which composed the external and internal mould,-the mode of rendering them safe for receiving the liquid burning metal,-the melting of the copper,-the quantities of alloy, and the proper degree of heat, -the working artists spoke a mysterious language, resembling in no small degree those conversations on Alchymy so happily ridiculed by Ben Jonson : "Let me see How is the Moon now? eight, nine, ten days hence "That Bacon maintained the secrets of the profession there can be little doubt, since the men who wrought his marble were not permitted to acquaint themselves with the arrangements of the foundry. His practice was to cast the figure in many pieces, and then to unite them into an entire whole by the process of burning or fusing the parts together. This plan had its advantages; it required small moulds, which were easily dried and readily handled,-small meltings, too, of metal,-nor was failure attended with the destruction of the entire mould of the figure. But it had this disadvantage: by the fusing together of many small pieces the just proportions of the whole were apt to be injured, and the figure liable to display an imperfect symmetry compared to a statue cast in one or two parts. The veil has been raised a little of late from the mystery of bronze-casting. In the splendid foundries of Chantrey and Westmacott colossal statues, twelve feet high, are cast at a couple of heats, and the whole process is exhibited to any one whom curiosity or chance may happen to conduct to the artist's studio when the moulds are ready and the metal melted."* It might be supposed that one of the two accomplished sculptors here referred to, Westmacott, had really obtained a commission of the extensive character sought by Bacon, so large is his proportion of the statues erected in the present century. Whilst the other sculptors whose talents have been in requisition, have, as yet at least, given us each but a solitary specimen of their skill, as Chantrey in the colossal bronze statue of William Pitt, in Hanover Square, one of the noblest of our public statues, erected in 1831; Wyatt, in the bronze equestrian statue of George III., erected in Pall Mall, East, in 1836; Gahagan, in the Duke of Kent's statue, also in bronze at the top of Portland Place, erected by public subscription as a tribute to his public and private virtues; and Mr. Clarke, of Birmingham, in the bronze-seated figure of Major Cartwright, in Burton Crescent, where the venerable reformer long resided; the sculptor in question alone has given us more than all his brother artists put together. Before we notice these, we must add a few words on the statue just mentioned of him who, according to Canning, was "the old heart in London from which the veins of sedition in the country were supplied." The honest and indefatigable Major Cartwright, whose zeal for what he believed to be the public good must be honoured even by those who disapprove of the means by which he pursued it, can afford even to have the attack recorded without the slightest apprehension of injury to his memory. A striking evidence of the purity of his intentions. *Cunningham, Life of Bacon,' p. 241. 76 [Pitt's Statue, Hanover Square.j was given on his being brought up for judgment, in 1821, on the verdict of guilty of sedition, &c., when "the learned judge spoke with so much respect of the character and motives of Major Cartwright that it was afterwards humourously remarked by that gentleman that he thought he was going to offer him a reward instead of inflicting a fine."* Westmacott's public statues, taking them in the order of their execution, are those of the Duke of Bedford, Fox, the Achilles or Wellington at Hyde Park Corner, the statue of the Duke of York on the pillar overlooking St. James Park from Carlton Terrace, and Canning's statue in New Palace Yard. The Bedford and Fox statues are noble works, and most happily situated, facing each other; the one on the south side of Russell Square, the other on the north side of Bloomsbury Square, the opening of Bedford Place forming a fine avenue, as it were, between them. The Duke rests one arm on a plough, whilst the hand of the other grasps the gift of Ceres; and the characteristics thus expressed are continued and still further developed by the children, representative of the seasons, at the four corners, and by the interesting bas-reliefs that adorn two of the sides: *Life, by his niece, F. C. Cartwright, vol. ii. P. 214. in one we see preparations making for the dinner of the rustic labourer, his wife is busy on her knees, a youth is blowing the horn, and two countrymen and a team of oxen complete the group; in the other the business of reaping and gleaning is shadowed forth, one of the figures, a young woman in the centre, of graceful form and sweet features, is evidently the village belle. The statue has only this inscription: Francis, Duke of Bedford, erected 1809. It is of bronze, and about twenty-seven feet in height. The statue of Fox represents the statesman seated, arrayed in a consular robe, and full of dignity. The likeness is said to be "perfect." This inscription, also, is noticeable for its simplicity-Charles James Fox. Erected MDCCCXVI." Thus should it always be! When a people are not sufficiently acquainted with the merits of its public men, to appreciate the honour done them in the erection of public statues, by all means let us wait till they are. Greater advantages even than the waiters anticipate would flow, not unfrequently, from such a rule. "It was a strange piece of tyranny," observes a writer in the Quarterly Review,'* in allusion to 6 the Achilles, "to press it into our service; but in our service it cannot abide; remove the inscription, and the Greek is a Greek again." Although the time was that one could not take up a newspaper but to read attacks or defences of this "best abused" of statues, or pass a print-shop without a laugh at some new caricature of the ladies' work, and when, of course, the whole subject became most wearisomely familiar, it may be useful now to some of our readers to have it stated that it is copied from one of two splendid specimens of ancient art, standing in front of the Papal palace at Rome. Each consists of a figure in the Vol. xxxiv. p. 131. act of reining a fiery steed; and the two have been supposed to represent Castor and Pollux. They are attributed to no less an artist than Phidias. As to their history, it is believed that they were conveyed from Alexandria by Constantine the Great, to adorn his baths in Rome, among the ruins of which they were found. To add to the doubts that envelope the whole subject, the horses were discovered some distance from the human figures, and may therefore never have belonged to them. It was certainly a daring idea to take one of these figures and stamp it decidedly Achilles, which, however, it may in reality be, though the presumption is sadly against it; and then, by a kind of mental process, which every one of course was expected to perform for himself, to transform Achilles into Wellington. But the event itself was unique, the subscription of the ladies of England for a statue to a great warrior; and we suppose it was therefore deemed advisable to commemorate it in a equally unique manner. The inscription runs thus, "To Arthur, Duke of Wellington, and his brave companions in arms, this statue of Achilles, cast from cannon taken in the battles of Salamanca, Vittoria, Toulouse, and Waterloo, is inscribed by their countrywomen." The cannon here referred to consisted of twelve 24-pounders. The statue is about eighteen feet high, on a basement of granite, of about the same elevation. It was placed on the latter on the anniversary day of the battle of Waterloo, in 1822; and the records of the period tell us of a curious coincidence that marked the occasion. A writer in the 'Gentleman's Magazine,' observes, "In ancient Greece the honoured victors of the Olympic games, on returning crowned to their native cities, were not permitted to enter them by the common way and gate; to distinguish them above all their co-patriots, a breach was made in the wall, by which they were borne home in triumph. By one of those accidents which seem to be fate, the Ladies' statue to the Duke of Wellington, when brought to its destination, was found to be too mighty for the gates by which it should have entered, and it became necessary to breach the wall for the admission of the trophy." The statue of Canning and the Duke of York column require no particular mention; the former was set up in its place opposite New Palace Yard, in 1832; and the latter completed in 1836. This consists of a colossal bronze statue of the "Soldier's friend," on the top of one of the ugliest columns perhaps that the wit of sculptor ever yet devised, of pale red granite, 150 feet high. The best thing about the whole is the view from the summit: what the Monument is for the east the Duke of York's pillar forms for the west of London. Such are the public statues of London. What does the reader think of them? Let us recount and classify the whole. Omitting works attached to buildings rather for the purposes of architectural ornament than for anything else, such, for instance, as the Temple Bar statues, of James and his Queen, and Charles I. and II., but including the Nelson Testimonial, now in progress, and the two Wellington Memorials, also unfinished, of Chantrey and Wyatt, there are thirteen kings and queens, namely, Elizabeth, formerly at Ludgate, now in front of St. Dunstan's church, Charles I., Charles II.,* James II., William III., three Annes-one before St. Paul's, one in Queen Square, Westminster, and one in Queen Square, Guildford * The monument in Soho Square; which it is most probable was erected, like several others of the kingly statues, to mark the era of the buildings around, and as Soho Square was begun in the reign of Charles II., the statue is most likely to be his. Street; two of the 1st George, one of the 2nd, and two of the 3rd George; three brothers of kings, Cumberland, Kent, and York; four warriors, namely, three Wellingtons and one Nelson; one nobleman, the Duke of Bedford; three statesmen, Fox, Pitt, and Canning; one parliamentary reformer, Cartwright; one public benefactor, Sloane; and one work of art, the admirable figure of the Moor, shown on our last page, which stands in the gardens of Clement's Inn. Of poets we have-none; philosophers-none; patriots in the highest sense of the term-none; moralists-none; distinguished men of science-none;-but, in short, the list is ended. Again we ask, what does the reader think of it? But the question is unnecessary, for even churchwardens are growing ashamed of such a gallery of England's Worthies. We see by the newspapers lately, that a tablet has been affixed to the external wall of Allhallows Church, Bread Street, Cheapside,, commemorating the birth of Milton in the parish; and though the tablet is not a statue, we are content to think its promoters wish it were, and to agree with them. At all events, a tablet is something. A more important evidence of the growth of a better feeling on this subject, is the Premier's letter to the Secretary of the Fine Arts Commission, just published, from which it appears, that, at last, men of eminent civil, literary, or scientific services are likely to be admitted into a participation of the public honours lavished hitherto upon kings, and the eminent of the sword or of the forum almost exclusively. Sir Robert |