MR. URBAN,

Cork, July 26. THE Coronation Medal represents on the obverse the profile bust of Her Majesty, wearing a tiara, and into this, at the back of the head, drapery is twisted, which falls, covering also the back of the neck. Inscription,

"VICTORIA D.G. BRITANNIARUM REGINA F. D."

The workmanship of the forehead, face, and neck, is good; the outline clear and delicately rounded off the surface. The general aspect is stern, and has an older character than our Sovereign possesses. The nose is certainly much too large, not merely for the original, but for the usual proportions and the rules of beauty, which an artist of taste, without sacrificing resemblance, would endeavour to follow. The hair is extremely bad it is merely scratched in, without any truth of nature or beauty of arrangement to compensate for its sharp wiry appearance; while the drapery from the tiara nearly covers the ear, and falling on the back of the neck destroys the

:

beautiful outline which may be given when it is left uncovered, and in my judgment injures the general effect, by destroying its lightness without increasing its dignity.*

The reverse represents Her Majesty with the globe in her right hand, and the sceptre in her left, seated on a cube and elevated two steps from the floor. Before her stand Britannia, Scotia, and Hibernia, respectively designated by a rose, a thistle, and a shamrock placed upon their helmets, offering a crown (though Ireland, ominously enough, clutches it as if she rather intended to keep it); but as both Her Majesty's hands are filled, it does not seem very clear how she is to take it; and skulking behind the throne, we see a lion holding a thunderbolt. In my estimation it is a bad design, badly executed.

Mr. Hamilton in his letter defending this work of Pistrucci (vide The Times of the 25th July) informs us, that the design was given to the engraver of her Majesty's medals.

And what is this "perfect composi tion," as Mr. Hamilton deems it? The three kingdoms are offering a Crown to Queen Victoria. This design might be very appropriate for the coronation or inauguration of Oliver Cromwell, Louis Philippe, or Leopold, who were raised by popular commo. tions to thrones to which they had previously neither claim, right, nor title. But Queen Victoria ascended the throne of these realms in consequence of her own legal and inherent birthrights, the moment her uncle ceased to breathe; and the moment it was known that William the Fourth was dead, all the authorities of the empire flocked to swear allegiance to her just rights, and not to request her acceptance of the Sovereignty. A more improper or erroneous design could scarcely have been devised. Then, as to the composition :-look at the three females. Britannia is a heavy, corpulent, and ungraceful figure. Each female has her left foot on the lower step of the throne, but neither the lines of the limbs nor the draperies give either elegance or effect. And at this time, so ostentatiously peaceable, why introduce an idea of war? Grant, however, the necessity, there is not classical authority to place a thunderbolt with any other delegate of Jupiter than the eagle, and the catlike animal who now assumes it, seems (unworthy representative of the Old British Lion!) to be willing to keep himself ensconced in the back ground, and to take protection from the throne, instead of being its defender. The only merit in the design, is the ease of her Majesty's sitting figure, which is very pleasing.

On the workmanship of the Reverse, as Mr. Hamilton says that it is unfinished, remark is unnecessary; but we may ask, should it have been so? as the engraver of Her Majesty's medals had only this one work to execute; and from the day of the Queen's ascending the throne, it was known that a Coronation must follow, and a medal be engraved; though Í should not have put this question, but for Mr. Hamilton's sneering observation, “that the engraver has taken a whole year to bring out some of the common coins of the realm." Of these I have seen in circulation the four varieties of the Maundy money, the groat, and the sovereign-six coins. What progress others may be in, neither I nor Mr. Hamilton can tell. Selecting the sovereign as the largest coin, I am quite satisfied to place its bust in competition with the bust on the Coronation medal, for elegance of composition, correctness of resemblance, and ability of workmanship. Both are now before the public, and to their judgment and impartiality I confidently appeal.

Mr. Hamilton has thought proper to insult and calumniate the memory of the late chief engraver of the Mint, Thomas Wyon, by asserting that Mr. Pistrucci was brought into the Mint to correct his blunders. It is a circumstance perfectly well known, that the busts (not portraits) called George the Third's, which Thomas Wyon engraved for the coinage of 1816, he was obliged to copy, by the orders of the then Master of the Mint (now Lord Maryborough) from Cameos engraved by Signor Pistrucci; and that

GENT. MAG. VOL. X.

2 N

they were faithfully copied by Thomas Wyon, may be easily ascertained by referring to the Cameos themselves, which, as the public paid for, we may presume became public property, and have been preserved. Le Sage, in "Le Diable Boiteux," tells us of a surgeon, who, not having much practice, used in the dusk of the evening to stab persons passing in the neighbourhood of his shop, then most humanely to come to their assistance, and

"for a consideration" in due time cure the wounds he had himself inflicted. Admitting Mr. Hamilton's assertion on this occasion to be correct, the Signor's appointment to correct blunders of his own creating was something analogous to Le Sage's surgeon; though I entirely acquit Mr. P of the surgeon's premeditated intention.

Had Thomas Wyon (who died at the age of only twenty-five years) been left to his own unfettered taste and judgment, (and we have abundant evidence in his works that he needed no foreign assistance or instructor), we should have had a coinage in 1816 that would have been equally honourable to himself and his country. To refer to the Waterloo medal, one of the most accessible of his works, as there must have been nearly forty thousand of them struck the head of George the Fourth on that medal, in all that constitutes merit of design and execution, will stand in successful rivalry against any bust of that sovereign executed by Mr. Pistrucci. Mentioning this medal also suggests an inquiry,-Is the Signor's Waterloo medal finished? (Mr. Hamilton says that for ten years, he had not a single order from Government), or-will the public ever see what they have paid so much for? Yours, &c. R. S.

cle Mr. DANIEL STUART states that, the booksellers having determined to set up two daily newspapers, the British Press and the Globe, in direct opposition to his papers, the Morning Post and the Courier, "took" from his employment George Lane (meaning me), his chief assistant, supposing that when they got me "they got the Morning Post, and that he (Mr. Stuart) was nobody."

To this charge of a combination against him, urged in several passages in his statement, I answer, that in my first interview with the booksellers on the subject of their papers, I inquired the motives for their new undertaking, and, in answer, they stated their object was not pecuniary profit, but the protection of their trade, which suffered from the manner in which the existing newspapers were conducted; that their advertisements were frequently thrown into the back of the paper, and there mixed with others of a gross and offensive character; that frequently their advertisements were refused insertion, or if received, their insertion was attended with injurious delay, as happened upon occasions of important parliamentary debate or other interesting matter requiring considerable space, and this in cases of new literary works prepared at great expense; and that, as a remedy for these grievances, they proposed to have a morning and evening paper of their own, the columns of which they could command. These were the views and motives they professed, and I firmly believed them; and I further declare that I never had cause to suspect that they had any other, or that the papers were intended for the unworthy purpose alleged by Mr. Stuart; nor did I ever conduct them in that spirit. Mr. Stuart refers to Sir Richard Phillips as a voucher for his statement; but at the time the booksellers applied to me the late Mr. Debrett, of Piccadilly, was the only member of the trade with whom I had the slightest acquaintance. Sir Richard Phillips I did not know until after I had made my engagement, when I found him a member of a committee for managing the financial affairs of the concern, with which, however, I had nothing to do, and I conducted the papers entirely according to my

own judgment, perfectly free from all undue influence. A new newspaper is, I conceive, as legitimate a speculation as a new bank or a new insurance office; and that the booksellers were perfectly justified in setting up their papers for the purpose I have stated. A new paper does not create new readers; its circulation is derived from the existing stock, and must necessarily affect the whole, though, perhaps, not each individual in the same degree but that the new papers were set up particularly in opposition to the Morning Post and the Courier I deny. If they were likely to affect any individual paper, "the Morning Chronicle" would appear, on Mr. Stuart's own showing, to have the greatest cause for apprehension, for he says, "" Mr. Perry, who aimed at making the Morning Chronicle a very literary paper, took pains to produce a striking display of book advertisements; while horses and carriages constituted the particular class of advertisements in the Morning Post. This much may suffice in vindication of the booksellers. I now proceed to make some observations in vindication of myself.

Mr. Stuart, while he gives me credit for merit cf various kinds, which, without betraying excessive vanity, I could not arrogate to myself, says, I owned that I was indebted to him “for all I knew of newspapers,” that by his instruction, he might say education, I had become valuable in various ways, and that I was his chief assistant in his morning paper. This 1 readily admit. Ilis statement is perfectly correct and true. I was a total stranger to newspapers when he accepted my proffered services, and any knowledge I possessed of newspapers was acquired in his office. But I will go further than the bare admission of this part of Mr. Stuart's statement in its most extended sense. During my connexion with him he uniformly treated me with exceeding kindness and great liberality, of which the following particulars may convey an idea. He proposed to me to enter into a written engagement with him which I declined. My refusal appeared to surprise him, and he said if I felt any cause of dissatisfaction in the establishment it should be removed. I answered there was none;

I was pleased with every one in it and every thing about it. He then said if I did not consider my salary sufficient he was ready to increase it; to which I answered that I was perfectly satisfied and felt myself amply compensated as I stood, but that I wished to hold myself a free man. This conversation took place at an early period of our connexion; and upon that footing I remained until its close, during which interval he added more than once to my income, but not at my instance or request. The advance always came spontaneously and unsolicited from his own will. I may add that I never heard any member of the establishment complain of want of liberality on the part of Mr. Stuart. He wished to have his business done diligently, but he was uniformly liberal in compensation. These are facts not now disclosed, or sentiments not now expressed by me for the first time. In every company in which I ever heard his character and conduct alluded to, I have uniformly borne testimony to his liberality, and expressed myself to the same effect.

It will now occur to the reader to ask how it happened that I, so highly favoured, should withdraw myself from an establishment in which I had so much cause of content. Mr. Stuart had repeatedly communicated to me his intention to retire from conducting his paper, and to confide the management of it to me; and the period was now approaching at which he proposed to carry his intention into effect. About this time the project of the booksellers became publicly known, and a proposal, totally unforeseen and unexpected, was made to me to become their editor, to which 1

gave a prompt and decided negative. On the very next day I learned that Mr. Stuart was desirous to dispose of his paper, and it may be conceived that the information produced in me surprise and disappointment. I was not so unreasonable as to expect that Mr. Stuart should continue to carry on his paper for my

sake; and his uniform kindness would justify an expectation that in a negociation for its sale he would endeavour to stipulate favourable terms for me but this was not the position to which I had been taught to look; I

may have been too fastidious, but, whether the feeling was right or whe ther it was wrong, I did not relish the idea of being transferred like a fixture with the concern to strangers. This feeling was aggravated by a little occurrence not now necessary to revive, but which Mr. Stuart probably remembers, when just at this critical moment the proposal, which I had so recently rejected, was repeated and pressed upon me, and I, in a discontented frame of mind and with reluctance, consented to entertain it. If then I left Mr. Stuart it was not until after I found he was ready, if opportunity offered, to part with me; if, as he charges, "the booksellers took me from him," it was not until he was ready to give me away. I continued with him nearly two months after I had apprised him of the engagement I had contracted, and dur ing that time he never adverted to the subject, nor had I cause to learn, except from his reserve and the coldness of his manner, that I had excited his displeasure. I could have had no mean, sordid, or unworthy motive for leaving Mr. Stuart. My terms with the booksellers were not, in a pecuniary point of view, more advantageous than those Mr. Stuart had proposed for me. I was exchanging a life of comparative ease for one of incessant labour and anxiety; I was leaving friends to whom I was affectionately attached to commit myself to strangers of whom I knew nothing. I was leaving an established flourishing paper to embark in a new speculation of uncertain issue. What mean, sordid, or selfish motive then could I have had to encounter so fearful a change? Mr. Stuart exclaims, "the booksellers being possessed of general influence among literary men, could there be a doubt of success?" Mr. Stuart greatly overrates the literary support and patronage which the new papers received. The actual sale at the commencement did not exceed two hundred each, and any literary contributions received and inserted were paid for. The booksellers almost immediately, from various causes, began to drop off. Mr. Murray, now of Albemarle-street, then a very young

man, was the most active, liberal, and valuable among them, but he with Messrs. Longman, Clarke of Portugal+ street, Butterworth, and many others of the greatest influence and importance, after a short time withdrew; and I was left to contend with difficulties and under the most discouraging circumstances, in which the fortune of the papers appeared desperate, and their very existence hung as it were by a thread, before I succeeded in establishing the concern on safe grounds, at which time not more than two booksellers remained partners in it.

These remarks will, I hope, be found of Mr. Stuart, from which it would be a satisfactory answer to the statement inferred that the booksellers, in setting up their papers, had formed a combination to injure, if not destroy, the property of a gentleman who had, by his prudent conduct, industry, and

talent, raised himself to an enviable state of affluence, and that I, a distinguished favourite, deeply indebted to his kindness, had consented to become a vile instrument in their hands for carrying their purpose into effect. I repeat that the booksellers' papers were not set up for the unworthy purpose alleged by Mr. Stuart. For myself individually I do declare, that in spite of the differences that subsequently arose between him and me, and which have ever been to me a source of painful reflection, I have

never ceased to entertain for him the

highest regard and respect. No inducement could have tempted me to leave him had I not felt confident that he meant to dispose of his paper. Yours, &c.

Mr. URBAN,

GEORGE LANE.

Aug. 14. AT the conclusion of a very interesting account of Lady Place, at Hurley, Berks, in a former number * of your Magazine, your correspondent remarked "that the mansion is almost past repair as a modern habitation, nor is its future destination at present known."

It was with feelings of something more than common disappointment and regret, that on revisiting yesterday