2'»« S. No 88., Sept. 5. '57.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



191 



butler's "hudibkas." 

 (2"*^ S. iv. 131.) 



Deva says he has in his possession a 12mo. 

 edition of Hudibras, dated 1732. I have a like 

 edition dated 1720. The title is similar, except 

 that it does not name " Mr. Hogarth" and more 

 publishers are mentioned. My copy also has a 

 portrait of Butler as a frontispiece, and a boldly 

 executed engraving it is. Deva states that his 

 copy has " nine other plates illustrating the poem, 

 some of them double-page width ; " mine has 

 seventeen plates elucidatory of the poem, one being 

 double-page and one treble-page width, both 

 folded. No name appears on any of them, but 

 they are obviously the original designs, as those 

 which we now possess, avowedly by tlogarth, have 

 similar scenes, groups, and figures. The main 

 differences are, higher finish,'more elaborate details, 

 and the humorous effect more carefully and ma- 

 turely worked out. Hogarth, as is known, was 

 apprenticed to a silversmith ; but he relates that 

 in 1718, " I determined that silver plate engraving 

 should no longer be followed by me." He was 

 then " out of his time." He adds, copper-plate 

 engraving had been the utmost of his ambition. 

 "His livelihood, however (after his apprentice- 

 ship), was earned by engraving arms, crests, ci- 

 phers, shop-bills, and other similar works." These 

 occupations have always been assigned as the cause 

 of that " pewtery " style of engraving which 

 characterised especially his early efforts. 



Unless we are to consider Hogarth a wholesale 

 plagiarist, instead of having much improved those 

 productions published in 1720, I venture to sub- 

 mit that there can be no doubt about their being 

 the bond fide labours of Hogarth ; at least I have 

 no hesitation about my edition of 1720, and as 

 little about that of 1732. Whether the latter is 

 " scarce " 1 know not. I can only remark that I 

 have always considered my copy published twelve 

 years earlier, and, as it now turns out, having eight 

 more plates than a subsequent edition, as very 

 curious and valuable. For the diminution of the 

 number of plates in a later edition, I have, at 

 present, no means of accounting ; though perhaps 

 it may safely be conjectured that as Hogarth 

 advanced in skill, taste, and judgment, for the 

 sake of his reputation, although still working for 

 the booksellers, he deemed it judicious to prune 

 his labours. 



It would be curious to ascertain wMch of the 

 seventeen were, twelve years afterwards, sup- 

 pressed or rejected. That can only be done by 

 comparing the two editions. If the editor of " N. 

 & Q." should think that the investigation might 

 lead to a result worthy of the trouble, and if he 

 would afford his practised skill in such matters, 



my copy is at his service, and no doubt the edi- 

 tion of 1732 would be forthcoming. 



A Hermit at Hampstead. 



Deva's 12mo. edition of 1732 has only the por- 

 trait and nine illustrative plates : and of these, 

 you state, from an examination of the same edition 

 in the British|Museum, that some of them have not 

 Hogarth's name, but have been re-engraved ; that 

 impressions of those with the name are much in- 

 ferior, as if the plates had already done good 

 service; and that, owing to a difference in the 

 pagination in Part ii. of the edition of 1732 and 

 1726, Hogarth's plates are misplaced in that por- 

 tion of the edition of 1732. 



My copy of the 12mo. edition of 1726 has some 

 peculiarities, perhaps worth notice in " N. & Q.," 

 in hope of an explanation from one of your corre- 

 spondents. 



1st. It has, besides the portrait, sixteen illus- 

 trative plates,, all by Hogarth, and all good im- 

 pressions, except the Skimmington, which seems 

 never to have been properly finished, owing per- 

 haps to its size, the extent of the subject, and the 

 impatience of the publisher : for it was in the very 

 year 1726 that Hogarth engraved seventeen plates 

 for a 12mo. edition. All the plates are correctly 

 placed in Part ii., because the pagination of that 

 part is not continuous from Part i., but is begun 

 so as to be adapted to the numbers on the plates, 

 referring to the pages which they illustrate. 



Probably, in the copy of 1732, the pagination 

 of Parts i. and ii. is continuous; which would 

 necessarily cause the misplacement of the plates, 

 if inserted with reference to the pages marked on 

 them. 



2nd. My copy of 1726 is, as originally bound, 

 in three volumes, (i.e.) each part separately. 

 Part i. has a general title ; but Parts i. and ii. 

 have only titles of those parts respectively. The 

 general title is the same as in Deva's 1732 ; ex- 

 cept that mine of 1726 has at the bottom, " Lon- 

 don : printed by T. W. for D. Brown," and 

 seventeen others, including B. Motte, for whom 

 alone the edition of 1732 was printed. 



Part i. ends with p. 142. and the catch word 

 " Book ; " but that word does not begin Part ii. 

 in my copy, nor in any other that I have seen. 

 The title of Part ii. has no printer's or publisher's 

 name, nor date, but has the catch " Hu-" — being 

 the first syllable of the title of Part iii. ; at the 

 bottom of which title is, " London : printed for 

 Francis Fayrham " (one of the seventeen named 

 in the general title), " at the south corner of the 

 Royal Exchange, mdccxxvi." It ends with p. 

 424., followed by twenty- one pages of Index, not 

 numbered. The ornaments are different in the 

 three parts, but the type and letter-press appear 

 to be the same in all. P. H. F, 



