and loved Thackeray could hesitate a moment between the "fac-simile of Lawrence's drawing, and the finest photograph "ever taken from the noble head of the living Thackeray." The reviewer subsequently adds-"For such a likeness we have every reason to be grateful to Mr. Lawrence, and to the photographer's art which multiplies copies of such a drawing "so cheaply."

We gather from the foregoing that even in portraiture the importance of photography is not questioned, which is only a very recent concession on the part of the fraternity; but that importance is based on its mechanical capabilities as a limner only. The critic argues thus: a work of art is solely dependant for its intrinsic merit on the brain by which it is produced. Whatever may be the subject chosen by the artist for his study, whether portrait or landscape, his intention is apparent throughout; his very soul is there embodied; in the portrait by his appreciation of some peculiarity in pose or expression, which he by an effort of his genius transfers to the canvas, so as to bring home to the spectator not only the bare features, but the character of the original. The landscape painter also, who takes nature for his guide, when he has made choice of his subject, watches with all the admiration of a lover the varying moods of his mistress, and selects one which harmonizes with his ideas of pictorial effect. It may perchance be one of her most fitful moods, and although it passes from his vision like a rapid but a vivid dream, it has left an indelible impression upon his memory: his utmost enthusiasm is aroused, and the picture grows into life under the touches of his pencil. But midway in his task new difficulties arise: he feels, and with truth, that some of his chief effects lie in the due preservation of the relative proportion between his light and shade. During these critical moments I can conceive that he begins to lose the recollection of that vision of nature's charming mood. Whatever it may

be necessary to sacrifice to fidelity, his picture must be saved as a work of art; he touches here, erases there-this is what the artist calls improving upon nature-yet it is in those effective touches that the picture becomes stamped with the mind, with the character and with the genius of its originator.

The art-critic further argues that photography is purely chemical and mechanical; that the camera has only to be pointed at the object, a few, to him, uninteresting chemical. manipulations performed, and an impression is obtained from which numbers of identical proofs can be multiplied, every one of them as lifeless and as deficient in soul as the mahogany instrument by which they are produced.

I have thus briefly stated the case, and before I proceed with the defence allow me to add that the allegations of the critic are to a very large extent founded on fact. Photography being such an enticing amusement, has enlisted the sympathy of all classes and conditions of men. It numbers among its earnest followers nobles of our land, dignitaries of the church, military men, astronomers, lawyers, physicians, and men of every grade of intelligence, even to the toiling artizan. Further, we as a nation to the present time have not accepted the rules of art as a prominent part of the education taught in our schools. When we consider that the votaries of photography, though men of information and taste in the general acceptation of the terms, are comparatively illiterate on matters connected with art, it is very easy to account for the existence and circulation of a great number of photographs calculated. to offend the educated eye of the artist, and to give him a very unfavourable impression with regard to photography itself.

Undoubtedly, as in every other profession, there are what we designate artists born. These are the very men who generally adopt art as a profession, and vain is it to attempt to allure them from its pursuit. I am personally

F

acquainted with one of these born artists. He was the. son of a farmer, who, far from appreciating the dawn of genius in the boy, commanded him to desist from occupying his time so unprofitably, and enforced the drudgery of the plough and the farm yard. It was shortly after discovered that the youth had spent his small allowance of pocket-money in the purchase of drawing materials, with which he occupied the hours which should have been devoted to sleep. The relentless father took these away from him and administered a severe castigation. There was nothing left for the poor fellow but to burn sticks into charcoal, with which he made his sketches when unobserved, on the back of the dairy door. The parent finding the incorrigible boy would never make his way as a farmer, bound him apprentice to a large Manchester machinist. Here the youth's spirit was crushed and his sinews taxed seven long dreary years at the vice, at the end of which time he knew very little more of mechanics than he did at the commencement of his term. But now he was free as the bird, and, nothing daunted, he resumed with double energy his old congenial avocation. For many years he prosecuted his studies with poverty staring him in the face, but he was determined to succeed, and successful he became. His profession became lucrative, and I have seen many truthful and artistic productions from his easel. I cannot conclude this sketch without giving you the sequel. A short time ago, acknowledging the importance of photography, he adopted it to assist him in his studies, and at this moment his numerous friends and old supporters know not which to admire mosthis artistic sketches, or his artistic photographs.

It is now time for me to enter upon the defence by endeavouring to convince you that the feeling of the artist can be exemplified by means of the lifeless camera, and that the inartistic qualities which have been so much derided by the biased followers of art as a profession, are not inherent to photography.

I will present you with a slight sketch of the principal methods-each of them independent ideas, by which photographers have endeavoured to effect this object; with what success I leave you to judge from the illustrations I shall have the honour to bring under your notice, which have been kindly furnished by the artists who produced them.

Like painting, photography divides itself into two distinct branches-portraiture and landscape-each forming in itself a separate study, and both can very seldom be successfully followed by the same individual.

Strange to say, the chief difficulty in the path of artistic portraiture is mechanical, which may sound in the ear of a portrait painter as somewhat anomalous. Every one who has even cursorily given his attention to the study of mankind. will be constantly impressed with the ever-changing expression of the human countenance-the only index of the restless soul within. Now the features are lighted up with a brilliancy of animation, inspiring the most commonplace with a certain character which commands feelings of pleasurable interest in every beholder. Again, there are fleeting moments when the countenances of the fairest and noblest of created beings are overspread with a preeminent lustre, almost amounting to sublimity, which reminds us that man was created in the image of his Maker. It is, I repeat, the perception of these grand truths, their retention in the memory, and their faithful delineation on the canvas, that ennobles the painter's art and by which all his success is achieved.

The photographer, although he may appreciate to their fullest extent these elements of artistic power, has to contend not only with mechanical defects present in the best-constructed optical instruments, but also with the lack of sensibility in the photographic tablet itself. Instead, therefore, of being able to watch his opportunity, and secure his desired result at the critical moment, he has to be content with a kind

of average expression of the countenance which, during the comparatively long time required to produce the impression, in extreme cases, may have varied between the gaze of animation and the fixed stare of the corpse. However reluctant photographers may be to acknowledge the fact, it is easy to gather from the foregoing considerations that the commencement of the art-era in photographic protraiture in the fullest meaning of the term will have to be dated from a period which has to arrive, but which, I believe, is not very far distant, when the latent image will be impressed with the rapidity of the lightning's flash.

The direction in which photographic portraitists have essayed to produce works of art again subdivides itself into two minor branches. The first consists in the production of a series of separate studies with a view to grouping the whole into one picture by means of double printing. The labour thus entailed is very considerable, presenting difficulties which, at first sight, appear almost insurmountable; and few are the men who would attempt to overcome them in the present state of our scientific knowledge These difficulties have, however, to a very large extent been successfully grappled with in some of the productions I now bring under your notice. In these specimens it is easy to recognise the conception of a master mind. That there are failings one can but admit; still enough of the artistic element is infused to show the working of a refined intelligence. He forgets the means by which they have been produced, and his mind becomes absorbed in the contemplation of the subject, catching up the feeling of the producer; thus the part which has been taken by the much abused camera and its accompaniments sinks to that of a secondary cause, corresponding with the indispensable auxiliaries of the easel, namely, the palette, the brushes and the colours of the painter.

I now bring under your notice some illustrations of the