I

I 44 ~ i i i II I4 ~ i I %II ~ 01

New Publications

FURNITURE AT TEMPLE NEWSAM HOUSE AND LOTHERTON HALL,YORKSHIRE by Christopher Gilbert

The definitive catalogue of 662 items from the collections of Leeds City ArtGalleries, 552 pages with 682 illustrations, 14 in colour, in two volumes. Publishedjointly by the National Art-Collections Fund and the Leeds Art Collections Fund,1978. f60 the two volumes, including postage. Cheques or money orders payableto the NACF Leeds Furniture Catalogue; post to Percy Lund, Humphries & Co.Ltd., The Manningham Press, Drummond Road, Bradford BD8 8DH.

CREAMWARE AND OTHER ENGLISH POTTERY AT TEMPLE NEWSAMHOUSE, LEEDS by Peter Walton

A sumptuous, expertly researched catalogue of 1182 items in the Leeds collection,295 pages, 16 colour plates and 450 black and white illustrations. Published by theLeeds Art Collections Fund, 1976. Price f42 including postage. Cheques payableto 'Lund Humphries'; post to Lund Humphries, Drummond Road, Bradford BD88DH.

THE LEEDS ART COLLECTIONS FUND

President His Grace the Duke of Norfolk; Vice-President The Rt. Hon. the Earl ofHarewood, LL D.; Trustees George Black, F.R.C.S,W. T. Oliver, M.A, C. S. Reddihough;Committee Councillor B. P. Atha, Mrs. S. Bidgood, W. A. B. Brown, D. Mason Jones,Dr. J. R. Sherwin, Dr. M. Wainman, Dr. R. B. Welch; Hon. Treasurer Martin Arnold,B.A; Hon. Secretary Robert Rowe; Hon. Membership Secretary W. B. Blackburn; Hon.Sacr'al Secretary Mrs. Francoise Logan.The Leeds Art Collections Fund is one of the oldest supporting bodies for the visual arts inGreat Britain, a source of regular funds for buying works of art for the Leeds collections.Why not identify yourself with the Art Gallery, Temple Newsam House and LothertonHall, receive your Arts Calendar free, receive invitations to all functions, private viewsand organised visits to places of interest. The minimum subscription is L5.00 individualand L7.50 for husband and wife. Corporate membership f25. Life membership X)00. En-quiries and application forms from the Hon. Secretary at Temple Newsam House, LeedsLS15 OAE. The Arts Calendar may be obtained for a subscription of f1.00per annum, in-cluding postage 12 issues); single copies may be purchased at the Art Gallery, TempleNewsam House and Lotherton Hall, 50p each.Note: starting with the first issue published in 1947, the entire Leeds Arts Calendar is nowavailable on microfilm. Write for information or send orders direct to Xerox UniversityMicrofilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, U.S.A.

LEISURE SERVICES COMMITTEE

The Lord Mayor; Chairman Councillor B. P. Atha; Deputy Chairman Councillor Mrs. E.A. Nash; Councillor Miss A. D. Atkinson, Councillor M. J. Bedford, Councillor B. L.Cook, Councillor M. J. Dodgson, Councillor J. G. B. Frankland, Councillor B. Haydn,Councillor W. Hudson. Councillor G. P. Kirk)and, Councillor E. Millet, CouncillorE. R. C. Smith, Councillor S. Symmonds, Councillor Mrs. C. M. Thomas.

STAFF

Director of Art Caller)'es Robert Rowe, c 8 E,M A,F M.A.; Principal Keeper ChristopherGilbert, M A.,F M A; KeePer (Art Gallery) Miranda Strickland-Constable, B.A..A.M A;Keeper (Lather(on Hall) peter Walton, 8 A .A.M.A; Keeper (Temple Nervsam) AnthonyWells-Cole, M A,A M A; Keeper (Decorative Art Studies) Terry F. Friedman, B.A.,PH D;Sent'or Assistant Keepers Alexander Robertson, M A,A M A, Adrian Budge,8 A.,M.PFIIL..cERr ED; Curatorial Assistant Barbara Thompson; Conservation SupervisorsMichael Sheppard, Ron Turner; Metalrvork Conservator Phoebe Clements, DA(Edin),DIP coNs (DEs)v&A); Textile Conservators Caroline Rendell, cERT.ED,DIP coNs(TExTILEs)(CN)v oF I.ONDON), Frances Jowitt, 8 A.; Technical Assistant John Berry, B.A.; Ad-mi'nr'stra(or Jean English; Secretary Fiona Mclndoe, 8 A.; Ctencat Assistants Jean Gannon,Anna Czerkaluk.

Cover illustrationCharles H on Horseback by Jean Cavalier, signed on verso: I. CAVALIER. F. 1684, ivory,15.3 by 12.5 cm. Bought with the aid of a Government grant and a contribution from theNational Art-Collections Fund, 1980.

LEEDS ARTS CALENDAR No. 88 1981

Editorial

Cavalier's Charles I I on HorsebackTerry Friedman

Phrenology and Sculpture 1820—1855Fiona Pearson

14

Peter Hollins at The Warneford HospitalBrenda Parry jones

24

,i I ~ lggg

'la ~

~~m %hw—

Armrhair, Ilnglish, late seventeenth century; elm aml asti embellished withbaluster spindles, scalloped bands, studs, knobs and numerous free ringsencircling the components. Bought with the aid of a Government grant, 1980.

Editorial

Uppermost in the minds of the curators and allthose who love Temple Newsam is the crashingblow dealt by the theft of the gold snuff'oxes.Twenty of the finest in the famous collection givento Leeds in 1939 by Frank H. Fulford —there wasan article on them by Anthony Wells-Cole inCalendar no. 71, 1972, and a booklet with colouredillustrations was published a few years ago-were literally snatched from the house on thenight of February 26th. Fortunately the etuiswere not touched.After the previous break-in, little more than

two years ago, thousands of pounds of publicmoney was spent on completely revising thesecurity system. Apart from the money the greatproblem is to protect the house and its treasuresfrom ever increasing risks without making it intoa fortress and so spoiling its character as a uniqueshowplace. Many of the objects stolen in the firstraid have now been recovered and there is stillsome hope that the Fulford collection will findits way home. The snuff boxes are so well knownand were so fully documented that within littlemore than an hour of the incident full details,photographs and colour transparencies were inthe hands of the police who went to work at once.Without exaggeration, the world was alerted.What more can be said about one of the mostdepressing episodes in the history of TempleNewsam;

As visitors know only too well the Long Gallery,library and the floor above them, known asSmithfield, where the reserve collection ofpotteryis available and much of our teaching done, havebeen out of commission for nearly three years.The repairs are now complete and everythingwill be in working order again soon. The hazardsfaced and the strains imposed in trying to main-tain as many of our public facilities as possiblewill no doubt be quickly forgotten, but thetremendous work put in by our volunteer potterycurators in getting everything back to where itbelongs should be for ever remembered. This isthe third time within a five year span that theyhave helped to move almost the entire potterycollection: first to set it up in the newly fitted out

Smithfield, then to store it away in tea chestswhile the whole area was gutted for repair workand now to redisplay it again —how would wemanage without them.Although it did not prove possible to replace

the over-red and unsympathetic damask wallcovering in the Long Gallery the ceiling and allthe woodwork has been painted in a four colourscheme chosen to bring out the very fine rococoplasterwork and carving and enhance the superbfurniture much of which was made for this, oneof the most beautiful interiors in the country. Thepictures, a number of the most important alsopainted for the room, including the delightfulItalian views provided by Antonio Joli to em-bellish the magnificent chimneypieces, shouldonce more come into their own. Mixing thecolours, determining the tonal relationships anddeciding on a decorative balance of all theelements was an exhilarating creative experienceeven if it carried the inevitable quota of stresssymptoms. The sort of feelings that a maleassumes might be part of the business of givingbirth.'Modern'culpture has been a cause of concern

in Leeds for more than forty years. A good dealofmainly healthy controversy has been involved,but more important a deepening and intelligentunderstanding of three dimensional art andwhat the terms of reference of a 20th centurysculptor are, should and could be. What ismore, public appreciation is clearly growing-not mere acceptance as some cynics like to saythey believe. Looking back it is easy to see thatSir Philip Hendy's purchase in 1941 of one ofHenry Moore's masterpieces —the Reclining Figureof 1929 in Hornton stone —was something of aturning point. During the 1950s the permanentcollection of contemporary work grew under thedirection of Ernest Musgrave whose idea it wasto hold an exhibition ofYorkshire born sculptorsto celebrate the centenary of the musical festivalin Leeds in 1958. Sadly he was killed in a motoraccident the year before. The exhibition washeld, however, opened by the Princess Royal andviewed by the Queen and Prince Philip. It was

decided to show it outside as well as inside theArt Gallery. This entailed making and workingfrom very small scale models of all the sculptureto be displayed in the Garden of Rest so thatbrick plinths could be erected beforehand at thesites carefully chosen on plan. During thedelivery days each large and heavy piece was setup on its temporary home-base with little fuss orbother watched by somewhat incredulousspectators. Strange objects in the centre of Leedsaccessible to all comers twenty-four hours a day.Although there was a minimal police presence—little more than the eye of the law there was novandalism.In 1962 special sculpture rooms were created

inside the Art Gallery, one area bathed in day-light, the other with flexible artificial lighting sothat each piece could be individually lit. Then in1966 came the scheme for enriching the barrenexterior first floor wall of the Art Gallery with awork in high relief by a sculptor who had been aGregory Fellow at the University. Although theproject never materialised it was an excellentidea and highlighted the role of Peter Gregory asa patron ofartists. He established the Fellowships,tenable for two or three years, in 1950.He wanteda painter, sculptor, musician and poet to workwithin the orbit of the student population; a

'oncept which has become familiar beyond Leedstoday. In the 60s and early 70s each of thepainters and sculptors had an exhibition in theArt Gallery and representative works werebought for the permanent collection. So thefoundations of the new Moore Sculpture Galleryand the open air sculpture garden on its roof werelaid in theory if not in concrete a long time ago.Perhaps even longer ago than one might at firstthink, for the climate of opinion in Yorkshire andparticularly in Leeds was very sculpture-conscious during the last century. Of enduringinfluence was the Northern Society for theEncouragement of the Fine Arts founded in 1809.The annual exhibitions not only gave local peoplethe chance of seeing the work of establishedLondon sculptors but introduced would-be buyersto the young Yorkshire practitioners who weregiven an opportunity of demonstrating theirabilities, often for the first time. The statue ofDr. William Hey by Sir Francis Chantry ex-hibited in 1826 proved to be a taste-setter withsturdy progeny. The new patrons, woollenmanufacturers and other industrialists, wereepitomised by Benjamin Gott and his family.

They consistently collected the work of the bestsculptors of the day including that ofJoseph Gott,two ofwhose finest monuments are to be found inSt. Bartholomews Church, Armley, Leeds. Otherfine pieces of smaller scale which show morereadily this sculptor's subtlety of mind as wellas his technical accomplishments —for example,his Greyhound of 1827 usually shown at LothertonHall —have through the years found their way,with considerable guidance it must be claimed,into the collections of the City Art Galleries.Readers may like to be reminded of two articlesby Terry Friedman on 'Aspects of NineteenthCentury Sculpture in Leeds'hich appeared inCalendars nos. 69 and 70, 1971/2, and the major.exhibition he organised with Timothy Stevens,also in 1972, of the work ofJoseph Gott.Jumping forward now to the time of Colonel

T. W. Harding: not only was he the foundingfather of the Art Gallery but he gave the BlackPrince by Sir Thomas Brock and other bronzesto adorn City Square. In so doing he contributed-for nearly a century already, if not for evermorean essential part of the visual image of Leeds. In1903 he became the third recipient of the Free-dom of the City.And yet, so far at least, nineteenth century

sculpture has never enjoyed the acclaim andscramble for ownership that has been the lot ofnineteenth century painting of almost every kindand size. Perhaps it is because, like architecture,one lives with a lot of it without choice andpeople are said to see little above their heads. Itwould certainly be difficult either to stumbleover or feel an acute desire personally to possessthe Black Prince, but sculpture came in domesticsizes too in the last century.This issue of the Calendar is devoted to sculpture

and particularly to the personalities of sculptors:the creative driving force, what it achievedthrough them and what they believed to be theirmission in life. Of no less interest are the views ofspecialists assessing the ingredients of the artistictemperament during a period remote fromtheir own.

Cavalier's Charles II on HorsebackTERRY FRIEDMAN

Catastrophic political and religious upheavalhas been the frequent cause of radical changes inthe course of art; many examples come to mindbut few affected the decorative arts in Englandmore profoundly than the events which tookplace in France towards the end of the seventeenthcentury. Following the infamous Massacre ofSt. Bartholomew's Day in 1572, when the Frenchfollowers of Calvin were slaughtered in their tensof thousands, Henry IV, a Protestant convert toCatholicism, who came to the French throne in1589, promulgated the Edict of Nantes, whichgranted political and religious freedom to Pro-testants, Huguenots as they came to be called.But the two communities continued to live to-gether only as uncomfortable bedfellows and onOctober 18, 1685, Louis XIV revoked the Edict,forcing some 250,000, including members of thenobility, to flee into Holland, Prussia and theAmerican colonies; many settled in London andthe craftsmen among them made a great impacton the arts in England. Some of their finestachievements can be seen at Temple NewsamHouse: the pair of silver-gilt ewers from WarwickCastle (1697) by Pierre Harache, the settee anddaybed made around 1700 for the 1st Duke ofLeeds by the royal cabinetmaker, Philip Guibert,Paul de Lamerie's tea equipage (1735), themarble bust of Alexander Pope (1738) by LouisFranqois

Roubiliac.'he

recent acquisition of a small but magnifi-cent ivory relief depicting Charles II on horse-back, carved by Jean Cavalier in 1684 (Coverand Figs. 7—8), adds another masterpiece to thisgroup of gorgeous objects; the ivory is f'urtherremarkable as the earliest known dated work bythis important sculptor and so far the only exampleof such an ambitious composition in an oeuvreotherwise devoted to small profile portraitmedallions.sCavalier was probably the most accomplished

ivory carver to work in England during the lateseventeenth century but unaccountably little isknown about him.s The engraver and diarist,George Vertue, who knew everyone, fails tomention Cavalier, although has much to say

about the work of the other great Huguenot ivorycarver, David Le Marchand (Fig. 1).4 NeitherCavalier's birth nor death dates are recorded andnothing has come to light about his career until1684, when the Temple Newsam relief wascarved. He was then already clearly a matureartist, although his technique was still to undergorefinement during the next few years. The dry,linear treatment evident in the Charles II and aprofile portrait of Princess Mary, signed anddated 1686 (Fig. 2), with its stylized and elaborate-ly dressed coiffure, was to give way to softer,more fluid modelling, particularly in the hair,and more delicate rendering in the details ofdress by the time he carved the portrait of SamuelPepys in 1688.'fter this time Cavalier'stechnique became more confident and in 1690he was appointed the 'King's medallist', f'r aletter dated December 11 of that year, signed onbehalf of William I I I, gave 'le Sieur JeanCavalier Notre Medalliste'a 'Pais Estrangers'otravel abroad. A second profile of Queen Mary,now in Berlin, is signed and dated 1690 and thisis probably the year he also carved the ravishingprofile of her husband (Fig. 3). The King wasrecently enthroned but is portrayed in armouran allusion to his military prowess with anelaborately embossed harness and crisp cloakthrown across his shoulder and chest; a long,delicately curled wig sets off his stern, un-flattering but not unsympathetic features. Themedallion is 3$ inches high.There is a further group of royal portraits in

the British Museum and members of the Courtalso began to patronize Cavalier. For example,in July 1690 he charged Charles, 6th Earl ofDorset and his wife, Countess Mary, $21.10.0for carving their medallion portraits,' notinconsiderable sum when compared to the $50Grinling Gibbons, Master Carver in Wood to theCrown, received in 1685 for a life-size marblestatue of Queen Mary for the Royal Exchangein London. In 1693, however, Cavalier movedon to Copenhagen, where he carved the profileof Ulrich Frederick Guldenlowe (Fig. 4), and inthe following year was in Sweden.s In 1697 he

Fig. 1 Portrait of Thomas Gttp by David Le Marchand, ivory 8 inches high, signed on the verso 'D.L.M. Sculp.'. The Victoriaand Albert Museum (A. 1—1936).

Fig. 2 Portrait of Princess (later Queen) Mary 11by Jean Cavalier, ivory, 3g inches high, signed on the verso 'Cavalier. F. 1686'.The Victoria and Albert Museum (A.201—1929).

Fig. 3 Portrait of'illiam 111 by Jean Cavalier, c1690, ivory, 3st inches high, signed on the shoulder 'C'nd inscribed'GVLIELMVS. III.D.G.MAG. BRIT. FR, & HI. REX.'.The Victoria and Albert Museum (A.18—1938).

Fig. 4 Portrait of Utrith Frederich Guldenlotoe by Jean Cavalier, ivory, 4 inches high, signed 'IC'nd inscribed 'VLDRIC. FRID.GVLDENLEW. 1693'. The Victoria and Albert Museum (A.8—1928).

accompanied the Swedish ambassador to Russia,then to Persia and apparently it was there,sometime in 1698 99, that he died.

Now among the most tantalizing and as yctunexplained aspects of Cavalier's career are hismovements during the unrecorded formativeyears up to 1684 and his sudden appearancethen as a mature and highly accomplishedsculptor. It must be that he had been trained inthe studio of some respectable Parisian ivorycarver. There was, for example, Michel Mollart(1641—1713),working as a carver and medallist

for Louis XIV, who allowed him an apartmentin the Louvre. His magnificent ivory profile ofthe King (Fig. 5), 4~to inches high, probablycarved around 1683, with its fantastic armourencrusted with portrait medallions of Anne ofAustria hanging over his ear, Marie de Medicion the shoulder, Marie Teresa of Austria as aneck pendant, and Henry IV and Louis XIII onthe helmet, which is crowned by a figure ofApolloriding in the Sun chariot, is characteristic.Although of'higher quality than Cavalier's earlywork, it seems to f'oreshadow his treatment of

Fig. 5 Portrait of Louis XIV as 'Le Roi Soleil'y Michel Mollart, c1683, ivory, 4+a inches high, signed on the shoulder 'MollartFecit'. The Victoria and Albert Museum (A.44—1935).

Fig. 6 Portrait ofCharles IIby an unidentified sculptor, c1660, ivory 3$ inches high. The Victoria and Albert Museum (A 6—1932).

Fig. 7 Detail of Charles H on Horseback by Jean Cavalier, ivory, 6 inches high, signed on the verso 'I. CAVALIER. F. 1684.'eedsCity Art Galleries iTemple Newsam House), bought with the aid of a Government grant and a contribution from the NationalArt-Collections Fund, 1980,

hair and dress. The presence of' small numberof portrait medallions in wax at tributed toCavalier suggests that, like Mollart, he suppliedmodels for bronze medals, although the possibilitycannot be ruled out that these waxes were madefrom casts taken from the ivory

originals.'ntil

more documents and works are found thisvital part of his early life remains a matter ofspeculation.There is, however, the incontestable evidence

of the Temple Newsam relief. On the reverseside (Fig. 8), Cavalier has tested the particularqualities of this comparatively large piece ofivory, 6 inches high, by chiselling a tree and aflower into the soft material. On the relief itselfthe royal stallion prances in a landscape of rolling,

grassy hills strewn with flowers; it is clearly en-joying himself and seems to be smiling. Theglossy sweat of its hind quarters is beautifullyconveyed in the delicate, curving grain of theivory; the animal's flickering, beribboned tailechoes the King's billowy cloak. The saddlecloth, armour and other accoutrements arerendered with the same loving care. Charles'head, crowned by laurels, is modelled sensitivelyto give the appearance of the resolute and goodmonarch. A comparison with an ivory of theKing as a younger man (Fig. 6) carved by anunknown sculptor perhaps around 1660, showshow pedestrian such portraits could be.The Temple Newsam relief, in contrast, holds

its own in an age which produced some notable

11

Fig. 8 The verso of Plate 7.

life-size equestrian statues of monarchs: HubertLe Sueur's bronze of Charles I at Charing Cross(1633), Jasper Latham's Charles II for theLondon Stocks Market (1672, now at NewbyHall, Yorkshire), the bronze at Windsor Castle(1679) by the Huguenot sculptor, Josias Iback,and others, not to mention those Continentalprototypes going back to the Marcus Aureliuson the Roman Capitol (A.D. 165).toBut when did Jean Cavalier come to England?

The most likely date, of course, would be duringthe last months of 1685 or shortly after, as a resultof the Revocation of the Edict of Nantesrn But arecent and fortuitous acquisition by The Victoriaand Albert Museum of a profile portrait in ivoryof Isabella, Duchess of Grafton (1667—1722),somewhat worn and of inferior quality butsigned by Cavalier and also dated 1684 (inexactly the same manner as the Temple NewsamrelieI),t'rovides an invaluable alternative date.The Duchess (Fig. 9), daughter and heiress ofthe Earl of Arlington, was married to HenryFitzroy (1663—90) at the age of five. At first theunion did not augur well —Henry was all of nineyears old —and the couple separated. But in 1675he was made Duke of Grafton and four yearslater they were remarried, Evelyn reporting

somewhat apprehensively on the reunion of this'sweetest and most beautiful child'nd the 'boythat had been rudely bred'.'s In 1684, the Duke,although apparently not the Duchess, visitedLouis XIV at Conde and for a brief time enteredhis military service and apparently conductedhimself with honour at the seige of Luxemburg.He then returned to England, established acareer as a daring soldier and in 1688, with JohnChurchill (the future Duke of Marlborough),joined William III in the struggle for the throneagainst the Catholic, James II. Grafton wasrewarded by being invited to carry the orb at theCoronation of the new king.

As the illegitimate but favourite son of CharlesII by Barbara Villiers, Duchess of Cleveland,could it not have been Grafton who was respon-sible for bringing Cavalier to England, perhapswhen he himself returned in 1684? May he nothave also commissioned the Temple Newsamrelief?Notes

l. See A. Wells-Cole, 'Two Rococo Masterpieces', LeedsArts Calendar, No. 79, 1976, pp.13—24 and Leeds ArtCalendar, No. 86, 1980, p. 1; C. Gilbert, Furniture atTemple 7tfewsam House and Lotherton Hall, Leeds, 1978,Vol. II, pp.320—24; W. K. Wimsatt, 7he Portraits ofAlexander Pope, 1965, pp.235—7, pls. 58a—b. The sculptor,John Cheere (1709—87), the subject of the exhibition, TheMan at Hyde Park Corner, Leeds and Twickenham, 1974,almost certainly had Huguenot ancestry.

2. Inv. no. 27/80. Bought with the aid of a Governmentgrant and a contribution from the National Art-Collections Fund, 1980 (7tfACF Eetvsletter, Christmas1980, p.14). See Christie's, April 29, 1980, lot. 170.

3. There is no substantial literature in English on Cavalierbut enthusiasts may wish to consult Arvid Julius, jeanCavalier och ntlgra andra elfenbenssnidare Studier i elfenben-plastik i Sverige, Uppsala, 1926, which deals with post-Renaissance ivories in Sweden, including Cavalier'scareer, pp.86—112, and a list of works, pp.113—44,pls. 22—24; J. Verbeek, 'Een Nederlander in Zwedendoor een Franse ivoorsnijder geportretteerd'withEnglish summary), Antiek, VIII, 1973—4, pp.35—42,concerning Cavalier's portrait of Anthony Grill, 1696;Europaische Barockplastik am JViederrhein Grupello undseine geit, Diisseldorf, 1971, pp. 193—4, cat. no.105,pl. 66, and E. von Philippovich, Elfenbein, 1961,pp.282—4. See also H. Osborne, ed., The Oxford Com-panion to Art, 1970, p.603.

4. T. Hodgkinson, 'An Ingenious Man for Carving inIvory', Victoria and Albert Museum Bulletin, April 1965,pp.29—32; M. Whinney, English Sculpture tyao—tSSo,1971, pp.25-29.

5. The Workshipful Company of Clothworkers, London,inscribed on the verso 'J. CAVALIER. FECIT. Ao.D.1688'Verbeek, op.cit., p.42, pls. 6—7). When thisportrait was shown at the Burlington Fine Art Clubexhibition, Carving in 1vory, 1923, the date was given as1688. Julius (op.cit.), however, dated it incorrectly to1683, a mistake repeated by later writers; Verbeek, for

12

example, dates the Clothworkers portrait correctly to1688 but assumes the existence of an earlier version of1683. There is clear need for an accurate catalogueraisonne of Cavalier's works. For other examples of1688, see the profiles of Christiane Eberhardine andEleonora Magdalena, Margravines of Brandenburg-Bayreuth, in Berlin (C. Theuerkauff; 'Wandlungeneiner Kunstkammer', Kunst u. Antiquitaten, III, 1980,pls. 24—25).

6. Public Record Office, Calendar of State Papers,Domestic Series, S.P. Dom. Warrant Book 35, p.497,quoted in Julius, op.cit., Bil.A.

7. Kent County Record Office, Sackville papers, A191(4,a receipt signed by Cavalier for supplying a pair ofmedallion portraits (untraced).

8. R.Gunnis, Dictionary ofBritish Sculptors r66o—s85s, 1953,p.168.

9. E. J. Pyke, A Biographical Dictionary of Wax Modetlers,1973, pp.25—6, pl. 46. For instance, Vertue related in1752 of Isaac Gosset's models for wax profile medallions,that 'molds or casts off. in the same composition ofwhitewax'ere sold 'in oval frames for one guinea apeece-the original model at 4 guin. each Other persons havegot these &, from molds & casts them in plaster of'paris.and are sold all over the town and Country —at a smallprice'; further, 'his uncle Gosset... was much esteemed

for...casting in wax all sorts of small figures fromIvory —carvings... by which he gaind a considerablefortune and dyd rich'Ilratpole Society, Vol.22, 1934,pp.160—61).

10. M. Whinney, Sculpture in Britain t53o to s88o, 1964,pl. 27. R. Gunnis, op.cit., pp.214,234.

11. A 'John Cavalier', perhaps our sculptor, is listed amongthe denizations of Huguenots on May 16, 1683 (W. A.Shaw, ed., Letters of Deniration and Acts of Ittaturah'rationfor Aliens in England and Ireland r6oS—tyoo, The Pub-lications of The Huguenot Society of London, Vol.XVI II, 1911,p. 162) .

12. See also the portrait of an elderly man, in Berlin, signed'I Cavalier F 1692'Julius, op.cit., no.722).

13. The Dictionary ofRational Biography, Vol.VII, pp.205—6.

Acknowledgements

Dr. Charles Avery, Malcolm Baker and Hilary Youngprovided most valuable information. I am also grateful toThe Victoria and Albert Museum for permission to illustrateworks in that collection.

Fig. 9 Portrait of Isabella, Duchess ofGrafton by Jean Cavalier, ivory 3$inches high, signed on the verso'Ds. GRAFTON I. CAVALIER 1684'.The Victoria and Albert Museum(A.97—1980).

Phrenology and Sculpture 1820—1855FIONA PEARSON

On January 8, 1821 the Edinburgh Phreno-logical Society, with George Combe, W.S., inthe chair 'moved and unanimously agreed tothat in respect of the valuable contributionswhich artists may be expected to make to theScience ofPhrenology in communicating accurateaccounts of the development of illustrious men,they be admitted members of this Society in anhonorary way without payment of

fees.'he

Society was founded on February 22, 1820by George Combe (Fig. 1), advocate and Writerto the Signet, and his brother Andrew, a

surgeon.'eorge,

born in 1788, one of seventeen childrenof an Edinburgh brewer, attended the parishschool of St. Cuthbert's around 1794, the HighSchool from 1797 and Edinbugh Universitybetween 1802 4. He was then articled toMessrs. Higgiris and Dallas, Writers to the Signet,and he in his turn educated his brothers andsisters.s George and Andrew Combe used theirrespective interests in criminology and medicineto make phrenological statements on the socialconditions of their day. The development 'of'illustrious men'as thought possible throughthe anatomical study of the mind, reading thecorresponding relief on the outside of the headwhich showed various tendencies which could becorrected, given certain conditions.4 The ideaof the face showing the mind of men was ex-pounded by the seventeenth century courtpainter Charles Le Brun in drawings 'illustrativeof the relation between the human physiognomyand that of the Brute creation.'s A century laterthe Swiss writer and friend of the painter Fuseli,Johan Caspar Lavater, wrote in his Essays on

Physiognomy 'There is nothing I would morestrongly recommend to the physiognomist thanthe study of exact and unchangeable busts inplaster... Whoever compares the plaster bustsof men of genius and idiots with each other,whoever dissects, draws and measures them,part by part, will have faith in physiognomyequal to the belief of his own

existence.'he

Edinburgh Phrenological Society follow-ed Lavater's example and began to amass acollection of skulls, life and death masks, portraitbusts and portrait engravings. The first artist-member was the struggling young sculptor,'Samuel Joseph Esq., Sculptor, London, presentlyin Edinburgh,'ho was unanimously admittedto membership on December 26, 1810, thirteendays prior to the decision to give free membershipto artists (Figs. 2 &.3).'t the same meeting Mr.Robert Buchanan and Sir George Mackenzieread observations on Benjamin Robert Haydon'spicture of 'Christ's entry into Jerusalem', whichwas then on display in Edinburgh.sJoseph's first contribution to phrenology was

at a meeting held at George Combe's house onJune 8, 1821. Mackenzie had noted that a tutorin his own house, a Mr. Ferguson, was unable toperceive relative position or distance on acanvas: 'Mr. Combe stated that Mr. Joseph, amember of'the Society had met with a case whichformed a perfect contrast to that ofMr. Ferguson,namely Mr. J. F. Williams, Landscape painterand scene painter to the Edinburgh Theatre...This gentleman had an extraordinary power ofrecollecting relative position and is otherwisedistinguished as a painter. Mr. Joseph has him-self made a mask of this gentleman and desiresit to be presented to the Society.'t the samemeeting Combe 'mentioned that Mr. JamesBridges, W.S., had shown him a letter fromR.B.Haydon Esq., Historical Painter in London,offering to present the Society with a number ofcasts in his possession or Duplicates of

them.'He

offered a bust ofSocrates in November 1821).Mackenzie also gave the Society on that occasion'a collection of portraits of celebrated paintersfrom authentic originals etched by James Girtin,as illustrative of the development of severalcelebrated individuals.'s The other main sourceof casts for the Society during these early yearswas Messrs Luke O'eill R Sons of the Canon-gate. Combe prepared an index to the casts

14

Fig. 1 Bust of George Combe (1788—1858j, marble, by Lawrence Macdonald (1799—18781.The Scottish National PortraitGallery.

made by this firm which was sold with them atsixpence each. By July 1821 the booksellersBell and Bradfute were holding a stock of thesecasts and Combe wrote to them 'If you aredisposed to give a few more a chance of sale Icould provide you with those in the annexedlist some of which I think would soon be askedfor. I have got a cast of each from London andany artist here could make a mould from mineand multiply them to any extent and at littleexpense.'n January 3, 1822 Luke O'eillpresented the Society with a phrenologicalbust."'The growth of the Society's collection necessi-

tated a permanent home. On September 23,1822 the Clyde Street Hall was taken as theirpermanent weekly accommodation and presseswere built for the casts, which were all numberedand labelled." Instruction in phrenology wasalso given and a Diploma was devised whichsported a Bust of Socrates, the forehead markedout with the organs, standing upon an Ionicpillar drawn from Samuel Joseph's pattern bookof pedestals.'s Joseph was commuting betweenEdinburgh and London in the early eighteen-twenties and work he sent for exhibition to theInstitution for the Encouragement of Fine Arts inScotland (which in 1827 was granted a RoyalCharter, becoming the Royal Scottish Academy)and to the Royal Academy in London of 1821 2were mainly of Scotsmen (Fig. 3)"and includedSir George Mackenzie of the Edinburgh Phreno-logical Society.'s In January 1822 Joseph sentthe plaster of this work to George Combe,together with his apologies for not being in aposition to repay a $20 loan.'s It would seemthat the patronage and interest of Combe aidedthe young sculptor in the expensive process ofexecuting commissions. However, he had toawait payment from clients and the apologeticletters extended through to May, due to the laxattitude of Lady Boswell and a severe eyeinflammation which prevented him from beginn-ing new commissions." Nevertheless, the twomen remained on good terms and in the summerof 1822 Joseph passed on to Combe a phreno-logical reading. Joseph's thanks were given inkind by presentations of works and casts to theSociety. On March 7, 1823 he gave a bust ofGeorge Combe which met with their 'highapprobation'" and at the following meeting onApril 17, 1823, he presented the cast of the headofMrs. Mary Mackinnonso who, 'kept a house of

ill fame in Edinburgh, and was executed thereon 16April 1823, for the murder of a young man,in a momentary fit of fury.'st His final gifts to theSociety, prior to returning to London in 1829,were casts of the heads of the notorious murderers,Burke and Hare.ss Joseph's place was taken bythe Scottish sculptor, Lawrence Macdonald(Fig. 5).A series of letters from Joseph in Londonto the Scottish genre painter William Lizarsshows that he left behind him in Edinburgh astring of debts and many unfulfilled promisesfrom a band of flattering followers. The establish-ment of the Royal Scottish Academy in 1827 andthe subsequent fight for places outlined in theseletters to Lizars,ss suggest that Combe andmembers of the Edinburgh PhrenologicalSociety put political weight behind the artistmembers of the Society in the art world. It alsohad the attraction of housing a collection ofbusts on permanent display.During the first twelve years of the Society's

existence, six painters became members: PatrickGibson, Landscape Painter (November 28, 1822),Thomas Uwins, Historical Painter (March 20,1823),John Morrison, Portrait Painter (March 3,1825), William Stewart, Miniature Painter(April 13, 1826), Charles Lees, Painter (March28, 1827) and John Syme, Portrait Painter(January 19, 1832).'4 The only sculptors, besideJoseph, to take an active part were LawrenceMacdonald (1799—1878) and John Steell(1804—91)"Macdonald was admitted to membership on

February 1, 1827 and proved to be a majorinfluence upon George Combe's enquiries intothe application of phrenology to the Fine Arts.Prior to this date, papers had been read on thistopic by Mr. William Scott, W.S., the subjectsbeing the character and genius of Raphaelillustrated by a cast of his skull, on February 5,1824's, and phrenology as applied to criticismin the arts of statuary and painting, in Decemberof 1824, when Combe read a paper on the bustsof certain eminent men in Westminster Hall.

'hepresence of Macdonald led Combe'sobservations closer to home with a notice onMr. James Thorn, the sculptor of ?am O'Shanterand 5otder gohnie, on December 4, 1828.ss

Fig. 2 Bust of Thomas Chalmers (1780—1847), plaster, bySamuel Joseph (1791—18501, inscribed Published est .Novembert 8oo. S. joseph fera. (Photograph before restoration). Facultyof Divinity, University of Edinburgh.

16

R

'g

1

W

17

Fig. 3 Bust of Professor james Gregory (1753—1821), plaster, 1821, bv Samuel Joseph. Scottish National Portrait Gallery.

Three years later, on the occasion ofMacdonald'sdeparture to London, Combe paid the followingtribute: 'observations on the Life, works, talentsand cerebral development of Mr. LawrenceMacdonald, illustrated by a Cast of the head,presented by that Gentleman at the Society'srequest. A cast of the skull of Raphael havingbeen laid on the table, Mr. Combe took occasionto point out the remarkable resemblance whichit bears to the head of Mr. Macdonald.'ssThe Preface to George Combe's Phrenology

applied to Painting and Sculpture of 1855 notes hisobligation to Macdonald, who had introducedhim to the philosophy of art 'while he was

resident in Edinburgh a quarter of a centuryago'. The Catalogue of busts in the possession of theEdinburgh Phrenological Society by Robert Coxincludes an early biography and a phrenologicalreading of the sculptor.so It details his precocioustalent in drawing and cutting figures in his nativePerthshire, which attracted the notice of thearchitect, James Gillespie Graham; he recom-mended him to the local landowner, Mrs.Oliphant of Gask, who became his patroness.After a period of study in Rome he settled inEdinburgh in 1827 where he made the ac-quaintance of the Combe brothers. His sub-sequent career in London and Rome brought a

Fig. 4 Death masts of Thomas Chalmers, plaster. Collection of the Edinburgh Phrenological Society, University of Edinburgh.

steady stream of portrait commissions anddespite his early break with the Combes, his bustof an unknown man at Cardiff (Fig. 6) revealfine facial modelling characteristic of thosesculptors who came into contact with phrenology.

Combe was convinced that phrenology hadgiven him 'facts and principles calculated to aidthe artist in realising his own inspirations.'hestudy of the landscape requires a knowledge ofgeology, 'Therefore, with the human form thekey to its nature is in Physiology of brain andnervous system.'e argued for expression versusthe beauty of form and his illustration was chosenfrom the experience of his mother-in-law, thefamous actress, Sarah Siddons, who advocatedthe use of outward calm with deep inwardpassion as the most effective manner of acting,as opposed to 'small brained screaming andgesticulation.' The emphasis was on the innatecharacter of the individual mirrored in thephysiology of the outward form. One painterwrote to Combe complaining that his facultiesof locality and form were rather small, whichcould explain his inferior work. He asked whatcould be done to remedy this fault.a2 The mootpoint of phrenology was that it promoted the useof human determination for a small improve-ment in under-developed faculties. However,this rather self conscious form of social improve-ment never found favour in the art world.Combe's wife, Cecilia wrote on the failure of hislate work, that 'Phrenology applied to theFine Arts", was a labour of love to him and someof the principles of Art there developed were sonew, and the ideas of a layman becoming Law-giver in Art seemed so preposterous to many whohad established themselves as judges and juriesaccording to the old approved methods, that itnever became popular except with some un-prejudiced artists and persons of fine taste whodared to judge for themselves.'as These wisewords summarise the personal mission of a smallgroup of Edinburgh phrenologists to introducedetailed and scientific observations into art. It isironic that Combe did not publish his theoriesuntil the mid eighteen-forties in The Phreno-logical journal,a4 only a few years prior to the fineobservations of nature practised by the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and John Ruskin, whoalso sought to illustrate the need for socialreform. The Pre-Raphaelites also depictedrealistic images of their friends and family butwithin a historical or narrative context and we

know that the sculptor, Thomas Woolner, PRB,was interested in phrenology. as However, Josephand Macdonald had in Edinburgh a far earlierexample of realistic portraiture in sculpture, thestatue of Duncan Forbes of Culloden of 1752 byLouis Franqois Roubiliac in Parliament Hall,next to the Library of the Writers of the Signet.The informal pose and the expressive gesture ofthe hands was possibly the precursor ofJoseph'masterpiece, the seated figure ofWilliam Wilber-force of 1838 in Westminster

Abbey.a'erhaps

Cecilia Combe was right when shesaid that Combe's wish to be a lawgiver in Artwas unacceptable to the art world. The initialstatement on artists and phrenology made in1821 suggested that artists could make 'valuablecontributions [to] the Science of Phrenology ascommunicating accurate accounts of the develop-ment of illustrious men.'he work of Roubiliac,Joseph and Macdonald did produce accurateaccounts of the features of illustrious men butthese were surrounded by stylised treatment ofhair and classical drapery, sometimes combinedwith contemporary dress. Moreover, the scienceof phrenology required only casts and skulls tomake its points. The creative aspect of the artistwas not needed. Nor did phrenology add to theinformation given to the artist in previous agesthrough life or death masks, measurements takenwith calipers, portraits, or, latterly, photography.It superimposed another set of rules upon theartist in the name of Science and sought to provethat illustrious men had uniform characteristics.Later supporters of phrenology included the arthistorian, Mrs. Anne Jamesons'nd the novelist,George Eliot. Therefore, one could conjecturethat phrenology did contribute to a new interestin art and literature in the individual's characterand psyche. It was itself characteristic of theVictorian move away from Romantic gesturesinto a world of self help and scientific discoveryon a hitherto unknown scale.

Fig. 5 Burt of Lawrence Afacdonald, marble, by JohnHutchison. Royal Scottish Academy.

20

.,: a;:II

Fi

]

g W'I

a ~ "~IgP~'L",

I

g

21

Notes

I.

2.3.

6.7.

8.9.10.11.12.13.14.

15.

16.17.18.19.

20.21.

22.

23.24.

26.27.

29.30.

Edinburgh Phrenological Society Minute Book (here-after E.P.S.), Edinburgh University Library, Vol. I,p.l l.E.P.S.Vol.l, p.l.Di< tionary of'ational Biography.D. dc Gustino, A Science vf the Mind, London, 1975.A series vf lithographic, drawings illustrative af the relationbetwrrn the human physiognomy and that of the Brute creationfrom a'esigns by Charles Le Bran, with remarks on the sysle>n,Lomlon, 1827.J. C. Lavater, Essays an Physiognomy, London, 1792.The plaster bust ol Thomas Chalmers of'1820. (Facultyof Divinity, University of Edinburgh) displays Joseph'formulation of stylised hair and classical drapery aspart of his oeuvre, l>ut the modelling ol'he fa<.c is flat andgives no hint ol'he dynamic character of'he famousyoung preacher and social reformer. This work wasexhibited at the Institution for the Encouragement

ol'ine

Arts in Scotland in 1821, with Joseph givingaddresses in London and Edinburgh. David Kilkie harlsketched Chalmers in 1817 (National Gallery of'cot-land, D4752) and knew Joseph by 1822; in thc inter-vening years he had persuaded Chalmers to allowAndrew Geddes to paint his portrait. On Wilkie's death,Joseph received the commission to execute a statue

ol'he

painter which was then placed in the NationalGallery, London. (A Cunningham, Life and Letters ofDavid Wilkie, Vol.l, letter of 16 August 1822; NewCollege MSS.CHA,4/9,49/14,39/18,64). P1.3 is a deathmask taken thirty years later (no. 11 in the EdinburghPhrenological Society Collection, Department

of'natomy,University of'Edinburgh).E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.10.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.27.The National Library ol Scotland, MS, 583, f.716.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.37.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.53.E.P.S.,Vol. I, pp.42,50,53.Professor James Gregory (1753- 1821)was most probablya posthumous subject. 1'his plaster bust was exhibitedat the Institution lor the Encouragement of'ine Artsin Scotland in 1822 (243) and at. the Royal Academy ofthe same year (1010).In the one year between this workand the bust of Thomas Chalmers, Joseph tightened uphis technique of modelling features from a broad treat-ment to a closely observed realism.F. Rinder and W. D. McKay, The Royal Scottish Academyi ga6—>9>6, Glasgow, 1917; A. Graves, The RoyalAcademy of Arts A Complete Dictionary vf Cnntributors,London, 1906.The National Library of Scotland, MS. 7208, I'.133.The National Library of Scotland, MS. 7208, I'.137.The National Library of Scotland, MS. 7382, I'.81.Letterbook of the Phrenological Society 1820—40,Edinburgh University Library, letter no.19.or Macimnes, E.P.S.,Vol.l, p.68.Cvx's Catalogue vf Busts in Possession uf the Edit>burghPhrenological Society, Edinburgh University I.ibrary(cat. no.l3).Cvx's Catalogue, for Burke, p.20, cat. no.32; for Hare,p.42, cat. no.88; see also E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.146, (April 2,1829).The National Library of Scotland, MS. 1831,9—24.E.P.S.,Vol.l, pp.56,66,102,115,124,177 rcspectivcly.E.P.S.,Vol. I, pp. 122, 161.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.80.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.96.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.140.E.P.S.,Vol. I, p.170.Cat. no.109, p.55.

31. George Combe, op.cit.,32. The National Library of Scotland, MSS. 7208/52

(December 23, 1822).33. The National Library of Scotland (Cecilia Combe

papers) .34. The Phrenological faurnal, 1844, 1846, 1847.35. I nlormation given by Benedict Read, Courta)d I nstitutc

of Art.36. For a discussion of Samuel Joseph, see Leeds Art Calendar,

No. 86, 1980, pp.20—28.37. The National Library of Scotland, MS, 584, f,922,

Acknowlcdgements

I would like to thank Dr. Terry Friedman for my initialintroduction to this period of British sculpture. The followingstaff of the University ofEdinburgh also assisted: Mrs. MargotButt, New College Archivist; Dr. Patsy Cambell, Depart-ment of Fine Art; Miss Sheila Fletcher, Old College; ProfessorGeorge Romanes and Mr. Alee Yeoman, Department ofAnatomy; University of Edinburgh Library ManuscriptRoom stafF. Dr. Rosalind Marshall ol the Scottish NationalPortrait Gallery has given generously ol her time and thanksare also due to the staff of the National Library of Scotland.

As an undergraduate at Edinburgh University, FionaPearson became interested in the relationship betweenphrenology and sculpture while working on her dissertationThe Collection of Portrait Busts at dttew College, Edinburgh. Shenow holds the post of Research Assistant in the Departmentof Art at the National Museum ol'ales and has organizedthe exhibitions Sir Alfred Gilbert, R.A. (1978), Goscoinbe john(1979) and Sculpture for the Blind (1980). At present she isworking on a large collection of'etters and manuscriptmaterial concerning thc Welsh sculptor James HavardThomas.

Fig. 6 Bust vf an Unknown Man, marble, 1844, by LawrenceMacdonald. National Museum of'Wales.

22

<ij kII I

Peter Hollins at The Warneford HospitalBRENDA PARRY-JONES

Amongst the archives of the Warneford Psychia-tric Hospital at Oxford,'here have, fortuitously,survived thirty-two autograph letters from theBirmingham-based sculptor, Peter Hollins(1800—86).2 In 1843, he was commissioned bythe Committee of Management to 'execute alife-size marble statue of the Asylum's greatestbenefactor, the Rev. Dr. Samuel Wilson Warne-ford, rector of Bourton-on-the-Hill, Gloucester-shire, who had endowed it with properties worth$70,000. This unique sequence of letters,supported by several other manuscript items, re-presents Hollins's side of the detailed discussions,advice and practicalities which were exchangedbetween him and the hospital authorities pre-paratory to the setting up of the statue in itstemporary location in the Asylum Chapel in1849. The letters cast, in addition, considerablelight on the pattern of life, methods of work andthe personality of an early Victorian, provincialsculptor.Peter Hollins was a member of a family with

considerable artistic talent. His paternal uncle,a glass-painter in Birmingham, had a son, JohnHollins, A.R.A. (1798—1855), who achievedconsiderable acclaim as a painter of portraitsand historical subjects. Peter's own father,William Hollins (1763—1843) was an architectand sculptor of great versatility, who wasresponsible for the erection in Birmingham ofsuch well-known buildings as the Public Officein Moor Street (1805—7), the Prison, OldLibrary and Public Dispensary. William Hollinsalso carried out major alterations to the Earl ofShrewsbury's mansion, Alton Towers, and, per-haps more surprisingly, drew up plans for theRoyal Mint in St. Petersburg at the request ofthe Empress of Russia, but declined the invitationto go there to superintend its erection. Inaddition, he was keenly interested in the historyof lettering and produced a number of finemurals and marble portrait busts in a simple,classical style, which were exhibited at the RoyalAcademy between 1821 and 1825.4

With this artistic background behind him, itwas scarcely surprising that Peter Hollins con-tinued in his father's footsteps and in duecourse became a respected and popular sculptorwhose work at its best was quite outstanding. Hewas a devoted member and later vice-presidentof the Birmingham Society of Artists. As atribute, a portrait ofHollins, by William ThomasRoden, was commissioned by subscription andnow hangs in the Birmingham Art Gallery andhe is also commemorated by a monument in thechurch of St. Paul at Birmingham.After initial training in his father's studio,

Peter went to London to work under Sir FrancisChantrey, one of the outstanding sculptors ofthe period, and it was probably during thisformative time that he acquired the artistry andfluidity which characterised his later sculpture.His modelling of recumbent female figures whichhave a light, flowing quality, was regarded bysome contemporaries as equal to the skills ofChantrey.s One of his finest female figures, themonument to Mrs. Thompson (1838) in MalvernPriory, received a most ecstatic commentary inBerrouo's Worcester journal, October 6, 1842, whena visitor, seeing it by chance, wrote 'we havedelighted in the elegant and classical productionsof a Flaxman, a Gibson, a Baily and a Chantry:but we have never felt a more profound emotionof pleasure than in contemplating this wonderfulwork. Moving on the spirit of the ancients, it isessentially English, essentially personal andhistorical; but it is also essentially classical in theutmost perfection of design and

execution.'uring

the eighteen-thirties, Hollins shared astudio at 17, Old Bond Street, London, with theBirmingham portrait painter, Harry Room, andhere, in 1833, he held a successful exhibition ofhis works. He visited Italy between 1835 and1836 and upon his return received a number ofimportant commissions. However, the death ofhis father in 1843 necessitated his return toBirmingham to take over the family business inGreat Hampton Street and all but one of the

24

Fig. 1 Bust of the Rev. Vaughan Thomas, plaster, 1845, by Peter Hollbas.The Warneford Psychiatric Hospital, Oxford.

25

Fig. 2 Statue of the Rea Dr. Samuel Wilson Warneford, 1843—48,marble, by Peter Hollins. The Warneford PsychiatricHospital, Oxford.

26

thirty-two letters discussed in this article werewritten from that address. Hollins emerges fromthis correspondence as an essentially simple andhumble character, co-operative and anxious toplease his patrons in every possible way.On April 29, 1843, a model of the bust of the

Rev. Dr. Warneford produced by Hollins in 1841for the Queen's Hospital, Birmingham, wasexhibited at a meeting of the Governors of theWarneford and was highly approved. In con-sequence, the Rev. Vaughan Thomas (1775—1858), the current Chairman of the Committeeof Management (Fig. 1) and a life-long friendof Dr. Warneford, paid a visit to Hollins's studioto commission a life-size statue, intended, atthis point, for erection in the Asylum Chapel,then in the process of being built to the designsof Thomas Greenshields, a local craftsman. OnOctober 13, 1843 Hollins sent Vaughan Thomasa quotation for $800, the cost of executing thestatue in white marble, remarking that it wouldbe a considerable advantage to his reputation tohave one of his works erected in Oxford, where itwould at tract useful publicity. He showedconsiderable shrewdness in making a provisothat the sum for the statue should be raised to$1,000 if the Asylum Committee was pleasedwith the finished product, but willingly acceptedthe instructions of the Committee as to theposture, expression and dress of his subject. Thefinal sculpture dutifully depicts Dr. Warnefordseated, with a thoughtful expression and wearingacademic dress, his right hand resting upon afavourite volume of Devotional Offices (Figs.2—3). Before actually embarking on the work,Hollins paid a visit in October or November 1843to his subject at his home, The Rectory inBourton-on-the-Hill, 1'or Dr. Warnef'ord reportedapprovingly in a letter to Rev. Vaughan Thomas,dated November 11, 1843, that the sculptor'appeared anxious to give the least possibletrouble'o him throughout the

sitting.'n

February 21, 1844, Hollins wrote toVaughan Thomas explaining that he awaited aclient at his studio about the time of the Asylum'sannual meeting and as an alternative to'his ownpresence there he offered to finish 'a smallplaster figure'f the statue (untraced) and sendit 'by the Oxford Coach', adding that 'the largemodel is in the naked state and therefore notfavourable for inspection'. Three days later hepenned another note to inform Vaughan Thomasthat the small model had been left at the coach

office ready for transit to Oxford. It was, heclarified 'an original cast from a clay

model'hich

had previously been submitted for inspec-tion at Oxford. The next letter, dated May 24,1845, duly records that 'the marble statue isprogressing rapidly and most satisfactorily—I go to London next week to have it packed andsent to Birmingham as the roughing out iscompleted —when I have the honour to seeyou in Birmingham, I shall hope to have theexcellent Doctor's statue in a favourable state toview'. Hollins begged Vaughan Thomas topardon the extreme briefness of this communica-tion 'as it is past 11 o'lock and I have been riding1'rom Mansfield most of the day'.Two further short letters were sent to Vaughan

Thomas, on August 27 and 30 of the same year,to acknowledge the safe receipt of his expenses onthe statue. The latter of these also records thefact that many 1'avourable comments had beenpassed by visitors to the studio on the fine work-manship both of the Warneford statue and abust ofVaughan Thomas (Fig. 1) being preparedthere concurrently and 'intended for the Queen'College't Birmingham.A year later, Hollins wrote to report that he

had been very busily engaged on the statue ofDr. Warneford which 'promises to be ready bythe end of this month for sending to London forexhibition at the Royal Academy', and askedVaughan Thomas's advice as to what descriptionshould be supplied for the exhibition catalogue.The entry f'r the year 1846 confirms that thestatue was finally registered as '1400 A marblestatue of the Reverend S. Wilson Warneford, tobe erected at Oxford'. It was well-receivedduring the exhibition and generally thought tobe a fitting exposition of the sculptor's 'con-siderable gifts'.

In July of the same year, Hollins wrote toDr. F. T. Wintle, Medical Superintendent of theWarneford Asylum, acknowledging the safereceipt of further money paid on account for thestatue. It appears that following the R. A. ex-hibition, the sculptor obtained the consent of theAsylum Committee to have it re-conveyed to hisBirmingham studio, Hollins thanking the Com-mittee for this concession in a note dated August6, 1846. Towards the end of that same month hewrote, apologetically, to Vaughan Thomasthanking him for his forbearance in acceptingthe long delays before completing his bust andattributing the time-lag to 'an unusual press of

27

business all this season', a situation intensified byhis 'personal fastidiousness'nd unwillingnessto allow any work to leave the studio withoutreceiving the finishing touches from his ownhand. However, Hollins had been able todespatch by 'Messrs. Pickford'n August 29,'three hampers, each containing a bust', one forVaughan Thomas's 'servantman'nd the othersfor the former's two nieces. The first of these wasdonated by Hollins free of charge, in recognitionof the service afforded to him professionally byVaughan Thomas's original commission of theWarneford Memorial.On November 3, Hollins again wrote to

Vaughan Thomas to inform him that thepedestal for the statue was complete and that hewished to make arrangements for both it and thestatue to arrive in Oxford at the same time. Hesuggested that it might now be appropriate forhim to pay a visit to'Oxford to assist in choosingthe site 'best calculated to exhibit the statue toadvantage'nd also to make arrangements forcutting the pedestal inscription. However, thisletter was followed by another, in January 1847,explaining that his intended visit to Oxfordwould have to be postponed until after thecompletion and delivery on January 18, of amarble bust ofDr. Jephson."There had evidently been some slight financial

misunderstanding between the parties as to thecost of the Warneford statue and the sculptor,therefore, was obliged to state cautiously in hisletter ofMarch 13, 1847 that 'under the impressionof receiving one thousand pounds I have had apedestal executed worth one hundred pounds,which was not calculated upon in the price Inamed at Oxford. I therefore hope you will notthink me going beyond what I set out withsaying if I ask for the two hundred you havepromised to send me'. His next letter concludedwith the announcement that he intended to visitOxford to inspect the proposed sites suggestedfor erecting the statue. It is clear from a varietyof'ontemporary sources that this latter decisionwas occupying considerable attention about thistime, for amongst the Asylum archives there hasalso survived a long letter to Vaughan Thomasfrom Rev. Dr. Frederick Barnes, Canon of ChristChurch and a former chairman of the originalBuilding Committee of the Warneford. In thisletter, dated March 19, 1847, Dr. Barnesaffirmed 'I fear there will be great difficulty inobtaining a desirable position for the statue'.

Since the asylum had been designed to be'useful'ather than 'ornamental', Dr. Barnespointed out that there was no suitable part of thebuilding wherein such a work of art could beerected. He advocated either the building of adomed addition to the existing entrance hall or alengthening of the Asylum Chapel (then afterprolonged delays nearing completion) as beingthe only possibilities worth considering to housesuch a remarkable memorial and so fine a workof art.The sculptor himself similarly concerned with

the siting of his masterpiece found time amidstall the business connected with his completion ofthe Jephson memorial to visit Oxford twice inthe late Spring of 1847.On returning to his studiohe penned another letter to Vaughan Thomas,in which he stated 'A second visit to the TaylorGalleries [The Taylorian at Oxford] confirmedmy first impression that the situation near thestaircase at the end of the Gallery for the antiquestatues is a good place', provided that the statuewas placed well away from the 'square bronzedwarming apparatus'. However, in a fascinatingdraft letter'rom Vaughan Thomas to an un-specified recipient it is revealed that the requestto place the statue in the 'new University

Gallery'et

with complete refusal on the grounds that itwas reserved exclusively for the exhibition ofantique busts and statues. This rejection wascountered by a spirited tirade in his letter ofJuly 1847 when Vaughan Thomas protestedvehemently against such misuse of the UniversityGallery for the displaying of what he termedderisively as mere 'Plaster of Paris

Trumpery'nworthyof the University. 'It is an abuse of thefine room', he continued, 'to fill it with the cheapbut clever Plasterworks of Messrs. Baldacci andBrucciani and the other vendors of modernantiques', such as were then being purchased on agrand scale to grace 'the residences of showygentlemen in common and commercial life'.Despite his eloquent plea that the Gallery shouldbe made a repository for 'statues of real men ofnative growth and sterling worth and a trulyEnglish Reputation'nstead of housing 'caststaken from the draped and undraped statues ofGods and Godesses, Heros and Heroines', not-withstanding his confident rating of Dr. Warne-ford's philanthropy with that of John Howard

Fig. 3 Statue ofDr. Warneford, 'P. Hollins, Sculptor J. Fisher,Engraver'.

28

29

and Thomas Guy, and despite the sculptor'hopes for a more eminent and public location, itwas in the Lunatic Asylum that Hollins's statuefinally came to rest.On July 11, 1848, the Committee ofManage-

ment came up with a Resolution, ofwhich a copywas sent to Hollins, stating 'that it is the convictionof the Governors that the proper, that is the mostappropriate locus in quo for the....admirablestatue is at the very seat and scene of Dr. Warne-ford's charity, the Warneford Asylum'. Theyrequested the sculptor to furnish 'the dimensionsof the Aperture which will be necessary to admitthe Pedestal and the Statue'. Hollins's reply wasa sketch-plan of the crated statue (Fig. 4)complete with measurements. The Committeealso ordered the sculptor, on the same day,July 11, to 'take steps for the safe removal of hisadmirable statue to the Asylum.... where abuilding is in the course of erection for thetemporary lodgement of the same till by theenlargement of the central House of the Asyluma suitable vestibule be constructed for its finaldeposit'. This latter remark clearly troubledHollins for within six days back came anotherletter expressing distinct anxiety about the un-finished building and advising 'the insideshould be complete before the Statue is erected orinjury may befall the Statue from the workmen-The floor may form an exception if it be stone asthis can as well be done after the Statue is erectedas before, but all plastering, painting andcolouring should be finished ere the Statue isfix'd'.Peter Hollins is known to have suff'ered inter-

mittently from rheumatism, the result of pro-longed working in wet clothes, which eventuallyforced him to give up sculpting for the finaltwelve years of his life. He commentedilluminatingly upon the rigours of one suchattack in a letter to Vaughan Thomas, withwhom he had struck up a lasting friendship, ofJuly 17, 1848: 'I am just recovering from asevere attack of Rheumatism which has confinedme to my home for the last two months.... andwhich has left me very weak and my medicaladviser has recommended a residence at the seaside for the next three weeks or a month, butthanks to the railway this has no need to interruptour proceedings as I can traverse the kingdomat any time I receive your command to erect thestatue of the Excellent Dr. Warneford'. Hollins'snext letter was addressed from Southport in

Lancashire where he had been staying 'for thebenefit of the sea air', whose ef'ect, he reported,had been 'most advantageous'nd he intendedreturning to Birmingham forthwith to resumehis professional labours 'quite restored'. He addedthat on arrival at his studio, he would despatchthe information necessary for Thomas Knowles,an Oxford stonemason, to undertake the erection

. of the statue in the Asylum Chapel and the sub-sequent supervision of the cutting of the inscrip-tion upon the pedestal. Knowles's letter, havingreceived the instructions, has also survived, inwhich he observed that the dimensions of thecrated figure, five feet ten inches by three feetthree inches, presented no difficulty in transport-ing it through 'a common doorway'.The next communication with Vaughan

Thomas took place on December 20, whenHollins requested the latter to further his'professional prosperity'y composing a testi-monial to be sent to the Bentinck MemorialCommittee. Hollins had been asked to attend atthe Town Hall in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire,with his designs to compete for a commission toexecute a commemorative sculpture to the lateLord George Bentinck.'aughan Thomas roseto the occasion and provided the sculptor with aglowing testimonial, a draft copy of which hassurvived. The statue ofDr. Warneford, VaughanThomas claimed, had given 'lovelier

satisfaction'nd

had been accorded 'approving criticism fromall who have seen it'. Following its exhibition atthe Royal Academy in 1846, the sculptor hadreceived a multitude of compliments for hislabour, operational skills and fine sentiment,which amounted to an almost unqualifiedapprobation of this work of art.

Seven letters from Hollins spanning the year1849 give considerable insight into his activities.The first, dated January 9, is simply a letter ofthanks for the fine testimonial sent to theBentinck Committee and concludes with sincerecommiserations with Vaughan Thomas who wassuffering a tiresome period of ill-health. InAugust, Hollins reported that he had at lastfound an artist to make a drawing from theWarneford statue (to be utilised for engravingsubsequently) and went on to remind the latterthat 'Although the marble statue of the excellentDr. Warneford is a great ornament to my studioI shall be glad to fix it in the destined situationbefore the cold weather sets in as there is a riskin fixing these works in frosty weather'. Quite

30

Fig. 4 Sketch of Warneford's statuecraled, with measurements, Prior lo deliverylo the Hospital, 1848. The WarnefordPsychiatric Hospital, Oxford.

appropriately, the next three letters, all writtenin October, were concerned with the transportarrangements of the statue from Birmingham andthe pedestal from London, so as to arrive inOxford simultaneously. Some delay was ex-perienced due to the need to re-polish thepedestal and to clean the statue which had'contracted some of the Birmingham smoke'.Both pieces were to be packed and transported,each in 'a spring van'nder the supervision ofeither Hollins or his foreman. Hollins mentionedin passing in one of these letters that due to illnessthere had been no progress by the artist em-ployed in making a drawing from the statue.Since no other artist in Birmingham couldaccomplish this task so adequately, Hollinsrecommended that he should be allowed toresume his work, utilising the small model whichwas to be retained in the Birmingham studio evenafter the removal of the statue itself. Despite thecomplexity of these travelling arrangements and

all the delays, both statue and pedestal werereunited in Oxford some ten days later, Hollinshimself having personally superintended thestatue in transit.

Hollins's next letter, on February 15, 1850,was a brief note containing an estimate for themanufacturing of an engraver's die required byVaughan Thomas for an unstated purpose."Eight months later the correspondence continuedwhen Hollins reported with some self-satisfactionthat 'the Good People in Birmingham have un-animously voted me the commission to executethe Peel testimonial to be erected in Birminghamat a cost of two thousand guineas'.'a He alsoreferred to his selection to 'complete with alimited number of sculptors for a bronze statueand pedestal to be erected at Manchester't thecost of $5,000. Before embarking upon hisdesigns he wished to refresh his mind by carefulexamination of the 'casts from [Sir Francis]Chantry, statues now in the Taylor Buildings'1

and he requested Vaughan Thomas to obtainpermission for him to spend a few hours theredaily for three or four days. Vaughan Thomasnot only obtained the necessary permit butpromptly offered the sculptor the hospitality ofhis board for the period, to which Hollins repliedin a letter of October 12, 1850 'I hope that youwill not think I undervalue the favour you haveaccorded me in asking me to take all my mealsat your hospitable board, when I say that theshortness of my time in Oxford and what I shallhave to do in the way of sketching, will requirethat I make arrangements for the most economicaluse of the daylight, which arrangements wouldbe sure to be set aside if I came so often withinthe influence of your interesting and instructiveconversation. I think, therefore, my Breakfastsand Luncheons must be like Lord John

Russell's'uring

the sitting of Parliament, sulky mealstaken alone at my Hotel'.'sIt is unclear 1'rom the remaining two letters in

the series, October 18 and 22, whether Hollins'sprojected trip to Oxford ever came about butthese final letters certainly provide a significantcommentary on the sculptor's activities at thisperiod. He referred to his completion of a marblebust for the Earl of'radford and to his willing-ness to execute a bust requested by a friend

of'aughan

Thomas (normally at a cost of $100but reduced to $80 in recognition of'is longfriendship). Work on this bust would, Hollinsstated, have to be postponed for two months,which was all the time left for the preparation ofhis model for 'the Manchester competition Peelstatue'; already he had 'too little time for sucha work —as success in this undertaking wouldplace at least ten thousand pounds worth ofcommissions't the winner's disposal.The only other manuscript fragment relating

to Hollins which has come to light at the Hospitalis an undated page of meticulously tabulateddirections on how to unpack 'the small cast of thestatue of the Rev'd. Dr. Warneford'n arrivalat the Asylum. This model, carefully packed withits plinth in a screw-topped wooden crate filledwith 'hurds or tow'o prevent damage duringtransit was presumably the one which had beenpresented for the Asylum Gommittee's approvalearly in 1844.There is no evidence to suggest that Hollins

had any further contact with the Warnefordaf'ter the Autumn of 1849 but his $1,000 statueremains a prominent and dominating presencein the entrance hall of the 1877 extension to theAsylum, designed by William Wilkinson (1819—1901) of Oxford.

."<lotos

1. Designed by Richard Inglcman of Southwell, .'sotts.,and opened in 1826.

2. R. Gunnis, Diet>or>ary oJ'Briri>h sculptors, 195>3, pp.205 7.

3. Hc publishc<l 'I he Brihsh Brrrndard oJ the ( aI>Rat Ieoer<Contained in tlte Roman Afphabec

4. A. Graves, The Royal.4<ademy oj Arts A Comi>lefe DiettonaryoJ''ontribators, 1906, Vol, IV, pp.133—4. Hollins ex-hil>ited a marl>lc bust ofWarncford, for th< BirminghamRoyal School of'I< dicine, at th< R.A. in 1842, no.1404.

5. T. S.R. Boase, L'err~li>h Art <8or> <87o, 1959, pp.147,301.

6. Recent enquiries at the hospital have f>oiled to tran thepresent whereabouts of this work.

7. Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Add. c.190, f.225.

8. At 1.<.amington IR.A., 1848, no. 1321>.

9. Warncliord Hospital archives.

10. 11802 48l second son <>I'he fourth <arl of'ortland, anoted racing enthusiast and turf rcfbrrner who <liedprematurely of' heart attack whilst out walking onSeptember 21, 1848.

11. 1 his was for a corporate seal I'or the Asylum whichdcpi< ted the Warnefbrd statue in rniniaturc at>d wasmanufitctured by George Barclay, Gcrrard Strcct,,ioho.

I '2. At Calthorpc Park, 1855.

13. A bust <>I'ussell by Hollins was exhibited at thc R.A.,1839, no. I 384.

Acknowledgemcnts

I wish to thank the Warneford Hospital Secretary for per-mission to publish the archive items, Mr. Dennis Coombs,Littlemore Hospital and the Department of Medical Illustra-tions, The John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford f'r the photo-graphy.

Brenda Parry-Jones is a History graduate of the University ofLiverpool with a Diploma in Archives Administration. Sheis the Archivist to the Oxfordshire Area Health Authority andAssistant Archivist to Magdalen College, Oxford.

32

l((hi ipsat llepper Heffse

INTERNATIONAL FURNITURE

AND

FINE ART AUCTIONEERS

AND

VALUERS

Sales Catalogue and

Information Leaflet available

free on request

phi iPhillips the lateraatioaal Aactioa People. Foaafiefl 1700.

QE 17a East Parafle, 4e4ls.Tel: OQ240029 anfl QI192Memhem of the Soctety of rtne Art Auntoneert

Designed and Pnnted bp E.jArnold 8''ion Ltmi fed af their Broadway Factory, Leedt r r

REMOVERS

STORERSPACKERS

SHIPPERS $287 ROUNDHAY ROAD, LEEDS 8

Phones 495828/9

MOUNTING BOARDS

COI.OURED PAPERTISSUE PAPERSUGAR PAPERCARTRIDGE PAPER

STUDIO ATELIERS LIMITED

14 Headingley Lane, Hyde Park Corner, Leeds 6

i1:s])R])Cf

Telephone 757825