nts.

PANDOLFI, Antonio, Venice. A Violin of this make, dated 1719, was
among the instruments exhibited at the Milan Exhibition in 1881.

PANORMO, Vincenzo, Palermo, born about 1740, died 1813. This maker was
one of the most successful followers of Antonio Stradivari. Panormo
and Lupot share the palm as copyists of the great Cremonese master.
Neither appears to have attempted to create a model of his own; their
sole aim was to imitate to the utmost the various patterns of
Stradivari, Guarneri, and Amati, but they principally confined
themselves to Stradivari.

Vincenzo Panormo left Italy in early life, and settled for a short
time in Paris, from which city a few of his instruments are dated.
From Paris he removed to London, where he remained many years. He also
visited Ireland, where he made, it is said, several beautiful
instruments from an old maple billiard-table, with which he was
fortunate enough to meet. He was of a restless temperament, which
showed itself in continual self-imposed changes. He would not, or
could not, permit his reputation to grow steadily, by residing long in
one place, but as soon as fame was within his grasp, he sacrificed the
work of years by removing to an entirely new field of labour.

Panormo furnishes us with another example of the certain appreciation,
sooner or later, of exceptional talents. No matter how trifling the
circumstances under which gifted men have laboured, some time or other
their genius is discovered, and acknowledged with its due award, if
not of fortune, at least of fame. The peculiar circumstances under
which Panormo lived would have been sufficient in the case of most men
to dwarf all efforts. Unable to obtain readily that patronage to which
his abilities justly entitled him, he removed from city to city,
hoping to discover a resting-place, in which favour might attend his
art. No doubt this was a mistaken course, and one which robbed his
work of the attention which a mind undisturbed by the care of
existence can bestow; nevertheless his natural gifts had a vitality
that could not entirely be suppressed. He worked and toiled for his
art and for bare sustenance alternately. His life, like that of many
others in the paths of literature and science, was a continued battle
with adversity. Such persons are forced to satisfy daily wants by
slaving at work which brings them but little credit in after time, and
becomes a standard by which they are too often erroneously jud