n 150 guineas for his work.
Probably this was the price originally agreed upon, the two Turner
drawings being ultimately accepted as a more welcome and appropriate
form of remuneration.

In all save one particular the Text here given follows precisely that of
the previous issues. It has been the good fortune of the present Editor
to be able to restore a characteristic passage suppressed from motives
of prudence when the work was originally planned.[D] The proof-sheets of
the first edition, worked upon by Mr. Ruskin, were given by him to his
old nurse Anne.[E] She, fortunately, carefully preserved them, and in
turn gave them to Mr. Allen, some ten years before he became Mr.
Ruskin's publisher. These proofs had been submitted as they came from
the press to Mr. W. H. Harrison (well known to readers of _On the Old
Road_, etc., as "My First Editor"), who marked them freely with notes
and suggestions. To one passage he appears to have taken so decided an
objection that its author was prevailed upon to delete it. But, whilst
deferring thus to the judgment of others, and consenting to remove a
sentence which he doubtless regarded with particular satisfaction as
expressing a decided opinion upon a favorite picture, Mr. Ruskin
indulged in one of those pleasantries which now and again we observe in
his informal letters, though seldom, if ever, in his serious writings.
In the margin, below the canceled passage, he wrote boldly: "_Sacrificed
to the Muse of Prudence. J. R._"[F]

[D] See _post_, p. 19.

[E] See _Praeterita_. She died March 30th, 1871.

[F] The accompanying illustration is a facsimile of the portion of
the proof-sheet described above--slightly reduced to fit the smaller
page.

That Mr. Harrison was justified in raising objection to this "moderate
estimate" of Turner's picture will, I think, be readily allowed. In
those days Mr. Ruskin's influence was, comparatively speaking, small;
and the expression of an opinion which heaped praise upon the single
painting of a partially understood painter at the expense of a great and
popular institution would only have served to arouse opposition, and
possibly to attract ridicule. It is different to-day. We know the keen
enthusiasm of the author of _The Seven Lamps_, and have seen again and
again how he expresses himself in terms of somewhat exaggerated
admiration when writing of a painter whom he appreciates, or a picture
that he loves. To us