it has ever fallen to our lot to read and to
criticise.

When our old friend, M. Soyer, declared his conviction that "to die is a
religious duty which every human being owes to his Creator," and that
when the parents of a family are suddenly cut off, the unfortunate event
"not only affects the children personally, but their future generations,
by destroying all the social comfort which generally exists in such
families, and probably would cause misery to exist instead of happiness,"
it occurred to us that sterner truisms in more naked guise it would be
difficult to produce. We had not then read Jones. _His_ self-evident
propositions are perfectly astounding. Here are a few of them.

"Chantrey believed that the mind and morals are improved by the
contemplation of beautiful objects." Who could have supposed it?
"Chantrey was convinced that variety in building, if under the guidance
of good sense and propriety, tends much to the beauty of a country." Is
it possible? "Chantrey believed that all which has been done may be
exceeded _when genius and ability are equal to the task_, for as Raphael
has surpassed the lay-figure art of most of his predecessors, so no
reason exists why Raphael should not be surpassed." Had he never spoken
again, this idea would have procured him a niche next to Francis Bacon.
The sculptor actually believed that even the glories of the past may be
outdone when there are genius and ability enough in the world to surpass
them! Will Mr. Jones favor us with the day and precise moment at which
this wonderful conception entered the great sculptor's mind? We should
like to record it. "Chantrey felt that the blind adoration of right and
wrong was likely to mislead the public." We really think we have heard
the remark before. "Chantrey referred every object to the Creator of all,
and admired without limit the works of the Great Artificer, from the
smallest leaf to the noblest production, and in his mundane calling
aimed at an imitation of that excellence of beauty which nature has
displayed." There is nothing like getting at the idiosyncrasies of the
famous. Since Chantrey, according to Jones, has set the example of
referring creation to a creator, and of studying nature when be wished to
imitate her, we can only trust that the practice may henceforward be
universally adopted. Chantrey was of opinion--no, we mistake, this is
Jones' own--Jones is of opinion that "although the literary education of
artists oug