explained philofophically, and confirmed by many examples drawn from art and nature.

In the performance before us, the Author illuftrates his general remarks by the conduct of two eminent artists.

Two inftances occur to me of two painters (Rembrant and Pouffin) of characters totally oppofite to each other in every refpect, but in nothing more than in their mode of compofition and management of light and fhadow. Rembrant's manner is abfolute Unity; he often has but one groupe, and exhibits little more than one spot of light in the midst of a large quantity of fhadow; if he has a fecond mafs, that fecond bears no proportion to the principal.

Pouffin, on the contrary, has fcarce any principal mass of light at all, and his figures are often too much difperfed, without fufficient attention to place them in groupes.

The conduct of thofe two painters is entirely the reverfe of what might be expected from their general ftile and character; the works of Pouffin being as much diftinguished for fimplicity, as those of Rembrant for combination. Even this conduct of Pouffin might proceed from too great an affection to fimplicity of another kind; too great a defire to avoid that oftentation of art, with regard to light and fhadow, on which Rembrant fo much wifhed to draw the attention: however, each of them ran into contrary extremes, and it is difficult to determine which is the moft reprehenfible, both being equally diftant from the demands of Nature, and the purposes of Art.

The Author obferves, that it is the knowledge of thofe powers and faculties of our nature, to which Art addreffes itfelf, that will enable the artift to diftinguish between those rules that require implicit obedience, and thofe that are of lefs confequence, and may be more eafily difpenfed with.' This is fufficiently illuftrated by the practice of the greateft painters. We fhall infert, as a fpecimen, what is faid of a rule laid down by Fresnoy :

It is given as a rule, for inftance, by Frefnoy, That the principal Figure of a Subject must appear in the midst of the Picture, under the principal light, to diflinguish it from the rest. A painter who fhould think himself obliged ftrictly to follow this rule, would incumber himself with needleís difficulties; he would be confined to great uniformity of compofition, and be deprived of many beauties which are incompatible with its obfervance. The meaning of this rule extends, or ought to extend, no further than this-That the principal Figure fhould be immediately. diftinguished at the first glance of the eye; but there is no neceffity that the principal light fhould fall on the principal figure, or that the principal figure fhould be in the middle of the picIt is fufficient that it be diftinguished by its place, or by the attention of other figures pointing it out to the spectator.

ture.

So

So far is this rule from being indifpenfable, that it is very feldom practifed, other confiderations of greater confequence standing in the way. Examples in oppofition to this rule, are found in the Cartoons, in Chrift's Charge to Peter, the preaching of St. Paul, and Elymas the Sorcerer, who is undoubtedly the principal object in that picture. In none of thofe compofitions is the principal figure in the midst of the picture. In the very admirable compofition of the Tent of Darius, by Le Brun, Alexander is not in the middle of the picture, nor does the principal light fall on him; but the attention of all the rest immediately diftinguishes him, and diftinguishes him more properly; the greatest light falls on the Daughter of Darius, who is in the middle of the picture, where it is more necessary the principal light fhould be placed.'

The Author has not confined himself to fuch topics as are naturally connected with his subject. He makes frequent digreffions, for the fake of introducing fome new observation on painting, which may have a tendency to improve the tafte of his hearers. Thus he obferves, Though it is not my business to enter into the detail of our art, yet I must take this opportunity of mentioning one of the means of producing that great effect which we obferve in the works of the Venetian painters, as I think it is not generally known or obferved. It ought, in my opinion, to be indifpenfably obferved, that the maffes of light in a picture be always of a warm mellow colour, yellow, red, or a yellowish white; and that the blue, the grey, or the green colours be kept almost entirely out of thefe maffes, and be used only to fupport and fet off thefe warm colours; and for this purpose, a fmall proportion of cold colours will be fufficient.

Let this conduct be reverfed, let the light be cold, and the furrounding colours warm, as we often fee in the works of the Roman and Florentine painters, and it will be out of the power of art, even in the hands of Rubens, or Titian, to make a picture fplendid and harmonious.

Le Brun and Carlo Maratti were two painters of great merit, and particularly in what may be called Academical Merit, but were both deficient in this management of colours; the want of obferving this rule is one of the caufes of that heaviness of effect which is fo obfervable in their works. The principal light in the picture of Le Brun, which I just now mentioned, falls on Statira, who is dreffed very injudiciously in a pale blue drapery; it is true, he has heightened this blue with gold, but that is not enough; the whole picture has a heavy air, and by no means anfwers the expectation raised by the print. Pouffin often made a spot of blue drapery, when the general hue of the picture was inclinable to brown or yellow;

C 2

which

which fhews fufficiently, that harmony of colouring was not a part of the art that had much engaged the attention of this great painter.

The conduct of Titian in the picture of Bacchus and Ariadne, has been much celebrated, and juftly, for the harmony of colouring. To Ariadne is given (fay the Critics) a red fcarf, to relieve the figure from the fea which is behind her. It is not for that reafon, but for another of much greater confequence, for the fake of the general harmony and effect of the picture. The figure of Ariadne is feparated from the great groupe, and is dreffed in blue, which added to the colour of the fea, make that quantity of cold colour which Titian thought neceffary for the fupport and brilliancy of the great groupe, which groupe is compofed, with very little exception, entirely of mellow colours. But as the picture in this cafe would be divided. into two diftinct parts, one half cold, and the other warm, it was neceffary to carry fome of the mellow colours of the great groupe, into the cold part of the picture, and a part of the cold into the great groupe; accordingly Titian gave Ariadne a red scarf, and to one of the Bacchante, a little blue drapery.'

If attention to arrangement had deprived us of fuch obfervations as those which we have cited, it would afford matter of regret to all lovers of the Arts. We muft obferve, however, that our Author appears to have been too negligent of order in his difcourfe. His propenfity to digreffion has fometimes betrayed him into inaccuracies, which it would have been easy to avoid. Thus, in page 9, he examines fimplicity, which he forbears to confider as implying that exact conduct proceeding from an intimate knowledge of fimple unadulterated nature, as it is then only another name for perfection.' He proceeds, therefore, to confider fimplicity in another fenfe of that word, as a general corrector of excefs. While employed in difcuffing this fubject, he obferves, p. 11, as we are speaking of the most refined and fubile idea of perfection, may we not enquire, whether a curious eye may not difcern fome faults, even in thofe great men?' meaning Pouffin and Le Seur. Thus, for the fake of introducing a remark on the works of these French painters, he returns to the first idea of fimplicity, which he had told us he meant not to examine. An error of this kind muft, doubtlef, be confidered as a blemish in a difcourfe which contains many excellent rules and obfervations, conveyed in a very good style; which, however, is rather (pirited than elegant; always flowing, fometimes verbofe, but in general diftinguished

Elegance always fuppofes the highest degree of correctnefs and purity. This our Author has not attained. P. 28, It is prefenting

tinguished by the happy medium between too much fimplicity. and too much refinement.

to the eye the fame effect as that which it has been accustomed to feel. P. 33, By recommending the attention of the artist to an acquaintance with the paffions and affections of the mind.' There are too many examples of this kind, which would be more excufable in a large work than in a discourse of thirty-eight pages.

ART. IV. A Propofal for Uniformity of Weights and Meafures in Scotland. by execution of the Laws now in force. With Tables of the English and Scotch Standards, and of the customary Weights and Measures of the feveral Counties and Boroughs of Scotland;Comparisons of the Standards with each other, and with the County Measures; Tables and Rules for their reciprocal Converfion; and fome Tables of the Weight and Produce of Corn, &c. Addreffed to his Majefty's Sheriffs and Stewarts-depute, &c. 8vo. 3s. Elliot, Edinburgh. Cadell, London. 1779.

W E cannot give a better idea of the scope of this Work

than in the words of the Author.

The advantages of uniformity in weights and measures are fo great, and fo general, that it has been an object of the legislature in every commercial kingdom.

In Engla d, from Magna Charta down to the prefent time, there are above fifty acts in the ftatute book concerning weights and

measures.

In Scotland, fince the Afifa of King David I. there are above forty acts of parliament upon the fame fubject.

66

About the year 1756, a committee of the Houfe of Commons was appointed to enquire into the original ftandards of weights and measures in England, and to confider the laws relating thereto; and to report their obfervations thereupon, together with their opinion of the molt effectual means for atcertaining and enforcing uniform and certain flandards of weights and measures to be used for the future."

This committee, taking the affillance of able artists and ingenious men, made a laborious and accurate comparison of the feveral ftandards of weights and measures accounted the ftandards; but which differed confiderably from one another. By this comparifon they afcertained the true medium ftandard. They alfo confidered the whole laws relative to weights and meafures, and came to feveral refolutions, expreffed at length in two reports made by them to the House of Commons in 1758 and 1759. Upon thefe reports, which contain the whole hiftory and hate of the English weights and measures, and the material laws concerning them, two bills were brought into the Houfe of Commons in the year 1765. The first is intitled, "A bill for afcertaining and establishing uniform and certain ftandards of weights and measures throughout the kingdom of Great Britain," &c. The fecond is intitled, "A bill for enforcing uniformity of weights and measures to the ftandards thereof by the law to be established."

Thefe bills were printed, and laid over, with a view that the public might have an opportunity of canvaffing them, and fuggefting proper additions and amendments. It was agreed, that certain claufes fhould be inferted for including Scotland, which had not originally been in the contemplation of the committee. But much is it to be lamented, the fubject has not again been refumed by the Houfe.

While this fubject was under the confideration of the House of Commons, an idea was suggested, that one of the great causes of the inefficacy of the many laws for establishing ftandards, and directing uniformity, was, the difficulty of carrying them into execution, without accurate tables for converting the customary weights and

measures into the ftandards.

The neceffity of fuch tables is very obvious. People who use, for the fame purposes, measures differing both in fize and name, fpeak as it were different languages; and it is not enough to make a law appointing all perfons to speak the fame language in that refpect, without alfo making fome provifion for teaching them to do fo. The cafe is even worfe where the different weights or measures have the fame names; for unless they who have occafion to use them, are not only afcertained that they speak of different things, though under the fame names, but also are taught where the difference lies, and how great it is, they are led unwittingly into great deception. As, for inftance, the boll is the general measure for corn over all Scotland; yet, it may be faid, there are hardly two counties in Scotland where the boll-meafure is exactly the fame, and there are some counties where the boll contains more than double what it does in others. The Trone weight, commonly called the wool weight, falls under the fame obfervation. So, unless people are apprifed of the differences, and taught how to convert the feveral weights and measures readily into one another, it will ever be a vain project to expect general conformity to the law. For that purpose, tables fhould be formed by public authority, and put upon public record,

This plan is neceffary for another reafon; namely, that it would be improper to destroy the memory and knowledge even of the weights and meafures intended to be laid afide; bécaufe, without that knowledge, ancient rights, ancient trade, and ancient hiftory, could not be understood.

Scotch writers have, for fome time pat, difcovered a laudable ambition to acquire a proper knowledge of the English language; but we have frequent occafion to remark, that from their great folicitude to avoid Scorticisms they frequently are led into faulty Anglicifms, as is the cafe with our Author, in the paffage here referred to. He does not mean that the bill was laid over (covered) with paint, or with gold, or with any other fubitance; his intention is to fay, that the business lay over, i. e. was neglected, and not brought to a period at that time. No error in language hath of fended our critical delicacy fo often as this particular inftance; nor can we help being amazed that an error fo very abfurd fhould be fo long perfilled in. Is it poffible that any perfon who hath had only a moderate fhare of education can be ignorant that the preterite of the active verb to lie is lay-and of the verb to lay (to place upon any thing) is laid.

8

• The