« ForrigeFortsæt »
associations. This occurs in the 'Spectator;' a number of which (383), dated from Addison's Summer-house at Islington, May 20, 1712, is devoted to an account of his visit to Vauxhall, in company with Sir Roger de Coverley, that most exquisite of Addison's creations. They go by water in a wherry from the Temple Stairs, the good Knight, with characteristic thoughtfulness, taking care to employ a waterman with a wooden leg; observing, 'You must know I never make use of anybody to row me that has not lost either a leg or an arm. I would rather bate him a few strokes of his oar than not employ an honest man that has been wounded in the Queen's service. If I was a lord, or a bishop, and kept a barge, I would not put a fellow in my livery that had not a wooden leg.' Sir Roger having trimmed the boat with his coachman, 'who, being a very sober man, always served for ballast on such occasions,' they made the best of their way to Faux Hall. On their way, Sir Roger, according to custom, gives good night to every person he passes on the water, one of whom, instead of returning the civility, asked what queer old put they had in the boat, and whether he was not ashamed to go a wenching at his years? with a great deal of the like Thames ribaldry. Sir Roger seemed a little shocked at first, but at length, assuming a face of magistracy, told his friend 'that, if he were a Middlesex justice, he would make such vagrants know that her Majesty's subjects were no more to be abused by water than by land.' 'We were now,' continues Addison, 'arrived at Spring Garden (Vauxhall), which is excellently pleasant at this time of the year. When I considered the fragrancy of the walks and bowers, with the chorus of birds that sung upon the trees, and the loose tribe of people that walked under their shade, I could not but look upon the place as a kind of Mahometan paradise. Sir Roger told me it put him in mind of a little coppice by his house in the country, which his chaplain used to call an aviary of nightingales. "You must understand," says the Knight, "that there is nothing in the world that pleases a man in love so much as your nightingale. Ah, Mr. Spectator! the many moonlight nights that I have walked by myself and thought on the widow by the music of the nightingale!" He here fetched a deep sigh, and was falling into a fit of musing, when a mask, who came behind him, gave him a gentle tap upon the shoulder, and asked him if he would drink a bottle of mead with her? But the Knight, being startled at so unexpected a familiarity, and displeased to be interrupted in his thoughts of the widow, told her "She was a wanton baggage," and bid her go about her business. We concluded our walk with a glass of Burton ale and a slice of hung-beef. When we had done eating ourselves, the Knight called a waiter to him, and bid him carry the remainder to the waterman that had but one leg. I perceived the fellow stared upon him at the oddness of the message, and was going to be saucy; upon which I ratified the Knight's commands with a peremptory look. As we were going out of the garden, my old friend, thinking himself obliged, as a member of the quorum, to animadvert upon the morals of the place, told the mistress of the house, who sat at the bar, that he "should be a better customer to her garden if there were more nightingales and fewer strumpets." Such is our earliest notice of Vauxhall as a public garden, written most probably not long after its opening. The name, as we have here VOL. III. (1841.) No. II.
seen, was originally Faux Hall, which has been corrupted into the present appellation of Vauxhall. It was popularly derived from Guy Faux, the gunpowder-plot conspirator; but the true derivation is supposed to be from Fulk or Faulk de Brent, a famous Norman soldier of fortune, to whom King John gave in marriage Margaret de Ripariis or Redvers. To that lady belonged the manor of Lambeth, to which the mansion called Fauk's Hall, was annexed. At all events, the manor-house was known for centuries before Guy Faux's time under the name it now bears. The manor, with the Isle of Wight and other property, was purchased by Edward I.; and by Edward the Black Prince it was given to the church of Canterbury, to which see it still belongs: Henry VIII., at the suppression of the monastery, having granted it to the dean and chapter. Near the Thames was formerly a large mansion belonging to Sir Thomas Parry, Chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and held by him of the manor of Kennington. Here the ill-fated Arabella Stuart, whose misfortune it was to be too nearly allied to a Crown, remained prisoner for twelve months, under the custody of Sir Thomas. This house, in Norden's 'Survey' (1615), is called Copt Hall, and is described as being opposite to a capital mansion called Fauxe Hall. The latter, Lysons imagines, was the ancient manor-house mentioned above, which being afterwards pulled down or otherwise lost, the name was transferred to Copt Hall. In the Parliamentary Survey taken after the execution of Charles I., Sir Thomas Parry's house is described as 'a capital messuage called Vauxhall, alias Copped Hall, bounded by the Thames; being a fair dwelling-house, strongly built, of three stories high, and a fair staircase breaking out from it of nineteen feet square.' It was sold in 1652, but reverted to the Crown at the Restoration. After passing through various hands, in 1675 Sir Samuel Morland obtained a lease of Vauxhall House, made it his residence, and considerably improved the premises. This gentleman was a great mechanic, and every part of his house was filled with his works. The side-table in the dining-room was supplied with a large fountain, and the glasses stood under little streams of water. His coach had a moveable kitchen with clock-work machinery, with which he could make soup, broil steaks, or roast a joint of meat. When he travelled he was accordingly his own cook. From this period to that of the visit of Addison and Sir Roger nothing appears to be known concerning Vauxhall, nor again from that time to 1732, when the gardens were in the occupation of Jonathan Tyers, Esq., and were opened by him in a style of novel magnificence. Of this gentleman we shall have more to say. On the re-opening there were about four hundred persons present. The ladies with their long waists, arching hoops, and decorated fans formed but a small proportion of the number: scarce one in ten, we are informed. One hundred soldiers were present to keep good order—a precaution that seems to explain very significantly the character of many of the anticipated visitants. The entertainment given on this occasion, which was announced as a Ridotto al Fresco,' was several times repeated, which encouraged the proprietor so much that in a short time he opened the gardens every evening during the proper season. Among Tyers's numerous friends was Hogarth, who had a summer residence at Lambeth, and who, to add to the attractions of the place, advised him to decorate the boxes with paintings. The
suggestion was immediately carried into effect, and at a great expense. Some of the paintings were copies by Hayman of Hogarth's own productions, and which still remain in the gardens. Tyers acknowledged the assistance he had received by a present of a gold medal, which admitted the artist and his friends free."
"Street Sights," and "The Monument," are the concluding contributions to the volume, the former of which by the Editor will supply us with a few curious fragments, just as a preceding paper to the title of "Street Noises" by the same writer, might well have done.
In compiling and in the dressing of these picturesque, amusing, and miscellaneous papers, we may remark that much good use has been made of old pictures and drawings. For instance, there is one of Joseph Clark, from Tempest's Collection, which represents the great posture-master, as if one of his legs and thighs had been so broken on the wheel as that his foot might be placed anywhere, and the entire walking limb could be twisted into any shape. The "Philosophical Transactions" have recorded that he had "such an absolute command of all his muscles and joints, that he could disjoint almost the whole of his body." Mr. Knight adds that "not a deformity which nature or accident had produced in the most miserable of cripples but Joseph Clark could imitate. Ask for a hunchback, and he straightway had one at command. Require the
'Fair round belly with good capon lin❜d,'
and he could produce it without a pillow. He would make his hips invade the place of his back; and it was perfectly easy to him for one leg to advance with the heel foremost, and another with the toes. He imposed upon Molins, a celebrated surgeon, so completely, that he was dismissed as an incurable cripple.'
From the collected notices of authors who wrote centuries ago, and from pictorial remains, Mr. Knight has been able to convey a good idea of street sights, and also of their transitions of style and taste. At the Restoration some of the ancient amusements were given back o the people; and that is the point of time which he has selected as a middle stage in his miscellaneous history, making use of Sir William D'Avenant's burlesque poem, entitled "The Long Vacation in London," for the costume and character which distinguished the age of Charles the Second, and when even Fleet Street was chosen for the display of feats. There was then the joculator who "was not very inferior in dignity to the minstrel; but in time he became degraded into a juggler, and a hocus-pocus.' There were rope-dancers, tumblers, and vaulters, who were the juggler's satellites. Mountebanks, too, and Merry Andrews were in repute; morris-dancers having gone out before. Raree-show men figured a hundred and fifty years ago; and dancing-dolls are
certainly a feature in Hogarth's Southwark Fair. But still there appears to be nothing very new under the sun; although, remarks the author of London Street Sights, bear-baiting, bull-baiting, and even cock-fighting are no more. The people, however, must and will have their sports. Let such, therefore, as are coarse, degrading, and puerile be, through the provisions of a wise and paternal government, exchanged for healthful exercise, the refined entertainment afforded by galleries, museums, and ancient edifices; and then we shall hear of no disgraceful crowding to behold a man leap off the parapets of the bridges into the half frozen river, in order to minister to a morbid appetite, and to die when counterfeiting death. We have now enabled our country readers to form an idea of the "Memorials and the things of fame, That do renown this city;"
and also of the novel work which so pleasantly by pen and pencil records and illustrates the antiquities and wonders of the same. We have done little else than to snatch morsels, and sometimes large pieces, from the publication itself. That the plan and matter of the work are good, its popularity testifies; and although there be still room for a connected history of London, to be drawn from our old chroniclers, from State papers, and municipal and corporation archives, Knight's contributions, with those of his associates, are sure to continue to find favour in the eyes of multitudes.
ART. II.-An Essay on the Government of Dependencies. By GEORGe C. LEWIS, Esq. London: Murray.
THE object of this Essay is to explain the distinction between sovereign or dominant governments, and those which are subordinate or dependent and to mark the relations which subsist between them. This object leads the author to consider the advantages and disadvantages which arise to each from their relative conditions as well as special natures, the practical ends sought to be taught, being the means of avoiding those quarrels, those oppressions and insurrections which have frequently been the forerunners of sanguinary wars, total separation and permanent animosity, to the great detriment of both governments. Mr. Lewis appears to limit the advantages of dependencies to the dominant party, to the being possessed of military posts; while the benefits which the former receive are protection and support. He sees, however, not a few counterbalancing disadvantages. The modes of acquiring a dependency are also made the subject of disquisition; and in another part of the Essay is given an historical sketch of ancient as well as modern dependencies or colonies, which necessarily describes their peculiar features. The plan of the work and the purpose of the writer re
quire that the nature of a dependency, and of a subordinate government, be clearly defined; the opening inquiry being, What are the powers of a sovereign government?
On the mere general announcement of these branches of investigation, every reflecting and informed mind will perceive that the field selected by Mr. Lewis has great breadth and importance, demanding philosophical treatment, the results of extensive reading for facts and illustrations, and above all, perhaps, such an acquaintance with life and mankind as enables an author to deduce principles which have vitality in them, and that comprise many practical truths. Our author, we think, is chiefly deficient as regards this last-mentioned requisite. He deals most in abstractions when searching for and propounding principles; and his speculations are generally rather cold upon a subject that is abstruse and not naturally very inviting. On the other hand, he is systematic, logical, and perspicuous; never leaving the reader at a loss for his meaning, or the point he aims at; although satisfaction may not be the result; and the mind may have been disappointed on finding nothing better than a truism, a commonplace idea, or a lame conclusion after all.
Unquestionably the subject of this Essay is one of great magnitude, surrounded with difficulties, and requiring much sagacious speculation. It so happens, indeed, that it has never, we believe, been made the subject of distinct and comprehensive investigation; much less have the most powerful and civilized nations reduced to practice a system of enlightened and rational principles, in founding and in governing their dependencies. At the same time, if ever a nation, a dominant power, should have been anxious to arrive at fundamental truths in this great department of inquiry, Great Britain must be that nation. A moment's reflection relative to the number, the extent, and the diversified position as well as circumstances of her colonial possessions will convince any one, that the random, and routine administration of the immense dependencies indicates strange blindness, obdurate prejudices, and gross selfishness. Think again of our commercial necessities. But we need not dwell upon such manifest circumstances; finding it also more agreeable to notice the promise that is springing up of a new day in practice as well as in speculation with regard to our colonial system. Many minds have set to work on this subject; experiments are in the course of being made; and even our anomalous position relative to India, and our past ignorance, neglect, and errors respecting that unrivalled dependency, are points and facts which are beginning to attract serious attention. Mr. Lewis's volume will help on with the speculations referred to, and will awaken anxieties. What is more, he has developed new principles in some instances, and still more frequently, we think, has he been successful in bringing together many facts and ideas that were previously acknowledged,