records that Collins and Abraham Cooper recommended the grant, and Baily and Richard Bone were the movers and seconders of the vote granting it.

But in 1823, before the permanence of Linnell's help was assured, Blake began the year with very short commons. It was now that he borrowed the Job designs that he had sold to Butts, and showed them about in the hope of employment, with the result that Linnell gave him the order for their engraving, and for a "duplicate" set of drawings. They are not identically the same; and the first set (which it would be a mistake to call the originals) were sold eventually by Lord Houghton, into whose possession they had come.

In the arrangement about the Job engravings, Blake for the first time received a proper agreement about his work, drawn up and signed. For the designs and copyright he is to have £100, payable in instalments, and out of the profits after the engravings are sold he is to receive another £100. If there were no profits, then of course nothing beyond the first £100 was due to him; in fact, it is not clear that anything was due unless the profits exceeded £100. There were practically none, and Linnell gave Blake £50 "out of" their absence.

There was an element of grandeur in the air of cold and business-like dignity with which Linnell surrounded all he did for Blake, and on the Blakean principle that "grandeur of ideas is founded on precision of ideas," the exact sums that passed shall now be set down and recorded.

In the little sketch of a memoir, elaborated only on the few points where a correction of or addition to previous records was needed, that was tacked on to the Quaritch edition, where it was intended to serve as a supplement to Gilchrist and a source of information to some future biographer, the present writer said: "In 1825, the date when the first complete proof of the Job was made, payments began to pass for a series of coloured drawings done for Mr. Linnell (the Dante series). . . . They were paid for by instalments, about £52 being given in all, so far as record remains."

Fortunately, the misunderstanding of some information and figures supplied by the Linnell family, which caused this mistaken statement, is corrected in a long and valuable letter from the eldest surviving son, who writes:

January 7, 1893.

DEAR MR. ELLIS-I have as yet had time only to glance at a very few parts of your new book (the Quaritch edition), and I instinctively

"When the Morning Stars sang together and all the Sons of God shouted for joy."

turned to those subjects as to which I have knowledge, and that have relation to J. Linnell, viz. those chapters describing the execution for J. L. of the Job engravings, and the Dante drawings, and plates, etc. I at once noticed a few inaccuracies and certain statements that are not in agreement with the real facts. Now, I am the only one of my family who has taken the pains and the time to examine my father's papers, and his diary, memoranda, etc., and thus I have obtained from these both certain and definite information as to some particulars in the transaction between him and Mr. Blake not known to everybody. The above documents are the ultimate authority for determining the facts in these matters.

Here follows a gentle reprimand to the present writer from Mr. Linnell for not having applied to him for information, and for not having submitted the MS. of the memoir to him. The more assiduous conduct of another biographer, writing the life of another subject, is held up at some length to show what should have been done:

. . . Certain statements would then have been made correct which are now misleading. See p. 131 (vol. i.), we read: "While the engraving of the Job series was in hand, etc." I believe it would be more correct to say: "On the completion of the engravings of the Job, J. L. commissioned W. B., in return for the different payments he made to W. B. (since the final payment on account of the Job, October 30, 1825), to illustrate Dante's poem by drawings in the book J. L. gave him, W. B. doing as much or as little as he chose."

From this we see that the date upon the proofs of the plates themselves, which says that they are "published as the Act directs, March 8, 1825," was only the date on which Blake himself first thought that he might consider the plates complete, and that proofs, retouches, and afterwards prints, were taken from them at leisure, and that the real " publication" took place the following year. The proofs were published at £10: 10s. the set, and the prints at £5: 5s. the set, bound in cardboard covers of terracotta colour, with white labels pasted in the middle upon which the price is written in pencil.

We know that the Job plates which were begun in March 1823 were completed in November 1825. In Blake's letter to J. L., November 10, 1825, he speaks of the final touches to the Job plates, and says: “I hope a few days more will bring us to a conclusion."

The plates must have been in the printer's hands in the latter part of 1825 and the beginning of 1826, for the book was published in March 1826. Now the Job was virtually finished and paid for before the work of Dante, and the payment of various sums on account of it commenced. Blake, in letter February 1, 1826, asks for a copy of the Job to show to Mr. Chantrey, showing that copies were being issued at that date.

...

A few lines condemning another biographer follow, and the letter is resumed:

Now from the contemporaneous accounts and receipts of the payments made by J. L. to W. B., it is certain and proved:-Firstly, the final payment for the Job plates was made October 1825. (The payments were from March to December 1823, during the year 1824, and from January to October 1825, for the Job plates.) [A word of general praise for another biographer follows.] This is given wrongly in your book, p. 135. All the proofs that have been taken of the plates were taken at this first date [Which? The proofs themselves, with the accidental exception mentioned, bear date March 8, 1825], before the publication, and after the proofs a certain number of prints were taken, which were also sold in March 1826. Of course no more "proofs " can follow after the "prints." Secondly, that the payments to W. B. of various sums on account of the Dante designs, both the drawings and the plates, for these were carried on together, commenced at the latter part of the year 1825, and continued till August 1827 (the last payment to W. B. was on August 2, 1827). Further, these payments added together amount to £103:5:6 (the total actually paid by J. L. to W. B. himself). This sum is cut down in p. 137 of your book to £52!

The "your book "here referred to is the memoir to the Quaritch edition. In justification, the present writer can but conjecture that the figure, which he did not invent, but received from one of the Linnell brothers, must have been taken from a note made by J. Linnell at some date or other when he had really paid only £52, and that notes of further payments were made later, which not being shown to the present writer when he was taking down the figures, he was left to infer, mistakenly, that this was the latest record, and represented the total payment.

After W. B.'s death, J. L. paid to Mrs. B., from September 1827 to September 1828, about £46 (including burial of Mr. B., £10: 15s., the rent of Fountain Court, etc.). Of the above sum, J. L. reckoned about £20 would be allowed to Mrs. B. for taking care of the house in Circuit Place, and the remainder he considered as additional payment for the Dante work, drawings and plates. I kno' in a letter March 1831, by J. L. to Fred Tatham, in reply to his question how much would have to be repaid to J. L. if the Dante were sold at an enhanced price for the benefit of Mrs. B., etc., he quotes these payments and says: Taking the £103 he paid to Mr. B. from (?) December 1825, and the £47 paid to Mrs. B., with £20 deducted for the housekeeping at Circuit Place, it leaves £130 to be repaid to himself if the drawings were resold, in which case the seven plates would be given up to Mrs. Blake. (That is all about the payments. The letter continues :) Further, I notice in page 168 an extraordinary statement-"How the MS. of Vala escaped and found safe keeping is not known by his own family"!! This is utterly untrue.

Unfortunately, the present writer had, when compiling