THE LAST OF A GREAT SCHOOL.

Otago Witness, Issue 2695, 8 November 1905, Page 75

THE LAST OF A GREAT SCHOOL.

(T. P.'s Weekly.) The largest sum of money ever giveL for a picture at a public auction in this country was the 14,050 guineas paid s few years ago tor John Hoppner's portrait of Lady Louisa Manners. This fact usefully indicates the revival of Hoppner's fame, which has been so conspicuous in recent years. And now I have before me a little book which is described as the first attempt at anything like a complete study of the life of this painter. It takes its place in the well-established series of "Little Books on Art." Like its fellow volumes, it is admirably illustrated. Its author, Mr H. P. K. Skipton, has done bis work well; he tells us. or puts us on the track of, all that is really known about Hoppner's career. There is every reason why we should be interested in Hoppner. He was the last of that great school of portrait painters whose works are precious, not only for their gloiious qualities in art, but as records of many of the most virile men and beautiful women that the English race has produced.

I. It is difficult to brush aside the story which makes Hoppner a natural son of George 111. I need not examine all the evidence. Mr Skipton accepts this royal origin as probable. The painter's rcother is said to have been one of the German attendants at St. James's Palace. We know nothing of her husband beyond what is revealed by her own tombstone, where she is described as "the widow of John Hoppner, surgeon," and by a statement that the elder Hoppner came to England shortly before George 111 ascended the throne. The future painter was born in 1758 in Whitechapel. It seems certain that he enjoyed royal notice as a child. It is said that he ran about the corridors of the Palace, that he was- given a place in the choir of the Chapel Royal, and that he went to the Academy schools at the King's expense when he was 16 years old. Mrs Hoppner's relations with the Palace were difficult. There is recorded a lawsuit arising out of a transaction between Mrs Hoppner and Richard Chapman, one of the royal pages. Mr Skipton thinks it must have been something of a cause celebre. It was concerned with an appointment in the customs, and (says- our author) the only possible construction that could have been put upon it was that Mrs Hoppner had presumed, for her own profit, on her past relations with the King. • It is worth mentioning only because it appears to have led to a. temporary withdrawal of the royal favour from young Hoppner-. It is not certain whether, after "all", he received vniuch academic training. If he did go through the full academic course he retained no great respect .for it. As a Quarterly reviewer — for he became one — he wrote : "Whenever schools have been instituted, ! whether by nations or individuals, the ! arts have -been observed generally to de- | cline ; and perhaps for this reason, that in such seminaries- everything is contagious except legitimate excellence." Be this as it may, Hoppner rose quickly by bis native and fostered talent, and at the age of 22 he saw his first picture hung on the walls of the Royal Academy exhibition, then quartered in Somerset House.

11. Among the wax effigies in Westminster Abbey there is a figure of Loro. Chatham. It was modelled by Hoppner's mother-in-law, Mrs Patience Wright," whose influence on his rise in life was considerable. It is curious that a Quaker element enters into the lives of two great painters of this period. Benjamin West, who succeeded Reynolds as president of the Royal Academy, was by birth an American Quaker, and he preserved some Quaker characteristics even at Court. Hoppner married Phoebe Wright, whose mother, Mrs Patience Wright, had been born of Quaker parents in New Jersey, and had married a Quaker. She had taken to wax modelling in New York for a livelihood. Then she -came to London, and wax-modelled to such good purpose that her productions became famous, and her house in Pall Mall the resort of men of the highest talent, among them David Garrick. Here the young couple lived with her after their marriage. Hoppner introduced portraits of his young wife into many of his early pictures. Mr Skipton identifies Phcebe with "The Fortune Teller," "The Primrose Girl," the "Girl With a Salad,' and a certain "Portrait of a Lady." Hoppner now became rapidly busy and successful, and we are immersed in the names of his numerous exhibited pictures. These early titles are not in themselves very interesting. The changes are rung on "Portrait of a Gentleman," "A Lady of Qua lily,"' "A Noblpman." "A Bishop," "A Young Gentleman, ' etc. These were all portraits, but at that time it was not customary to give the names of the sitters, either on the picture-frames or in the Academy catalogues. Such a reticence could not last for ever, and Hoppner was one of the painters who broke it down. In 1798 he exhibited 12 portraits, with the full name attached to each, and other painters took the same sensible course.

111. Between Hoppner and West little love was lost, but professional rivalry between them hardly existed. Hoppner's real antagonist was Lawrence, who became a "portrait painter in ordinary to the King." Hoppner, who had now his own house in Charles street, close to Carlton House, was "portrait painter to the Prince of Wales." Both secured a stream of distinguished sitters. In social gifts, general information, and conversational ability, Hoppner was the equal of any painter of the day. He had far more independence than West; indeed, he was

free with his tongue, and did not scruple to have political opinions. A man of wit and spirit, he mingled in the best company. He was frequently at Rogers's breakfast table. Rogers credits him with genius and a bad temper. The sketch of Hoppner in Table Talk is worth quoting for its curious statement regarding Hoppner's relations with the Court :

Hoppner was a painter of decided genius. Some of his portraits are equal to any modern portraits, and his "Venus" is certainly fine. He had an awful temper — the most spiteful person I ever knew ! He and I were members of a club called the Council of Trent (so named from its consisting of 30) ; and because on one occasion I was interesting myself about the admission of an artist whom Hoppner disliked, lie wrote me a letter of the bitterest reproach. Yet he had his good qualities. He had been a singingboy at Windsor, and consequently was allowed "the run of the royal kitchen"; but some time after his marriage (and, it was supposed, through the ill-offices of West) that favour was withdrawn; and in order to conceal the matter from his wife, who, he knew, would be greatly vexed at it, Hoppner occasionally, after secretly pocketing a roll to dine upon, would go out for the day, and on his return pretend that he had been to Windsor. Rogers proceeds with his malicious prattle : He and Gifford were the dearest friends in the world ; and yet they were

continually falling out and abusing

each other. One morning Hoppner, having had some little domestic quarrel with Mrs Hoppner, exclaimed very vehemently, "Is not a man to be pitied who has such a wife and such a

friend?" (meaning Gifford). His wife and daughter were always grumbling because, when he was asked to the Duchess of 's or to Lord 's, they were not invited also ; and he once said' to them, "I might as well attempt, to take the York waggon with me as you." 't Rogers adds that tke wives and children of great painters could not expect that introduction to the highest circles which the artist himself won only by his genius., These petty stories notwithstanding, Hoppner was fortunate in his wife. All his .children prospered.

IV. Such trifling anecdotes may be excused, because anecdotes v about Hoppner are scarce. ' There is " one other — a ludicrous one — -which Mr Skipton might very well have transferred from the pages of Redgrave. It illustrates the annoyances which beset a portrait painter, and which became peculiarly trying to Hoppner, whose constitution gave way in middle life. A carriage drove up to his door and emptied into his hall a wealthy stockbroker and his lady and five sons and seven daughters, "all samples of Pa and Ma." "Well, Mister Painter," said the broker, "her we are, a baker's dozen. How much will you demand for painting the lot of us ; prompt payment for discount?" "Why." replied Hoppner, in his astonishment, "that will defend npon the dimensions, style,' composition, and " "Oh, that is all settled," was the reply; "we are all to be touched- off in one piece as large as life, all seated upon our v lawn at Clapham, and all singing ' God save the King." j

V. To turn over the illustrations in this little book is to know that the fairest women in London entered Hoppner's studio. One cannot help asking whether any such ladies are left — or whether they ever existed. . Certainly, Hoppner's method of painting a lady's portrait warrants the latter doubt. According to his own account, he used to make as beautiful a face as he could, and then proceed slowly to give it a likeness to the sitter, working down to the reality until the bystanders cried out, "Oh, I see a likeness coming !" At that instant he stopped. Certainly- these eighteenth-cen-tury portrait painters knew how to portiay womanhood with a dignity, a grace, and a witchery which one looks for vainly on any exhibition wall' to-day. Such portraits as Hoppner's "Daughters of Sir Thomas Frankland," "Mrs Lascelles," the "Ladies Catherine and Sarah Bligh^" "Lady Coote," and "Mrs R. B. SKerid,an and Her Son" are a joy for ever. On the whole, it is to be believed that these and many other great ladies were all that was said of Wiem in paint. What praises have not leen written of Mrs E. B. Sheridan, Macaulay's "beautiful I mother of a beautiful race" — a race | which had brains as well as looks, inj eluding, as it did, the Duchess of Somerset, Mrs Norton, and Lady Dufferin. Wilkes wrote of her, "She is superior to all I have heard of her, and is the most modest, pleasing, and delicate flower 1 have seen for a long time." Garrick [ called her "the saint." Yet it was in painting children that Hoppner excelled most. There it may be contended that I he comes nearer to life than Reynolds, I and is often as beautiful. Of such a portrait as that of Miss Cholmondeley, a child in a white dress stepping across a stream, with a landscape behind her, Mr Skipton justly remarks that "there is in it that irresistible pathetic quality of childhood which Hoppner knew so well how to express." TTT

With his adult male sitters he was, as a rule, less successful. But there were exceptions, a notable one being his great portrait of Pitt. This was the last portrait for which Pitt sat. Mr Skipton tells us : It was actually finished on October

28 of the previous year, and was still in the painter's studio when Pitt died on January 23. Applications for replicas poured from his friends, and Lord Mulgrave, for whom the picture was painted, acceded to them liberally. Ten., at least, of these are known, and

one of them is now in the National Portrait Gallery. ... As regards the merits of the portrait there seems to be little question, and it is in any case -.11 impressive picture. Lord Rosebery appears to prefer the portrait painted by Lawrence; but he admits that contemporaries noticed in it the absence of the " port wine complexion," which is faithfully reproduced in Hoppner's pictures. Wilberforce certainly, approved Hoppner's portrait, while remarking on the falling oft it showed on the youthful Pitt ; and even Fox apparently had a good word to say for it. The Prince Regent signified his approvel in equally characteristic fashion. As Haydon relates the story, on the authority of Lascelles Hoppner, the Prince stepped one day into the gallery where Hoppner had hung his portrait. "Ah, ah," said the Prince, " there he is, with his

d d obstinate face." It should be remembered, also, that Hoppner painted a ' superb full-length portrait of Lord Nelson.

At the age of 50 Hoppner's rather poor constitution gave way. The Royal Academy Exhibition of 1809 was the -last to which he contributed. He was tenderly nursed by his wife, and he saw a fine family of children nearing the age of selfhelp. Just as Sir Joshua Reynolds visited Gainsborough on his deathbed, and buried all unkindness, Lawrence came to Hoppner. It is said, however, that he was not very graciously received. Hoppner's warmest professional friendship was with Sir Martin Arthur Shee. As a painter his rank — never likely to be again challenged — is with Reynolds, Gainsborough, and Romney. He is now placed far abos'e Lawrence, with whom, in his last chapter, Mr Skipton contrasts him. Lawrence was a worldling, a "ladies' man," and heartless :

Hoppner was the reverse of all this : blameless in his social relations, happily married, generous, recklessly outspoken, and hot-tempered ; a true artist, always striving after the best, despising insipidity and fashion, and aiming to catch and express the soul of his sitter,

even if he did not always succeed. It is a great pity- that Hoppner is represented in the National Gallery by only one portrait, Lady Oxford ; and that, as Mr Skipton says, not a single picture of child-life from his hand is to be found in a public gallery in London. Hoppner's resting-place is the burial ground of St. James's Chapel, in the Hampstead road, where also George Morland was buried. — John o' London.