came out in after years, when Robert Ainslie told the story of his sister being alarmed at the violent words of the preacher (old Dr. Bowmaker, to whom Burns alludes in his diary of this time) denouncing "obstinate sinners," upon which Burns, noticing Miss Ainslie hunting up the text, wrote on the paper the following epigram:

"Fair maid, you need not take the hint,

Nor idle texts pursue,

'Twas guilty sinners that he meant,

Not angels such as you!"

As Burns was in Duns and the neighbourhood for some time, my father had other opportunities of seeing him. One of these I well remember hearing thus described:-One bright May morning my father was tempted to go out about six o'clock, his object being to ascend to the top of Duns Law, from which is a splendid view of the Cheviot Hills and the whole "valley of the Merse," with the tall steeple and high arched bridge of Berwick-on-Tweed on the horizon. When he reached the top, he saw Burns lying down on the grass, a little way off, with his elbows on the ground and his chin and head supported by his hands, evidently lost in a reverie, as he gazed at the lovely scene before him. Burns, evidently observing some one approaching, suddenly sprang to his feet, and walked away as if he did not wish his thoughts to be disturbed.

There are still some of my father's old friends living who remember what I have related above, and especially the earnest way in which he used to relate how Burns, in one of his walks with Robert Ainslie, crossed the Border, and when he first trod on English ground, he doffed his hat, and then kneeling, reverently repeated the last two verses from his "Cottars' Saturday Night," which my father, in telling the story would repeat as earnestly as if he himself were inspired with the noble words in which Burns has apostrophised his native land.

Among his other recollections of Burns, he used to speak of the appearance in Edinburgh, long after the Poet's death, of a supposed portrait of Burns, by Peter Taylor. Fortunately, in addition to my own recollection of this, I have a record of it in my father's hand-writing, written at the time, as well as a long letter written in 1851, to his old friend Alexander Ireland of Manchester, who had often heard my father tell the story of his seeing Burns; and at his request he wrote out his account of

the Taylor Portrait in order that Mr. Ireland might send it to Mr. Robert Chambers in Edinburgh. About ten years ago the son of Mr. Chambers in looking over his father's papers relating to Burns, found this letter, and noticing that it was addressed to Mr. Ireland (who was a great friend of the Chambers), he returned it to him, thinking he would like to re-possess it. Mr. Ireland then kindly sent it on to me, knowing that I would be greatly pleased to read it, as it would revive and confirm all my own recollections of the familiar story it contained. Mr. Ireland is still well and hearty, though over 80 years of age, and is able to confirm all I have written. We have been life-long friends, as our fathers were before us, when they both lived in Edinburgh. The letter is rather long, but so interesting in itself that I make no apology for quoting it in full, especially as it gives quite a different opinion of this picture as a likeness of Burns, from those quoted by Mr. Stevenson from the Edinburgh Literary Journal of 1829:

"Mr Alexander Ireland,

THE ELMS, TOXTETH PARK, LIVERPOOL, 27TH APRIL, 1851.

"MY DEAR SIR,-In obedience to your request I herewith send you a few lines on the subject of the supposed, or as I should rather say spurious, likeness of our great poet, intended to be palmed on the public as an original and correct likeness. That Mr. Aitkin, the partner of Constable, believed it to be what the painter or possessor of it represented I have no doubt; but that he was imposed on I am equally sure, and for the following reasons:

“When living in Edinburgh in 1829, my friend, Mr. John Aitkin, called and requested me to go with him and see a portrait of a personage that I should soon recognise. I accompanied him to the back office in Waterloo Place, where hung a painting of a person. I looked at it, but I did not recognise any resemblance to anyone I had ever seen, and told him so, when he said,

"You don't perceive any resemblance to Robert Burns?'

"No,' I repeated, 'not the smallest.' 'That is very odd,' he said in a tone of surprise and disappointment, adding, 'I was in hopes of having your testimonial to its correctness, and had made up my mind to present you with a copy of it framed in the manner of the one before you.'

"My reply to that was that I would never hang it up in my house as a picture of Burns. Indeed, I told him I feared he had been imposed upon. He then asked me if I knew Dr. John M'Kenzie, surgeon, an old acquaintance of Burns? I told him I did, and intimately, on which he asked me if I would get him to call and see the picture. I replied that I would be glad to do so, and that I should not mention a

syllable of it to him, or influence his opinion in any way on the subject -a subject which I considered, so to speak, all but a sacred one.

"I sent for the Doctor, who soon made his appearance. I then introduced him to Mr. Aitkin, and left them together. The former returned in a few minutes, my office being close to Constable's. Like myself, he not only could trace no resemblance, but added that it could never have been intended for Burns, and this he told to Mr. Aitkin. I then begged Dr. M'Kenzie to see Mr. William Tennant, who married the daughter of Dr. Dalrymple ('Dalrymple mild '), and whose opinion would go far to confirm ours, should we be correct. Mr. Tennant's testimony in all respects coincided with my own and Dr. M'Kenzie's. As with the Doctor, not a hint of the subject was given to Mr. Tennant; indeed, he considered it a joke, and could not speak of it for laughing.

"I then proposed that we three should take the liberty to call on Mr. Nasmyth, who resided in Queen Street. We did so, and on mentioning our errand we were most cordially received by the venerable artist. He ran through the whole history of his engagement with Creech to take Burns's likeness with a view to embellish the title page of the Edinburgh edition, which he then was preparing for publication. Mr. Nasmyth further told us he felt unwilling to undertake the task, he not being a portrait but a landscape painter. There being at that time no good hand at that in Edinburgh, on Mr. Creech pressing him earnestly, he consented, and with a view to becoming acquainted with the phiz of the bard, as he expressed it, the two were engaged to meet next morning at Creech's at breakfast. They then set out on a pilgrimage to the Pentlands, and down the Esk to Roslin, Hawthornden, and Lasswade, and returned with the publisher to supper. Having progressed thus far, next morning the artist commenced his work, which, by the way, as he informed us, never was entirely finished; for having got so far in the sketching of the picture, and being himself (Mr N.) so much pleased with it, he was afraid to proceed any further, lest he should spoil it, and nothing more was done to it. Such is the true history of the only likeness ever made of the poet, as Mr. Nasmyth informed us he had never heard of any other; and as to the one in the possession of Constable's house, on the artist's name being mentioned— I think it was a Mr. Taylor, of Leith-he said he knew him, and that he never pretended to be otherwise than a coach painter.

"I might mention that Dr. M'Kenzie and Mr. William Tennant were Ayrshire men, and knew the poet well, especially the former. Being in Dunse in 1787, just after the publication of the first Edinburgh edition, Burns himself being there at the time on a visit to the family of his friend Robert Ainslie, of Berrywell, near Dunse, the writer often saw the poet, and sitting on the sill of a window in the same room at a friend's, where Burns, with several other respectable inhabitants of the town, were conversing, and having the volume in my hand, I occasionally looked at the picture and then at the poet, and wondered at the resemblance. Mr Ainslie told me, on mentioning our proceedings anent the Constable picture, that he knew of no such picture; that Nasmyth's was

a good likeness of the features of the poet; 'but, in my opinion,' he continued, 'no painter living could take it, none being able to give that expressive flash of the eye that Burns possessed.' He never witnessed such an eye."

The letter concludes with:-
:-

"I have often told you of the extraordinary meeting of myself with Burns's young friend' Andrew Aitkin, and Mr. Nasmyth, the writer having been introduced to Mr. Aitkin by Dr. Gairdner (son-in-law of Mr. Tennant already mentioned) on board the steam packet from Leith to London, and of our being joined by Mr. Bruce, the son of one of the poet's heroines-I have forgotten the name of the song, but it goes, 'I lo'ed her mickle and lang.'t This meeting should it be of any use to Mr Chambers, I will give some other time—the above being as much as I can do at present, being pretty well for one bordering on eighty years. Give my regards to Mr. Chambers; he will remember me, having once ciceroned him and his lady in Liverpool, and I have called on him since at his office in Edinburgh. Trusting the above may prove useful to the publisher and author of the life and writings of the poet,—I remain, dear sir, yours,

"WILLIAM HALL.”

After receiving the above letter from Mr. Ireland, I remembered that I had amongst my father's old papers, the original pamphlet issued by Constable, entitled-"Unpublished Remains of Robert Burns,-Lockhart's third edition of his life,-Account of a lately discovered portrait, with letters concerning it." This seems to have been issued as an advertisement as it is stated on the reverse side of the title page, "Extracted from the Edinburgh Literary Journal, No. 54," (published 21 November, 1829). My father has added some foot notes of his own, evidently written at the time. After giving a description of the newly discovered portrait, the writer says that "it was painted by the late Peter Taylor, an artist of considerable celebrity at the time of Burns's visit to Edinburgh in 1786," and that "Buchan, Bonar, and Nasmyth were his contemporaries, and entertained the highest respect for his abilities, &c."—all of which, as we have seen above, is quite incorrect so far as Nasmyth is concerned. The account altogether

reads very much like one of Lockhart's random statements, for which he was so celebrated, and which Chambers, Scott Douglas, and others have corrected. In reference to the letters quoted in favour of the picture, and the fact that the writers received copies of the engraving—my father writes at the foot of the

"She's fair and fause."-[ED.]

page, "A bribe! they offered me a copy of the print enclosed in an elegant frame." This is signed with his initials "W. H.” Then in reference to these letters and others which are not quoted in the pamphlet, it is said, "They all agree in speaking of the portrait as amazingly like the original." To this my father adds another note thus :

"It is somewhat remarkable that the respectable publishers of this print could not procure, though strongly urged to do so, the concurrence of several intimate friends of the poet then alive, namely-Dr. John M'Kenzie, Mr. Nasmyth, Mr. Robert Ainslie, and Mr. William Tennant. Mr. Syme's account of it, as his son informed me, was anything but flattering. I also, who had often seen the poet, was strongly urged to lend my testimony to the likeness, but I could not do so, not being able to perceive any. The first four named gentlemen, all of them intimately acquainted with Burns, laughed at the idea of it being thought a likeness."

W.H.

This portrait was engraved by J. Horsburg, and published by Constable, in 1830, and caused considerable discussion in Edinburgh, but it was generally condemned as an impossible likeness of Burns. Some thought the portrait rather like Gilbert Burns, but he was not considered to be like his brother the Poet. The supposed artist does not seem to have painted any other likeness that is known, and this one at the best is a very poor work of Art. The original oil painting is still in the National Portrait Gallery in Queen Street, Edinburgh, where I first saw it in 1887, when it was exhibited after its return from Australia, where it had been for some years. I have seen it several times since, but only think it interesting as an illustration of the discussion which it has raised. Any one who wants to see the difference between it and Nasmyth's can easily do so by looking at the two engravings of them in last year's Chronicle, or better still by looking at the two originals in Edinburgh, and they will at once perceive that as Burns was only 27 when they were both taken, he could not be like both of them! Taylor's looks much older than the other, and gives no indication of the man who charmed every one who saw him, and whose eyes "literally glowed," as Scott himself has described them, a characteristic which one can easily imagine from Nasmyth's original painting, or Walker's beautiful engraving of it. I quite agree with what Mr. Stevenson says about the Skirving portrait having "a charm of its own." I have always understood that Skirving drew it at the suggestion of Burns's family, as they were