Now, the term miniature as commonly used would not be applied to the small oil picture by Taylor, and it was unquestionably this picture which was submitted by Mr. Bridges to Kirkpatrick Sharpe. Of this there can be no doubt: this portrait had been only recently released from its long imprisonment, through being bequeathed by the widow of the artist to Mr. Taylor, Leith, in the previous year, 1828, and the names of C. Kirkpatrick Sharpe and David Bridges, Junr., are included by the 'Literary Journal' among the witnesses who spoke in favour of this portrait after its "discovery."

In order to show how jealously Mrs. Taylor guarded this portrait it may be said that, the Earl of Buchan having detained it a day or two beyond the stipulated time, when he had obtained the loan of it to show to the Duchess of Gordon; a request for the loan of it a second time was refused, although accompanied with an offer of forty guineas.

It is the work of an untrained and unskilled hand.

It is impossible to believe that this hard featured man, not ten years before, had charmed the 'belles' of Edinburgh, even if they were years of no light labour and trial.

Burns, if he ever saw this portrait of himself, could never have spoken of it as he does in the letters concerning the miniature by Reid: nor should we forget that Allan Cunningham considered this painter worthy of mention in his "Lives of Eminent Artists."

As Mr. Scott Douglas in his Life of Burns expresses the same opinion as Mr. Hately Waddell he must pass under the same condemnation.

It is to be regretted that no record has decended to us direct from Burns, of his having sat to Peter Taylor for the small picture at present in the National Portrait Gallery, Edinburgh, but that he did so, we have the testimony of Mrs. Taylor, and such internal evidence as is possessed by the picture.

Whether from the fact of its having been locked up for many years, by the widow of the painter, and being practically unknown until the publication of the engraving from it, by Horsburgh in 1830; or to whatever cause it may be ascribed, the fact remains, that, interesting, although this picture undoubtedly is, and in spite of the testimony in its favour from various friends of the

Poet, the public have refused to accept it as a faithful or satisfactory representation of Burns.

We now proceed to make a few comparisons for ourselves: looked at side by side, the first and strongest divergence noticeable between the portraits by Nasmyth and Taylor, is the length of nose in Taylor's, and the absence of the slight upward turn in the former; in this detail Nasmyth agrees with the small profile done, as Burns, in a letter of 23rd June, 1788, to Mr. Ainslie, says "in two minutes by an artist named Miers."

We all know how wonderfully the character of a face is frequently caught in these silhouettes; and this by Miers is in perfect harmony with Nasmyth's portrait, varying, but only apparently in the line of the head: lost to some extent by the 'queue' worn by Burns at this time.

With this exception of the length of the nose, which may appear unimportant, but is sufficient to change the aspect of the face, and alter its character completely, the features in the two pictures will bear comparison. The under lip is heavier, and not so fine as in Nasmyth, but the line of the mouth is simpler, and so far better; it is not, however, drawn in true perspective to the rest of the face.

The drawing of the eye-brow in Taylor's is finer, and has the variety of form lacking in the other, while the eye, although not so open and brilliant, suggests an even longer orb, such as is almost invaribly found in Poets and Orators. It fails however

to convey an adequate idea of that eye described by Scott as "large, and of a dark cast which glowed (I say literally glowed), when he spoke with feeling or interest." It may be said that Taylor obviously made no effort to represent this phase of Burns, and that he purposely wished to give us the serious side of his sitter. The twilight of the back ground, and the shadow thrown over the eyes by the hat, may be thought to lend weight to such a supposition, but even if this be admitted, he cannot be said to have realized such an aim with perfect success.

We all admire the serious side of Burns' nature, and how gladly would we have welcomed, and been ever charmed with, an adequate and satisfying representation of this side of his personality, such as a Raeburn might have bequeathed to us; but all this does not effect our present inquiry; limited as it is to which of these portraits he most truly represents, and places before us, the features and distinguishing characteristics of Burns.

In a letter to George Thomson dated May, 1795, Burns, at the conclusion of a letter, writes :-" There is an artist of very considerable merit, just now, in this town, who has hit the most remarkable likeness of what I am at this moment, that I think ever was taken of anybody." And writing to Mrs. Walter Riddell, Halleathes, from Dumfries, 29th January, 1796, Burns, after speaking of other matters, says :-"apropos to pictures, I am sitting to Reid in this town for a miniature, and I think he has hit by far the best likeness of me ever taken. When you are at any time so idle in town as to call at Reid's painting room, and mention to him that I spoke of such a thing to you, he will show it to you, else he will not; for both the miniature's existence and its destiny are an inviolable secret, and therefore very properly trusted in part to you."

There is nothing improbable in a portrait, even in miniature being carried on from May till January, the above refer in all probability to the same portrait, and I consider the miniature in the Watson collection sufficiently good in every way to meet all that is said in these letters.

In the absence of any signature or mark on the portrait, or valid history attached to it, more I fear cannot be said at present connecting it with these letters.

The attempt made by the Rev. P. Hately Waddell in his Life of Burns to claim Reid as the painter of the wretched thing he terms the "Kerry miniature," an engraving of which he gives with the initials "R. B., 1796," underneath. I can scarcely speak of it with patience, nor will it bear a moments investigation.

Allan Cunningham in his "Lives of Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects," speaks of “ Read a wandering limner who found his way on a time to Dumfries, where he painted Burns and his Jean on ivory."

The late Mr. W. F. Watson believed the miniature on ivory in his collection to be the portrait of Burns here referred to; I had many opportunities of seeing it in the house of Mr. Watson, as well as the silhouette, now in the National Portrait Gallery.

Mr. Watson attached so great a value and importance, to this portrait that he refused to allow it out of his possession: he very kindly, however, lent it to me for a short time while modelling a head of Burns in which he had taken a great interest.

Fortunately this miniature gives the left side of the face in profile, the silhouette is from the right. To me it bears all the internal evidence of having been taken from life; there is a spirit about it, an amount and accuracy of detail, extending to the ear, which is well drawn, incompatible with the supposition of its being a concoction. The small portion of the ear seen in Nasmyth's painting, is badly suggested, and the defective drawing of the original has been aggravated, more or less in nearly all the copies and engravings.

This miniature harmonises with the Nasmyth portrait and the silhouette, but with a difference; the difference of time; I perceive in it, small as the features are, a trace of tear and wear in the firmer, and rather harder look of the mouth.

Altogether I cannot help imagining that the artist has only too faithfully caught and preserved a marked falling off, compared with the face of the young Poet, who looks with eyes beaming with hope and enthusiasm from the canvas of Nasmyth.

Having now examined and considered, in a necessarilly brief manner, the portraits of Burns, known to have been done from life, namely: the Nasmyth painting, and the Miers Silhouette; followed by Taylor's painting, which the emphatic testimony of Mrs. Taylor leaves little room for doubt, was painted from life.

To these I venture to add the Reid miniature, partly on the evidence of Allan Cunningham, already quoted, but equally on the indubitable evidence it carries, satisfying me that it was done from the Poet.

Two of these portraits, and if my view of the miniature be accepted, three, will be found to harmonize and substantiate each other, while the fourth, by Taylor, is isolated, and, at best, must, I fear, be content with the fourth place.

Of the whole length portrait, painted by William Allan, and engraved by John Burnet, in 1838, perhaps the best of its class executed at that period, nothing need be said; nor of the miniature medallian by Tassie, in the National Portrait Gallery, although it looks more like an independent production than a servile copy; and while in harmony with Nasmyth, Miers, and Reid, has a character of its own. It suggests Burns as older than in Nasmyth's portrait, and might quite well have been done by Tassie, from a drawing by himself, although it was not published until 1801, five years after the death of the Poet.

It is impossible within our limited space to say much concerning the innumerable engravings of Burns, nearly all from the same source, viz:-Nasmyth, the first being the small frontispiece by Beugo, the “eminent engraver," alluded to by Burns in his letter already mentioned.

Burns gave several independent sittings to Beugo, but whether from this cause, and having to some extent departed from, or having failed to realize the original, which had been set before him immediately after leaving the hands of the painter, he certainly failed to satisfy Nasmyth.

Of this engraving I have always felt that it was too strongly impregnated with the rustic air and wanting in the native dignity, never absent from Burns, more particularly at this period.

I believe that a closer attempt to realize the original picture would have better succeeded, than attempting to touch up, or alter from life on the plate: a daring and difficult task even to the most accomplished yielder of the bruin, and possibly beyond the powers of Beugo.

That Nasmyth was more completely satisfied with the wellknown engraving, by William Walker, we have the direct