In the series of "Great Artists" (Sampson Low and Co.),
we have to acknowledge three volumes, David Car and Peter de "Wint, by Gilbert E. Redgrave ; Mulready, by Frederick G. Stephens ; and George Cruikshank, by the same author. Cox and De Whit were born in successive years (1783 and 1784), but Cox survived his fellow-artist by ten years, dying in 1859. De What was con- nected by marriage with another English painter (Hilton), who missed the fame be deserved partly by his own fault. He painted with a bad medium, Pictures of his—e.g., "ir Calepine and Serena," once to be seen in the National Gallery—are now so dis- figured that they cannot be exhibited. De Wint also damaged his work by using unsafe colours. The prices paid to these artists for their work curiously contrast with what we are now accus- tomed. Eight pounds for an extra-well-finished picture by Cox sounds ludicrously small. Five hundred of De Whit's sketches were sold after his death (1849) for .22,394, not .25 each, and this was thought a good price. Mulready's long life (1789-1863) was one of more than usual interest. He learnt art under difficulties, the story of which makes very good reading. His first paying employment was on panoramas. He exhibited for the first time in the Academy in 1804, and for the last, just fifty-eight years later. He was not very prolific. The total of his works is about eighty, little more than one per year, and yet he worked hard ; but then, he felt that he could never put too much work into what he produced. He gave, also, much time to the work of Visitor of the Academy Schools. From the time of his election to the day before his death, his visits were constant. George Cruikshank was in many respects the very opposite to Mulready; in the copiousness and facility of his work not least so. The list of the principal books which he illustrated numbers double the total of the other artist's work, and some of them contain more than thirty sketches ! And there was a vast mass of work
besides, •
Previous page
