246 Sir Herbert Maxwell on Bomney and Ms Worlcs. [Feb. 6, 



soon had a few sitters, for there were no photographers in those days 

 to gratify the pardonable curiosity which everybody feels ab )ut his 

 own appearance. Thus Eomney was able to keep the wolf from 

 his own door, to send home, we may suppose, money to his wife, 

 and also, as we know, to help three of his brothers who were in 

 difficulties. 



Komney spent six happy and fruitful weeks in Paris during 

 1764. In 1767 he paid a flying visit to his wife ; returning to London, 

 found plenty of work to do, and continued to exhibit in the Free 

 Society of Artists. The Eoyal Academy was founded about this 

 time, but injudicious friends persuaded Romney that Joshua Rey- 

 nolds, its first President, was prejudiced against him. Eomney's 

 suspicions were ever on the alert : he refused all invitations to send 

 pictures to Somerset House, and so it came to pass, that no work 

 of his was exhibited on the walls of the Eoyal Academy until 1871, 

 sixty- nine years after his death. 



Eomney's most productive period was from 1776-87. His studio 

 was besieged by distinguished and fashionable sitters, and even from 

 the moderate fees he charged he never earned less than at the rate of 

 3000/. a year. 



The period of his decline dates from 1791. About that time he 

 began to weary of what he called the drudgery of portrait painting, 

 and gave up his days to working on historical and Shakespearian 

 subjects. His irritability and suspicious habits increased to an alarm- 

 ing extent ; he nursed mighty projects of a painting gallery, which 

 he carried out at an imprudent expense in a new building at 

 Hampstead in 1796. 



Eomney died at Kendal on 15th November, 1802. 



I cannot close this brief sketch of your distinguished countryman 

 without allusion to one feature in his life-work which I believe to 

 be without parallel. It has often happened that pictures which 

 could not find a purchaser during the painter's life, have risen to 

 almost fabulous value when he was no more. To mention only one 

 example. The French peasant-painter, Jean Francois Millet, died in 

 poverty in 1875, after failing to obtain 80Z. for his Angelus, which 

 had been painted sixteen years before. Fourteen years after his death 

 that picture was bought by the French nation for 60,OOOZ. 



Again, there are plenty of cases in which a painter has been 

 popular with the public during his life, but has fallen out of all 

 esteem after his death. What is remarkable — unique — in Eomney's 

 case is this, that his painting enjoyed an enormous vogue during his 

 active life, fell into utter neglect after his death, and of late years 

 has found feverish favour again with collectors. 



[H. M.] 



