which faces the great Basilica of the Heart of Jesus,

otherwise known as the Church of the Estrella. Here, in a leafy spot

where the nightingales fill the still air with song, and watched by

those secular cypresses from which the place takes its Portuguese name

of _Os Cyprestes_, lies all that was mortal of him whom Scott called the

"Father of the English Novel." His first tomb, which Wraxall found in

1772, "nearly concealed by weeds and nettles," was erected by the

English factory, in consequence mainly--as it seems--of a proposal made

by an enthusiastic Chevalier de Meyrionnet, to provide one (with an

epitaph) at his own expense. That now existing was substituted in 1830,

by the exertions of the Rev. Christopher Neville, British Chaplain at

Lisbon. It is a heavy sarcophagus, resting upon a large base, and

surmounted by just such another urn and flame as that on Hogarth's Tomb

at Chiswick. On the front is a long Latin inscription; on the back the

better-known words:--

LUGET BRITANNIA GREMIO NON DARI FOVERE NATUM. [Footnote: The fifth word

is generally given as "datum." But the above version, which has been

verified at Lisbon, may be accepted as correct.]

It is to this last memorial that the late George Borrow referred in his

_Bible in Spain:_--

"Let travellers devote one entire morning to inspecting the Arcos and

the Mai das agoas, after which they may repair to the English church and

cemetery, Pere-la-chaise in miniature, where, if they be of England,

they may well be excused if they kiss the cold tomb, as I did, of the

author of "Amelia," the most singular genius which their island ever

produced, whose works it has long been the fashion to abuse in public

and to read in secret."

Borrow's book was first published in 1843. Of late years the tomb had

been somewhat neglected; but from a communication in the _Athenaeum_ of

May 1879, it appears that it had then been recently cleaned, and the

inscriptions restored, by order of the present chaplain, the Rev.

Godfrey Pope.

There is but one authentic portrait of Henry Fielding. This is the pen-

and-ink sketch drawn from memory by Hogarth, long after Fielding's

death, to serve as a frontispiece for Murphy's edition of his works. It

was engraved in _facsimile_ by James Basire, with such success that the

artist is said to have mistaken an impression of the plate (without its

emblematic border) for his own drawing. Hogarth's sketch is the sole

source of all the portraits, more or less "romanced," which are prefixed

to editions of Fielding; and also, there is good reason to suspect, of

the dubious little miniature, still in possession of his descendants,

which figures in Hutchins's _History of Dorset_ and elsewhere. More than

one account has been given of the way in which the drawing was produced.

The most effective, and, unfortunately, the most popular, version has,

of course, been selected by Murphy. In this he tells us that Hogarth,

being unable to recall his dead friend's features, had recourse to a

profile cut in paper by a lady, who possessed the happy talent which

Pope ascribes to Lady Burlington. Her name, which is given in Nichols,

was Margaret Collier, and she was possibly the identical Miss Collier

who figures in Richardson's _Correspondence_. Setting aside the fact

that, as Hogarth's eye-memory was marvellous, this story is highly

improbable, it was expressly contradicted by George Steevens in 1781,

and by John Ireland in 1798, both of whom, from their relations with

Hogarth's family, were likely to be credibly informed. Steevens, after

referring to Murphy's fable, says in the _Biographical Anecdotes of

William Hogarth_, "I am assured that our artist began and finished the

head in the presence of his wife and another lady. He had no assistance

but from his own memory, which, on such occasions, was remarkably

tenacious." Ireland, in his _Hogarth Illustrated_, gives us as the

simple fact the following:--"Hogarth being told, after his friend's

death, that a portrait was wanted as a frontispiece to his works,

sketched this from memory." According to the inscription on Basire's

plate, it represents Fielding at the age of forty-eight, or in the year

of his death. This, however, can only mean that it represents him as

Hogarth had last seen him. But long before he died, disease had greatly

altered his appearance; and he must have been little more than the

shadow of the handsome Harry Fielding, who wrote farces for Mrs. Clive,

and heard the chimes at midnight. As he himself says in the _Voyage to

Lisbon_, he had lost his teeth, and the consequent falling-in of the

lips is plainly perceptible in the profile. The shape of the Roman nose,

which Colonel James in _Amelia_ irreverently styled a "proboscis,"

would, however, remain unaltered, and it is still possible to divine a

curl, half humorous, half ironic, in the short upper lip. The eye,

apparently, was dark and deep-set. Oddly enough, the chin, to the length

of which he had himself referred in the _Champion_, does not appear

abnormal. [Footnote: In the bust of Fielding which Miss Margaret Thomas

has been commissioned by Mr. R. A. Kinglake to execute for the Somerset

Valhalla, the Shire-Hall at Taunton, these points have been carefully

considered; and the sculptor has succeeded in producing a work which,

while it suggests the mingling of humour and dignity that is Fielding's

chief characteristic, is also generally faithful to Hogarth's

indications. From these, indeed, it is impossible to deviate. Not only

is his portrait unique; but it was admitted to be like Fielding by

Fielding's friends. The bust was placed in the Shire Hall, 4th September

1883.]

Beyond the fact that he was above six feet in height, and, until the

gout had broken his constitution, unusually robust, Murphy adds nothing

further to our idea of his personal appearance.

That other picture of his character, traced and retraced (often with

much exaggeration of outline), is so familiar in English literature,

that it cannot now be materially altered or amended. Yet it is

impossible not to wish that it were derived from some less prejudiced or

more trustworthy witnesses than those who have spoken,--say, for

example, from Lyttelton or Allen. There are always signs that Walpole's

malice, and Smollett's animosity, and the rancour of Richardson, have

had too much to do with the representation; and even Murphy and Lady

Mary are scarcely persons whom one would select as ideal biographers.

The latter is probably right in comparing her cousin to Sir Richard

Steele. Both were generous, kindly, brave, and sensitive; both were

improvident; both loved women and little children; both sinned often,

and had their moments of sincere repentance; to both was given that

irrepressible hopefulness, and full delight of being which forgets to-

morrow in to-day. That Henry Fielding was wild and reckless in his youth

it would be idle to contest;--indeed it is an intelligible, if not a

necessary, consequence of his physique and his temperament. But it is

not fair to speak of him as if his youth lasted for ever. "Critics and

biographers," says Mr. Leslie Stephen, "have dwelt far too exclusively

upon the uglier side of his Bohemian life;" and Fielding himself, in the

_Jacobite's Journal_, complains sadly that his enemies have traced his

impeachment "even to his boyish Years." That he who was prodigal as a

lad was prodigal as a man may be conceded; that he who was sanguine at

twenty would be sanguine at forty (although this is less defensible) may

also be allowed. But, if we press for "better assurance than Bardolph,"

there is absolutely no good evidence that Fielding's career after his

marriage materially differed from that of other men struggling for a

livelihood, hampered with ill-health, and exposed to all the shifts and

humiliations of necessity. If any portrait of him is to be handed down

to posterity, let it be the last rather than the first;--not the

Fielding of the green-room and the tavern--of Covent Garden frolics and

"modern conversations;" but the energetic magistrate, the tender husband

and father, the kindly host of his poorer friends, the practical

philanthropist, the patient and magnanimous hero of the _Voyage to

Lisbon_. If these things be remembered, it will seem of minor importance

that to his dying day he never knew the value of money, or that he

forgot his troubles over a chicken and champagne. And even his

improvidence was not without its excusable side. Once--so runs the

legend--Andrew Millar made him an advance to meet the claims of an

importunate tax-gatherer. Carrying it home, he met a friend, in even

worse straits than his own; and the money changed hands. When the tax-

gatherer arrived there was nothing but the answer--"Friendship has

called for the money and had it; let the collector call again." Justice,

it is needless to say, was satisfied by a second advance from the

bookseller. But who shall condemn the man of whom such a story can be

told?

The literary work of Fielding is so inextricably interwoven with what is

known of his life that most of it has been examined in the course of the

foregoing narrative. What remains to be said is chiefly in summary of

what has been said already. As a dramatist he has no eminence; and

though his plays do not deserve the sweeping condemnation with which

Macaulay once spoke of them in the House of Commons, they are not likely

to attract any critics but those for whom the inferior efforts of a

great genius possess a morbid fascination. Some of them serve, in a

measure, to illustrate his career; others contain hints and situations

which he afterwards worked into his novels; but the only ones that

possess real stage qualities are those which he borrowed from Regnard

and Moliere. _Don Quixote in England_, _Pasquin_, the _Historical

Register_, can claim no present consideration commensurate with that

which they received as contemporary satires, and their interest is

mainly antiquarian; while _Tom Thumb_ and the _Covent-Garden Tragedy_,

the former of which would make the reputation of a smaller man, can

scarcely hope to be remembered beside _Amelia_ or _Jonathan Wild_. Nor

can it be admitted that, as a periodical writer, Fielding was at his

best. In spite of effective passages, his essays remain far below the

work of the great Augustans, and are not above the level of many of

their less illustrious imitators. That instinct of popular selection,

which retains a faint hold upon the _Rambler_, the _Adventurer_, the

_World_, and the _Connoisseur_, or at least consents to give them

honourable interment as "British Essayists" in a secluded corner of the

shelves, has made no pretence to any preservation, or even any

winnowing, of the _Champion_ and the _True Patriot_. Fielding's papers

are learned and ingenious; they are frequently humorous; they are often

earnest; but it must be a loiterer in literature who, in these days,

except for antiquarian or biographical purposes, can honestly find it

worth while to consult them. His pamphlets and projects are more

valuable, if only that they prove him to have looked curiously and

sagaciously at social and political problems, and to have striven, as

far as in him lay, to set the crooked straight. Their import, to-day, is

chiefly that of links in a chain--of contributions to a progressive

literature which has travelled into regions unforeseen by the author of

the _Proposal for the Poor_, and the _Inquiry into the Causes of the

late Increase of Robbers_. As such, they have their place in that

library of Political Economy of which Mr. McCulloch has catalogued the

riches. It is not, however, by his pamphlets, his essays, or his plays

that Fielding is really memorable; it is by his triad of novels, and the

surpassing study in irony of _Jonathan Wild_. In _Joseph Andrews_ we

have the first sprightly runnings of a genius that, after much

uncertainty, had at last found its fitting vein, but was yet doubtful

and undisciplined; in _Tom Jones_ the perfect plan has come, with the

perfected method and the assured expression. There is an inevitable loss

of that fine waywardness which is sometimes the result of untrained

effort, but there is the general gain of order, and the full production

which results of art. The highest point is reached in _Tom Jones_, which

is the earliest definite and authoritative manifestation of the modern

novel. Its relation to De Foe is that of the vertebrate to the

invertebrate: to Richardson, that of the real to the ideal--one might

almost add, the impossible. It can be compared to no contemporary

English work of its own kind; and if we seek for its parallel at the

time of publication we must go beyond literature to art--to the

masterpiece of that great pictorial satirist who was Fielding's friend.

In both Fielding and Hogarth there is the same constructive power, the

same rigid sequence of cause and effect, the same significance of

detail, the same side-light of allusion. Both have the same hatred of

affectation and hypocrisy--the same unerring insight into character.

Both are equally attracted by striking contrasts and comic situations;

in both there is the same declared morality of purpose, coupled with the

same sturdy virility of expression. One, it is true, leaned more

strongly to tragedy, the other to comedy. But if Fielding had painted

pictures, it would have been in the style of the _Marriage a la Mode_;

if Hogarth had written novels, they would have been in the style of _Tom

Jones_. In the gentler and more subdued _Amelia_, with its tender and

womanly central-figure, there is a certain change of plan, due to

altered conditions--it may be, to an altered philosophy of art. The

narrative is less brisk and animated; the character-painting less

broadly humorous; the philanthropic element more strongly developed. To

trace the influence of these three great works in succeeding writers

would hold us too long. It may, nevertheless, be safely asserted that

there are few English novels of manners, written since Fielding's day,

which do not descend from him as from their fount and source; and that

more than one of our modern masters betray unmistakable signs of a form

and fashion studied minutely from their frank and manly ancestor.

POSTSCRIPT.

A few particulars respecting Fielding's family and posthumous works can

scarcely be omitted from the present memoir. It has been stated that by

his first wife he had one daughter, the Harriet or Harriot who

accompanied him to Lisbon, and survived him, although Mr. Keightley

says, but without giving his authority, she did not survive him long. Of

his family by Mary Daniel, the eldest son, William, to whose birth

reference has already been made, was bred to the law, became a barrister

of the Middle Temple eminent as a special pleader, and ultimately a

Westminster magistrate. He died in October 1820, at the age of seventy-

three. He seems to have shared his father's conversational qualities,

[Footnote: _Vide_ Lockhart's _Life of Scott_, chap. 1.] and, like him,

to have been a strenuous advocate of the poor and unfortunate. Southey,

writing from Keswick in 1830 to Sir Egerton Brydges, speaks of a meeting

he had in St. James's Park, about 1817, with one of the novelist's sons.

"He was then," says Southey, "a fine old man, though visibly shaken by

time: he received me in a manner which had much of old courtesy about

it, and I looked upon him with great interest for his father's sake."

The date, and the fact that William Fielding had had a paralytic stroke,

make it almost certain that this was he; and a further reference by

Southey to his religious opinions is confirmed by the obituary notice in

the _Gentleman's_, which speaks of him as a worthy and pious man. The

names and baptisms of the remaining children, as supplied for these

pages by the late Colonel Chester, were Mary Amelia, baptized January 6,

1749; Sophia, January 21, 1750; Louisa, December 3, 1752; and Allen,

April 6, 1754, about a month before Fielding removed to Ealing. All

these baptisms took place at St. Paul's, Covent Garden, from the

registers of which these particulars were extracted. The eldest

daughter, Mary Amelia, does not appear to have long survived, for the

same registers record her burial on the 17th December 1749. Allen

Fielding became a clergyman, and died, according to Burke, in 1823,

being then vicar of St. Stephen's, Canterbury. He left a family of four

sons and three daughters. One of the sons, George, became rector of

North Ockendon, Essex, and married, in 1825, Mary Rebecca, daughter of

Ferdinand Hanbury-Williams, and grandniece of Fielding's friend and

school-fellow Sir Charles. This lady, who so curiously linked the

present and the past, died not long since at Hereford Square, Brompton,

in her eighty-fifth year. Mrs. Fielding herself (Mary Daniel) appears to

have attained a good old age. Her death took place at Canterbury on the

11th of March 1802, perhaps in the house of her son Allen, who is stated

by Nichols in his _Leicestershire_ to have been rector in 1803 of St.

Cosmus and Damian-in-the-Blean. After her husband's death, her children

were educated by their uncle John and Ralph Allen, the latter of whom--

says Murphy--made a very liberal annual donation for that purpose; and

(adds Chalmers in a note), when he died in 1764, bequeathed to the widow

and those of her family then living, the sum of L100 each.

Among Fielding's other connections it is only necessary to speak of his

sister Sarah, and his above-mentioned brother John. Sarah Fielding

continued to write; and in addition to _David Simple_, published the

_Governess_, 1749; a translation of Xenophon's _Memorabilia_; a dramatic

fable called the _Cry_, and some other forgotten books. During the

latter part of her life she lived at Bath, where she was highly popular,

both for her personal character and her accomplishments. She died in

1768; and her friend, Dr. John Hoadly, who wrote the verses to the

_Rake's Progress_, erected a monument to her memory in the Abbey Church.

"Her unaffected Manners, candid Mind,

Her Heart benevolent, and Soul resign'd;

Were more her Praise than all she knew or thought

Though Athens Wisdom to her Sex she taught,"--

says he; but in mere facts the inscription is, as he modestly styles it,

a "deficient Memorial," for she is described as having been born in 1714

instead of 1710, and as being the second daughter of General _Henry_

instead of General _Edmund_ Fielding. John Fielding, the novelist's

half-brother, as already stated, succeeded him at Bow Street, though the

post is sometimes claimed (on Boswell's authority) for Mr. Welch. The

mistake no doubt arose from the circumstance that they frequently worked

in concert. Previous to his appointment as a magistrate, John Fielding,

in addition to assisting his brother, seems to have been largely

concerned in the promotion of that curious enterprise, the "Universal-

Register-Office," so often advertised in the _Covent-Garden Journal_. It

appears to have been an Estate Office, Lost Property Office, Servants'

Registry, Curiosity Shop, and multifarious General Agency. As a

magistrate, in spite of his blindness, John Fielding was remarkably

energetic, and is reported to have known more than 3000 thieves by their

voices alone, and could recognise them when brought into Court. A

description of London and Westminster is often ascribed to him, but he

denied the authorship. He was knighted in 1761, and died at Brompton

Place in 1780. Lyttelton, who had become Sir George in 1751, was raised

to the peerage as Baron Lyttelton of Frankley three years after

Fielding's death. He died in 1773. In 1760-5 he published his _Dialogues

of the Dead_, profanely characterised by Mr. Walpole as "Dead

Dialogues." No. 28 of these is a colloquy between "Plutarch, Charon, and

a Modern Bookseller," and it contains the following reference to

Fielding:--"We have [says Mr. Bookseller] another writer of these

imaginary histories, one who has not long since descended to these

regions. His name is Fielding; and his works, as I have heard the best

judges say, have a true spirit of comedy, and an exact representation of

nature, with fine moral touches. He has not indeed given lessons of pure

and consummate virtue, but he has exposed vice and meanness with all the

powers of ridicule." It is perhaps excusable that Lawrence, like Roscoe

and others, should have attributed this to Lyttelton; but the preface

nevertheless assigns it, with two other dialogues, to a "different

hand." They were, in fact, the first essays in authorship of that

illustrious blue-stocking, Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu.

Fielding's only posthumous works are the _Journal of a Voyage to Lisbon_

and the comedy of _The Fathers; or, The Good-Natur'd Man_. The _Journal_

was published in February 1755, together with a fragment of a Comment on

Bolingbroke's _Essays_, which Mallet had issued in March of the previous

year. This fragment must therefore have been begun in the last months of

Fielding's life; and, according to Murphy, he made very careful

preparation for the work, as attested by long extracts from the Fathers

and the leading controversialists, which, after his death, were

preserved by his brother. Beyond a passage or two in Richardson's

_Correspondence_, and a sneering reference by Walpole to Fielding's

"account how his dropsy was treated and teased by an innkeeper's wife in

the Isle of Wight," there is nothing to show how the _Journal_ was

received, still less that it brought any substantial pecuniary relief to

"those innocents," to whom reference had been made in the "Dedication."

The play was not placed upon the stage until 1778. Its story, which is

related in the _Advertisement_, is curious. After it had been set aside

in 1742, [Footnote: _Vide_ chap. iv. p. 94.] it seems to have been

submitted to Sir Charles Hanbury Williams. Sir Charles was just starting

for Russia, as Envoy Extraordinary. Whether the MS. went with him or not

is unknown; but it was lost until 1775 or 1776, when it was recovered in

a tattered and forlorn condition by Mr. Johnes, M.P. for Cardigan, from

a person who entertained a very poor and even contemptuous opinion of

its merits. Mr. Johnes thought otherwise. He sent it to Garrick, who at

once recognised it as "Harry Fielding's Comedy." Revised and retouched

by the actor and Sheridan, it was produced at Drury Lane, as _The

Fathers_, with a Prologue and Epilogue by Garrick. For a few nights it

was received with interest, and even some flickering enthusiasm. It was

then withdrawn; and there is no likelihood that it will ever be revived.

APPENDIX No I.

FIELDING AND SARAH ANDREW.

By the courtesy of the editor of the _Athenaeum_, the following letter is

here reprinted from that paper for 2d June 1883:--

75 Eaton Rise, Ealing.

In 1855, when Mr. Frederick Lawrence published his _Life of Henry

Fielding_, he thus referred (ch. vii. p. 67) to an "early passage" in

the novelist's career: "On his [Fielding's] return from Leyden he

conceived a desperate attachment for his cousin, Miss Sarah Andrews

[_sic_]. That young lady's friends had, however, so little confidence in

her wild kinsman, that they took the precaution of removing her out of

his reach; not, it is said, until he had attempted an abduction or

elopement.... His cousin was afterwards married to a plain country

gentleman, and in that alliance found, perhaps, more solid happiness

than she would have experienced in an early and improvident marriage

with her gifted kinsman. Her image, however, was never effaced from his

recollection; and there is a charming picture (so tradition tells) of

her luxuriant beauty in the portrait of Sophia Western, in _Tom Jones_."

Mr. Lawrence gave no hint or sign of his authority for this unexpected

and hitherto unrecorded incident. But the review of his book in the

_Athenaeum_ for 10th November 1855 elicited the following notes on the

subject from Mr. George Roberts, some time mayor of Lyme, and author of

a brief history of that town. "Henry Fielding," wrote Mr. Roberts, "was

at Lyme Regis, Dorset, for the purpose of carrying off an heiress, Miss

Andrew, the daughter of Solomon Andrew, Esq., the last of a series of

merchants of that name at Lyme. The young lady was living with Mr.

Andrew Tucker, one of the corporation, who sent her away to Modbury, in

South Devon, where she married an ancestor of the present Rev. Mr.

Rhodes, an eloquent preacher of Bath, who possesses the Andrew property.

Mr. Rhodes's son married the young lady upon his return to Modbury from

Oxford. The circumstances about the attempts of Henry Fielding to carry

off the young lady, handed down in the ancient Tucker family, were

doubted by the late head of his family, Dr. Rhodes, of Shapwick, Uplyme,

etc. Since his decease I have found an entry in the old archives of Lyme

about the fears of Andrew Tucker, Esq., the guardian, as to his safety,

owing to the behaviour of Henry Fielding and his attendant, or man.

According to the tradition of the Tucker family, given in my _History of

Lyme_, Sophia Western was intended to pourtray Miss Andrew." To Mr.

Roberts's communication succeeded that of another correspondent--one "P.

S."--who gave some additional particulars: "There is now, at Bellair, in

the immediate neighbourhood of Exeter the portrait of 'Sophia Western'

[Miss Andrew]. Bellair belongs to the Rhodes family, and was the

residence of the late George Ambrose Rhodes, Fellow of Caius College,

and formerly Physician to the Devon and Exeter Hospital. He himself

directed my attention to this picture. In the board-room of the above

hospital there is also the three-quarter length portrait of Ralph Allen,

Esq., the 'Squire Allworthy' of the same novel." No further contribution

appears to have been made to the literature of the subject. The late Mr.

Keightley, in his articles on Lawrence's book in _Fraser's Magazine_ for

January and February 1858, did, as a matter of fact, refer to the story

and Mr. Roberts's confirmation of it; but beyond pointing out that Miss

Andrew could not have been the original of Sophia Western, who is

declared by Fielding himself (_Tom Jones_, bk. xiii. ch. i.) to have

been the portrait of his first wife, Charlotte Cradock, he added nothing

to the existing information.

When I began to prepare the sketch of Fielding recently included in Mr.

John Morley's series of "English Men of Letters," matters stood at this

point, and I had little hope that any supplementary details could be

obtained. I was, indeed, fortunate enough to discover that Burke's

_Landed Gentry_ for 1858 gave the year of Miss Andrew's marriage as

1726; and inquiries at Modbury, though they did not actually confirm

this, practically did so, by disclosing the fact that a child of Mr. and

Mrs. Ambrose Rhodes was baptized at that place in April 1727. It became

clear, therefore, that instead of being subsequent to Fielding's "return

from Leyden" in 1728, as Lawrence supposed, the date of the reported

attempt at elopement could not have been later than 1725 or the early

part of 1726--so far back, in fact, in Fielding's life that I confess to

having entertained a private doubt whether it ever occurred at all. That

doubt has now been completely removed by the appearance of some new and

wholly unlooked-for evidence.

After the publication in 1858 of his _Fraser_ papers, Mr. Keightley

seems to have continued his researches with the intention of writing a

final biography of Fielding. In this, which was to include a reprint of

the _Journal of a Voyage to Lisbon_ and a critical examination of

Fielding's works, he made considerable progress; and by the courtesy of

his nephew, Mr. Alfred C. Lyster, his MSS. have been placed at my

disposal. Much that relates to Fielding's life has manifestly the

disadvantage of having been written more than twenty years ago, and it

reproduces some aspects of Fielding which have now been abandoned; but

in the elucidation and expansion of the Sarah Andrew episode Mr.

Keightley leaves little to be desired. His first step, apparently, was

to communicate with Mr. Roberts, who furnished him (6th May 1859) with

the following transcript or summary of the original record in the

_Register Book_ of Lyme Regis:--

"John Bowdidge, Jun., was Mayor when Andrew Tucker, Gent., one of the

corporation, caused Henry Fielding, Gent., and his servant or companion,

Joseph Lewis--both now and for some time past residing in the borough--

to be bound over to keep the peace, as he was in fear of his life or

some bodily hurt to be done or to be procured to be done to him by H.

Fielding and his man. Mr. A. Tucker feared that the man would beat,

maim, or kill him. 14th November 1725."

We thus get the exact date of the occurrence, 14th November 1725 (_i._.

when Fielding was eighteen), the fact that he had been staying for some

time in Lyme at that date, and the name of his servant. In a further

letter of 14th May 1859, Mr. Roberts referred Mr. Keightley to Mr. James

Davidson, a Devon antiquary, in whose _History of Newenham Abbey_,

Longmans, 1843 (surely a most out-of-the-way source of information!), he

found the following, derived by the author from the Rhodes family (pp.

165, 166):

"The estate [of Shapwick, near Axminster] continued but a short time the

property of the noble family of Petre, being sold by William the fourth

baron, on the 10th of November 1670, to Solomon Andrew of Lyme Regis, a

gentleman, who possessed a considerable property obtained by his

ancestors and himself in mercantile affairs. From him it descended to

his only son, who died at the age of twenty-nine years, leaving two sons

and a daughter, the latter of whom, by the decease of her brothers,

became heiress to the estate. This young lady was placed under the

guardianship of Mr. Rhodes of Modbury, and her uncle, Mr. Tucker of

Lyme, in whose family she resided. At this time Henry Fielding, whose

very objectionable but once popular works have placed his name high on

the list of novel-writers, was an occasional visitor at the place, and

enraptured with the charms and the more solid attractions of Miss

Andrew, paid her the most assiduous attention. The views of her

guardians were, however, opposed to a connection with so dissipated,

though well-born and well-educated a youth, who is said to have in

consequence made a desperate attempt to carry the lady off by force on a

Sunday, when she was on her way to church. The residence of the heiress

was then removed to Modbury, and the disappointed admirer found

consolation in the society of a beauty at Salisbury whom he married."

There are some manifest misconceptions in this account, due, no doubt,

to Mr. Davidson's ignorance of the exact period of the occurrence as

established by the above record in the Lyme archives. In the first

place, it must have been four or five years at least before Fielding

consoled himself with Miss Charlotte Cradock, and nearly ten (according

to the received date) before he married her. Again, in saying that he

was "dissipated," Mr. Davidson must have been thinking of his

conventional after-character, for in 1725 he was but a boy fresh from

Eton, and could scarcely have established any reputation as a rake. Nor

is there anything in our whole knowledge of him to justify us in

supposing that he was at any time a mere mercenary fortune-hunter.

Finally, according to one of Mr. Roberts's letters to Mr. Keightley,

timorous Mr. Tucker of Lyme had a very different reason from his

personal shortcomings for objecting to Fielding as a suitor to his ward.

"The Tucker family," says Mr. Roberts, "by tradition consider themselves

tricked out of the heiress, Miss Andrew, by Mr. Rhodes of Modbury, Mr.

Andrew Tucker intending the lady for his own son." Nevertheless, these

reservations made, Mr. Davidson's version, although _ex parte_, supplies

colour and detail to the story. From a pedigree which he gives in his

book, it further appears that Mrs. Rhodes died on the 22d of August

1783, aged seventy-three. This would make her fifteen in 1725. There

remained Lawrence's enigmatical declaration that she was Fielding's

cousin. Briefly stated, the result of Mr. Keightley's inquiries in this

direction tends to show that Miss Andrew's mother was connected with the

family of Fielding's mother, the Goulds of Sharpham Park; and as Mr.

Lawrence does not seem to have been aware of the existence of Davidson's

book, or to have had any acquaintance with the traditions or archives of

Lyme, Mr. Keightley surmises, very plausibly, that his unvouched data

must have been derived, directly or indirectly, from the Rhodes family.

Mr. Keightley also ingeniously attempts to connect Fielding's subsequent

residence at Leyden (1726-28?) [Footnote: See Peacock's _Index to

English-speaking Students who have graduated at Leyden University_, 1883

(p. 35), where Fielding's name occurs under date of 16th March 1728, and

_Cornhill Magazine_ for November 1863--"A Scotchman in Holland."] with

this affair by assuming that he was despatched to the Dutch university,

instead of Oxford or Cambridge, in order to keep him out of harm's way.

This is, however, to travel somewhat from the realm of fact into that of

romance. At the same time, it must be admitted that the materials for

romance are tempting. A charming girl, who is also an heiress; a

pusillanimous guardian with ulterior views of his own; a handsome and

high-spirited young suitor; a faithful attendant ready to "beat, maim,

or kill" in his master's behalf; a frustrated elopement and a compulsory

visit to the mayor--all these, with the picturesque old town of Lyme

for a background, suggest a most appropriate first act to Harry

Fielding's biographical tragi-comedy. But to do such a theme justice we

must

"call up him that left half-told"

the story of _Denis Duval_.

APPENDIX No. II.

FIELDING AND MRS. HUSSEY.

At pp. 124-5, vol. i., of J. T. Smith's _Nollekens and his Times_, 1828,

occurs the following note:--

"Henry Fielding was fond of colouring his pictures of life with the

glowing and variegated tints of Nature, by conversing with persons of

every situation and calling, as I have frequently been informed by one

of my [i.e. J. T. Smith's] great-aunts, the late Mrs. Hussey, who knew

him intimately. I have heard her say, that Mr. Fielding never suffered

his talent for sprightly conversation to mildew for a moment; and that

his manners were so gentlemanly, that even with the lower classes, with

which he frequently condescended particularly to chat, such as Sir Roger

de Coverley's old friends, the Vauxhall watermen, they seldom outstepped

the limits of propriety. My aunt, who lived to the age of 105, had been

blessed with four husbands, and her name had twice been changed to that

of Hussey: she was of a most delightful disposition, of a retentive

memory, highly entertaining, and liberally communicative; and to her I

have frequently been obliged for an interesting anecdote. She was, after

the death of her second husband, Mr. Hussey, a fashionable sacque and

mantua-maker, and lived in the Strand, a few doors west of the residence

of the celebrated Le Beck, a famous cook, who had a large portrait of

himself for the sign of his house, at the north-west corner of Half-moon

Street, since called Little Bedford Street. One day Mr. Fielding

observed to Mrs. Hussey, that he was then engaged in writing a novel,

which he thought would be his best production; and that he intended to

introduce in it the characters of all his friends. Mrs. Hussey, with a

smile, ventured to remark, that he must have many niches, and that

surely they must already be filled. 'I assure you, my dear madam,'

replied he, 'there shall be a bracket for a bust of you.' Some time

after this, he informed Mrs. Hussey that the work was in the press; but,

immediately recollecting that he had forgotten his promise to her, went

to the printer, and was time enough to insert, in vol. iii. p. 17 [bk.

x. ch. iv.], where he speaks of the shape of Sophia Western--'Such

charms are there in affability, and so sure is it to attract the praises

of all kinds of people.'--'It may, indeed, be compared to the celebrated

Mrs. Hussey.' To which observation he has given the following note: 'A

celebrated mantua-maker in the Strand, famous for setting off the shapes

of women.'"

There is no reason for supposing that this neglected anecdote should not

be in all respects authentic. In fact, upon the venerated principle that

"there it stands unto this day

To witness if I lie,"--

the existence of the passage and note in Tom Jones is practically

sufficient argument for its veracity. This being so, it surely deserves

some consideration for the light which it throws on Fielding's

character. Mrs. Hussey's testimony as to his dignified and gentlemanly

manners, which does not seem to be advanced to meet any particular

charge, may surely be set against any innuendoes of the Burney and

Walpole type as to his mean environment and coarse conversation. And the

suggestion that "the characters of all his friends"--by which must be

intended rather mention of them than portraits--are to be found in his

masterpiece, is fairly borne out by the most casual inspection of _Tom

Jones_, especially the first edition, where all the proper names are in

italics. In the dedication alone are references to the "princely

Benefactions" of John, Duke of Bedford, and to Lyttelton and Ralph

Allen, both of whom are also mentioned by name in bk. xiii. ch. i. The

names of Hogarth and Garrick also occur frequently. In bk. iv. ch. i. is

an anecdote of Wilks the player, who had been one of Fielding's earliest

patrons. The surgeon in the story of the "Man of the Hill" (bk. viii.

ch. xiii.) "whose Name began with an _R_," and who "was Sergeant-Surgeon

to the King," evidently stands for Hogarth's Chiswick neighbour, Mr.

Ranby, by whose advice Fielding was ordered to Bath in 1753. Again, he

knew, though he did not greatly admire, Warburton, to whose learning

there is a handsome compliment in bk. xiii. ch. i. In bk. xv. ch. iv. is

the name of another friend or acquaintance (also mentioned in the

_Journey from this World to the Next_), Hooke, of the _Roman History_,

who, like the author of _Tom Jones_, had drawn his pen for Sarah,

Duchess of Marlborough. Bk. xi. ch. iv. contains an anecdote, real or

imaginary, of Richard Nash, with whom Fielding must certainly have

become familiar in his visits to Bath; and it is probable that Square's

medical advisers (bk. xviii. ch. iv.), Dr. Harrington and Dr. Brewster,

both of whom subscribed to the _Miscellanies_ of 1743, were well-known

Bathonians. Mr. Willoughby, also a subscriber, was probably "Justice

Willoughby of Noyle" referred to in bk. viii. ch. xi. Whether the use of

Handel's name in bk. iv. ch. v. is of any significance there is no

evidence; but the description in bk. iv. ch. vi. of Conscience "sitting

on its Throne in the Mind, like the LORD HIGH CHANCELLOR of this Kingdom

in his Court," and fulfilling its functions "with a Knowledge which

nothing escapes, a Penetration which nothing can deceive, and an

Integrity which nothing can corrupt," is clearly an oblique panegyric of

Philip Yorke, Lord Hardwicke, to whom, two years later, Fielding

dedicated his _Enquiry into the late Increase of Robbers_, etc. Besides

these, there are references to Bishop Hoadly (bk. ii. ch. vii.), Mrs.

Whitefield, of the "Bell" at Gloucester, and Mr. Timothy Harris (bk.

viii. ch. viii), Mrs. Clive, and Mr. Miller of the _Gardener's

Dictionary_ (bk. ix. ch. i.); and closer examination would no doubt

reveal further allusions. Meanwhile the above will be sufficient to show

that the statement of the "celebrated mantua-maker in the Strand"

respecting Fielding's friends in _Tom Jones_ is not without foundation.

APPENDIX No. III.

AMELIA'S ACCIDENT.

In addition to the alterations mentioned at p. 109 _n_., Fielding

inserted the following paragraph in the _Covent-Garden Journal_, No. 3,

for 11th January 1752:--

"It is currently reported that a famous Surgeon, who absolutely cured

one Mrs. Amelia Booth, of a violent Hurt in her Nose, insomuch, that she

had scarce a Scar left on it, intends to bring Actions against several

ill-meaning and slanderous People, who have reported that the said Lady

had no Nose, merely because the Author of her History, in a Hurry,

forgot to inform his Readers of that Particular, and which, if those

Readers had any Nose themselves, except that which is mentioned in the

Motto of this Paper, they would have smelt out."

The motto is the passage from Martial (Ep. i. 4. 6) in which he speaks

of the _nasus rhinocerotis_.

APPENDIX No. IV.

FIELDINGIANA.

The three foregoing Appendices were added to the second edition of 1889.

In this Appendix, No. IV., I propose to bring together a few dispersed

fragments of information, which, either in the way of fresh particulars,

or in correction of hitherto-accepted statements made in the body of the

book, have come to light during the interval. Much that is absolutely

new cannot, at this date, be reasonably anticipated. But the unexpected

always happens; and the unexpected in the present instance has been

productive of two or three items which are not unworthy of brief record.

The first relates to that famous "eulogy of Gibbon" mentioned in the

second sentence of the book. The connexion of Fielding's family with the

Hapsburgs is now no longer asserted. In April 1894, the question was

exhaustively examined in the _Genealogist_ (New Series) by Mr. J. Horace

Round, who came to the conclusion that such a claim could not be

established; and that, consequently, any picturesque conjunction between

that "exquisite picture of human manners" (as Gibbon called _Tom Jones_)

[Footnote: _Autobiographies of Edward Gibbon_, 1896, p. 419.] and the

"Imperial Eagle of the house of Austria" must henceforth be abandoned.

Mr. Round has since reprinted his paper at pp. 216-49 of his _Studies in

Peerage and Family History_, 1901; and in a final paragraph he announces

that his arguments, at first hotly contested, have now been accepted by

Burke, from whose records the story has been withdrawn.

The next matter is the exact period of Fielding's residence at Leyden

(p. 8). This, although somewhat developed, long remained obscure. In

1883, in the absence of other data, I accepted, as my predecessors had

done, Murphy's statement that Fielding "went _from Eton to Leyden_, and

there continued to show an eager thirst for knowledge, and to _study the

civilians_ with a remarkable application for _about two years_, when,

remittances failing, he was obliged to return to London, _not then quite

twenty years old_ [i.e. before 22nd April 1727]." [Footnote: Fielding's

_Works_, 1762, i. 8. The italics are mine.] When the "Sarah Andrew"

episode was conclusively traced to November 1725 (Appendix I. p. 200),

it seemed only reasonable to suppose that it was succeeded by the Leyden

expatriation, especially as Fielding's first play was produced in

February 1728. Nor was this supposition seriously disturbed by the

appearance of further information. Among Mr. Keightley's MSS. I found

reference to a paper in the _Cornhill Magazine_ for November 1863,

entitled "A Scotchman in Holland" (I believe it to have been by James

Hannay). In this the writer stated that he had been allowed to inspect

the Album of the University of Leyden, and had there, under 1728, found

the entry, "Henricus Fielding, Anglus, Ann. 20. Stud. Lit." Further,

that Fielding was living at the Hotel of Antwerp. It will be noted that

this account was derived from the Album itself; and that Fielding is

styled "Stud. Lit." Twelve years after the _Cornhill_ article, the

University published their list of students from 1575 to 1875; and in

1883 Mr. Edward Peacock, F.S.A., compiled from it, for the "Index

Society," an _Index to English speaking Students who have graduated at

Leyden University_. At p. 35 of this appears "Fielding, Henricus,

_Anglus_, 16 Mart. 1728. [col.] 915." This, it will be observed, adds

the month and day, but reveals nothing as to the class of study. As I

have implied, neither of these entries was seriously inconsistent with

Murphy's statement, except as regards "studying the civilians." But in

1906, Mr. A. E. H. Swaen printed in the _Modern Language Review_

[Footnote: Vol. i, pp. 327-8 (July 1906, No. iv.)] what was apparently

the fullest version of the inscription. From col. 915 (the column given

by Mr. Peacock), he copied the following:--"Febr. 16 1728: Rectore

Johanne Wesselio, Henricus Fielding, Anglus. 20, L." Mr. Swaen held that

this meant that, on the date named, Fielding was _entered as litterarum

studiosus_ at Leyden. In this case, it would follow that his stay in

Holland must have been subsequent to February 16, 1728; and Mr. Swaen

went on to suggest that as Fielding's "first play, _Love in Several

Masques_, was staged at Drury Lane in February 1728, and his next play,

_The Temple Beau_, was produced in January 1730," the barren interval or

part of it, may have been filled by residence at Leyden.

The fresh complications imported into the question by this new aspect of

it will be at once apparent. Up to 1875 there had been but one Fielding

on the Leyden books; so that all these differing accounts were

variations from a single source. In this difficulty I was fortunate

enough to enlist the sympathy of Mr. Frederic Harrison, who most kindly

undertook to make inquiries on my behalf at Leyden University itself. In

reply to certain definite queries drawn up by me, he obtained from the

distinguished scholar and Professor of History, Dr. Pieter Blok, the

following authoritative particulars. The exact words in the original

_Album Academicum_ are:--"le Martii _1728_ Henricus Fielding, Anglus,

annor. 20 Litt. Stud." He was then staying at the "Casteel van

Antwerpen"--as related by "A Scotchman in Holland." His name only occurs

again in the yearly _recensiones_ under the 22nd February 1729, as

"Henricus Fieldingh," when he was domiciled with one Jan Oson. He must,

consequently, have left Leyden before the 8th February 1730,--the 8th

February being the birthday of the University, after which all students

had to be annually registered. The entry in the _Album_ (as Mr. Swaen

affirmed) is an admission entry; there are no leaving entries. As

regards "studying the civilians," Fielding might, in those days--Dr.

Blok explains--have had private lessons from the professors, but could

not have studied in the University without being on the books. To sum

up:--After producing _Love in Several Masques_ at Drury Lane, probably

on the 12th February 1728, [Footnote: Genest, iii. 209.] Fielding was

admitted a "Litt. Stud." at Leyden University on 16th March; was still

there in February 1729; and left before 8th February 1730. Murphy is

therefore in fault in almost every particular. Fielding did _not_ go

from Eton to Leyden; he did _not_ make any recognised study of the

civilians "with remarkable application" or otherwise; and he did _not_

return to London before he was twenty. But it is by no means improbable

that the proximate cause of his coming home was the failure of

remittances.

Another of the hitherto-unsolved difficulties in Fielding's life has

been the date of his first marriage (p. 38). Lawrence gave the year as

1735; and Keightley suggested the spring of that year. This, as Swift

would say, is near the mark, though confirmation has been slow in

coming. In a letter dated 18th June 1906, Mr. Thomas S. Bush announced

in the _Bath Chronicle_ that the desired information was to be found in

a register (not at Salisbury, where search had been fruitlessly made,

but) at the tiny church of St. Mary, Charlcombe, a secluded parish about

one and a half miles north of Bath. Here is the record:--"November ye

28, 1734.--Henry Fielding, of ye Parish of St. James in Bath, Esq., and

Charlotte Cradock, of ye same Parish, spinster, were married by virtue

of a license from ye Court of Wells." All Fielding lovers owe a debt of

gratitude to Mr. Bush, whose researches also revealed the fact that

Sarah Fielding, the novelist's third sister, was buried, not in Bath

Abbey, where Dr. John Hoadly [Footnote: Bishop Hoadly is sometimes said

to have written her epitaph. In this case it must have been (like Dr.

Primrose's on his Deborah) anticipatory, for Dr. Benjamin Hoadly, Bishop

of Winchester, died in 1761.] raised a mural memorial to her, but "in yr

entrance of the chancel [of Charlcombe Church] close to yr Rector's

seat," 14th April 1768. These are not the only fresh traces of the

connexion of the Fieldings with the old "Queen of the West." In June

last a tablet to Fielding and his sister was placed on the wall of Yew

Cottage, now Widcombe Lodge, Church Street, Widcombe, where they once

lived.

Sarah Fielding figures frequently in Richardson's _Correspondence_; and

it is with Richardson as much as with Fielding that the next jotting is

concerned. Previously to 1900, although second-hand booksellers had, I

believe, occasionally attributed to Fielding the pamphlet known as _An

Apology for the Life of Mrs. Shamela Andrews_, April 1741, no one had

devoted much attention to that unworshipful performance. But when Miss

Clara Thomson began to prepare her excellent and careful life of

Richardson (1900), it became a part of her task to examine into this

question. She found, first, that Richardson had himself ascribed

_Shamela_ to Fielding in a letter to "Mrs. Belfour" (Lady Bradshaigh);

[Footnote: _Correspondence_, 1804, iv. p. 286.] and she was acute enough

to discover, in the pamphlet itself, which appeared some months before

_Joseph Andrews_, the suggestive, though not conclusive, fact that "Mr.

B." was provisionally transformed into "Mr. Booby." When, in 1902, I was

engaged upon my own Memoir of Richardson for the "Men of Letters"

series, I was naturally indisposed to connect this undoubtedly clever,

but also unquestionably gross production with Fielding, already

"unjustly censured," as he complained in the "Preface" to the

_Miscellanies_ of 1743, for much that he had never written (p. 72). But

I must honestly confess that for the present it has been my ill-fortune

to discover only corroborative evidence. To a document at South

Kensington, in which _Shamela_ is mentioned, I found that Richardson had

appended, in the tremulous script of his old age:--"Written by Mr. H.

Fielding"; and since the publication of my book on Richardson, Mr.

Frederick Macmillan has drawn my attention to the fact that a letter

written in July 1741, by Mr. T. Dampier, afterwards Sub-Master of Eton

and Dean of Durham, to one of the Windhams, contains the following:--

"The book that has made the greatest noise lately in the polite world is

_Pamela_, a romance in low life. It is thought to contain such excellent

precepts, that a learned divine at London [Footnote: This enables me to

correct an error at p. 74. As Miss Thomson points out (_Samuel

Richardson_, 1900, p. 31) it was Dr. Benjamin Slocock of St. Saviour's,

Southwark, and not Dr. Sherlock, who praised _Pamela_ from the pulpit.

The mistake seems to have originated with Jeffrey, and was freely

repeated.] recommended it very strongly from the pulpit.... The

dedication [of Conyers Middleton's _Life of Cicero_] to Lord Hervey has

been very justly and prettily ridiculed by Fielding in a dedication to a

pamphlet called _Shamela_ which he wrote to burlesque the fore-mentioned

romance." [Footnote: Hist. MSS. Commission, 12th Report, Appendix, Part

IX., p. 204.] This shows unmistakably that _Shamela_ was attributed to

Fielding by contemporary gossip. But then so was The _Causidicade_ (p.

112), and _The Apology for the Life of Mr. The' Cibber_, _Comedian_ (p.

72). I still cling to the hope that Fielding was _not_ the author of

_Shamela_. The matter is examined at some length at pp. 42-45 of the

"Men of Letters" Memoir of Richardson; and it is plain that, if Fielding

had wished to father it, he would have included it in the _Miscellanies_

of 1743.

The remaining points which call for notice are little more than

dispersed adversaria. To the _amende honorable_ which Fielding made to

Richardson in the _Jacobites Journal_ (pp. 113-14) should be added a

further passage from the later _Covent-Garden Journal_, No. 10--

_Pleasantry_ (as the ingenious Author of _Clarissa_ says of a Story)

"_should be made only the Vehicle of Instruction_." Among other places

connected with the composition of _Tom Jones_ (p. 118) may be mentioned

Widcombe House, Bath (then Mr. Philip Bennet's), a Palladian villa close

to the road from Widcombe Hill to Prior Park; and, if we are to believe

_Rambles round Edge Hills_, 1896, p. 17, Fielding actually read that

work in MS. to Lyttelton and Lord Chatham in the dining-room of Radway

Grange in Warwickshire (Mr. Miller's). It should also be added that the

agreement for _Tom Jones_ (p. 121), dated 5th March 1749, together with

Fielding's antecedent receipt for the money, dated 11th June 1748, of

which in 1883 I could obtain no tidings, are (or were lately) in the

Huth collection. But perhaps the most important item which has come to

light since 1883 is the Will discovered in the Prerogative Court of

Canterbury by Mr. George A. Aitken. It is undated, though it was

evidently executed at Ealing in the novelist's last days, and runs as

follows:--

"In the name of God Amen. I Henry Fielding of the Parish of Ealing in

the County of Middlesex do hereby give and bequeath unto Ralph Allen of

Prior Park in the County of Somerset Esq. and to his heirs executors

administrators and assigns for ever for the use of the said Ralph his

heirs, &c. all my estate real and personal and whatsoever and do appoint

him sole executor of this my last will Beseeching him that the whole

(except my share in the Register Office) may be sold and forthwith

converted into money and annuities purchased thereout for the lives of

my dear wife Mary and my daughters Harriet and Sophia and what

proportions my said executor shall please to reserve to my sons William

and Allen shall be paid them severally as they shall attain the age of

twenty and three. And as for my shares in the Register or Universal

Register Office I give ten thereof to my aforesaid wife seven to my

daughter Harriet and three to my daughter Sophia my wife to be put in

immediate possession of her shares and my daughters of theirs as they

shall severally arrive at the age of twenty one the immediate profits to

be then likewise paid to my two daughters by my executor who is desired

to retain the same in his hands until that time. Witness my hand Henry

Fielding. Signed and acknowledged as his last will and testament by the

within named testator in the presence of Margaret Collier, Richd. Boor,

Isabella Ash."

"On the 14th November 1754," comments Mr. Aitken, "administration (with

the will annexed) of the goods, &c., of Henry Fielding, at Lisbon,

deceased, was granted to John Fielding, Esq., uncle and guardian

lawfully assigned to Harriet Fielding, spinster, a minor, and Sophia

Fielding, an infant, for the use and benefit and of the minor and infant

until they were twenty one; Ralph Allen, Esq., having renounced as well

the execution of the will as administration of the goods, &c.; and Mary

Fielding, the relict, having also renounced administration of the goods

of the deceased." [Footnote: _Athenaeum_, February 1, 1890. A portrait of

Mary Fielding by Cotes, described by one who knew it as "a very fine

drawing of a very ugly woman," was sold not many years since at

Christie's.]

The Register Office, above mentioned, is that referred to at p. 194.

What was the amount of the property so disposed of is not known. But in

making inquiries in connexion with an edition of the _Journal of a

Voyage to Lisbon_ issued by the Chiswick Press in 1892, [Footnote: This

considerably elaborates the first note at p. 179.] I discovered that

Fielding died possessed of a considerable library (653 lots), which was

sold in February 1755, "for the Benefit of his Wife and Family," by

Samuel Baker of York Street, Covent Garden, realising L364:7:1, or about

L100 more than the public gave in 1785 for the books of Johnson. An

account of this collection, rich particularly in law, classics, poetry

and drama, is given in the third series of my _Eighteenth Century

Vignettes_, 1896, pp. 164-178.

A few words, in supplement to those in the "Postscript" (pp. 191-2), may

be devoted to Fielding's family. Concerning the daughter Harriet, or

Harriot, mentioned in the foregoing will, I am indebted to Colonel W. F.

Prideaux for pointing out to me that in Burke's _Landed Gentry_, 1875,

vol. ii. p. 938, it is stated that she afterwards became the second wife

of Colonel James Gabriel Montresor. As his first wife died in March

1761, when he was more than fifty-eight; and as he afterwards married

for the third time, a widow, Mrs. Kemp of Teynham, Kent, it is probable

that, as Keightley says, Harriet Montresor was not long-lived.

[Footnote: According to Thomas Whitehead's _Original Anecdotes of the

late Duke of Kingston and Miss Chudleigh_, 1792, p. 95 (for reference to

which I am also indebted to Col. Prideaux), Miss Fielding was, at the

date of her marriage, "in a deep decline,"--a circumstance which lends a

touch of chivalry to Col. Montresor's devotion. She is said by Whitehead

to have been of "a sweet temper, and great understanding."] Of the other

children spoken of at p. 192, Louisa died in May 1753, being buried from

a house in Hammersmith. And this brings me to a final question as to

Fielding's sisters. Richardson speaks in August 1749 of being "well

acquainted" with _four_ Miss Fieldings; and Murphy and Lawrence both

refer to a Catherine and an Ursula of whom Mr. Keightley could learn

nothing. With Colonel Prideaux's help, and the kind offices of Mr.

Samuel Martin of the Hammersmith Free Library, the matter has now been

set at rest. In 1887 the late Sir Leslie Stephen had suggested to me

that Catherine and Ursula were probably born at Sharpham Park. This must

have been the case, though Keightley had failed to establish it. At all

events Catherine and Ursula existed, for they both died in 1750. The

Hammersmith Registers at Fulham record the following burials:--1750

July 9th, Mrs. Catherine Feilding (_sic_).

1750 Nov. 12th, Mrs. Ursula Fielding.

1750[-1] Feby. 24th, Mrs. Beatrice Fielding.

1753 May 10th, Louisa, d. of Henry Fielding, Esq.

The first three, with Sarah, make up Richardson's "Four worthy Sisters"

(p. 140); and the final entry renders it probable that, in May 1753,

Fielding was staying in the house at Hammersmith then occupied by his

surviving sister, Sarah.

No well-authenticated likeness of Fielding has yet superseded Hogarth's

outline (pp. 184-5), nor, if Murphy's statement (_Works_, 1762, i. p.

47) that "no portrait of him had ever been made" previously, be

accurate, can any new likeness be looked for. Nevertheless, both at the

Guelph (1891) and Georgian (1906) exhibitions, the Hon. Gerald Ponsonby

exhibited a portrait of Fielding; and another is included in the picture

attributed to Hogarth (also shown at the latter exhibition, and lately

belonging to Sir Charles Tennant), of the "Green Room, Drury Lane."

There is also a bust (posthumous) by W. F. Woodington at Eton. And this

reminds me that no more fitting tail-piece to this Appendix can be

conceived than the compact and penetrating lines which the late James

Russell Lowell composed as an inscription for the bust of Henry Fielding

at Taunton:--

"He looked on naked nature unashamed,

And saw the Sphinx, now bestial, now divine,

In change and re-change; he nor praised nor blamed,

But drew her as he saw with fearless line.

Did he good service? God must judge, not we.

Manly he was, and generous and sincere;

English in all, of genius blithely free:

Who loves a Man may see his image here."

A. D.

_March_ 1907.