I 140 3 



When I reflect upon the whole of your 

 Letter, I cannot help being ftruck with the 

 very fingular contraft between your profef- 

 fions at the beginning of it, and the whole 

 tenor of it afterwards. You fet out by 

 agreeing with me in the general princi- 

 ples of your art, which general principles, 

 according to my doctrine, are precifely thofe 



the art of gardening, would probably allow, that the owner of 

 a place might liften with attention and intereft to the remarks 

 of a painter, on the manner in which many groups of trees 

 might be broken, or united; or in which parts of the diftance 

 might be let in, or mut out; on the pi&urefque effect which 

 projecting trees, roots, ftones, and broken ground, with a torrent 

 forcing its way among them, had on the eye when viewed from 

 below. On all thefe points he might think his hints and ob- 

 fervations very juft; but mould they afterwards get to the top 

 of the fame'bank, and look down the courfe of the torrent, and 

 fhould the painter then attempt to expatiate on the fame effe&s 

 reverfed — the owner, according to Mr. Mafon, might Hop him 

 fliort, and tell him,---You mull le'ave this to me, and my gar- 

 dener, for you know you cannot reprefcnt this view in a picture, 

 exactly as it appears to us looking at it from the brink of the 

 precipice; and therefore you can have no idea yourfelf, andean 

 give me no idea, how it fhould be improved, or what mould, 

 or fhould not, be done. If the painter thought it worth his 

 while to anfwer fuch a reafoner, he would not be at a lofs for 

 arguments, but he probably would do as I mall now — not fay 

 another word on the fubject. 



Of 



