scan0007

“No. 40. White Mountain Views. Tip Top House. F. B. Gage, Photo. Published by E. Anthony, N. Y.” 1859.

“Tip-Top House, Mount Washington, Sept, 1959. We were up early and proceeded to pack our chemicals, camera, and fixtures in two compact bundles, to be taken along with us. At nine o’clock we were mounted on Canadian ponies, each having a bundle weighing about twenty-five pounds before us in the saddle, where we held it during the journey up the mountain. Then, with a company of thirty-four others, we struck off into the bridle path. Nine miles of such horseback riding as that was no very pleasurable job while encumbered with glass ware, as we were. Up, up, through woods and clouds, winding around and climbing the rocks, on the verge of chasms and ravines, we held our way for four hours, until we arrived at the summit. The day was beautifully warm, the mountain was enveloped in clouds as we ascended, and occasionally we got glimpses of the glorious valleys below, as the clouds for a few moments opened and closed again. There was no vegetation for the last four miles; the only thing to be seen was the granite rock in fragments of all sizes, from the pebble stone up to those weighing thousands of tons! How is it possible for horses to climb over these rocks, hurled together in the wildest disorder, is more than I can comprehend; yet they do it, and seldom injure themselves or their riders.
Arrived at the Tip-Top House, we proceeded to occupy apartments previously engaged there. After dinner we took out the camera to take a view of the rude stone-house and its granite surroundings. A plate was sensitized and exposed with an unsatisfactory result; another, and then another followed with the same result. We were thunderstruck and completely puzzled, that our bath and collodion — the same which worked so splendidly only the day before – should now refuse to produce even an indifferent negative. But even the skies would not develop, by any device, and there was a want of intensity that betokened trouble ahead…. On the next morning our bath was again in working order, but a terrific storm had set in, so that we could not use it. During the latter part of the night we had been enveloped in a thunder-cloud, the lightning playing beneath us and the thunder rumbling at our feet. The cloud continued to envelop us all day, the atmosphere hourly growing colder. The next morning the moisture in the cloud had congealed on the rocks of the summit until they were white with ice.…Thus for three days the storm raged unabated. On the evening of the third day, just at sunset, the cloud disappeared, and our eyes beheld the great panorama of mountain, lake, and river. The ice on the summit, in many places, was fully eighteen inches thick, glaring white and desolate-looking in the sun, while the valleys below were smiling in their summer greenness. The next morning the sun rose clear, and the air was calm and still. Ninety miles away we saw the ocean with the naked eye. Myriads of vessels could be seen with the glass dotting its surface. Mountains upon mountains extended upon the other hand, villages, lakes, and rivers, the whole range of the Green Mountains, making a circumference of more than six hundred miles. There was just enough cloud and just enough sunlight to make it one of the most glorious visions that eyes ever beheld. Our host of the Tip-Top House assured us that it was the finest view of the season, and we felt well repaid for our imprisonment. We were early at work, but found it too icy to take views with comfort until nearly noon, when the party of travellers from the Glen House had arrived. We secured a capital negative of that party around the Tip-Top House. The party from the Crawford House arriving soon after, we secured two other negatives equally good. The ice had melted just enough to produce a fine effect in the pictures, and we thought it a fortunate addition…. Having secured all the negatives that we could, we packed up our apparatus and descended the mountain. When we reached the Crawford House—where we now are—we found ourselves very tired….” Gage, F. B. “Photography on Wheels. No. 2 (Concluded.)” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL (Dec. 15, 1859): 241-243.
 

FRANKLIN BENJAMIN GAGE. (1824–1874) (IN PROGRESS)
Franklin Benjamin Gage is one of those unusual individuals who pop up throughout photographic history and help keep the field interesting – for me at least.
Gage, son of Royal Gage and Anna Tyler Gage, was born in East St. Johnsbury on July 29, 1824. He grew up, lived, and worked through the 1850s through 1870s, in the town of St. Johnsbury in Northeastern Vermont, far away from the power centers of New York or Boston or Philadelphia. Yet during his lifetime he gained a reputation as an acknowledged expert on photographic processes, and — as described in his obituary — “…Mr. Gage enjoyed a good reputation as an artist, and was one of the most industrious experimentalists in the business. To him the fraternity owes much of the progress that has been made in the various photographic processes….” “…He was a man of more than ordinary genius, and somewhat eccentric withal, was always inventing and trying new processes. It is said he “hardly ever finished two sets of pictures by the same process.”…”
Another editor’s description of Gage during one of his rare trips to New York City helps account for the “somewhat eccentric withal” comment. “Imagine a man of about thirty-five years of age or thereabouts, dressed in a suit of coarse New England black cloth, with a low-crowned black felt hat, light complexion, blue eyes, a whitey-brown beard like that formerly worn by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, reaching down to his waist, a rather closely trimmed mustache, long hair, hands stained all over with nitrate of silver solution and black as the ace of spades, Heavy cow-hide boots with soles an inch thick, and you have some idea of the personel of Mr. Gage.
In his manner he is quite reserved, talks very little, and that in the genuine dialect of a Vermont Yankee, occupying himself at the same time with combing his flowing beard with his fingers, in the same manner as you have seen a man running his digits through the mane of a horse…” Gage apparently was very fond of his beard, which was kept unusually long even for rural Vermont; as he mentioned it more than once in his various writings, and even identifying some of his early poems by signing them “By the Man with the Flowing Beard.”
At this point we do not know a great deal about Gage’s early life or career. Its stated that Gage learned daguerreotyping when he was about twenty-two years old, which would have been about 1848, and in 1850 he sailed from New York City to Savannah, Georgia for some unknown purpose, (Perhaps he was working as a travelling daguerreotypist, or assisting in a studio there?) and in 1852 he started a photograph business in St. Johnsbury, where he continued until his death twenty-four years later. There is a note in 1862 that Gage was related (A cousin) to a “distinguished literary lady in Boston.” That’s about all that’s known at Gage’s early life at this time. Some of these dates do not coincide with those in his published obituary, which have some inaccuracies. In 1866 Gates states he had had his first gallery for fourteen years, which would mean that he opened it in 1852. Advertising in the local paper also starts in 1852. Other inconsistencies are also present in later materials published on Gates. Further research could clear up some of the questions.
Before Gates opened his studio apparently anyone wishing to obtain a daguerreotype portrait in St. Johnsbury had to travel to Boston, (Several of the Boston galleries –Plumbe, Chase, Southworth & Hawes, J. A. Whipple and others advertised in the St. Johnsbury newspaper throughout the 1840’s and early 1850’s.) or wait for the W. D. McPherson’s travelling Daguerreotype Saloon to pull into town. In fact both the Boston galleries of J. A. Whipple and Masury & Silsbee had advertisements on the same page of the Sept. 25, 1852 issue of the Caledonian newspaper where Gage published his first advertisement for his new studio.
Once Gage established his gallery, between portrait settings and photographic trips to make landscape views for stereographs, he experimented endlessly to improve the varied photographic processes of his era; and beginning in the latter 1850s, he submitted the results of his experiments in clear, well-written articles to the photographic journals of his day; thus sharing the fruits of his discoveries with the profession at large. This generosity, if not completely unusual, was at least not the common practice in a competitive business whose practitioners tended to hoard its professional secrets to themselves.
Between May 1857 and mid-1860 Humphrey’s published more than forty of Gage’s articles. Then Gage apparently stopped submitting articles to Humphrey’s in 1860, and the reasons for this are not clear. But the editor of Humphrey’s Journal was an active supporter of the various attempts to have James A. Cutting’s patent overturned. To oversimplify this complex issue, Cutting had patented a part of the process critical to anyone making ambrotypes, – and, as ambrotypes were the hot new photographic process at the time, according to Cutting (And for a while at least, the Law.) nearly every commercial photographer in the country making portraits were supposed to pay a fee to Mr. Cutting for the privilege. Many felt that Cutting patented something that was already common practice and so many considered the patent unjust and possibly illegal; and it was considered to be hamstringing professional photographers around the country. Gage, who had paid for right to use of Cutting’s patent in Vermont, and to be the regional agent for Cutting, wrote letters to Humphrey’s supporting the patent. Beyond the fiscal issue, Gage might also have been supporting the idea of firm patents, as he had taken several patents out himself. In any case, the flurry of articles around this contentious issue were the last that Gage published in Humphrey’s. (On the other hand, Humphrey sold his Journal to Joseph H. Ladd in 1859, who would take over it’s editorship until 1862, when he hired John Towler as the new editor, a move that brought a new credibility to the journal. It is possible that Ladd, and then Towler simply went to other individuals for their articles. Certainly a wave of new, well-educated amateur photographers began writing for Humphrey’s in the early 1860s.) Gage did not publish any articles again until several new photographic journals, such as Philadelphia Photographer and Anthony’s Photographic Bulletin, began to publish in the late 1860s and early 1870s, and thus offer Gage new venues for his articles. But by then Gage was very ill, and only able to publish a few articles in these later journals.
 
Gage married Lauretta H. Huntley, also from East St. Johnsbury, in 1853 and between 1856 and 1867 they had three daughters –Beatrice, Genevieve, and Jesse, and a son, Elbert Ellsworth. (The daughter’s names may reflect Gage’s literary interests.) Gage wrote poetry, some of it puckishly humorous doggerel, some more serious and infused with that preoccupation with death and the afterlife which was such a staple of the literature of the period – and with Gage’s later poetry. Gage would write and publish poems advertising the virtues of his gallery and the value of obtaining portraits from him. (Marcus A. Root, the well-known photographer and author from Philadelphia and New York also loved to publish his poems in his advertisements in the New York newspapers; and there was even a brief fashion for advertising poetry that forced Brady, Gurney, and the other big Broadway galleries to hire writers to compose jingles or poems for their advertisements.) But the local St. Johnsbury newspaper also published Gage’s other poems, and later, short stories, as literature. In 1874 the Youth’s Companion magazine, published in Boston, published seven of Gage’s short stories, and published four more posthumously.
Gage seems to have been active in his local community. His exhibition of photographs were considered a highlight at the Caledonia County Fair each year, and the occasional “exhibitions” that he held in his gallery attracted viewers. The newspaper published his poems and short stories, and promoted his occasional poetry readings. He was a freemason, and in the 1870s elected an officer in the local Templar organization. This, along with his writings, indicates that he was religious, and probably involved in the social and cultural world of his church. He was active in the local Temperance Society. There are indications that Gage supported anti-slavery policies before the Civil War, and that he supported the Republican Party and Abraham Lincoln during the war. During the 1860’s Gage’s support of the war strengthened as it progressed and as the toll of wounded and dead soldiers from Vermont brought home the realities of that distant conflict. He acquired and sold cartes-de-visite of Abraham Lincoln and of “The Little Drummer Boy,” Willie Johnson, (A 14 year old Vermont volunteer who received the second Medal of Honor ever awarded.) and portraits of other Vermont military figures. He photographed and distributed prints of a sarcastic cartoon published in Harper’s Weekly pillorying a controversial attempt to “compromise with the South.” He held at least one poetry reading and donated the proceeds to the war charities, and in 1864 he donated $20, (a respectable sum for the time and place) to the local Ladies Soldiers Aid Society. These seem like small acts, but indicate both the mood of a culture and the cast of an individual temperament. Occasionally, usually around Christmas, he would run an advertisement offering to trade pictures for firewood – an act both practical and generous – making it possible for cash-poor farmers to obtain portraits of their families.
By 1856 Gage advertised that his was the largest photographic establishment in the state of Vermont; at first offering daguerreotypes and then adding all the modern processes and styles as they became available – ambrotypes, mezzotypes, ebonytypes, cartes-de-visite, cabinet portraits, and so on, as well as displaying and selling his stereo views. Like many galleries at the time he occasionally sold stereos or cartes-de-visite by other photographers in addition to his own. In 1857 Gage entered a brief business partnership with F. Rowell, and the team of Gage & Rowell made cheap ambrotype portraits in the studio; but then, under contract with Edward Anthony, they began taking stereo views in Vermont and in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. The partnership was dissolved in February 1858 and Rowell, the junior partner, set up his own studio in Lebanon, NH. Gage quickly stopped making the cut-priced ambrotypes and tried to reestablish reasonably fair higher prices for his portraits. This policy, much debated in the photographic community, was seen to be a mark of professional responsibility. Gage proudly specialized in “life sized” portraits, which were hand-colored – again considered the mark of the more-skilled portrait studios. Gage never took another partner, but throughout the latter 1860’s, and suffering from illness, he advertised several times (apparently fruitlessly) for an apprentice or an assistant, or, finally, even for a clerk to help in the gallery.
With a score or more technical articles already published in the professional journals, in 1859 Gage published a sixty page manual, Theoretical and practical photography on glass and paper: with positive rules for obtaining intense negatives with certainty, which was well regarded and frequently used in America.

scan0019

“Fairbanks Scales Factory. St. Johnsbury.” ca. 1868.

So how, in rural Vermont, did Gage learn the skills to become an expert practical chemist and experimental scientist? In the 1830s Thaddeus Fairbanks, a resident of St. Johnsbury, invented the platform weighing scale and then built a factory which manufactured and sold these scales. By mid century the town had become a prosperous center of manufacturing, and as it was located on the new railroad that linked Boston to Montreal, sales went world-wide. In 1842 the Fairbanks family had returned some of its wealth to the town by establishing the St. Johnsbury Academy, an excellent private school which then and still now provides a free education to any St. Johnsbury resident. It is quite possible that Gage obtained a fine education from the Academy, and that may be where he learned the rudiments of chemistry and the methodology to practice chemical experiments. Even if Gage didn’t attend the Academy, St. Johnsbury was a wealthy town, with an educated, skilled, and informed citizenry, and Gage would have had many opportunities to learn what he needed in that climate.

scan0017

“St. Johnsbury.” ca. 1868.

St Johnsbury was also a gateway town into the White Hills region of New England, which had become a summer tourist destination for wealthy and educated city dwellers from Boston and New York and along the eastern seaboard. So there was always a layering of more open and cultured ways of thinking about the world available to the inhabitants of St. Johnsbury than was normally available in a rural community. In 1871 the Fairbanks family also founded the St. Johnsbury Athenaeum, an early response to the public library movement then developing in the United States. The Athenaeum opened with 9,000 volumes, and, two years later a small but significant art gallery was added, which housed works of art by American painters of the Hudson River School and others. So St. Johnsbury Vt. was a prosperous and active center and supported a level of cultural institutions and activity that was far larger than could be found in the average American community at the time.

scan0014

“Library. St. Johnsbury.” ca. 1871.

Gage began to make stereo views of the White Hills scenery during the second half of the 1850s, on a contract with Edward Anthony, a publisher and distributer of this newly fashionable form of visual entertainment and education. These views put him amoung the earliest of the fast-developing profession of American stereo views makers. (As late as June 1860, the editor of Humphrey’s Journal could state: “We wish operators generally would take more interest in the making of stereoscopic pictures. There is hardly a locality in the country that does not afford scenes of interest for the operator, and of which he could not take pictures that would command a ready and remunerating sale.”) A careful and detailed history of the development of landscape photography in the Eastern United States has yet to be written; but if and when it is, certainly the role of the E. & H. T. Anthony Company will play a large role in that development, and just as certain, the very early work of Franklin Benjamin Gage will have a featured position in that history as well.
Fortunately, Gage published several informative narratives of some of his travelling experiences in Humphrey’s Journal, and a predominant feature of these stories is the often extraordinary efforts that he had to take in order to overcome the difficulties encountered while photographing outdoors with the complicated and refractory wet-collodion process, so that he could bring the stereo project to a successful conclusion. His essays are intelligent and informed, laced with occasional notes of humor, and they provide valuable insights into the shifts and shufflings, the actions and activities that a small-time professional photographer performed to survive while working during the period of enormous and rapid change in mid-century America. However he did not narrate one event that occurred at the beginning of his first photographic trip; where, through a series of ridiculous misunderstandings or even through malice, a hotel owner sent Gage’s bags full of photographic chemicals back by the railroad to St. Johnsbury as Gage was out scouting locations. But this incident indicates that the practice of outdoor photography or stereo view making was still very uncommon at the time, as Gage had identified himself and his activities to the hotel owner, who apparently still misunderstood what he was doing.
During large parts of 1859 and early 1860 Gage closed his portrait studio as he photographed landscape views in the White Mountains and elsewhere. At one point, after a long absence, he announced reopening the gallery in June and then six weeks later in July, wryly advertising “F. B. Gage has been seized with a fit of covetousness and is about to start for the Gold Regions, leaving the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery closed for further notice…” This notice, slyly reflecting upon the craze of the California Gold Rush of 1849, is actually referring to a supposed gold strike in Plymouth, Vt., to which Gage went to take stereo views. (Several of these views are in the photograph collections of the New York Public Library.).
In 1865 an enigmatic note in the Philadelphia Photographer magazine mentioned that Gage had stopped taking stereo views during the Civil War. “A letter from F. B. Gage of St. Johnsbury, VT, including stereos of eighteen landscapes taken five years ago, before “the rebellion drove me out of view taking into portraiture.” I have no idea why he would stop taking views in Vermont during the Civil War, unless the war damaged some segments of the stereo view market as interest shifted to the part of the country where the war was being fought. If the note implies that Gage lost his income from views, this in turn implies that some of his pre-war income had come from tourists buying views at his gallery and that the war severely impacted tourism in the Northeast. Or, what might seem even more unlikely, he felt that his unusual photographic wagon and apparatus would make others think he was a spy of some kind. One other, more practical reason he may have stopped for a while was his continued debilitating illnesses and the physical difficulties involved in photographing outdoors with the wet-collodion process.
Gage held a brief monopoly in the stereo market in his community – when he began in 1858 or 59 there are several indications that editors had to explain exactly what stereos actually were to their readers, and Gage could offer showings of his and other’s views in his gallery as an inducement to attract interest and customers. But as the craze for stereos swept the country that monopoly or priority very quickly eroded and Gage was soon facing increasing competition. The first competition was not from other photographers, but came from the local Goods Emporium, C. C. Child’s which was the equivalent of the Big Box Store in his day, which sold everything from eyeglasses and watches, books and toys, to china and silverware. C. C. Childs was soon importing and selling stereo views. The store even acquired a permanent table-top stereo viewer that held dozens of stereos on a rotating wire frame that the viewer cranked around to see the next card, which it installed as a permanent attraction to attract customers. The store could undercut Gage on price and offer a wider variety of stereos from other photographers than Gage could inventory on his more limited budget. This same pattern of wholesalers driving out individual stereo photographers and eventually depressing the market happened throughout the country through the 1860s. Another consequence of this flooding the market was that the “special” nature or novelty attraction of Gage’s views –and of his professional accomplishments– was inadvertently diminished as well.

scan0007 (2)

“19. St. Johnsbury, Vt. Looking S. W.” ca. 1871.

Then, after the unexplained break in taking views during the war, a break which lasted for almost a decade, Gage resumed view making in the late 1860s. But now he was facing much more competition from fellow photographers, who had began to move into territory first explored by Gage. Formidable competition arrived in the 1870s, as Benjamin Kilburn, from Littleton, NH, began making views in the neighborhood of St. Johnsbury. In 1870 D. A. Clifford, a long-time veteran photographer, actually moved from the East Coast into a studio above the Caledonian offices, where he was offering views of Mount Washington, one site of Gage’s early triumphs. Many other local photographers had colonized Gage’s former territory as well. In one of Gage’s early narratives he convincingly describes the almost untouched wildness of the Flume Pool in New Hampshire. During the next two decades very stereo view maker who could get to this noted attraction, from John P. Soule to the Kilburn Brothers, photographed it; and one local photographer named H. S. Fifield, from nearby New Hampton, NH, even set up a portable studio there for three months of each year to photograph tourists at the site and to sell his views. By 1875 other local photographers, such as J. N. Webster, of Barton, were offering “Vermont Views” as well.
In 1866 Gage expanded his gallery. “After fourteen years’ successful practice in my old gallery, I have just moved into a new one. I occupy one entire floor, forty-two by seventy-two feet. My skylight-room is twenty-eight feet square. I can operate on three sides of the light, east, south, and west, and I get a fine light at all hours, rain or shine.” And Gage again began experimenting there incessantly with processes as he continued to refine and expand his technical skills. Incidentally, during a severe thunderstorm in July 1868 Gage’s sky-light room was struck by a bolt of lightning, scattering bricks from a chimney, knocking down the stove pipes, tearing up the floor, throwing large splinters through the ceiling, etc., before running through the sink’s plumbing pipes to the ground in the basement. Gage had literally been standing by the sink at the exact spot of the strike a minute before the bolt hit, but had crossed the room to close a window and thus escaped being hurt or killed.
In the 1860s Gage took out a series of patents. In 1867 he obtained two United States patents – No. 66,581 “Process for making positive and negatives photographs in the Camera, on July 9, 1867 and No. 72, 627 “Improvements in photographic cameras,” on Dec. 24, 1867 and filed an intent to patent in Great Britain that same year. Then in July, 1869, he patented a process for using diffused light in the camera for the purpose of giving detail “…so as to render visible slight gradations of shade, both in the light and dark parts of the picture, and to unite softness and strength,” in the United States, Great Britain, and France. Unfortunately, nothing really developed out of these patents to Gage’s benefit.
Gage begun to take stereo “views about town” again in 1868, and by 1869 he was using a dry plate process to do so– which should have simplified his practice a great deal from the old wet-collodian system. In 1870 he made a view of Black River Falls in Springfield, VT, the site of the “original manufactory of the United States Piano Co.,” which had a large shop on Broadway in New York City. The Piano Co. then ordered 1800 copies, “which they will use this year to advertise their pianos.” I suspect this commission was a godsend for Gage.
There are indications that Gage suffered from bouts of ill health throughout his entire life, but it never seemed to keep him from pursuing his practice to the fullest extent of his abilities. However, in December 1870, “owing to increasing ill health” he offered to sell his gallery immediately. But there doesn’t seem to have been any takers and he kept the gallery running for another four years, until his death on the 23d of August, 1874.
The next year a George H. Hastings, advertising that he had spent the winter training in a gallery in Boston, set up a gallery “…in the old quarters, formerly occupied by F. B. Gage….”

 FRANKLIN BENJAMIN GAGE. (1824–1874) (BIBLIOGRAPHY IN PROGRESS)

ON-LINE RESOURCES

 Stereoview cards by F. B. Gage are in several public collections: the New York Public Library, the Bailey-Howe Library at the University of Vermont, the George Eastman House in Rochester, NY, (not available on-line) and the St. Johnsbury History and Heritage Center, St. Johnsbury, Vt. (Not available on-line.)
The NYPL items are excellently catalogued and presented on line.
“NYPL Digital Gallery. Robert N. Dennis collection of stereoscopic views. > United States. > States > Vermont. > Hills and Dales of New England / F. B. Gage.” www.digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/dgkeysearchresult.cmf?parent_id=626268
[23 stereo views with the Anthony series title “Hills and Dales of New England” on printed labels attached to the verso of stereocards. This seems to me to be a later series issued by Anthony in the late 1860s – 1870s, which may have included some of Gage’s earlier images as well as later photographs which he took after the war. However, this series should not be confused with Anthony’s previously issued “White Mountain Views.” series of Gage’s photographs taken in 1859.

Some stereos in several public collections in Vermont are also available on-line, through the University of Vermont’s “Landscape Change Program” website, posted by the Geology Department at the University of Vermont. This site is focused on the subject matter of the photographic views rather than their photographic history; and the images are cataloged in a more fragmentary and incomplete manner. Several stereos by Gage are identified, but others by Gage in their collections are not properly identified. Nevertheless, one finds here that Gage made several stereoviews depicting the 3rd Regiment and Company G of the Vermont forces of the Union Army troops leaving for the war from St. Johnsbury on July 20th 1861.

Internet searches may also bring forth additional Gage items. An internet search presented a charming c-d-v portrait of a mother and daughter, and another site produced an excellent group portrait of a family, each image displaying Gage’s excellent mastery of his craft of photographic portraiture. These references, however, are often both fleeting and fugitive. Slightly more stable internet references are:

“Gage, Franklin B.” Craig’s Daguerreian Registry: The Acknowledged Resource on American Photographers 1839 — 1860. www.craigcamera.com/dag/   [Birth and death dates, brief biography.]

Pearl, Peggy. “F. B. Gage, Dec. 21, 2011,” St. Johnsbury History & Heritage Center Newsletter www.sthhistory.org/wordpress/?page_id=77

“Stereoviews of Franklin B. Gage. White Mountain Scenery” www.familystacks.com/custom/views/fam/S12g.htm [2 views on-line: “View up Eastern Avenue, St. Johnsbury, Vt, 1871. and “Picnic at St. Johnsbury, July 4th, 1859.” No. 45. F. H. Gage, Photo. Published by E. Anthony, New-York.”]

An image of the “First U. S. Piano Co. Factory, Springfield, Vt., 1868,” of which Gage made 1800 prints for advertising, is available at www.antiquepianoshop.com.

Commercial dealers in stereoviews have offered F. B. Gage cards for sale online. For example, at this time, (May 1, 2013) Jeffrey Kraus Antique Photographics, www.antiquephotographic.com has a half dozen or so Gage stereoviews for sale on his website. Other sites, David L. Spahr, www.stereoviews.com also lists three or four and www.worldstereoviews.com lists at least one Gage holding as well.

[I would like to thank Peggy Pearl at the St. Johnsbury History & Heritage Center for her swift and courteous response to some of my questions.]

BOOKS

Gage, F. B. Theoretical and practical photography on glass and paper: with positive rules for obtaining intense negatives with certainty, by F.B. Gage. New York, S. D. Humphrey, 1859. 60 p.19 cm. [“Preface. This work was written more especially for the use of Amateurs, or beginners in the Photographic Art; yet it is hoped, and confidently expected, that much matter will be found in its pages which will prove useful and valuable, not only to the Neophyte, but also to those who have reached the advanced stages of Photographic Science — whether it be the professional man, or the savan who pursues the beautiful Art of “Sun-penciling,” con amore. The theory of light-Iodizing here advanced, is different from anything heretofore published, and will be found, in practice, to give better results-it is confidently asserted-than any hitherto placed before the public.
Every part touched upon, is intended to be made as plain and easily comprehended as possible, that the inexperienced may succeed, by its aid, in producing satisfactory proofs; and should the experimenter achieve but a tithe of the success which has attended the working of this Process in the bands of its originator, the result cannot prove otherwise than gratifying to both parties-to the Experimenter, in the superiority of his products over old modes of operating-and to the Author, in having contributed his mite toward ·rendering smooth and easy the rugged path of Photographic Science; and by extending encouragement to others, increase the number of its followers, in the hope of ultimately, at no distant day, achieving that triumph of perfection, which the manifold and constantly-developing beauties of the Art warrant all in looking forward to. This should prove the incentive and aim of every true lover of Aesthetic Beauty, The Author May 1, 1859.”]

 “Photography,” on p. 488-489 in: The Town of St. Johnsbury, Vt., a Review of One Hundred Twenty-five Years to the Anniversary Pageant 1912, by Edward T. Fairbanks. St. Johnsbury: The Cowles Press, 1914. 592 pp.
[“Photography The old-time Daguerreotype Car, painted white, sky-lighted, drawn by four horses, used to appear periodically on our streets prior to 1850, and all the sun-pictures of that period were taken under its glass dome; there are still a few surviving specimens of 1849 that were printed in the Brooks car from Boston, which was moored a little way below the old burial ground.
The pioneer daguerreotypist who obtained a residence was F. B. Gage whose St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery was opened 1851 in the Emerson Hall building then standing on the Athenaeum site. He was ingenious, painstaking and skilful as an artist, with a touch of eccentricity and droll humor; he styled himself The-Old-Daguerreen, The-Man-with-the-long-flowing-Beard, creator of Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes, Statutypes, Colorotypes; he took first premiums at the County Fairs and diversified the columns of the Caledonian with his whimsical verse. The lines here given were entitled
& So Forth & So On
By The Flowing Beard

How swiftly the moments of life hurry on,
   Nor slow forth nor slow on,
But swift as the tide of a swift rushing river
They flow forth & flow on
& so forth & so on.
Then O, as you row down the River of Life,
   As you row forth & row on,
Have your likeness preserved in a case or a frame
To show forth and show on
& so forth & so on.
And e’en though the weather be cloudy or fair
   Or snow forth & snow on,
And e’en though the tempest should rise in its wrath
   & blow forth & blow on,
We’ll take you a picture you won’t be ashamed
When you go forth & go on
To show forth & show on
& so forth & so on.

The Gage gallery in Brown’s block at the time of his death, was purchased by Geo. H. Hastings and has descended thro successive owners to W. H. Jenks, the present proprietor. Long time photographers on Eastern Avenue were T. C. Haynes and C. H. Clark. A photographic artist of eminence was D. A. Clifford over the Post Office block, who died in 1889. For 47 years he had kept himself master of every known process of his art. Among 167 exhibitors, English and American, at the Lambert exposition in New York 1878, the first prize for large carbon work was awarded D. A. Clifford of St. Johnsbury, Vt., and two of his pictures were kept by Mr. Lambert as specimens of American photography to be exhibited in England. Clifford was for several years, until his death, vice-president of the American Photographers Association; for his enthusiasm in the art he was called among the members the old war horse from Vermont; it was agreed that his landscape pictures were adding much to the popular fame of Green Mountain scenery, chiefly of this immediate vicinity.”]

“The-Man – With- The-Long-Flowing-Beard” on p. [n. p.] in: Stone, Arthur Fairbanks. Old Time Stories of St. Johnsbury Vermont St. Johnsbury, VT: Caledonian Record, 1938. (85th Anniversary of Passurnpsic Savings Bank St. Johnsbury, Vermont)
[“This isn’t a story about an Indian warrior, but a sketch of our pioneer photographer, F. B. Gage, artist, poet and philosopher. It was only a dozen years after the French Academy of Sciences had startled the world with the announcement of the discovery of photography by Daguerre and Neipee [sic Niepce] that Mr. Gage opened in 1851 the “St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery.” For nearly a score of years he was the only photographer in town, though itinerant tin type producers appeared at our county fairs in their travelling road wagons. While many in this early period of the development of the art were thrilled to get a “Photo by Brady” our own townsfolk were just as pleased to have a “Photo by Gage”, and these early pictures are highly prized in many homes today. Like Barnum he believed in advertising, and this somewhat eccentric individual always included one of his whimsical poems in his Caledonian ads. Often using as his title the one that heads this story he referred to himself at other times as “Old Daguerreen” or “Creator of Daguerreotypes. Ambrotvpes, Statutypes and Colortypes.”
“For twenty-five cents
Is all the expense
Of an Ambrotype made of your face,
And for double that sum
If you presently come,
‘Twill be made and put in a case.”
His gallery was first located in the Emerson Hall block which stood in the fifties where •the Athenaeurn is now located. In the last of h is successful career he occupied the third story of the Brown Block which is now the home of the Jenks studio. Evidently he became dissatisfied with the credit system for he adopted in May 1856, the cash basis, with this advertisement on that date:
“Men of wealth, and men of fashion,
Men that sometimes get in passion;
Men that put all sorts of trash on
And, in fact,
Any one that brings the cash on”
It was at this time, too, that he announced “that having lately enlarged my Gallery and fitted up my reception room in a magnificent manner: the ladies will now find it pleasant to call and look at the pictures. I would remind them that
Queer old maids that are cross and fretty,
And young girls intensely pretty,
Wearing curls extremely jetty,
Will be very sure to get a
Capital Ambrotype at Gage’s.”
In a few years Mr. Gage added landscape views to his growing trade and was the first in this vicinity, and perhaps in Vermont, to produce pictures of the Vermont mountains and lakes and the White Mountain scenery along the “wild Ammonoosuc.” Like the famous Kilbourne Littleton artist [sic Kilburn Brothers, Littleton, NH) many of these views were two on a card for the use of the stereoscope, which was such a well known parlor ornament of those days. On one occasion he hired a hall and exhibited some 300 pictures with some explanations to an interested audience of both young and old. One of his most highly prized portraits is that of Willie Johnson, the 14-year-old drummer boy, who was presented with the Medal of Honor by Secretary of War Stanton for keeping his drum in the retreat of the Union soldiers at Harrison Landing, when all the other musicians in their panicky flight threw their instruments away. So now
“Have you heard what all the rage is;
‘Tis the Ambrotypes at F. B. Gage’s.
Pictures called by all the sages
The greatest wonder of modern ages.”]

 “Businesses: Photographers,” on p. 85 in Pearl, Peggy. A Brief History of St. Johnsbury. Charleston, SC: The History Press, 2009. [Mentioned as the first photographer in St. Johnsbury, with a brief biography and a poem.
“For twenty-five cents
Is all the expense
Of an Ambrotype made of your face,
And for double that sum
If you presently come,
‘Twill be made and put in a case.”]

Gage is listed in the Vermont Vital Records Index, (Which states he died of blood poisoning, on Aug. 24, 1874 in St. Johnsbury.)
He was listed in the annual Walton’s Vermont Register and Farmer’s Almanack for at least the years 1855, (listed as a daguerrian artist), 1865, 1867, 1869-1873, (listed as a “Photographist,”). [These were the years accesible to me, it is probable that he was also listed in this business almanac for many of the other years during this period.] 
Gage is also listed as a “portrait and landscape painter” in Groce and Wallace. New York Historical Society’s Dictionary of Artists in America, 1564-1860.

 PERIODICALS

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK,

ORGANIZATIONS. USA. PHOTOGRAPHICAL SECTION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE. 1867.
“Proceedings of the Photographical Section.” ANNUAL REPORT OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, FOR THE YEAR 1867-68. (1868): 1025-1035. [November 11, 1867. Mr. H. J. Newton in the chair; O. G. Mason, Secretary. Minutes of the last meeting were read and approved. Mr. Hull laid before the Section a series of prints from negatives made by the Zantmyre lens, and globe lens, showing the relative field and illumination of the lenses. He also read a letter from Mr. B. F. Gage, of St. Johnsbury, Vt., accompanied by a cabinet photograph and ambrotype, showing the peculiarities of the process which formed the subject matter of his communication to the Section. Mr. Hull also read the specifications of Mr. Gage’s patent claim, as published in the Philadelphia Photographer. Prof. Tillman asked whether any member had tried Mr. Gage’s device. Mr. H. S. Anthony thought it advisable that some competent person should try the process and report to the Section. Mr. Hullenback explained a method which consisted of exposing the plate to diffused light after its removal from the camera and before development. Then followed a general discussion upon various methods which had been used to produce similar results. On motion of Mr. Hull, a committee of three were appointed to make pictures by Mr. Gage’s process, and by the ordinary negative process, and exhibit the results at the next meeting of the Section. Messrs. Anthony, Hull and Chapman were appointed by the Chair to serve as such committee. On motion of Mr. Chapman, the name of the Chairman was added to the committee. …On motion of Prof. Tillman, the time of meeting was changed to the first Tuesday in the month, instead of the second Monday. The Section then adjourned to the first Tuesday in December.”
December 3, 1867.
Mr. H. J. Newton, in the chair; O. G. Mason, Secretary. Minutes of the last meeting were read and approved. Prof. Tillman read a letter received from Professor Joy. The committee appointed at the last meeting to try experiments with Mr. B. F. Gage’s negative process, reported progress….”

ANTHONY’S PHOTOGRAPHIC BULLETIN

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“New Pictures.” ANTHONY’S PHOTOGRAPHIC BULLETIN 2, no. 6 (June 1871): 184. [Gage (St. Johnsbury, VT) sends stereoscopic prints.]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Cage, F. B. “Bronchitis Cured By Photography.” ANTHONY’S PHOTOGRAPHIC BULLETIN 3, no. 1 (Jan. 1872): 405.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Cage, F. B. “How to Get Excellent Cotton with Little Trouble.” ANTHONY’S PHOTOGRAPHIC BULLETIN 3, no. 2 (Feb. 1872): 438-441.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Obituary.” ANTHONY’S PHOTOGRAPHIC BULLETIN 5, no. 10 (Oct. 1874): 374. [Brief note that F. B. Cage (St. Johnsbury, VT) died.]

BURLINGTON WEEKLY FREE PRESS (BURLINGTON, VT)

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Vermont Items.” BURLINGTON WEEKLY FREE PRESS (BURLINGTON, VT) (July 19, 1867): 2. [“Mr. Jonathan Bagley of Hartland was thrown from his carriage on the 3d inst. and almost immediately killed. He was an old man, over eighty.
A boy of 11 years, son of Dr. J. S. Morse of Royalton, was drowned in the river July 21, in attempting to swim across.
The surveyors of the Portland and Ogdensburg road are now at work in Danville searching for the best place for locating the road through that town….
…Abel Stacy’s dwelling-house in Concord was struck by lightning July 4th, tearing up the boards under Mrs. Stacy’s chair, but not hurting her.
A house in Hartford was struck the same day, and all the stove-pipes in the house knocked down, and the kitchen stove moved some inches.
The rum-sellers of Lyndon were looked after a little, by State’s Attorney Willard, a week ago Friday, and fined $50 each.
Patents were issued July 9th to W. H. Baldwin and J. H. Blake of Brandon, for improved railway chair; to B. O. Church and Harvey Smith of Brattleboro, for octave coupling for reed instruments; to G. Simpson and W. H. Edmunds of Waterbury, for improvement in lamp extinguisher; to Franklin B. Gage of St. Johnsbury, for process for making positive and negative photographs in the camera.
Martin Keith of Troy, Vt., was killed by a two year old bull, in his pasture, on the 4th. His body was found terribly mangled. The bull had never shown signs of viciousness, but was killed immediately.”]

CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT)
[This weekly newspaper has been in continuous publication since 1837. F. B. Gage advertised in almost every issue of this paper during the more than twenty years that his gallery was open in St. Johnsbury. There were also special ads for specific events, and the paper published news items about a colorful local individual and valuable businessman in the community; and published his poems and short stories, etc. All together, there are hundreds of citations. I have selected some of these references here, which help put some flesh on the bones of the more formal accounts of Gage’s life and career.]

MCPHERSON, W. D.
[Advertisement.] “Daguerreotype Miniatures.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 29, 1851): 3. [Taken singly or in groups at W. D. M’Pherson’s Daguerrian Saloon, opposite J. C. Bingham’s Drug Store, where he would respectfully invite all those who wish for a perfect Likeness to give him a call. Children taken of any age. Pictures taken from Portraits, Daguerreotypes, Busts, &c.; also, from deceased persons and invalids, at their residences. Pictures taken equally well I cloudy weather, and neatly set in Lockets, Rings, Pins or Frames – Prices $1.00 and upward. St. Johnsbury Plain, Nov. 24, 1847.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “F.B. Gage’s Sky-Light Daguerrean Gallery. St. Johnsbury Plain, Vt.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 25, 1852): 3. [“The subscriber having opened a skylight Daguerrean Gallery, three doors south of the St. Johnsbury House, would respectfully announce to the inhabitants of St. Johnsbury and neighboring towns, that he will be happy to wait on all who may wish for a correct likeness of themselves or friends. Having procured all the latest improvements in the Art, he is now able, by a new arrangement of light and the use of new materials, to produce pictures of a most Lifelike & Beautiful Complexion, as all may see by calling and examining specimens. These pictures are finished by a newly discovered process which gives them a richness and durability unsurpassed by any in this country or Europe. The public are requested to call and examine specimens. Come one and all; you will be equally welcome whether wishing pictures or not. If you have called once call again, and tell your friends to call also, as he-will be happy to see you at all times and show you anything new in the Art.
Pictures taken in cloudy as well as clear weather.
Perfect likenesses warranted in all cases or no charge.
Copies from Daguerreotypes, Portraits, &., neatly executed.
Miniatures for lockets, pins, rings, &c., taken in the most perfect manner.
Views of buildings and scenery taken in a style unsurpassed by any.
Likenesses of sick or deceased persons taken at their residences if desired.
Prices varying from 1 to 8 dollars according to style and finish of case.
Pupils instructed and furnished with apparatus
.
F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Sept. 25, 1852.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Daguerreotype Likenesses.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 11, 1852): 3. [“Our neighbor, Mr. Gage, is doing a good business in taking likenesses. His pictures look well, and he will satisfy all of his customers. He has a fine room for his purpose over E. Hall & Co’s Store.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “A Daguerreotype Song.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Jan. 8, 1853): 4. [“Supposed to have been sung by a lady after having visited F. B. Gage’s Daguerrean Gallery, three doors south of the St. Johnsbury House) St. Johnsbury Plain, Vt.
Air: Things that I don’t like to see.
One morning last week when I’d nothing to do,
And wanted to see something funny or new,
I went with my cousins Maria and Jane,
To visit the Daguerreotype Rooms on the Plain.
I merely went in just to make a short call;
And look at the pictures that hung on the wall;
But I saw just as soon as I entered the door,
I had never seen pictures more perfect before.

For there was Estella, Adelia, and Jane,
And I never saw pictures so rich or so plain:
And John and his sweetheart, and Sam and his wife;
I declare they all looked just as natural as life.
There were multitudes more both in cases and frames
But I never could tell you one half of their names,
I thought every one looked the nicest and best,
Though I think Jenny Lind’s not so good as the rest.

Now when I had seen them, they all looked so fine,
Said I to the Artist, “I’II sit and have mine.”
Then he had me sit down in a chair at my ease,
And, said he, “You may wink just as much as you please.”
And then, when I smiled just as much as I ought,
In less than a moment my likeness was caught.
So quickly ’twas taken, so nicely ’twas done,
To sit for my picture was nothing but fun.

And every one says,(so I know it must be,)
That my picture’s a very apt emblem of me.”
Since this is so perfect, I must have another,
To go to the West to my sister and brother,
And then I must have another to send —
But no matter to whom for he’s only a friend.
And now if the people will take my advice,
I freely will give it without money or price.

If you want nothing more, give the Artist a call,
Just to look at the pictures that hang on the wall,
‘Twill do you no harm just to drop in and see,
And take your friends with you, as I did with me.
He can take them as well whether cloudy or fair,
And you’ll find him at home for he always, is there.
He’s using a splendid new German Machine,
That was made by one Sohn in the Province of Wein.

If any should wish to acquire this great Art,
He’ll learn him the trade so he’ll-know it by heart,
And his pictures wont fade, as other Artist’s have done.
For you know that he hangs them right out in the sun.
And whether in lockets, pins; rings, or a frame,
You’ll see that his pictures are always the same;
And then, I am sure you’ll conclude with the rest,
That he’s always a little ahead of the best.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Look out for Counterfeits!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (May 7, 1853): 4.
[“Since ev’rythings’ new in these new-fangled times,
I’ll tell you some news, and I’ll tell it in rhymes.
‘Tis a bit of a secret, and you’ll keep it no doubt,
For it never would answer to have it leak out.
Kate told me the story, so I’ll tell it to you, —
For I know that the story is perfectly true, —
That a fellow from somewhere – nobody knows where.
Came to St. Johnsbury, & settled down there.

And, perhaps, you will think it a dreadful disgrace,
But he’s opened a counterfeiting shop in the place.
Where he counterfeits everything under the sun,
That ever the skill of an Artist has done.
He’s fitted a splendid new room in the town
Just below the ‘Post Office, kept by Jewett & Brown,’
And you’ll see his new sign hanging out from the door.
Just over the well-known E. Hall & Co.’s store.

There he counterfeits faces, and does them so brown
That he’s had a great rush since he came into town,
And ev’ry one says, since tis now all the rage:
If you need a good face you can get it of Gage.”
He’s studied and practiced so long in the Art,
I should know at a glance that he knew it by heart,
And if any should happen to doubt what I say,
Drop in there and see when your passing that way.

Drop in there some day when you have nothing to do,
And in less than a minute he’ll counterfeit you;
And he’ll do it so well, whether cloudy or fair,
You would say ‘twas yourself, and no counterfeit there.
Since his counterfeits win the most hearty applause,
Be assured that he stands in no fear of the laws;
But in spite of the law, and Artistical ire,
He’ll be appy to counterfeit all who desire.
St. Johnsbury Counterfeiting Gallery, March, 1853.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Marriages.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (June 11, 1853): 3. [“In this town, June 6, by Rev. W. B. Bond, Mr. F.  B. (Gage and Miss Laurietta Huntly, all of this town. In this town, May 31, by Rev. Wm. D. Malcolm, Mr. Lucius Spencer of Brownington and Miss Susan J. Randall of Lyndon.
In Waterford, June 6, by Rev. F. Warriner, Mr. Dexter Fitts of Hanover, N. H., and Miss Sarah A. M. Hill, of Waterford.
In Derby, May 29, by Rev. H. Tabor, Mr. Herman Bisbee and Miss Mary P. Sias, all of West Derby.
In Danville, May 29, by Rev. A. G. Button, Mr. Austin A. Finley, of Hartland, and Miss Mary M. Pope, of Danville.
In Cabot, May 29, by Rev. Mr. Cooper, Mr. Elijah W. Chamberlin, of this town, and Miss Caroline M. Nevins, of Cabot.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Gage’s Mezzotint Statutypes.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 23, 1853): 2. [“Our industrious and highly successful Daguerrean Artist, Mr. F. B. Gage, modestly announces in our advertising columns, that he has brought to a good degree of perfection a new process of daguerreotyping likenesses, which promises to surpass all methods previously known. The difference between this method and those before practiced, consists in the preparation of the plate. It is well known that the plate is rendered capable of retaining an image by being exposed in turn to the vapors of Iodine and Bromine. The practitioners of the art have always been conscious that something was wanting in the process, and they have made many attempts to discover what was needed to increase the susceptibility of the plate and render it more sure and reliable. These labors often resulted in some minor advantages, but not in that great and decided improvement which was the object of the research. Many months ago Mr. Gage conceived the idea, and by a long course of experimenting has at length succeeded in discovering a substance, which in addition to those already used, will impart to the plate the power of recovering and retaining a picture, bold and clear as the sharpest mezzotint, and at the same time soft, and delicately chiseled as the most exquisitely cut marble. These pictures are extremely distinct. They can be seen in any light, and always stand out bright and clear as the living countenance. One examination of Mr. Gage’s specimens will convince any one that we have not exaggerated, nor set down aught in extensio.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Caledonia County Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 30, 1854): 3. [“The annual Cattle Falr of the Caledonia County Agricultural Society was held at Danville on Wednesday and Thursday. The show of cattle, and the various products of the, farm and the shop, was a good one, but we have not time to enter into a particular description.  The following are the Premiums Awarded.
Neat Stock.
1st, Ten yoke oxen from one town,
             Cabot,                         $10.00
2d.       Danville,                          $5.00
(Etc. about a column of listings of every animal and product)
Daguerreotypes.
1st, E. Perry, Danville,   .           $1.00
2d   F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury,    $.50
Monochromatic Painting.
1st, Helen Davis, Danville,          $1.00
2d, Aaron Smith, Hardwick,          $.50
1st, oil painting Miss L. Pearson,
Peacham,                                 $1.00
(Etc.)”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “F. B. Gage, Daguerreotypist and Statutypist.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Apr. 14, 1855): 3. 1 illus. [(Advertisement has a crude woodcut of a sun rising behind a daguerreotype camera, perched on a globe.) “St. Johnsbury Daguerrean Gallery. Gage’s Mezzotint Statutypes.
Something New!
These pictures are different from any ever before offered to the public, and are  considered by the best judges the most desirable style of likeness which the Daguerrean Art is capable of producing. They have all the roundness and apparent solidity of a perfect statue, combined with all the richness of the most brilliant Mezzotint engraving. Pictures taken in this style have more character than if taken in the usual way, as every line, angle and wrinkle of the face is chiseled with the most unerring certainty, and all the peculiarities of expression are retained in the greatest perfection. – Light blue eyes taken by this process retain their expression, and have all the perfection of life.
The method of taking the Statutypes was discovered (after making a great variety of experiments) by F. B. Gage, of St. Johnsbury, and is known and practiced by him only. Specimens of these pictures are on exhibition at his Gallery. Artists are especially requested to call and examine them.
Pictures taken in all kinds of weather, and perfect satisfaction guaranteed or no pay. Instructions given in the Art. Any person wishing to learn the trade will find an excellent opportunity in doing so by applying soon. St. Johnsbury, March 1855.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “The Old Daggerreen.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Mar. 15, 1856): 4.
[“Since the sleighing
Is so splendid
And may soon be .
Quite suspended,
Come up beaux and
Belles together,
Get your pictures
This fine weather.

Come good father,
And fond mother,
Come with sister
And with brother;
Ere with palsy,
Ye be shaken,
Come to Gage’s
And be taken!

Whether fleshy,
Lean of sharky,
Come-up white folks,
Come up darkey;
Both for ugly
Folks, and clever,
Gage takes pictures
Better’n ever
!
St. Johnsbury, Jan. 10,’ 1656.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Ambrotypes.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (May 10, 1856): 3.
[“To Every Body.
As this advertisement has never before been in print, and may never be again the public are advised to read it, and permission is hereby respectfully given them to do so.
Have you heard what all the rage is?
‘Tis the Ambrotypes at Gage’s.
Pictures that are called by sages
The greatest wonder of the modern ages.
To The Ladies
Having lately enlarged my Gallery, and fitted up a Reception Room in magnificent style, the ladies will now find it pleasant to call and look at the pictures. I would remind them that,
Queer old maids that’s cross and and fretty,
And young girls intensely pretty,
Wearing curls extremely jetty,
Will be very sure to get a
Capital Ambrotype at Gage’s.
About Babies.
Certain days will be mostly devoted
taking pictures of  babies of all styles and qualities, such as
Babies little and babies bigger,
Babies that can squall with vigor,
Babies that cut quite a figure,
and all sorts, from white to nigger.
N. B. –Nigger means them that is sable complexioned.”
To The Gentlemen.
The gentlemen will not be sent away empty, as I am better than ever before prepared
To Extract
Men of wealth, and men of fashion,
Men that sometimes get in passion,
Men that put all sorts of trash on,
And, in fact,
Any one that brings the
Cash on!
F. B> Gage, Artist. St. Johnsbury, May 1, 1856.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Gage’s Farewell.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 15, 1856): 3. [“Gage Is Going To Leave
These ‘ere frosty diggings
And take no more pictures
Over Hall & Higgins;
For he’s bound to flourish
 In some Western city
Where the wintry weather
Aint so cold and gritty.

Therefore all ye people
Take this little warning:
Gage is going early
Some bright and pleasant morning,
And if you want pictures
That beat all the nation,
Shun that little word
Called procrastination.

For a few weeks longer,
ln all kinds of weather,
Gage will take the beaux and
Laughing belles together.
So bring on your faces
And don’t stand a-croaking,
Gage means what is written.
Without any joking!
November 10, 1856.”
This may certify, That Mr. F. B. CAGE of St. Johnsbury, Vt., received the fallowing premiums at the First Annual Fair of the Conn. River ValIey Agricultural & Industrial Association, held at Bradford, Vt. Oct. 14, 15 & 16, 1856:
1st premium on Ambrotvpes,                   $3.00
1st premium on Photographs,                 $2.00
1st  premium on Colorotypes.                  $2.00
George Pritchard. Treasurer. Bradford, Nov. 12, 1856.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Gage & Rowell, Ambrotype & Photographic Artists.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Apr. 4, 1857): 3.
[“St. Johnsbury, Vt., & Littleton, N. H.
The Gallery at Littleton will be open only two or three weeks in every twelve. Open April 8, for one or two weeks.
Ambrotypes taken at less prices than formerly. Old daguerreotypes cleaned to look as well as new. Oil Paintings cleaned and Varnished, At the Bradford Fair, Mr. Gage drew
1st Premium on Ambrotypes                   $3.00
1st Premium on Photographs                  $2.00
1st Premium on Colorotypes                   $2.00
At the Caledonia Fair,
1st Premium on Daguerreotypes, &c.      $2 00
(From the People’s Journal.)
“We feel warranted in recommending Mr. Gage as one of the first artists in the country.”
(From the White Mountain Banner.)
“Mr. Gage’s reputation is, not excelled, by any artist in New England.”
(From The Caledonian.)
“Mr. Gage is an adept in the line of his profession.”
(Humphrey’s Daguerrean Journal published in New York City, says:)
“Gage’s Photographs are Gems. We can confidently say that we have never seen so pleasing a collection from one operator. They are an honor to the artist.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “& So Forth, & Soon.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (May 23, 1857): 3. [“By the Flowing Beard.
How swiftly the moments of life hurry on.
Nor slow forth, nor slow on,
But swift as the tide of a swift rushing river
They flow forth & flow on.
Towards that dark, solemn land, where- the footsteps of man,
Never go forth, nor go on—
& so forth, and so on.

Then O, as you row down the River of Life,
As you row forth, & row on,
Have thy likeness preserved in a case or a frame
To show forth & show on,
When thy form lieth cold in that land where no flowers
Ever grow forth, or grow on—
& so forth, & so on.

Then take my advice. oh ! ye pictureless tribe!
Good advice as I know on:
With some rocks in your pockets, go forth from your homes
Just go forth, and go on,
Not stop ‘till you reach Gage & Rowell’s Saloon
With a good healthy glow on,
& so forth, & so on.

And e’en though the weather be cloudy or fair,
Or snow forth or snow, on:
And e’en tho’ the tempest should rise in its wrath.
& blow forth & blow on.
Will take you a picture, you won’t be ashamed
When you go forth & go on,
To show forth & show on–

Our Ambrotype pictures are greatly improved.
As we get forth, & go on.
Until they surpass everything in the world
That we hear on, or know on;
And our prices of late we have greatly reduced,
As we show forth & show on,
& so forth & so on.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Good Wheat.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 4, 1857): 4. [“A few bushels of good wheat wanted in exchange for cash. F.B. Gage. St. Johnsbury. June 15, 1857.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Pictures for the Times!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Jan. 9, 1858): 3. [“Ambrotypes  for 25 Cents at Gage & Rowell’s.
Then bring on your sons
(As our cheap machine runs
Only three weeks from date.)
And take out your daughters
And trot out your quarters
Before its too late.
St. Johnsbury, Nov. 12, 1857.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Copartnership Expired.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Feb. 13, 1858): 3. [“The term of copartnership between the undersigned having expired, the same is dissolved by mutual consent. All business matters appertaining to the copartnership, will be settled by Mr. Gage only.    
D. F. Rowell
E. B. Gage.
St. Johnsbury, Feb. 6th; 1858.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Life Size!!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (May 15, 1858): 4.
[“Life     Size     Photographs.
That surpass the most delicate Steel Engravings, at Gage’s.
Life      Size      Photographs
Colored in oil colors until they surpass the portraits of the Old Masters, at Gage’s.
Improved      Ambrotypes
From 50 cents to 10 dollars each, at Gage’s
Pictures of ‘Life Size’ are made at no other Gallery in Vermont.
Come And See Them!!!
F. B. Gage.
St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery, February, 1858.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Caledonia County Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 25, 1858): 2. [“First Day.—Wednesday. The first day of our Fair was particularly cold and raw. Notwithstanding this, quite a large number of people assembled on the Fair grounds in the morning, and the number gradually increased till the last of the afternoon. The heavy thunder shower of Tuesday afternoon, effectually dispelled the dust, and the roads and grounds were in a good condition. The morning was principally devoted to the necessary preliminaries of entry and arrangement for the exhibition. The grounds presented quite a lively and animated appearance. The Boston Brigade Band, which repaired early to the ground, discoursed from their stand, from time to time, most excellent music. Mechanics’ and Floral Hall were filled with active men & women arranging for an advantageous display of the works of Nature and Art,–of mechanical skill and taste, which had been brought to our Industrial Exhibition…” “…Floral Hall was really beautiful. The busy hands of many ladies and gentlemen had made it look like a gallery of art. Great praise is due those individuals who gave their time and labor so freely, in fitting up the building in such beautiful taste…. Miss O. M. Lawrence of Waterford, presented some hair work that must have been the occasion of a great deal of patient labor…. Among the worsted work we noticed’ a beautifully wrought chair …Some very fine bead baskets were suspended in the room,…  a leather “what-not.” Mr. Gage occupied one corner of the room, mostly with Photographs, both of individuals and rural scenery. They were pictures that do credit to the “man with the long flowing beard,” “and so-forth, and so-on.” Some very good oil paintings were presented…There were pin cushions, and other knick-knacks…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Judgment Come at Last.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Jan. 29, 1859): 3. [The validity of James A. Cutting’s Ambrotype and Photographic Patents having been established by Judicial decision. Every Artist in Boston has been compelled to buy a license and place himself under bonds not to sell any pictures for a less sum than 50 cents each. The Artists of Caledonia county will be compelled to enter into the same arrangement. F. B. GAGE, Agent for Patentees. St. Johnsbury, Vt. Jan. 29, 1859.”] 

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“A Good Job.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Apr. 30, 1859): 2. [“Gage does not dabble in poetry to the neglect of the chemicals. He is now engaged in engraving Negative Photographic plates for the Stereoscope, from which millions of photographic pictures may be taken. Mr. Gage is employed by a New York house, and we understand that this will not be less than a thousand dollar job for him. He is out now taking views of some of the wildest and most picturesque scenery for which Vermont is so noted. Some of our readers would be surprised at the beauty of such a picture as the Lyndon Falls, or a backwoods sugar camp, as brought out by an artist in a modern stereoscope. The fact that Mr. Gage is employed for this undertaking is only another evidence of his acknowledged superiority abroad as an artist. He is an inventor as well as a practical artist. He has now a book in press treating subjects connected with the art which he has so long-made a study, the copyright of which is already sold. Aside from this, he is a regular paid contributor to a lending New York journal, the articles of which are copied into a London paper, and from that translated into both the French and German. We only mention these facts to show that we have an artist among us whose skill is appreciated and acknowledged by those who “know what’s what.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Rossibus – Gageibus – Gasibus.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (May 7, 1859): 2. [“We have received a very lengthy communication from Barnet in regard to the (illegible.) The parties in this great “fight” are Gage versus Ross, and they employ no counsel, but argue, their own cause. We will state, however, that this poetic war closes with this number; all further communications will be inserted in advertising columns at one dollar a square. We will see how valiant these men are when their pockets are concerned.
As a matter of news we would state (what was broadly hinted in Mr. Game’s article last week) that Maj. Ross left St. Johnsbury Centre without settling his bill for fuel, lights, use of hall, &c. At Barnet he was arrested by Sheriff Stevens, but procured bail and was set at liberty. The trial was last Monday, when the plaintiff recovered his whole bill and the costs of prosecution. We presume that the valiant Major will make this trial the subject of one of his lectures in future, as he did his Brattleboro trial at this place: and he will doubtless draw tears from the eyes of his auditors when he recounts this fresh evidence of his martyrdom to the cause of—soap.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
De Forest. “Gage-ibus Blowibus.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (May 7, 1859): 3. [“Our photograph friend seems ill at ease
That his tricks are exposed to the public gaze.
Of all the good people of country and town,
That arc met in the weekly “Caledonian’s round,
And replies with a lyric, ground out of his mill,
A decoction ‘t might waken Shakspearian will.

Free-from all intentional guilt,
We acknowledge ourselves “intirely kilt”
Innocence, smothers all feelings of rage
Towards St. Johnsbury’s patron and knight, F. B. Gage,
And if it produce him but one throb of joy.
To try to annihilate a New Hampshire boy—
Here goes—I am ready—and will, if I can,
Stand up and fight bravely this poetry man.

“Rossibus Soapibus” never will shrink
From the truth—he needs must think.
If Mr. Gage sends out his rockets.
Fusing about St; Johns bury pockets,
We humbly suggest that it might be wise
To pluck the beams from his jaundiced eyes,
Before he is blinded by the dross
That he charges upon his neighbor Ross.

He. commenced by blowing the Major’s clothes,
Like those in which liberty conquered its foes,
Which were worn on the brow of old Bunker Hill,
And which are the emblems of liberty still.
He laughs them to scorn with a gracious good will.
And vows that the Major’s whole business he’ll kill,
By introducing a guillotine bill,
And by management, getting it “chucked through the mill.”
Then he blows on his soap, and his jewelry too,
And he says many things which “I” say are true,
In regard to his soap—’tis a hard thing to whip,
In regard to his jewelry—I “give up the ship.

He makes the assertion that Ross is a clown,
And if he descended from Scotch ancestry down,
He’s descended so low that they’ll never be proud
To own him as kin at home or abroad.

I would very much like to ask from what race
Our poet descended.—The hair on his face
Proclaims that he has an affinity strong
To the canine tribe — say, Gage, am I wrong?
I hope that our friend will take no offense
At my method of judging his sense—or nonsense,
For I own my opinion is paltry indeed
Of the man whose brain has but run out to seed.

“Rossibus Soapibus” is not dead.
The guns you fired went over his head.
Don’t fire again ; he will beat a retreat,
Hoping next time you blow you will aim at his feet,
So don’t tear the ground with your powder and ball
To kill out the soap man—watches and all.
Lancaster, N. H.; May 2d. 1859.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Stereoscopic Views.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 16, 1859): 2. [“Mr. F. B. Gage succeeded in getting several stereoscopic views of the crowd that were collected here the 4th, among the most interesting of which figure the Fantastics.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Sterescopic [sic] Pictures and Sterescopes [sic] for sale at Gage’s.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 20, 1859): 3. [“The Wreck of the Train of Aug. 9th; a striking picture for the Sterescope, for Gage’s.
White Mountain Views, for the Sterescope, for sale at Gage’s.
Family Groups,made for the Sterescope, at Gage’s.
Ambrotypes greatly improved and Photographs as usual, at Gage’s.” (Includes a crude woodcut illustration of a large pile of stereoscopic cards.)]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Local and State. ‘Twenty-five Cents a Crack.’” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 10, 1859): 1. [“Dropping into Gage’s gallery the other day, we found his walls literally lined with pictures of which both the originals and the artist may well be proud. Mr. Gage has spent a large portion of the past season in procuring “negatives” of some of the fine scenery which is so abundant in this part of Vermont, as well as some very fine views of White Mountain scenery, and the picturesque “Wild Ammonoosuc.” These pictures are taken for the stereoscope, and we learn that there is a large and increasing demand for them.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “St. Johnsbury Business Directory.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 10, 1859): 1. [“F. B. Gage, Artist,
At St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery.
Ambrotypes, Melainotypes, and Life Size Photographs.
Better and cheaper than elsewhere.”
(The Caledonian Record published a “Business Directory,” which consisted of a three or four line listing of individual businesses, printed down the page in a column of every weekly issue. The listing was about $2 for a year, and Gage had a similar listing in almost every issue from the 50’s through to the 70’s. He would also run content specific or time-specific advertisements as well.)]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Selling Out at Cost.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 30, 1859): 3. [“Cheap Ambrotypes.
Twenty-five cents a pop,
Over to Cage’s shop.
Popping ‘em fast as he can,
Woman, baby, and man:
Making a regular rout,
Cleaning the Old Stock out,
For twenty-five cents a crack
At either your face or back.

Short to the day of Grace.
Shave and forward your face,
Deborah, Jake and Nance,
Or you will lose the chance:
The chance of getting a pop
For a Quarter at Gage’s shop.
For when the old stock is through,
Higher the price of the new.
Dec. 1, 1859.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “I’ll Treat.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Feb. 17, 1860): 3. [“Citizens of St. Johnsbury and elsewhere, with a sight of some of the wonders of the stereoscope, consisting of
4 Instantaneous Views of Niagara,
4 Instantaneous Views of Broadway, N. Y.
Blondin Crossing Niagara on the Tight Rope.
Gage’s White Mountain and other Views, (splendidly colored.)
Open Day and Evening, Terms—Gratis.”]

RAWSON, E. E. (LYNDON, VT)
[Advrtisement.] “Photographic Pictures!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Mar. 23, 1860): 3.
[“Low Prices! Low Prices!
Ambrotypes
For only 15 cts. each, and with a good case at 37 ½ cts. Photographs and Melainotypes.
Cheap In Proportion.
Rawson’s Picture Gallery will be closed nearly all the time during the summer, after about the middle of May. Pictures will be sold at these extremely low prices but a
Few Weeks Only
and all persons wishing anything of the kind should avail themselves of this opportunity.
N. B. A good assortment of Stereoscopic pictures and Stereoscopes for sale.
E. E. Rawson. Lyndon, March 22, 1860.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Apprentice Wanted.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Mar. 23, 1860): 3. [“At the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery. Any ingenious young man who can come with good reference will receive a liberal offer to learn the art, if application be made immediately to F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vt.” (The “I’ll Treat” ad repeated on the same page.)]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Returned.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (June 8, 1860): 3. [“F. B. Gage having returned to the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery, it will be open as heretofore.
A new set of stereoscopic pictures on exhibition. F. B. Gage. June 6, 1860.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “More Gold!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 20, 1860): 3. [“F. B. GAGE has been seized with a fit of covetousness and is about to start for the Gold Regions, leaving the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery closed until further notice. July 18, 1860.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Thursday, July 19th, 1860.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 20, 1860): 2.

[“Was there ever yet a wetter
Morn than this, or any better?
All men laughing, none complaining.
Of this glorious freak of raining.

All the clouds, the drouth transgressing,
Pouring down this mighty blessing?—
To the farmer, grown serener,
Earth looks gloriously greener.

Grass and grain their heads are raising.
In the very act of praising;
Where’s the man that stands refraining
Blessing God for this great raining?”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“A True Historie.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 20, 1860): 2. [“Of ye greate duplicitie of Dr. La Costie, in ye romantic’ citie of St. Johnsburie; in the, year Anno Domonie eighteen hundred and sixtie.”
The people of old St. Johnsbury Plain
Are much astonished to see no rain;
And they daily protest they can’t see why
The clouds and the rain have left the sky.
Leaving the fields as much in despair.
As Dr. La Coste’s patients are, —
Who have suddenly changed their natural hue,
From magnificent green, to horrible blue.
This Dr. La Coste, as you must know,
Came into the place two weeks ago,
As-great a Christian as any you’ll find,
Of his very peculiar style and kind;
For he cheerfully took poor strangers in,
With his splendid roots and capital gin,—
And squeezed them until he got their “tin;”
And ’twas in this curious style and wise,
He cured their deafness and healed their, eyes!
To the famous St. Johnsbury House he came,
A man of exceeding skill and fame,
From the Hospitals of England and France,
He would offer the people a splendid chance.
His business it was to heal the deaf,
In a space of time exceedingly brief:
The most incredulous he could surprise
In his rapid manner of curing eyes;
Ten days would render the cure complete
Of the toughest cases he could meet
All the people whose sight was dim,
And the deaf, should come at once to him,
Or they might fail of a cure at all,
If they failed to make him an early call.
Well, the people flocked from far and hear,
This wonderful Doctor’s logic to hear;
And they very soon became impressed,
That this Doctor with wonderful skill was blest,
And they felt so very exceeding sure;
The Doctor’s skill the patient would cure,
That, rather than lose so good a chance
Of enlisting this wonderful man of France,
They paid the Doctor his fee in advance.
For the Doctor would
never dispense a pill
Till the anxious patient had paid the bill
.
Now the sequel is this, and it plainly appears
That the Doctor did sharpen their eyes and ears,
For ’twas found one morning at break of day,
That the Doctor at night had run away,
And of bills contracted—a goodly array —
He left for his father, the Devil, to pay:
And neighbor Watson found in his valse
A peck of the Advocates of Peace,
Rolled up, doubled up, and into it pressed
Twas all the baggage the Doctor possessed.
Now Mr. Watson could well afford
To get rid of the scoundrel, by losing his board.
I never will tell, not even next winter,
What kind of a trick he served the printer.
It must have been something exceedingly funny,
For it was a trick without any money.
He also went into Gage’s saloon
And ordered some pictures delivered at noon;
But long before noon he had taken his leave,
And Gage and the pictures were left to grieve.
It may be he fled because afeared
Of this long flowing bard, with his long flowing beard.
I fancy the tailor could give you his measure.–
But the tailor is deaf when you ask of his treasure.
And he is also so blind that he can’t see the ‘rocks’
He expected to get and invest in the stocks.
But these are the very diseases, I’m sure,
The great Dr. Coste pretended to cure.
Now these parties should feel exceedingly cheap,
To be caught at their regular business asleep;
And whenever a traveling doctor is seen,
If they look in the glass they’ll see something green.
But that’s nothing compared with these new style of greens,
That shell out their fives, their tens and fifteens,
To pay the sham Doctor for sham medical skill.
That will catch the purse, and the patients kill:
Or leave them, until some other knave comes,
To whistle Yankee Doodle, and suck their thumbs.
                                  MORAL
Who pays for sham pictures, or pays for sham pills,
Pays for pictures that fade, and for physic that kills,
Kills either the patient, or kills his pus.
You can scarcely tell which is better or wus!”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Letter from the Vermont Gold Diggings.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 3, 1860): 2. [“Gold Regions, Plymouth, Vt., July 28; 1860.
To the Editor of The Caledonian.
Here I am in the Glen House at Plymouth Five Corners in the heart of the Vermont Gold Regions. I left your place on Tuesday the 23d, by rail to White River Junction.— Then by cars to Woodstock Station up the Central 5 miles. Here I took the stage to Quechee 3 ½ miles. Quechee it noted for some remarkable gulfs and other fine scenery. Two days were spent in transferring some of the gems to my dark box. The next day a ride of 6 miles brought me to Woodstock, where I found the birth-place of the renowned Powers in its original style of architecture of more than sixty years ago.— Not the Tom Powers of political notoriety, but the veritable Hiram, the sculptor of the Greek Slave—the most distinguished of all American sculptors. The old house has been scarcely altered from the time of Hiram’s birth. It is designed to keep it so as long as possible. By the assistance of the present owner I was enabled to stow the old house and its surroundings into my trunk and bring it away with me for the benefit of your citizens. When I returned to the Woodstock Hotel I found the polite landlord had turned his hotel into an express office, and had sent my trunk with its array of chemicals back to St Johnsbury by express. Between not very  good accommodations and pretty stiff charges, with the carelessness of sending my trunk away, I did not find much to commend in Mr. Henry’s Hotel., As another hotel is going to be opened here it may be possible for the traveler to find a more decent house.
A ride of 6 miles by stage to Bridgewater Village, and a private team to this place, six miles more completed the trip and brought us to the gold regions. This place is reported to be the most profitable digging ground in the state. It is an old place in a deep glen, shut in by high hills of the brightest green imaginable. A more romantic region could not well be conceived of, and it has the peculiarities of a place removed from the great thoroughfares.
A good story is told of a New York exquisite who came up here, and was so struck with the out of the world appearance of everything and the barbarous looks of the miners that he selected the most human looking man of the crowd, took him aside and confidentially asked him if it would be safe for him to stop there over night. I visited several mines to-day, but only two of them are worked on account of a scarcity of water to wash the gold out—the drouth having delayed the mining very much. Some of these mines are working out from five to twenty dollars a day to each man, but there is work in it, as any one may judge from the huge heaps of earth and rock that are moved by the miners. It is not so easy to spend money here as at the White Mountains, but there is more picturesque scenery here, and more diversity than there. It is probable that the miners do not average more than they could at some other business as many lose their time where one gets his “pile.” However the stimulus is such that many rush into it and out of it in a very short time, the claims changing hands very often.
There are diggings all over this town and in some of the neighboring towns. They are all more or less worked, bur the one at Plymouth Five Corners seems to be the headquarters, Out of a small mill pond in sight of the Glen House, Mr. Hankerson, the man who first discovered the gold in these regions is clearing four or five thousand dollars above all expenses this season.
Several of the most picturesque diggings and other views were transferred to my package to-day, and I shall leave for some other diggings on Monday, satisfied that some of the people of this state who rush to the White Mountains, might see more and pleasanter things in their own Green Mountains if they chose to take the trouble. The Covetous Man.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Henry’s Hotel, Woodstock.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 10, 1860): 2.  [“We have received a communication of nearly a column, signed Gilman Henry & son, Woodstock, in which a paragraph of ten lines which appeared in our columns last week in regard to Henrys’ Hotel is explained on replied to. The letter is too long to publish entire, and we will try to give the “gist” of it in a few words. First, the Messrs. Henry say that they asked and received of our correspondent, F. B. Gage, $1.50 for a day and a half’s board, which they consider answer enough to his assertion of “pretty stiff charges.” Second, persons having articles to send by express frequently leave them at the hotel, there being no express office in town, and the stage driver, finding Mr. Gage’s trunks marked, “St. Johnsbury by express,” carried them off without the knowledge of the hotel proprietors. They were returned free of expense. This is all there is in the Messrs. Henry’s communication to explain the strictures of Mr. Gage the remainder of the letter being mostly complimentary (in a horn) of Mr. Gage’s personal appearance. As all our readers know the proprietor of the “long flowing beard” to be a good looking man, we will omit this part of the letter.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Personal — Very.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 17, 1860): 2. [“Two weeks ago we published short letter from the Vermont Gold Diggings, written by one of the-citizens of this place, in which the following paragraph occurred; “When I returned to the Woodstock Hotel I found the polite landlord had turned his hotel into an express office and had sent my trunk with its’ array of chemicals back to St. Johnsbury by express. Between not very good accommodations and pretty stiff charges, with the carelessness of sending my trunk away, I did not find much to commend in Mr. Henry’s Hotel. (As another hotel is going to be opened here it may be possible for the traveler to find a more decent house.” The next week we received the following;
Woodstock, Vt. Aug. 6.
To the Editor of the Caledonian:
Sir:—A friend called our attention to a letter published in your paper of the 3d inst., in which there were some strictures upon our hotel, and we will thank you to give space to this explanation or reply. On the 26th day of July last a person, of rather rough exterior, after depositing a very unusual quantity of baggage in the lobby or hall of the house, entered his name on our register as ‘F. B. Gage, Photographer for the American Stereoscopic Emporium, N. Y.’— As we did not know what this long tail to the person’s name was intended for, we perhaps were guilty of neglect, in not showing him more attention, we suppose, however, he took his meals like other men, and his. room we know was clean and comfortable. On the morning of the 27th, we furnished him with a man, horse and wagon to take him and a quantity of luggage to the old farm house where Hiram Powers was born, and on the evening of the same day the man and team was sent to bring off his load of traps, which we suppose the ‘Photographer of the American Stereoscopic Emporium, N. Y. used in his art or kept for show, we do not know which. The next morning he left town after breakfast, making his time at the house 1 ½ days. We usually charge one dollar and twenty-five cents a day. As his appearance did not indicate an abundance of money, and as he perhaps was not in at .dinner the 27th, we asked and received of him one dollar and fifty cents for his day and a half at the house and for the man and team to the Powers’ place, fifty cents each trip, and we should pity any hotel keeper whose necessity for business or money would induce him, after seeing the man, to keep him the same length of time for less. So much as to what he says about ‘pretty stiff charges.’
He says we ‘turned our hotel into an express office and sent off his trunk.’ There is not any express office in the village, and persons having parcels to send by express often leave them where he left his trunk, and the proprietor of the stage who carries express bundles, seeing this trunk marked “St. Johnsbury—by Express”; without our knowledge forwarded it to St. Johnsbury, but on learning, that it should not have been sent, he went at once to the telegraph office and directed it to be returned the next morning, and it was returned he say’s without expense to the owner, and forwarded to some place in Bridgewater, as directed by him.
We frequently hear it remarked that persons who travel the least and fare the poorest at home, are the first to find fault when they are abroad. How true that may be in this case we are willing to leave to those better acquainted with the ‘Photographer for the American Stereoscopic Emporium, N. Y.’ than we are, There are however two things which we wish to call the gentleman’s attention to, and that as publicly as he has assailed us and our business. One is, that we wish to have it distinctly understood that when it is not as much of an object for him (or any other man) to avail themselves of such-accommodations as we offer, as it is to us to keep them, we choose to have them go further; and the other is, that as keepers of a public house, we have a public character and when that is assailed and we are injured by such falsehoods as he has published, we have other remedies, which, might be more troublesome to the gentleman than a newspaper article, if we should see fit to employ them. Very respectfully, Gilman Henry & Son.”
Considering the above letter much longer than was necessary to answer the charges of our correspondent, as well as unnecessarily personal, we summed up the answer of the Messrs. Henry in as few words as possible, and gave it in our last. This did not at all satisfy the much injured proprietors of Henry’s Hotel, it seems, as we received another letter from them this week, demanding their first letter entire in our next issue. As we never like to be told what we must publish; (suggestions always thankfully received,) the first impulse was to take no more notice of Gilman Henry and Son; but we finally thought we would grant them the notoriety which they so much sought, and give their letter entire as we have. We doubt if our readers generally will consider personal abuse as any great argument, and Gilman Henry & Son may find that underneath the “rough exterior” of our correspondent there may lie brains—an article that many persons of more polished exterior do not possess.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Henry’s Hotel — Mr. Gage’s Reply.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 24, 1860): 2. [“To the  Editor of the Caledonian. Gilman Henry & Son of the Woodstock Hotel, in the last number of the Caledonian have charged me with falsehoods, which means pretty much the same thing as saying that I l-i-e-d. This, being a rather serious charge, I would like to tell what I know about the matter, and as I made no specifications in my letter from the Gold Regions, it will be proper to do so now. In regard to H. & Son’s table I have no fault to find. I have had better, and have had worse elsewhere. I could not say the same of the lodging accommodations. On retiring, to rest I found the bed too highly flavored to admit of sleep. After holding my nose a while, to shut out the fragrance emenating from some portion of the bed-clothes, I instituted a search for the objectionable article which I found, and having deposited it on the floor, I spread my coat over me in the place of it and slept a portion of the night.— I considered it the poorest accommodations I ever received at a public hotel. It will be remembered however that their guest was a person of “rough exterior, whose appearance did not indicate an abundance on money.”
In regard to the steep charges, I find no fault with the charge for board and lodging although it was more than I would be willing to pay again for the same accommodations, when better could be obtained for more money. I did consider it however rather “steep” to pay one dollar for ten or fifteen minutes’ ride with H. & Son’s Irishman, notwithstanding I carry “a rough exterior with an appearance that does not indicate an abundance of money.”
H. & Son admit that my trunk was deposited in the “lobby” of their house, and that the express man forwarded it to St. Johnsbury without their knowledge. As all hotel keepers are responsible for their guests’ baggage, it was H. & Son’s business to see that my trunk was not carried off. Knowing that the express called there for bundles, they should have guarded against any possibility of its being taken. It was none of my business what various uses they made of their “lobby,” provided my baggage was forthcoming when demanded ; neither was it their business if my trunk had been all covered with old directions “to go by express”— When I arrived at Rutland,. I found I had been delayed two days on account of my trunks. I was obliged to lie idle during this time, and on expense, and had to return 7 miles to get it, making 14 miles more travel, besides finding sundry bottles smashed and chemicals lost. I judged it to be not less than $10 actual damage to me. H. & Son evidently think the returning of the trunk “without expense” a magnanimous act. Had they been magnanimous enough to have paid the ten dollars loss occasioned by their unwarrantable carelessness, I should have had less reason to complain. Even had they indulged in a handsome apology it might not have hurt them. But their guest was a man of “rough exterior whose appearance did not indicate an abundance of money,” it is scarcely necessary to treat such persons with common civilities!
My stay at Henry & Son’s hotel 1 ½ days cost me in reality twelve dollars and fifty cents, as I have shown. It was under this provocation that I said in my letter from the Gold Regions that I did not see much to commend in Mr. Henry’s Hotel, a statement which I have seen no reason as yet to retract. With this explanation I leave H. & Son’s ragged hotel remarking that when they have become favorites with a moderate share of the citizens of their own town they may find themselves more capable of satisfying travelers of “rough, exterior whose appearance does not indicate an abundance of money,” and who moreover happen to have a “long tail attached to their names,” which Henry & Son admit they are not shrewd enough to comprehend. Very respectfully yours, F. B. Gage.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Annual Fair of the Caledonia County Agricultural Society and Fair Ground Company.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 5, 1860): 2. [“First Day–Wednesday, Sept. 36.
The first day of our Fair opened rainy and unpromising, and it “held its own” remarkably throughout the day. Notwithstanding the rain and mud and cold, the show of stock was quite good indeed, we noticed this year an improvement in the quality of the stock. There were no poor cattle upon the ground….”
Mechanical Department
“…F. B. Gage occupied the South-east corner of the building with his photographs.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “The New Stairs!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 5, 1860): 3. [“Will admit the patrons to the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery in a more comfortable manner than before, where the man of the “Rough Exterior” may be found for a few days.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Local and State News. The Fair.—Addenda.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 12, 1860): 2. [“There were some mistakes and omissions made in the printed list of premiums last week. On box of edging Margaret F. Stocker, (not Aver,) drew the premium. Mrs. J. S. Parker, (not Barker,) was awarded premium on ottoman, &c. Timothy Coveny (not Canning,) had the best unrefined sugar; and Joseph Lang of Peacham, June butter. The committee on fancy articles we have learned since the-Fair that it was expected they would examine the photographs, &c., in the absence of the committee especially appointed for the purpose. They take pleasure in making honorable mention (which is all they can now do.) of the photographs and stereoscopic views presented by Mr. F. B. Gage of St. Johnsbury. We are pleased to see by a comparison of the photographs of this year, with those presented heretofore, that our artist of the “rough exterior” is not of the old fogy school, but is determined forge ahead. We would especially mention the stereoscopic views presented by him as worthy ‘of notice. We were hardly aware that nature had placed so many gems of beautiful landscapes along the Passumpsic valley, till we saw them so finely reproduced before us in the stereoscope. We have never seen so good an atmospheric effect brought out as is seen in some of these pictures.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“New Advertisements.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 26, 1860): 2. [“Our numerous Lyndon readers will notice that Mr. Lewis R. Brown has received a new stock of jewelry, watches, silver-ware, &c.
Mr. and Miss Hosmer are advertised to give a concert at Union Hall next Thursday evening. The papers say much in praise of these vocalists.
The “man of rough exterior” advertises his new pictures, which are truly marvellous.
H. C. Dickinson—New buckwheat flour.
E. Jewett—Cloaks.
Aldrich & Underwood—Picture frames.
N. M. Johnson & Co.—Worsted goods.
E. B. Magoon & Co.—Weeks Magic Compound.
***
Anti-Slavery Addresses.
Messrs. Douglas and Remond, two colored gentlemen, spoke to a large audience…”]

 RAWSON, E. E. (LYNDON, VT.)
[Advertisement.] “Enlargement!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 12, 1860): 3. [“E. E. Rawson has recently added Two New Rooms to his Picture Gallery, making it the largest and most commodious gallery in this part of the state
All kinds of photographic pictures made as usual, and not excelled in Vermont. Come and see Rawson’s Stereoscopic views of Memphremagog Lake Scenery. These views are sold at wholesale and retail by E. Anthony, 501 Broadway, N. Y., and by the subscriber at this gallery. E. E. Rawson, Lyndon, Vt., Oct. 1860.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“A ‘Good Thing.’” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 11, 1861): 2. [“It is said that war is not promotive of the fine arts. However true this maybe in a general application we are very sure that it will not hold good in all cases. For instance: notwithstanding- the war, Mr. Gage continues experimenting and inventing and improving in the art of making pictures of various styles till he stands among the best photographic artists of the country. We were led to these remarks by examining some of his new style card pictures, called the Ebonytype, which compare favorably with the best pictures made in New York and London. These card pictures are made-the same size the world over, and are calculated to slip into the. Photographic Album, a book in which one can preserve likenesses of all his friends, however numerous, in a neat, compact and much better way than by the common ambrotype or daguerreotype. We call the photographic album a “good thing.” Call at Gage’s and see it.”]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1861.
[Advertisement.] “C. C. Childs.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 25, 1861): 3.
[“
Watchmaker, Jeweler, and Engraver
Opposite the Post Office. St. Johnsbury, Vt.
In this week opening his
New Stock
of Goods which he has recently purchased in New York and Boston, at the Lowest Cash Prices and he now offers from his large Stock of Watches, Jewelry, Silver and Silver Plated Ware, Fancy Goods,
Books and Stationery, Toys,
Picture and Picture Frames,
Great inducements to all who wish to purchase any articles in his line of goods, as he sells for
Cash At Low Prices.
Also, he has made arrangements with some of the principal Importers and Manufacturers of N. York and Boston to furnish him with the latest styles of Watches, Jewelry; Plated Ware, &c— Also with some of the first publishing houses to supply him with any articles in the Book and Stationery line, weekly, thereby giving him advantages (not possessed by other dealers,) to furnish his Wholesale and Retail
customers at all times with new and desirable goods, such as Watches and Jewelry it all kinds and styles, Books and Stationery, Silver Plated Ware, Fancy Goods, a great variety, 1001 kinds;

German Toys
of laughable styles and amusing to children.
Plain and Colored Lithograph Pictures,
Oval, Gilt and other Picture Frames.
At my store at all business hours may be seen, free of charge, a Picture Gallery, revolving Stereoscope and many fine Stereoscopic Views.
Spectacles and Eye Glasses.
Of Gold, Silver and other kinds of bows. My assortment and experience are such that I can fully supply the wants of those who can be helped, equal to any optician, and at one fourth less price. Mrs. C. C. Childs continues to manufacture
Hair Jewelry
in the latest and most approved styles and. at cheaper rates than in Boston or New York.

N. B. I continue to manufacture my silver Spoons and warrant them coin standard.
Old Gold and Silver taken in exchange for goods. Those wishing to purchase will find it for their interest to give me a call.
All Goods Warranted as Represented.
Watch, Clock And Jewelry
Repairing And Engraving.
Having had over 12 years experience in the business, being a practical Watchmaker and Engraver myself, I shall spare no pains in giving satisfaction in this department of my business and warrant all work.       C. C. Childs. St Johnsbury, Vt.”
(A similar advertisement on p. 2 of the Aug. 23, 1867 edition of the Caledonian, has this additional statement: “…Also, Albums and a fine variety of Stereoscopic views. White Mountains, Battle Field, and other views for the low price of $3.00 per dozen, and another lot of those Decalcomic Paintings…”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“An Old Rogue.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (June 13, 1862): 3. [“We publish below a .spirited- correspondence between a distinguished literary lady of Boston and Mr. F. B. Gage of this place, The correspondence will sufficiently explain, itself, and will distinctly recall to our readers a distinguished Dr., an old acquaintance of the “circulating order,” and will serve as another warning to our citizens not to trust too much to appearance. It is due to the lady to say that she was only duped by being misinformed that the gallant Dr. had reformed from his intemperate habits and had adopted an honorable course of life.
Boston, May. 30, 1862.
My Dear Cousin:—J. R. Dix, Esq., author, etc., etc., has this moment left the house after one of his calls. Your portrait hung on the wall, your pictures lay on the table, and quite naturally our conversation reverted to you. Under such circumstances, I could not resist the temptation to repeat the story of your night at the Hancock House—the midnight attack of the bloodthirsty compagnons de lits, and your utter defeat, which you so well avenged. Snatching from his pocket a pencil, .the gentleman cried— “Bring me paper;” and in thirty seconds produced the following, which I transcribe, wishing to preserve the original,
Yours, very sincerely,
In his bed lay Gage, in a terrible rage,
In condition which oft we’ men see:
But there he lay, not till break of day—
He rose in poetical frenzy.
The spirit of Poetry came to his aid,
He brushed off the insects with curses,
And lo! Inspiration wiped out his vexation,
And he scratched off some wonderful verses.

St. Johnsbury, June 2, 1862.
Your little note, dear coz., is read;
I trust my answer will be short—
Where scoundrels drag me into rhymes,
I spare them not when I retort.

Some years ago—perhaps ’twas six—
There came a man into our town;
He called himself one John Ross Dix,
An English author of renown.

He came to lecture; and he gave
Two lectures here in Union Hall;
When people thought it wise to save
Their time, for all his talk was small.

He soon got drunk; and got in debt,
For pictures, printing, and his board;
Then run away one certain day,
Before a single bill was scored.

He-left a carpet-bag, I think
The landlord said, with nothing in’t,
Except an empty whiskey flask,
A poem, and a worn-out flint.

He borrowed from a lady, too,
One dollar, which she thinks is sunk:
He failed to pay, but did not fail
To get himself supremely drunk.

There is no honor in that man.
No honesty nor manliness;
I hold him in such vast contempt
That words its vastness can’t express.

He came well recommended here
For doing things both just and good;
Where John Ross Dix got recommends,
I’m very sure the Devil could.

Oh, cousin, if he call again,
His stay I fancy will be short,
If you remind him of his lines,
Then read to him this plain retort.
Truly Yours,      F. B. Gage.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Remember The Dead.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Jan. 9, 1863): 3. [“You can have Beautiful Card Pictures of your deceased friends made from Daguerreotypes or Ambrotypes for Christmas & New Years Presents. Also copied to frame and finished in ink or colored. Card Pictures of various styles from $.50 to $3.50 per dozen, at St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery. F. B. GAGE. Proprietor.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Caledonia County Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 25, 1863): 2. [“The 18th Annual Fair of the Caledonia County Agricultural society was held on the Fair Ground in St Johnsbury on Tuesday and Wednesday Sept. 22 and 23, 1863.
Tuesday, Sept. 23. The day opened (shall we say, as usual?) with a cold, drizzling rain, which continued at internals throughout the forenoon. This fact doubtless kept some stock and many people away from the first day’s fair….”
Floral Hall.
“ln regard to the articles of household manufacture, embroidery, fancy articles, and a huge mass of property which we should class under the head of “miscellaneous,” we are not competent to judge of and have not much to say. The show was good, as the continuous crowd which filled the building abundantly evidenced. Without drawing comparisons, and at the risk of being considered a reporter of poor taste, we will say that a “love of a bonnet” was exhibited by no less than three manufacturers and dealers: Mrs. Johnson of Railroad street, Miss McDougall and Mrs. Fleetwood of Main street. The establishment made of moss was very unique and a great attraction in Floral Hall. There were two beautifully executed crayons hung up by some one, who, we could not learn. Some pencillings by Amanda L. Brown of Lower Waterford, were very good indeed. Mrs. M. Badger of Danville, exhibited some picture frames that showed great ingenuity and skill in the composition. Gage occupied a prominent place with his photographs, which are hard to beat, as every one knows….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Wanted.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Apr. 8, 1864): 3. [“Any honest, industrious, intelligent young man wishing to learn the Photography business, will find good inducements at the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery. The best references required. Apply immediately.   F. B. Gage.” (This ad ran for months, apparently without any positive result.)]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Lost in Battle.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (June 17, 1864): 2. [“Large, beautiful, imperishable Portraits of any friend who has been
Lost In Battle
Can be made from Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes, card pictures or card negatives.
Perfectly Satisfactory
Likenesses
Guarantied!

These are the most
Pleasing Mementos
That can be preserved of those who have laid down their lives for the Nation’s welfare. Call at the
St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery
And examine specimens. F. B. Gage, Proprietor.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Living and Dead. Card Pictures.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 8, 1864): 3. [“Of Abraham Lincoln; Wendell Philips, Capt. E. B. Frost, Willie Johnson, the Little Drummer Boy, Lieut. Able Morrill, Mrs. Butler, (over 100 years old).
Also card pictures of other distinguished persons for sale at the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery.  F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Local and State Items.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 16, 1864): 3. [“—Dr. Bullard hat returned from Newbern. We understand that both he and Col. Grout procured about 30 recruits.
—Copper has been discovered in several towns in Essex county. A vein has been opened in Concord that promises rich results.
—Carlos Pierce’s big Sanitary Fair ox, — a five thousand pounder—passed through here in Monday en route for the State fair. An effort is being made to get him to our county fair. He is two sizes larger than Van Amburgh’s elephant, and is growing every day.
—Rev. James P. Stone was in town a day or two the present week, preaching in his old church at the Centre in the afternoon and speaking to the North Church sabbath school in the evening of Sunday. Most of our readers are aware that he has been for the past fifteen months laboring among the Freedmen at Hampton, near Fortress Monroe, Va. He soon returns to his field of labor, and he earnestly begs of Christian men and women here at the North to send him money, women and children’s second-hand clothing, bedding of all descriptions, to save the lives of the thousands of contrabands who are flocking within the Union lines utterly destitute, and many of whom must die of exposure as cold weather approaches unless relieved by the hand of charity. Send letters and packages to “Tyler House, Fortress Monroe, Va.
— Mr. Gage has photographed a striking picture that appeared in Harper’s Weekly a short time since, entitled “Compromise with the South—dedicated to the Chicago Convention.” It represents in the foreground a Union soldier, minus one leg, and on crutches as leaning over a grave and shaking hands with a southerner armed to the teeth, and holding in one hand a cat-o’-nine-tails.— The headstone of the grave is inscribed—”In memory of the Union Heroes who fell in a useless war.” Kneeling over this grave is the goddess of Liberty. In the background on the side of the southerner is a group of slaves manacled, and a white Union man swinging from a gibbet. On the other side there is a representation of the barbarities of the rebels so common of late. It is an excellent picture for the peace men to look at and ponder.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Local and State News.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 25, 1864): 3. [“ —The “Man of Rough Exterior” modestly announces in our advertising columns to-day that he will read poems of his own production, to our citizens, at the Town Hall, on Saturday evening next, for the benefit of the Christian Commission. It has a worthy object and we conclude it will be a novel entertainment. Mr. Gage proposes to pay all the expenses so that all money taken at the door will go to the aid of our sick and disabled soldiers. Tickets 15 cts., for sale at Howard’s.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Novel Patriotic Entertainment!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 25, 1864): 3.
[“
Novel Patriotic Entertainment: At the Town Hall. Saturday Eve., Nov. 26
F. B. Gage will read selections from nearly 200 poems of his own productions. Selections, will be made of such only as are suitable for the occasion. The poems will be upon a great variety of subjects and in many different styles from those of an amusing character to the grave, the philosophical and patriotic. The entire amount taken for tickets will go to the Christian Commission for the relief of our sick and disabled soldiers.
Tickets  15 Cents.
For Sale at T. M. Howard’s Bookstore.
Doors open at 7. Entertainment to commence at 7 ½ o’clock.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Brief Locals.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 30, 1864): 3. [“—The funeral services connected with the death of Harrison W. Varney, who died at Annapolis from cruel treatment by the rebeIs at Andersonville were held at the Methodist church to-day (Thursday.) From letters received from his chaplain, and the nurse during his last days, we learn that s he lived a good life and died a happy death. In his last letter to his wife were these long to be remembered words: “I am on my death bed. I die under the protecting folds of the starry banner of freedom! Take good care of our little one, and prepare to meet me in Heaven.”
—Mrs. E. A. Kingsbury of Philadelphia will lecture in the Town Hall on Tuesday evening next at 7½ o’clock. Subject: Our Country, in Fetters and in Freedom. Admission 15 cents. After the lecture there will be for sale the photographs of the three white slave children Gen. Banks sent North from New Orleans, for the benefit of the free colored people of the South.
—Sparks from the engine caught something in the baggage car on fire near Mclndoes on Tuesday, doing considerable damage before it was discovered.
—There is earnest enquiry all about whether our town will have to raise as many men on the new call as though we had put in one year’s men instead of three years’ men last fall. Our authorities had positive assurance from the War Department, when raising the men last summer, that should there be another call for men the quotas should be evened up and those towns that put in three years’ men should have credit accordingly. It will be a flagrant act of bad faith unless it is done.
—At a meeting of the Ladies Soldiers Aid Society, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: Resolved, That a vote of thanks be tendered to Mr. F. B. Gage, and to Miss Kate Kittredge for gifts of twenty dollars and fourteen dollars and twenty-five cents, respectively. C. M. Chamberlin, Sec.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Splendid Imperishable Portraits,” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 13, 1865): 3.
[“Such As Those
Exhibited At The Late County Fair,
Can Be Made
From Old Imperfect Ambrotypes,
Daguerreotypes and Card Pictures of deceased persons. Call and see specimens.
Colored Card Pictures,
Views of Residences, &c.
Just Received—A new and large supply of
Oval, Black Walnut and Black Polished
Frames,
At Gage’s Portrait Gallery. St Johnsbury, Sept. 22, 1865.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Good Templars.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 10, 1865): 3. [“The following officers were elected by Harmony Lodge, No. 17, for the quarter commencing Nov. 1:
J. P. Scarry,                 P. W. C. T.
F. B.Gage,                    W. C. T.
Julia A. Carpenter.        W. V. T.
C. H. Walter,                 W. S.
Julia Martin,                  W. T.
C. C. Bingham,             W. P. S.
A. W. Williams,             W. M.
Mrs. M. B. Flint,             W. I. G.
S. W. Hall,                    W. O. G.
H. P. Hoyt,                    Chaplain.
Mrs. C. H. Walter,         W.A. S.
Jossie Stevens,             W. D. M.
Mrs. L. H. Gage,            W. E. S.
Ottie P. Carpenter,         W. L. S.
L. O. Stevens,               Lodge Deputy.
Meetings Tuesday evenings.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “The Wonder!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (June 15, 1866): 3.
[“Far up among the Green Mountains
In the valley of the Passumpsic
In the County of Caledonia
In the village of St. Johnsbury
In the store where Hall & Peck keep
In the room of the Post office
Where a crowd of people gather
Every day just when the mail comes;
In the store where Hall & Peck keep
(And sell goods the very cheapest)
You can see a modern wonder
You can see a tiny tintype
See a little tiny tintype
Never much but now so faded
You would call it a dim picture
You will also see a portrait
See a large and splendid portrait
Copied from that little tintype
Made into a splendid painting
Made and finished up at Gage’s
You will wonder ‘tis so perfect
So much like a living being
You will almost think it breathing.
After you have gazed and wondered
And expressed your admiration
You’ll go home and muse upon it
And you’ll think of some old picture .
And some dear one dead and buried
You will search and find that picture
And you’ll take it up to Gage’s
That you may behold another
Wonder great it was the portrait,
That was made from that small tintype
You will tell your friends about it
They will come and see the picture
So that Gage’s reputation
Will so overshadow others
That all will know where to go to
To get portraits of their dear ones
Of their dear ones dead and buried.
     •     •     •     •     •     •    •     •     
Once a daring, little creature
Once a radiant little cherub
A little fairy full of fondness
Filled a happy home with laughter
But then Autumn cold and cheerless
Clad the hills in crimson raiment
She lay down to sleep for ever
Two days after, from her features
A small photograph was taken
From that photograph a painting
Sprung and grew to wond’rous beauty’
And almost unknown perfection
They who loved the fairy creature
Feel and know that is Like Her
Who once filled their home with gladness
Like that dear one dead and buried
Call at Hall & Peck’s and see it!
F. B. Gage.”
________________________________

“Another Wonder”
“I have been to the post office.
To the store that Hall & Peck keep,
And sell goods so very cheap;
And I saw that little tintype;
Saw that little faded tintype,
Scarce could see that little tintype,
‘Twas so much worn and so faded.
Time had wrought on it such changes
That the picture never worth much,
Could scarcely now be seen at all.
Longer still I gazed and wondered,
Wondered at the face before me,
Wondered if it really could be.
That that picture large and life like,
That the picture full of beauty.
Could be copied from that worn out
From that faded worn out tintype.
Truly that a wondrous art is,
And Gage is a wondrous artist,
And I hope that all who have a
Little, faded worn out tintype.
Quick will take it unto Gage’s.
He will stand and look upon it,
Stand and look a while upon it;
Then will smile and say he thinks that
He can make a splendid picture,
He can make a life-like picture,
From that little good for nothing;
Very small and faded tintype, But there is another wonder.
Not so great perhaps as Gage’s,
Yet a wonder surely it is;
As those who sleep well will tell you.
All those who are so very wise are,
As to buy a good spring mattress,
A spring mattress of Cassino;
For it is the very best bed,
As all those who use it do say,
(And their number now is many,)
If you will but ask them of it.
Ask about this good spring mattress;
This spring mattress that Cassino
Will .sell to you if you ask him,
If you have the greenbacks with you,
Have the greenbacks to give him
For the mattress he will sell you.
J. T. Cassino. St. Johnsbury, Vt.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“The Farmer’s Festival. Twenty-First Caledonia County Agricultural Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 21, 1866): 3. [“Seed time and harvest have come and gone once more, and with the ingathering crops the farmers again gather in their accustomed festivals. Very many of our readers recollect the first fairs held on the old grounds north of Paddock’s village; those were called good fairs, but they bear no comparison to the fairs now held by the same society. Fewer people recollect the fair held at Lyndon corner more than twenty-five years ago, and the one held here on the flat northwest of where the Methodist church now stands, some over twenty years ago. Agricultural fairs were then in a primitive state in Vermont; since then great improvements have been made. So much by way of preamble. We now propose to speak somewhat of the exhibition of I866:…
Floral Hall.
Of Floral Hall we do not propose to speak very minutely. This is always a great attraction at these fairs, and the present year was no exception to the general rule. Directly in the center of the exhibition building F. B. Gage the artist had established his portrait gallery. Of his pictures we have no need to say a word—they speak for themselves. Although the artist may pride himself on his “rough exterior,” he is quite as proud of his skillful workmanship….”
Miscellaneous Articles
Patch work ottoman Mrs. H Curtis             $.50.
2d Mrs. Houston, St J.                             $.50.
Sofa pillow L A Chase, St J.                     $.50.
(Etc.)
Bead work Jennie Jewell (blind)                $.50.
(Etc.)
Picture and frame Mrs. C. H. Walter         $.25.
Oil painting Mrs. H C Newell                      $.50.
(Etc.)
Leaf wreath Louisa Bemick, St J               $.25.
Best photographs F B Gage                    $2.00.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Connecticut River Valley Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 12, 1866): 3. [“At this fair held at Bradford, Mr. F, B. Gage of this place, took a $10 premium on his collection of photograph portraits. This is deserved. Gage stands at the head of all the artists in this section. Mr. Caswell’s three years old colt also took the first premium at this fair. A. Newbury man got the refusal of this splendid animal at $1000. W. J. Henderson of Ryegate took the second-premium on stallions, and E. B. Kenney of Mclndoes Falls, on cheese.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Complimentary to the Artist.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 2, 1866): 3. [“An old lady having occasion to visit Gage’s new portrait gallery lately, was surprised on entering the door to encounter the familiar face of Dr. Bullard. “Well Doctor,” said she, “I am not feeling well to-day; can you prescribe for me?!’ Not receiving a reply as soon as she expected, she adjusted her spectacles and approached a little nearer. “Law, me!” she exclaimed in astonishment, “this is only a picture —why, I really thought it was the doctor himself!” Gage’s gallery is lighted evenings and is open for the reception of visitors.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Patent Granted.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 5, 1867): 3. [“Mr. F. B. Gage of this town, has received a patent from the United States for a process for blending the lights and shades of pictures made in the camera, and which is considered an important invention. London journals of June 7th publish that Mr. Gage has been granted a patent in England for the same invention. Mr. Gage has also applied for a patent in France. He has also applied in the United States for patents on two other inventions in the photographic art.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “New Patented Pictures.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 19, 1867): 3. [“Specimens of the new pictures patented by F. B. Gage July 9, 1867, may be seen at the St. Johnsbury Portrait Galley, Call and See Them!
A trustworthy girl wanted to work in the Gallery. F. B. Gage.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Mary.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 2, 1867): 3. [“An Interesting Poem with a Moral.

Two little tin-types out a walking
One day fell earnestly to talking.

One Tin-type said unto the other,
My grief I really cannot smother:

For I’ve been villainously slighted,
And wronged so that it can’t be righted.

Ah! said the other one, replying,
You do look grieved, there’s no denying.

That you’ve been wronged I’d never doubt it,
So tell me plainly all about it.

I wilI — did you know Brigg’s daughter,
She that dwelt just across the water?

She was the fairest of all the creatures,
And I was taken from her features.

And I will own I felt elated,
From one so fair t be created.

Small as I was, in me were traces,
Of all her beauty and her graces.

Briggs owned a farm and lived by tillage,
And Mary daily to the village

Came faithfully in quest of learning,
That treasure so well worth the earning.

But ere her seventeenth year was ended.
Just when the Autumn had descended,

She drooped and died; ’twas sad entombing
A face so beautiful and blooming.

To leave her in the silent keeping
Of those dark walls forever sleeping.

Wrapped in the dreamless everlasting slumber,
Whose years no dial ere can count or number.

How swift it came! oh how appalling.
The shock upon that household falling!

But after Mary had departed,
And all around seemed broken-hearted:

I, in her mother’s work box lying,
Heard all about poor Mary dying.

Her mother then came very often,
And I could see her hard face soften:

And for a long time without stopping,
Could see and feel her big tears dropping.

Her playmates too, scholars and teachers,
Came frequently to see her features.

They prized me, then, beyond all measure,
And I was then their dearest treasure.

Betwixt her memorandum’s pages,
One day she took me down to Gage’s:

Opened the book and showed me to him.
By his long flowing beard l knew him,

And though I saw that she was weeping,
She turned and left me in his keeping.

Although I knew not all the meaning
Of all his focusing and screening:

He, with strange chemicals and vapor,
Copied me large as life on paper.

Upon the easel then ‘twas painted,
While I looked on and almost fainted:

Knowing if that were once created
I should thence forth be underrated.

Daily I saw the Iikeness growing,
Her bright black eyes, and dark locks flowing:

Her face like purest alabaster,
Until I saw and knew him master,

Of that great, wonderous art of giving
That look which makes the dead seem living.

‘Twas done — ’twas taken home – amazing
It was to see and hear the praising.

Folks flocked to see it by the hundred,
Admired it, praised it too, and wondered,

How Gage acquired the art of giving
That Iook which makes the dead seem living.

How was that household once so saddened
Again by Mary’s bright face gladdened.

Her mother blesses him who brought her
Again her almost living daughter.

Her father hourly gazes on it,
Nor mourns the money paid which done it.

     •     •     •     •     •     •    •     •    

Now when the Tin-types tale was ended,
The tears adown its face descended;

For Gage, in fact, as well as story,
Had magnified and stolen its glory!

A heavy grief had fallen upon it,
For none took comfort gazing on it:

And now neglected, and down-hearted,
lt mourned its glory all departed!

Moral

Pause here and heed this little sequel,
Gage made another really equal;

That all may see and feel conviction,
This story’s true and is no fiction.

Come then and see this farmer’s daughter,
She that dwelt just across the water.

Persons who have small pictures which they wish enlarged and painted, should not lose the present opportunity of getting them done at the St. Johnsbury Portrait Gallery as the health of the present proprietor may compel him to leave the business. By the new processes just patented by F. B. Gage, better card and other pictures are made than ever before. They can be obtained at no other place in this vicinity. F. B. Gage. St, Johnsbury, July, 1867.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Wanted.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 30, 1867): 3. [“A lady with some taste for pictures to learn to print and finish card photographs. A permanent, light and pleasant employment. Apply by letter or otherwise to F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vt.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Caledonia County Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 27, 1867): 2. [“The twenty-second annual fair of the Caledonia County Agricultural society commenced Tuesday, Sept. 24th — one of the brightest of all the beautiful days of this beautiful month. The people of the County turned out with their best productions, and the exhibition, taken all in all, has never been equalled in this county, and people who attend other fairs, say it has been excelled no where….”
(Etc.)
Wax flowers Miss N. S. Graves St J                        $.25.
Pictures Miss Mary Hale Peacham                        $.50.
Water colors Miss Eliza D. Gleason                       $.50.
(Etc.)
Wax boquet Miss Lucy Currier Walden               $.25.
Chemise yoke Mrs. D. W. Shaw St J                        dip.
Shell work M. Adams                                                   $.50.
(Etc.)
Photographs F. B. Gage St J                                      dip.
Ottoman Miss Lucy Hawkins D’vl                           $.25.
(Etc.)…”]

 KILBURN, BENJAMIN WEST.
“Wells River.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 8, 1867): 3. [“Mr. Kilburn the well known Photographer of Littleton, has recently taken several very interesting stereoscopic views in this vicinity. One represents the Montreal R. R. bridge between here and Woodsville. The picture gives us a very beautiful view of the bridge itself, and then quite as fine a view of the island just above it at the bank beyond the bend in the river, Bath mountain, and a portion of the sky above mirrored in the smooth surface of the Connecticut. Another represents the valley of the Connecticut as seen from the Pass. R. R. track, just above the bridge over the Wells River. Either of these pictures will bear a favorable comparison with the productions of any stereoscope manufacturer in the land. They not only illustrate the degree of perfection to which the art has been carried, but, quite as strikingly, they show how much of beauty there is in nature’s landscapes on every hand.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Wind and Rain.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (July 17, 1868): 3. [“…On Wednesday afternoon at five o’clock, there was a heavy thunder shower at this place, accompanied by much wind, which refreshed the earth and purified the air. Probably the wind and rain beat down the growing crops and much made hay was thoroughly wet and our highways are badly washed out for the first time this season, but the chance in the weather is very grateful.
“Struck by Lightning.”– During the shower Wednesday afternoon the lightning struck the north chimney on the store of E. F. Brown, scattering the brick in every direction, and throwing some of them ten rods, though the larger part were hurled down upon the building of S. Higgins, demolishing two windows and a door in the part occupied by O. C. Dow. The fluid passed the entire length of the chimney to the cellars where it is supposed to have passed into the ground, although no trace of it appears there except the bursting open of the small door at the base of the chimneys and the scattering of soot about the floor. In the upper story, used by Gage as a photograph gallery, the floor was torn up about the stove, and some large splinters thrown up with such force as to break through the ceiling and lodge in the lath. The stove pipes and caps, soot and ashes were thrown about the rooms. Mr. Gage was at work at the sink in his back room, but had a moment before stepped into the front room to close a window, and was returning when the bolt came. Had he remained at the sink he would most probably have been killed, as the floor was ripped up by the sink, directly where he was standing. The building is occupied as stores, shops and offices, and a family lives in the second story, but notwithstanding it was full of people, no one was injured, and no one complains of feeling even an electric shock. It was a most Providential escape. Those who stood on the piazzas on the opposite side of the street, and saw the flash, represent it to have appeared like two large balls of fire descending upon the building, and giving it the appearance of being in one mass of flame.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“The Holidays and Our Advertisers.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 18, 1868): 2. [“Photographs.”
“Gage continues to make the pictures for the million. His eccentricities are only equaled by his genius. Not satisfied with making good counterfeits of the form divine, he has lately been taking views about town; and has finished up some very nice stereoscopic views which he is about ready to throw into the market. Gage’s pictures excel in some points those of all the artists.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Familiar Places.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 20, 1869): 3. [“Next to a local newspaper, the old-time residents of a town like to get pictures of old familiar places. Mr. Gage has been for a year or two taking stereoscopic views all about the village, and in other villages and other towns; Some of these are highly prized by those who remember places as they were. In a year or two a view of Main street at the junction of Eastern avenue, as it was last April, will be prized by many. Mr. Gage’s gallery is full of views, valuable for associations—and any one will find it so who takes the pains to examine it.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.]  “Wood! Wood!! Wood!!!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Jan. 7, 1870): 3
[“If you want some pictures good,
Gage will take his pay in wood;
And if you have no wood to sell,
Cash will answer just as well.
January 1, 1870.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Novel Advertising.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (June 3, 1870): 3  [“While photographing Springfield, Vt., some days ago, Mr. F. B. Gage of this place made a picture of Black River Falls; including in this picture the original manufactory of the United States Piano Co., whose warehouses are now at 645 Broadway, New York. It being a very attractive picture, the Piano Co. saw money in it, and they have ordered 1800 copies which they will use this year to advertise their pianos.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Christ and the Cross.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 30, 1870): 1. [“Whoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven”—Matt, x: 35.
Show me the Christ—
I will cry to him!
Show me the Christ—
I will fly to him!
Show me the Christ—
I will die for him,
And bless him forever and ever!”

Hold up the Cross—
I will sing to it!
Hold up the Cross—
I will cling to it!
Hold up the Cross—
I will bring to it
Hosannahs forever and ever!

Give me the Cross—
I will boast of it!
Give me the Cross—
And the Host of it!
Give me the Cross—
The Holy Ghost of it
Shall bless me forever and ever!
Sept. 1870.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“The Caledonia Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 30, 1870): 2. [“The Fair of 1870 opened auspiciously Tuesday, the 27th inst. At an early hour the people began flocking towards the fair grounds, and there was little cessation in the flow until about the middle of the afternoon, when the tide set outward….”
Photography
Portrait F. B. Gage, St J                                                $2.00.
2d T C Haynes, St J                                                        $1.00.
Carte de visite Photographs T. C. Haynes            $2.00.
2d F. B. Gage                                                                     $1.00.
Ambrotypes or Tintypes T. C. Haynes                   $2.00.
2d F. B. Gage                                                                     $1.00.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The Last Look.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 7, 1870): 1. [Thoughts at the funeral of Miss Army Weeks, at the Methodist Church. St. Johnsbury, Sunday; September 25, 1870.
The hymns were sung, the prayers were said,
And, when the coffin lid was raised,
The throng passed round with muffled tread
And on the dead in silence gazed.

Ah would that I could read the thought
Of all who gazed upon her face:
How much repentance was there wrought?
How many thoughts of heavenly grace?

How many passed with vacant stare,
And read no lesson from the sight?
How many gazed whose dark despair,
Grew blacker than the blackest night?

God only knows—his eye can scan
The secrets of the souls of all;
That God who loves and pities man,
And will not let his sparrows fall.

Ah! mourner as I paused to gaze,
Death’s awful mystery to see,
I joyed to think that Christ was raised
A ransom both for you and me.

Ah! will we but stretch out our hand
And let Him lead us to that shore?
That brighter and that better land

Where sin and sorrow are no more.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “A Prayer.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 28, 1870): 1.
[“We have sinned long enough;
Make us, God, strong enough
Our great sins to see!
We’ve scorned thy grace enough,
We’ve shunned thy face enough.
We’ve been disgrace enough,
Oh turn us to Thee!

We have done lies enough;
Make us, God, wise enough
Our own faults to see!
Make our faith sure enough.
Make our lives pure enough,
Help us endure enough,
To cleave unto Thee.

We’ve been sin’s slave enough;
Make us, God, brave enough
Good Christians to be!
Fill us with fear enough,
Make us sincere enough,
Till we’ve dwelt here enough,
And go home to Thee.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The Captain’s Prayer.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 18, 1870): 1. [“The circumstances here narrated are no fancy sketch. They occurred on board the brig I. B. Lunt, from New York to Savannah, Nov. 8, 1850. The writer of the following poem was one of the passengers, and still retains a vivid recollection of the effect produced by the Captain’s prayer:
At break of day we put to sea;
(Then I had never sailed before,)
On ocean’s vast immensity,
We soon were swept far from the shore;
And night and tempest wild and dark,
Shut in around our little bark.

And then there fell upon my soul,
A-strange and awful loneliness;
A feeling I could not control.
A fear that words cannot express;
A feeling that no power could save
That doomed ship from a watery grave.

And all that long November eve,
We cowered in mortal dread and fear;
We felt the great waves swell and heave,
They seemed to cry:—Your graves are here—
Your eyes no more shall see the land,
For death and judgment are at hand!

But when a Bible, worn and old,
The Captain look from off a shelf.
And read where Christ’s great love is told.
And prayed for us and for himself,
With voice and faith serenely calm.
Our souls were filled with heavenly balm.

For their the Captain’s soul we knew,
That it was calm and true and brave
That all that human hands could do
His hands would do the ship to save: —
And so we trusted him and slept,
While God his-ship in safety kept.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “You and Me. A Thanksgiving Day Poem.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Nov. 25, 1870): 1.
[“In Bethlehem one peaceful morn.
The blessed Son of God was born,
That he might suffer death and be
A sacrifice for you and me!

And oh, what agony he bore
To open wide Redemption’s door,
That you and I might leave our sin,
And come to him and enter in.

A crown of thorns, a mocking name
They gave him to complete his shame;
And then they nailed Him to the tree,
And pierced his side for you and me.

Christ walked the sea in mortal guise
To show the power that in him lies :—
Then He in triumph walked the sea
Of Death to ransom you and me!

Lest dread Oblivion in its waves,
Should chain us as in endless graves;
Lest grim annihilation there
Should swallow us and our despair!

By Jewish hands his blood was spilt,
O! awful deed of shame and guilt!
O! Love unfathomed, that set free
The bonds of death for you and me!–

O, soul of scorn! oh heart of pride!
With Iust and vanity allied,
Will ye the bitter cup renew
And crucify the Christ anew?

Oh, meekness in a manger born!
Pity our pride. subdue our scorn,
And lead us to the cross to kneel.
Where Christ his glory will reveal.

Before Jehovah’s holy throne,
Let us our shame and sins atone;
And while in penitence we pray,
Make life one long Thanksgiving Day.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Local News.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 9, 1870): 3. [“Mr. F. B. Gage, who has a large collection of poems, will give a public reading at the town hall this (Thursday) evening, at half-past 7 o’clock.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Look Here! Photograph Gallery For Sale!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Dec. 30, 1870): 3. [“Owing to increasing ill health I will sell my Photograph Gallery, and go out of the business. This a chance in a thousand for any one who wishes a good, well-established business. Persons wishing to avail themselves of my long experience in making large pictures should attend to it at once, as I shall sell out and leave the business as soon as possible. F. B. Gage. St. Johnsbury, Vt. Dec. 23, 1870.”]

CLIFFORD, D. A.
“State and Local News.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 15, 1871): 3. [“Mr. D. .A Clifford artist over the Caledonian office, has procured a quantity of views for the stereoscope, taken on Mount Washington last winter. Call and see them.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“The State Fair.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 22, 1871): 2. [“The State Fair which was held in this place last week, though successful in some particulars, on the whole was a lamentable failure, and the subject of quite general complaint. This failure was due to its management;…”
Vermont State Fair.
Mechanic’s Hall.
There were many, things worthy of special notice in Mechanic’s Hall. Prominent among the articles here shown, was an elaborate display of Howe’s Scales, from a railroad track scale down to a post office balance. These scales were evidently got up to exhibit,—not for use, —and they made a very handsome show. It may be proper here to say that the Fairbanks had no scales on exhibition, and have had none at state fairs for several years. These fairs come,at a season of the year when they are pressing their force to the utmost to fill orders, and they actually had not on hand an assortment which they could put into the fair…. a display of files… …agricultural and joiners tools…. a section of water-pipe… …little “coasting wagon”‘ from Springfield was a pretty child’s toy,… …double circular saw mills… farming and other implements. …horse-powers… planers and matchers… hoes, forks and rakes… hay tedders and horse-rakes, plows, cultivators and corn planters, and innumerable other implements of husbandry….carriage work and carriage painting, …phaeton,…a top buggy…open buggies and a sleigh… Sanford’s improved sickle grinder, …Colby’s little washer,: one of those inventions calculated to lessen woman’s hard lot… Gale’s sugar evaporator… a portable gas machine with which he proposes to light buildings… stoves, copper and tinware ; and F. B. Gage had a good exhibition of photographs, life-size, and smaller. G. H. Hastings of Lyndonville also exhibited photographs.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
[Advertisement.] “Dress Making.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Sept. 19, 1873): 3. [“—Mrs. F. B. GAGE will attend to Dress Cutting and Making. Mrs. G. is agent for the Davis Chart, and gives instruction in that system of drafting and cutting any style ladies garments. Rooms in Armington’s new Building, Prospect St., St. Johnsbury.” (Mrs. Gage advertised several times in 1873 and 1874. I wonder if she was working just for interest and pin-money or whether Gage’s apparently increasingly serious illness and the apparent diminished business in his gallery had reduced their income to where she had to do this out of necessity.)]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“The Annual Temperance Meeting.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Jan. 10, 1874): 2. [“The annual meeting of the Caledonia Young Men’s Temperance Society was held at the Town Hall in this place on Saturday, the 24th inst. There was a large attendance present, nearly all parts of the county being well represented….” (Followed by a long and detailed report of the meeting, where reports from various townships in the county were read and committees formed, the Vermont liquor law described and discussed, etc. Organization officers were elected and a resolution to attempt to stop liquor sales and work to elect pro-temperance public officials, who would enforce the liquor laws, were draw up and passed. F. B. Gage was at this meeting and he commented several times throughout, including a statement that “He voted with the Republican party, but hereafter he would vote for temperance men only, without distinction of party…”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Death of F. B. Gage.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Aug. 28, 1874): 3. [“The death of Mr. F. B. Gage removes from our place a long-time resident, and an eccentric and in some respects remarkable character. He was eccentric in his dress, looks and manner of life. Always wearing his beard long and flowing years ago when short beards were the style, he became a marked man. During a newspaper controversy some dozen or more years ago, he was designated by his opponent as “the man of rough exterior.” This nom de plume rather pleased than offended Mr. Gage, and he afterwards often assumed it. Mr. Gage’s mind was of quite a literary turn. He formerly wrote a good deal of poetry, but later years he has given more attention to story-writing, and was quite successful, especially in writing childrens’ stories, many of which were published in the Youth’s Companion. Some of his early poems had merit in both sentiment and wit, and many of them found their way into these columns in years past. He battled with disease all his life, and we doubt if he saw a “wee day” in the last twenty years. He leaves a wife and four children.
In one of Mr. Gage’s published poems is the following verse which is appropriate to appear with this notice:
I have a treasure in the blue Beyond!
And since my brow is wrinkled o’er with time,
And all my dearest hopes have passed away
Seeking my treasures in that viewless clime,
I shall lay by my staff some Autumn day,
And pass into the blue Beyond!”]

 WEBSTER, J. N. (BARTON, VT))
“Vermont Views.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Feb. 19, 1875): 2. [“We are in receipt of stereoscopic views of some noted places in Vermont, from Mr. J. N. Webster of Barton. They include several views about Willoughby Lake: Newport and Memphremagog: Crystal Lake near Barton; several views on the Connecticut, and the new Congregational church at Barton, Dartmouth College, etc., etc.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, Franklin B. “Mrs. Pope and the Bear.” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 8, 1875): 1. [“You must look out for the sheep, wife. These warm days will bring the bears out of their dens. They will be ravenous, and like as not; they will break into the yard and carry off some of the sheep. l saw bear tracks up the mountain this morning.”
“Well,” said Mrs. Pope, ”they needn’t expert to get any of our sheep. If they come prowling round here, I’ll drive them oft in some way. We need the sheep too much to have them carried off by bears.”
“I wish you understood using the gun, wife. When I am gone, I worry about leaving you and the baby all day alone. The woods are so near, I can’t help thinking some wild animals may come, down from the mountains and attack you.”
“You needn’t fear about that,” answered Mrs. Pope. “To be sure it is lonesome with neither man nor dog about and l presume I should feel safer if I understood handling a gun, but I don’t believe anything will come near in the day-time. So-don’t worry about us, only be sure to get home before dusk.”
“Well, good-bye, then. Don’t expose the baby or yourself to any danger, and I’ll be back before night.”
So saying, Mr. Pope, with a bag of grain on-his horse, started off to the mill, leaving his wife and baby alone in their solitary log cabin in the wilderness.
This conversation occurred in the town of Kirby, Vermont, in the spring of the year 1811, when that region was but little settled, when even women understood they were in constant peril from wild beasts. Jesse Pope’s cabin stood close to the foot of the Kirby mountains, in whose rocky fastnesses bears, catamounts and wolves had their inaccessible dens. Bears, especially, were so thick as to be a sources of constant dread to those who had flocks, or were compelled to leave their homes unprotected, while they went, to the larger settlements on necessary, business.
Mrs. Pope fully understood the peril that surrounded her during her husband’s absence. Her cheerful talk with her husband was not mere bravado. She said what she did, us much to keep her own spirits up as to dispel her husband’s anxiety.. She knew that he must go to the mill, and there was no way for her but to stay at home and be as brave as possible. She was a brave woman. Nature had endowed her with courage, and the surroundings of her early life had all tended to foster and strengthen it. She fully, understood her situation, and when her husband passed out of sight she knew she and her baby were alone in the great wilderness, beyond the reach of help, should anything serious occur. But she had always lived, in the wilderness. The howl of the wolf and the growl of the bear were familiar sounds to her, and she had become accustomed to a lonely life in the woods. So, instead of shutting herself in the house, she went on with her work as usual.
After the breakfast dishes were washed and put away, she brought out her little “linen wheel” and went, to spinning flax. They must have clothes for summer wear, and that was the season to spin and weave, before, the summer fully set in. I can remember my mother and her spinning-wheel, .and I can imagine just how Mrs. Pope looked, sitting with one foot on the treadle. I can hear the buzz of the wheel as it flew round; l can see just how often she dipped her lingers in the little cup of water, as she drew out the fibers of flax, and dexterously shaped the strong symmetrical thread, in a manner that would astonish modern housewives.
All the long forenoon her musical wheel kept humming its pleasant tune, stopping only now and then as its mistress either crowed to the baby in the cradle, or looked out to see that no wild animals were prowling about. Noon came and went, and nothing disturbed them. The baby in the cradle went of to sleep, and she kept on with her work. After a time she rose and looked out again. This time she saw an astounding sight! Coming down the mountain-side from the woods, she beheld a full-grown bear, not a hundred yards distant. He was on his way to the yard where the sheep were in fold, and she knew he was after the sheep. She had a gun, but that would not avail anything, for she had never learned to use it. She had an axe, but she knew an axe to be a poor weapon to fight a bear with. The next thing she thought of was a pitchfork. Their few sheep were a treasure to the family. All their winter clothing was to come from the sheep, and now that they were in peril, she was aroused to instant action. The one absorbing thought of saving the sheep banished all sense of personal danger. Instead of shutting herself up in the house she darted out and closed the door after her lest anything should molest the baby. Then running into the log barn, she snatched up the pitchfork, ran around the barn, and planted herself directly in the bear’s path. Brandishing her pitchfork and screaming at him, she attempted to scare him back to the woods. But the bear was ravenous with hunger, and he came straight down the hill at her, showing his teeth and growling fiercely. As he approached and sprang toward her, Mrs. Pope dodged and dealt him a blow, the iron ring of the fork striking him exactly on the end of the nose. The shock stunned the bear for an instant, and during that one instant, with almost superhuman strength, Mrs. Pope plunged both tines of the fork into the bear’s side, where she supposed the heart to be. Either good fortune, or the hand of Providence, directed the weapon, for one of the tines passed clear through the bear’s heart, and he fell over dead, leaving, her not only victorious, but unharmed. After the excitement of the contest was over, Mrs. Pope went back to the house, shuddering at the extremity of peril she had been in. But after a time her nervousness passed off, and she went on with her work again; and so the afternoon, wore away.
At length, when the sun was about an hour high, she saw her husband emerge from the woods near the house. She left her spinning-wheel, and, with the baby in her arms, met him at the door as if nothing unusual had occurred. As he came up to the door leading the horse with one hand, and holding on the bag of flour with the other, he spoke out:
“Well, wife, I am thankful nothing has happened to you while I was gone. I suppose it was foolish, but I couldn’t help worrying all the time.”
“I don’t know as it was foolish, husband. But hitch the horse, and bring the bag in. I want to talk with you.”
When the bag was deposited in the house, Mrs. Pope said, “So you were nervous about us then?
”Yes. I don’t remember ever being so nervous before in my life.”
“Well, husband, I was nervous, too. I couldn’t help thinking what could I do if a bear should come down from the mountain after the sheep.”
“Why, common sense would tell you what to do; shut the door, take care of yourself and baby, and let the sheep go.”
“Do you think so, husband?” “Of course I do. What else could you have done?”
“You will see if you go out behind the barn and look.” “Behind the barn! What do you mean?”
“I mean what I say. Go and look behind the barn.” Mr. Pope started out in the greatest wonder, while, her wife buried her face in the baby’s apron to smother the womanly tears she could no longer restrain.
To his utter astonishment Mr. Pope found the dead bear behind the barn; with the pitchfork sticking in its side.
When he went in and heard the whole story from his wife; he fully realized that something had happened in his absence, and that he had more reason than ever to be thankful.
I am indebted to the wife of James Harris. Esq., of St. Johnsbury, for this history of Mrs. Pope’s encounter with the bear. Mrs. Harris’s father—Rev. Timothy Locke —lived not far from Mr. Pope’s house at this time; Mrs. Harris stilI distinctly remembers seeing the bear’s skin nailed on the outside of the barn, where it remained all summer, while Mrs. Pope became famous throughout the neighborhood for her heroism.”]

HASTINGS, GEORGE H. (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT))
[Advertisement.] “Photographs!” THE CALEDONIAN (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT) (Oct. 8, 1875): 4. [“Home again and in the old quarters (formerly occupied by F. B. Gage) after a winter’s stay in one of the first galleries in Boston, perfecting my self in the art, and with improved facilities, think we can please all who may favor us with their patronage. AII the New and Different Styles. Gotten up with neatness and dispatch. Stereoscopic Views of the Village and Vicinity. Albums, frames, Bookmarks, etc., etc. For sale at low prices. We would invite all to call and examine specimens of work. Geo. H. Hastings, Brown’s Block, Main Street, St. Johnsbury, Vt. May 12.”]

HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Photography in St. Johnsbury, Vermont.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 8:19 (Feb. 1, 1857): 289-292. [Letter from F. B. Gage, plus the editor’s description of seventeen photographs primarily views – of New Hampshire, taken by Gage.]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Collodion Process.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 9:1 (May 1, 1857): 2-4. [Gage from St. Johnsbury, VT.]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “More about Saltpetre – Light in the Dark Room, &c.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 9:23 (Apr. 1, 1858): 358-359. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: I was somewhat alarmed on reading your correspondent C. G.’s paper, in No. 22 of your Journal, in regard to the combustible nature of the drippings from the silver bath. As the table where I keep my hath had become thoroughly saturated with silver, I chipped off a small piece to try it, as C. G. proposed, placed it at a respectable distance from the dangerous table, and proceeded with a palpitating heart to try a match. I beg C. G.’s pardon, but it was no go—not the match, but the chip. I then supplied myself with a pail of water and proceeded to touch off the table, fully expecting that it would blow up notwithstanding the chip did not. Here, however, I was as sadly disappointed as in the other case, for it would not go off “no-how.” Astonished at this, I sat down and reflected that, perhaps, my table had none of that “double elective affinity” that C. G. tells about, and that that was the reason it would not explode. Perhaps some of my brethren may be more fortunate, and not find so much difficulty in blowing up when they try the experiment. C. G., however, had better keep an eye to his gun-cotton and collodion.   I will wager that he can blow them up, at any time, without much extra trouble   I will guarantee, also, that pine tables are not one-half as dangerously explosive. I speak from experience, as I was blown up by the vapor of collodion not long since, whereby my favorite beard (only 12 ½ inches long), eye-brows, and hair were most woefully singed. I advise every one not to fulfill that passage of Scripture which says: “Go thou and do likewise,” as it might be a little dangerous if over-done. C. G. speaks of dark-rooms. For my part, I have no taste for dark-rooms, and have nothing of the kind about my establishment. I silver and develop my pictures under a skylight, where it is so light that you may see to read the finest print, or even a watchmaker could clean and put up watches without the least difficulty. One thickness of lemon yellow paper (about the thickness of that upon which Humphrey’s Journal is printed) is all that I use to change the light. This sheet is placed over the window so as to exclude all the white light. The light coming through this sheet tinges everything yellow, but still leaves it so light that you can see the picture grow up under the developer with as much certainty as one can desire. The paper should be of a lemon yellow color; orange yellow would not do as well. We have used yellow light for nearly two years past for developing, silvering, toning, and all such purposes, and would not go back to the lamp for “heaps of money.” I have a photographic tent, for field-work, made of yellow cloth, which works well, of which I may say more hereafter. O, ye sons of light, that toil in darkness! throw your gas and fluid lamps to the dogs—take the daylight into your dark-room, through a yellow curtain, and you never will repent the day you removed such a “stumbling-block” from your establishments. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Dark Room again – Lemon-yellow,” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 9:24 (Apr. 15, 1858): 371.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Effect of Light upon White Lead and Ivory Black.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 9:24 (Apr. 15, 1858): 371.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Remedy for Foggy Nitrate Baths.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:1 (May 1, 1858): 3-5.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Adaptation.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:3 (June 1, 1858): 36-37.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Theory of the Negative Process.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:4 (June 15, 1858): 49-51.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Quick versus Slow Processes; their comparative Merits.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:5 (July 1, 1858): 65-66.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Foggy Baths Again.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:5 (July 1, 1858): 68.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Cleaning Glass.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:5 (July 1, 1858): 68-69.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Washing Prints.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:6 (July 15, 1858): 83-84. [To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: There is a great deal written in foreign journals, and by foreign writers, about long soaking of prints after they come from the toning-bath.  One recommends passing them through three or four dishes of water, changing the water and dishes continually for five or six hours, and then let them soak for twenty-four hours longer. Another is strongly in favor of sponging, which is sure to perform the cure and leave them freed of chemicals.  One soaks (them in a running stream for one or two days; another soaks them twenty-four hours and then finishes with boiling water.   Thus any amount of ignorance and folly is displayed by these writers, who seem more anxious to see their names in print, attached to some “darling conceit of their own,” than to suggest anything really beneficial to the art. The farther they get from what common sense would dictate, the better they seem pleased and the more glory they take to themselves therefore. There is so much wrangling among them about who was the inventor of the honey process, who used (sulphate of irons first, and a hundred other equally useless points, that it is almost impossible for them to find time to do anything else but wrap their neighbors’ knuckles and call hard names. It seems an easy thing to determine what is the best manner of cleansing prints of the excess of chemicals. A running stream is certainly not to be excelled by any other process, if the stream is large enough to change the water rapidly. The stream should be large enough to free the print from soda in one hour, and never, under any consideration, more than three hours. This soaking the prints until the soda is all out, and then soaking them till the sizing is all gone, and still longer, until the organic matter in the water penetrates the pores of the paper and commences a decomposition of its tissues, is “all bosh.” How would our ambrotypes look if soaked two or three days in dead, dirty water? Would it be likely to improve the whites? Half of the smutty prints in vogue are owing to the half-rotten state they are in from long soaking. The beauty of a print, after one or two hours’ washing, begins rapidly to diminish, caused by the decomposition and softening of the sizing. The amount of chemicals that are left in the print after two hours good cleansing, in a running stream of water, is not half as likely to fade the print as the organic matter, deposited from the water, and the sizing are. This not only seems reasonable, but it is corroborated by experience and observation. I have noticed that prints soaked in a strong running stream for not more than three hours, have invariably proved brighter and more durable than those that have soaked twenty-four hours. Those that have remained in two days have lost all their beauty, and in three days were entirely ruined. Prints should be soaked in small lots and not piled in and allowed to mat together. If the water is very cold, or the paper uncommonly thick, it may need a longer time. Every one must use his own judgment in these matters. Therefore I say, “Photos,” don’t try to do your work so the roughly as to overdo and spoil it. Overdone beef-steak is horrible, and an over-soaked print is in exactly the same category. If it seems that one or two hours’ soaking is better than twenty-four, try it and note the result. Don’t take my word, nor any one’s, for your own standard, but use your own common sense, and you will arrive at some definite time for the cleaning. This is a progressive world, and old customs and opinions are of no value only so far as they are founded on truth. The plow-share of experiment must break through them, while observation stands by to note the result—to retain the good and reject the bad. The man that has a monstrous veneration for old customs or opinions, or anything that smacks of antiquity will never succeed in this new art. His ever-busy competitor, Experiment, is enthusiastically going ahead and will leave him so far in the rear, that ruin is sure to follow from which there is no escape. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Keeping Collodion Plates Sensitive.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:6 (July 15, 1858): 84-86. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: In your notices to correspondents, in a late No. of your Journal, you call upon me to give my views of the best method to keep plates sensitive for field use, and also my opinion as to what is the best way to build a tent for the same purpose. In regard to keeping plates sensitive for field-work, I think it is entirely useless to try any dry process unless you are willing to be satisfied with inferior results. It is chemically impossible to get as good results on a dry film as on a wet one; for the freshly silvered plate, when just removed from the nitrate bath and exposed to light, is in the best possible condition to receive the developing and produce the desired results. The dry processes are all, except, perhaps the albumen) in my opinion, sheer humbugs, and are just fit for English amateurs, who have nothing else to do, to quarrel over. Having tried them the roughly, I am convinced of their demerits. All the preservative mixtures are also mere vexation; they are an element not needed and not to be admitted if you are determined to seek the greatest degree of artistic perfection. But if you are fond of streaks, stains, fogs, and scums, you can daub your plate with honey, oxymel, gelatine, or any other kind of adstickitiveness (I did not get that word from Webster) that happens to suit your individual fancy, and I will warrant that you will produce these effects with but little trouble. It is very singular that Taupenot never produced anything but the most perfect results with Taupeuot’s process. Barnes always gets splendid impressions with Barnes’ process. Shadbolt never made a poor impression with Shadbolt’s process. Maxwell Lyte never fails with Lyte’s process; and so it goes through almost the whole catalogue of foreign writers, each one claiming his own darling process as infallible, and condemning all others as not giving as good results as his own. It is equally singular also, that none but the originators of these respective processes can work them and get good results. The publication of every new process brings out a whole army of amateurs who besiege the journals for months with their troubles and inquiries. Thus it is almost impossible to put any reliance upon these crazy-headed enthusiasts, who are by far too near perfection (in their own opinion) to improve. The only process for keeping plates sensitive that I have found worthy of adoption is, to sensitize and use them as soon as possible while wet, and the sooner they are used the better; every minute they are allowed to remain out of the bath, before developing, deteriorates and destroys more or less of the good qualities of the resulting negative.
Tent for Field Use.
My tent for field use is made of two thicknesses of black cambric and two of yellow calico, stretched over three hoops, made of white oak, 5 feet in diameter. These hoops are placed two feet apart, and the tent when raised is about five and a half feet high, with a cone roof of two feet above that. A strong cord is attached to the top of the cone for the purpose of suspending the tent from the limb of a tree or any other convenient object. When we wish to operate inside we lift one edge of the bottom and stoop down so as to go under it, and when done we return in the same way. This plan operates quite well, but I shall build another soon which I can recommend as being far better for that purpose. Make a light frame about three feet wide by four and a half or five feet long, and high enough to stand up in. This should have as light a floor as can be made and be of the required strength to sustain the operator. Cover the whole with the cloth as described for the other tent. This tent should be mounted on two light wheels—”horsecart-fashion”—so that the artist can pack in apparatus and materials and go where and when he chooses. A door in the end will admit the operator and a yellow oil-cloth window will let in as much light as is needed to operate. When you arrive at a place where you wish to take an impression, it is but an instant’s work to take the wheels off your cart; your house then stands on the ground, and you can proceed with all the coolness of a May morning to take your picture. When done, the wheels are returned and you are in a rolling condition again. In this way you need no assistant and are your own “boss and hired hands,” which is not only the cheapest but most certain plan. Such a tent as this, with good chemicals, will “give fits” to any dry process. I will guarantee your correspondents that they will get ten gems with this arrangement where they would get none from any dry process ever yet originated. In a trip of one week to the White Mountains last year we had excellent success, although very high winds prevailed at the time, so as to injure all foliage in the foreground. The tent system is the only one, therefore, that I can recommend to others as worthy of their time and attention.
It is not to be understood by my remarks on foreign writers, that I condemn them as a class or on all points. But on the subject of dry collodion they seem entirely to have thrown common sense aside, and to have run crazy after something that will produce the best results with but little labor. I prefer, however, to lay out more labor if the results are anything better, as they are never too good at the best. Ours is a noble and difficult art, and only patience, perseverance, and toil can conquer it. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Backgrounds, &c.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:7 (Aug. 1, 1858): 102-104. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: The question is often asked—if it requires much study, skill and experience to make a good daguerreotypist or photographist. The opinion seems to prevail, that any man that is capable enough to focus the image of the camera, or coat a plate, is competent to do the business; because it is merely mechanical, composed of a certain amount of manipulations that will necessarily produce artistic results. This idea leads men into the business that are more of a disgrace to the community, to the art, and to themselves, than they are aware of. Men who are so gifted as to aspire to take a copy of the “human face divine,” for the sum of twenty-live cents, are likely to astonish the public with flaming circulars and wonderfully new processes that were discovered somewhere in the regions, of their own brains. Such men will flourish until the community takes them by the windpipe and forcibly stops the incoming and outgoing of their photographic breath. The community will do this only as it becomes educated by the works of the true artist, and learns to distinguish the difference between a picture that is a mere inexpressive images and one where every lineament seems to possess the breathing life and spirit of the friend from whom it was taken, and who now, perhaps,
Lies sleeping in that dreamless sleep
That knows no waking;
in which case the work of the real artist becomes a precious jewel that no price can purchase, while the other is only a source of regret that a better one had not been obtained while living. An incident in my experience will illustrate this point: — Not long ago a lady in deep mourning entered my reception-room. I saw at a glance that she was in deep trouble. Handing me a one-ninth ambrotype, she asked: “Can you do anything to make that look better?” Glancing at it I saw that it was an ambrotype on a single glass, that the black varnish had cracked, and had cracked the image at the same time. More than this, the whole picture had that peculiar yellow cast of an over-toned photograph, caused by the fixing not being well washed out before being finished. I replied, that I feared that it was beyond remedy. I saw the tears start into her eyes instantly, and she said: “That is a picture of my only daughter; we were in Boston last year, and I got that taken at one of the cheap establishments. It never looked much like her, and I have thought every day that I would get a better one taken; but I neglected it, and now she is gone, and that is all there is left of her. I would give anything if I could get as good a likeness of her as some you have here (pointing to some specimens), but it is too late now.” While she was speaking I was looking at the ambrotype, and I fancied it bore a certain resemblance to a person I had seen before. Not being certain, however, I carelessly remarked: “You will find a likeness of a beautiful lady in the gilt frame at the other end of the room; will you step there and look at it?” The picture referred to was a favorite daguerreotype specimen, made some four or five years before, and was a perfect embodiment of soul. Stepping forward she looked at it, and the instant her eyes took in the image she exclaimed: “Oh, dear!” and dropped into a chair, too much overcome to move or speak for several minutes. It was a likeness of her daughter, and one of uncommon beauty and perfection. I had taken it for a specimen, having kept it four years or more. The mother had never known or had forgotten it, and it was only through a good Providence that its existence was thus brought to her knowledge. The mother purchased the picture, was so well pleased with it that ten copies were taken and distributed among her friends, and I received the assurance that that family would never again patronize a cheap establishment on account of cheapness. But I have wandered from my subject; let me return. The study of backgrounds for sun-pictures is a seven years’ study, and a lifetime is not too long to master it. But how many there are that have no backgrounds to their pictures, and consequently no relief to the image. One operator uses a piece of blue cotton cloth hung as a curtain behind the sitter, so near as to be in focus of the instrument.   His pictures are taken “beautifully white all over,” and are wedged in between the folds of the aforesaid blue cambric, that being the only thing about them that is not flat; he would be angry enough to astonish you if you were to suggest a different one. Who is going to tell him anything?   Hasn’t he been in the business three months, and don’t he know what he is about? This is only one of a thousand who are in just the same category. My friend Veteran, however, is a different man. Veteran has been in the business ten years. Veteran has a taste for pictures—an eye for the beautiful. Veteran beautifies all he touches if he can have his way. But Veteran cannot always have his taste exercised, and Veteran is sometimes sorely puzzled to know what background to use to produce the most, artistic effect. Let us illustrate. Let us give you a pen-photograph of a scene in Veteran’s gallery. A fashionably-dressed young lady walks into Veteran’s reception-room. Veteran is there, and is as polite and attentive as ever. Young lady wants a picture, and wants it made very beautiful; takes off her bonnet and shawl, and proceeds to “prim.” Veteran ventures one look at her person from head to foot, and then runs his eye over his numerous backgrounds and talks to himself in this wise: Background No. 1 will give the best effect to that lady’s head, but it will not harmonize with her dress. No. 2 is too light. No. 3 is too dark. No. 4 is not just the thing. No. 5 is too gaudy. No. 6 is too gloomy for such a cheerful face;” and so he goes through the whole list of backgrounds, and then turns away disappointed, and asks young lady if she will not have a crayon head on No. 1. Lady says no decidedly. Veteran then suggests that perhaps she may have a shawl, or some other outer garment, to throw around her, that will “harmonize with the rest of the figure.” Lady has just got a new dress—made the latest fashion by Madam So-and-So. Lady is indignant—Iooks daggers at Veteran and says: “She don’t care anything about the harmony; all she wants is a good picture” (likeness). Veteran proceeds to despatch one; gets the impression about half taken, and lady says: “I want to look right straight forward, so that both of my ear-jewels will show.” Veteran don’t swear, but he thinks swear, which is just as profane, though not so noisy. Veteran jerks the plate-holder out of the camera, puts in another plate, and has, the picture in a twinkling; it is soon completed. Lady looks at it: “Oh, my! how handsome it is; how plain my dress shows, and only just see how fine the jewelry looks and how red my cheeks are!” Veteran shrugs his shoulders and says: “Beautiful, beautiful!” but ventures only one more look of disgust while pocketing the change. Lady whips on her shawl and bonnet, and is off in a twinkling to show her friends “Oh, such a love of a picture!” but which, in reality, is as far as possible removed from anything like beauty and harmony. Veteran is an enthusiastic admirer of a good picture and equally detests a poor one. Veteran, therefore, sits down in a fit of the blues after the lady has gone; he wishes he was anything but a “picture-taker,” Half an hour passes and he is no better. Suddenly the door opens and a stranger enters. He glances at the pictures for an instant, and then mutters: “Very good, very good!” half to himself and half to Veteran; then takes his hat off abruptly, turns to Veteran and says: “I will sit.” Veteran ventures one glance at his physiognomy and sees he is a splendid subject—chief among ten thousand. “What kind of picture will you have?” inquires Veteran. “As perfect a picture as the Art will produce, and just such a one as you would make if I were your best friend and you intended to keep the picture.” Veteran is in his glory now; how his eyes brighten! That man will leave Veteran’s gallery with a gem; everything will harmonize—background, figure, attitude, expression, and tone, will all blend so as to produce a harmonious whole. Veteran would rather spend an entire day than have one blemish, and he will do it. The beauty of a background is that it shall be distinctly indistinct, or rather that it shall represent nothing and represent fit distinctly. Anything that attracts the eye away from the subject is not in the best of taste. The background should be such that we shall not be conscious, while looking at the picture, that it possesses any background, unless our attention is particularly called to the fact.  Such an effect is what the true artist will strive to attain, and which will be belter appreciated alter the frenzy of the cheap picture fever has subsided. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The Saltpetre Subject again.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:8 (Aug. 15, 1858): 117-118.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Positive Collodion Process.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:10 (Sept. 15, 1858): 145-146.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The Saltpetre subject again.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:10 (Sept. 15, 1858): 150.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Photographic Trip to Memphremagog Lake.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:12-14 (Oct. 15 -Nov. 15, 1858): 179-181, 192-195, 211-213. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal. While you have been rusticating in the regions of game, we have been having a different experience. We were seated in our reception-room, watching the progress of business and events, and feeling the luxury of being able to sit up after illness, when a boy entered and handed us a note addressed to Messrs. Gage & Rowell. We opened it without any expectation of finding more than a quack photographic circular, when out dropped a neat card upon which was printed and written as follows:
Pass Messrs. Gage and Rowell, photographers, to Owl’s Head and back. Geo. A. Merrill, Supt. C. & P. R. R.
Here was a mystery indeed! We had made no application for a pass to Owl’s Head. We had seen owls of all descriptions, and had no desire to renew our acquaintance with that kind of ”quadruped.” What could it mean? Thus we cogitated for perhaps half an hour, and had arrived at no solution of the matter, when another boy entered and deposited another note, which was in this wise:
Owl’s Head Mountain House, Aug. 20, 1858. Messrs. Gage & Rowell. The Supt. C. & P. R. R. will pass you to this place and back. The best accommodations of my house are at your service (without charge) as long as you choose to stay, provided you bring your photographing Implements with you and that you will photograph some of our beautiful scenery. Come, by all means, as soon as portable. Truly yours, A. O. Jennings, Proprietor of the Mountain House.
Here was a solution of the mystery, then. “As long as you choose to stay without charge;” how that sounded in our ears, and how tempting to a poor worn-out photographer to rest and rusticate. But, how were we to go? We were but two days up from a dangerous illness; exposure might bring on a relapse, and we were not yet strong enough to think of photographing. Our partner here came to our aid by saying: “I can do the work while you rusticate and enjoy yourself.” Here, then, was a temptation; “rusticate and enjoy yourself” sounded like the music of a dream; and before we were well aware of it, we stood in the presence of that awe-inspiring personage, the family physician, and proceeded to ask his advice. “Well,” said the doctor, after we had explained the case, “we’ll see about that;” whereupon he folded his hands, turned round facing ourself, and looked us steadily in the eye for a whole minute without moving a muscle. Then he burst out with a hearty laugh and said: “Yes, go; only be prudent. Do not expose yourself, and the ride will do you good.”
Our next business was to make a sample of collodion as follows:
Ether (concentrated)                                7½ ounces
Alcohol                                                   6 ounces
Iodide of potassium* [*After many experiments I find that I prefer iodide of potassium for views, as it gives more strength and is sufficiently fine for that purpose. The above formula is only a modification of the formula published in the first edition of Humphrey’s Collodion Manual, and is the best formula I have ever used for views.]
                                                            53 grains.
Bromide of ammonium                           27 grains.
Gun cotton (French)                              90 grains.
Saturated solution of iodine in alcohol        3 drops.
Hydrobromic acid (Humphrey’s)               2 drops
Our bath was made in the usual way, 35 grains of silver to the ounce, slightly acidified with glacial acetic acid.
Developing.
Water                                                   1 ounce.
Sulphate of iron (pure)                           45 grains.
Acetic acid, No. 8                                  2 drachms.
Our next business was to collect our apparatus, which consisted of the conical tent described in Humphrey’s Journal, vol. X, page 85, and other necessary articles. Besides the collodion prepared for the occasion, we took a half pound made after the same formula, but which had stood about eight weeks and had become insensitive and useless. Our time was thus fully occupied until the arrival of the train, when we took the cars for Barton, 24 miles, where we arrived at 7 o’clock, p. m. Here we took the stage to Newport, distant 14 miles, and rode that distance through a heavy thunder-storm and almost total darkness, not a very pleasant trip for an invalid, nor an available subject for a photographer. We remained over night, and next morning took the steamer Mountain Maid down the lake, to the Owl’s Head Mountain House. The heavy masses of clouds trailed down the mountains and across the lake as the south wind swept them slowly along, and we had but a limited glimpse of the lake and scenery until we arrived at the Mountain House, when a sudden current of north wind swept the clouds away, and we beheld one of the most enchanting views that the world possesses. We spent the day at the Mountain House; Mr. Rowell, in the meantime, by invitation of Capt. Fogg, continued down the lake to look out more points of interest for pictures. The next day we took out our camera and took two or three near views, using the old collodion, to each ounce of which was added one drop of concentrated ammonia.* [*Since writing the above I see that Mr. Mathiot recommends the use of caustic potash in collodion which has become insensitive. The effect is the same in both cases, but it will not remedy collodion that is too old.] which restored it to working order. The negatives appeared good, but when we printed some, to try their qualities, we were not very well pleased with them, and concluded the collodion was too far gone to admit of producing good results. We accordingly threw it away as the readiest way to dispose of it. The next day we took two negatives of the Mountain House, the new collodion working to our satisfaction. The house being elevated from the wharf, we were obliged to raise the camera nearly 20 feet to get the right angle. If the camera had stood on the ground, the building, in the picture, would have the appearance of leaning back; therefore we built a platform, and the resulting pictures appear upright and not canted in any direction. We find it necessary to elevate the camera nearly one half the height of the building to produce the best effect. Our next attempt was a picture of Sherman’s Bay. The bay and boats are in the foreground, and the mountain behind shooting 3,000 feet into the air, its inaccessible sides covered with rocks and trees nearly to its summit. We secured two negatives of this location, by which time the Mountain Maid appeared in sight, on her way up the lake, and we prepared to take a negative of her on her arrival at the wharf. The camera was set so as to take in the end of the wharf and boat. The moment the boat touched the landing a plate was immersed in the bath. There was a strong breeze blowing and we had no hope of getting a good impression; .but as the captain of the boat was confident that he could lash her up so tight that she would not rock, we took one to show him he had miscalculated his abilities in that respect, and that he was not only out of his latitude, but in a Fogg indeed. As we expected, the impression proved an entire failure, the boat having lurched just in time to give two distinct images. On her trip up the next day, however, she was lashed more tightly to the wharf than before. Mr. Howell and the proprietor of the Mountain House exercised their Yankee ingenuity by placing a plank over the edge of the wharf and under the guard of the boat, so as to pry her off and steady her as much as possible, while I proceeded to expose the plate. The wind was blowing harder than the day previous and we were fearful of a failure. The exposure was 15 seconds with a four-fourth Holmes, Booth & Haydens’ camera, the back lens being removed and a one-third inch diaphragm inserted. The plate was removed to the house and developed; it proved an entire success. The boat was crowded with passengers fore and aft and the wharf lined with spectators, as you will see by the print before you.* [*At the close of these papers the editor of Humphrey’s Journal will examine a print from each of these negatives, with the privilege of criticizing them for the benefit of his readers.”] Capt. Fogg stands upon one of the paddle-boxes pointing to the summit of the mountain. A large share of the figures are recognizable, and your readers can form some idea of the sharpness of this picture from the fact that the captain’s watch-guard and seal, when magnified three diameters, are plainly discernible. (To be continued.)
[HJ 10:13 (Nov. 1, 1858): 193-195.] [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: The next day we crossed the lake to Skinner’s Island and took a view of Owl’s Head from that point, a mile and a half off. Pictures taken at that distance lack sharpness on account of the atmospheric effect. We took a picture of Sugar Loaf Mountain from this point, and then rowed to Long Island to get a picture of Balance Rock. This rock lies upon a point of ledge that runs out into the lake in such a way that it seems as if a child might topple it off. A pine tree leans over it in a manner which gives a picturesque effect. How this massive granite boulder was placed in this position is a matter of great conjecture. We found it impossible to get a good view from the land side. We look an impression, however, and from that point resolved to make another attempt. Your humble servant was taken sick with an attack of pleurisy on his return to the Mountain House, and had it not been for the prompt attention of the people of the House, this paper would never have been written. The next morning Mr. Rowell and an attendant crossed the lake again, prepared to make another trial. They took soundings, and found the water 23 feet deep where they had wished to place the camera. Their next operation was to cut three poles of the required length .and nail boards on to form a stand; this stand or chair was then floated out to the spot, and after a great deal of trouble they succeeded in sinking it, and piled stones on to keep it down. The weather was very rough, and rather than “run the risk of losing the camera, they attached a strong cord to it and fastened it to the shore. The camera being placed on the stand, a new difficulty arose on trying to focus. The sun shone into the camera tube and rendered it impossible to operate; and it would be three hours or more before they would get a good light. Not disheartened at this they rowed to Skinner’s Island and took two fine impressions of the Palisades, after which they returned and look two of the rock which were very satisfactory. The next day was devoted to taking a picture of the Smuggler’s Cave, on Skinner’s Island. The cave is in a ledge and on a level with the lake, so that the water flows in and out at times. They endeavored to get far enough away to take in the massive ledge above the entrance of the cave, but found it impossible. Thirty-five feet from the entrance the water is from five to ten feet deep. Ten feet farther out the ledge shoots down fifty or sixty feet. To place the camera on the edge of this submarine precipice, and take a picture, required some nerve and not a little discretion. A chair was made as the day previous, but it was found impossible to locate it from the boat, on account of the shelving rock and the constant motion of the boat. The word fail was not to be found in their dictionary; and a council of war was held accordingly, after which they stripped off their garments and went at it with a will. One plunged into the water up to his chin and located the chair, placed the camera on it, focussed it, and kept it there while the other sensitized a plate, waded out and exposed it, and then returned in the same way to develop it. Two fine impressions were taken in this way. The only thing to be regretted is that they did not take another picture to be entitled “Photographing under Difficulties,” as it might have been interesting to the fraternity, as showing the amount of pluck sometimes necessary to secure a good negative. If any of your readers have got the idea that there is no work in photographing, let them try it and see. Let them make a few trials of climbing mountains, carrying their apparatus; let them row across the lakes in all kinds of weather; and, finally, let them try photographing, a la nude, under water, and they will not be long getting over their false notions. Having recovered so as to be able to ride I returned home, leaving Mr. Rowell to finish the work. Three good negatives were made of the Mountain Maid, two of Capt, Fogg’s residence at Georgeville, two of Round Island from the Mountain House, which I think is one of the most beautiful natural combinations for a picture that I have ever seen; two distant views of the lake were taken, and some other interesting nooks. These were printed on Canson’s paper as follows:
Common salt                             120 grains.
Water                                         60 ounces.
The sheets were immersed in this and then dried.
Nitrate of silver                          240 grains.
Water                                           5 ounces.
This is made into ammonio-nitrate in the usual way.  No acid is added, as it destroys the life of the shadows.
Hyposulphite of soda                      8 ounces.
Water                                         16 ounces.
Nitrate of silver                            32 grains.
Chloride of gold solution* [*Dissolve one gold dollar, or its equivalent. In nitre muriatic acid; after the gold is dissolved, add an ounce and a-half of pulverized chloride of sodium (common salt); evaporate the acid in a sand-bath. Now dissolve the dry chloride of gold in 5 ounces of water; test it with litmus-paper; if it turns the paper red, add aqua ammonia, a drop at a time, and shake well; continue to do so until it is neutral, and then use as directed in the formula. The sand-bath is made by placing a small quantity of sand in a sheet iron dish; a porcelain saucer is placed on the sand, in which the gold is dissolved by the aid of a spirit lamp placed underneath. It should be done only in the open air, as the fumes are very destructive to life.]
                                                         1 fluid oz.
They were toned only until the chloride of silver was removed.  This is the only secret of obtaining a good toning. The artist should study to keep the gold and soda in such proportions that the print will arrive at the proper color at the same moment that the chloride of silver is all removed. If not enough chloride of gold is used, the print will have a ghastly red when the chloride of silver is all removed from the paper, and will dry out a dead cold tone. If, on the contrary, there is too much gold, the shades will assume too deep a black before the chloride of silver is all removed, and the print will be equally as dead and smutty as in the former case. Thus, if the photographer will only remember that the soda is simply the cleaning element, and that the gold is the agent to give the color, he will soon arrive, by experiment at a point where he can get the right color at the moment the cleaning is completed, and thus ensure permanent prints. If the toning of the print is thus properly done, and the washing quickly performed in a strong running stream of water, I have no-doubts but the print will be as permanent as any sun picture, if not as lasting as an engraving. I am now at Springfield, Vt., having come 100 miles to take a negative of the Falls in this village; you will hear with what success in my next. (To be continued)”]
[HJ 10:14 (Nov. 15, 1858): 211-213.] [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: My last letter was mailed to you from Springfield, Vt., where I went for the purpose of taking negatives of the Falls of Black River, at that place. This is a village of about 1,500 inhabitants, the river dividing the village in the center. The river is broad and still above the village, but as it approaches it grows more turbulent until it reaches the center of the village, where it takes its final plunge of one hundred feet, nearly perpendicular, making a fall of about two hundred and fifty feet in a quarter of a mile. The cliffs on each side, just below the main fall, are about one hundred and fifty feet high. The bridge that connects the two portions of the village (about sixty feet long) rests upon the cliffs directly over the main fall. Standing upon the bridge, you may look at the rushing waters above, and the roaring cataract below, while the cloud of spray that rushes up from the narrow gorge ascends even to the tops of the tall poplars that line its banks. This is undoubtedly one of the wildest and most romantic falls in this country, combined with one of the neatest of New England villages. Mr. Powers, the ambrotypist at this place, gave me permission to use his laboratory, and I was soon fitted up and in working order. The first impression was a view of the upper falls, as seen from the bridge; it proved to be satisfactory. Two more negatives were taken of points below; but it was found impossible to get at the main fall and bridge without building a temporary bridge across the stream, as the camera could only be placed in the middle of the narrow chasm, where the waters rushed down with the speed of a mill-race. With some difficulty I found a man who was willing to undertake the job. The fire-wardens kindly volunteered the use of their fire-ladders, and by noon the next day, with the help of two assistants, he had bridged a narrow point of rocks in the bed of the stream, so that I could place my camera there and get the desired point of view. While this was doing I had not been idle. I had climbed to the roof of a barn that was built on the very edge of the cliff, several rods below the bridge. Here I contrived to fasten the camera so as to take in the bridge, a portion of the main fall under it, and all the fall above, with the buildings lining its banks. I think this makes the wildest natural view that I have ever seen. The Devil’s Fall, in this picture, is as great a curiosity as the Old Man of the Mountain at Franconia. This is formed by the water pouring over the rocks, and it certainly looks more human than many cheap ambrotypes that I have seen. This negative being taken, I climbed down the cliff and placed my camera on the bridge of ladders, and took a negative of the main fall and bridge. By climbing along the ledges I succeeded in finding two other points of interest, of which I took negatives that were satisfactory. The next day was spent in taking a view of the village and a view of Black River Hotel, with some other good scenes, making ten good negatives in all. I was sorry that other matters compelled so short a stay, as there were many other points of interest, perhaps enough in this place to keep a photographer busy for a month. My friend. Mr. Powers, had his patience put to the test by the crowded visitors who thronged his gallery, as much perhaps to see the man with the long beard, as to examine the prints which I had printed out and hung up as specimens. However, as the orders for prints flowed in abundantly, I was willing to be considered the “day’s talk and wonder.” I presume there was not a child four years old in the village but knew who I was, where I came from, what I was there for, and when I was going away. There is nothing that will create a crowd in a country village like a photographer with his “yellow tent and “camera.” Mr. Powers has long been a veteran daguerreotypist (He takes Humphrey’s Journal), and is a good artist; and it is only to be regretted that he has been taken down with the cheap picture fever; but as he is recovering, and has resolved to be wiser and not expose himself to that terrible disease again, it is to be hoped that his fraternal shadow will never be less. Leaving Springfield, I took a trip to the little village of New York, to see if any improvements could be picked up in that quiet little place, an account of which may perhaps be found in a future No. of the Journal. Here I procured an orthoscopic view camera, with folding bellows-box for plates 15 by 15 inches. As these cameras are reputed to give better perspective and render distances better, I resolved to try one and note the result. The tube is fixed with an ingenious diaphragm that opens and shuts like the human eye; all the operator has to do is to move a small knob on the outside of the tube to get any size of opening that he chooses at an instant’s notice. A scale, with figures, is placed alongside the knob, that gives the different sizes of opening from one-fourth to one inch. The tube was manufactured by C. C. Harrison; the box by the Scoville Manufacturing Co. On my return I took several views of the scenery at Westminster, Vt., and Walpole, N. H., and then visited Lebanon, N. H., where my former partner, Mr. F. Rowell, has located his business. Several views were taken here, after which I returned well rewarded for the trouble and hard labor necessary to secure the negatives which I brought home with me. While operating at Westminster I found nearly one-fourth of my bath precipitated by the use of impure glacial acetic acid. This acid I find the most difficult of any to procure in a pure state. There is not one dealer in twenty who sells an article that is fit to use. Most of it is put up in bottles with cork stoppers, and is nothing more than a poor sample of No. 8, having a dull, putrid, sickening smell. The pure article has a sharp sour smell, with none of the “putrid flavor.” The French is the only reliable article that I know of (Wittmann & Poulenc), which comes in glass stoppered bottles. I have had more trouble in procuring this article than in all the other chemicals I use. Many a good sample of silver has been condemned, when made into a bath, on account of the acid which has been added to it.
Erratum.—In the note at the foot of page 194, in the recipe for making chloride of gold, it should read—one half ounce of pulverized chloride of sodium, Instead of “an ounce and a-half,” as rendered by the printer.—F. B. G.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Cleaning Glass.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:15 (Dec. 1, 1858): 225. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: It has been found very difficult to clean glass for negatives so the roughly as to leave no organic matter on the surface to cause fogginess and streaks. I have tried nearly all the various methods I have seen proposed, and have never been quite satisfied until I adopted the method I am now using. New glasses should first be immersed in nitric acid and water (1 part acid to 20 of water), and rubbed the roughly and then rinsed in clean water, after which it is to be wiped dry on a clean linen towel.* [*The towels should be Washed in a solution of sal soda, and rinsed in several clean waters to remove all greasiness. Soap is not fit for that purpose.] Now lay the glass on a clean sheet of paper or in a clean vice, and drop on a few drops of burning fluid which is to be briskly rubbed off with a clean tuft of cotton flannel until the surface is dry and smooth. I believe this ensures a chemically clean surface, or as near as is attainable. This would not at first be thought a cleaning element; but, on second thought, there appears a plausible theory “thereunto belonging,” as the lawyers say. The turpentine in the fluid has a certain amount of adhesiveness. When placed on a glass it adheres to the organic matter on the glass. The cotton absorbs the fluid and gathers up the organic matter at the same time. Try it, photographers, and see if you are not pleased with its effect. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “To Transfer Ambrotypes.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:15 (Dec. 1, 1858): 225. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: The picture should be taken on a heavy film, and a trifle lighter than for the ambrotype. Dry it in the usual way, after which pour on a solution composed of 30 or 40 drops of nitric acid in 2 oz. of alcohol; let it remain on the plate while you clean the paper or other black surface, which can be done by rubbing it with pulverized starch or fine flour until it is perfectly clean. Then apply the cleaned surface to the picture immediately, and remove all air-bubbles by gently rubbing the back of the paper or other material, after which a weight is applied to keep the surfaces together until the alcohol has evaporated, when the picture will peel off the glass without any trouble. The time required to perform the operation is from 10 minutes to half an hour, according to the temperature of the room at the time. Care should be taken to have no powdery silver on the surface, as that would prevent a perfect adhesion of the surfaces. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Poisonous Effects of Cyanide of Potassium.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:16 (Dec. 15, 1858): 241-242. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal:, At various times it has been asserted in Humphrey’s Journal, and other publications devoted to the photographic art, that cyanide of potassium is a dangerous poison, and that it should never be used. On the other hand, it has been equally as strongly urged that this is only a whim, and that the fumes of the potassium are harmless. Still others have qualified the statement by saying that it is poisonous to some, and not to others. Having had my attention called to this matter by sudden and unaccountable inflammation of the throat and mouth, accompanied with dizziness and “great difficulty of breathing, I instituted a series of experiments and inquiries to ascertain if the sickness was caused by this chemical. After my recovery I laid the potassium aside for four weeks, using hyposulphite of soda instead. Having occasion to make a picture extremely white, l tried the cyanide of potassium for fixing the impression. Although not exposed more than one minute of time to the weak fumes, I felt an immediate return to the symptoms of the dizziness and inflamination. One subsequent trial,-Three weeks after, produced the same effect; and I have since fully resolved not to use it at all in future. I then commenced making inquiries of other operators; and, out of twenty, I found five who had been extremely sick with the same description of disease. Ten more, of the twenty, had felt the symptoms I describe; the other five did not know whether they had experienced any bad effects from its use, as they had not been long in the business, and never had thought about it. On one occasion a lady accidentally got a silver stain on her finger, and I gave her a lump of the potassium to remove it with. The fumes produced such instantaneous and extreme prostration that she had to be carried from the room. I have been accustomed to fix my pictures where my customers could watch the operation as a matter of curiosity, and I recollect many instances where they’ spoke of feeling queer from the effect of the fumes. Considering all these facts, in connection with what has been previously published, I think there need be no doubt that it is poisonous to all, and that its use is to be avoided in all cases.  The appearance of the symptoms of poison from its fumes is only a matter of time, and not of certainty. The symptoms may appear instantaneously, as in the case of the lady referred to ‘above; or they maybe delayed months, as in my own case; or even for years, as in another case which I have seen. The length of time that it takes to make its appearance is governed by the susceptibility of the individual; but the result will be just as certain and just as destructive in one case as the other. Even if it be delayed until the eleventh hour, it will come. I am better pleased with the results which I obtain, both positive and negative, by the hypo than by the cyanide. With the collodion, the recipe for which I shall give in a future communication, the most unsurpassable whites are obtained in ambrotypes, thereby rendering the use of the cyanide entirely unnecessary.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Albumen Printing.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:16 (Dec. 15, 1858): 242. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: It is amusing to see how little reliance can be placed in a large share of what is published in foreign journals relating to improvements in the photographic art. I have been very much surprised at this, and, after making all due allowances for climate and different manipulations, I am compelled to think that much is published for the sake of publishing, and not for the benefit of the art. In a late No. of Humphrey’s Journal, in an extract from a French publication, it is stated that albumenized sheets are readily coagulated by floating them, back down, on the surface of boiling water; and that sheets so treated will not discolor the nitrate bath in sensitizing. Now I had long been in search of some such process whereby the stability of the bath might be preserved. I have laid awake nights and dreamed, with my eyes open, of some means to accomplish this desirable end; but have never been able to attain it. When, therefore, this process appeared I was eager to try its virtue; but, not being in a condition to do so for several days, I built air-castles during that time of beautiful albumen prints and never-failing baths of colorless nitrate of silver. When the time arrived I floated the sheets as directed, and then proceeded to printing: for two days the bath worked beautifully, and I was in ecstasies. At the end of three days, however, the creeping death began to show itself, and at the end of a week the bath was as black as the visage of a real African, and the prints were spoiled. The discoloring of the bath was not remedied in the least—only delayed. Thus my air-castles and beautiful process were demolished at once, and the latter pronounced not half as good as it purported to be?. Who is the lucky man that will tell us of some process to render the albumen bath permanent? F. B. Gage.”]

 GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Photolithographs.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:19 (Feb. 1, 1859): 290-291. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal. I was very much surprised to receive from you several prints of this new style of picture from a negative by my late partner, Mr. RowelI. Judging from these specimens, the process is being very much improved and will, no doubt, claim the attention of our operators. For many purposes they are already supplanting the photograph, and I think are yet destined to rank high, I know nothing of the details of the process—whether it will be generally practicable, or whether it will be confined to a few; but I am very much pleased with the results already produced, and hope to hear and see more…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Enlarging Photographs.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:19 (Feb. 1, 1859): 292-294.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Improved Negative and Positive Process.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:20 (Feb. 15, 1859): 306-307. [“To make Absolute Photographic Alcohol. To 1 gallon of Atwood’s or other alcohol, in a tall open-mouthed bottle, add 3 lbs. of unslaked lime in lumps; shake it occasionally for ten or twelve days, or as long as the lime continues to slack, keeping it well corked. At the end of that time it may be filtered through filtering paper, from the superabundance of lime, into another tall bottle, where it should be allowed to settle until it is free from all appearance of lime, when it is ready for use.
Ambrotype Collodion.
Formula.—
Absolute alcohol (as above)                    4 ounces.
Ether (concentrated)                              1 ounces.
Iodide of cadmium                                 25 grains.
Bromide of cadmium                              17 grains. 
Gun-cotton enough to give a heavy film. It will probably take double the amount generally used. Before using, add film-condensing solution according to directions.* [*If the film-condensing solution is not procurable, one drop of hydrobromic acid may be used in each oz. of collodion to prevent fogging. Or, better still; add one part of glacial acetic acid to 7 parts of absolute alcohol. From 4 to 8 drops of this to each oz. of collodion will keep back the high lights and insure a better-toned negative. If there is any water present in this collodion, it will produce a reticulated film; if free from water; it will flow like oil and produce a beautiful glossy film free from ridges and any imperfections.]
Negative Collodion.
Formula.—Absolute alcohol (as above)                4 ounces.
Ether (concentrated)                                          1 ounce.
Iodide of cadmium                                             20 grams.
Bromide of cadmium                                          10 grams.
Enough cotton to give a heavy film. Film-condensing solution according to directions.
Nitrate Bath, 45 grains to the ounce of water.
Developing.
Formula.–Sulphate of iron                                  3 ounces.
Water                                                               1 quart
Acetic acid, No. 8                                              6 ounces.
Adaptation of the Developing. The strength of the bath is all the time changing, and the developing that will work well to-day may not work at all to-morrow. If you cannot procure satisfactory delineations, weaken the developer with water until they suit you. I adapt my developing every day or two, and can tell in an instant what change need be made. Make your collodion and bath by the formulae, and then don’t tamper with them, as any desired result may be produced by changing the strength of the developing. Too strong developing destroys the delineations, too weak gives smutty lights. After being in use some weeks there will be an accumulation of alcohol in the bath when this collodion is used, so that the developing will not flow over it and develop the negative evenly. This “crawling” of the developing can only be remedied by evaporating the alcohol from the bath; it can be done by placing the solution in a strong open-mouthed bottle: place the bottle in an iron or earthen vessel containing water, and heat it gradually until the alcohol is evaporated. This operation is attended with some little trouble, but after becoming accustomed to it I find this process has many advantages which repay more than ten times over this one drawback on its practicability. The alcohol can be evaporated after the day’s work, and the bath will be ready to use in the morning after filtering. Alcohol should never be used in developing, as it precipitates the iron out of the solution, and is the cause of many of the holes in the skies so generally complained of.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Enlarging Photographs.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:21 (Mar. 1, 1859): 323-325. [(Includes a letter from A. A. Thayer (Jefferson, OH) and a letter from D. A. Woodward, inventor of the solar camera.) “To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: Since the publication of my process for enlarging photographs I have received sundry letters on that subject, which I can best answer through your pages, as they contain or require information important to many of your subscribers. I quote the following from a letter from D. A. Woodward, inventor of the solar camera: — “The great length of time you require cannot be accounted for, in my mind, unless you are making use of a small camera. If this is the case, it would have been proper for you to have stated it. You must be aware that the time required for a small-sized solar camera to do its work is much greater than that required by a large one, not only on account of the quantity of sunlight passed through the large condensers of the large size being so much greater, but also on account of the operator being able to use negatives much larger, say two-thirds instead of one-fourth. Now the time of printing is diminished just in proportion to the decrease of the magnifying. Consequently, a one-half or two-thirds image will print quicker than a one-fourth. Another cause would be the use of negatives over-developed, or of too dense a structure. I have been astonished sometimes at the result of a negative with no intensity whatever. I use a largo-sized camera and negatives on one-half or four-fourth plates; in the latter case the image must be reduced to about a two third. Or a better rule, is to make the image on the glass plate as large as possible, at the same time not too large for the condensing lent to cover. In taking the negative, to ensure sharpness, I diaphragm the tube and focus with a strong magnifying eye-glass. The time for printing a life-size, say 18 x 22, never exceeds one hour, oftener not over 40 minutes. My paper is prepared as follows: Float it or immerse it in a bath of muriate of ammonia, 10 grs. to the oz., 1 ½ gr. of pure gelatine, ammonio-nitrate brushed carefully on, 100 grs. to the oz. I hope you will excuse me for trespassing on your time; but I fear your letter might deter many from adopting the process merely on account of the apparent time consumed. Where time is an object, it would certainly be economical to use one of the large size.”
I should judge from Mr. Woodward’s letter that he is not aware that the process published by me was given in answer to letters inquiring how certain pictures, now on exhibition in New York, were produced. I confined myself entirely to giving that process, intending to resume the subject again and give other processes by which different results and different time is obtained. I use the small-size camera, and have made albumen prints in one hour; ammonio-nitrate in one hour and a-half with some negatives. The best results are not obtainable, however, with negatives of this class. In the printing-frame a negative should be opaque enough in the shadows, so that, when it is placed over the sheet, nothing, or scarcely anything, while can be seen through the negative. The lights of the negative should possess just enough more opacity to render the highest lights perfectly white when the shadows are sufficiently printed with suitable gradations between the highest lights and deepest shades. The same principles hold good in making a negative for the solar camera, only the whole structure need not be so dense. The deepest shadows should be dense enough to possess delineations, and the highest lights should be just enough more dense to leave the print perfectly white. Any departure from this will produce inferior results; and if the time be shortened, it is at the loss of some good quality which the picture should possess. Mr. Woodward remarks:
“I have been astonished sometimes at the result of a negative with no intensity whatever.” Mr. Woodward scarcely meant to convey the meaning which his words do here convey, because an ambrotype or positive picture possesses more or less intensity, and a negative with no intensity whatever would give no contrast of light and shade in a print. I rather understand him to mean, that some negatives which appear exceedingly transparent will produce much better results than could be expected of them. I have noticed the same thing. This results from the color of the negative in connection with the fineness of the particles of silver which compose it. Such negatives do not apparently possess as much density, but if the contrasts in the prints are produced, it is apparent that they do possess the intensity of others apparently more intense. In regard to the comparative time of printing in the different sizes of instruments I am not prepared to judge, as I have only used the small size. The less the print is magnified, the more rapid the printing, consequently the large size will print quicker than the other—how much quicker I am not able to state. I am inclined to believe that the smaller instruments will produce the best results as far as delicacy is concerned, though I may be in error on this point.
A. A. Thayer, of Jefferson, Ohio, writes:—
“I, being one among the many readers and subscribers of Humphrey’s Journal who look eagerly for articles from the pen of F. B. Gage, and having waited (it seemed) a long while for the promised article on enlarging photographs, to ascertain the kind of instrument used, I now take the liberty to address you, though a stranger, asking your opinion of the megascopic camera, if it will do all it is said to do. The solar camera costs so much that, if the megascopic camera will do the work as well, I will buy that.” In reply to Mr. Thayer I can only tell him how I managed to procure my solar camera. It is an old motto that “A singed cat dreads the fire,” and having been singed in small matters in former years, I have learned to trust nobody’s eyes but my own in matters of this description. When the solar camera was first advertised I placed the price of a camera in the hands of the Express Co. in this place, receiving their receipt for the same. This receipt I forwarded to the agent who advertised the camera, telling him that he might send on an instrument, and if it proved what it purported to be, I would keep it and the Express Co. would send him the money. If it was not what it purported to be, the Express Co. would return his instrument and deliver the money to me. The instrument was sent and proved satisfactory, and continues so to this day. Let Mr. Thayer procure both instruments by this means, and try them side by side, and he will soon see the difference between a real invention and a pretended one. There are several megascopic cameras about here, but I have neither seen or heard of an ammonio-nitrate print being made with them.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Apparatus for freezing Alcohol from Water.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 10:24 (Apr. 15, 1859): 371-372.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Iodizing and Bromizing Solution.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:1 (May 1, 1859): 4-5.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Improved Toning Bath for the Ammonio-Nitrate Process.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:4 (June 15, 1859): 49-50.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Apparatus for Distilling Water.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:4 (June15, 1859): 53-54. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: Some time ago a correspondent in your Journal gave a description of an apparatus for distilling water. Having improved the construction so as to render it more efficient, I give a description of it here that all may cheaply avail themselves of this necessary article in the photographic laboratory. A tin band is made to fit tightly to the top of a tea-kettle, or any other convenient kettle for the purpose. To the top of this band is soldered a disk or base 15 inches in diameter, with a hole 1½ inch in diameter in the middle, for the steam to rise up through. The upper side of this base or disk is made slightly convex, so that the liquid may run towards the outer edge. A rim, 1 inch high, is soldered to the outer edge of the base, and a tin cone, 18 inches high, is fitted tightly to the inside of this band or rim. A pipe at the outer edge of the base conveys the condensed water off into an earthen or glass vessel. The steam, rising through the hole in the center of the base, condenses on the under surface of the cone, runs down until it reaches the base, and is then conducted off through the pipe. The cone would soon become too warm to condense all the steam. To remedy this, a rim of tin, 8 inches or more high, is soldered to the lower edge of the cone, thus forming a vessel outside the cone, which is filled with cold water. The cone, being surrounded by this body of cold water, will condense for several hours. When the water outside the cone becomes too hot, it is draws off through the faucet…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Photography on Wheels.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:7 (Aug. 1, 1859): 97-99. [(F. B. Gage made stereo views which, presumably, E. & T. H. Anthony distributed.) “No. 1.” “Ours is a progressive art. Photography, like all kindred arts, must pass through its infancy before it can arrive at a riper age. The first stage of its existence is already past. What at first seemed only designed for amusement, has grown into utilitarian proportions. The demand for its aid in many branches of business has led to the adoption of various improvements for carrying it on, and one of these will be here described under the guise of Photography on Wheels. The first stage of photography was essentially a stage of photography on foot—a slow and uncertain method of progression. Photography on foot, with dry plates and dry results, was the peculiarity of the first stage. But photography on foot was often disappointed at the end of its journey to find that the exposed plates had not been properly exposed, or that they would not develop at all, or, if properly exposed, streaks and stains were found to be the only recompense of many a hard day’s labor. Then again, after the plate had been properly exposed and developed into a good negative, photography on foot often saw it slip entirely from the plate in the operation of fixing, thus at the last moment eluding the baffled amateur, and blasting in an instant his fondest anticipations.
Then there was photography on foot with wet plates and its tent and other consequent inconveniences. Photography in this guise was laborious photography, with immense satisfaction and but little pay. Then there is photography with its dark camera-box and calico sleeves, through which the harnessed operator can manipulate about as comfortably and conveniently as a diver could swim in a shirt of mail. But these things have had their beginning, and, although it is hoped their end is far distant, yet their novelty is past, and they must yield the palm to their new competitor, photography on wheels.
Having been applied to, by a firm in New York, to furnish them with a set of stereoscope negatives, and having formed a contract to that end, I conceived the idea of placing photography on wheels, for its more rapid and convenient transportation from place to place. For this purpose I applied to a carriage-maker and gave him a plan of a chemical room on wheels. This plan was pronounced available, and the construction of the carriage was immediately commenced; in a short time it stood at my door complete and ready to receive its supplies. The following is a description of this carriage complete:
The running part is nothing more than what is usually found is a common one-horse buggy, made light but strong. On this running part rests the body supported by steel elliptic springs. The body part is 5½ feet long inside, 2 feet 10 inches wide inside, boarded tightly all around to the height of 16 inches. At the height of 16 inches from the floor the body it made to project 7 inches on each side. From the outer edge of this projection is raised a light elastic framework of wood which is coveted with black enameled cloth. The height inside, from the floor to the roof, is 6 feet 4 inches. A door at the rear end affords ingress and egress. An adjustable stairs is attached by hooks, so that it can be removed and placed inside at a moment’s notice. At the forward end is the seat of the driver, which, like Goldsmith’s drawers, is so contrived ” a double debt to pay,” that when we are about to take a view it suddenly expands: and is as suddenly transformed from a seat outside into a sink and shelf inside, making a convenient table for our bottles and to work on.
A row of cases, inside at the bottom of the carriage, is contrived to hold a share of the necessary bottles; and all those which we are using daily are suspended in leather sockets at the side of the carriage, all duly labeled so that any one can be found in a moment, used, and returned to its proper place. 29X11 yellow glass windows supply the inside with light. These windows are so buttoned in that they can be removed in a moment and a free ventilation effected.
Thus we have a room, when closed up for travelling, which measures only 4 feet 2 inches long by 4 feet wide, but when operating it expands to 6 feet 4 inches long by 4 feet wide, and 6 feet 4 inches high. The sink is 16 inches wide by 2 feet in inches long, with table of the same dimensions.
This forms a laboratory of sufficient size to enable us to work with certainty and despatch, and we find it very convenient. The inside is painted yellow, so that if any light should happen to get through the enameled cloth it is colored and loses actinic force before it reaches the sensitive plate. Thus armed and equipped with the necessary chemicals and apparatus, we attach the faithful horse, mount the box, and drive where our views are to be made. The horse is taken from the carriage, a pail of water is procured, the camera taken out, and in a few minutes the plate is sensitized and the view taken and developed. If the negative is not just what is wanted it is known at once, and another taken to supply its place.
If the sun shines very hot we usually contrive to get in the shade of some tree or building, which we can generally do. But if the day be cool, the sun shining on the black surface of the carriage helps to keep up a good temperature inside. When the view is secured, the horse is attached, and we are off for another point of interest. If perchance the view lies beyond the reach of our carriage, we take out the tent which we carry inside and descend from photography on wheels to photography on foot. We drive as near the spot as we can, and then proceed to our task with the tent. Or, if we choose, we can immediately prepare a dry plate, take only our camera, and climb the crags or wade the swamps as we like.
In our excursions we carry a stereoscopic camera, of C. C. Harrison’s make, for instantaneous views; also an orthoscopic lens, same maker, for plates 15 x by 15 inches. We have three baths, one for instantaneous views—the composition of the solution being unknown to us as it was furnished by the firm for whom we travel: these baths all have water-tight covers. The solution in the large bath is made with 30 grains of silver to the ounce, neutralized with caustic potash, and then rendered sufficiently acid, with chemically pure nitric acid, to ensure results free from fogginess. The third bath is made in the same manner and with the same proportions, and is kept in the best possible condition for stereoscopic views. We have different collodions always present. One sample is made as follows:
Ether                                        10 ounces.
Alcohol, 95 per cent                   12 ounces.
Iodide of potassium                      5 and a-half grs. to each oz
Gun cotton                                  6 and a-half grs. to each oz
Another sample is made in the same manner, only that 2 oz. of absolute alcohol are used to each oz. of ether. Another sample is made like the last, with the addition of one grain of bromide of ammonium to each oz. For developing agents we carry both the iron and pyrogallic acid, and use each as occasion seems to require. Before starting on a trip our glass is thoroughly cleaned and packed away in grooved boxes, ready to be drawn out and coated at any time; nevertheless we carry the cleaning materials with us, as we may exhaust our stock before we return. The glass is first immersed in nitric acid, 1 part to 10 of water, and wiped dry with a clean towel, after which it is polished with burning fluid and Canton flannel. The commercial fluids are frequently contaminated with gummy matter; therefore it is better to make it, which is easily done:
Rectified spirits of turpentine      1 ounce.
Atwood’s alcohol                        4 ounces.
Half an ounce of ether may be added if preferred, but it is not important. I have the assurance of many experienced artists who have used it, that this method is the best ever devised for removing all impurities from the surface which are not inherent in the glass. We are about starting on a trip, and the readers of this Journal may hear from Photography on Wheels in a future number.”]
[HJ (Nov. 15, 1859): 209-210.] [(*Note.—Mr. Gage writes us that he was unable to send the above account sooner, in consequence of a severe illness caused by being thrown from his carriage by the viciousness of his horse.”)
“No. 2.” “Tip-Top House, Mount Washington, Sept., 1859. To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: Having made several trips in my photographic carriage, and found it very convenient and satisfactory, I propose to give you an account of the .present excursion to this elevated and stormy region. We left St. Johnsbury on the 10th of August. A ride of thirty miles brought us to the famous Franconia Notch of the mountains. This is a narrow pass, through which we ride for eight or ten miles, with rugged cliffs rising on each side to the height of three or four thousand feet from the road. At the entrance to this pass is the Profile House, now filled with its hundreds of fashionable boarders. It derives its name from a profile on one of the cliffs about a quarter of a mile from the House. This cliff rises to the height of more than two thousand from the road, and almost at its summit are several sharp projections of rock that form a fine profile. As we stand on the road and focus our stereoscopic camera on this profile, the image on the ground glass appears about one-eighth of an inch long; the profile is, however, eighty feet long from the top of the forehead to the chin. From this some idea can be formed of the rock.
On two previous occasions we made an attempt to take a good negative of this profile, our chemicals being each time in fine working order; strange to say, however, we made an entire failure, the impressions being unaccountably foggy. After a great deal of conjecture as to the cause, we at last concluded that it could only be produced by the water of the lake which we used to reduce the strength of our developing. The water appeared to be very clear and pure, and we had no thought of its being the cause of the fogging until it was found to smell putrid of fish, and, night being near, the attempt had to be abandoned.
On the present occasion, however, we expected to succeed to our liking. We arrived on the ground in the morning, but the smoky atmosphere obliged us to give up at once all hope of getting a good negative on that day. We, therefore, continued our journey down to the Flume House. From here we drove half a mile into the woods, taking our tent and other necessary apparatus; after a walk of another half mile we were in the celebrated “Flume.” This is a narrow and deep passage, formed by a small stream in the rocks, varying from ten to thirty feet in width and from thirty to one hundred and fifty feet in depth. These perpendicular walls of wild broken rock, dripping with water, are overhung with trees, so that in the deepest part it is at least two hundred feet from the bottom of the rocks to the tops of the trees. The weather being cloudy, we found it impossible to get light enough to work; to after stowing our traps under a shelving rock, we adjourned to the Flume House to wait a change of weather.
A two-days’ storm came on, not wild and dreary, but warm and drizzling, which kept us from our photographic labors. On the rooming of the third day we were favored with a bright sun and clear sky, and at once repaired to the spot to take the “flume;” as it is half a mile long, we could only take detached views, and our first trial was of the “hanging rock.” This is a large granite boulder weighing several tons, which had rolled from the top and lodged about half way down, the cliffs being too narrow to admit of its falling further. Here it hangs, about forty feet above our heads as we walk up the flume, and as we pass directly under it we instinctively quicken our steps, dreading lest the enormous mass should come thundering down and crush us beneath it.
In a short time our tent was raised, and we prepared and exposed a plate with the full aperture; we exposed it three minutes, and on development it proved much under-exposed. Another trial of six minutes proved it to be the right exposure and developed a fine negative. This exposure of six minutes was 120 times longer than we would have exposed in the open country, from which you can imagine the depth and gloom of the place. Securing three other negatives of the flume and cascade above it, we returned to the Profile House. The next morning we rode to Echo Lake, half a mile distant, a sheet of water about half a mile in diameter, famous for its wonderful echo. Here in the deep woods, at its edge, we found an Indian and his squaw who had migrated from Oregon. We took a negative of them in their Indian costume, as they stood before their wigwam. There being nothing more of interest to take, we went up to the summit of Mount Cannon, a trifling climb of 3,500 feel from the Profile House. We were above vegetation when we arrived at the top, the wind sweeping over the desolate rocks. Mount Lafayette seemed not more than a mile oft, but in reality its summit was nearly three miles distant, it being 1,200 foot higher than Mount Cannon. This mountain is named from two massive rocks, so thrown together as to resemble a mounted cannon when seen from the road at its feet. The resemblance is perfect enough to terrify a hostile army who might attempt to pass through the notch below, unless previously aware of its true character. We descended the mountain, remained over night in the Profile House, and in the morning started for the Crawford or White Mountain Notch. A three days’ rain convinced us that between the wind and the weather there is not much comfort or profit for photographers in this changeable region.
The wind was very high on the fourth day, but nevertheless we took our tent out and climbed the ravine west of the house for half a mile, where we found four successive cascades of the wildest and most picturesque nature imaginable. They have only been discovered within this year, and the deep gloom which the overhanging forest throws down upon them adds to the cool pleasantness of the place. Here in this deep forest of trees hundreds of years old there was not a breath of wind to stir the branches, although we could hear it roar on the mountain above and through the open country below. We erected the tent, and succeeded during the day in making negatives of four of these cascades, the best day’s work of the season. The exposure in the stereoscopic camera, with half-inch aperture, would average one and a-half minute, which was thirty or forty times longer than it would require to take the interior of many buildings. The negatives proved to possess the most gratifying qualities, and are considered by ourselves the best things we have yet done. That night we slept at the Crawford House to dream of our proposed ascension to Mount Washington. F. B. Gage. (To be continued.)”]
[HJ (Dec. 15, 1859): 241-243.] [“No. 2.—Concluded.” “Tip-Top House, Mount Washington, Sept, 1959.” “To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal. We were up early and proceeded to pack our chemicals, camera, and fixtures in two compact bundles, to be taken along with us. At nine o’clock we were mounted on Canadian ponies, each having a bundle weighing about twenty-five pounds before us in the saddle, where we held it during the journey up the mountain. Then, with a company of thirty-four others, we struck off into the bridle path. Nine miles of such horseback riding as that was no very pleasurable job while encumbered with glass ware, as we were. Up, up, through woods and clouds, winding around and climbing the rocks, on the verge of chasms and ravines, we held our way for four hours, until we arrived at the summit.
The day was beautifully warm, the mountain was enveloped in clouds as we ascended, and occasionally we got glimpses of the glorious valleys below, as the clouds for a few moments opened and closed again. There was no vegetation for the last four miles; the only thing to be seen was the granite rock in fragments of all sizes, from the pebble stone up to those weighing thousands of tons!
How is it possible for horses to climb over these rocks, hurled together in the wildest disorder, is more than I can comprehend; yet they do it, and seldom injure themselves or their riders.
Arrived at the Tip-Top House, we proceeded to occupy apartments previously engaged there. After dinner we took out the camera to take a view of the rude stone-house and its granite surroundings. A plate was sensitized and exposed with an unsatisfactory result; another, and then another followed with the same result. We were thunderstruck and completely puzzled, that our bath and collodion — the same which worked so splendidly only the day before – should now refuse to produce even an indifferent negative. But even the skies would not develop, by any device, and there was a want of intensity that betokened trouble ahead.
Mr. Anderson, an amateur, from Pennsylvania, who travels with and assists me for his own amusement, began to get discouraged at the prospect and thought there was not much use in attempting anything further. Although ignorant of the cause, I differed with him in opinion. I knew that nothing had got into the bath to do the mischief. What, then, was the cause? I went out on the edge of the mountain, seated myself on the edge of a massive rock, and began to cogitate, as it is better to study out the trouble before tampering with anything.
I was not long in arriving at a conclusion, after which I returned to the house, coated two stereoscopic plates, and introduced them into the bath, where I let them remain for two hours.  On withdrawing them from the bath, at the end of that time, they had a honey-comb appearance, the iodide being entirely eaten away in spots. Other plates were immediately coated to replace those taken out, so that the bath might become saturated with iodide of silver. On the next morning our bath was again in working order, but a terrific storm had set in, so that we could not use it. During the latter part of the night we had been enveloped in a thunder-cloud, the lightning playing beneath us and the thunder rumbling at our feet. The cloud continued to envelop us all day, the atmosphere hourly growing colder.
The next morning the moisture in the cloud had congealed on the rocks of the summit until they were white with ice. The instrument—furnished and kept for the Smithsonian Institute—gave the velocity of the wind at 40 miles per hour. Any one but an experienced mountaineer would be instantly prostrated by such a gale as this, so we wisely did not venture out. Thus for three days the storm raged unabated. On the evening of the third day, just at sunset, the cloud disappeared, and our eyes beheld the great panorama of mountain, lake, and river. The ice on the summit, in many places, was fully eighteen inches thick, glaring white and desolate-looking in the sun, while the valleys below were smiling in their summer greenness. The next morning the sun rose clear, and the air was calm and still. Ninety miles away we saw the ocean with the naked eye. Myriads of vessels could be seen with the glass dotting its surface. Mountains upon mountains extended upon the other hand, villages, lakes, and rivers, the whole range of the Green Mountains, making a circumference of more than six hundred miles. There was just enough cloud and just enough sunlight to make it one of the most glorious visions that eyes ever beheld. Our host of the Tip-Top House assured us that it was the finest view of the season, and we felt well repaid for our imprisonment. We were early at work, but found it too icy to take views with comfort until nearly noon, when the party of travellers from the Glen House had arrived. We secured a capital negative of that party around the Tip-Top House. The party from the Crawford House arriving soon after, we secured two other negatives equally good. The ice had melted just enough to produce a fine effect in the pictures, and we thought it a fortunate addition. The bath and chemicals worked as finely as we could wish for. We discovered that the trouble with the bath was a lack of iodizing—a trouble that causes more poor results than a majority of artists would dream of.
A bath should never be fully saturated with iodide of silver if a collodion containing only iodide is used. The skies will surely be full of holes. If, on the contrary, bromides are used in connection with iodide, the bath should be kept thoroughly saturated. In making negatives or positives, coat a plate, put it in the bath, and let it remain over night after each day’s work, that the iodide consumed during the day may be replaced for the next day’s work.
Having secured all the negatives that we could, we packed up our apparatus and descended the mountain. When we reached the Crawford House—where we now are—we found ourselves very tired. We shall take our carriage and ride to the White Mountain House, five miles off, where we will remain over night.
We append the bill of our expenses for the benefit of all who may be inclined to try photographing in this expensive region:
Two ponies to ascend the Mountain.                                                        $6.
Ditto    to return.                                                                                                $6.
Board at the Tip-Top House for two, at $4 each per day, five days.            $40.
Envelopes, guides’ fees, etc.                                                                    $3.
Total.                                                                                                    $55.
Only fifty-five dollars for five days at Mount Washington; but, as this is the regular charge, we are not disposed to complain.
From the White Mountain House we return home tomorrow to St. Johnsbury. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Temperature of Toning Bath.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:10 (Sept. 15, 1859): 146-147. [“In toning all kinds of prints the temperature of the toning-bath should be carefully attended to. It should always be as high as 60 degrees, and will generally work quicker and better as high as 150 degrees. This fact will be sure to manifest itself to all who make a trial of it, and is of great importance to those who desire uniform results. With a cold bath it will be found very difficult to obtain good blacks, when the bath is below 60°, in a reasonable time, and if the print lies for a long time in the bath, in a nearly inactive stale, the print will be sure to suffer in its keeping qualities….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Ammonio-Nitrate Toning Baths.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:11 (Oct. 1, 1859): 163-164. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: The toning bath for ammonio-nitrate prints, given by me at page 49, current volume, of this Journal, being constructed to act in a different manner from those in general use, I have thought fit to make some further remarks on its peculiarities. Let it be promised, therefore, in the beginning, that there is no toning bath free from objectionable points, and none but what there will be some objectionable results produced in sometimes. The process during the winter gave, in my hands, very fine results; but on the approach of warm weather there seemed, in several instances, a tendency to yellowness in the high lights. They did not seem to be evenly distributed all over the print, but were in the form of large yellow stains. The beauty of the pictures produced by the bath led me to continue its use and to seek a remedy for the yellow stains. It was readily found, but not without impairing, to a certain extent, the beauty of the prints. The remedy is, to add a few grains of hyposulphite of soda to the gold, just enough to dissolve the precipitate that forms in the bath. Thus, if the fixing be going on in the slightest degree, the precipitate will not form and the yellow stains will not appear….” “… Sometimes with such negatives it is necessary to double and even treble the quantity of salt required for negatives of equal density made with collodion containing bromine. Very frequently different lots of paper from the same maker, of apparently the same quality, will require different treatment. The only true way to arrive at the quantity of salt best suited to any lot of paper, is to try different quantities until the first point is reached. Actual experiment is the only true test. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “New Toning Agent.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:15 (Dec. 1, 1859): 228-229.

COALE, GEORGE BUCHANAN. (1819-1887) (USA)
Coale, Geo. B. “Le Gray’s Toning Process – A New Formula.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:16 (Dec. 15, 1859): 243. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: This is, perhaps, the “New Toning Agent” sought by Mr. Gage in his communication in the last No. of Humphrey’s Journal. It is extremely simple and beautiful in its results. I give it as received from my friend C. G. of Philadelphia: (C. G. would be the amateur Constance Guillou.)
 — Put about half a drachm of chloride of lime in a pint bottle and fill it up with water; shake it well and filter about 8 or 10 ounces of the solution; add to this from 2 to 5 grains of chloride of gold. Exactness in quantity is not material. Print very deeply; more so than for the ordinary gold toning bath. As the prints come from the negative throw them into a vessel of clean water, of course protected from the light, and allow them to remain until all free nitrate of silver is dissolved from the paper. This is the one important point in the management of this process. The removal of the nitrate of silver may perhaps be more surely effected by laying the prints, face downwards, in water in which you have thrown a handful of salt—and the silver saved thereby. When properly washed, immerse the prints, one at a time, in the toning bath. The dingy red of an albumen print changes, in from 5 to 10 seconds, to a delicious dark purple. Prints on plain paper, with ammonio-nitrate, change in 1 or 2 seconds to a rich velvety black. Fix in a fresh solution of hypo, strong enough to do its work in 5 minutes, say 4 oz. in 10 oz. of water. Not only is the tone of prints made by this process a very beautiful one, but they have none of the flatness which is so often caused by the prolonged immersion in old hypo. The process was given to me for albumen paper only, but I find it answers equally well with plain paper. The bath still retains its quality at the end of a week. There is every reason to believe that a more permanent picture results from it than from the ordinary toning bath. Geo. B. Coale. Baltimore, Dec. 8, 1859.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The New Toning Process.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:16 (Dec. 15, 1859): 243-244. [“St. Johnsbury, Vt, Dec. 10, 1859. To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: Enclosed pleased find two prints toned by the new process. I think they are very fine. They are said to be toned instantaneously. How do you like them? F. B. Gage.
We like them very much indeed; they equal anything we ever saw. There is a richness of tone about them that is hard to beat. These specimens are on albumenised paper, which accounts in a measure for their exquisite fineness and delicacy. Our friend Gage will notice that in this No. of the Journal we publish a communication, from that sterling friend of the art, George B. Coale, Esq., of Baltimore, containing “Le Gray’s New Toning Process,” which Mr. Coale presumes to be the same as that alluded to by Mr. Gage in our last No. Is this so? We think not. In No. 9, Vol. XI., of Humphrey’s Journal we published, under the head of “Photography in Paris,” Le Gray’s new process for toning and fixing positives, which is altogether different from the formula sent to us by Mr. Coale and published in this No. Since the publication of Le Gray’s process, above-referred to, he has probably made new discoveries, which our friend Guillou, of Philadelphia, has got hold of and communicates to Mr. Coale. Mr. Gage says distinctly, in his last article, that he is almost daily in receipt of prints from two able photographers who claim to have discovered a new process. We think it cannot be the same as Le Gray’s.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The New Toning Agent.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:17 (Jan. 1, 1860): 259-260.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “More about the New Toning Agent.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:18 (Jan. 15, 1860): 275-276.

GAGE, F. B.
Gage, F. B. “Old Processes Analyzed, Criticized, and Systemized. The Positive Collodion Process. – No. 1.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:19 – 21 (Feb. 1 – Mar. 1, 1860): 289-290, 307-309, 321-323.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Cleaning Glass with Burning Fluid.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:1 (May 1, 1860): 3. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: During one of my photographic trips last summer I fell in with an amateur photographer, who told me that he had tried my plan of cleaning glass, as recommended in your Journal some months since, and failed. Since then I have met with others who have failed to make it work uniformly well, and therefore I would add a few words for the benefit of all who have tried it. If they have all failed it is not from any defect in the process, but from not rightly using it, and from not comprehending the theory of its action.
In the first place let it be premised that it is not possible to rightly clean a glass in a cold damp atmosphere, as the moisture condenses on the surface faster than it can be removed. When, therefore, I wish to clean a glass I first immerse it in dilute nitric acid, then wash it in clean water, and dry it off by wiping on a clean linen towel; or it may be hung up on nails and allowed to drain and dry, if the operator chooses. It is then warmed over a stove or spirit lamp until it is considerably warmer than the temperature of the room. If it be a glass of the stereoscope size, 3½ by 6 it is placed in a clean vice, and one drop of burning fluid is dropped on the middle. This one drop is instantly and smartly polished off with, a small ball of cotton, or, what is still better, clean tissue paper. It requires but a few moments’ rubbing to collect all the organic matter on the surface, after which it is of no avail to rub longer. One half-minute will clean a glass in this way, and do it thoroughly.
The points of importance are, that the glass be warmed (if the room be not well warmed) not so as to be what is called hot, but a few degrees above ordinary summer temperature. It is necessary also that there be not an excess of fluid used, not more than one or two drops for a stereoscope glass, or more than two or three for a four-fourth size. I have practiced this process through the summer; and wish for nothing better. In a private letter, received from Mr. George B. Coale some time since, he says: “since the publication of your method I find that it is not such a horrid bore to clean glass as it used to be.” From this I infer that he has found its operation satisfactory, which all will do if they will use it rightly. F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Vegetable and Mineral Photography.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:2 (May 15, 1860): 23-24.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN.
“More from the Opposition.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:6 (July 15, 1860): 81-82. [“We publish in this number what purports to be a reply to Mr. Fitzgibbon, but which is, in reality, a full endorsement of the position taken by that gentleman. Mr. Gage, as is generally known, belongs to the class of A 1 operators, and is down on cheap map-takers. He is decidedly bitter and pungent in his irony, and we trust feels relieved by the discharge. We are sorry that the cheap picture mania has reached to the utmost recesses of the Green Mountains, and hope, with our friend “Mr. Assistance,” that Mr. Gage will endeavor to elevate the art he so truly adorns.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN.
Gage, F. B. “The Patent Case. – Reply to Mr. Fitzgibbon.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:6 (July 15, 1860): 84-85. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: I noticed an article in a late number of your Journal, from the pen of Mr. Fitzgibbon, on the subject of the Cutting Patents, which seems to be very much at variance with the Fund movement in your city. Now, although I have an abundance of respect for Mr. Fitzgibbon, I cannot endorse his article on account of its not being sufficiently philanthropic. In fact, Mr. Editor, there is a great want of philanthropy in the photographic ranks. There is an exclusiveness among the first operators which, to the undiscriminating, seems very remarkable. As you remark in the Journal of June 15: “The better class of operators, such as Brady, Gurney, Fredricks, etc., think they know as much about taking pictures as anybody, in this country at least, can teach them. They also are men who are doing a lucrative business, and who have no time or inclination to devote to going to school. They are posted; they have learned the ropes, and are not going to impart their information to greenhorns either for money or love of their profession.” It is noticeable that almost every good operator has his mouth eternally sealed as far as the art is concerned, and he has also conceived the idea that he never learned to use the pen. Now, you see, if there was a proper degree of public spirit and interest in the welfare of the art, these first-class operators would put all their dodges in the Journal and reveal them to the Photographical Society; they would also generously go across the street and detail the particulars to the rival artist, who is taking pictures superior to any in town at one-fourth the charge in other galleries. It has not cost these first-class operators anything to obtain this ascendency. No! they were born lucky. No toil, no money, no hard study. Nature showered success upon them in such abundance that they have only to float; never to wade. But, on account of this great want of philanthropy, they are not disposed to help the less favored.
Now, if these operators of the first class would only consent to reveal to the second class, then the latter would be very grateful, and forthwith sink the price of pictures from five cents, down to two and a-half cents; and, if they thought this was not compensation enough, they would make up the balance in slandering and lying about class 1.
I would like to know what right this Mr. Fitzgibbon has to wish to obtain an honest, honorable livelihood? Does he not know that he might do a vast amount of good by divulging his knowledge of the art and assisting the five cent class, who never take a journal, and never will, provided they have to pay for it? Even if Mr. Fitzgibbon has children to feed and clothe, he should show his philanthropy though he lets them starve. More than ten cents, for a photograph as large as a barn door is rank extortion. No matter whether they are good or bad, all pictures should be the same price per square yard! I have no doubt that Mr. Fitzgibbon could give any honorable competitors fits, or, at least, he could Fitz-gib-um. But then he should be philanthropic; he should look to the good of the art!
There is another set of extortioners; these are the stock dealers. Some of them are actually making enough to pay their way, which should be looked to at once. They should be made to work for something less than their board. The old Bible standard, “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” is changed to “Love thy neighbor and hate thyself.” This is designed to apply only to the best class of operators and journalists. Now, why not publish the Journal for one dollar a-year? This would enable the five-cent class to make pictures about half a cent cheaper per square yard, as one dollar a year would be saved from their actual expenses, provided they were to take the Journal.
I can cite an individual case of this exclusiveness. There is a Mr. Gage, living somewhere up in Vermont, who has written more or less for this Journal. There is also another operator, born very near where this Mr. Gage originated, who is at present taking pictures in the same State. Although friends in boyhood and at the present time separated by more than a hundred miles, and having no interests that clash, this artist has grown very unfriendly to Mr. Gage. He acknowledges that Mr. Gage is a good operator, but says that he “publishes all he knows, and more too.”
The probable reason of his unfriendliness is, that his own reputation has not extended beyond his native State, while Mr. Gage’s having become somewhat more extended, he evidently feels envious; he looks upon every one more successful than himself as his enemy, and treats him accordingly. Mr. Gage, however, could inform this same operator that, although he has published some things, he has not yet published all he knows, neither has he published the best he knows. There is one process that Mr. Gage possesses, which he has worked out within the last three months, the secret of which neither this operator, nor any other cheap operator, could purchase for five hundred dollars, unless they would give satisfactory bonds not to degrade the price of pictures made by this process.
Here you find, Mr. Editor, a case of want of philanthropy and the good of the art. Mr. Gage, however, says that he “would be pleased to publish the process in full in your Journal, but as long as the assassin stands at his door he chooses not to lend him his choicest weapons.
“If there was only an honorable competition at uniform prices, every operator of credit in the land would be willing to publish his best process in the Journal at once. If that were the case, you would see the art progress. Until then you will see it developing only under the exclusive order. The man who sincerely thinks the art is going to advance in the least under the cheap operators is more than a fool.”
Well, Mr. Editor, you see by the above what Gage thinks about the matter, and, as he unblushingly asserts that he has none of the philanthropic spirit, and does not publish the best he knows, I advise you not to print any more of his productions. I also advise all cheap operators, and several in particular, not to steal certain copies of Humphrey’s Journal and read its articles in secret, being too stingy and miserably mean to pay for them.
If Mr. Fitzgibbon should happen to see this communication, I hope he will feel pretty nearly used up. Let him study the new translation of scripture: “Love thy neighbor; hate thyself.” Truly yours, F. B. Gage.
P. S.—The Editor of H. J. may have a chance ere long to see some of the pictures taken by the process mentioned above.”]

CUTTING, JAMES AMBROSE. (1814-1867) (USA)
“The Fredricks’ Fund. Reply to Mr. Gage. – Mr. Fitzgibbon looked after.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTSAND SCIENCES 12:8 (Aug. 15, 1860): 113-114.

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “The Cutting Patents. – Another Item from Mr. Gage.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:8 (Aug. 15, 1860): 115-116. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: In your issue of July 15, in your editorial article, you comment, on page 90, as follows:-—”Mr. Fitzgibbon and Mr. Gage are both entirely wrong. Their course is utterly indefensible and can never be carried out. … Mr. Gage and Mr. Fitzgibbon must take pictures that, by their superior expedience shall command their prices, and not endeavor to put up prices by supporting unjust patents.”
Your language places Mr. Fitzgibbon and myself in an entirely wrong light, which I propose to correct, after which I shall probably leave the subject and also the “map-makers.” I do not admit that the patent is unjust, or that I am supporting an unjust patent. All patents are supposed to be just until proved otherwise. Cutting’s patent has not been proved so. Assertion is not admissible in a court of justice, and the photographic fraternity have, as a body, never have had any better proof than assertion. When the Supreme Court of the United States declares it to be unjust, it will then be soon enough for them to talk of unjust patents. Even then the patent may be just, and the decision unjust. Many innocent persons have been proved guilty and hung. Cutting’s patent may suffer the same kind of martyrdom. Because Mr. Fitzgibbon and myself are not willing to give a liberal sum to pay for trumping up proof to overthrow what we consider a just patent, we are accused of supporting on unjust one. The plea, that the discovery of the use of bromine in combination with collodion was made in Europe, is certainly a dubious one. Even at this time the great body of European photographers are almost entirely ignorant of the benefit resulting from using bromine in collodion, so much so, that F. Hardwich and T. Sutton, two of the most accomplished photographers in Europe, neither use or recommend it. Almost all the European views that come to this country bear positive proof that no bromine is used in making them. If some European photographer did publish the suggestion, that perhaps bromine might be used in collodion, it did not result in anything until it was factually made available and patented by Mr. Cutting. The instant it was patented there were hundreds ready to suck the blood of the patent, and declare that it had been done before. As no such results were shown before as were shown when the patent was issued, it is evident that Mr. Cutting made the thing generally available and generally valuable, and he deserved the patent for this, if for no other reason.
On account of these facts I infer that the patent is just, and that all just men would sooner pay money to sustain that justice than, to overthrow it.
When, therefore, you find me paying money to overthrow this patent, merely to gratify a grasping class of operators, you may reasonably conclude that I am insane.
“It will be a burning shame” if Mr. Fredricks does not get his fingers singed to his regret, after which he can talk of unjust patents with propriety. The very fact, that so little money is subscribed outside of New York proves conclusively that the fund movement is unpopular among the better class of country operators. F. B. Gage.”]

FITZGIBBON, JOHN H. (ca. 1817-1882) (USA)
Fitzgibbon, J. H. “A Reply from Mr. Fitzgibbon to `Assistance.'” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:8 (Aug. 15, 1860): 116-117. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: ”Assistance” forces me to reply to his communication in your issue of July 15. “For the sake of the cause in which Mr. Fredricks is (not) so deeply engaged,” I had hoped that, after “Assistance” had been advised of the fact, which I wished him distinctly to understand, namely, that I am decidedly opposed to either money or subscriptions flowing into the treasury of the Fredricks’ Fund, he would have rested easy. I do not profess to write any literary, or enter into any scientific controversy on any subject appertaining to our profession; but I can assure him that these labored articles he speaks of come quite natural to me, and I should never tire when I felt I had really the good of the art at Heart. “Assistance” doesn’t know me if he thinks that I would relinquish this controversy in the manner he mentions; no, sir! I will Gib-bum-Fitz as long as I have a hand to wield a pen or a tongue with which to talk.
As there are no points whatever in “Assistance’s” letter requiring an answer, permit me to walk slightly into your affections, Mr. Editor:— In your editorial of July 1st, after giving me a very flattering notice (you know we are all susceptible of flattery), you say: “As to Mr. F., he reasons altogether from wrong premises; he takes the ground that Mr. Cutting has a moral as well as a legal title to the bromide patents, which is the reverse of what is true.” Strong words these, Mr. Editor. In the English language, both Webster and Walker define “the reverse of what is true.” to be a l-i-e. Now, I cannot think you intended to be interpreted that way, although you said it. At all events, let us hear from you on that subject again.
In your editorial of the 15th ult. you say: “Mr. Fitzgibbon and Mr. Gage are both wrong entirely, and their course is utterly indefensible, and their plans can never be carried out.” Now, Sir, I contend that you, as Editor of a Journal devoted to the whole art, ought not to use such definite language when a subject is being discussed. If you cannot remain neutral, why be as neutral as you can; at least do not be so definite as to say we are “entirely wrong and utterly indefensible.” You ought to have added, “in your opinion.”
I will en-Gage with such pens as the one that has just proved itself not a very green-Gage to do that, Mr. Editor, which you seem to think it impossible to do, viz., “to purify and elevate our art,”‘ so that all who  wished might be honorably engaged in following a profession which is now so much abused and ill-used. J. H. Fitzgibbon.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Portrait of Mr. F. B. Gage.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:8 (Aug. 15, 1860): 117-118. [“Some great men display a certain peculiarity of dress or personal appearance. A distinguished politician of Iowa is described as wearing a checked shirt, an old slouched hat, seedy cotton pants, an old shoe down at the heel on one foot, and an antiquated boot with a two-inch slit in the instep on the other; no coat or vest: this is his warm weather rig. A well known physician of this city, who makes a certain disease his specialty, is seen going down Broadway any fine day dressed in the style of the English gentleman of a century ago. Breeches made very tight, silk stockings, round-toed shoes with massive silver buckles, a long waistcoat with big flaps, an enormous coat with expansive skirts, a white choker unaccompanied by a collar, a low-crowned and wide-brimmed beaver hat, cocked up on three sides, and a gold-headed cane completes his attire. Of course every one looks after him as he walks along, and inquires: “Who in the world is that chap?” then we have Howe, of sewing machine notoriety, wearing his brown hair in long flowing curls like a young girl of sixteen summers; said hair surmounted with a peculiarly shaped Quaker-like hat having a brim a foot in width. Every one says: “That’s Howe, the famous sewing-machine man!” Then we have Greely, whose comical white coat reaching down to his heels, an old white hat caved in on one side, with his pantaloons ten or twelve inches too short, and one leg of them resting on the top of his boot, is familiar to many. Then there is Walt. Whitman, the eccentric poet, with a black Kossuth hat a foot or so in hight, with the crown rounded off to a semi-globular shape, and his shirt collar turned over on the collar of his coat, his shirt open in front exposing the greater part of his ample chest and an ample grizzled beard; if once seen he is not soon forgotten. We might mention several more similar geniuses, but the above must suffice.
As other arts and sciences have their eccentric-looking characters, so Photography has hers. As we reached our sanctum the other morning, we noticed a stranger sitting and occupied in reading the news. He came forward as we entered, and introduced himself as F. B. Gage, of Vermont; of course we were glad to see him. Mr. Gage has written several articles for Humphrey’s Journal, and has also edited a work on Photography. We had heard much of him, and had some correspondence with him, but had never before seen the gentleman, and must say that we were struck with his appearance. Imagine a man of about thirty-five years of age or thereabouts, dressed in a suit of coarse New England black cloth, with a low-crowned black felt hat, light complexion, blue eyes, a whitey-brown beard like that formerly worn by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, reaching down to his waist, a rather closely trimmed mustache, long hair, hands stained all over with nitrate of silver solution and black as the ace of spades, Heavy cow-hide boots with soles an inch thick, and you have some idea of the personel of Mr. Gage.
In his manner he is quite reserved, talks very little, and that in the genuine dialect of a Vermont Yankee, occupying himself at the same time with combing his flowing beard with his fingers, in the same manner as you have seen a man running his digits through the mane of a horse.
Mr. Gage has taken very good pictures, and we have seen some of them which do credit to his native State. His work on Photography has sold, we believe, very well, and his writings in the Journal have been generally acceptable. We trust he will live long enough to obtain eminence in his profession, and “publish the best he knows.”]

GALLOWAY, T. K.
Galloway, T. K. “Ammonio-Nitrate.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:9 (Sept. 1, 1860): 131-132. [“To the Editor of Humphrey’s Journal: I am much pleased with your Journal; I think it equal to any published in America or Europe. I am thoroughly hungry for each number to come. I read each article and try most of the processes and experiments proposed. I presume a better corps of correspondents than you have cannot be found under the wings of the spread eagle; but there is more truth than poetry in that article of one of them where he says: “We do not publish the best we know,” or to that effect [see F. B. Gage’s article in the July 15th number of the Journal], their books are no better.
For instance, they all say: ” to prepare ammonio-nitrate, pour off one quarter of the silver solution, and add ammonia, drop by drop, to the three-quarters until a precipitate is formed and redissolved; then return the other quarter, and filter.” But if the first part of these directions is followed, others will have to be more successful than I have been if the remaining one-fourth ever can be added; for I have poured in the ammonia equal in amount to the silver solution without dissolving the sediment, or any prospect of it.
No doubt many of your correspondents have, like myself, found the above a failure, and would be pleased to have the pen of some one, through the medium of your Journal, to help them out of the fog.
If you can tell me how to make a fixing solution that will not bleach out and destroy the beauty which prints have when they leave the toning bath, I will store up a thousand thanks for you.
But send on the Journal anyhow; we cannot do without it. We must know how our brother operators get along, and what they say. Enclosed please find $3, which I believe pays up to the end of the present volume. Yours respectfully, T. K. Galloway.
[Ans.— 1., As to your first trouble, it is with your ammonia, which is good for nothing, that’s sure; if it was, you would have no such difficulty as you speak of. You need not look for success as an operator unless you have first-rate chemicals.
2. You must overprint and overtone a little, and when the prints come from the fixing solution they will have the proper degree of intensity. You can tell by experimenting what degree of overtoning is necessary. The prints will lose some of their beauty in the fixing solution, and fade more or less.—Ed.)”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, F. B. “Tent for Field Use.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:11 (Oct. 1, 1860): 166. [“In volume X., page 65, of Humphrey’s Journal, we published a description of a tent suitable for field use. Recently we have had so many calls for that number by subscribers and others who are in want of such a tent, that we have determined to publish the article, which is over the signature of Mr. F. B. Gage:—
“My tent for field use is made of two thicknesses of black cambric and two of yellow calico, stretched over three hoops, made of white oak, 6 feet in diameter. These hoops are placed two feet apart, and the tent when raised is about five and a haft feet high, with a cone roof of two feet above that. A strong cord is attached to the top of the cone for the purpose of suspending the tent from the limb of a tree or any other convenient object. When we wish to operate inside we lift one edge of the bottom and stoop down so as to go under it, and when done we return in the same way. This plan operates quite well, but I shall build another soon which I can recommend as being far better for that purpose. Make a light frame about three feet wide by four and a half or five feet long, and high enough to stand up in. This should have as light a floor as can be made and be of the required strength to sustain the operator. Cover the whole with the cloth as described for the other tent. This tent should be mounted on two light wheels—‘Horse-cart fashion’—so that the artist can pack in apparatus and materials, and go where and when he chooses. A door in the end will admit the operator, and a yellow oil-cloth window will let in as much light as is needed to operate. When you arrive at a place where you wish to take an impression, it is but an instant’s work to take the wheels off your cart; your house then stands on the ground, and you can proceed with all the coolness of a May morning to take your picture. When done, the wheels are returned and you are in a rolling condition again. In this way you need no assistant and are your own ‘boss and hired hands,’ which is not only the cheapest but most certain plan. Such a tent as this, with good chemicals, will ‘give fits’ to any dry process. I will guarantee your correspondents that they will get ten gems with this arrangement where they would get none from any dry process ever yet originated.”]

KENT, WILLIAM.
Kent, William. “Hints to Authors.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:20 (Feb. 15, 1861): 306-307. [(Actually, sort of a review of F. B. Gage’s and Ch. Waldack’s books. The editor’s snide remark is curious, as it was Humphrey’s press that published Gage’s book in 1859. But they may have fallen out over the Cutting patent issue, but, in any case, I’m not certain that Gage published any more articles in Humphrey’s Journal after this.)] “It seems to me that much more value would attach to photographic productions if each author would confine himself exclusively to his own process in the production of pictures, and give the details in full, so that a beginner with ordinary study could readily understand it. The formation of the bath, its working qualities, and its peculiarities, if any, under given circumstances should be accurately described; the developer should be given with the same particularity. If a writer is not a careful, observing, rigid experimenter, he has no right to impose his productions on the public; and if he is such an experimenter, we want to know what process he has found the best in his own practice. We do not care a fig what others think, but we wish to know what he has found by demonstration to be the best within the range of his own experience. If some master-artist would do for Positives what Gage has done for Negatives, he would confer no small favor on the artistic fraternity. Out of more than fifty processes, Gage has selected what he has found by rigid experiment to be the best.* [*Mr. Kent forgets that Mr. Gage, in No. 6 of the present volume of Humphrey’s Journal, declared that he did not publish “the best he knows!— Ed.] We thank him for this, but it does appear, in the publication of his work; that his thoughts were concentrated most unrighteously upon his pocket, or he would have given us a full index, which he could have done, and then have been abundantly well paid for his skill. There can be but one best positive process; and if the many processes claiming this character were subject to the rigid ordeal of experiment, by some]

ORGANIZATIONS. USA. AMERICAN INSTITUTE, PHOTOGRAPHIC SECTION: 1867.
“Photographic Section of the American Institute, Reported for Humphrey’s Journal.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 19:16 (Dec. 15, 1867): 247-248. [Hull showed his own prints and photographs by B. F. Gage (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) Books illustrated by the American Photo-Lithographic Co. were displayed by Mr. Mason. Anthony, Hull, Chapman, Newton, Prof. Tillman discussed issues.]

KANSAS HERALD OF FREEDOM. (WAKARUSA, KAN. TERRITORY)

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Acknowledgment.” THE KANSAS HERALD OF FREEDOM. (WAKARUSA, KAN. TERRITORY) (Nov. 22, 1856): 3. [“Of Receipts for subscriptions to the Herald of Freedom, from Aug. 25th, to Nov. 5th, 1856.” (This is followed by a list of more than fifty subscribers from around the country, the majority from New England, including “…F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vt.; $2.00.” Kansas was an often violent battleground arena between slavery and anti-slavery advocates before the Civil War.)]

MILAN EXCHANGE. (MILAN, GIBSON COUNTY, TN.)

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Gage, Franklin B. “Some Adventures with Catamounts.” THE MILAN EXCHANGE. (MILAN, GIBSON COUNTY, TN.) (Sept. 17, 1874): 1. [“It is doubtful if any specimens of the catamount, or panther, once the terror of our forests, now survive in the State of Vermont; but as late as in 1857 two of these animals were killed in different parts of the State. In the autumn of that year a fox-hunter, near the foot of Ascuntney, Mountain, in Weathersfield, Vt., had a valuable hound mysteriously killed. All his efforts were vain to trace the cause of the animal’s death. The mangled remains found showed that the dog had received terribly rough usage, but what sort of antagonist had done the deed, the hunter could not even guess; for it was not supposed that there was any wild animal in the vicinity capable of killing a fox-hound. Some time afterwards, several children on their way to school one day, met a strange animal in the road. It did not seem inclined to turn out for them. On the contrary, it faced them with so ferocious an appearance that they turned and fled. Most fortunately the animal did not pursue them. When they reached home and told what they had seen, their parents could not believe the story. The description given by the children answered to that of a catamount, but as no such creature had been seen in that thickly settled region for nearly forty years, it was decided that the young people must have been frightened by a dog. On the 30th of January, however, a hunter by the name of Venight struck the track of some strange animal, and feeling curious to learn what had made it, followed the footprints to the top of Pine Hill about one mile south of Downer’s Hotel. There he found the tracks led into a den. Night was approaching and he could not stay to investigate. He could hear a low growling in the den, and this convinced him that some dangerous animal was hidden there. Finding materials near at hand, he stopped up the hole as near as he could, and went home. The next morning, in company with several other men who were armed with guns and had shovels also with them, he re paired to the spot again. He found that his prisoner had not escaped. The only way of reaching him in safely seemed to be to dig down to the den from above. After two hours of labor they cleared the earth from the rocks over the cave, and found a small hole through the roof. Then procuring a rail, they thrust it down through this aperture, and immediately a fierce snarl came up from the darkness below. The next moment the end of the rail was spitefully seized, and held so firmly, that the man who stood at the opening could not pull it away. Several other men took hold with him, and drew the rail up by main strength, bringing the animal along with it. As soon as the creature’s head appeared above the rocks, a ball was fired into it. The catamount (for the men were certain now it was a catamount) relinquished his hold, and dropped to the bottom of the cave again. This operation had to be twice repeated before the fierce animal was killed. When he was dragged from the cave he measured, from the tip of the nose to the end of the tail, seven feet and nine inches. He was thirty-two inches high and weighed one hundred and twenty-one and one-half pounds. The skin was stuffed by Prof. Hagan, formerly State Geologist, and is now on exhibition at Downer’s Hotel, Weathersfield, near the foot of Ascutney Mountain. The same year, on the 18th of December, a man by the name of Gomen, living in the town of Johnson, on the Lamoille River, was going through a piece of woods to the house of a distant neighbor. On his way he saw in the snow the tracks of a large animal with which he was not acquainted. He followed the footprints, and, after some time, the creature itself started up from a clump of bushes, and confronted him. It was a full-sized catamount. One glance at his long, lithe body, his fiery eyes and merciless teeth was sufficient to remind Mr. Gomen that discretion is the better part of valor at least to a person unarmed and he incontinently took to his heels. Going home, he soon collected thirteen men with guns and three good dogs, and with this force he returned to the woods. Dividing here, one party went around and stationed themselves where they could head off the catamount should he attempt to escape. The other party with the dogs followed up the track. They had not gone halt a mile before the catamount showed himself on the other side of the woods, where the first party lay in wait for him. One of the hunters fired, and wounded him in the hip. At this, the dogs being close upon him, the animal turned, and with an enormous leap plunged into the undergrowth. The ground was level here, and it is asserted that this single leap of the huge cat measured from twenty-five to thirty feet. After tearing his way through the thickets for ten or eleven rods, hotly pursued by the dogs, he sprang into a tree, and commenced jumping from one tree to another. Finally, reaching a large spruce, he curled himself upon a limb, nearly forty feet from the ground, and faced his enemies. The hunters were close upon him. Several shots were fired, most of them taking effect, and one ball brought him to the ground. The dogs rushed upon him, but wounded as he was. they soon found that they were no match for the fierce animal in a close fight. They would have paid dearly for their rashness had not a rifle-ball put a speedy end to his struggles. This catamount was eight feet and a half-inch long, and two feet seven inches high. His weight was one hundred and two pounds. He was very lean, and when his skin was stripped off, the cause of his leanness was discovered. His head and shoulders were filled with porcupine’s quills. One or more of them had passed entirely through his head, and many others were half way through, showing that at some time he had made rather sorry work of trying to devour this small but formidable kind of prev. Had he been in good flesh he would have weighed much more, and in that case, too, it is likely he would have sold his life much more dearly than he did. Franklin B. Gage, in Youth’s Companion.”]

PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
“Correspondence.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 2:17 (May 1865): 80-81. [(Letter from F. B. Gage of St. Johnsbury, VT, including stereos of eighteen landscapes taken five years earlier.) “Allow me to present for criticism in the Philadelphia Photographer, a package of stereograms, the negatives of which were made five years since, at which time the rebellion drove me out of viewmaking into portraiture. It was my endeavor to reproduce these wild nooks among our mountain streams in such a manner as to convince you, while you were looking at them in the stereoscope, that the water in our highlands is really water, — such water as you would not relish falling into, if you were not able to swim….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA) “Correspondence.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOCRAPHER 2, no. 19 (July 1865): 111-112. [Long letter with technical discussion about proper lenses for landscape work.]

FITZGIBBON, JOHN H. (ca. 1817-1882) (USA)
[Fitzgibbon, John H.] Justice. “Failures and their Causes.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 3:27 (Mar. 1866): 87-88. [“To the Editor Phila. Photographer. A few thoughts have suggested themselves to my mind after reading your Prospectus for 1866. In olden times most of the articles for the journals were written by the practical operators of the day, and were more to the point and easier understood. The various processes and styles of manipulation that the journals are now filled with, I must say, are generally very indefinite and unsatisfactory. Now, Mr. Editor, by your kindness, and through your Journal, the fraternity at large get the benefit of the practical knowledge of the professor or amateur…. …I recollect the first photographs exhibited at the Crystal Palace by Whipple & Black, under the name of the Talbotype; nothing like the difficulty that is experienced at the present day was experienced by those gentlemen then, or by the fraternity for I might say ten years afterwards, for it is only a few years since new formulas have been given in the journals, and fresh inquiries by different artists of the causes of the many failures which they are constantly troubled with. Now, I ask what is the cause of those failures? …is it, Mr. Editor, caused by the innumerable processes, formulae, or important improvements, that we see crowding the journals of the present day, chiefly from the pens and brains of amateurs and professors, arid not the sayings and doings of the real practical photographers of the present time? Let the operator of the present period look back into Humphrey’s Journal, Snelling’s, Dr. Burges’s, and Waldack’s books, and they will find processes there that will not give them half the trouble that those published at the present day do. I do not attempt to deny that there are many good and valuable articles written by professors and amateurs, but theoretical practice should not be palmed off on the profession as practical experience. Let us hear, as of old, from such men as Whipple, Black, Gurney, Fredericks, Bogardus, Davie, Williamson, O’Neal, Turner, Fitzgibbon, Gage, Webster, Germon, Faris, Root, mostly old contributors to the Journals, and hundreds of others that could give some good beneficial articles to the fraternity at large, and in such plain language that it would neither break your jaw to pronounce the big words of many writers, or need an interpreter to understand, or the last resort, a Webster’s dictionary, to explain what they are talking about.”]

GAGE. F. B. (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT)
“Paper Turning Yellow.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 3:34 (Oct. 1866): 296-297. [“Editor Philadelphia Photographer: In the August number of The Photographer, page 253, you give, under the head of “Paper Turning Yellow,” some hints, and various precautions, to be observed to prevent the same. As the article does not state or explain the cause of the “turning,” the remedy is only partial, and many times of no avail. Having prepared my own albumen-paper ever since it was first used in the art, I was for a long time troubled with it turning yellow, measles striking through to the back of the paper, and all the category of calamities incident thereto. Various and numberless were the expedients resorted to dislodge this enemy from his position; but all my endeavors were of only partial avail. At last, however, I became convinced that the yellow stains were caused by fermented acid in the albumen used; but I found Mr. Acid so strongly entrenched in his stronghold that I was unsuccessful in my attempts to rout him by any direct attack. As a last resort, I concluded to flank him, “ate Grant,” and take him in the rear. For that purpose, I prepared a solution, as follows: Water, 20 ounces. Sal soda (washing soda), 60 grains. Chloride of ammonium, 120. I floated the paper, back down, on this solution five minutes, or until the paper laid flat, and the albumen surface became moist and soft. I then hung it up to dry, after which it was silvered, fumed, printed, and toned as usual. In that way, the sal soda neutralized the acid, and the paper would keep some days very white, unless it was very hot. There is some work in this, but a good return is made in the quality of the prints and the paper saved. Of course, it is necessary to use some care, and not to allow the neutralizing solution to come in contact with the albumen, as it immediately washes it off. If the paper is already heavily salted, the ammonium can be omitted from the neutralizing solution. All albumen-paper before silvering should be smartly rubbed on the albumen face with a clean piece of cotton flannel. The flannel will absorb and convey away a thin film of animal oil, which deters the silver from taking readily. Any of your subscribers who are troubled with the yellows, by adopting this “dodge,” will very soon discover the fact that their old enemy is really dead and buried.
After fourteen years’ successful practice in my old gallery, I have just moved into a new one. I occupy one entire floor, forty-two by seventy-two feet. My skylight-room is twenty-eight feet square. I can operate on three sides of the light, east, south, and west, and I get a fine light at all hours, rain or shine. Several “well-posted” photographers, who have seen it, have expressed the conviction that I have made a strike, not exactly in oil, but in light. My own opinion is, that it is not excelled. I can give you a description, and perhaps a drawing of it, if desirable. The cause of the paper turning yellow is fermented acid. Lest any one should fall into error in regard to the soda, I would say that the amount given in my formula is not to be taken as the amount that is best at all times, and with all papers. The amount of fermented acid is very different in different samples of paper. Sometimes one grain of soda to the ounce of water is enough to prevent the yellowing; sometimes five or eight is none too much. Enough to neutralize the acid is necessary. I have been using, for a long time, a sample of paper that required only three grains of soda to each ounce of water. To-day I am getting some choice results with another sample, using a twelve-grain solution….” “…Nearly all plain papers are sized with sizing containing more or less fermented acid. The same treatment will prove beneficial in keeping the lights pure while printing. A knowledge of the course and remedy for paper turning yellow, is of great importance to the practical photographer, as it gives him control of his printing, and is a means of getting very much better effects. You may hear from me again, now I am getting settled. F. B. Gage. St. Johnsbury, Vt.
Mr. Gage is well known to many of our readers, and his papers are always fresh, valuable, and welcome to our pages. — Ed.”]

GAGE, F. B. (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT)
“Coagulating Albumen Paper.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 3:35 (Nov. 1866): 341-343. [“Editor Philadelphia Photographer: In a late number of The Photographer, I saw a few words in regard to the coagulating of albumen-paper by the use of alcohol. It occurred to me that, at the present price of alcohol, it must be rather an expensive business; and as I have had some experience in the matter, I send an account of it for the edification of your subscribers. For some years I have practised coagulating my paper previous to silvering….” “There is a great field of undiscovered possible uses to which albumen may be put when its treatment has become better understood. I fancy that it may yet attain to an importance, and play a part, not yet dreamed of at this time by our fraternity. Truly yours, F. B. Gage. St. Johnsbury, Vt., Oct. 8, 1866.”]

BY COUNTRY: USA: 1867.
“Editor’s Table: The New Size.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:39 (Mar. 1867): 95-96. [“The New Size, we are convinced, is going to become popular. Elegant specimens are coming to us from all directions. Each enterprising man seems to be trying how good he can make them. It has so awakened and revived some of the callous ones, that they have already expended hundreds of dollars in preparing to make these new pictures. Some of the most excellent examples we have received, …Mr. George H. Fennemore, with Mr. F. S. Keeler, …Messrs. Wenderoth, Taylor & Brown have also sent us some…. In New York, Messrs. Bendann Brothers, ….Messrs. J. Gurney & Son, ….Mr. H. Benedict, of Seville, Ohio,…. Mr. F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vermont, has sent us some specimens which are not only new in size, but entirely new in style. They are bust pictures from what he calls “vignetted negatives.” The “vignetting” process gives a very pretty clouded effect around the whole or parts of the figure, as the taste may require, and by proper care, very good results may be secured. Some of the specimens are certainly very pretty, while in others the vignetting is too decided; but this, Mr. Gage says, is owing to the haste with which the backgrounds were made. This we can readily see is easy to manage. Mr. Gage has applied for a patent for his process. His improvement may be applied to any size. Let the style be varied, and the entire get-up of the new size be as distinct as possible from the old styles. Be careful not to begin at too low a price. As we seek to improve the business and the art in one direction, do not let us degrade it by low prices and inferior productions.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B. (ST. JOHNSBURY, VT)
“Editor’s Table.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:42 (June 1867): 194. [“In our last issue we announced that a subscriber had informed us that he had discovered a plan by which the admission of light upon the negative or positive picture would cause astonishing developments. Since then we have had an interview with the discoverer, who is Mr. Franklin B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vermont. He described his process to us, which is so simple and so easy as to seem almost ridiculous, but we were privileged to see some specimens which evinced the most soft and beautiful blending of light and shade, and yet wonderful vigor and strength. Only the severe illness of Mr. Gage, prevents the publication of his specifications and claim for patent in this issue. That the process is simple, practicable and certain, we are convinced. American and Foreign Patents have been applied for, and in our next we hope to give fuller information concerning Mr. Gage’s method. While we would not say too much, we feel that it is going to work somewhat of a revolution in Photography.”]

GAGE, F. B.
“Editor’s Table.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:43 (July 1867): 233. [“Mr. Gage’s Discovery. — As promised in our last we hoped to have received Mr. Gage’s specifications in time to publish in this issue, but have not yet done so. However, as we heard them read before he applied for his patent, and, as a patent has been granted him both here and in England, we will briefly describe his method now, and have more to say hereafter. He calls it “partial development by light in the camera,” by which he submits the sensitized plate to a certain amount of diffused light while in the camera, claiming thus to illuminate the shadows and harmonize the lights and shades of the photographic impression. He proceeds as follows: having exposed the plate, the lens is turned towards any dark surface for a short time, so that the plate is subjected to the weak radiations reflected from the dark dead surface. Mr. Gage accomplishes this by using a screen about eighteen inches square, covered with black cloth or velvet, and provided with a handle. This he keeps in motion before the lens for a longer or shorter time, and this is his plan. We shall describe it more minutely in our next, but would add here that we have received a number of prints from negatives thus “illuminated,” from Mr. Gage, and, while they possess great vigor, there is an entire absence of hardness and strong contrast of light and shade. More anon.”]

GAGE, F. B.
“Gage’s Process for Making Negatives and Positives in the Camera.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:44 (Aug. 1867): 260-261. [“Below we give further details of Mr. F. B. Gage’s process, briefly described and commented upon in our last. In his specifications, he says: “I proceed to take a photographic impression in the manner usually employed. Then I place some plain, dark, dead surface in front of the camera, the sensitive surface still remaining in the camera. I then remove the covering from the lens-tube and expose the sensitive surface, on which the impression has been formed, to the light reflected from the dark surface, while the dark surface is kept in gentle motion, so as to prevent the sensitive surface from taking an impression of any wrinkles or other variations on the surface from which the light is reflected. The time of this exposure must be varied according to the amount of light reflected, and the effect it is desirable to produce. The usual amount of time occupied in this exposure will be from one-fourth to double the time employed in taking the invisible impression. But in some cases it can be extended much beyond this time. for a dark, dead surface I usually use a piece of thick, black woollen cloth, about eighteen inches square, attached by one edge to a stick about two feet long, which I hold horizontally, and gently move in front of the camera with the left hand, while I uncover the lens-tube with the right hand. It is not absolutely essential that this dark surface be kept in motion, but it is safer. This exposure of the sensitive surface to light reflected from a dark dead surface apparently leaves the lightest portions of the impression but little changed, while it effects a much greater change in the darkest portions of the same, and thus harmonizes and properly blends the two, giving to the whole an atmospheric effect never before realized in photographic impressions. It also renders it less difficult to obtain the necessary intensity in negatives. It will be understood that my invention applies equally well and is operated in the same manner in taking positives or negatives in the camera. I believe that the best results are produced when the dead surface is as strongly lighted as possible without sunlight, using a diaphragm to reduce the aperture of the lens to prevent the development being so rapid as to become unmanageable. I have produced excellent results with a silver bath of twenty grains of nitrate of silver to the ounce of water, being about one-half the usual strength in use, the sensitizing of the collodion being proportionally reduced. I believe it will effect a great saving of expense for this reason. I believe my invention also removes the most important obstacle to the production of dry-plate impressions by harmonizing the lights and shades, which have heretofore usually been hard and inartistic. Exposing the sensitive surface in the manner described, before the impression has been formed, has less tendency to blend the lights and shades than when done afterwards, but I believe it gives a different and peculiar tone to the impression, which, in some cases, is very desirable, especially in negatives. When the object to be impressed is strongly lighted, accompanied with deep, heavy shadows, it is found advisable to illuminate, in the manner described, the sensitive surface, both before and after the impression is formed. This is effected by moving the black cloth before the camera a short time, before as well as after, and operating otherwise in the same manner as before described. Light dead surfaces may be used to produce a similar result, but their use is attended with greater hazard; and I believe the result obtained from dark surfaces is always to be preferred. I believe, also, that some glossy surfaces even may be used for this purpose, but require greater care to insure desirable effects. I believe that some good effect may be produced by admitting transmitted light upon the sensitive surface, or again, light reflected from yellow, and even red, and other colored surfaces, either before or after, or both before and after the photographic impression has been formed, but I believe that the reflection from a dark dead surface is much to be preferred, and have described a method of operating which I have found perfectly convenient and practical for use. The dead surface may be placed in the exact focus of the lens if the surface be kept in motion, so as to produce no distinct impression of its porous structure and inequalities, but it is neither as safe nor convenient as when the surface is out of focus. Having now fully described my invention, what I claim as new, and desire to secure by Letters-Patent, is as follows: I claim in photography the employment of diffused light, under the conditions herein specified, so as to render visible slight gradations of shade, both in the light and dark parts of the pictures, and to unite softness with strength, as herein explained and set forth.”]

SEUTTED, E. V. (RAYMOND, MS)
“Voices from the Craft. Gage’s Patent.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:45 (Sept. 1867): 300-301. [“— In 1854 I was making Daguerreotypes in Raymond, Mississippi. An individual, whose name I can give, called upon me, and offered to instruct me how to detect counterfeit notes and how to take children quickly, for $5. I “bit,” and the following was his process for the latter accomplishment: Expose the plate in the camera a few seconds to a black velvet background. As mine was a swinging one, I used it that way, and before exposing the plate to the sitter. If this is not the same thing that Mr. Gage has a patent for, I am much mistaken. E. V. Seutted.

LETTS, J. M. (DUNDEE, YATES CO., NY)
“Voices from the Craft. Gage’s Patent.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:45 (Sept. 1867): 301. [“I see by your last number of the Photographer, that Mr. F. B. Gage’s great intention of development by diffused light, is nothing more than an old dodge that I have made use of for seven years, and have abandoned for a much better plan, to effect the same thing, and upon which there is no patent now, but there is no certainty but that some inventive genius may reinvent it and obtain a patent. I proceed as follows:…”]

BY COUNTRY: GERMANY: 1867.
Vogel, Dr. H. “German Correspondence.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:46 (Oct. 1867): 327-329. [“American Photographs — Osborne’s Process — Zentmayer’ s Lens — The German Photographic Society — Photographs in Colors — Consumption of Silver and Collodion in the Negative Process — Prevention of the Reflection of the Sun in the Atelier — Collodion Experiments — Action of Bromide. “Bathing-place, Misdroy, September 1st, 1867. My dear Mr. Wilson: Rarely have I experienced so much pleasure as was given me by the receipt of your parcel containing American photographs. The collection proved all the more interesting to me, as I obtained by it a more thorough, perfect, and favorable impression of the capabilities of American photographers, than I had formed at the Paris Exposition, where the few American pictures exhibited seemed lost among the thousand and one other things, and part of them were hung very unfavorably…. I have mentioned already in my report on the Exposition. I had read in your Journal, the interesting processes of Meinerth and Gage for obtaining good half-tones. Meinerth had sent me specimens before yours came, which I laid before the Berlin Photographic Society, whose members admired them greatly. His method is best adapted to ladies’ heads; for gentlemen it is barely marked enough. Gage’s method I shall try as soon as I return to Berlin….” For years I have been occupied with the study of the negative process….” Truly yours. Dr. H. Vogel.”]

GAGE, F. B.
“Voices from the Craft.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:46 (Oct. 1867): 335-336. [“Mr. Editor: In your last number of the Photographer, your correspondent, J. M. Letts, after asserting that he had used the process which I have patented, for seven years, then goes on to say that he has abandoned it for another that there ” is no patent on.” If Mr. Letts had carefully read my specifications he would have discovered that his new dodge is patented. In those specifications he will find these words: “Good effect may be produced by admitting transmitted light upon the sensitive surface.” Now it makes no difference what Mr. Letts transmits his light through, whether ground, red, or yellow glass, or cloth, or other medium, it is just as much an infringement of the patent as the use of the cloth for reflecting the light. Mr. Letts also tells us that Professor Towler claims to have published something concerning this process “some years ago.” If the Professor had, indeed, published what he says he has, he would probably be able to give a more definite date. However well, Mr. Editor, “some years ago” may look in print, it is very much too indefinite to allow any interested parties to refer to it. Truly yours, F. B. Gage.

ORGANIZATIONS: USA: NEW YORK PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: 1867.
Hull, C. Wager. “New York Correspondence.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 4:48 (Dec. 1867): 388-389. [“The stated monthly meeting of the Photographic Section of the American Institute, was held on Monday, November 11, 1867, Mr. H. J. Newton in the chair. I regret exceedingly to note the absence of Mr. Rutherfurd and Professor Rood, both having been seriously ill, but now removed from danger, and improving … Mr. Hull exhibited a series of pictures made by F. B. Gage, which were made by his patented process, described in a recent issue of your Journal. A committee was appointed to make experiments as directed by Mr. Gage, and, until their report and specimens are handed to the Society, it is not worth while to argue upon the merits of his discovery….”

BY COUNTRY: USA: 1869.
Editor’s Table.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 6:63 (Mar. 1869): 94-96. [“Mr. F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vermont, has sent us a number of stereos of snow scenes, from dry plates, which are exceedingly fine. Although such subjects are a very hard test for that process, there is not a harsh spot in any one of these. They are admirable in every way. “The Model Snow-storm” is very peculiar looking, as if a blinding storm was going on, hiding almost every object, and yet, in the stereoscope, the effect is fine and beautiful.” p. 96.]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1869.
“Editor’s Table. Photographs Received.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 6:64 (Apr. 1869): 136. [“…Mr. F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, Vermont, has favored us with some more of his beautiful winter views from dry plates. Nothing could be much more perfect than they are. Mr. Gage advertises them for sale in Specialties.” (This copy bound without advertising supplement.)]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1869.
“Editor’s Table.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 6:69 (Sept. 1869): 323-324. [“From Mr. F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury. Vt., some stereos from dry-plates, possessing a great deal of merit. Mr. Gage is continually working upon a process which he has not yet made known, but which he thinks must be fully equal to the wet process in every way.” p. 324.]

GAGE, FRANKLIN BENJAMIN. (1824-1874) (USA)
Obituary – A Veteran Gone.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 11:130 (Oct. 1874): 318. [“We regret to be called upon to announce the death of one of the veterans of photography, Mr. F. B. Gage, of St. Johnsbury, Vt., which occurred on the 23d of August, 1874. From Mr. Gage’s family we learn that he was born July 29th, 1824. He learned daguerreotyping when about twenty-two years of age, and in 1850 started the photograph business in St. Johnsbury, where he continued to conduct it for a period of twenty-four years, or up to the time of his death. Mr. Gage enjoyed a good reputation as an artist, and was one of the most industrious experimentalists in the business. To him the fraternity owes much of the progress that has been made in the various photographic processes. In July, 1869, he patented in the United States, Great Britain, and France, a process for using diffused light in the camera for the purpose of giving detail “so as to render visible slight gradations of shade, both in the light and dark parts of the picture, and to unite softness and strength.” We well remember meeting Mr. Gage in New York, by his request, to examine the merits of this invention, and how we were almost sworn to secrecy before he ventured to reveal the principle on which his claim was based. Previous to this he also patented an improvement in photographic cameras. He was a man of more than ordinary genius, and somewhat eccentric withal, was always inventing and trying new processes. It is said he “hardly ever finished two sets of pictures by the same process.” Mr. Gage possessed a good deal of literary talent, was a frequent contributor to local publications of current literature, as well as to this journal on the various processes of photography, in which he always manifested a deep interest. It is sad to see the pioneers of our art passing away from us, and when such men as Mr. Gage go, they leave a vacancy that is not easily filled, and their memory is cherished by those who are benefited by the results of their lifelong efforts.”]

WALDACK, CHARLES.
Waldack, Charles. “Belgian Correspondence.” PHILADELPHIA PHOTOGRAPHER 11:132 (Dec. 1874): 375-378. [“Ghent, November 2d, 1874. Editor Philadelphia Photographer. According to promise, I will endeavor to give you occasionally a brief account of whatever observations I may make here, which can be profitable or of interest to your readers. The first question that a photographer coming back from Europe would be likely to be asked by one of his brethren would certainly be: What do you think of our art in Europe? This question I will also try to answer briefly. …” “….I must not conclude without giving a few lines to a subject which is of great importance to photographers. I refer to the reduction of exposure obtained by the use of colored glasses to admit light in the camera or by other similar means. The colored light is supposed to continue the action of the white light. It is contended, however, and with very good reason, that this action is due to the imperfect opacity to the actinic rays possessed by the glass which is used. In daguerreotype times, Blanquart Evrard proposed to paste white paper inside the camera, seven or eight years ago. Mr. Gage proposed to reflect the light from his focussing cloth in the camera, by keeping it for some seconds in front of the object-glass. It has been contended that the only effect of all such means was to fog the plate slightly, thus giving a picture which was less hard than one which was under-exposed, but still devoid of details in the shadows….” p. 377.]

PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ARTS JOURNAL

GAGE & ROWELL.
Gage & Rowell. “How Is It?” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 10:9 (Sept. 1857): 281.

GAGE & ROWELL.
Gage & Rowell. “Humbugs vs. Anti-Humbugs.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 10:9 (Sept. 1857): 287.

GAGE, F. B.
“The Solar Camera – Printing Process – Glass Cleaning.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 11:4 (Apr. 1858): 105. [“Mr. Snelling,—I use the Solar Camera which some of your contemporaries stigmatise as a “poor concern.” I beg leave to say that I differ from these august sentiments. After using it six months, I grow more astonished daily to see the results which I produce. I have printed by the Calotype, the Albumen, the Ammonio-nitrate, and the Wenderoth Processes. The ammonia-nitrate and albumen process please me the best, as I have the time to print the limited number that I make. With the right kind of negative, from two to three hours will print a half-length portrait.
I use in salting—
Chloride of ammonium               2 grains.
Water                                       1 oz.
I have tried every amount from one grain to ten, and prefer the two grain solution as giving the best results.
Nitrate of silver                          30 grains.
Water                                       1 oz.
Made into common nitrate in the usual way, and one drop c.p. nitric acid added to each four ounces of solution. Toning bath as laid down in the Moulton process. The Wenderoth process works rapidly, and produces fine results in my hands, but is more expensive and requires much more care, when only a small number of prints are made. In large establishments where hundreds are made a week, its value is not to be told.
For all our silver solutions, I melt clean snow in an earthen ware vessel, and use it in place of distilled water, as it produces better results than Croton, bottled (labelled distilled water), and sold for fifty cents per gallon. Those who have never tried it can easily save their fifty cents per gallon, and have a better solution in the bargain.
The most pleasing pictures that I have printed in the printing frame, were made by a process for calotypes, by Mr. Sutton, but which I modified as follows:
Water                                       1 oz.
Pure white gelatine                    6 grains.
Common salt                             4 grains.
Put the ingredients into the water while cold, and warm it gently until they are all dissolved (care being taken not to get it boiling hot); filter it through a sponge while warm, and it is ready for use. This should be kept in a warm place, and the paper floated on it two or three minutes and then dried.
For silvering I use—
Water                                       1 oz.
Nitrate of silver                          35 grs.
Lemon juice                              1 or two drops.
Float the paper five or six minutes, as the thick body of the gelatine will require that time to soften, so as to absorb a sufficient amount of silver.
Print a very little darker than you want, and tone in the Moulton toning bath; or the bath used for toning your illustrations, which is nearly the same.
The superiority of this process lies in the fact, that the gelatine keeps the picture on the surface of the paper, and the lemon juice gives the print a very warm violet tint when properly toned. Mr. Sutton says,— “No one that has not tried it, can have any idea of the wonderful brilliancy imparted to a print by the mucelage contained in lemon juice.”
These remarks were made in reference to prints developed by gallic acid: but I find they are equally applicable to those printed without development. In the prints that I have made by this method, the details are equal to the very best albumen prints. The gelatine having a very fine grain, the surface of the print has not a certain half-glassy, haIf-scaly appearance, which all albumen prints have on close examination. Moreover, the lights, when properly printed and toned, are absolutely pure; which, combined with the other superior quality, make them the most deservable prints I have made. It is like all good things, more work to print a given number of copies by this process, than by the ammonia-nitrate, when the solution is spread with cotton, but the better quality will repay the extra trouble. In spreading the ammonio-nitrate over the paper, I use cotton flannel, after having washed it thoroughly in a weak solution of sal-soda, rinsed and dried. Cut a patch to the desired shape and place it on the paper, nap side down; then lay a small ball of cotton wool on the middle of the patch, gather up the corners so as to enclose the cotton, and proceed to spread the solution, and you will seldom be troubled with greasy streaks which often occur when using the prepared cotton wool.
I have tried many ways to clean glass when negatives were varnished with any of the spirit varnishes, and have never succeeded to my liking until of late. I now make a saturated solution of sal-soda in water, lay the glass in this, and in a few hours the varnish will contract so as to detach the film from the glass. I then rub them over carefully with rotten stone or Norton’s cleaning powder; wash it off and the glass is ready for another picture.
I use the soda for cleaning all my glass now, and succeed in getting better results than ever before. Respectfully yours, F. B. Gage.”]

GAGE, F. B.
“Personal & Art Intelligence.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 11:4 (Apr. 1858): 126-127. [“Having had a great number of inquiries, lately, respecting the “Solar Camera.” The paper on that instrument by Mr. Gage, will prove highly advantageous to those who use, or contemplate using it. Whatever may be said as to the merits or demerits of Mr. Woodward’s patent, one thing is certain ; there is no better instrument, for the purpose, made. It accomplishes all that is claimed for it, and it does its work well. There is no necessity for purchasing the large size, as the small one will answer the same purpose and is more portable, although for large galleries the 4-4 size may be found more stable. We have seen life-size pictures that were printed by a new process, discovered by Mr. Woodward, in four and five minutes without development. This is certainly quick enough, and if Mr. Woodward consults his own interests as well as those of his brother artists, he will give it to the public immediately. In the formula for printing by Mr. Gage, on page 105, we are desired by him to make a correction. The salting solution should be as follows:
Water                           1 ounce.
Pure gelatine                 4 grains.
Common salt                 8 grains.
The solution as previously given will not flow well when cold.”]

GAGE, F. B.
“Personal & Art Intelligence.” PHOTOGRAPHIC AND FINE ART JOURNAL 11:6 (June 1858): 190-192. [“Mr. Gage, of St. Johnsbury, Vt., has sent us a charming little lot of portraits and views, some of which are exquisite. The portrait of the Rev. B. F. Hall is unsurpassable either by the camera of the photographer or the pencil of the painter. It almost speaks; every portion of the picture within the focal reach of the camera is delightfully round, exquisitely shaded, and minute in detail. That of Dr. Newton is of different style of finish, but equally good, except in position, and in the evident desire of the Doctor to give prominence to a fine pair of bright eyes and large overhanging eyebrows. A little drooping of the eye-lids would have produced a more pleasing result. The views are fair, but a little overtoned. This is a branch of photography in which our American artists have yet much to learn. The manipulations and details of these views are good, but they want perspective and an atmosphere. The best solar camera prints we have yet seen have been executed by Mr. Gage They are not now before us, and we therefore cannot point out their good qualities.
This reminds us of the article we copied last month from Mr. Sutton’s Photographic Notes, on enlarging collodion negatives by Woodward’s Solar Camera. The position therein assumed by Mr. Sutton is not tennable, and had he seen its operations would never have been put forth by him. His objections, suggestions, and speculations are all chimerical, and we can have no better proof — nor would he require better — against his arguments than the portraits sent to Mr. Anthony by Mr. Gage.” p. 192.]

PRACTICAL MECHANIC’S JOURNAL

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1867.
“Applications for Provisional Protection for Inventions under the Patent Law Amendment Act.” PRACTICAL MECHANIC’S JOURNAL 20:233 (July 1867): 125-128.
[“22nd May, 1867. 1526. W. E. Newton, Chancery Lane — Portable photographic apparatus. — A com.” p. 127.
“25th May, 1867. 1553. James Simpson. Hulme— Producing photographic pictures.” p. 128.
“29th May, 1867. 1593. F. B. Gage, St. Johnsbury, U. S. — Harmonizing the lights and shades in photographic impressions.” p. 128.
“30th May, 1867. 1603. C. E. Brooman, Fleet Street— Photographic albums — A com.” p. 128.
“7th June, 1867. 1676. J. Petrzwalski, John Street— Photo –megascope.” p. 128.”]

VERMONTER

 Dexter, Lorraine. “Gage of St. Johnsbury – Hills and Dales, 1859.” VERMONTER 4, no. 8 (Sept. 1966): 23-29. illus. [This article includes a listing of Edward Anthony’s stereoview series “Hills and Dales of New England,” taken by F. B. Gage. (Nos. 451-480, and c. 580-600.), with a checklist listing the holdings of these cards in several public and private collections. (The earlier Anthony series of views by Gage  “The White Hills,” seems to be different from the later “Hills and Dales of New England” series, although some of those images may have been recycled by Anthony in the latter issues.]

YOUTH’S COMPANION

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, F B. “A Sad Story.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 47:8 (Feb. 19, 1874): 59. [“Our readers will rightly pronounce this story a romance, but it is a romance of reality–not only sad, but sadly true. The characters in its brief but bitter tragedy are an aged woman, her daughter Mary, and her grandson Charley, ten years old. The family had once been in comfortable circumstances, but death had taken away their providers and protecters…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “The Great Wolf Hunt at Seymour Lake.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 47:26 (June 25, 1874): 205. [“Seymour Lake is in the town of Morgan, Vt. Encircled by green hills, there is not a more beautiful body of water in New England. It is some ten miles from Island Pond, a station on the Grand Trunk Railroad. Forty years ago an unbroken wilderness extended from this lake hundreds of miles to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. On the south and west sides of the lake were several farms, which had been under cultivation ten or fifteen years…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “What Happened at the Swamp.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 47:34 (Aug. 20, 1874): 271.
[“Farmer Stanton was a man of few words. Eating his supper one spring day, he spoke out abruptly,—
“I’ve hired my help for the season.”
“You have?” said his wife. “Who have you hired?”
“David Locke and Jim Thompson.”
“Have you? Well, David Locke is smart enough, but I guess Jim Thompson aint much.”
Fanner Stanton was a shrewd, observing man. Rising from the table he remarked.—
“I’ll wager Jim Thompson is the smartest of the two,” and went out.
Mary Stanton, the farmer’s daughter, sat at the table, and heard the conversation. Mary was a rosy-cheeked girl of sweet sixteen, full of life and animation, and much admired by the young swains of the neighborhood. David Locke and Jim Thompson were both well known to her.
David was a dashing, showy fellow with plenty of conceit. Jim was just the reverse of that. He was very retiring, bashful to a fault, and never disposed to assume any thing. In the presence of young ladies, particularly, Jim always had his “worst foot forward,” and appeared to great disadvantage. Naturally enough, the lively Mary voted him a downright “stupid,” and her mother agreed with her.
A week later found the two boys installed in Farmer Stanton’s family. David and Mary were at once on the best of terms, for Mary was fascinated with his brilliancy and wit. But Jim, although he admired Mary more than any other girl he knew, had not enough assurance to assert himself, and he received but little attention from Mary.
One evening Farmer Stanton and his wife went off to the Green on business, The weather was chilly, and Mary and the two young men sat round the fire. David Locke, as usual, led this conversation, and presently he commenced telling bear adventures, taking care to figure himself in them as the chief actor, and a hero of the first mark.
Jim and Mary listened to his boasts, little thinking how soon the opportunity would come to test him. Still less did David dream of being put to the proof of his courage, even while he was boasting about it. But before he had finished telling his gallant adventures, a great uproar was heard at the barn.
Mary thought very likely some wild animal was about, for the night was dark, and favorable for prowlers. Turning to David, she exclaimed,—
“Take the lantern, David, and go to the barn and see what the matter is.”
To her surprise, instead of hastening to do her bidding, as he always had done, David turned pale, sat still, and forcing a light laugh, said,—
“There’s nothing the matter at the barn, Mary.”
“But I tell yon there is, and you know it,” persisted the young lady, with a meaning look. She was beginning already to see how thin David’s pretentions to courage were.
Turning to Jim, she said,—
“You’ll go, wont you?”
Jim colored to the very roots of his hair, but he replied, firmly,—
“No, David is the man to go, of course. He may have another heroic adventure.”
“Ho, ho; you needn’t ask Jim,” cried David, hastily. “He’s afraid there’s something out there”
“I know that’s the reason why you wont start. ‘Tisn’t my reason by a long shot.”
“Well, why don’t you go, then?”
“If Miss Stanton had asked me first, as she did you, I would have gone.”
“O fol-de-rol for you!  You’re a coward, Jim.”
“With flashing eyes, Mary Stanton sprang up and reached for the lantern.
“You are both cowards,” she exclaimed. “I’ll go myself.”
The resolute girt actually lit the lantern, and got herself ready before the young men could so far forget their own quarrel as to notice what she was doing; but just as she opened the door her father drove up.
Taking the lantern from Mary’s hand, he went to the bam, where he found that one of his oxen had broken loose, so it proved the disturbance had not been caused by a wild beast at all.
That little evening episode lowered the two boys greatly in Mary Stanton’s esteem. She had never expected much of Jim, but for David to fall from her good opinion was certainly a disappointment.
Thus matters stood for a long time—a long time to Jim Thompson’s thinking, at least. Both the boys saw by Mary’s changed manner what she thought of them. David didn’t seem to care for her good opinion, but Jim worried considerably in secret, and he more than once regretted his refusal to go to the barn. The foolish pique of a moment had lost him a fine chance to prove his courage— and courage enough Jim certainly had.
One day, after dinner, Farmer Stanton said,—
“Boys, I am going to the Green. While I am gone David will chop at the wood-pile in the door-yard. You, Jim, may hitch the horse into the wagon. After I get off, go down to Neighbor Chamberlain’s, and ask the loan of his inch auger, long enough to mend the harrow. Then come back and work with David till I get home,”
Farmer Stanton and his wife rode away, and Jim started across lots to do the errand, leaving David chopping. Some twenty rods below the house there was a swampy piece of woods to pass through. Jim had scarcely entered the woods when he suddenly came upon a bear; digging dragon root. The bear was backed up to a small tree, with his head down, grubbing away so intently that he did not hear Jim’s approach.
Jim was clear-headed, and knew what to do in a real emergency better than many a more brilliant young man. Besides, he possessed remarkable strength of limb.
Quick as thought, he sprang forward and caught the bear by his hind legs. Jerking his feet from under him, he pulled them backwards, and, in a second, twisted them round the body of the tree, where he held them with the grip of a vice. The astonished bear found himself standing on his fore-paws, with his nose to the ground.
Roaring with rage, he tried to turn round and bite, but as fast as he turned, Jim walked round the trunk, keeping out of the way of his teeth; and thus the two circumnavigated the tree, like a pair of boys balanced on a whirligig.
Mary Stanton had paused a minute in her in-door work, and was just noticing David Locke’s lazy motions at the wood-pile, when the noise of the raving bear in the swamp reached her ear through the open window, and in a moment after Jim’s voice, calling,—
“David, David, come here with your axe. Quick!”
“Run, run, David, run with the axe,” cried Mary. “Perhaps the bear is killing Jim!”
Alas, then, for David’s boasted courage! He heard the outcries in the swamp plainly enough, and a brave man would have needed no second command. Instead of rushing to Jim’s aid, he looked wildly about him, dropped his axe, and went into the house, looking cowed and pale.
Mary did not waste any more time over him. Darting out bareheaded, she seized the axe herself, and was over the door-yard fence in a moment. Rushing into the woods, she followed the sounds to the swamp, where she found Jim and the enraged bear walking round and round the tree.
“Where’s David?” exclaimed Jim, amazed at seeing Mary with the axe.
“In the house, the coward! But I’ll kill the bear if you’ll hold him tight, Jim.”
Jim and Mary were both self-possessed. Jim told her when and how to strike, and a single blow severed the bear’s spine, and laid him dead.
The next day, David Locke left Farmer Stanton’s service. The contempt and taunts of the family made his place too hot for him. “Jim Thompson is worth a dozen such braggadocios,” the farmer said.
And certainly Jim never needed an advocate with the fanner’s daughter after the affair in the swamp. And when Mary, one day, informed him and her mother that she had elected Jim for their son-In law, neither of them offered a single objection. Fortunately, Jim had other good qualities besides courage, and so she made a good choice.”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “Two Catamount Stories.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 47:36 (Sept. 3, 1874): 287. [“It is doubtful if any specimens of the catamount, or panther, once the terror of our forests, now survive in the State of Vermont; but as late as 1867 two of these animals were killed in different parts of the State. In the autumn of that year a fox hunter, near the foot of the Ascutney Mountain, in Weathersford, had a valuable hound mysteriously killed…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “Edgar Kibby and His New Gun.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 47:47 (Nov. 19, 1874): 387. [“Edgar Kibby lived in the town of Charleston, Vt., many years ago. At the time of which we write, he was about ten years old, a strong, healthy boy, quite small, but full of life and spirit. He was keen of observation, quick to understand, and handy at any thing he attempted to do. More than this, he possessed wonderful coolness and courage as the sequel will show….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, F B. “Mrs. Piper’s Bear Story.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 48:1 (Jan. 7, 1875): 3. [“The year we lived on the Bebee Place, said Mrs. Piper, the bears was master thick. The Bebee Place is East Charleston, little more’n a mile out of the village, and six miles from Island Pond. One day, twenty-one year ago come August, I and John (that’s my husband) went to the village to ‘tend the funeral of old Mis’ Snell…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, F B. “Almost a Hug.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 48:16 (Apr 22, 1875): 125. [“The following story of the old “up-country” times, was told me by one of the oldest inhabitants of St. Johnsbury, Vt. About two miles north-east from what is now the “village” of St. Johnsbury, a man named Houghton purchased a piece of land, and established himself in the wilderness. He made a clearing, built him a log house, and settled down to pioneer farming….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “A Scare and a Laugh.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 48:47 (Nov. 25, 1875): 391. [“Mr. Harrington lived in the town of St. Johnsbury, Vt., and his neighbor, Zebina Goss, just over the line, in the town of Waterford. Harrington was a tall, loose-jointed, clownish fellow, a great boaster, and an equally great coward. Mr. Goss was, however, quite a small man, and very unpretending, but endowed with more than ordinary courage….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “A Desperate Encounter.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 49:6 (Feb. 10, 1876): 45. [“For many years there lived in the town of Brighton, Vt., a man by the name of Seneca Foster. Although a man of no more than medium size, he possessed the most wonderful physical vigor and endurance. No exertion or exposure seemed to impair his health. Mr. Foster’s son Jack inherited much of his father’s strong constitution and elastic frame….”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “Old Brindle’s Fate.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 50:13 (Mar. 29, 1877): 98. [“Mr. Young entered his log-cabin with an unmistakable glow of satisfaction on his face. Seating himself before the fire, he said, — “Wife, you can’t possibly guess what John Martin just told me.”…”]

GAGE, FRANKLIN B.
Gage, Franklin B. “Foolish George Hogden.” YOUTH’S COMPANION 52:18 (May 1, 1879): 146. [“Foolish George Hogden is not an imaginary character. I believe he is a native of the town of Newport, Vt. People call him “Foolish” George because he is rather weak of intellect.–a little daft, as the Scotch say….”]

POLAROID PROJECT IV. JOHN WOOD.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

The following is an excerpt from an essay on John Wood, written by Susie Cohen as part of the collaborative “Polaroid Project” that John participated in with Robert Frank, Dave Heath, Robert Heinecken, and Susie and me in the early 1980s. (Search this site for “Polaroid Project” for more information about this project.)

THE KNUTE ROCKNE OASIS NEWSLETTER & JOURNAL OF CRITICAL OPINION

Vol 1: no. 1 (Sept. 1983)

Editorial Statement

Hi. Susie and I decided to go ahead with the idea that we half-humorously advanced before: to write and xerox a “newsletter” to the folks who are participating in “The Project”. The Knute Rockne Oasis Newsletter will be uncertain in format and irregular in publication. Its purpose is mostly to spread information around to everyone and to keep everyone reminded that the Project advances.

The first piece of information is that the Knute Rockne Oasis is a comfort stop along the Indiana Turnpike and it shows up on the horizon when you need some comfort.

The major item in this issue is Susie’s “letter” to Eelco Wolf. This “letter” is a fictional device that we have adopted to allow us to collect our thoughts during various phases of this event. It might be placed somewhere between a diary entry and a very rough draft of preliminary research. This device allows us a private, even personal “voice” which is frowned on in more scholarly circles. (It will probably become quickly apparent that Susie’s “private voice” is much more elegant than mine).

Let me close this inaugural “editorial statement” with a plea common to editors down through generations… If anyone wants to participate in the Knute Rockne Oasis Newsletter, please jump in.

William Johnson

NEWS & COMMENT

Robert Heinecken and Joyce Neimanas’ new address is: 407 E. Florence Blvd. Englewood, CA. 90301. (213)-672-1561. They apparently survived the move from Chicago.

Susie and my new address is: 123 White St., Belmont, Mass. 02178, (617)-484-3784. We apparently survived the move from Connecticut.

Dave Heath will be spending the week of Sept. 26-30 teaching at the Rhode Island School of Design. He will be showing his latest slide-tape performance to the public, on the 27th. There is a concurrent 40 print exhibition of his most recent work (made since everyone got together in Rochester last April).

Susie and I are gathering copy slides of John Wood’s work to send or show to everyone, which we will do soon. We fell in love with the new Polaroid instant 35mm slides which demonstrate once again that photography is alchemy and thus close to magic. John was also intrigued and has started “experimenting” with them. If anyone else would like to try some out let me know.

August 23, 1983. Dear Eelco,

Bill and I visited John Wood for the first time last week. We spent two days at his home in Alfred, New York as the guests of John and his very charming and hospitable wife, Suzanne. For over twenty years the Woods have lived in an old farmhouse that overlooks the town of Alfred through overgrown and cultivated fields. There is some relatively recent college architecture visible on the slope back into town, and a few neighbors further on up the road; the fields and woods have the atmosphere of quiet that places unmastered by neon possess. Mrs. Wood returned to school when her children were grown, and is now a librarian for the Agricultural and Technical College at Alfred. They are by no means isolated: though physically situated away from the center of town and its cluster of universities, driving (or; in John’s case, biking) into town seems a daily activity. What one senses at their house is not seclusion, but self-sufficiency that they have evolved as a couple. While the house bears evidence of family activity and outgoing hospitality: lawn and gardens, dining areas, childrens’ books, there is also evidence that they live actively for their own interests; Suzanne’s loom, her weavings, and balls of yarn in hand made pots and baskets; the study with books and papers; the potting room; tiny paper animal cut-outs that have found themselves on window sills.

In its attention to detail and its overall eclectic evolution, the house reveals elements of chance, practical elegance, craftsmanship and wide-ranging inquiry that are also elements of John’s art and character. The house is not a “work” however, as these elements are found there as separate solutions or as the unplanned evolutions that emerge from living in one place for a long time. Bill spotted the element of chance in the volunteer strawberry plants growing in cracks of the cement stairs that lead to the front porch. On the porch itself, a post has been hung to support the roof, but the post is 3″ short of its goal, supported in turn by an oval rock. John explained that this is a technique used by Japanese builders to prevent a post from rotting. I don’t really think we noticed it until John, experimenting with the instant slide film we’d brought, made two pictures of it. The slides (we looked at them right after breakfast because it had been too dark the evening we arrived to use the film) showed the upright (half in light, half in shadow, edge highlighted) contrasting the continuously shaded round rock. Simple, lovely. Inside, in the staircase leading from the ground floor to the upstairs bedrooms, the banister is a long, tapered branch, glowing from the handholds of countless passers. The bathroom towel rack is also a branch, rounded and polished in use.

I would not pretend to know them well after so brief a visit, but would suggest that the Woods’ graciousness is a habit not so much of special treatment for guests, but of absorbing the visitors within their full lives. We were obviously an interruption of some routines, yet we felt that there was “room” for our presence and our ideas.

For many years John had used various spaces within the large house as studio space, but several years ago he and his daughter constructed a building in the field just across the road from the house. Though the field is harvested casually by a neighbor for hay, the studio building itself sits in a wild growth of tall grass and flowers visited by birds and butterflies, Chicory, hawkweed, butter-and-eggs and Queen Anne’s Lace grow along the path from the road to the studio. It was idyllic when we were there, but John warned us that Alfred is dismal in the winter, which hangs on in low gray wet skies until April.

John’s studio: one large ground floor room, an el shape, with a small darkroom; storage loft above. Well-lighted with windows and a sky-light. Most of the furniture is old cabinets and work tables, a desk with telephone in one corner. A woodstove, drafting table, one hard-wood chair, a stool, a director’s chair. The stairs to the loft are narrow pyramids set on end to a slanting board.

Books: Miro, Sears catalogue, geometry, stencil patterns, Theodore Roethke; on printmaking and bookbinding. On the walls and window sills: paper stencils, hand made paper birds, shells, stones, pottery, folded paper. On the tables: papers, string, jars of ink. crayons, pencils, color swatches, rulers, fixative, clothespins, magazines, cans. On a beam; jars of tint for making crayons. On one table: a low flat heat box that John uses to make wax color drawings (he built it fearing to use the wood stove for this purpose).

John claims to be an disorganized person, and it is true that the studio is a clutter of tables, piles, paper, bottles, brushes, finished work and work in progress. Yet the ongoing work – in this case, collages on Japanese paper photographically printed in cyan – was spacially and visually distinct. As John began to bring out older work for us to see, he did so from drawers and solander boxes that though heaped with more current materials, were carefully closed and protected. John wraps and handles the work with precise movements made of equal parts of physical and emotional respect for it. I noticed particularly that John’s body arcs around an “area of interest” (whether its the work or a newspaper or an implement) and thus he defines a special and intense enclosure for himself and the onlooker.

In earlier interviews, and to us, John stated that while working, he is often “distracted” from one direction to another by the glimpse of an object or the glimmer of an idea. And we could see that the jars, colors, textures, and shapes of things were casually situated to be suggestive to an open mind. Though our acquaintance is brief, I would like to stress this: that the “disorganization” is a provocation of possibilities, an endless store of manipulable source material. The clutter is a screen in the negative sense only to the extent that it may bother John personally. I suspect, however, that John is himself a screen, and that he instinctively adjusts the mesh to allow through, to see, what it is he needs to work. John is not directionless but multi-directioned. His purpose is less to make than to feel the making, less to finish that to experience. His works, both ongoing and finished, are visually and psychologically forceful expressions for finely distincted feelings and for a variety of forms for them.

John is expert at photography, printmaking, papermaking, painting, drawing, and bookbinding, and these in pure states and in combinations. He often creates or recreates the tools and processes he uses. The most apt term for him would be image-maker. (He feels that “photography” is the silver print, that what he does is closer to “printmaking” in traditional terms. He is worried, and curious, at the categories in which his work has been placed and discussed). At this point in our acquaintance, I would concur with John’s assessment that his training at the Institute of Design is responsible for his openness to and facility with materials, processes and ideas. This training is at least what gave discipline to the creative intentions that were intriguing him and then lured him to the Institute in 1950.

I’m not sufficiently aware of the chronology or diversity of John’s work to describe it well. From what I saw, however, which included ingeniously bound books, black and white and color pencil drawings, paintings, sculpture of sticks and paper, straight silver photographs, collages of photographs and drawings, collages of photographs, collages with words, stencils, etc, I have a preliminary sense of what makes John’s work his.

First, as I mentioned, there is an air of respect about finished works that is not only an attitude of John’s, but emanates as well from the work. Each series, or piece (regardless of its sketch-like quality or polish) is made with an assured hand, the hand of an experienced and careful craftsman. Even the most “experimental” or protean work proceeds from a clarity that demonstrates purpose -even if the ultimate “meaning” is not yet known.

Secondly, there is the fact of the diversity itself. Any material, and surface is a potential “light modulator” (in Moholy’s words). And I think that John’s encompassing attitude toward the potential significance of any scrap of material or ray of light parallels his attitude toward feelings: that there is none too insignificant among human states not worthy of exploration and visual form. It seems that John can evoke “tenderness” as well from three sticks joined in an open pyramid as from moonlight; “terror” from the outline of a gun as well as from the depiction of natural forces; and the exuberance of human motion from the abstract markings of his hand as well as from the literal depiction of the moving figure. Unlike Moholy’s fierce idealism, which projected the camera as the transmitter of modern experience, John’s work is filled with a gentler, but also an uncompromising social purpose. He does not believe that his art, or any art, can change the world directly, especially through specific, cause-related imagery. Yet he has faith that his art, and all art, in the long run, elicits a non-violent, positive response from the sensitive viewer. Though some of his images depict recognizable events or situations (such as the Vietnam war) his art his non-narrative, non-propagandistic. He calls them “quiet protests.” Others of his pieces refer to environmental and other current political concerns such as the preservation of whales and nuclear disarmament. Where Heinecken’s commentary is biting, John’s is fantastical, due to the use of animal shapes and the surrealism of the collage technique. Yet they are penetrating and memorable because of the purity of form and the richness of form combinations. Some of the work, such as the pencil “systems drawings”, some watercolors and paintings, and handmade paper shapes, are pure abstractions. Like the abstract works of Hartley, Marin and O’Keeffe, however, they derive ultimately from the observation of nature rather than from abstract intellect. In the “systems drawings” for instance, the thickness of marks and the layering of tone strongly evoke the careful but pleasurable movement of the hand. The patterning devices are a control, and these were stimulated from an interest in Mimbres pottery.

Another group of abstractions is a series of small watercolors, each the size of a folio account sheet cut in half from a blank “banker’s book” John found. John made a special, cloth-covered box to hold the series. The overall design of each is an open, geometric mesh, constructed with short, bright strokes. Again, the formality of the design is played against the thin/thickness of the outlining strokes and fill-in color. Though John has training as an architecture engineer and can make very precise renderings, these watercolors (and others of his drawings)’show a deliberate skew from mechanical rigidity. He made the brushes for this series from dried yucca stalks. The brushes, still tinted, sit in a clay pot on a window sill.

Although it may be hasty at this point, or even irrelevant, I want to try to categorize John’s work beyond “multi-media humanist”. I’m guessing that there is some central belief at the heart of it: faith not in a hierarchical ordering but faith that there isn’t disorder in the universe. That change observed or made is mysterious but meaningful; that perception of alteration or the proclivity to alter is the human gift.

John is averse to mechanical (photographic) order for its own sake. He has said on several occasions that making his work isn’t meaningful for him unless it incorporates the feelings he has for the people (objects, motion, color) in this work. He is equally shy of the sort of stylized belief that Minor White (whom he knew) developed around photography. Certainly the content of John’s photographs are seen “for what else they are” but John does not use, or advocate the use, of photographs for self-teaching or meditation.

John consistently uses symbolic imagery: stars, whales, guns, tree images of himself and of his friends: certain pastel hues, layered space and photographic puns are repeated formal devices; the marks of his hand with pencil, with paint and in sand are both form and content, John goes to galleries, judges contests, oversees students and is well-versed in art history- But like his house, when he works he is self-sufficient: inventing and borrowing as he needs. He neither follows trends nor cares if he leads them. His work refers occasionally to pictographs, surrealism and popular media. But all of this: symbols, references, forms are only the letters of an alphabet and I haven’t yet grasped whether they make novels or poems or prayers.

John didn’t work much during our visit. We had brought the 4×5 film he requested and stayed awake late one night to try it out and took our portraits with it before we left. The surprise was his response to the Polaroid instant slide film. We had brought it to make record slides but John was intrigued with the quickness of it and with the magic processing box. He liked the cellular quality of the color, and the platinum-like tonal range of the black & white. We left the processor and some film with him. Another “distraction”? I hope so. More soon,

SUSIE.

Two acknowledged interests of John’s were Buckminster Fuller and the concrete poetry movement, and he referenced both in many images throughout his career.

At one time John often frequented a local beach, where the waves deposited a layer of white sand over a layer of dark sand, which was erased and reconstituted with each wave, a natural process creating a tabula rasa for the “mark making” that John so loved to do.

The following images are several pages from my informal records of the “retrospective” portion of the exhibition, indicating choices and positioning of that portion of the project. John’s early conceptual sequences, created years before other, better-known artists in California, were a pioneering effort in shifting the paradigm of “creative photography” away from the single print modernist aesthetic, which was one of the criteria we considered when we asked the four artists to participate in the project.

First meeting as a group, held at Joan & Nathan Lyon’s house in Rochester, NY.

John was one of the participants who accepted the offer to use the Polaroid 20 x 24” camera in the studio at the School of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. On this visit John chose to experiment with the color and scale of the large camera, as the last stage in his continuously evolving process of segueing an image through a variety of media and processes to finally reach the completed image. It is entirely possible that some portion of the final collages shown on the studio walls began as the 35mm Polaroid slide film that is described in Susie’s comments on our first visit to his house in 1983.

Copy of the layout of the images that John created for his 16 page signature that each artist made for the project. The final image is a portrait of one of his grandchildren. For me this sequence was one of John’s “quiet protests,” a poetically visual and subtly unsettling statement about the potential dangers of unconsidered nationalism and unbridled patriotism in the nuclear age.

Susie and I visited John again in 1991, where he surprised us with a gift of this lovely book. John created the book out of his copy of the maquette that he had put together for the 16-page signature for the project. The covers and binding were designed by John, who included bookmaking among his many skills.

POLAROID PROJECT IV. JOHN WOOD.

The following is an excerpt from an essay on John Wood, written by Susie Cohen as part of the collaborative “Polaroid Project” that John participated in with Robert Frank, Dave Heath, Robert Heinecken, and Susie and me in the early 1980s. (Search this site for “Polaroid Project” for more information about this project.)

THE KNUTE ROCKNE OASIS NEWSLETTER & JOURNAL OF CRITICAL OPINION

Vol 1: no. 1 (Sept. 1983)

Editorial Statement

Hi. Susie and I decided to go ahead with the idea that we half-humorously advanced before: to write and xerox a “newsletter” to the folks who are participating in “The Project”. The Knute Rockne Oasis Newsletter will be uncertain in format and irregular in publication. Its purpose is mostly to spread information around to everyone and to keep everyone reminded that the Project advances.

The first piece of information is that the Knute Rockne Oasis is a comfort stop along the Indiana Turnpike and it shows up on the horizon when you need some comfort.

The major item in this issue is Susie’s “letter” to Eelco Wolf. This “letter” is a fictional device that we have adopted to allow us to collect our thoughts during various phases of this event. It might be placed somewhere between a diary entry and a very rough draft of preliminary research. This device allows us a private, even personal “voice” which is frowned on in more scholarly circles. (It will probably become quickly apparent that Susie’s “private voice” is much more elegant than mine).

Let me close this inaugural “editorial statement” with a plea common to editors down through generations… If anyone wants to participate in the Knute Rockne Oasis Newsletter, please jump in.

William Johnson

NEWS & COMMENT

Robert Heinecken and Joyce Neimanas’ new address is: 407 E. Florence Blvd. Englewood, CA. 90301. (213)-672-1561. They apparently survived the move from Chicago.

Susie and my new address is: 123 White St., Belmont, Mass. 02178, (617)-484-3784. We apparently survived the move from Connecticut.

Dave Heath will be spending the week of Sept. 26-30 teaching at the Rhode Island School of Design. He will be showing his latest slide-tape performance to the public, on the 27th. There is a concurrent 40 print exhibition of his most recent work (made since everyone got together in Rochester last April).

Susie and I are gathering copy slides of John Wood’s work to send or show to everyone, which we will do soon. We fell in love with the new Polaroid instant 35mm slides which demonstrate once again that photography is alchemy and thus close to magic. John was also intrigued and has started “experimenting” with them. If anyone else would like to try some out let me know.

August 23, 1983. Dear Eelco,

Bill and I visited John Wood for the first time last week. We spent two days at his home in Alfred, New York as the guests of John and his very charming and hospitable wife, Suzanne. For over twenty years the Woods have lived in an old farmhouse that overlooks the town of Alfred through overgrown and cultivated fields. There is some relatively recent college architecture visible on the slope back into town, and a few neighbors further on up the road; the fields and woods have the atmosphere of quiet that places unmastered by neon possess. Mrs. Wood returned to school when her children were grown, and is now a librarian for the Agricultural and Technical College at Alfred. They are by no means isolated: though physically situated away from the center of town and its cluster of universities, driving (or; in John’s case, biking) into town seems a daily activity. What one senses at their house is not seclusion, but self-sufficiency that they have evolved as a couple. While the house bears evidence of family activity and outgoing hospitality: lawn and gardens, dining areas, childrens’ books, there is also evidence that they live actively for their own interests; Suzanne’s loom, her weavings, and balls of yarn in hand made pots and baskets; the study with books and papers; the potting room; tiny paper animal cut-outs that have found themselves on window sills.

In its attention to detail and its overall eclectic evolution, the house reveals elements of chance, practical elegance, craftsmanship and wide-ranging inquiry that are also elements of John’s art and character. The house is not a “work” however, as these elements are found there as separate solutions or as the unplanned evolutions that emerge from living in one place for a long time. Bill spotted the element of chance in the volunteer strawberry plants growing in cracks of the cement stairs that lead to the front porch. On the porch itself, a post has been hung to support the roof, but the post is 3″ short of its goal, supported in turn by an oval rock. John explained that this is a technique used by Japanese builders to prevent a post from rotting. I don’t really think we noticed it until John, experimenting with the instant slide film we’d brought, made two pictures of it. The slides (we looked at them right after breakfast because it had been too dark the evening we arrived to use the film) showed the upright (half in light, half in shadow, edge highlighted) contrasting the continuously shaded round rock. Simple, lovely. Inside, in the staircase leading from the ground floor to the upstairs bedrooms, the banister is a long, tapered branch, glowing from the handholds of countless passers. The bathroom towel rack is also a branch, rounded and polished in use.

I would not pretend to know them well after so brief a visit, but would suggest that the Woods’ graciousness is a habit not so much of special treatment for guests, but of absorbing the visitors within their full lives. We were obviously an interruption of some routines, yet we felt that there was “room” for our presence and our ideas.

For many years John had used various spaces within the large house as studio space, but several years ago he and his daughter constructed a building in the field just across the road from the house. Though the field is harvested casually by a neighbor for hay, the studio building itself sits in a wild growth of tall grass and flowers visited by birds and butterflies, Chicory, hawkweed, butter-and-eggs and Queen Anne’s Lace grow along the path from the road to the studio. It was idyllic when we were there, but John warned us that Alfred is dismal in the winter, which hangs on in low gray wet skies until April.

John’s studio: one large ground floor room, an el shape, with a small darkroom; storage loft above. Well-lighted with windows and a sky-light. Most of the furniture is old cabinets and work tables, a desk with telephone in one corner. A woodstove, drafting table, one hard-wood chair, a stool, a director’s chair. The stairs to the loft are narrow pyramids set on end to a slanting board.

Books: Miro, Sears catalogue, geometry, stencil patterns, Theodore Roethke; on printmaking and bookbinding. On the walls and window sills: paper stencils, hand made paper birds, shells, stones, pottery, folded paper. On the tables: papers, string, jars of ink. crayons, pencils, color swatches, rulers, fixative, clothespins, magazines, cans. On a beam; jars of tint for making crayons. On one table: a low flat heat box that John uses to make wax color drawings (he built it fearing to use the wood stove for this purpose).

John claims to be an disorganized person, and it is true that the studio is a clutter of tables, piles, paper, bottles, brushes, finished work and work in progress. Yet the ongoing work – in this case, collages on Japanese paper photographically printed in cyan – was spacially and visually distinct. As John began to bring out older work for us to see, he did so from drawers and solander boxes that though heaped with more current materials, were carefully closed and protected. John wraps and handles the work with precise movements made of equal parts of physical and emotional respect for it. I noticed particularly that John’s body arcs around an “area of interest” (whether its the work or a newspaper or an implement) and thus he defines a special and intense enclosure for himself and the onlooker.

In earlier interviews, and to us, John stated that while working, he is often “distracted” from one direction to another by the glimpse of an object or the glimmer of an idea. And we could see that the jars, colors, textures, and shapes of things were casually situated to be suggestive to an open mind. Though our acquaintance is brief, I would like to stress this: that the “disorganization” is a provocation of possibilities, an endless store of manipulable source material. The clutter is a screen in the negative sense only to the extent that it may bother John personally. I suspect, however, that John is himself a screen, and that he instinctively adjusts the mesh to allow through, to see, what it is he needs to work. John is not directionless but multi-directioned. His purpose is less to make than to feel the making, less to finish that to experience. His works, both ongoing and finished, are visually and psychologically forceful expressions for finely distincted feelings and for a variety of forms for them.

John is expert at photography, printmaking, papermaking, painting, drawing, and bookbinding, and these in pure states and in combinations. He often creates or recreates the tools and processes he uses. The most apt term for him would be image-maker. (He feels that “photography” is the silver print, that what he does is closer to “printmaking” in traditional terms. He is worried, and curious, at the categories in which his work has been placed and discussed). At this point in our acquaintance, I would concur with John’s assessment that his training at the Institute of Design is responsible for his openness to and facility with materials, processes and ideas. This training is at least what gave discipline to the creative intentions that were intriguing him and then lured him to the Institute in 1950.

I’m not sufficiently aware of the chronology or diversity of John’s work to describe it well. From what I saw, however, which included ingeniously bound books, black and white and color pencil drawings, paintings, sculpture of sticks and paper, straight silver photographs, collages of photographs and drawings, collages of photographs, collages with words, stencils, etc, I have a preliminary sense of what makes John’s work his.

First, as I mentioned, there is an air of respect about finished works that is not only an attitude of John’s, but emanates as well from the work. Each series, or piece (regardless of its sketch-like quality or polish) is made with an assured hand, the hand of an experienced and careful craftsman. Even the most “experimental” or protean work proceeds from a clarity that demonstrates purpose -even if the ultimate “meaning” is not yet known.

Secondly, there is the fact of the diversity itself. Any material, and surface is a potential “light modulator” (in Moholy’s words). And I think that John’s encompassing attitude toward the potential significance of any scrap of material or ray of light parallels his attitude toward feelings: that there is none too insignificant among human states not worthy of exploration and visual form. It seems that John can evoke “tenderness” as well from three sticks joined in an open pyramid as from moonlight; “terror” from the outline of a gun as well as from the depiction of natural forces; and the exuberance of human motion from the abstract markings of his hand as well as from the literal depiction of the moving figure. Unlike Moholy’s fierce idealism, which projected the camera as the transmitter of modern experience, John’s work is filled with a gentler, but also an uncompromising social purpose. He does not believe that his art, or any art, can change the world directly, especially through specific, cause-related imagery. Yet he has faith that his art, and all art, in the long run, elicits a non-violent, positive response from the sensitive viewer. Though some of his images depict recognizable events or situations (such as the Vietnam war) his art his non-narrative, non-propagandistic. He calls them “quiet protests.” Others of his pieces refer to environmental and other current political concerns such as the preservation of whales and nuclear disarmament. Where Heinecken’s commentary is biting, John’s is fantastical, due to the use of animal shapes and the surrealism of the collage technique. Yet they are penetrating and memorable because of the purity of form and the richness of form combinations. Some of the work, such as the pencil “systems drawings”, some watercolors and paintings, and handmade paper shapes, are pure abstractions. Like the abstract works of Hartley, Marin and O’Keeffe, however, they derive ultimately from the observation of nature rather than from abstract intellect. In the “systems drawings” for instance, the thickness of marks and the layering of tone strongly evoke the careful but pleasurable movement of the hand. The patterning devices are a control, and these were stimulated from an interest in Mimbres pottery.

Another group of abstractions is a series of small watercolors, each the size of a folio account sheet cut in half from a blank “banker’s book” John found. John made a special, cloth-covered box to hold the series. The overall design of each is an open, geometric mesh, constructed with short, bright strokes. Again, the formality of the design is played against the thin/thickness of the outlining strokes and fill-in color. Though John has training as an architecture engineer and can make very precise renderings, these watercolors (and others of his drawings)’show a deliberate skew from mechanical rigidity. He made the brushes for this series from dried yucca stalks. The brushes, still tinted, sit in a clay pot on a window sill.

Although it may be hasty at this point, or even irrelevant, I want to try to categorize John’s work beyond “multi-media humanist”. I’m guessing that there is some central belief at the heart of it: faith not in a hierarchical ordering but faith that there isn’t disorder in the universe. That change observed or made is mysterious but meaningful; that perception of alteration or the proclivity to alter is the human gift.

John is averse to mechanical (photographic) order for its own sake. He has said on several occasions that making his work isn’t meaningful for him unless it incorporates the feelings he has for the people (objects, motion, color) in this work. He is equally shy of the sort of stylized belief that Minor White (whom he knew) developed around photography. Certainly the content of John’s photographs are seen “for what else they are” but John does not use, or advocate the use, of photographs for self-teaching or meditation.

John consistently uses symbolic imagery: stars, whales, guns, tree images of himself and of his friends: certain pastel hues, layered space and photographic puns are repeated formal devices; the marks of his hand with pencil, with paint and in sand are both form and content, John goes to galleries, judges contests, oversees students and is well-versed in art history- But like his house, when he works he is self-sufficient: inventing and borrowing as he needs. He neither follows trends nor cares if he leads them. His work refers occasionally to pictographs, surrealism and popular media. But all of this: symbols, references, forms are only the letters of an alphabet and I haven’t yet grasped whether they make novels or poems or prayers.

John didn’t work much during our visit. We had brought the 4×5 film he requested and stayed awake late one night to try it out and took our portraits with it before we left. The surprise was his response to the Polaroid instant slide film. We had brought it to make record slides but John was intrigued with the quickness of it and with the magic processing box. He liked the cellular quality of the color, and the platinum-like tonal range of the black & white. We left the processor and some film with him. Another “distraction”? I hope so. More soon,

SUSIE.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

Two acknowledged interests of John’s were Buckminster Fuller and the concrete poetry movement, and he referenced both in many images throughout his career.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

At one time John often frequented a local beach, where the waves deposited a layer of white sand over a layer of dark sand, which was erased and reconstituted with each wave, a natural process creating a tabula rasa for the “mark making” that John so loved to do.

The following images are several pages from my informal records of the “retrospective” portion of the exhibition, indicating choices and positioning of that portion of the project. John’s early conceptual sequences, created years before other, better-known artists in California, were a pioneering effort in shifting the paradigm of “creative photography” away from the single print modernist aesthetic, which was one of the criteria we considered when we asked the four artists to participate in the project.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

First meeting as a group, held at Joan & Nathan Lyon’s house in Rochester, NY.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

John was one of the participants who accepted the offer to use the Polaroid 20 x 24” camera in the studio at the School of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. On this visit John chose to experiment with the color and scale of the large camera, as the last stage in his continuously evolving process of segueing an image through a variety of media and processes to finally reach the completed image. It is entirely possible that some portion of the final collages shown on the studio walls began as the 35mm Polaroid slide film that is described in Susie’s comments on our first visit to his house in 1983.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

Copy of the layout of the images that John created for his 16 page signature that each artist made for the project. The final image is a portrait of one of his grandchildren. For me this sequence was one of John’s “quiet protests,” a poetically visual and subtly unsettling statement about the potential dangers of unconsidered nationalism and unbridled patriotism in the nuclear age.

Susie and I visited John again in 1991, where he surprised us with a gift of this lovely book. John created the book out of his copy of the maquette that he had put together for the 16-page signature for the project. The covers and binding were designed by John, who included bookmaking among his many skills.

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

For more info, Contact William Johnson or Tate Shaw

DSCN3438

DSCN3442

DSCN3412

These texts are taken from the Knute Rockne Oasis Newsletter & Journal of Critical Opinion vol. 1, no. 3 (December 1983); which was an informal “newsletter” that Susie and I wrote to send to the “collaborators” during the course of this project (See the Robert Frank post for more information.)

Heinecken at the Museum School
Robert flew into Boston on November 16th to give a lecture at the School of the Museum of Fine Arts. He had arranged to spend the 17th and 18th with John Reuter and the 20″X24″ Polaroid camera – now housed at the School – to complete or at least continue a project that he began when the camera was temporarily set up at the Center for Photographic Arts in San Diego last fall. Susie and I attended the lecture and then Robert spent the evening at our place. We talked about the Project and showed him the slides that we’d made of Frank’s work, John’s work, and Dave’s new series. We arranged to spend the 17th observing Robert at work as a preliminary to the larger event this summer. The next morning Robert and I arrived at the Museum School around 10:00 and we soon found John Reuter and the studio. Susie joined us a little later.
Heinecken hoped to complete three projects during the two day session. First he wanted to create a suite of eight to ten prints that I call the “Tuxedo Series”. Then he wanted to make a series of composit portraits of television newscasters. (Susie describes this effort more fully in her “Letter to Eelco”.) Finally, he wanted to create some “food photograms” after the manner of those that he made in the early 1970’s.
Robert never got to the food photograms during that two day session; but one of my fondest memories of the day was watching the delicate negotiations that Robert undertook with the faintly incredulous food vendor at the school for the delivery of a dozen or so additional sandwiches for the next day. Careful consideration was given by both parties to the available menu: “ham and cheese on white”, “pastrami on dark or light rye, hold the pickle…”and so forth. The vendor was dubious but blasé to the bizarre requests of his art school clientele. Robert seemed earnest but abstracted, as if he could not quite previsualize the effects of mustard on the subsequent photogram. This gentle imbroglio of art and commerce held, for me, both risible and metaphoric overtones.
The “Tuxedo Series” is a group of portraits of models dressed in variations of the traditional male formal tuxedo ranging from a high-fashion evening outfit to bikini underpants. As in previous work, Robert has drawn his images from a wide variety of mail-order clothing and underwear catalogues – where the reproductions are usually published about 2″X3″ in size. He then paints out distracting lettering or backgrounds or enhances small details such as more clearly defining the edges of bowties, etc. These pages were then brought to the 20″X24″; which is being used in this case as a large copy camera. The force of the idea in this piece resides in the original selection of the images and the idea of representing them in this very large format. So there is little manipulation of the imagery necessary or available in the process of this work other than the slight adjustments of camera position to bring the images to the same scale and slight adjustments of exposure to alter the color balance of the Polaroid prints.
So, in this instance, the completion of this project simply requires care and patience. The process reminded me of the British Household Guard’s formal marching step: step – pause – drag – step – pause – drag – step -, and so on. The tension of force against restraint was constant throughout the day and, for me, wearing on the nerves.
I was impressed by the careful, courteous and patient manner in which Robert developed the working day in partnership with John Reuter. They had already spent two days working together with the 20″X24″ in California and Heinecken had come away with a sense of respect for Reuter’s skill at handling the machinery of the camera and his ability to help realize and further an idea. On this day the partnership was again successful and the day proceeded with a smooth efficiency that was pleasant to see. In attempting to present the feel of this day’s efforts I want to choose adjectives that convey a sense of purpose and order and even of the mundane for the day was dominated by the qualities of hard work, balance and efficiency. There were a series of muted emotional surges as each print was pulled from the camera and added to the suite and as one saw the gradual completion of the effort extend across the wall of the studio. But these excitements were constrained and restricted to the greater need to complete the project in good time. Any sense of a roiling, driving creative energy was contained and structured to the needs of this project and it’s machinery. This energy surfaced only in small but significant fragments. As far as I could tell Robert ate nothing during the entire day; even when everyone else would drop out briefly for a sandwich. Instead, he fueled himself with countless cups of coffee. Even more interesting, on this day Robert, a chain smoker, almost stopped smoking during long stretches of the day.
However, I felt the entire day crystallized during a brief period after the first print was pulled from the camera and placed on the viewing easel. Robert settled into a fierce concentrated regard of that first print. Thirty seconds, a minute went by as he looked at the print. That tense angle of his head never appeared during the remainder of the day. Finally, after this long appraisal, satisfied that the idea might work, Robert turned away and began the long day’s labor.
As Susie and I had to leave for Arizona the next day, we did not follow that day’s events or see all of the finished work. However we felt that the day that we spent there was a valuable experience.
* * *Addendum* * *
Robert returned to Boston again at the end of December and he and John met on the 29th to complete the projected suite of composit portraits of TV newscasters and to try again to make some food photograms, They had run into a series of technical and administrative difficulties with the school’s TV monitor on the 18th and run out of time before they could complete all that they had hoped to. Susie and I again spent the day observing these efforts. We picked up Robert and Carl’s television set and met John at the Museum School at 9:00 A.M. The School was closed for the winter vacation and, except for an occasional distant, figure in the hallway; we had the building to ourselves.
On this day the pace was different – quicker and more resolved than before. The morning was given over to finishing the composit portraits. By now Robert, knew exactly which split-second of each portion of the video tape that he wanted to use; the routine was perfected, the equipment functioned with few problems and Robert and John smoothly finished the desired number of prints. In this case, a group of three individual portraits of blonde female newscasters and a composit of the three superimposed together. I was struck again at Robert’s perceptiveness as I watched him speed up and slow down the videotapes to get to the exact image he wanted. He just seems to see faster than the rest of us. At normal speed the tape shows a segment   of an attractive woman reading some news bulletin; slowed down, suddenly every nuance and moue of facial expression is apparent. These ladies are definitely selling – at a level just slightly below our conscious perceptions (and to be fair to them, probably slightly below their own).But it is really there. Since there is a certain element of chance in the overlapping process, made three composit portraits before they achieved one that Robert felt would work. This all took until about 11:30. Then they turned to the new project.
Robert decided that the food photograms should consist of a series of two “meals” presented side by side on each 20″X24″ print. One half of the image would consist of the documentary trace, (Or the shadow or whatever it is that a photogram is.) of a meal available at the cafeteria located in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts across the street)and one half of the image would have the documentary record of the food available from the vendor at the Museum School, Thus each image would contain a typical lunch available to the artist side by side with the lunch available to the art patron.
At this point some background helps… The Museum School, as do most artist’s schools, has a small group of crotchety vending machines in the basement which dispense coffee, soft drinks or candy. In addition, during the school sessions, a food vendor, (The sort that drives those silver-paneled trucks up to construction sites.) brings in a selection of sandwiches, snacks, and drinks and sets up in a room in the school each day for lunch. The arrangement is actually rather luxurious by my own experience with art school food facilities, but naturally the selection is limited. On the other hand, the Boston Museum of Fine Arts has recently added a multimillion dollar wing to it’s building and a significant portion of that space is given over to an elegant(and very good) restaurant, a slightly less formal coffee and desert area, and a basement cafeteria that serves hot lunches, wine, and so on. This arrangement seems to provide an additional measure of pleasure to the museum’s visitors and apparently a good source of income for the museum.
So, to implement Robert’s idea we all went over to the Museum where Robert selected a lunch from the menu – linguini, green peas and rice, a quiche, the salad bar and a selection from the dessert cart of a whipped cream and chocolate roll, a moca-almond cake, and a glacé fruit tart. Then we were able to convince the staff to saran-wrap the lot and, under the watchful eyes of the museum guards, we ferried the lot out of the Museum, across the street and into the Museum School. (Where Robert became positively dictatorial about nibbles and snacks.) Then Robert was fortunate, (Because of the intersession.) to just catch the Museum School’s food vendor. He acquired a typical, if diminished, selection of sandwiches, peanuts, chips, and a lethal looking jelly donut.
Then we had lunch. (From, I must report, the vendor’s selections. And Robert was again, in my opinion, pretty hard-nosed about the Fritos). After lunch we moved ourselves, the food, and the Polaroid camera (which stands, when folded closed, about seven feet tall, four feet wide and three feet deep on its wire and metal wheels) down four floors into the basement darkroom. Unanticipated problems that one runs into in this sort of project include things like standing in a freight elevator that refuses to run in a deserted building until a certain amount of desperate banging somehow activates the circuit.
The darkroom – following a logic common to all art schools – is reached by going through the ceramics studio’s storeroom which is piled high with 100 pound bags of dirt that are destined to be mixed into potter’s clay. The camera was placed with its back to the open darkroom door amid these piles of bags;   the food was perched precariously on a small table-saw (the only available horizontal surface) and while John began looking for the enlarger’s lens and flipping switches to see what turned what on, Robert began to unwrap the food and to arrange it on the plexiglass sheets he had brought; along.
The photograms are created by removing the roll of negative material (a thin, tough plastic-based material about 22″ wide) from the camera, then placing this film (still rolled, of course) under the enlarger.    By now, Robert has arranged the food on the plexiglass, and brought it into the darkroom. The lights are turned out, John unrolls the film across the baseboard of the enlarger, Robert by feel places the tray of food onto the negative material, and the enlarger is turned on. After the exposure, Robert removes the tray of food and John rerolls the film. Then John replaces the film into the camera in the next room, and processes it in the conventional manner.
After a few trials to determine the proper exposure and to determine the final arrangement of the food on the plexi (which Robert accomplishes with deft jabs of a plastic fork, or too impatient for that, with his fingers) the final version of the image is achieved.   Once again Robert and John work together easily to produce an “edition” of prints. This time the run was three sets of three prints each. It is not the least accomplishment of the day –given the dark and crowded conditions– that Robert did not once drop the plexi or even spill any food.
Two more observations, and a final statement:
…the tiny, almost imperceptible but violent tremor in Robert’s hands as he began to distribute the food on the plexiglass… that disappeared as Robert found the composition and pushed the materials into the right order…
…Robert would swing back and forth between the darkroom and the adjoining storeroom, honoring the restriction on smoking:   a cigarette constantly burning in the storeroom, stubbed out against the concrete block as he reentered the darkroom, alight again on the return.
The final statement is a confession:   I seriously underestimated the day’s project.   When Robert described what he intended to do I felt that it was an amusing and not terribly serious extension of his already established body of commentary on the nature of human appetites and the curious ways they are played out within the social order. I underestimated the sheer beauty that infuses so much of Robert’s work which for me extends it beyond the realm of so much of what many others working with the same subjects manage to produce.   These food photograms are simply lovely. The Polaroid paper base is a clear white that provides a luminescent space for the crystalline colors that float on its face like shards from a mosaic. In a way that I still don’t understand, the shadow (or is it the substance?) of the food that is photogrammed is the same color as the original food: beets are maroon, lettuce is pale green, Fritos are yellow.   The shapes of the images distinctly allude to the original food (one recognizes a tomato, a bun, even the grim outline of that deadly jelly cruller) but the colors are clear and modulated with an almost ethereal quality. The almost programmatic arrangement of the subject, presented flat across the plane of the image, called up for me comparisons with medieval herbals, and even more strongly, the “quick brush” techniques of Japanese watercolors and ink drawings.    The Fritos retained their identity as crisp, curly shapes and yet they irresistibly infer Japanese calligraphy, with all the grace, power and energy of that wonderful alphabet.   The linguini, floating on its lucent ground, swirled into configurations that must be what linguini dreams of becoming in its afterlife.
So, once again, in that dingy, underground cave, surrounded by bags of cl piled to the ceiling, I was forcefully reminded of the transformative quality of good art — which is, I guess, what its all about anyway.
The end of the day was hurried. Rushing because we were late, cleaning up, wrestling the camera into that cranky elevator and back into the studio, wrapping up the prints, negotiating the extremely complex exit from the closed building with the janitor, saying goodbye to John, and later to Robert, and then home for us to an exhausted sleep.

Letter to Eelco
Dear Eelco,
Bill and I have known Robert Heinecken for several years, in a variety of circumstances ranging from the lecture hall to the poker table, but we have never had the opportunity to see him work. Even in the several lengthy interviews we’ve had with him in his house in Los Angeles, and last winter in Chicago, the studio was an area that we sat in, looking at work in progress perhaps, but not penetrating its active spirit. So watching Heinecken work on the 20 x 24 camera at the Museum School was a new insight. I know him too well to have expected a performance á la beret and smock, but having pierced what I had imagined as a private realm, a reserve for intense preoccupation, I saw Heinecken address his task with business-like determination and orderly procedure.
No interaction with Heinecken is ordinary. The beat of the drummer to which he marches is not only different, but double-time. Seeing him in the roles of teacher, conversationalist, curator, I have watched, and distinctly felt, his decisive pace of judgment/act/judgement/act. But on this occasion of his responding to materials and equipment as well as to people; of making judgement calls about color, form and texture as well as subject, there were extra beats: syncopations, Chaplin-like pauses. I don’t imply the comic or frenetic by this reference to silent film. Rather, Heinecken demonstrated the temporal distinction between human act and machine act in a way that reinvested the human with reality in a culture, and in a specific situation, that proposes, supposes the machine to be the more dominant. And here is the crux: Heinecken has a special relationship with the; machines he uses.
Let me describe the scene for you. Heinecken’s project was to produce a picture of an “ideal, non-white, female TV newscaster.” He had previously taped and edited about 30 separate spots of oriental, Hispanic and black women delivering the news. The “ideal” would result from the superimposition of the features of three close-ups, each paused on the TV monitor, multiply-exposed within the 20 x 24 camera.
Simple in conception, the idea follows from Heinecken’s Magazines of the 60s and 70s, which proposed that sequential images superimpose (and interact) in the mind. In those pieces, the superimposition was still imaginary, however much assisted by Heinecken’s rearrangement of pictures. To achieve an actual fusion of images (sort of Are You Rea with control) required a lot more “business.”
A TV monitor, turned 90° so that its screen was in proportion to the vertical 20 x 24 ground glass, was positioned facing the big camera apparatus. For each exposure, the two larger than human structures of angular glass, metal and wood were slowly raised and lowered, cranked forward and away from each other until the monitor’s image was correctly aligned on the ground glass. In the darkened room, it looked and felt like a machine cabala, a conspiracy of electrical and light sensitive pulses whose intentions were served by docile, fidgety human servants. Like Erich Solomon’s heads of state in conference, the cubicles were aloof, imposing, but here: adjusting their postures with grave electronic diplomacy.
As potentially frightening as this scenario can be (and as easily turned to farce) it is a cliche, as insufficient an engagement with technology as the film War Games. Like the movie, my description too readily gives power to anthropomorphized, intentioned machines, and too easily heroicizes the eccentric who can harness them. The loss of individual and human identity to technology is obviously an expressed fear, but seems to me no more and no less than an update of the tension of the “social contract”: the extent to which the individual gives over his selfhood to society.
But since Heinecken’s art had dealt consistently with the social contract (society expressed as its media images; the individual as the responsive viewer) it is in this instance only the newness, grandeur and complexity of the tools, and the size of the picture, that leads me to tilt the power toward the machine. In truth, Heinecken is not intimidated by machines. Neither has he chosen, as some artists of the past two decades have, to bypass the machine in favor of the “natural” processes and materials (the photographer’s version of clay and fiber being the lensless camera, hand-sensitized paper, sun-developed prints). For Heinecken, advanced reproductive technologies are challenging jousting partners.
Heinecken’s willingness to engage the newest machines insures that consistent themes in his work (such as the “intercourse” between sexuality and persuasion) are always current. And, of course, bending the manufacturer’s specifications to extend the codes and purposes of materials is another of his aesthetic products. But watching him work that day, I realized that however successful (or not) his product might be, the engagement itself was a necessary, vitalizing experience for him.
A brief digression: Heinecken used to be a Marine Corps fighter pilot, and an instructor of pilots. He has come close to death on several occasions, due sometimes to machine failure, sometimes to human frailty. The anecdotes he lives to tell have this in common: in each brush with death Heinecken had to decide very quickly how much of the failing Other could be used to save his life. These are instances when abandoning the Other was also certain death. Self-reliance, yes; but also a necessary and thrilling interdependence.
Physical and emotional survival of intimacy with death requires (or perhaps endows) a strength of personal identity. As in the best of sexual intimacies, the individual aware of his/her own capabilities and boundaries can permit of the greatest contact without the threat of being dependent or overwhelmed. Heinecken knows who he is, and where he ends; he knows where the machine begins, but not always what it can do. But the distinction between himself and it allows him to accept the machine’s potential, and to push for it. He can claim the success as his own, the result of his initiation; but the machine’s failure is not his failure.
In a society as complex as ours, the privileged among us (the adequately fed and educated) get to pick the arena in which we negotiate our social contract. Artists, who in myth flaunt and ignore social conventions, are in fact among the ablest of the “loyal opposition,” returning to the society the evidence of their sessions at the bargaining table. Heinecken’s arena is the technology threat to identity. But unlike the cliche which offers only an either/or, Heinecken’s art re-assures us all about a doubt expressed by E.B White:
   We have tended to assume that the machine and the human are in conflict.
   Now the fear is that they are indistinguishable.
Heinecken suggests that neither has to be true. Both conflict and oblivion can be avoided by acknowledging the machine image as the product of interdependence.
P.S. December 29. Food and Appetites.
Throughout the afternoon of watching Heinecken make photograms of food, I was compelled to over-serious metaphor and nervous laughter. I wanted to transform these very literal pictures of food stuffs into something more “meaningful” than bread, beets and salami. The flowing linguini, for instance, I compared to the sinuous tresses of Alphonse Mucha’s Job Cigarette Girl. I described Robert’s pushing the linguini around on the plexiglass as heavy impasta, pun intended. Bill’s references include allusion to medieval herbals, to ideograms.
Part of the compulsion had to do with the “observing” itself, which is an awkward business. Bill and I were neither part of the ongoing conception or procedure (though we tried to be useful) nor were we a good audience (though we could make suggestions without offending either Robert or John). The space was small and the time was limited. We were in no way indispensible, but we’d been invited, and our presence was not in dispute. Still, our role was undefined and perhaps the need to speak, to comment, was a justification for being there.
But there is more to this, and best said straight: I was more embarrassed by the handling and picturing of food than I have ever been by the most explicit of Robert’s personal/sexual images. Given the structure provided by sex books and sexy movies, even observing the making of Robert’ images of sexual contact (from life) would have been easier than this hands-on maneuvering of lettuce, jelly and cheese.
I don’t know why this is, and I’m nervous about saying it here in case I’m making a too personal confession. But I think its harder to tell an adult he has spinach between his teeth than that his fly is unzipped.
And parents are easier at explaining a child’s sexual preoccupations than they are  with that same child’s inability to keep his fingers out of the mashed potatoes.
I can only guess that the “sexual revolution” has been won, (Or at least its battlegrounds defined and coded.) but that the equally basic drive to satisfy the appetite is still bound in intellectual, dissimulating metaphor. Robert’s food-o-grams simultaneously call up the taboos with each exposure, and disarm them with each delicately colored composition.
Susie.

 

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) BIBLIOGRAPHY (in progress)
Copyright by William S. Johnson

This unedited draft is drawn from a bibliography of articles about photography, with excerpts and annotations, published in America and in England from 1839 to 1869; describing its practitioners and practices, and displaying the impacts of those activities and events upon the general culture of that time. More than 800 magazines and newspapers published in the United States and in Great Britain from January 1839 through December 1869 were reviewed for articles in which photography was featured, discussed or mentioned in some illuminating manner, or which acknowledged the use of the medium in the creation of at least some of their illustrations.

As of December 2012, this project, organized (for now) alphabetically by magazine title, then chronologically, has reached 10,080 pp. in length. Its strengths are that it does what it was designed to do; which is to complement the work Nineteenth Century Photography: An Annotated Bibliography, 1839 1879, by William S. Johnson. Boston: G. K. Hall & Co., 1990. Its weaknesses are that the earlier published work which has been incorporated into the project does not contain the detailed information available in the latter effort. The earlier work was also not complete in its coverage of early British journals devoted to photography – which is the very place where many references to Mayall would be found. I am in the process of cleaning up and strengthening the files for some of the earlier titles, but to redo them all would add another five years to the project – something I am not considering favorably at this time.
Another problem is that the photographic journals did not begin until the 1850’s, nearly a dozen years after Mayall began his career, and, of course, this project ends in 1869, well before Mayall ended his career. Nevertheless, if one looks through these references as they are, I suspect that they will find that a more complete picture of the career of John Mayall than has been previously available will be found here and that a more detailed picture of the background in which Mayall practiced his art will be displayed as well.
Please feel free to use this in any manner helpful to you except to publish it completely as your own work, and I would appreciate a credit should you use it extensively.
William Johnson.

HIGHSCHOOL, PROFESSOR see MAYALL.

[Mayall used the name Professor Highschool in the early 1840s.]
“…To those who honestly desire to understand art-principles and their applications, as I have reason to believe the larger number of photographers now do, I fearlessly address myself; and taking first that class of picture which, by virtue of what it aims at, should rank highest, I commence my task with what I may call Subject Photographs. Amongst painters the class of pictures I am about to speak of are commonly termed genre, and the accepted meaning of this term, so applied, is subjects of real or ordinary life, as distinguished from the ideal or the historical….” “…Some-of the earliest attempts in this direction were made, in the days of the daguerreotype, by Mr. Mayall; and I remember very well the anxiety with which I—then a boy—posted off to the Strand to see them, after reading a very glowing account of their beauty in a morning paper. That I was sadly disappointed may have been the fault of the writer rather than that of Professor Highschool, the name by which Mr. Mayall then sought to be known….”
Wall, A. H. “The Late Conduit-Street Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED PHOTOGRAPHER 1:43 (Nov. 27, 1868): 513.

PROFESSOR HIGHSCHOOL
KILBURN, WILLIAM EDWARD. (GREAT BRITAIN
“Daguerreotype Studies: Messrs. Kilburn and Highschool.” ATHENAEUM no. 1016 (Apr. 17, 1847): 416. [“Amongst the many candidates for fame who are practicing the heliographic art-as M. N. Niepce calls it-two are conspicuous as having carried it to the highest perfection of which it has hitherto been deemed susceptible; and these two have done so much in a short time, and are both so fertile in resource and enterprising in character, that in their hands it will probably be proved that this art is as…”]

HUNT, ROBERT. (1807-1887) (GREAT BRITAIN
Hunt, Robert. “Photographic Colouration.” ATHENAEUM no. 1017 (Apr. 24, 1847): 440. [“The interest that I feel in the beautiful art of Photography-which appears to be steadily advancing towards perfection-induces me to offer a few remarks on your notice last week of the Daguerreotypes of Mr. Kilburn and Prof. Highschool….”]

HIGHSCHOOL, PROFESSOR. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Metropolitan News. Institute of Civil Engineers.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 12:319 (Sat., June 3, 1848): 361. [“  On Tuesday, Mr. field, the President of the Institution, gave a grand soiree at the Society’s House on Great George –street… The drawing rooms and theatre were were crowded throughout the evening; and the exhibition of models, &c. novel and attractive… Metal pipe-Making machine… Glass-Making machines… a marble therm of Tragedy, sculptured by Mr. Thomas,…paintings by Lance; daguerreotypes by Professor Highschool, &c. Refreshments were served…”]

BY COUNTRY. 1847.
“Photography.” NORTH BRITISH REVIEW 7:14 (Aug. 1847): 465-504. [(Review of eight books extends into a report on the state of the art. Sir David Brewster is not named as the author, but his authorship has been cited elsewhere. Pagination for the American edition is pp. 248-269.) (Dr. Adamson of St. Andrews, Edmund Becquerel, Dr. Berres (Vienna, Austria), Bingham, Blanquart-Evrard, Sir David Brewster, Brooke, Channing (Boston, Ma), Charles Chevalier, Antoine Claudet, Henry Collen, Daguerre, Sir Humphry Davy, Donne, John William Draper, Dumas, Fitzeau, Chevalier Frederichstal, Furlong, W., Dr. Fyfe, (Aberdeen, Scotland), Gaudin, Goddard, Prof. Grove, Guerin, Sir John Herschel, Prof. Highschool (London, England), Hill & Adamson, Robert Hunt, Johnson (New York, NY), Prof. Karsten (Berlin, Germany), Dr. George Keith, Kilburn (London, England), Knorr, Lassaigne (Paris, France), N. P. Lerebours, Mapes (New York, NY?), Martens, Ludwig Moser (Berlin, Germany), Joseph Isidore Niepce, Nicephorus Niepce (Chalons sur Saone, France), Ronalds, Dr. Ryan, Rev. J. B. Reade, William Henry Fox Talbot, Dr. Waller, Thomas Wedgewood, Prof. Wheatstone, Wolcott (New York, NY) Dr. Woods (Parsonstown, GB), Prof. Zantedeschi (Venice, Italy) discussed or mentioned in this article.) Book review. 1. Researches on Light; An Examination of all the Phenomena connected with the Chemical and Molecular Changes produced by the Influence of the Solar Rays, embracing all the known Photographic Processes, and new Discoveries in the Art, By Robert Hunt, Secretary to the Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society. Pp. 304. London, 1844. 2. A Treatise on the Forces which produce the Organization of Plants; with an Appendix containing several Memoirs of Capillary Attraction, Electricity, and the Chemical Action of Light. By John William Draper, M.D., Professor of Chemistry in the University of New York. Royal 4to, pp. 324. New York, 1844. 3. Nouvelles Instructions sur l’usage du Daguerreotype. Par Charles Chevalier. Paris, 1841. 4. Melanges Photographiques. Complement des nouvelles Instructions sur l’usage du Daguerreotype. Pp. 128. Paris, 1844. 5. The Pencil of Nature. By Henry Fox Talbot, Esq., F.R.S., &c., &c. Nos. I., II., III., IV., V. London, 1844. 6. Traite de Photographie, contenant tous les perfectionnements trouvees jusqu’a ce jour, appareil panoramique, differences des foyers, gravure Fizeau, &c. Par Lerebours et Secretans, Opticiens de l’Observatoire, et de la Marine. 5me Edit. Pp. 268. Paris, Octobre 1846. 7. Des Papiers Photographiques, Precedes de M. Blanquart-Evrard et autres, avec Notes de N. P. Lerebours. Pp. 31. Paris, Mar. 1847. 8. Excursions Daguerriennes. Collection de 114 Planches, representant les vues et les monumens les plus remarquables du Globe. 2 Vols. “The history of science presents us with very few instances in which great inventions or discoveries have burst upon the public view like meteors, or startled the public mind by their novelty and grandeur. The greatest feats of intellect have, like the intellect itself, been of tardy growth. A suggestion from one mind and in one age, has become a fact in another; and some sickly embryo of thought, which has preserved its vitality for a century, has often assumed the form and beauty of a living truth, when the public taste or the wants of society have stimulated research, or created a demand for the productions of genius. So slow, indeed, has been the march of great ideas, and so obscure the path by which they reached their gigantic consummation, that the historian of science has often been unable to trace their steps, and the arbiter of genius to discover the brow upon which he might plant the laurel which they deserved. The astronomy which in one century gave immortality to a priest, in the next immured a philosopher in prison; and geological truth passed through the phases of a presumptuous speculation, and of an atheistical dogma, before it became the handmaid of piety and the creed of the Church. It is with much difficulty and some uncertainty that we can trace even the telescope and the microscope to their humble origin. The steam-engine has not yet owned its obligations to a single mind, and little more than half a century has elapsed since an English court of law came to the decision that James Watt had made no improvement on this mighty instrument of civilization. The steam-ship and the railway-chariot—the locomotives on water and on iron—at once the benefactors and the wonders of the age, will continue to be disputed or unclaimed inventions till society has forgotten the prediction of the poet, or lamented its fulfilment:—
“Soon shall thine arm, unconquer’d Steam! afar
Drag the slow barge, or drive the rapid car.”
There are other inventions and discoveries, on the contrary, on which are stamped imperishable names, or with which these names are inseparably associated. Kepler’s laws are engraven on the planetary heavens. Newton will never cease to be named, while satellites revolve and terrestrial bodies fall; and while Neptune bears his trident across the firmament, the fame of Adams and Le Verrier will endure. The electro-magnetic power which speeds over the globe the telegraphic message, will carry the name of Wheatstone to its most distant terminus whether in space or time; and the thunderbolt which Franklin drew from heaven, and which, when untaught and untamed, shattered in its course the structures of organic and inorganic life, will acknowledge its apprenticeship to Faraday, while it is imparting new organizations to matter, playing round the solar ray, and guiding even the particles of light in their fantastic gyrations. Other discoveries have associated themselves, even in their nomenclature, with individual names; and in the very terminology of the two great arts which we are about to expound—the Daguerreotype and Talbotype—a grateful age has already embalmed the names of their distinguished inventors. The two inventions which we have just mentioned possess a character, and occupy a place, essentially different from that of any of the sister arts. While the painter delineates on canvass, or the sculptor embodies in marble those images in their eye to which the law of vision gives an external place, the photographer presents to Nature an artificial eye, more powerful than his own, which receives the images of external objects, and imprints on its sensitive tablet, and with indelible lines their precise forms, and the lights and shadows by which these forms are modified. He thus gives permanency to details which the eye itself is too dull to appreciate, and he represents Nature as she is—neither pruned by his taste, nor decked by his imagination. From among the countless images of surrounding objects which are actually accumulated in every part of space, he excludes, by means of his darkened chamber, all but the one he wishes to perpetuate, and he can thus exhibit and fix in succession all those floating images and subtile forms which Epicurus fancied, and Lucretius sung.*
(* Dico igitur, rerum effigias, tenuisque figuras
Mittier ab rebus summo de corpore earum;
Quae quasi membrana, vel cortex nominitanda’st
Quod speciem, ac formam similem gerit ejus Imago,
Quojuscunque cluet de corpore fusa vagari.
Next, for ’tis time, my muse declares and sings
What those are we call images of things,
Which like thin films from bodies rise in streams,
Play in the air and dance upon the beams.—
A stream of forms from every surface flows,
Which may be called the film or shell of those,
Because they bear the shape, they show the frame.
And figure of the bodies whence they came.—Creech.)
The art of photography, or that of delineating objects by the agency of the light which they radiate or reflect, is substantially a new invention, which we owe to two individuals, Mr. Talbot and M. Daguerre, although, like all other arts, some approximation had been made to it by previous inquirers. So early as 1802, Mr. Thomas Wedgewood, the celebrated porcelain manufacturer, published in the Journals of the Royal Institution, A method of copying paintings upon glass, and of making profiles by the agency of light upon nitrate of silver, which was accompanied with some observations by Sir Humphry Davy. Having ascertained “that white paper or white leather, moistened with a solution of nitrate of silver, undergoes no change when kept in a dark place,” but “speedily changes colour” when “exposed to the daylight,” Mr. Wedgewood found “that the alterations of colour took place more speedily in proportion as the light was more intense;” that the full effect was produced by the sun’s light in two or three minutes, whereas two or three hours were required in the shade; that the red rays have little action upon it, the yellow and green more, and the blue and violet most of all. “Hence,” says Mr. Wedgewood, ” when a white surface covered with a solution of nitrate of silver, is placed behind a painting on glass exposed to the solar light, the rays transmitted through the differently painted surfaces, produce distinct tints of brown or black, sensibly differing in intensity, according to the shades of the picture, and where the light is unaltered the colour of the nitrate becomes deepest. When the shadow of any figure is thrown upon the prepared surface, the part concealed by it remains white, and the other parts speedily become dark. For copying paintings on glass, the solution should be applied on leather, and in this case it is more readily acted upon than when paper is used. After the colour has been once fixed upon the leather or paper, it cannot be removed by the application of water, or water and soap, and it is in a high degree permanent.” Mr. Wedgewood endeavoured by repeated washings, and by thin coatings of fine varnish, to prevent the white parts of his pictures from becoming dark when exposed to light; but all his attempts were fruitless, and he was obliged therefore cither to exhibit them in candle-light, or for a short time in the shade. This process was applied by its author to taking profiles, and “making delineations of all such objects as are possessed of a texture partly opaque and partly transparent, such as the woody fibres of leaves and the wings of insects.” He tried also, but without much success, to copy prints; and he failed still more signally in what was his leading object, to copy the images in the camera-obscura. In following these processes, Sir H. Davy found ” that, the images of small objects produced by means of the solar microscope, may be copied without difficulty on prepared paper—the paper being placed at but a small distance from the lens;” and he ascertained that about 1 part of nitrate to about 10 of water, gave the best solution. Mr. Wedgewood likewise ascertained that the muriate was more susceptible than the nitrate of silver, and that both were most readily acted upon while wet. He impregnated his paper with the muriate, either by diffusing it through water, and applying it in this form, “or by immersing paper moistened with the solution of the nitrate in very diluted muriatic acid.” The impossibility of removing the colouring from the white parts of the pictures, suggested to Mr. Wedgewood the idea that “a portion of the metallic oxide abandons its acid to enter into union with the animal or vegetable substance, so as to form with it an insoluble compound,” and he had experiments in view to discover some substance that could destroy this compound either by simple or complicated affinities. “Nothing,” he adds, “but a method of preventing the unshaded parts of the delineation from being coloured by exposure to the day, is wanted to render the process as useful as it is elegant.” This beautiful process, which notwithstanding its defects, it required neither science nor skill to repeat, seems to have excited no interest whatever. The writer of this Article gave a notice of it in a Scottish Journal, so early as 1803, but he has not been able to learn that the experiment of Mr. Wedgewood was repeated. Without knowing what had been done by Mr. Wedgewood, Mr. Henry Fox Talbot, of Lacock Abbey, was led by accidental circumstances to turn his attention to the subject of giving a permanent existence to those beautiful but evanescent pictures, which the camera-obscura presents to our view. Recollecting that nitrate of silver was changed or decomposed by light, he began, early in 1834, that series of experiments which led him to the beautiful art which now bears his name. Anxious to perfect the new art which he had discovered, Mr. Talbot continued his experiments till the year 1839, when he communicated to the Royal Society Some Account of the Art of Photogenic Drawing, or the process by which natural objects may be made to delineate themselves without the aid of the artist’s pencil. In this paper, which was read to the Society on the 31st January 1839, several months before M. Daguerre had published his photogenic processes, Mr. Talbot enumerates the various purposes to which the new art could be applied; but it was not till the 21st February that he communicated to the Society his process for preparing the paper, and his method of fixing the images. A sheet of superfine writing paper (of a good firm quality and smooth surface) is dipped into a weak solution of common salt (muriate of soda) and wiped dry. A solution of nitrate of silver, namely, a saturated solution six or eight times diluted with water, is spread with a brush over one surface only, and the paper when dry is fit for use. When leaves of flowers, lace, engravings, &c., are laid upon the nitrated surface of the paper and exposed to the sun, very perfect images of them are obtained, the lights and shades being reversed, or, what is the same thing, the pictures are delineated by white in place of black lines, or are negative pictures. In like manner, the pictures thrown upon the nitrated paper placed in the focus of a camera-obscura are negatively delineated. In order to fix these pictures, or prevent the white lines and portions from being blackened by exposure to light, Mr. Talbot first washed them with iodide of potassium greatly diluted with water; but the method which he proposed, as being safer and simpler, was to immerse the picture in a strong solution of common salt, and then to dry it after wiping off the superfluous moisture. At this period Mr. Talbot’s pictures were negative, like those of Mr. Wedgewood, but yet he has distinctly shown how positive pictures, or those in which the lights and shades are given as in nature, may be obtained. “In copying engravings,” says Mr. Talbot, “by this method, the lights and shadows are reversed, consequently the effect is wholly natural…..* (*London and Edin. Phil. Mag. March 1839. No. 88, vol. xiv. p. 208.) The communications of Mr. Talbot to the Royal Society could not fail to draw the attention of connoisseurs to so curious an art, and we accordingly find that the Rev. J. B. Reade. F.R.S- a gentleman to whom the sciences owe valuable obligations, had made important additions to the photogenic processes, and had himself applied them to the delineation of objects of natural history, of which he took pictures by the solar microscope. The following process was communicated by Mr. Reade, on the 9th of March 1839, to E. W. Brayley. Esq- who explained the process and exhibited the drawings referred to at one of the soirees of the London Institution on the 10th April 1839. “The more important process, and one probably different from any hitherto employed, consists in washing good writing paper with a strong solution of nitrate of silver, containing not less than 8 grs. to every drachm of distilled water. The paper thus prepared is placed in the dark, and allowed to dry gradually. When perfectly dry, and just before it is used. I wash it with an infusion of galls prepared according to the Pharmacopeia, and immediately, even while it is yet wet, throw upon it the image of microscopic objects by means of the solar microscope. It will be unnecessary for me to describe the effect, as I am able to illustrate it by drawings thus produced. I will only add, with respect to the time, that the drawing of the flea was perfected in less than five minutes, and the section of cane, and the spiral vessels of the stalk of common rhubarb, in about eight or ten minutes. These drawings were fixed by hyposulphite of soda. They may also be fixed by immersing them for a few minutes in weak salt and water, and then, for the same time, in a weak solution of hydriodate of potash. The drawing of the Trientalis Europea was fixed by the latter method: it was procured in half a minute, and the difference in the colour of the ground is due to this rapid and more powerful action of the solar rays This paper may be successfully used in the camera-obscura. Farther experiments must determine the nature of this very sensitive argentine preparation. I presume that it is a gallate or tannate of silver, and, if so, it will be interesting to you to know that what has hitherto been looked upon as a common chemical compound is produced or suspended at pleasure by our command over the rays of light.” This process cannot fail to be considered as highly honourable to the ingenuity of Mr. Reade. The first public use of the infusion of nut-galls, which, as we shall see, is an essential element in Mr. Talbot’s patented process, appears to be due to Mr. Reade, and his process of fixing his pictures by hyposulphite of soda, which has since been universally used as the best, and was afterwards suggested in 1840 by Sir John Herschel, must be regarded as an invaluable addition to the photographic art. Notwithstanding the great beauty of the drawings which Mr. Talbot obtained by the process which he published, the art was still far from being perfect. The discovery of a paper highly sensitive to light was essentially necessary to the production of portraits from the life, and even of accurate pictures of buildings and landscapes, in which the lights and shadows are constantly changing both from the motion of the sun and of the clouds. Mr. Talbot accordingly directed himself anew to this part of his subject, and he succeeded beyond his most sanguine expectations. He discovered a process by which paper could be made so sensitive that it was darkened in five or six seconds when held close to a wax candle, and gave impressions of leaves by the light of the moon. To this most important invention Mr. Talbot gave the name of Calotype, which his friends have now changed into the more appropriate name of Talbotype, and he secured the exclusive privilege of using it by a patent for England, which was sealed on the 8th February 1841. The following is the patent process for obtaining the negative picture:—… (formulae and process given) …By this process we get a negative picture, and from it any number of positive pictures may be obtained in the following manner-… (process given) …As all the inequalities and imperfections of the paper on which a negative picture is formed, are copied on the positive picture which it yields, attempts have been made to obtain positive pictures by a single process. This was first effected by Dr. Fyfe, of King’s College, Aberdeen, and M. Lassaigne of Paris; and Mr. Talbot has included a process of this kind in his specification. We have in our possession one of the pictures taken by Mr. Talbot by this process; but though it has the advantage of giving sharper lines than the double process, it is greatly inferior to it, and is not likely ever to come into general use. All the copies of pictures which it yields are reversed, and all its portraits and landscapes reversed; but the principal objections to its use are two: It requires such a length of time that portraits could not easily be taken by it, and even when we do obtain a good picture, we cannot multiply it as in the double process. The following is the single process, as contained in Mr. Talbot’s specification:—”A sheet of calotype paper is exposed to the daylight for a few seconds, … (process follows)…. An image of a positive kind is thereby produced, and represents the lights of objects by lights, and the shades by shades, as required.” The property of hydriodate of potash, to whiten paper that has been darkened by exposure to light, was observed about the same time by Mr. Hunt, Dr. Fyfe, Sir J. Herschel, Mr. Talbot, and M. Lassaigne. Mr. Hunt, in particular, has paid much attention to the photographic processes founded upon this peculiarity of the hydriodate, and has published the results of his inquiries in a very interesting paper which appeared in the Philosophical Magazine for September 1840… (process described)… This branch of photography is more curious than useful… (Faded in light.) …Varous photographic processes, under various names, such as the Cyanotype, the Sidderotype, the Chrysotype, the Energiatype, the Platinotype. the Aurotype. the Chromatype, the Catalysotype, have been described by different authors: but notwithstanding the ingenuity which they display, and the beauty of the results which some of them yield, they are all of inferior value to the Talbotype, which, though, it has been rendered more perfect since its first publication, by Mr. Talbot himself, and by other philosophers — and is doubtless still susceptible of further improvement—will, we are persuaded, continue to be the favourite photographic process, when the sun-pictures are to be received on paper. We shall therefore confine ourselves to this valuable form of the art, and give our readers some account of the improvements which it has received since Mr. Talbot’s first specification appeared. The earliest improvements upon the Calotype process, as given in Mr. Talbot’s first patent, were made by Mr. Talbot himself, who secured his exclusive use of them by a second patent, which was sealed on the 1st June, 1843. In order to remove the yellow tint from the negative picture. Mr. Talbot plunges it for ten minutes in an almost boiling solution of hyposulphite of soda in ten times its weight of water. When washed in warm water and dried, the picture is placed upon a hot iron, and wax melted into the pores of the paper, to increase its transparency. Mr. Talbot also recommends that a warm iron be placed behind the calotvpe paper while in the camera, to increase its sensibility. In order to simplify the process by dispensing with the second wash, Mr. Talbot washes the iodized paper with gallic acid and thus obtains io-gallic paper, which requires only to be washed with the solution of nitrate of silver, before it is put into the camera. The picture, though generally invisible, rapidly develops itself when removed from the camera, requiring no farther care than ultimately to fix it. “Instead of gallic acid,” Mr. Talbot observes, “sulphate of iron answers the same purpose perfectly.” He mentions, also, that Tannin, and other substances, such as tea, may be substituted for gallic acid, and he defines the Calotype and Talbotype process as depending on a combination of iodine, silver, and a deoxydizing agent. As a still farther simplification of his process, Sir. Talbot washes iodized paper with a mixture of 26 parts of a saturated solution of gallic acid, and one part of the ordinary solution of nitrate of silver. It may then be dried without the fear of spoiling, may be kept a little time, and used without further preparation. In order to improve photographic drawings, Mr. Talbot keeps them twice the usual time in the sun, so that the shadows are too dark, and the lights not white. The drawing is then washed, and plunged for one or two minutes in a solution of iodide of potassium, of the strength of 500 grains to a pint of water.* (*Mr. Talbot has included in his second patent, a method of Photographic printing, and of Photographic publication. Letters are cut out of a transparent page and sorted, they are then put up in words, cemented and copied photographically; and in Photographic publication he makes good negative drawings on papers prepared with Kilt (3 or 4 oz. to 1 gallon of water) and the ammonia nitrate of silver, (50 grains of nitrate to 1 oz. of water, ammonia being added to form a precipitate, and redissolving the same, leaving the solution clear), and having fixed them he takes positive drawings from the negative copies as usual.) It is then washed, and plunged into a hot bath of hyposulphite of soda, till the proper tints are obtained. Mr. Talbot also improves his positive pictures by waxing them, and placing white or coloured paper behind them. Various changes, and some improvements have been made upon the processes adopted by Mr. Talbot. Mr. Hunt has given us the following account of some of these:— “Mr. Channing of Boston appears to have been the first to publish any method by which the calotype process could be simplified. This gentleman directs that the paper be washed over with sixty grains of crystallized nitrate of silver in one ounce of water, and when dry, with a solution of ten grains of the iodide of potassium in one ounce of water. It is then to be washed with water, and dried between blotting papers. It is now fit for use…. (Additional processes described.) …Dr. Ryan has shown the necessity of some care in the use of the iodide of potassium, into a solution of which Mr. Talbot recommends the nitrated paper to be placed for a few minutes. If the paper is left too long in such a solution, the iodide of silver will be dissolved, that salt being soluble in an excess of iodide of potassium. Simply passing the paper through the solution appears to answer every purpose effectually. Mr. Collen has modified Mr. Talbot’s process, by brushing over the paper with a weak solution of the ammonio-nitrate of silver, and in using the same solution in combination with the gallic acid, instead of the nitrate of silver. It does not, however, appear to me that any advantage is gained by this mode of proceeding. A careful adjustment of the best proportions of the ingredients recommended by Mr. Fox Talbot, will be found to afford better results in a shorter time.”—Researches, &c., pp. 66-68. Instead of dipping the sensitive paper in distilled water, after it has been washed with the strong solution, No. 1, Dr. Adamson of St. Andrews has avoided this by weakening that solution with four times its bulk of distilled water, and taking off the superfluous moisture by blotting paper.* (*Mr. W. Furlong prepared his iodized paper by simply washing the paper in a solution of iodide of silver, in a strong solution of iodide of potassium, and thus produced very fine Talbotypes.) Among the improvements of the Talbotype we may enumerate the introduction of sulphate of iron in place of gallic acid. This improvement we owe to Mr. Hunt, who published an account of his process in the Athenaeum for June and July 1844, under the name of the Energiatype, which consisted in using nitrate of silver and succinic acid, and in developing the picture by protosulphate of iron. At the meeting of the British Association at York in 1845, Mr. Hunt exhibited, under the name of Ferrotypes, pictures produced by using every salt of silver, and developed by iron. At the same meeting Dr. Woods of Parsonstown communicated another photographic process, under the name of Electrolysotype, (afterwards changed to Catalysotype,) in which ioduret of iron was substituted for iodide of potassium, and which he states to have all the beauty and quickness of the Calotype, without a tenth of its trouble and very little of its uncertainty. In this process the paper is steeped in water to which hydrochloric acid has been added, in the proportion of two drops to three ounces….. (Further processes.) …Dr. Woods found the following proportions to give very fine negative pictures…. A new photographic process of very high pretensions has been recently submitted to the Academy of Sciences at Paris, and published in the Comptes Rendus for July 1847. It has since been reprinted in a separate pamphlet, with notes by M. Lerebours, and has thus apparently received the approbation of the Academy, and of its eminent annotator, as a new art. The author of the process, M. Blanquart-Evrard, places a sheet of fine letter paper on the surface of a solution of 1 grain of nitrate of silver to 30 grains of distilled water…. (Process follows.) …Mr. Evrard’s process for taking positive portraits from this negative picture differs in no respect from that of Mr. Talbot, excepting that in salting the paper for two or three minutes in a mixture of 3 parts of a saturated solution of salt, with 10 parts of distilled water, (which we think too strong,) he places merely the surface upon the mixture. After being well dried by blotting paper, the same surface is to be Immediately placed upon a solution of 1 part of nitrate of silver and 5 parts of distilled water. It is then dried and ready for use. We have thus given minutely the process of M. Blanquart-Evrard, which we are persuaded all our readers will regard as an indefensible plagiarism of Mr. Talbot’s process. The solutions are all the same, with the trifling variation in the proportions of the ingredients, if we except the one part of bromide of potassium used in the negative process. The methods, too, are the same, with this difference merely, that the paper is laid upon the solutions, in place of being brushed over with them, and the completion of the negative by waxing it, and the interposition of a plate of glass in front of the paper in the camera, are also Mr. Talbot’s inventions. Mr. Talbot’s name is never once mentioned, and the unlearned reader would doubtless suppose, that M. Blanquart-Evrard was the discoverer of the Talbotype! He speaks, indeed, of the multiplication of processes to infinity, by a great number of savans, but he mentions no individual, and affirms that, owing to the absence of principle in the preparation of the paper, all their attempts have been fruitless!! Such is a brief account of the various processes which have been regarded as improvements on the Talbotype. We cannot, from our own experience, venture to say that they are all inferior to the original process of Mr. Talbot, or that they contain no important additions to the chemical agents which he employs, or to the methods of manipulation which he used; but we can positively affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that the fine pictures executed by Mr. Talbot himself, which have been chiefly taken from works of art, public buildings, and landscape scenes, and the portraits executed in Scotland, by Messrs. Adamson and Hill, and several private individuals, and in London by Mr. Collen, have not been surpassed, and we believe scarcely equalled, by those of any other persons who have employed processes different from that of Mr. Talbot. In referring for a proof of this to the different numbers of the Pencil of Nature, published by Mr. Talbot, in which the plates are impressed by the agency of light alone, without any aid whatever from the artist’s pencil, we cannot withhold our admiration of the genius and patience with which he has overcome difficulties which many of his friends thought to be unsurmountable in the production of such a work. The large volumes of Talbotypes published by Messrs. Adamson and Hill, at the price of £40 or £50 each, and now in the possession of one or two of the most distinguished artists in London, evince also the perfection of Mr. Talbot’s process, while the beautiful Talbotype miniatures of Mr. Henry Collen, touched up and improved by that eminent artist, show how much is yet to be accomplished by the application of artistic skill to the original productions of the solar pencil. In treating of an art so beautiful and enchanting as the Talbotype undoubtedly is, we are unwilling to speak of its defects. In the delineation of fixed objects we consider it as nearly perfect—and it is to such objects that Mr. Talbot himself has applied it; but when it is employed to take portraits, particularly those of children and females, it invariably presents us with unsatisfactory results. Even if the sitter were motionless, the picture, though perfect in its outlines, would still fail to represent the delicate lines and shades of the human countenance. This defect is so great, as to deter many persons from sitting for their portraits; for when the other defects, arising from the unsteadiness of the sitter, and the painful expression which arises from exposure to strong light, are added to the picture, it is often a hideous likeness, even when female beauty has submitted to its martyrdom. This defect arises, to a certain extent, from the rough grain, so to speak, of the paper, and also to its imperfect transparency—for in the positive picture every imperfection of the paper is copied, and every luminous point re-appears as a black one—so that the positive picture has the appearance of being stippled, as it were, with grains of sand, which give a painful coarseness to the human face. Some attempts have been made, and not without success, to remedy these imperfections. Mr. Talbot himself, in his second patent, proposes to improve the positive photographs by waxing them, and placing white or coloured paper behind them. Sir David Brewster, who has made many experiments on this branch of the art, recommends soaking them with varnish or oils; but in order to bring out the full effect of this application, he places the negative picture on the wrong or unnitrated side of the paper which is to receive the positive, and he exposes it twice or thrice the usual time to the sun’s light. When the negative is removed, the positive picture, seen by reflected light, is of an unsatisfactory grey colour; but when looked at by transmitted light, it is a strong and powerful picture, the silver having been drawn by the action of light from the nitrated side into the interior or substance of the paper, in which the picture is actually formed. After being fixed, and well dried, the picture is now to be made transparent with certain varnishes or oils; and when it has imbibed these varnishes or oils equally, the grey colour of the surface disappears, and the interior picture is seen as if it were on the surface, with its natural harshness singularly softened. When the picture is placed upon a sheet of white paper, its softened tints appear to great advantage, and it loses all resemblance to an ordinary sun-picture. It is, as it were, a solid picture; each atom of silver with which it is depicted being seen through a certain thickness of the translucent paper, and therefore, from that cause, greatly softened.* (*Thick paper, or thin Bristol board, may be advantageously used, and soaked in the solution of the nitrate, or ammonia-nitrate of silver. If, instead of immersing the |.:i|.c! in the solution, we first nitrate one side, A, of the paper, and afterwards the other side, B, the nitrate of silver passes from B to A in drying, so that a picture taken on the side!’. is grey, exactly like one taken on the wrong side I), when A alone is nitrated. When the paper has been soaked in the nitrate solution, it is almost impossible to get an equally strong picture on both sides of it. The action of the light on t r.e Hi!p draws the nitrate from the other.) Pictures thus formed, may, like the waxed positives of Mr. Talbot, be improved, or rather varied, in their character, by placing coloured paper behind them; but the transparent condition of the paper has enabled Sir David Brewster to give to these pictures all the effect of colouring without touching the picture itself. To do this accurately, it was necessary to place behind the principal picture a very faint copy of the same picture so as to coincide with it with mathematical accuracy. An accomplished photographer had, for a different purpose, endeavoured, without success, to obtain on the same folded sheet of paper two perfectly coincident negatives, and it was after learning from him his failure that Sir David Brewster was led to the following method of effecting it:—Take a quarto sheet of paper, … The process above described, admits of several useful variations… (Process detailed.) …Another method, which may be combined with the preceding, of producing very soft and agreeable positive pictures, has been successfully used by Sir David Brewster. He places between the negative and the nitrated paper one, two, or even three sheets of fine letter paper, and he sometimes places the back of the negative upon the nitrated paper, which gives a reverse portrait. In all these cases, the light which passes through the white portions or through bright specks in the negative has diffused itself before it reaches the nitrated paper; and in place of producing sharp black points and lines, it gives a penumbral shading of great softness and beauty. If a thin sheet of glass is interposed between the negative and the nitrated paper, a picture is obtained, which, like the oil paintings of some good masters, produces its effect only at a distance, the lines of the picture being ill- defined and shadowy, when we view the picture closely. This method of interposing sheets of paper, &c., between the negative and the nitrated surface, protects the negatives from injury, and prevents the positives from being entirely blackened or over-sunned by too long exposure. It is of special advantage when we use waxed negatives. Having thus given our readers some account of the Talbotype, and of the art of taking sun pictures upon paper, an invention wholly English, and wholly due to the genius of Mr. Talbot, we shall now proceed to give a similar account of the Daguerreotype, an invention wholly French, and the most important improvements upon which we owe to French artists and French philosophers. In the year 1814, M. Nicephorus Niepce of Chalons sur Saone, had directed his attention to Heliography, as he called it, or to the subject of fixing the pictures in the camera-obscura by the agency of light. He had discovered the remarkable property which light possesses of either solidifying, or of diminishing the solubility of certain resinous substances, according to the duration or intensity of its action, and he was thus led to the following heliographic process: — “I fill a wine-glass half full with pulverized asphaltum. I pour upon it, drop by drop, the essential oil of lavender, till the bitumen can absorb no more. I afterwards add as much more of the essential oil as will can.se the whole to stand about three lines above the mixture, which is then covered and submitted to a gentle heat, until the essential oil is fully impregnated with the colouring matter of the bitumen. If this varnish is not of the required consistency, it is to be allowed to evaporate slowly, without heat, in a shallow dish, care being taken to protect it from moisture, by which it is injured, and at last decomposed. A tablet of plated silver is to be highly polished, on which a thin coating of the varnish id to be applied cold, with a light roll of very soft skin; this will impart to it a fine vermillion colour, and cover it with a very thin and equal coating. The plate is then placed upon heated iron, which is wrapped round with several folds of paper, from which, by this means, all moisture has been previously expelled. When the varnish has ceased to simmer, the plate is withdrawn from the heat, and left to cool and dry in a gentle temperature, and protected from a damp atmosphere. “The plate thus prepared may be immediately submitted to the action of the luminous fluid, in the focus of the camera. But evert after having been thus exposed a length of time sufficient for receiving the impressions of external objects, nothing is apparent to show that these impressions exist. The forms of the future picture remain still invisible. The next operation, then, is to disengage the shrouded imagery, and this is accomplished by a solvent.” This solvent consists of a mixture of one part by volume of the essential oil of lavender, and ten of oil of white petroleum. A vessel being procured of a sufficient size, enough of this solvent to cover the plate is poured into it. “Into this liquid the tablet is plunged, and the operator, observing it by reflected light, begins to perceive the images of the objects to which it had been exposed gradually unfolding their forms, though still veiled by the supernatant fluid, continually becoming darker from saturation with varnish. The plate is then lifted out, and held in a vertical position till as much as possible of the solvent has been allowed to drop away.” The silver plate is now carefully washed, by being placed upon an inclined plane, over which a stream of water is made to run, in order to clear away the remaining solvent that may adhere to the varnish. In this process the light has solidified the varnish, and the parts upon which the shadows fell being more soluble, will be more acted upon by the solvent. On the recommendation of Daguerre, Niepce substituted Iodine for his varnish, and Daguerre improved the process by using the resin of the essential oil of lavender, dissolved in alcohol, and by exposing the silver plate to the vapour of petroleum instead of washing it with the oil of lavender and petroleum solvent. The substitution of a film of iodine for a varnish, which failed in the hands of Niepce, became the foundation of Daguerre’s success, and having once obtained a material so sensitive to the action of light, the French artist overcame all the other difficulties with which he had been surrounded. While occupied with these interesting researches, M. Niepce died in 1833, and on the 14th June 1837 his son, M. Joseph Isidore Niepce, entered into a new agreement with M. Daguerre, that they should carry on their heliographic inquiries for their mutual benefit, and that the process should bear the name of Daguerre as its sole inventor. M. Niepce pursued his father’s process without making any essential improvement upon it, while Daguerre brought his own to such perfection that the old process was entirely abandoned. The discovery of Daguerre was announced in 1839, and the extreme beauty of the pictures he exhibited at once surprised and delighted the scientific world. M. Arago, whose great discoveries on light entitled him to the confidence of the inventor, was intrusted with Daguerre’s secret, and with that devotion to science, and to the interests of its cultivators, which we desire to see more frequent among philosophers, he resolved that while France had the honour of so great a discovery, it should also have the higher glory of rewarding and honouring the discoverer, and of making it a present to the whole civilized world. With these objects in view he persuaded the French Government to give Daguerre an annual pension of 6000 francs, (£500,) and Niepce “a pension of 4000 francs, (£333.).* (*Daguerre himself proposed a reward of 8000 francs, to be equally divided between him and Niepce. The Government assented; but on the ground of Daguerre’s having agreed also to publish his secret of Dioramic painting, his pension was rated to 6000 francs.) The bill received the unanimous assent of both Chambers, and was signed by the King on the 15th June 1839. While science continues to interest and confer benefits on our species, the noble liberality of the French Government will never be forgotten; but though a grateful posterity may feel and express its gratitude, it will launch it fiercest invectives against the laws and legislature of England, for having wrested from its subjects the high privilege purchased for them by France, and will reprobate the conduct of those interested men who have bartered for gold the rights and immunities of British genius. When the Daguerrian bill received the Royal signature, Daguerre and Niepce were the sole possessors of the secret which they had sold for the benefit of the whole world. The artists and men of science in England anticipated with delight the disclosure of the new art, but what was their surprise to find that MM. Daguerre and Niepce had actually disposed of their invention to parties in England, just in time to enable these parties to secure by patent the exclusive privilege of using it. Mr. Pye, a well- known English artist, had the manliness to remonstrate with M. Daguerre, who, with an effrontery unparalleled, did not scruple to repudiate the declaration made by his friend and benefactor M. Arago, that “France had adopted the discovery, and that from the first moment she had cherished a pride in liberally bestowing it a gift to The Whole World.” “If you will take the trouble,” replies Daguerre, “to read attentively the articles of agreement between me and the French Government, you will see that the process has been sold, not to the civilized world, but to the Government of France, for the benefit of My Fellow-Countrymen!” “From the first,” says M. Arago, “Daguerre perceived that the payment of a stipulated sum might give to the transaction the base character of a sale;” and yet, after receiving £500 per annum, and the reversion of one-half of this sum to his widow, he does sell, for some paltry equivalent, the right which France had given to every British subject;—and that right has been for eight years protected by the Great Seal of England. Some public-spirited individuals opposed the issue of letters patent before Sir Thomas Wilde, then Her Majesty’s Solicitor-General; but their opposition was in vain. The scientific arts of England found no sympathy among the Officers of the Crown, and a patent was granted to Mr. Miles Berry for a communication from a certain foreigner residing abroad. That communication was the Daguerreotype process, and that foreigner—we blush to record it—was Daguerre! It is with peculiar satisfaction, however, that we inform our readers that the same Sir Thomas Wilde, in the capacity of a Judge, has within these few days concurred in the decision of a Jury to set aside the patent. The specification declared it to be indispensable that, just before the moment of using the plate in the camera, the silver plate should be rubbed lightly with pumice and some nitric acid, whereas, as sworn by the witnesses for the defendant, and as well known to every Daguerreotypist, the operation, lasting from ten to thirty minutes, of putting the coating of iodine on the plate, must follow the application of the acid, and precede the introduction of the plates into the camera. Having thus submitted to our readers these historical details, we shall now endeavour to give a very abridged account of the process of the Daguerreotype, as practised and published by its inventor. A plate of silvered copper about the thickness of a shilling, having been well cleaned and polished by rubbing it with a pledget of cotton, fine pumice powder, and dilute nitric acid, is then exposed to the heat of a spirit-lamp placed below it till a strong white coating is formed on the polished surface of the silver. When the plate has been cooled suddenly on a cold slab of metal or of stone, the white coating must be removed by again polishing it several times with dry pumice and cotton, and also three times more with the dilute nitric acid and pumice powder. The silver plate being thus carefully cleaned, is now placed in a box containing iodine, till it is seen, by the light of a candle, to be covered with a golden yellow film of that volatile body. The colour of the plate must neither be pale yellow nor purple yellow, but of an intermediate tint of a gold colour. It is then placed in the camera, care being taken to keep it from light, till a distinct picture of the landscape is formed upon the iodized surface. After remaining in the camera from five minutes to balf-an-hour, a period depending on the intensity of the light, the plate is removed from the camera to a metallic box containing in a cup at least 3 oz. of mercury. A spirit-lamp placed below the cup of mercury throws off the mercurial vapour, and in proportion as this vapour deposits itself on the parts of the plate which have been acted upon by the light, in the same proportion is the picture disengaged, as it were, or developed on the surface of the plate by the adhesion of the white mercurial vapour to the different parts which had been impressed with the light, the lights of the picture being drawn or put in, as it were, by the vapour. As soon as the picture appears complete, the plate is placed in a vessel or square trough of sheet copper, containing either a saturated solution of common salt, or a weak solution of hyposulphite of soda. The coating of iodine will thus be dissolved, a result which will be obtained when the yellow colour has quite disappeared, and we have only to pour over it distilled water, hot but not boiling. The drops of water which remain on the plate must be removed by blowing upon them. The picture thus finished is then preserved from dust by placing it in a square of strong pasteboard and covering it with glass; and if the operation has been successfully performed, we shall have a picture almost as perfect in its details as that in the camera-obscura itself, though without any of the colours of nature. The palette of the sun contains only a single colour, and that is white. The shades in its picture are supplied by the black polish of the metallic surface. When this specular surface reflects a luminous object, the white vapour of the mercury appears in shade, and we thus obtain from the Daguerreotype plate either a positive or a negative picture, according to the light in which it is viewed. If we judge of an art by the beauty of its productions, we can scarcely deny that the Daguerreotype, as applied to landscapes and inanimate objects, came almost perfect from the hands of its inventor. The time of exposure in the camera was too long to make it applicable to the delineation of living objects; and though M. Arago remarked, ” that a very slight advance beyond his present progress will enable M. Daguerre to apply his processes to the execution of portraits from life,” yet the acceleration of the process, and the successful delineation of the human form, were effected by the genius of other artists. The first portrait from life taken by the Daguerreotype was taken on the 6th October 1839, by Mr. Walcott [sic Wolcott] of New York, upon a plate about the size of a sixpence, now in the possession of Mr. Johnson of that city, and portraits were afterwards taken by Messrs. Draper, Mapes, Johnson, and others. The art of taking portraits has been particularly studied, and brought to a high degree of perfection, by M. A. Claudet, who was the first person who discovered, in the beginning of May 1841, an easy and sure method of accelerating the action of light upon the film of iodine, and thus greatly shortening the process. M. Edmund Becquerel had, indeed, shown that one-hall of the spectrum, viz., the blue and violet half, had alone the power of exciting the iodine, in forming the picture, and that the other half, though destitute of the power of excitation, had the property of continuing the action of the blue and violet rays after they had produced a slight effect. Hence he shortened the time of sitting for a portrait, by keeping it in the camera for a very short time, and completing the action by making the sun’s light pass through a red glass, and shine upon the plate for a few minutes. This process, however, was not suited to the professional artist, and we believe is not now practised. M. Claudet’s invention could not fail to supersede it. He discovered that the sensitiveness of the iodized plate was increased in a very remarkable degree by the action of the chloride of iodine or bromine, and when the plate, before it had acquired the appearance of a yellow tint, was held, for about two seconds, over the mouth of a bottle containing either of these chlorides, the vapour spread itself over the iodine film, which soon acquired the proper yellow colour when placed in the iodine box. Various methods of applying these accelerating substances, have been employed. M. Fizeau exposes the iodized plate for a few seconds to a very dilute solution of bromine in water, while others fill a vase with the vapour of bromine and chlorine by means of a syringe, which shall just contain as much vapour as will coat the plate. The accelerating mixer of the Iodine or Bromine vapour was so great, that M. Claudet obtained with it pictures in ten seconds, which would have required four or five minutes by the original preparation of Daguerre. A new and very ingenious method of giving sensibility to the iodized plate, has been recently proposed by Mr. Bingham. In order to avoid the use of water for dissolving the bromine, he combines bromine with hydrate of lime, and forms a sort of bromide of lime. This may be done by allowing bromine vapour to act upon hydrate of lime for some hours, or more conveniently by placing some of the hydrate at the bottom of a flask, and then putting some of the bromine into a glass capsule, supported a little above the lime, the lower part of the flask being placed in water of the temperature of about 50°. The lime gradually becomes scarlet, like the red iodide of mercury. By slightly colouring the silver plate with the chloro-iodide, and then exposing it for a proper time over the bromide of lime, Mr. Bingham says that pictures may be obtained in a fraction of a second, even late in the afternoon! The accelerating American mixture, prepared by Mr. Wolcott, viz., chlorine combined with bromine, and the Hungarian mixture of M. Guerin, which is a compound of bromine, chlorine, and iodine may be obtained in the solid state by a combination with lime, like the bromine colour; but Mr. Bingham greatly prefers the pure bromide of lime as the quickest accelerator yet known.* (*See London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine, October 1846, vol. xxix., p. 287.) Soon after M. Claudet’s discovery of the accelerating property of the chlorides of iodine and bromine, M. Gaudin of Paris tried the bromide of iodine without chlorine, and this compound is now generally employed by photographers as highly sensitive, and producing the very best results. When this compound of iodine and bromine is correctly prepared, it is of little consequence whether the plate be exposed a shorter or a longer time to its vapour, which is not the case when they are applied separately. With the bromide of iodine the two ingredients evaporate in due proportion, and provided neither of them be in excess on the plate, the coating will possess its highest degree of sensibility. The following accelerating solution, which has been kindly communicated to us by its author, Dr. Karsten of Berlin, not only imparts a high degree of sensitiveness to the iodine film, but gives a fine colour to the picture. Make a saturated solution of bromine, on equal parts of fuming nitric and muriatic acids, and then add as much iodine as the solution will dissolve. As the iodine enables the liquid to dissolve more bromine, add as much more as it will dissolve. After this addition it will dissolve more iodine, and so on, till the solution is completely saturated with both these bodies. In this concentrated solution the bromine and iodine are so combined, as to be nearly without smell. To one part of this solution, add one-hundred parts, or thereabouts, of distilled water, till the liquid has the colour of rum, when it will be ready for use. Having iodized the plate to a rose colour, expose it to the vapours of the above liquid, till it assumes a violet colour, and it will be ready to be placed in the camera. Notwithstanding the great degree of sensitiveness to light, which the iodized plate receives from these accelerating substances, they have not yet enabled the photographer to carry on his pursuits with artificial light. Dr. Draper indeed obtained an imperfect picture of the moon by the aid of a lens and a heliostate in half-an-hour, upon an iodized plate. In fifteen seconds the flame of a gas-light gave a distinct stain to his plate, when held close to it, and in one minute the impression was strong. A gas-lamp gave a good representation of a figure on a magic lantern’s slide, and with Drummond’s light, and the Pea light of the oxyhydrogen blow-pipe, he obtained the same result. Mr. Talbot has found that his sensitive paper darkened when held for five or six seconds close to a wax candle, and it was so distinctly acted upon by the light of the moon, that he took impressions of leaves upon it by moonlight. In 1841, Mr. Goddard, obtained images of busts by gas-light, and by the oxyhydrogen light. Mr. Hunt made similar experiments, and M. Claudet took portraits from nature by the oxyhydrogen light in fifteen or twenty seconds, with an object-glass of short focus; and his own portrait thus taken, was publicly exhibited. He obtained also impressions of black lace by the light of the full moon in two minutes, and even by the light of the stars in fifteen minutes. He likewise obtained an image of the moon in his camera in four seconds, in which the shadowed parts of the disc were visible, and in about the same time the image of an alabaster figure by the light of a candle in fifteen minutes, and a similar image by an Argand lamp in five minutes. Mr. Kilburn has more recently obtained well-defined photographic impressions by the light of a common dip candle in ten minutes, by the smallest fish-tail burner of coal gas in three minutes, and by an oil lamp (a solar one,) in the same time. Next in importance to the acceleration of the photographic process is the perfection of the image which is thrown upon the iodized plate—not of the visible image which is received and seen on the ground glass, but of the invisible image formed by the photogenic rays. M. Claudet has paid much attention to this subject, and has placed it beyond a doubt that the non- coincidence of the luminous and the photogenic focus, was the cause of the many failures which take place. With cameras of single lenses, the photogenic focus is always more distant than the luminous focus; but M. Claudet found, that with some achromatic cameras, in which the coincidence should have been nearly effected, the photogenic focus was nearer the lens than the luminous focus. This unlooked-for result he ascertained to be owing to an overcorrection of the chromatic aberration of the less refrangible rays, and he found this “to be generally the case with object-glasses in which, by the excess of the dispersive power of the concave glass, or the irrationality of that dispersion, the extreme rays of the most refrangible part of the spectrum are, during the second refraction, diverged in a greater proportion than they have been converged by the refraction of the convex lens; and these rays being nearly invisible, do not affect the achromatism of the luminous rays.” M. Claudet, therefore, recommends that the rays of the photogenic spectrum should be united in one focus, even at the sacrifice of the achromatism of the more refrangible rays. As the photogenic focus, however, will change its place with the colour and intensity of the light, and with the distance of the object, the photographer should determine experimentally its position in relation to these varying influences. In many of the early Daguerreotypes the pictures were reversed—that is, the right side of the picture was the left side of the landscape; but this intolerable evil, which does not take place in the Talbotype, was soon corrected—in some cases by reflexion from a glass or metallic mirror, and in others by a prism, which is decidedly the best. As much light, however, is lost by these reflexions, and the time of sitting prolonged, artists have scrupled to correct the reversion of the picture. M. Claudet, indeed, is, so far as we know, the only person who makes a point of correcting the reversion of the picture; and he has placed it beyond a doubt that a picture not reverted, is a more artistic and truthful representation of the individual than a reverted one. We have long been convinced of this truth; and if any person doubts it let him look at the two sides of a Calotype made transparent by the process which we have already described, and though the two portraits are mathematically the same, he will see that in the air and even in the likeness, they are essentially different. By means of these processes, portraits of a very superior character are now taken professionally by several distinguished artists in the metropolis, by M. Claudet, Mr. Kilburn and Professor Highschool, each of whom have distinguishing excellences of their own. M. Claudet’s long experience in the art of Daguerreotyping has enabled him to produce portraits of great beauty and force. The portraits taken by Mr. Kilburn, and coloured by a celebrated Parisian artist, M. Mansion, are exceedingly attractive, while those of Professor Highschool, from America, executed by new processes, and some of them tinted by peculiar methods, exhibit great chemical knowledge, and evince much experience in the practice of his art. He has employed with much success the vapours of cadmium, antimony, arsenic, and also of several metallic alloys, and from his devotion to the subject we have no doubt that he will make still greater additions to the resources of photography. His very interesting series of panoramic views of the Falls of Niagara, were, we believe, the first ever taken by the Daguerreotype. The Daguerreotype pictures produced by the methods which we have now described, being caused by a slight deposit of mercury, resembling the bloom upon a plum, which is effaced by the slightest touch, could scarcely be regarded as durable or permanent works. In order to remedy this evil, M. Dumas proposed to protect them with some transparent vegetable varnish; but as this coating was not proof against damp and atmospheric influences, it has never been satisfactorily applied. The object, however, which Dumas contemplated has been effected by M. Fizeau, by a very beautiful and simple process. Having covered the silver plate containing the picture with a solution of chloride of gold, mixed with a solution of hyposulphite of soda, in certain proportions, and then exposing the plate to the gentle heat of a spirit-lamp, the metallic gold is precipitated upon the plate, and forms a thin transparent coating, which gives a rich tone to the picture. The gold precipitated on the plate forms an amalgam with the molecules or crystals of mercury, and by adding to their size increases the brilliancy and force of the picture. Other metals have been precipitated by the electrotype process, but the precipitates are less transparent and adhesive. The process of M. Fizeau, besides fixing the picture, enables the artist to colour his portraits—a most desirable result, which could not have been otherwise effected. To the same ingenious author, M. Fizeau, we owe the beautiful art of reproducing the Daguerreotype pictures by the electrotype process, which was discovered in the same year with the Daguerreotype.* (*The process of M. Fizeau was communicated to the Academy of Science! on the 15th and 24th May, 1841.) In this new process metals are precipitated from their solution by the action of electricity, the precipitate being deposited on every part of the picture, so that when the metallic film, or plate thus formed, is removed from the surface of the Daguerreotype, it resembles it so exactly that it would be impossible to decide which was the original and which the copy, did we not know previously of what metals they were respectively composed. This perfect resemblance between the original and its impression shows that the Daguerreotype image consists of minute crystals, produced on the surface of the plate by the combined action of the mercury and the iodide of silver, that the lights arise from these reflexions, and that similar reflecting faces are produced on the electrotyped plate. As the Daguerreotype pictures cannot be multiplied like the Talbotype ones, it became desirable to discover some method of fixing them on the plate by a more permanent tracing than mercurial lines, and to make this plate the means of their reproduction. The first person who partially succeeded in this attempt was M. Donne, who, after covering the edges of the plate with a protecting varnish, poured upon its surface a weak solution of nitric acid. While the pure silver was bitten in by the action of the acid, the other parts, protected by the mercury, remained untouched, provided the action was not long continued. As the impressions given by these etchings were very faint, Dr. Berres of Vienna used the vapour of dilute nitric acid, and applied a varnish to the parts of the plate which required to be protected; but this method, requiring the skill of an artist in laying on the varnish, has been as unsuccessful as that of M. Donne. The process of etching Daguerreotypes, though considered, after these failures, as beyond the reach of art, has been greatly improved by the agency of electricity. Professor Grove, availing himself of the property of the Voltaic battery to precipitate at the positive pole metals placed at the negative pole, places the Daguerreotype plate at the negative pole, and by the use of solutions which attack the pure silver surface in preference to the amalgamated metal, the biting of the silver is effected after it has been immersed only a few seconds in the battery when put in action. This elegant process, however, owing to the breaking of the delicate coating which protects the silver, is still susceptible of farther improvement. M. Fizeau, to whom the photographic art is so much indebted, has given us another method of etching the plate. He employs a mixture of nitric acid, nitrous acid, and chlorohydrid acid, which attacks the silver and not the mercury. The chloride of silver is formed by the action of the acid upon the silver, and stops its action, but the coating of chloride is removed by a solution of ammonia, and the biting continued by fresh acid. This operation is repeated till the plate is etched. In order to increase the depth of the etching, M. Fizeau, gilds the white parts, which he does by filling the bitten parts of the silver with a siccative ink. By wiping the surface slightly, the ink fills up only the hollow parts, and the mercury remains perfectly unprotected. He then immerses the plate in an electrotype battery, charged with a solution of gold, and as soon as the contact is established, the gold is precipitated on the white parts only, the greasy ink preventing the precipitation upon the silver. When the gilding is completed, the ink is removed by caustic potash, and the plate again submitted to the action of nitric acid. The etching commenced by the first operation is now continued, the part which is to remain in relief being protected by the gilding. A plate thus etched, will give a great number of very good impressions; but as it would soon be worn by the printing, M. Fizeau, recommends, in order to protect the original, and insure a greater number of copies, that it should be electro- typed, so that from one matrix any number of copper-plates may be produced, and from them any number of copies printed for publication. We have already seen that the sun carries upon his palette only one colour. He paints but with china ink, or with bistre. From the pure white of his virgin beam, he refuses to disenchain the mystic hues which it embosoms and combines. The gay colours of the natural world, whether they sparkle in leaf or in flower, on the insect wing or on the virgin cheek, appeal to him in vain. Even his own setting glories he refuses to fix. He lights up indeed with new brightness the azure vault, as if to entice to the upward but difficult ascent. But the gold of Croesus shines dim on his canvass, and he refuses to give expression to the scarlet vestments of power, and the red banners of war. To speak more plainly, the tints of the water-colour painter, which correspond to the solar red, orange, yellow and green, and all their mixtures, appear black upon the Daguerreotype plate, while the blue, indigo and violet colours, are more or less white. According to M. Claudet, who made these experiments with his usual accuracy, and who has kindly communicated to us the result of them, “Blue appears the whitest, indigo the next, and then violet. Light yellow and green appear the darkest, although but little difference can be distinguished between them and red and orange colours.” According to Sir John Herschel, the condensed colours of the spectrum give the following tints on prepared paper:—Red, no tint; orange, a faint brick red; orange-yellow, a glaring brick red; yellow, red passing into green; yellow-green, a dull bottle-green; green, the same, but bluish: blue-green, a sombre blue, almost black: blue and violet, black. Hence it is obvious that coloured paintings and drawings cannot be successfully copied by the photographer. If the lights are yellow, they become shadows in the photograph, or if the shadows are blue, they become lights! In order to show this curious effect, M. Claudet exhibited at one of the Marquis of Northampton’s soirees, the head of a female figure, the hair of which was painted yellow, the eyes red, the lips blue, and the face of various tints of indigo and violet, with the shades yellow. When a copy of this ludicrous figure was taken in Daguerreotype, the picture was perfect with all the effects of a correct chalk-drawing. M. Claudet had another female head executed, in which the colouring was apparently correct, but in which the artist had on purpose employed yellow, green and their mixtures to produce the lights, and blue, indigo and violet with their mixtures to produce the shades. The Daguerreotype copy of this picture was as ridiculous in appearance as the party-coloured female head which gave a correct picture. Some enthusiastic photographers consider if as possible, and even probable, that the gay colours of the natural world may yet be brought out by the agency of light. We have no such expectation; and we consider it to be infinitely improbable with the sensitive materials now used in photography. New materials may doubtless be discovered, which shall receive from the photogenic rays the colour of the bodies from which they emanate, but even this will appear to be all but impossible, when we consider that the photogenic rays which form the pictures in the Talbotype and Daguerreotype, are not rays of light, nor rays of heat, but are actually invisible radiations, with which colour has no connexion whatever. In the valuable work of Professor Draper of New York, which we have placed in our list of photographic publications, there are many important observations, relative both to the theory and practice of photography. We believe that he was the first person who discovered what he calls, “the antagonizing action of the two halves of the spectrum?’ the blue or more refrangible half having a decomposing agency on iodide of silver, and the red or less refrangible half a protecting agency. He states that there is a certain condition of the sky, namely, when it has such a degree of brightness that the sensitive surface is slightly stained by it, under which the decomposing effect of its light is exactly balanced by the protecting agency of the other rays—80 exactly balanced that it is immaterial whether the exposure be for one minute or an hour, for the resulting action is the same.” An equilibrium in these two opposite actions, to a greater or less extent, seems to take place even with the solar rays in tropical regions, as if the sun’s light there was intrinsically different from what it is here. “There are strong reasons,” says Dr. Draper, “to believe it so. The Chevalier Frederichstal, who travelled in Central America for the Prussian Government, found very long exposures in the camera needful to procure impressions of the ruined monuments of the deserted cities existing there. This was not due to any defect in his lens. It was a French achromatic, and I tried it in this city before his departure. The proofs which he obtained, and which he did me the favour to show me on his return, had a very remarkable aspect. More recently in the same country, other competent travellers have experienced like difficulties, and as I am informed, failed to get any impressions whatever. Are these difficulties clue to the antagonizing action of the negative rays upon the positive?”* (*A Treatise, &c. Chap. xii. pp. 197, 198.) In opposition, however, to the idea of such an antagonizing action, Dr. Draper himself afterwards affirms, that the red, orange, and yellow rays which protect the plate from the ordinary photogenic action, were themselves capable, when insulated, of producing a. peculiar photogenic effect; while Mr. E. Becquerel maintains, as we have seen, that they have the property of continuing the action of the ordinary photogenic rays, when once commenced. In this state of the subject M. Claudet began a series of experiments which lead to valuable results, and of which he has enabled us to give the following abstract…. (Describes results of experiments.) Several curious phenomena connected with photography have been recently observed and studied by different philosophers. It had -been long t»go noticed, that if we write upon a piece of glass with a pencil of soapstone, the words, though perfectly invisible, may be read by simply breathing upon the glass, and the experiment will succeed even if the surface is rubbed with chamois leather after the words are written. Dr. Draper has often noticed that if a coin or a wafer is laid upon a piece of cool glass, or metal, and the surface be breathed upon once, and if, as soon as the moisture has disappeared, the surface is again breathed on, a spectral image of the coin or wafer will be seen, the vapour being deposited in a different manner upon the part protected by the coin or wafer. The impression thus communicated to the surface, under certain conditions, remains there for a long time. “During the cold weather,” says Dr. Draper, ”last winter, (1840-1841,) I produced such an image on the mirror of my heliostate: It could be revived by breathing on the metal many weeks afterwards, nor did it finally disappear until the end of several months. Dr. Draper has also shown that a series of spectra may co-exist on a phosphorescent surface (sulphuret of lime,) and after remaining latent for a length of time, will come forth in their proper order on raising the temperature of the surface. Place a key, for ex- ample, on a phosphorescent surface, and make that surface glow by a galvanic discharge between charcoal points for two or three minutes—the image of the key will of course be seen after removing it. If the surface, kept in the dark for a day or two, be now inspected, no image will be visible, but when laid upon a piece of warm iron a spectral image of the key will be seen. Take a similar plate similarly impressed by a key, but whose image has not been evolved, and having set before the surface another object, such as a metallic ring, discharge at a short distance a Leyden jar. The phosphorus will shine all over except on the portion shaded by the ring. This image of the ring soon disappears totally; but if the plate is set upon a piece of warm iron it will speedily begin to glow, the image of the ring will be first reproduced, and as it fades away the spectral form of the key will gradually unfold itself, and then vanish. Invisible traces of written words have been rendered visible in several curious phenomena of crystallization. Dr. Draper observed, that if we draw a line on the interior of a glass-receiver containing camphor, and if we expose the receiver to the sun after it is exhausted of its air, the line described will be stellated with crystals of camphor. If we make a solution of a few grains of sulphate of magnesia, and three of carbonate of ammonia, in an ounce and a half of water—or, what Dr. Waller prefers, of ten grains of phosphate of soda instead of the sulphate of magnesia—and spreading this solution upon a plate of glass (or upon quartz or agate), write with a pen upon the glass, the words will become visible (by the deposition of crystals,) both on the glass and on the surface of the fluid! Dr. Waller, to whose interesting paper we refer our readers—(Phil. Mag. Feb. 1846, vol. xxviii. p. 94)—has shown that similar images may be formed upon the traces of words by gaseous bodies—the letters being written as it were in bubbles of gas. Hence, as he shows, we have the cause of the effervescence produced by the immersion of a piece of bread in champagne. This curious subject has been recently studied by M. Ludwig Moser of Berlin, who has arrived at several very important conclusions, which our limits prevent us from giving, otherwise than in the following abbreviated form: — If the surface of a solid body has been touched in any particular part by another body, it acquires the property of precipitating on the touched part all vapours which adhere to it, or which combine chemically with it, differently from what it does on the untouched part. This result was obtained with all bodies—such as glass, metals, resins, wood, pasteboard, &c., and in order to produce the effect * absolute contact was not necessary; a shilling held above mercury and then breathed upon gave the image of the shilling, as when it was laid upon a plate of glass and subsequently breathed upon. Mercurial vapour, and that of iodine, acted exactly like the vapour of water. Hence the phenomenon of the Daguerreotype was produced without the intervention of light, for the experiments were equally successful by night as by day, and consequently “contact is capable of imitating the action of light.” After showing, by experiment, that “the violet rays continue the action commenced by contact,” he examines the action of light upon plates of silver, copper, and glass…. (Experiment described.) …M. Moser has endeavoured to explain these, and various other phenomena, on the hypothesis “that every body is self-luminous, and emits invisible rays of light,” and that when two bodies are sufficiently approximated, they reciprocally depict each other by means of the invisible rays which they emit. Mr. Hunt, who dissents from this hypothesis, has described several experiments in which the phenomena are produced by heat, and he has given the name of Thermography to this process of copying engravings on metallic plates,* (*See Transactions of the Cornwall Polytechnic Society, 1842. London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine October 1840 and December 1842, vol. xxi, p. 462, and Researches &c., p. 228.) regarding the phenomena, “if not directly the effect of a disturbance of the latent caloric, as at least materially influenced by the action of heat.” Mr. Hunt placed on a well-polished copper-plate a sovereign, a shilling, a large silver medal, and a penny, and when the plate had been gently warmed by a spirit-lamp, cooled, and exposed to the vapour of mercury, each piece left its impression, the sovereign and the silver medal being most distinct, and the lettering in each copied. A bronze medal gave its picture, though placed 1/8th of an inch above the plate. When the copper-plate was made too hot to be handled, it gave impressions in the following order of intensity, gold, silver, bronze, copper, the mass of the metal materially influencing the result, and the impressions from the gold and silver being permanent. The heat of the sun’s rays produced analogous effects, the calorific rays alone influencing the result. In this way Mr. Hunt copied printed pages and engravings on iodized paper, by mere contact and exposure to heat, and he found that this could be done even at considerable distances between the object and its copy. By amalgamating the surface of the paper according to the following process, he was at length enabled to copy from paper line-engravings, wood-cuts, and lithographs, with surprising accuracy. “A well-polished plate of copper is rubbed over with the nitrate of mercury, and then well washed, to remove any nitrate of copper which may be formed; when quite dry, a little mercury, taken upon soft leather or linen, is well rubbed over it, and the surface washed to a perfect mirror. The sheet to be copied is placed smoothly over the mercurial surface, and a sheet or two of soft clean paper being placed upon it, it is pressed into equal contact with the metal by a piece of glass or flat board. In this state it is allowed to remain for an hour or two. The time may be considerably shortened by applying a very gentle heat for u few minutes to the under surface of the plate. The heat must on no account be so great an to volatilize the mercury,”— Phil. Mag., vol. xxi., p. 467.—Researches, p. 237. The plate is then placed in a mercury box, the vapour of which attacks the white parts of the copy, and gives a faithful but indistinct image. It is then exposed to the vapour of iodine, which attacks the parts free from mercury, and by blackening them gives a perfectly black picture. M. Knorr has shown that these images may be produced without any condensation of vapour, and simply by the action of heat. The copper-plate is heated to the degree at which it begins to change colour, and when the spirit-lamp is extinguished and the plates and medals withdrawn, distinct impressions of them are found penetrating, to a considerable depth into the surface of the metal. Dr. Karsten of Berlin has obtained still more interesting results by the agency of common electricity. If a medal is placed upon a glass-plate, and this plate upon a metallic one, and if the medal is subjected to discharges of electricity, a perfect image of the medal, capable of being developed by mercury or iodine, will be received upon the glass; and if several glass-plates are interposed between the medal and the metallic-plate, an image of the medal will be formed on the upper surface of each of the plates of class. M. Fizeau is of opinion that the images which we have been considering arise from a slight layer of organic matter, volatile, or at least capable of being carried off by aqueous vapour. Professor Grove has adopted the same general view, and Sir David Brewster, having succeeded in forming very fine pictures upon glass, by the entrance of nitrate of silver into its pores, regards all these images as the result of the absorption of matter, emanating from one body and received into the pores of another. Hence he has been led to the following general conclusions: — “That all bodies throw off emanations in greater or less abundance, in particles of greater or less size, and with greater or less velocities—that these particles enter more or less into the pores of solid and fluid bodies, sometimes resting near their surface, sometimes effecting a deeper entrance, and sometimes permeating them altogether—that the projection of these emanations is aided by differences of temperature—by great heat* (*The coloured films produced upon steel and other metals by heat are obviously the material radiations from the metal uniting with the oxygen of the atmosphere.) —-‘by vibratory action—-by friction—by electricity,—in short, by every cause which affects the forces of aggregation, by which the particles of bodies are held together; and that these emanations, when feeble, show themselves in the images of Fusinieri, Draper, Hunt, Moser, Fizeau, Knorr, Karsten, and Zantedeschi* (*Professor Zantedeschi, of Venice, has shown that metals pass into a radiant state—are reflected like light and heat, and return into a concrete state in virtue of chemical affinity.— Ricerche Fiscio-chimico Fisiologiche sulla Luce, chap. iv. Venezia. 1846. Folio.) — when stronger, in certain chemical changes which they produce — when stronger still, in their action on the olfactory nerves, causing smell, and when thrown off most copiously and rapidly, in heat, affecting the nerves of touch—in photogenic action, dissevering and re-combining the elements of matter, and in phosphorescent and luminous emanations, exciting the retina and producing vision.” Before we conclude this part of our subject we must give a brief notice of a very remarkable invention of M. Martens, by which an extensive panoramic view, amounting even to an angle of 150°, may be taken by the Daguerreotype. The object-glass is fixed upon a pivot, and put in motion by an endless screw, so as to present a narrow aperture in front of it, in succession, to the landscape or group of figures to be copied. When the long iodized plate, curved cylindrically, is placed in the apparatus, the cover is taken from the object-glass, and the handle, is turned slowly and steadily round, slowly when a dark object is in the field, and quickly when a luminous object is there. By means of a common achromatic object-glass, one inch and four-tenths in, diameter, views have been produced thirty-eight centimetres long and twelve wide; and these views, one of which, we have seen, are as perfect as if they had been taken by the common camera. Having thus given our readers a brief account of the history and processes of the two sister arts which constitute photography, we must now endeavour to estimate the advantages which they have conferred upon society, and which may yet be expected from their future progress. The arts of architecture, sculpture, and painting, have in every age called into exercise the loftiest genius and the deepest reason of man. Fostered by power, consecrated by piety, and hallowed by affection, their choicest productions have been preserved by the liberality of individuals, and the munificence of kings—while the palaces of sovereigns, the edifices of social life, the temples of religion, the watch-towers of war, the obelisks of fame, and the mausolea of domestic grief, remain under the blue cupola of nature’s museum, to attest by their modern beauty, or their ruined grandeur, the genius and taste of their founders. To the cultivation and patronage of such noble arts, the vanity, the hopes, and the holiest affections of man stand irrevocably pledged; and we should deeply deplore any invention or discovery, or any tide in the nation’s taste, which should paralyze the artist’s pencil, or stay the sculptor’s chisel, or divert into new channels the genius which wields them. Instead of superseding the arts of design, as some have feared, photography will but supply them with new ideas—with collections of costume, with studies of drapery and of figures, and with scenes in life and nature, which, if they possess at all, they possess imperfectly, and without which art must be stationary, if she does not languish and decline. Sentiments analogous to these have been more professionally expressed by M. Delaroche, a distinguished French artist, and we believe also by Mr. Eastlake, the highest authority in England; and if a new era be now seen in our horizon, with all the promise of an auroral dawn, in which the three sister arts shall simultaneously advance to perfection, it will be by the agency of photography—importing nature herself Into the artist’s studio, and furnishing to his imagination an exuberance of her riches. In sculpture, advantage has not yet been taken of the peculiar help which is offered to her by photography. All the elements of statuary, and all the forms and proportions of a living figure, may be obtained from a number of azimuthal representations, or sectional outlines, taken photographically; and by means of a binocular camera, founded on the principle of Mr. Wheatstone’s beautiful stereoscope, two of these azimuthal sections may be combined into a solid, with all the lights and shadows of the original figure from which they are taken. Superficial forms will thus, at his command, stand before the sculptor in three dimensions, and he may thus virtually carry in his portfolio the Apollo Belvidere and the gigantic Sphynx, and all the statuary of the Louvre and the British Museum. But while the artist is thus supplied with every material for his creative genius, the public will derive a new and immediate advantage from the productions of the solar pencil. The home-faring man, whom fate or duty chains to his birth-place, or imprisons in his fatherland, will, without the fatigues and dangers of travel, scan the beauties and wonders of the globe, not in the fantastic or deceitful images of a hurried pencil, but in the very picture which would have been painted on his own retina, were he magically transported to the scene. The gigantic outline of the Himalaya and the Andes will stand self-depicted upon his borrowed retina—the Niagara will pour out before him, in panoramic grandeur, her mighty cataract of waters—while the flaming volcano will toss into the air her clouds of dust and her blazing fragments.* (*An accomplished traveller who ascended Mount Etna in order to take Talbotype drawings of its scenery, placed his camera on the edge of the crater, in order to get a representation of that interesting spot. No sooner was the camera fixed, and the sensitive paper introduced, than a partial eruption took place, which drove the traveller from his camera in order to save his life. When the eruption ceased, he returned to collect the fragments of his instrument, when, to his great surprise and delight, he found that his camera was not only uninjured, but contained an excellent picture of the crater and the eruption!) The scene will change, and there will rise before him Egypt’s colossal pyramids, the temples of Greece and Rome, and the gilded mosques and towering minarets of Eastern magnificence. (The drawings in the Excursions Daguerriennes, taken from the sun-pictures in the splendid gallery of M. Lerebours, contain 114 plates, representing scenes and public buildings in America, Algeria, England, Egypt, France, Spain, Italy, Greece, Russia, Sardinia, Sweden, Switzerland, Savoy, Nubia, Syria, and Palestine.) But with not less wonder, and with a more eager and affectionate gaze, will he survey those hallowed scenes which faith has consecrated and love endeared. Painted in its cheerless tints Mount Zion will stand before him “as a field that is ploughed,”—-Tyre as a rock on which the fishermen dry their nets—Gaza in her prophetic “baldness,”—Lebanon with her cedars prostrate among “the howling firs;”—Nineveh “made as a grave,” and seen only in the turf that covers it;—and Babylon the Great, the Golden City, with its impregnable walls, its hundred gates of brass, now “sitting in the dust,” “cast up as an heap,” covered with “pools of water,” and without even the “Arab’s tent” or the “shepherd’s fold.”* (*Dr. Keith has brought home with him from the Holy Land, about thirty Daguerreotypes of its most interesting scenery, executed by his son, Dr. George Keith, and which are now engraving for publication. Since this note was printed, we have received, and now have before u», fourteen of these beautiful engravings, representing Mount Zion, Tyre, Petra, Hebron, Askelon, licrash, Cesanca, Ashdod, and other interesting places.) But though it is only Palestine in desolation that a modern sun can delineate, yet the seas which bore on their breast the divine Redeemer, and the everlasting hills which bounded his view, stand unchanged by time and the elements, and, delineated on the faithful tablet, still appeal to us with an immortal interest.* (*See Lond. and Edin. Phil. Magazine, Feb. 1846, vol. xxviii. p. 73; and Phil. Trans., 1847,pt. I., pp. 59, 69, and 111.) But the scenes which are thus presented to us by the photographer have not merely the interest of being truthful representations: they form, as it were, a record of every visible event that takes place while the picture is delineating. The dial-plate of the clock tells the hour and minute when it was drawn, and with the day of the month, which we know, and the sun’s altitude, which the shadows on the picture often supply, we may find the very latitude of the place which is represented. All stationary- life stands self-delineated on the photograph: The wind if it blows will exhibit its disturbing influence—the rain if it falls will glisten on the housetop—the still clouds will exhibit their ever- changing forms—and even the lightning’s flash will imprint its fire-streak on the sensitive tablet. To the physical sciences Photography has already made valuable contributions. Mr. Ronalds, Mr. Collen, and Mr. Brooke have, with much ingenuity, employed it at Kew and at Greenwich to record the variations of meteorological and magnetical instruments in the absence of the observer, and Mr. Brunel has Daguerreotype pictures taken of the public works which he is carrying on at stated times, so as to exhibit their progress, and give him as it were a power of superintendence without being personally present. Sir John Herschel and other philosophers have obtained from photography much important information respecting the properties of the solar spectrum, and Dr. Carpenter has applied it with singular success in executing beautiful drawings of objects of natural history, as exhibited in the solar microscope. If the solar pencil fails in its delineations of female beauty, or of the human countenance when lighted up with joy and gladness, or beaming with the expression of feeling or intelligence, it yet furnishes to the domestic circle one of its most -valued acquisitions. The flattering representations of the portrait-painter, which delight us for a while, lose year after year their likeness to the living original, till time has obliterated the last fading trace of the resemblance. The actual view of the time-worn reality overbears the recollection of early beauty, and the work of the painter, though it may be a valuable production of art, has lost its domestic charm. In the faithful picture by the sun, on the contrary, time adds but to the resemblance. The hue of its cheek never grows pale. Its unerring outline changes neither with age nor with grief, and the grave and sombre, and perchance ungainly, picture grows even into a flattering likeness, which to the filial and parental heart must become a precious possession. These observations, which apply principally to the Talbotype, were at one time especially applicable to the Daguerreotype portraits, when the sitter sat long, and when a pallid whiteness characterized all its productions. The improvement of the art, however, in the shortness of the sitting, in the tone of light and shadow, and the process of colouring the picture, has been so great that the Daguerreotype portraits have all the beauty of the finest miniatures, and are at least faithful if not flattering representations of female beauty.* (*As examples of the perfection of Engravings from Daguerreotype portraits, we may mention those of the Duke of Wellington and Dr. Chalmers, from Daguerreotypes executed by M. Claudet.) The Talbotype will, we doubt not, make the same start towards perfection; and when a fine grained paper shall be made, and a more sensitive process discovered, we shall have Talbotype portraits the size of life, embodying the intellectual expression as well as the physical form of the human countenance.”]

MAYALL, J. E.
“Curiosities of Science. Daguerreotyping the Falls of Niagara.” SHARPE’S LONDON JOURNAL vol. 9 (Mar. 1849): 50. [“Sir C. Lyell, in his recently published Travels, observes : “The Falls of Niagara, though continually in motion, have all the effects of a fixed and unvarying feature in the landscape; and, however strange it may seem, some Daguerreotype representations have been executed with no small success. They not only record the form of the rocks and the islands, but even the leading features of the cataract, and the shape of the rising clouds of spray. I have often wished that Father Hennessin could have taken one of these portraits, and bequeathed it to the geologists of our times. It would have afforded us no slight aid in our speculations respecting the comparative states of the ravine in the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries.” The first series of Views of the Falls taken by the Daguerreotype, was executed by J. E. Mayall, (Prof. High School,) in September, 1846.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN).

EXHIBITION CATALOGS
EXHIBITIONS. 1851. LONDON. GREAT EXHIBITION OF THE WORKS OF INDUSTRY OF ALL NATIONS.
Official Catalogue of the Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All Nations. Second Corrected and Improved Edition. London: Spicer Brothers, Wholesale Stationers; W. Clowes & Sons, Printers; Contractors to the Royal Commission. 320 pp. + 34 pp. advertising. [“Arrangement of the Catalogue.—The British productions are entered in the Catalogue in the order of the classes, and the Foreign in alphabetical order of the countries; the title and number of the class, and the name of each colony and foreign country, are printed conspicuously at the top of the page. Exhibitors’ Numbers.—Each class as well as each foreign collection has its own distinct set of numbers; and labels are appended to the various articles, showing where the descriptions are to be found in the Catalogue.”
(The British portion of the catalog was divided into 30 Classes, from “Class 1. Mining and Mineral Products.” to “Class 30. Fine Arts, Sculpture, Models, & Plastic Arts, &c.” (pp. 1 – 155) Materials relating to photography were most often placed in “Class 10. Philosophical, Musical, Horological, and Surgical Instruments.” or in “Class 30. Fine Arts, Sculpture, Models, & Plastic Arts, &c.” The remainder of the catalog is organized by country, first those of the British Colonial possessions (India, Australia, etc.) (pp. 156 – 183) then the Foreign States, from “America, United States of” to “Tuscany.” (pp. 184-320.) The system of arrangement by classes was not followed in the displays of the foreign countries, and all items seem to have simply bundled together in little order, if any. The USA had 586 items on display listed, France had 1740, etc.
Apparently only the most rudimentary sort of grouping of like items was accomplished throughout the exhibition, at least for the photographs. They seem to have been stuck in wherever they could be fit, and, if grouped together at all, only because their makers shared the same city of origin. I have included a random sample of the some other items listed, as an indication of what a jumble sale the exhibition must have resembled. Almost all of the photographs on display seem to have been there as examples of photographic practice, rather than in the exhibition for their content or subject matter. By 1869 the use of photographs to document and illustrate the works or activities of a distant country or even of a specific company or product had become commonplace practice in international fairs, but in the 1851 exhibition it seems to have been so used very sparingly.
The following is a listing of exhibitors, following the order of presentation in the catalog.)]
291 Mayall, J. E. 433 West Strand, Prod.—Daguerreotype panorama….
491 Mayall, J. E. Philadelphia.—Daguerreotypes….

PERIODICALS
MAYALL.
“English Copyright of Photographs.” ALBION, A JOURNAL OF NEWS, POLITICS AND LITERATURE 40:11 (Mar. 15, 1862): 130. [From the Athenaeum. “A case in which the question of copyright in photographs was raised came in for trial, before the Lord Chief Baron and a special jury, in London, on the 18th inst. The plaintiff was Mr. Mayall. It appeared from his evidence that he had, upon his own account, and at his own expense, taken a considerable number of portraits of celebrated persons, which portraits he had not published, the negatives always remaining in his own possession…” (Mayall lent prints of these negatives to Mr. Tallis,) “… for the purpose of being engraved as a series of portraits in connection with the Illustrated News of the World.” Tallis went bankrupt, someone bought Mayall’s prints from the bankruptcy proceedings, made smaller copy negatives from the prints and began selling the portraits. The jury found for Mayall, but awarded him what seems a very small settlement.)]

MAYALL, J. E.
Mayall, J. E. “Factitious Ivory for Photography.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMANY 3rd s. 6:1 (Jan. 1858): 84-85. [“This invention, by the well known photographer of Regent Street, relates to the use of artificial ivory for receiving photographic pictures instead of glass or paper. This artificial material, which possesses all the properties and beautiful finish of ivory, and allows of any subsequent tinting of the image, and the obtainment of superior softness in the semi-tints, is what is known in France as Pinson’s artificial ivory, consisting of a compound of gelatine and alumina….” From London Pharmaceutical Journal, Oct. 1, 1857, in turn from London Practical Mechanics’ Journal.]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1860.
“Report of the Collodion Committee.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 2:21 (Apr. 1, 1860): 322-330. [Twelve person committee in the British Photographic Society tested Mayall’s, Sutton’s and Hardwich’s collodion formulas. Results.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN).
“Note.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 3:8 (Sept. 15, 1860): 123-124. [Portraits of the British Royal Family by Mayall discussed.]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1862.
“Photographic Aids to Physiognomy.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 4:16 (Jan. 15, 1862): 382-383. [Argument that photographic “truth” in portraits valuable. Mentions Mayall, Dickensen, Silvy and Watkin.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN).
“Photographic Piracy.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 4:21 (Apr. 1, 1862): 490-492. [From Photographic News. Trial of Mayall vs. Higby. Higby had acquired several of Mayall’s portraits, was issuing them as his own.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN).
“Copyright in Photographs.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 5:1 (July 1, 1862): 10-11. [From the Athenaeum.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN).
“Useful Facts, Receipts, Etc. The American Fashion in London.” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ALLIED ARTS & SCIENCES n. s. 5:7 (Oct. 1, 1862): 165. [Mayall (of London) threw a very large party for his employees.]

BOOKS. 1856.
[Advertisement.] “Standard Illustrated Books, Suitable for Presents.” AMERICAN PUBLISHERS’ CIRCULAR AND LITERARY GAZETTE 2:51 (Dec. 20, 1856): 813. [Book notice. The Complete Works of Shakspere; Revised from the Original Editions; with Historical Introductions, Notes Explanatory and Critical, with a Life of the Poet. Embellished with Eighty magnificent Steel Engravings, being Portraits of all the celebrated living American and British Artists in character, taken by the Daguerreotype, by Gurney, Meade, Root, Beard, Mayall, &c. Complete in Three Vols. Imperial 8vo. price, superbly bound in extra Turkey morocco, $21; fine calf extra, $18; morocco cloth, elegant, $14.50…. Complete Catalogues of the illustrated publications of The London Printing and Publishing Company, may be had on application to S. D. Brain, 55, Dey-St., New York.” (Advertisement repeated in 1856.)]

BOOKS. 1858.
[Advertisement.] “English Publishers’ Depot. Scribner & Co., Commission Booksellers and Importers.“ AMERICAN PUBLISHERS’ CIRCULAR AND LITERARY GAZETTE 4:40 (Oct. 2, 1858): 484. [Book notice. The Illustrated News of the World and National Portrait Gallery of Eminent Personages, chiefly from Photographs by Mayall, engraved on Steel. With Original Memoirs. January to June, 1858. 1 volume. Folio. With 21 splendid Steel Portraits, including Dr. Livingstone, Lord Palmerston, Professor Faraday, Albert Smith, Sir Colin Campbell, the Princess Royal of Prussia, &c., and many hundred Woodcuts. Scarlet cloth, richly gilt. $5.50. (This work was advertised several times through 1858, with, in later issues, this addition: “Ditto Ditto. Nos. 11 to 17 (October 1st). each number containing 2 Steel Portraits. Per number,…$0.50.” This work, first issued as a serial weekly journal, failed; and it seems to have been also been published as a combined single volume. The publishing venture went into receivership, was sold, and Mayall would have to sue the new owners to get the rights to his own photographs back.)]

BOOKS. 1859.
[Advertisement.] “English Publishers’ Depot. Charles Scribner. Charles Welford. Scribner & Co., Commission Booksellers and Importers.” AMERICAN PUBLISHERS’ CIRCULAR AND LITERARY GAZETTE 5:3 (Jan. 15, 1859): 36. [Book notice. the Drawing Room Portrait Gallery of Eminent Personages, from Photographs by Mayall, etc., and Memoirs by the most able authors. Folio. Forty splendid Engravings on Steel. Cloth, gilt edges, . . . . $6.50.
Three Visits to the Island of Madagascar during the Years 1853, ‘54, ’56, including a Journey to the Capital. With Notices of the Natural History of the Country, and of the Present Civilization of the People. By the Rev. William Ellis, author of Polynesian Researches. Illustrated by Woodcuts from Photographs, &c. 8vo….$4.50.”]

BOOKS. 1864.
“Notes on Books and Booksellers. Photographic Portraits.” AMERICAN LITERARY GAZETTE AND PUBLISHERS’ CIRCULAR ns 3:7 (Aug. 1, 1864): 200. [“Mr. Mayall, one of the most successful photographers in London, is bringing out, to be completed in twenty monthly parts, a new series of portraits of eminent and illustrious persons. Each part contains two portraits, handsomely mounted on India paper, 17 by 11 inches, and memoirs. The portraits are 6 inches by 4. The three parts published contain the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred, the Prince and Princess of Hess (a group), the Maharajah Dhuleep Singh, Mr. Tennyson the poet, and Lord Stanley. We have not ascertained what is the price of this publication.”]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Crayon Daguerreotypes.” ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, OR YEAR-BOOK OF FACTS IN SCIENCE AND ART FOR 1851 (1851): 152. [“A Very beautiful process for obtaining crayon Daguerreotypes has recently been discovered by Mr. Maya], of London, formerly of Philadelphia. This gentleman, refusing to take out a patent, has published the process in the London Athenaeum. It is as follows : — Take a Daguerreotype image on a prepared plate as usual, taking care to mark the end of the plate on which the head is produced. When taken, and before mercurializing, remove the plate from the holder, and place it on a plate of glass prepared as follows. Cut a piece of thin plate glass of the same size as the Daguerreotype plate, glue upon one side of it a thin oval piece of blackened zinc, the centre of the oval to coincide with that of the image upon the plate. Having carefully placed the glass thus prepared, expose the whole to daylight, for twenty seconds. The action of the light will obliterate all traces of the image from every part of the plate, except that covered with the blackened zinc, and also, from the thickness of the glass, the action will be refracted under the edges of the zinc disk, and will soften into the dark parts. Mercurialize the plate as usual; the image will be found with a halo of light around it gradually softening into the background, that will at once add a new charm to these interesting productions. By grinding the glass on which the disk is fixed, and by altering the shape and size of the disk, a variety of effects may be produced which every ingenious operator can suggest for himself.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1851. LONDON. EXHIBITION OF ALL THE NATIONS.
“The Great Industrial Exhibition of 1851.” ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, OR YEAR-BOOK OF FACTS IN SCIENCE AND ART FOR 1852 (1852): 1-15. [“Prominent among the events which have signalized the progress of Science and Art in the course of the nineteenth century, has been the “Great Industrial Exhibition of all Nations,” during the year 1851. The conception of the scheme might have originated in any age ; its realization could have belonged only to our own. The time, the location selected, the condition of the civilized world, all were propitious to the undertaking; and its results have surpassed the expectations of its designers. A friendly confidence among rival States, a feeling of perfect security, a freedom of commercial intercourse among all nations, facility and cheapness of transportation, the perfection of inventions, and the multiplication of practical applications — all these conditions, as they exist now, were requisite for the success of the Exhibition. That its results have been in the highest degree beneficial, in the diffusion of intelligence, promotion of good taste, and the cultivation of friendly intercourse among different people, none can doubt. The Exhibition has existed and passed away, but it will remain in history as an exposition and true exponent of the progress and degree of development to which the civilized world had attained, in all branches of science and art, at the close of the first half of the nineteenth century. In the following pages we propose to present a succinct and intelligible account of the origin, plan, and construction of the Crystal Palace, with the general history and details of the Exhibition….” p. 1. “…Continuance and Close of the Exhibition.—The arrangement for the exhibition of articles was effected by the division of the building into courts, or areas, of 24 feet square, included between four columns, which were appropriated to the different countries contributing productions, or to particular classes of materials. Any attempt at description of the various wonderful and curious objects exhibited, would be impossible in the space allotted to the present work. Many, which were of unusual novelty, or which displayed remarkable ingenuity, we have described elsewhere under appropriate heads. An examination, however, of the catalogue of articles exhibited, will show, that comparatively few inventions or discoveries, originating and belonging to the history of the progress of science in the years 1850 and 1851, were brought forward or illustrated at the Great Exhibition. Many of the most striking objects displayed were of a class which might have been produced equally well centuries ago, as at the present time ; for example, the statuary, wood carving, ornamental work in gold and silver, etc. Other articles were the result of patient industry only, or of processes which, although not old, are yet generally familiar. All these illustrate the general progress of the race up to the present epoch, but have little pertaining to the history of advancement during the past year. The exhibition, which opened on the 1st of May, continued until the 11th of October, when the final closing took place, accompanied with the awards of the jurors, and the distribution of medals. The number of prize medals awarded was 2918 ; the number of council medals, 170 ; of others, honorable mention was made. The prize medals were awarded for the attainment of a certain standard of excellence ; utility, beauty, &c., being taken into consideration. The council medals were given for such articles as might be expected, from their originality and ingenuity, to exercise a more important influence upon industry than could be produced by mere excellence in manufacture. The whole number of exhibitors was 17,000….” p. 9. “…The following are the awards made to exhibitors from the United States….” p. 9. “…Class X. Philosophical and Surgical Instruments and the like.
Council Medal. William Bond & Son, for the invention of a new mode of observing astronomical phenomena, &c.
Prize Medals. A. D. Bache, balance; M. B. Brady, daguerreotypes ; W. A. Burt, solar compass, surveying instruments; J. Ericsson, sea lead, pyrometer, kc. ; M. M. Lawrence, daguerreotype ; John R. St. John, detector compass ; J. A. Whipple, daguerreotype of the moon ; B. F. Palmer, artificial leg.
Honorable Mention. J. E. Mayall, photographs….” p. 11.]

MAYALL.
“Improvements in Photography. Mayall’s Improvements in Crayon Daguerreotypes.” ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, OR YEAR-BOOK OF FACTS IN SCIENCE AND ART FOR 1854 (1854): 188. [“The London Athenaeum gives a description of a beautiful recent invention of Mr. Mayall, of London, by which he is enabled to produce an effect of arrangement similar to that which the crayon painter imparts to his portraits. By its means a more truthful gradation is obtained, — and the force in the features of the face is freed from that exaggeration hitherto inseparable from the process. The result is, a far more agreeable version of the human face than has been hitherto obtained by this instrument. Some specimens which have come under our notice are much distinguished also for the beauty of their execution, — the tint being harmonious and neutral, the various textures of flesh, hair, drapery, &c., discriminated with a painter’s taste, and an entire absence of a certain commonness of aspect which has tended hitherto to disparage this art. The mechanical arrangement of this invention consists, we are informed, of a slowly revolving disc, arranged on a support somewhat like a fire-screen, and having a central opening in the form of a large star. This disc is carried between the forks of a framepiece, the stem of which is adjustable as to height in the pedestal. To keep the disc in motion, an arrangement of clockwork is attached to the framing, — the actuating spring being contained in a box, driving a spur-wheel in gear with a pinion on the spindle of the fly. The screw for setting the disc up or down is at a certain point. This apparatus is interposed between the object, or sitter, and the camera; and the central portion of the star is made large enough to admit the rays from that part of the object which is to be shown in strong light, whilst the rays from those parts which are to be gradually shaded off to a dark background are partially intercepted by the points of the star. In this way the intensity of the light is gradually destroyed, and the softened-off “crayon” effect is produced. The apparatus is applicable to every description of camera, — and by placing it nearer to or further from the lens, any portions of the image may be so softened off.”]

MAYALL, E. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Improvements in Photography: Mayall’s Photographic Ivory.” ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, OR YEAR-BOOK OF FACTS IN SCIENCE AND ART FOR 1857 (1857): 207. [“E. Mayall, of London, has obtained a patent for the application and use of a new material in photography, known by the name of “artificial ivory.” This substance is formed of small tablets of gelatine or glue immersed in a bath of sulphate of alumina (alum) or the acetate of alumina. A combination takes place between the alumina and glue, and forms the substance for receiving the photographic pictures, as a substitute for the common metal plates and prepared paper. It is stated that it receives a polish equal to ivory, and the tints of the pictures have an exquisite softness, far surpassing these of the daguerreotype. The process for obtaining pictures is the same as that commonly pursued in photography.”]

MAYALL, J. E.
“Photographs in Factitious Ivory.” ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, OR YEAR-BOOK OF FACTS IN SCIENCE AND ART FOR 1858 (1858): 230-231. [“An invention by Mr. J. E. Mayall, the well-known London photographer, relates to the use of artificial ivory for receiving photographic pictures instead of glass or paper. This artificial material, which possesses all the properties and beautiful finish of ivory, and allows of any subsequent tinting of the image, and the obtainment of superior softness in the semitints, is what is known in France as Pinson’s artificial ivory, consisting of a compound of gelatine and alumina. This material is prepared in the form of slabs, for the photographer’s use, in this way: The tablets or slabs are composed of gelatine or glue in its natural state, and are immersed in a bath of alumina, which is held in solution by sulphuric or acetic acid; by this means a complete combination takes place between the alumina and the gelatine or glue. The tablets or slabs should remain in the bath a sufficient time to become thick enough for the purpose for which they are required, and to allow the alumina to entirely penetrate them and incorporate itself therewith ; they are then removed and allowed to dry or harden, when they may be dressed and polished by any of the ordinary and well-known processes for polishing ivory. Artificial ivory tablets, capable of bearing a fine polish, may also be made by mixing alumina directly with gelatine or glue; but this process is not so satisfactory as the process hereinbefore described, since the thickening produced by the admixture of the alumina with the gelatine, renders the manufacture of the sheets both difficult and expensive. Another composition of artificial ivory which is employed, consists of equal portions of bone or ivory dust, used either separately or combined, and albumen or gelatine, the whole being worked into a paste, and afterwards rolled out into sheets by suitable rolling or flattening mechanism. The sheets are then allowed to harden by exposure to the atmosphere, and are cut into slabs or tablets of the required size. But it is preferred to use two parts of fine powdered baryta, and one part of albumen, well worked together, and rolled out into slabs. The best plan hitherto discovered for working the materials together, is that commonly used in the manufacture of Parian marble; this composition may also be used spread upon paper, if desired. These slabs or tablets are then carefully scraped, to give them a perfectly even surface. They are then washed with alcohol, to remove any impurity therefrom, and are prepared in the ordinary manner to receive positive pictures. The pictures having been printed, the entire slab or tablet may be immersed for a few minutes in a weak solution of nitro-sulphuric acid or nitro-hydrochloric acid, for the purpose of rendering the picture more clear and brilliant. It is then fixed in the usual manner with hypo-sulphite of soda, and is washed, and then dried on a marble or other slab, or under pressure, to prevent it from warping.”]

MAYALL, J. E. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Miscellaneous Improvements in Photography. Crayon Photographs.” ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, OR YEAR-BOOK OF FACTS IN SCIENCE AND ART FOR 1858 (1858): 234. [“The shading of the so-called Crayon photographs, invented by Mr. Mayall of London, and called Crayon, from their close resemblance to crayon drawings, is effected by means of a revolving disc in which the opening is in the form of a small star. This is interposed between the object, or sitter, and the camera; and the central portion of the star is made large enough to admit the rays from that part of the object which is to be shown in strong light, whilst the rays from those parts which are to be gradually shaded off to a dark background, are partially intercepted by the points of the star.”]

BY COUNTRY. 1848.
Hunt, Robert. “On the Application of Science to the Fine and Useful Arts: Photography.” ART-UNION: MONTHLY JOURNAL OF the FINE ARTS AND the ARTS DECORATIVE, ORNAMENTAL 10:119 (May 1, 1848): 133-136. 8 illus. [(Illustrations are diagrams of cameras, etc., the spectrum, a negative image and its reverse, the positive print, etc. The article is a survey of past discoveries and a survey of the present state of the art.). “Great results often arise out of trivial causes. When Baptista Porta saw for the first time, on the wall of his dark chamber, the images of external nature, and traced them to the lenticular character of the small hole through which a beam of light found its way, he little thought of the interesting uses to which the instrument, he was from this led to invent, would be applied, and still less did he imagine that the subtle sunbeam would ever be made to draw upon solid tablets the objects which it illuminates. The Camera Obscura of the Italian philosopher, although highly appreciated, on account of the magical character of the pictures which it produced, remained little other than a scientific toy, until the discovery of the Daguerreotype process. The value of the instrument is now so great, and the interest of the process which it essentially aids so universally admitted, that it forms a very apt illustration of the importance of seizing every new idea and giving it, if possible, a permanent form, with entire independence from any feeling of its value, or its apparent merits. The cui bono cry has too frequently crushed the germ of important truths, which would eventually nave ministered to the service of mankind. All the beautiful processes of Photography, in a similar manner, sprung from the simple fact, observed by the alchemists of the sixteenth century, that horn silver blackened when exposed to sunshine. The history of the gradual development of this discovery is curious and instructive, but want of space compels us to avoid it in our columns.* (*See “Researches on Light.” and “A Popular Treatise on the Art of Photography,” by Robert Hunt.) We cannot, however, avoid stating, with much satisfaction, the circumstance that the very first photographic drawings of which we have any account, were the production of Wedgwood,* (*See Journal of the Royal Institution for a paper on “An Account of a Method of Copying Paintings upon Glass, and of making Profiles by the Agency of Light upon Nitrate of Silver, with Observations, by H. Davy.”) to whom our country is so eminently indebted for improvements in the fictile manufactures, which at once advanced our British pottery to a level with the best continental specimens. Daguerre, the celebrated dioramic painter, was desirous of employing some of the singularly changeable salts of silver to produce a peculiar class of effects in those charming productions of his pencil, and the results thus obtained led him with his associate, M. Niepce.* (*Photographs on Metal Plates were produced In this country, by M Niepce, in 1814. These remained in the hands of Mr. Bauer, the celebrated microscopic observer, until his death, after which they became, and are now, the property of Mr. Brown, of the British Museum.) to pursue an investigation which led eventually to the discovery of the Daguerreotype. Regarding the photographic processes as most valuable aids to mimetic Art, particularly those in which paper is the material employed for receiving the sensitive surface, we purpose devoting a few columns to such a description of the practice of Sun-painting, as will enable travellers, whether artists or not, to avail themselves of the favourable season now advancing, to procure with facility pictures of nature, drawn by the unerring pencil of the sunbeam. When it is remembered that Photography enables us to copy, in a few seconds, the most extensive architectural pile, with all the details of elaborate tracery and highly ornamented columns; to preserve faithful pictures of those “English Shrines” made holy ground to us by the sacred memories which cling to their crumbling walls; to possess ourselves of most truth-telling representations of those tombs of Egypt which, even in their endurance, bear melancholy testimony to the vanity of man—of those temples of Greece which impress us still with the consciousness of the workings of a highly intellectual people, imbued with a soul love for the beautiful—of those arches, fanes, and arenas of Rome, which equally speak of mental greatness, and of the triumph of principles which even. when spreading civilization, were written in blood and tears upon their mighty portals—and of those medieval relics, fast mouldering ‘neath the rough touches of modern vandalism and slow-wasting time, which stand in their desolation, like the embodied Past eager to instruct the Present and guide to a brighter Future—when, in addition, Photography is found to furnish the best studies of perspective, and preserve gradations of light and shadow in their natural beauty and consistency, it will require no argument to convince our readers of the real value of this beautiful Art. Before proceeding to describe the manipulatory details of any of the processes, it will be found advantageous to consider briefly the principles of action involved in the curious phenomena with which we have to deal. Photography, the name applied to the processes of Sun-painting, implies that the delineations are due to the agency of Light. There are many reasons for doubting the correctness of this somewhat hasty deduction. That the results are effected by a principle associated with light is the most probable conclusion, and not by the luminous principle itself. The importance of a knowledge of this fact becomes most essential in practice, as will be presently seen. If a pencil of the sun’s rays fall upon a prism, it is bent in passing through the transparent medium; and some rays being more refracted than others, we procure an elongated image of the luminous beam exhibiting three distinct colours—red, yellow, and blue, which are to be regarded as primitives—and from their interblending, seven, as reckoned by Newton, and shown in the accompanying woodcut. (Illustration of sunlight passing through a prism, spreading into the color spectrum.) Those rays being reflected or absorbed differently by various bodies, give to Nature the charm of colour. If we allow this prismatic or Newtonian spectrum to fall upon any surface prepared with a sensitive photographic compound, we shall find that the chemical effect produced bears no relation to the intensity of the light of any particular coloured ray, but that, on the contrary, it is dispersed over the largest portion of the spectrum, being most energetic in the least luminous rays, and ever active over an extensive space, where no trace of light can be detected. This will be understood more perfectly by reference to the woodcut, which is a copy of the kind of impression which the spectrum, previously explained, would make on a piece of paper covered with any very sensitive photographic preparation. (Illustration of a spectrum.) the white space (a) corresponds with the yellow or most luminous ray, over the limits of which all chemical change is prevented. A similar action is also produced by the lower end of the red ray(c); the upper portion, however, producing a very decided change. The most active chemical alteration is, however, produced by the rays above the yellow; the green being the least active, and the blue and violet rays the most so, the action still continuing far beyond the point (A), which is the end of the luminous image. Without entering into any examination of the philosophical questions which are involved in these phenomena, it will be important to show the practical value of these facts in the prosecution of the art of Photography. Some preparation, say for example, the chloride or iodide of silver, is spread over a uniform surface; and these chemical compounds being under the influence of solar radiations, rapidly change in colour and composition; and as this change is always in agreement with the quantitly and character of the rays reflected from the surface being copied, it is important to know the relative effects of radiations from a group of coloured bodies. Let us suppose it is desired to copy by the Daguerreotype or Calotype process, any objects brightly coloured,—blue, red, and yellow; the last or course reflects the most light, the first the least; but the rays from the blue surface will make a most intense impression, whilst the red radiations are working very slowly, and the yellow remain totally inactive. It is on this account that considerable difficulty is experienced in copying bright green foliage, a large quantity of the yellow and red rays being combined with the blue to make up the colour of leaves; and the imperfections of a Daguerreotype portrait of any person having a freckled face, depends on the same cause. A yellow hazy atmosphere, even when the light is very bright, will effectually prevent any good photographic results; and in the height of summer, with the most sensitive processes, it not unfrequently happens that the most annoying failures arise from this agency of a yellow medium. In the selection of subjects, all striking contrasts in colour of this kind, should be most scrupulously avoided, and experiments should not be attempted under such atmospheric influences as those described. The first photographic process which claims our attention is the Daguerreotype. It is not intended to enter minutely into all the manipulatory details of each process, but simply to give some account of the most easy method of operating, leaving the more technical description to those text-books which have been published on this subject. As the Camera Obscura is an instrument essentially necessary to all the photographic processes, it will be the best course to give some description of it first. The Camera is a dark box, having a lens placed in one end of it, through which the radiations from external objects pass, and form a diminutive picture upon any screen placed at the proper distance from it. [Illustration is of camera obscura depicting a view on its screen.) Thus a being the lens, and 6 the object of which a picture is desired, the rays (c—cc) proceeding from it fall upon the lens, and are transmitted to a point, which varies with the curvature of the glass, where an inverted image (rf) of b is very accurately formed. At this point the sensitive photographic material is placed for the purpose of obtaining the required picture. The great desideratum in a photographic Camera is a very perfect lens. The utmost transparency should be obtained, and under the closest inspection of the gloss no stria should be detected. Beyond this, a curvature which as much as possible prevents spherical aberration, should be secured, and by an achromatic arrangement, chromatic aberration prevented. From the first defect we are annoyed by converging perpendiculars; two towers of any building, for instance, would be represented as leaning towards each other, and by the last we get great confusion around the edges of the picture, arising from the blending of the rays. These defects are rarely entirely overcome, but a careful optician reduces them within very small limits. There is but little doubt that a more effective plan than any vet adopted would be the use of lenses of large diameter, the edges being rendered opaque by black paint, so that only the most perfect centre should admit any rays. It is true that screens in front of the lens are very commonly, almost constantly, employed in the best Cameras; but this is not sufficient. It will, however, be seen by figures a and 6, (sec engraving on the second column) that by using glasses of a much larger size than usual, and obstructing the passage of the light over one-half or two-thirds of their surface, we procure the most perfect form possible; the better the glass, as a whole, the more perfect will it be found in part. For Photography it is necessary that the Camera Obscura should be fitted up with screw adjustments for regulating the distance of the lens from the screen, and with some means of removing the plates or paper from the Camera, or of placing others within it, without any exposure to daylight, except that which passes from the object to be copied through the lens. Many very ingenious contrivances have been applied to these ends, and nearly all the Cameras now made by philosophical instrument-makers are very effectively fitted up in these respects.
The Daguerreotype.—Plates of copper covered with silver—the best Sheffield plate indeed—form the tablets upon which the sensitive coating is to be produced. A plate of this silvered copper is to be brought to the highest state of polish of which the metal is capable. This is effected by hand polishing, in the first instance, with finely levigated polishing powders, such as rotten-stone, and lastly, with lamp-black spread upon buffers of black velvet. There must not be any scratches upon the surface, nor must it be touched with the moist finger or, indeed, any organic body. The plate must now be exposed to the vapour of iodine, as it is slowly liberated from that curious substance, at the ordinary temperature of the atmosphere. This is best effected by placing the plates, face downwards, over a box, at the bottom of which some iodine is spread. In a few minutes the silver will be found to have acquired a golden yellow colour, which rapidly passes onward to blue and red. The iodising must be stopped as soon as the plate is uniformly yellow. Of course, as the iodide of silver thus formed is very sensitive to solar radiations, it can only be examined by some faint light, such as that of a taper, or by the light which is admitted through a yellow or a red glass. Although the plate thus iodised is sufficiently sensitive for all the purposes of the Art, except that of portraiture, an infinitely higher degree of sensibility may be produced by exposing the iodised surface to the vapour of bromine, by which it immediately acquires a I rose hue. This body, bromine, is by far more volatile than iodine, and can only be safely used in a diluted state, as by putting a drop into a tolerably large vessel of air, or by mixing it with some water, from which it is freely liberated. Mr. Bingham, of the London Institution, has recently introduced some compounds of iodine and bromine with lime, similar to the well-known chloride of lime, which answer exceedingly well for both iodising and bromidising the silver plates. This process being completed, the plate is placed in the Camera Obscura to receive the required image, and allowed to remain, according to the sensibility of the plate and the degree of light, for a period varying from a second to many minutes, when it is fitted for the next stage of the process—mercurialisation. One point connected with the use of the Camera it is important to attend to, that is, that the best visual picture is not the one best fitted for producing a good chemical impression. This arises from the fact, that the actinic rays (the name given to the solar chemical principle) have a different focal length from the luminous rays; consequently a little adjustment is required. Having observed the point at which the most perfect picture is visible, it is necessary to slide in the lens and shorten the focus very slightly to bring the tablet to the actinic focus.* (*Further information on this point will he found in a Paper by Mr. Towson, Phil. Mag., vol. xv,, page 381, and in another by Mr. Cundell, Phil. Mag., vol. xxiv., page 352. See also “Researches on Light.”) (Illustration depicts varied focus in a convex lens.) Upon the most sensitive coatings of the silver tablets the effect may be regarded as instantaneous; and even upon the merely iodised plate, in good sunshine, a few seconds are sufficient to produce the required change. It is not necessary that a visible image should be produced in the Camera; indeed, it is preferable to have only a dormant one, which we have the power of evoking by subsequent manipulation. The picture is developed by exposing the plate to the vapour of mercury. The best arrangement for effecting this is a box with a metallic bottom into which some mercury is placed, and being fixed upon a stand, heat is applied by means of a spirit-lamp. The plate is placed a few inches above the mercury, and the vapour slowly rising by a temperature which should not much exceed 100″ Fahrenheit, is deposited in a most curious manner over every portion of the plate that has been exposed to solar influence. The deposit of mercury bears a direct relation to the amount of radiation. Thus all the strong lights, as the sky and white objects, are represented by a very thick coating of mercury, the middle tints by a diminished quantity, and the shadows, as they pass into darkness, by the most delicate gradations of the vaporised metal. Notwithstanding all the attention that has been paid to the phenomena of the Daguerreotype, we have no satisfactory explanation of the causes which determine this very remarkable result. The picture produced upon the metallic surface is pure black and white, the polished silver representing the blacks, and the finely divided mercury the whites, and these correspond most perfectly with the lights and shades of nature: the picture however being, unless the object has been reflected from a mirror, the reverse of the true arrangement as it regards right and left. To render these pictures permanent, the first process is to remove the sensitive coating by the use of a solution of the hyposulphite of soda, and then washing with pure warm water; and secondly, to render the mercury more coherent by giving the plate a coating of gold. This is effected by placing the tablet in a perfectly horizontal position on a stand, and pouring over it a weak solution of the chloride of gold. This being done, it is to be gently warmed by a spirit-lamp, by which a deposit of gold takes place over the whole surface, and much greater permanency ensured, but still the Daguerreotype requires the protection of a glass. Such are the chief manipulatory details, but the whole process is of such exceeding delicacy, that much practice is required before portraits or landscapes can be obtained in a satisfactory manner. The attention of experimentalists on the Continent has been directed, almost exclusively, to the Daguerreotype process, whereas in England the use of paper has been regarded with much higher interest. The result of this has been the discovery of a variety of very curious and most interesting processes of greater or less sensibility to solar influences, but all of them valuable, and, for the purposes to which they are applicable, exceedingly beautiful. The most sensitive of these are the Calotvpe of Mr. Fox Talbot, the Catalysotype of Dr. Woods, and the Ferrocyanotype and Ferrotypes of the author. The Cyanotype, the Chrysotype, and Amphytype of Sir John Herschel and the Chromatype of the author are amongst the most interesting of the less sensitive processes. It was long thought that this peculiar property of changing colour and character, under the influence of the solar radiations, belonged to a few salts of silver and gold only, but the researches of modern experimentalists have proved that every substance is liable to change when exposed to this influence. Not merely the salts of the metals, but the brightly polished surfaces of the metals themselves, and even the superficial coats of wood, glass, and stone, can be shown to change in molecular character when these bodies have been exposed to sunshine. It was first announced by M. Niepce in 1814, that sunshine had a destructive influence on all solid bodies, but that they had the power in the period of darkness, when this influence was removed, of restoring themselves to their original states. The truth of this is now rendered certain by the researches of Sir John Herschel, Professor Moser, and others; to whose papers, published in the Philosophical Transactions and in the Scientific Memoirs, we must refer those who may desire detailed information on this subject. The Calotype process, which has been more extensively employed in this country than any other, consists, essentially, in taking advantage of the deoxidising power of gallic acid, at the same time that the salts of silver are influenced by the solar rays. (Two illustrations of a woodland trail depicted in both positive and negative.) Paper is first covered with iodide of silver, by washing it with iodide of potassium and then with nitrate of silver, in which state it keeps without injury. The proportions in which these salts are employed, is materially varied by different operators. The most sensitive preparation, however, appears to be the following:—Twenty grains of iodide of potassium, and five grains of the bromide of potassium, are dissolved in four ounces of distilled water; and with this solution the paper is first washed over, on one side only. Nitrate of silver, in the proportion of sixty grains dissolved in one ounce of distilled water, is applied on the same side of the paper, as soon as the first wash has dried. We thus produce a primrose-coloured paper, which should be very uniform in tint. Previously to using this paper in the camera, it must be washed over with a mixture of a few drops of the solution of nitrate of silver, with a little solution of gallic acid. This combination forms, what the patentee calls, the gallo-nitrate of silver; it is an exceedingly unstable compound; and although in the dark it may be preserved some hours unchanged, the moment it is exposed to even diffused daylight, it suffers decomposition. It is a curious fact, not uncommon in chemistry, that the process of change in one body communicates a similar action to another in contact with it, and thus the iodide of silver on the paper, being influenced by this change of the gallo-nitrate, rapidly darkens over all those parts which are exposed to lenticular radiation. It is not always that a visible change of colour takes place during the brief exposure of the paper in the Camera, varying from a few seconds to a few minutes, according to the intensity of light; but on removing it from the Camera in the dark, and rewashing it with the gallo-nitrate of silver, a picture gradually develops itself in a magical and beautiful manner. The Photograph thus produced, differs very materially from that which we procure by the Daguerreotype process. It is wrong as regards both light and shade, and right and left. In the first picture obtained all the lights are shadows, and the shadows lights. This will be readily understood by recollecting that the operation of the sun’s rays is to blacken the prepared paper according to the intensity with which they are reflected from external objects. But it is perfectly easy to procure from this first negative proof, any number of positive copies, which shall be in every respect correct. The first woodcut represents the character of a negative Photograph, in which it will be seen, when compared with the second positive impression, that all the parts which should be white are black, and the reverse. If we take the negative Photograph, and place it, face to face with another piece of prepared paper, it is evident that the sun’s rays passing more freely through the white than the dark parts of the paper, will produce a second picture the reverse of the first, and correct as in Nature. The contrast between the two woodcuts is exactly of the same character as that which exists between the Photographic proof, and the copies from it. Before this copy can be produced, it is necessary to render the proof insensible to any expose to sunshine, and to preserve the white parts as transparent as possible. This is effected in the following manner. The paper when taken from the Camera, and the picture fully brought out, is placed in a vessel containing a good deal of clean water and allowed to soak for half an hour. It is then placed on a porcelain or glass slab, and rinsed with clean water, until it passes off quite colourless and free from taste. A solution of the hyposulphite of soda (about one ounce of the salt “dissolved in a pint of water) is now to be brushed over both sides of the paper, by which operation a considerable portion of the iodide of silver is washed out of it, and what remains rendered insensible to any amount of solar exposure. The paper is again subjected to washing, by pouring clean water carefully over it, and by dapping it with a sponge until the water which flows off has no taste of the salt employed, which leaves a peculiar sensation of sweetness on the palate. It is then to be dried. To render the paper still more transparent it is advisable to wax it: this is done by placing it on a warm metal plate, and rubbing some white wax upon the face of the picture until it is equally absorbed over every part. It is unnecessary to use so sensitive a paper for receiving the copies as we employ in the Camera. The following paper answers remarkably well. Good letter paper is soaked in a solution of about thirty grains of salt in a pint of water; it is to be taken out of the solution, carefully wiped with a clean cloth, and dried; when dry, it should be washed over, on one side only, with a solution of two drachms of the nitrate of silver to the ounce of distilled water, and dried and preserved in the dark. For copying these proofs from the Camera pictures or, indeed, for obtaining copies of engravings, of botanical specimens, or any objects of that kind, a copying frame is necessary. (Illustration is of the front and back of a copying frame.) This consists simply of a frame as for a picture, with a stout and clear glass fitted into it, a soft cushion of some sort, and a strong back with the means of pressing these close to the glass. . I represents such a frame, and II a simple means of effecting this end by a brass bar, a, which passes into angular grooves on the inside of the frame. It is essential that the most perfect contact of every part of the two sheets of paper should be secured, as the interposition of a film of air, by dispersing the rays of light, produces an indistinctness in the copy. Of course this method of copying applies equally to all the photographic process in which it is required. The Catalysotype of Dr. Woods is, in many respects, similar to the Calotype of Mr. Fox Talbot. The process, as described by Dr. Woods himself, in the journal of the Irish Academy, is as follows:— “Take of syrup of ioduret of iron, distilled water, each two drachms; tincture of iodine ten to twelve drops. Mix. First brush this over the paper, and, after a few minutes, having dried it with blotting-paper, wash it over in the dark (before exposure in the Camera) with the following solution, by means of a camel hair pencil:—Take of nitrate of silver one drachm; pure water one ounce. Mix. This gives a darker picture than the original preparation, and, consequently, one better adapted for obtaining positive ones; it also requires no previous steeping in an acid solution. To fix the picture, let it be washed, first in water, then allowed to remain for a few minutes in a solution of hydriodate of potassa (five grains to the ounce of water), and washed in water again. The paper I use is the common unglazcd copy-paper, but such as has a good body. When it blackens in the dark there is too much caustic used; when it remains yellow, or that it is studded with yellow spots, too much iodine; when marked with black spots, too much iron. It is necessary to mention these on account of the varying strength of the materials employed.” the sugar in the syrup here plays as important a part as docs the gallic acid in the Calotype process. The sensibility of the Catalysotype to solar influences is remarkably great, but owing to the delicate nature of the materials employed it is somewhat uncertain. There is, however, no doubt but a little care in experimenting, added to a slight knowledge of chemical science, would most materially tend to the improvement of a process which appears to have all the elements necessary for the most perfect results. A process to which, in the first instance, the name of the “Energiatype ” was given, but towhich that of the ” Ferrotype is far more applicable, was discovered by the author, and published at the meeting of the British Association at York in 1843. Its sensibility is in every respect equal to that of the Calotype, and might, there is no doubt, be rendered superior to it, and its facilities are far greater. It consists in the discovery that the sulphate of iron has the property of developing, in the dark, the faintest trace of actino-chemical action upon any of the photographic preparations with which we are acquainted. The patentee of the Calotype process claims the use of iodide of silver, but this is not a salt essential to the success of this process, although it may be employed, and the protosulphate of iron is indeed used in the patentee’s own establishment with the iodide of silver. an the combinations of silver with organic acids are exceedingly sensitive, and with this salt of iron give beautiful pictures. But perhaps the most easy and effective process is the following:—A solution consisting of ten grains of bromide of potassium and five grains of common salt (muriate of soda) in an ounce of water, is applied in the first instance to the paper. When dry, a solution of 100 grains of nitrate of silver to the ounce of water is spread uniformly over one surface, and the paper dried in the dark. It must be carefully kept in a portfolio until required for use. Previously to being placed in the Camera, it is to be washed over with a solution of the iron salt in the proportion of sixty grains of the protosulphate to four ounces of distilled water, to which about two drachms of good mucilage of gum arabic has been added. On being removed from the Camera, the picture may be allowed to develope itself in the dark, which it will do slowly, or, it may be accelerated by the application of another portion of the ferruginous wash. Two precautions are necessary to prevent failure in the use of the iron salt; one is, to be sure of having pure protosulphate of iron, as the admixture of any persulphate destroys the resulting picture; and the other is, that the iron solution must be very carefully screened from all daylight. It being a remarkable fact that the sun’s rays appear to impart some peculiar property to the iron salt which it does not possess when preserved in darkness. These Ferrotypes are rendered permanent in precisely the manner we have described as most effective for the other processes. It should be enforced that it is essential in all photographic processes to use the utmost precaution in spreading the washes, from the combination of which the sensitive surfaces result. The same brush should always be kept for the same solution, and never used for any other, and always washed in clean water after having been employed. The use of any metallic mounting for the brushes must be avoided, as the metal precipitates the silver from its solutions. The four processes which have been, somewhat briefly, described, are the most sensitive that have been hitherto employed. Although there are some others, as the Ferrocyanotype, which are as sensitive as any of them, but which are set aside owing to some little difficulties of manipulation. Of these and the less sensitive but equally beautiful processes, it is our intention to treat in a subsequent article. We cannot allow the opportunity to pass without a few words on the advantages which Photography presents to the student of Nature. It is true that the pictures which we obtain are either the mere contrast of black or brown and white—the charm of colour is wanting—but the delicate gradations of light and shade almost supply this want, and the linear perspective is so perfect, that they are amongst the most perfect studies the artist can obtain. Many of the physical phenomena of light, which shed a beauty over Nature, are lost by the landscape-painter in transferring the outward form to his canvas. The cause of this is not at first apparent; some trifling point only has been omitted which lends to the whole its enchantment. This Photography preserves on its pictures. As a remarkable instance of the perfection of the Art, we might state that the cloud of vapour curling over the great falls of Niagara, is preserved with the utmost fidelity; and although the rush of moving waters would appear to promise only confusion, in the Daguerreotypes in the views taken on the spot by Mr. Mayall of the Daguerreotype Institution in the Strand, every curve of the falling fluid mass is most curiously preserved. Although the details of foliage is rarely, from the causes already explained, copied with much advantage, yet the natural arrangements of forest masses, with the strangely beautiful play of sunshine through the boughs, is preserved in a marvellous manner. The disposition of drapery is also most effectively given by any of the sensitive photographic processes. Photography has not yet been taken up by an artist with a view to its improvement, except by Mr. Hill, of Edinburgh, whose groups of the Newhaven fishermen, executed by the Calotype process, have been universally admired. We are confident that by the combined exertion of the artist and the man of science, effects far superior to anything yet obtained would be the result. It should be borne in mind, that the Photographs on paper admit of being coloured; therefore it is easy to copy the general aspect of any scene, and add the native colour to the photographic drawing.* (* Some very interesting specimens of this kind have been produced by Mr. Calvert Jones of South Wales.) Some advances have been made towards securing photographic impressions in colour; the coloured image of the spectrum has been faithfully copied, ray for ray, on papers spread with the juice of the Corchonus japonica and with the fluoride of silver; and more recently on silver plates covered with a thin film of the chloride. Many are most sanguine that this problem of natural colouration will be speedily solved; it appears however to us, upon an attentive consideration of all the phenomena of light, colour, and actinic effects, that, although within the limits of possibility, the probability of arriving at this great desideratum, is somewhat remote. There is, however, in the art of Photography as it now stands, so much that deserves attention, that we look to it as an important aid towards that advancing improvement of taste, which, abandoning what has been called “artistic effect,” looks for the beautiful in the stern simplicity of Nature in her ever-varying moods. Robert Hunt.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1848.
Hunt, Robert. “The Applications of Science to the Fine and Useful Arts: Photography. Second Part.” ART-UNION: MONTHLY JOURNAL OF the FINE ARTS AND the ARTS DECORATIVE, ORNAMENTAL 10:122 (Aug. 1848): 237-238. [“Light, or some subtle agency associated with it, we have shown in our former paper, is capable of producing remarkable chemical changes, almost instantaneously, upon some compounds of silver and peculiarly constituted agents, which are singularly distinguished from most other bodies by striking physical and chemical properties. To insure a high degree of sensitiveness to the solar influences, it is necessary that the balance of chemical affinity should be nicely suspended between two dissimilar actions, so that any external excitement, whether of light, or heat, or electricity, should directly determine towards one of them. Upon this principle depends the high sensibility of the Daguerreotype plates, and of those preparations which we have already described. As far as our experience at present goes, there are but one or two processes, beyond those already mentioned, which possess the required delicacy for the Camera Obscura. Of these, the most interesting is the Ferrocyanotype. This process consists in washing paper, upon which, in the manner already pointed out, iodide of silver has been spread, with a moderately strong solution of the ferrocyanate of potassium—the yellow prussiate of potash of commerce. The paper is placed in the Camera in a moist state, and, in a very short space of time, a well-defined image is developed, which, when the paper is carefully prepared, exhibits strong contrasts in the lights and shadows. The method which has been found most effective for securing this variety of sun-pictures from alteration by subsequent exposure, is to wash them with moderately strong ammonia, and then with pure water. The uncertainty, however, which has attended the fixation of this very charming class of Photographs, has prevented this process from being so generally employed, as it would otherwise be, from its high sensibility. There can be little doubt, but an industrious experimentalist, possessing an ordinary amount of chemical knowledge, would in a short time discover some method by which all uncertainty in this respect might be removed. In a communication made to the Royal Society, and printed in their Transactions, in 1840,* (*On the Influence of Iodine in rendering several Argentine Compounds spread on Paper sensitive to Light, &c., by Robert Hunt.—Phil. Trans, for 1840.)
the author pointed out the curious, and until that time, unobserved fact, that the vapour of mercury, which acts so peculiarly upon an iodised silver plate, was condensed in a similar manner upon a variety of argentiferous preparations spread over paper, and that, in some instances, the results were very beautiful, particularly when bromide of silver was employed. As the process is an easy one, and capable of being considerably improved, we shall presently describe it. It is at the same time highly instructive, as illustrating the very curious pnenomena which dimly indicate the exertion of some force, or principle, which is in its action different from any of the modes of physical power with which we are acquainted—a property of determining the deposition of ponderable matter upon a surface which has previously been exposed to radiant influences, in such an order that each thickness of deposit bears an exact relation to the heliographic power which has been exercised upon each part. The action appears to be rather mechanical than chemical, and is in Borne unknown way connected with those radiations from the surfaces of material bodies, which have particularly claimed our attention in the article on Thermography.* (*Art Union Journal for March.) To the general reader, these minute phenomena may not appear to possess much interest, but, upon consideration, it will be found that they involve some of the most important questions in physics, and the reflective will at once discover that our future advances in the development of Nature’s secrets, and in the application of her truths, depend almost entirely upon a searching scrutiny into the operation of powers which, in the present state of science, we are compelled to regard as occult. A peculiar power of radiation belongs to every variety’ of colour, and in the disposition of the rays which gladden the eye in the lustre and beauty of the flowers of the field, and the ever-changing hues of the forest tree, an order of arrangement is evident, which regulates the powers of those solar influences, changing with each change of season, and thus aiding most materially the growth of the plant, and the production of its fruit and seed. In like manner, every body in nature is under the influence of those mysterious radiations, and are themselves centres of actinic action. The process to which we have referred is as follows:—paper is, in the first place, washed over with a solution of 20 grains of the bromide of potassium, dissolved in one fluid ounce of distilled water; and secondly, when dry, a wash of a solution of nitrate of silver, in the proportion of 100 grains to the ounce of water. It is necessary that the papers should be prepared but a short time previously to their use. Having placed one of these papers in the focus of the Camera, with the ordinary precautions of manipulation, it should be exposed to the solar influences, as radiated from the object we desire to copy, for a few seconds onlv, the time, of course, varying with the quantity of light. The screen being closed, the paper, with its dormant image, is to be removed in the dark, and placed in the mercurial box employed for the Daguerreotype, and the mercury must be slowly volatilised, at a temperature not exceeding 90 deg. Fahr. After a few minutes, a faint image will be seen to show itself: the source of heat must now be removed, and the picture carefully watched. The impression gradually deepens from the increased accumulation of mercury, and when a good and decided effect is produced, it must be instantly removed from the vapour box. This is necessary, as by a prolonged exposure to the volatilising metal the whole surface is liable to darken. The best mode of securing this kind of Photograph, is to plunge the paper into a weak solution of the hyposulphite of soda, and after it has remained in it for ten or fifteen minutes, to remove it to a vessel containing plenty of clean water, to which a small quantity of the mucilage of gum-arabic has been added. When dried, these pictures are very permanent. It has long been desired that some process should be discovered, by which pictures with correct lights and shadows should be produced by one operation. In all the processes which we have described, the first impressions are of a negative character (as those Photographs in which the lights are represented by shadows and the contrary, have been called), and it is necessary to take a copy from this negative one to produce a positive, as has been already described and illustrated in the former article. Although no process has been discovered which proves sufficiently sensitive for any of those purposes requiring rapid action, we are in possession of one or more whereby beautiful pictures of any architectural details may be produced, and which give copies of botanical specimens, or of engravings, with a magical beauty and fidelity. Several modifications of this process have been introduced, but we must confine our attention to that which gives the best results. Good letter-paper is washed over, on one side only, with water slightly acidulated with nitric acid, 6 drops of acid to 2 ounces, or a wine-glass full of water. This wash is to be allowed to dry, and then a solution of the muriate of barytes, 20 grains of the salt to an ounce of water, applied equally on the same side. This second application being dry, the surface is to be very evenly washed over with a silver solution, of 80 grains of nitrate of silver to one ounce of water, and immediately exposed to bright sunshine. By this exposure, the surface is rapidly darkened, but it frequently happens, from causes over which the best manipulator has bat little control, that the darkening does not, in the first instance, produce uniformity. When the paper is nearly dry, it is to be washed with the silver solution a second time, and again exposed to solar action. In a short period the whole surface exhibits a coating which is uniformly of a chocolatebrown colour. When this condition is produced, the paper should be placed between folds of blotting paper and preserved in the dark, and as much as possible from the action of the air, for use. Papers thus prepared, if kept with care, do not lose their sensibility to the exciting agents for several weeks. To use this darkened paper, we must have a solution of the iodide of potassium in the proportion of 40 grains of the salt to one ounce of water, or, still better, of 60 grains of the iodide of barytes, to which, previously to use, a drop of diluted sulphuric acid has been added. This solution is to be applied plentifully upon the prepared paper, which being spread out smoothly on a plate of glass, is to be placed in the Camera Obscura. The time required to produce a well-defined picture, varies with the intensity of radiation, from fifteen to thirty minutes. The ordinary copies of leaves by juxtaposition is effected in good sunshine in a few minutes. These pictures are fixed by first well washing them in water, and then with a solution of hyposulphite of soda, or of ammonia. There is a peculiar charm about these directly positive pictures which none of those produced by the secondary process possess; they are free from those imperfections which arise from the fact, that in copying from the negative picture we actually copy the texture of the paper, and they have greater sharpness of outline. Could a higher degree of sensibility be secured, an important and valuable addition would be made to our Photographic knowledge. Sir John Herschel, to whom we are indebted for scientific researches of the most refined character and of the highest value, took up the subject of the chemical influences of the sun’s rays, and he has added to our knowledge of sensitive agents, and of the peculiar mode of action of the solar rays, by the publication of a series of most ingenious experiments and philosophical deductions therefrom. Among the processes discovered by this most talented investigator, we must particularly notice the Chrysotype and the Cyanotype. The Chrysotype consists in washing paper with a solution of the ammonia-citrate of iron, which should be about the colour of ordinary sherry wine. The paper, when dry, is of a yellow colour, having a slight tendency to brown. It will keep well in a portfolio, and is alwaj’3 ready for use. It should be explained, that the ammonia-citrate of iron is a salt of the peroxide of iron, and that these peroxides, when exposed to sunshine in contact with organic matter, are rapidly reduced to a lower degree of oxidation, becoming, in fact, protoxides. The salts of the peroxides of iron produce no immediate effect upon any of the solutions of gold or silver, but those of the protoxides directly precipitate these metals. Consequently, if a piece of this Chrysotype paper is exposed, partly covered, to sunshine, this conversion of the peroxide into the protoxide takes place, and the paper changes slightly in colour, becoming rather paler over the exposed parts. If we now wash it with a solution of chloride of gold, we have an immediate revival of gold, and a picture of a rich purple colour is the result, which is readily rendered permanent by being washed with a weak solution of the iodide of potassium, and then in clean water. The Cyanotype, which includes a great number of very interesting varieties, differs from the Chrysotype only in the application of the prussiate of potash instead of the solution of gold, by which an intensely blue picture is produced. Either of these processes may be employed to procure pictures of any objects which are capable of being superposed in the Photographic copying frame. They are so exceedingly simple, the results are so certain, the delineations so perfect, and the general character so interesting, that they recommend themselves, particularly to ladies, and to those travellers who, although not able to bestow much attention or time on the subject, desire to obtain accurate representations of the botany of a district. We have seen specimens of the British Algae executed by a lady, by the Cyanotype process, that are remarkable for the extreme fidelity with which even the most attenuated tendrils of the marine plants are copied. The Cyanotype process may be varied by using the red prussiate of potash on the paper in the first place, and a protosalt of iron, as the sulphate, after exposure. The Chrysotype also admits of several modifications. Indeed, the salts of gold possess several remarkable properties in connection with the solar influences, which are well deserving of a closer examination than they hare yet received. If we wash paper with a neutral solution of the chloride of gold, and expose it to sunshine for a very short time, no change will be visible to the eye at first, but if put aside in the dark, the action which the solar rays have begun, goes on, and if any object has been superposed during the exposure, a picture of it will be eventually developed. This process may be quickened by holding the paper in steam, or by placing it in cold water. If we combine with the chloride of gold a portion of bichromate of potash in solution, the resulting picture is of the most intense purple colour. We must refer all desirous of further information on these curious subjects to the original papers of Sir John Herschel,* (*On the Chemical Action of the Rays of the Solar Spectrum, Sm., by Sir John Herschel, Bart, Phil. Tran, for 1840.) or to the “Researches on Light'” in which all these phenomena are particularly described. Sir John Herschel was the first to show that the juices of flowers might be used as Photographic agents, all of them being liable to change with greater or less rapidity, under the influence of sunshine. It is not necessary, in this place, to detail these very novel processes. It will be sufficient to state, that the coloured juices are obtained by bruising the petals in a mortar with a little water, and then squeezing them strongly in a muslin bag; that previous to their being applied to paper, the expressed juice is allowed to rest for a short time, to admit of the settlement of any feculent matter which may be mixed with it. For our knowledge of the Photographic use of the salts of mercury, we are also indebted to Sir John Herschel; and many most remarkable phenomena result from the use of them. If a nitrate of mercury is combined with one of the persalts of iron, and the combination be applied to paper, a picture results, which is, in the first place, in no respect different from the ordinary negative Photographs. If, however, this picture is obliterated by the use of an additional dose of the mercurial salt, and, when the paper is dry, it is exposed to the action of a hot iron, a Positive image is reproduced with great intensity. One remarkable feature about these mercurial pictures is, that they fade out in the course of time, and again restore themselves to their original condition. In connexion with this fading of the mercurial Photographs, we may mention a very curious process by which the ordinary kinds may be rendered invisible, kept in that state for any length of time, and brought out with all their original intensity at pleasure. If we take any of the Photographs prepared with the salts of silver and wash them with a solution of corrosive sublimate, they very rapidly fade out, and no trace of any picture can be detected. If a chloride or white salt of silver had been employed in the production of the original, the paper becomes quite white; but if an iodide of silver had been employed, it becomes yellow. No degree of exposure to light or to the atmospheric innuenco produces any change upon these dormant pictures. At any time they are instantly rendered visible by merely washing the paper with hyposulphite of soda. In the whole range of natural magic, a more striking effect than this is not to be found; and it is in the hands of the ingenious capable of being employed in the production of results, which must appear to the uninitiated marvellous in a high degree. That common yellow salt, the bichromate of potash, is an interesting Photographic agent. If a solution of it is spread upon paper it becomes of a fine yellow colour; by placing an engraving or leaves, or lace-work over it, and exposing it to sunshine, all the uncovered parte and those which correspond with the whites of the engraving, become brown, the other parts remaining yellow. If upon removing the paper from the light it is placed in a basin of water, all the yellow parts are dissolved out and a negative picture—white in contrast with brown—is the result. In this process, which was discovered by Mr. Ponton, we have a result analogous to that explained in the Chrysotype; a portion of chromic acid is liberated from the salt, which combines firmly with the organic matter of the paper, so that it cannot be dissolved out, whilst the other parts are exceedingly soluble. These pictures, though very pleasing as a variety, are too faint to be of much value. The Chromatype, which was a discovery of the author, gives very beautiful positive pictures by one process. It is simple in manipulation and very constant in its results; the Photograph being a rich red chromate of silver upon a pale buff ground. A solution of ten grains of bichromate of potash and twenty grains of sulphate of copper, and a solution of nitrate of silver, is all that is required. The first solution is washed over the paper, on one side only, and it is used, when dry, as any other Photographic paper may be; and when removed from the sunshine, the paper, upon which but a faint image is visible, is washed with the solution of silver, and, at once, an intense positive image is developed. To fix these Chromatypes, nothing more is required than to wash them with pure clean water, care being taken that it does not contain any muriate of soda, which salt is liable to act upon the chromate of silver. If by immersing the Chromatype picture in a weak solution of common salt we obliterate the impression and then expose it to sunshine, the picture revives, but instead of being red it is now of a violet colour. Those pictures afford another instance of the curious changes which, after the first excitement is produced by solarisation, go on, slowly but constantly, even in the dark. If one of those Chromatypes is set apart without having been submitted to the washing process, it will be found, after a few months, that the picture is nearly obliterated by the revival of a film of metallic silver over the face of it; whilst the image is gradually developing itself upon the back of the paper, which goes on until a very distinct picture presents itself. Since the first introduction to this country of the Daguerreotype process it has been wonderfully improved, notwithstanding it was most injudiciously and unfortunately hampered with a patent. Our reflection applies only to that “foreigner residing abroad,” upon whose “communication” the patent was originally founded, and does not include the present proprietor, who fairly purchased it as a promising commercial speculation. In the hands of Mr. Claudet, of Mr. Beard, of Mr. Kilburn, in England, and in those of Mr. Mayall of America, the amount of perfection which has been obtained in Daguerreotype portraiture is great; yet, still, it is desired that more harmony, if possible, should be produced in those shades which represent the coloured radiations. To avoid the want of truth which to a certain extent presents itself in all these Daguerreotype portraits, they are, in most cases submitted to the artist, who, by a judicious application of colour, removes many of the objections; but owing to the want of transparency in the colours, a defect due entirely to the material upon which the artist has to work, the tinted Daguerreotypes are seldom pleasing to the artistic eye. The problem of natural coloration is one which has constantly, since the publication of the discovery of Photography, presented itself to each inquirer. In the last number of the Art Journal we noticed the fact that M. Edmund Becquerel had announced the discovery of a process by which pictures could be taken in colours. As far as the prismatic spectrum is concerned this is perfectly correct: the young French savan, even in the midst of revolutionary tumult, has been pursuing his well-directed inquiries with the utmost industry and undisturbed attention; and not only has he obtained a coloured impression of the spectrum, but he has indicated the most probable method by which coloured Photographs may be naturally obtained. It must be stated that M. Becquerel is by no means the first experimentalist who has obtained colour by the action of natural radiation. Sir John Herschel procured impressions of the spectrum in colour, each ray being faithfully represented in its natural tint; and the author, some years since, pointed out a peculiar colorific property belonging to the Barytic salts, which Sir John Herschel did him the honour to publish in his paper in the Philosophical Transactions on this subject, and a few years since he discovered and published the fact, that fluoride of silver was susceptible of receiving a coloured impression of the solar rays. The beautiful theory of Sir Isaac Newton has most satisfactorily shown to us, that colour depends entirely upon the mechanical arrangement of the particles of matter which constitute the reflecting surface, and that as we vary the thickness of superficial films, so we vary the colorific reflection. M. Edmund Becquerel, following upon the mere indication of a fact first pointed out by M. Moser, has shown that vapour acting upon a metallic surface, whilst it is under the influence of the prismatic rays, attacks it in different degrees, according to the dissimilar influences of these rays, and that hence, films of varying thicknesses are produced, each one possessing the property of reflecting to the eye the colour under the influence of which it was formed. This is a most important step in the science of actino-chemistry, and it promises much for the Art of Photography. Great attention has been paid to processes on paper in this country, and but for the imperfections which arise from the uncertain manufacture of the paper itself, the result has been most satisfactory. Many of the productions by the patentee of the Calotype process—Mr. Fox Talbot,—involving the use of the gallonitrate of silver, may be seen at his place of business in Regent Street: they are exceedingly beautiful, but inferior, on the whole, to the artistic photography of Messrs. Hill and Adamson, of Edinburgh, or those of several members of the Photographic club. With an improved paper, (and we understand means are being taken to procure such), we have no doubt but very superior Photographs will be produced to any we have yet seen. It must be recollected that it is but a few years since the discovery broke upon the world, like a thing of magic. A picture, drawn by the solar rays, seemed but another version of the monkish legend, which tells us of a saintly pilgrim who arrived at a shrine, and hung his cloak upon a sunbeam previously to his kneeling for prayer. But the reality was soon shown, and by this discovery, not only has Art obtained a new minister, but Science has been enabled to advanco her search into a realm of mysterious agencies which were unknown before, but which are ever active in the great physical phenomena of the universe. Robert Hunt.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1849. BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND. BIRMINGHAM EXHIBITION OF MANUFACTURES AND ART.
“The Birmingham Exhibition of Manufactures and Art.” ART-JOURNAL 1:10 (Oct. 1, 1849): 293-321. 100 plus illus. [(Illustrations are of the products exhibited.) “This is the second Exhibition that has taken place, in Birmingham, of manufactured articles in a degree peculiar to the Locality. The first was held in 1839, during a visit of the British Association for the advancement of Science; this learned body has revisited the Town, and the event has been commemorated by another Exposition of the Industrial Arts:… (Long and detailed description of the articles and spaces of the exhibition.) “…The astonishing extent and interest of the present Exhibition, the descriptive catalogue of which occupies 96 closely printed 8vo. pages, contrasts very forcibly with that got up in 1830 in this town, on the previous visit of the British Association, On that occasion a couple of dozen pages sufficed to contain a rather widely printed list of contributions, the greater number of which were models, philosophic machinery, &c, sixty-nine articles only being devoted to the manufactures of the place, and most of those consisting of such illustrations of the various stages of their varied processes as we should expect to find at the Polytechnic Institution, London, or similar places. Altogether, the contrast is very striking, and exhibits forcibly the awakened sense of the value of such exhibitions now felt in this important manufacturing district….” “…If we turn to the Porcelain manufactures, and, commencing our examination with the specimens of early pottery contributed to this Exhibition by Mr. Richard Prosser, continue it onward till we arrive at the works in which Wedgwood, the scientific potter, was aided by the genius of England’s greatest sculptor, Flaxman, and then inspect the productions of Copeland, of Minton, of Rose and others, in which we hare examples of the most perfect material ornamented by the finest colours—we shall discover that Physical Science has aided to produce the result by its development of the laws of molecular arrangement; and of the great Physical Forces that Geology has brought its examinations amid the hills and vallies of our land to bear in the discover}- of aluminous and silicious formations suited to the purposes of the potter; that Chemistry has assisted in determining the best composition for the mass and in the actual discovery of colours for its ornamentation. Equally, if not indeed to a greater extent, is the glass-blower indebted to all these branches of science; and every production of the loom which is seen in this large Exhibition also shows the dependence of the advance of manufacture upon its assistance. More strikingly still is this exemplified by the numerous beautiful productions of the electrotype process, so purely a boon of science to mankind; and again by the exhibition of the photographic works of M. Claudet and Mayall, the latter exhibiting a portrait of the life size executed by the daguerreotype process with considerable success, which is beyond a doubt the largest picture which the pure pencil of the sunbeam has ever painted. From these considerations we cannot but rejoice that Birmingham has availed itself of the opportunities afforded by the meeting of the World of Science to bring together such an Exhibition of Manufactures as that which is now open. It must be remembered that the Art-Journal has for years insisted on the advantages to be derived from such an Exhibition; and it is not without some feelings of pride that we witness the peculiar and striking benefits derived from the actual experiment. Art, Manufacture, and Science are linked together in this Exhibition, and we view it as a pleasing evidence, that our great practical workmen acknowledge the value of Art in its instructions in the path of beauty of form and purity of decoration; and the assistance of Science in teaching those secrets by which the character of the material employed, and the permanence of all its parts, may be effectively secured….” p. 294.]

MAYALL.
“Minor Topics of the Month. Photographies [sic] of the Crystal Palace.” ART JOURNAL 3:11 (Nov. 1, 1851): 299. [“Mr. Mayall, the American photographist has taken a series of photographs, on an unusually large scale, of various points in the Great Exhibition, which are remarkable for their extreme accuracy and power. Transcripts from the sculpture (the most difficult of all the objects therein assembled in the ordinary way) have thus been rendered perfect. It is we are told the intention of the artist to reproduce these photographs on paper, in which form they will rank among the most valuable recollections of the Exhibition.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Mayall’s Crayon Daguerreotype Portraits.” ART JOURNAL 5:10 (Oct. 1853): 267. [“An apparatus, which, in its application to photographic portraiture seems to us of the very highest importance, has recently been invented and patented by Mr. Mayall, one of the most successful practitioners of this Art. It may briefly be described as similar in appearance to a fire-screen, in the centre of which is a slowly revolving disc or plate of iron, having an opening in the form of a large star. This is placed between the camera and the sitter, so that a view of the face and bust is obtained through the opening. As the disc is turned, the points keep intervening, and effectually stop out the light from the lower part of the figure, thereby excluding the part most liable to exaggeration. The result of this operation is, that the head and bust of the sitter, which, of course, are the most important parts, and which he desires to have the most faithfully rendered, come out with remarkable clearness and delicacy, the background, if so it may be called, being shaded down to a degree of softness that is scarcely perceptible. We must admit that we have never seen anything in photographic portraits so truly artistic as these; they have all the force and beauty of an exquisite mezzotinto engraving, hence the appropriate name of “crayon portraits,” by which Mr. Mayall designates them. We saw, in his gallery, a score or two of portraits of men whom we know personally; each one was the man himself-a living likeness, such as the most skilful painter could never set before us: they are as far superior to the multitude of photographic caricatures one sees in every great thoroughfare, as a coarse woodcut is to a delicate engraving on steel or copper. It is quite evident the inventor of this apparatus knows as much of the science of his Art, and of its capabilities, as he does of its practice.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Mr. Mayall’s Daguerreotypes.” ART JOURNAL 5:11 (Nov. 1853): 299. [“In the Art Journal for October we had occasion to speak in terms of praise respecting Mr. Mayall’s Crayon Daguerreotype Portraits. The paragraph states his pictures were “as superior to the general run of daguerreotypes as a coarse wood-cut is to a delicate engraving on steel or copper.” The mistake in arranging the sentence is obvious. We should certainly be the last to prefer a coarse wood-cut to a more perfect specimen of engraving, and it is evident from the context that we meant– Mr. Mayall’s pictures represent the high art of the daguerreotype, while the majority of such productions can only be compared to the coarsest wood-cut. The compliment we intended to pay him was thus unfortunately, we may add, absurdly, turned into a remark for which, doubtless, he little thanks us.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1854. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“The Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ART JOURNAL 6:2 (Feb. 1854): 48-50. [(First exhibition of the Photographic Society, with 1500 photographs on display.) “At the rooms of the Society of British Artists in Suffolk Street, there was opened on Tuesday the 3rd of January, a novel exhibition. In many respects it was worthy of especial note; it was a fine example of the value of every abstract discovery in science: it was singular, as it exhibited remarkable progress, made in an art by non-scientific men, every stage of which involved the most refined physical and chemical principles. It was of great interest, as showing the value of photography to the artist, to the traveller, the historian, the antiquarian, and the naturalist: to all, indeed, the exhibition appears to display points of the utmost importance. We purpose, therefore, to devote an article to the consideration of this, the first exhibition of the Photographic Society. It is pleasing to commence our task by recording the interest taken by our Most Gracious Queen in the progress of everything which has any tendency to exalt the character of the people over whom she reigns. Upon the formation of the Photographic Society, her Majesty and Prince Albert became its patrons; and on the morning previously to the opening of the Exhibition, these illustrious personages paid a visit to the Gallery, and spent a considerable time in examining the numerous specimens exhibited. The Queen and Prince were received by Sir Charles Eastlake, President; Professor Wheatstone, VicePresident; Mr. Roger Fenton, the Honorary Secretary; and Mr. Fry, Mr, Berger, Mr. Rosling, Dr. Diamond, and Professor Robert Hunt, members of council, with Mr. Henfrey, the editor of the Journal, and Mr. Williams, the Assistant-Secretary. Both her Majesty and the Prince have for a long period taken the utmost interest in the Art; and their expressions of delight at the productions now brought together, cannot but have the most important influence on the yet greater advance of photography. Nearly 1,500 pictures, illustrating, with a few unimportant exceptions, every variety of the photographic Art, are now exhibited. It is, of course, impossible, and if practicable, it would be useless to examine so many productions in detail. To the inexperienced, it may also appear that, since every picture is drawn by the same agent— the sunbeam, in the same instrument—the camera obscura, they must have the same general character, and therefore admit not of any critical remarks as to their artistic value. Such is not, however, the case. The productions of the painter are not more varied than those of the photographer; and it is a curious and interesting study to examine the subjects selected for photographic view, and to trace in these, as we would in an artist’s picture, the peculiar bent of the mind. To select a few examples: —Sir William Newton delights in the picturesque features of the Burnham beeches, and studies to produce a general harmony and breadth of effect, rather than to secure the minute details in which many of his photographic brethren delight. The Count de Montizon is a student of natural history; and in some fifty pictures which he exhibits, we have examples of the zoological collection in the Regent’s Park. These are curious evidences of the sensibility of the collodion process which the count employs: lions, tigers, bears, birds, and fish are caught, as it were, in their most familiar moods, and are here represented with a truthfulness which but few artists could approach with the pencil. The Viscount Vigier delights in nature’s grander moods,—the mountain gorge, the foaming torrents, the beetling rocks, and the everlasting snows, are the subjects which he labours to secure upon his photographic tablets. The views in the Pyrenees, now exhibited, prove how completely he has succeeded in securing the bold features of alpine scenery, with all its depths of shadow and its savage grandeur. Nothing more successful than these photographs of the Viscount Vigier have yet been produced. Mr. Turner leads us amidst the ruins of the English abbeys; he delights in ivy-clad walls, broken arches, or mouldering columns; his pictures are purely, essentially English; when he leaves the ruined fanes hallowed by ancient memories, he wanders into the quiet nooks of our island, and with a poet’s eye selects such scenes as “wavering woods, and villages, and streams.” Mr. Delamotte displays a natural feeling somewhat akin to this; his quiet pictures of the “Old Well,” “Alnwick Castle,” “Brinkburn Priory,” and the ” River Coquet,” show him to be one of those
“who lonely loves To seek the distant hills, and there converse With Nature.”
Exquisitely curious as are the details in the views of the Crystal Palace at Sydenham, and in Mr. Delamotte’s copies of Irish Antiquities, they bear no comparison as pictures with those little scraps from nature which he exhibits. Mr. Hugh Owen, with the eye of an artist, selects bits out of the tangled forest, the “Path of the Torrent,” or the depths of the glen, which must prove treasures to a landscape-painter. Mr. Rosling is amongst Photographers what Crabbe was amongst poets, one who delights, in all the minute details of the most homely scenes, who, if he ventures far from home, seeks
“villages embosom’d soft in trees. And spiry towns by surging columns mark’d Of household smoke.’
The delight in details is shown by the really wonderful microscopic reproductions of the Illustrated London News which this gentleman exhibits. It has been, from time to time, said that in all Photographic productions the veil of air through which all nature is seen, is wanting. In most of them this is the case, but there are two striking exceptions in this collection; a view of St. Paul’s by Mr. Rosling, and “The Garden Terrace,” by Mr. Roger Fenton. In these little pictures the gradation of tone is as perfect as in any sun pictures which we have seen, and the gradual fading off of the outlines of the objects as they are respectively more and more distant from the eye, yet still retaining their distinctness, is beautifully artistic and at the same time natural. The productions of Mr. Fenton are more varied than those of any other exhibitor. His pictures of the works at the suspension bridge at Kief, now in the process of construction by Mr. Vignolles, for the Emperor of Russia, mark the stages of progress, and thus the camera of the photographer is made to act the part of a clerk of works and record the mechanical achievements of every day. This is by no means an unimportant application of Photography; the engineer or the architect can receive from day to day, the most accurate information respecting works which he may have in the process of construction hundreds of miles apart, and thus be saved the labour of constant personal inspection. Mr. Fenton’s Russian tour has enabled him to enrich his portfolio with numerous views of the monasteries, churches, &c, of the Russian capitals. Many of these are exhibited, and then he gives us homely views, selected with an artist’s eye, and manipulated with great skill, together with portraits of considerable merit. Although some of Mr. Fenton’s productions are obtained by the collodion process, the greater number are the result of wax paper, in which process this gentleman, the secretary of the society, is one of the most successful operators in this country. Messrs. Ross and Thomson continue to familiarise us with Scotch scenery. There is
“the copse-wood gray That waved and wept on Loch Acliray, And ruiugled with the pine-trees blue Ou the bold cliffs of Ben-venue.”
We have on former occasions had to commend the productions of these artists, and the fine character of the specimens on the walls of the gallery in Suffolk Street causes us to regret that there are not a larger number of such scenes, as their Loch Acliray, and Loch Katrine, so nearly realising Sir W. Scott’s description of those lakes and their enclosing
“mountains, which like giants stand, To sentinel enchanted land.”
We might in this manner gather into groups the especial subjects now exhibited, each group bearing the well-marked impress of the mind of the photograper. The art is purely mechanical, and the results are obtained by means of a philosophical instrument, which has no power to alter its conditions. That which external nature presents the camera-obscura represents, therefore the varied character to which we allude is dependent, mainly, on the selection made. We say mainly dependent, because the photographic manipulator has it in his power, in the process of printing his pictures, to secure certain effects, which add more or less of the pictorial character to the result. A few years since, and a period of twenty minutes was required to obtain upon the most sensitive tablet then known a view of a building. How greatly does the sensibility of our preparations now exceed this. Here we have Mr. Dillwyn Llewellyn presenting us with a view of a Welsh sea-coast, and the waves of the restless ocean have been caught ere yet the crest could fall, the hollow ascend to become the crest, or the breaker cast its foam upon the shore. Dr. Becker, librarian to the Prince Albert, has also, since the opening of the exhibition, contributed a picture in which the fleeting, and ever-varying clouds are painted, by their own radiations, in singular truth. The improvement in sensibility is particularly shown however in the portraits of the insane by Dr. Diamond. The rapidity of operation is shown by the life which is in every countenance. The physiognomy of the affliction is truthfully preserved, and all the phases of excitement or melancholy rigidly preserved. High medical testimony assures us that these portraits are of the highest value in the study of that most severe of human afflictions, the deprivation of reason. The portraits by Mr. Berger are equally remarkable for the evident rapidity with which they have been taken, and for the artistic tone which is given to many of them. Two of these portraits, in particular, struck us as proving the correctness of Raffaelle, and his boldness. It is not possible that we can particularise the respective excellences of the numerous exhibitors. The portraits by Mr. Hennah, by Mr. Home, and Mr. James Tunny are especially deserving of notice. To the daguerreotype productions of Mr. Claudet, Mr. Beard, and Mr. Mayall we need scarcely devote a line; their various excellences are already too well known to the public. There are many pictures, subsequently coloured by the artists’ hand, of great merit, but as being coloured they are removed, as it were, from the domain of the photographer. Yet, not entirely so, since we have here examples of colouring upon photographic portraits by the artists already named, and also by Mr. Laroche, equal in nearly all respects to the first class ivory miniatures, but which are produced at about one-tenth their cost. The value of photography to the traveller who desires to secure faithful resemblances of the lands he may visit, and to the “Home-keeping Wit,” who still wishes to know something of the aspects of other climes, is here most strikingly shown. We have an extensive series of views from Egypt—the Vocal Memnon, the Sphinx, the Pyramids, the temples of Isis and Dendera, and numerous other photographs by Mr. Bird, make us acquainted with all the peculiarities of the architecture of the land of the Pharaohs. Mr. Tenison brings us acquainted with Seville and Toledo, while Mr. Clifford shows us Segovia, with its modern houses and its ancient aqueduct, Salamanca, and other Spanish scenes. M. Baldus exhibits several most interesting photographs of scenes hallowed by historical associations, amongst others the amphitheatre at Nimes, is on many accounts a remarkable production. This picture is by far the largest in the room, and certainly one of the largest photographs which has yet been executed. The positive now exhibited is copied from three negatives ; that is, three views have been taken in the first place, by moving the camera-obscura round as it were upon a centre, so as to embrace a fresh portion of the ruins each time. These three negatives being fixed are united with much care, and the positive taken by one exposure. In this case the joining has been so skilfully contrived, that it is scarcely possible to detect the points of union. The study of natural history cannot but be greatly aided by the publication of such photographic copies of objects as those produced by the MM Bisson. We learn that in the production of these, every assistance is rendered by the French government, and in this way it is contemplated bopublish all the choice specimens of the Museum of the Jardin des Plantes, and other Parisian collections. Since this was written, a set of prints from steel plates, etched by Niepce’s bituminous process, have been received, and show still an extension of photography in the aid of art and science. The portraits of the Zulu Kaffirs, by Mr. Henneman, prove the value of the art to the ethnologist, since the physiognomy of races may be in this way most faithfully preserved. Under this section, the microscopic objects photographed by the Rev. W. I. Kingsley, and those by Mr. F. Delves require notice; those by the latter gentlemen are, as it appears to us, the most remarkable productions of this class which have yet obtained. Mr. Kingsley’s pictures are the largest in point of size, but they want that clearness and definition, that evidence of space penetration which strikingly distinguishes the works of Mr. Delves. Amongst the objects of purely scientific interest, the i impressions of the spectrum by Mr. Crooke, showing the Fraunhofer lines, and some j copies of the images produced in crystals by polarised light will attract most attention. The practical value of these is to j show the advantages of the bromide of silver over the iodide in all cases where we desire to copy objects, such as foliage, in which green and yellow surfaces .prevail. These are not new facts, as they were pointed out by Sir John Herschel in 1840, and particularly examined by Mr. Robert Hunt in his “Researches on Light,” in which volume is also given a drawing of the fixed lines of the chemical spectrum. The photograplis of Mr. Stokes’ charming little bits of nature, those of Mr. Waring, of Sir Thomas Wilson, and numerous others, as illustrating interesting photographic phenomena, would, did our space permit, claim some observations. Any one examining the collodion pictures executed by Mr. C. T. Thompson, and those by Mr. F. Bedford, cannot but be struck with the wonderful detail and correctness of every part. The finest chasings in silver, carvings in ivory, and copies of the antique furniture which was exhibited last year at Gore House show the variety of purposes to which the art can be, and is now being, applied. There are several specimens of much historical interest exhibited, such as the first collodion portrait by Mr. P. W. Fry, and the earliest application of the protonitrate of iron by Dr. Diamond. Of actual novelties in the Art, there are none ; the linotype, or pictures stained on linen, scarcely deserving the name, and its utility being very doubtful. The examples of photo-lithography, and of Mr. Talbot’s etchings on steel we have already given a full description in former numbers. Auguring from this, the first exhibition of the Photographic Society, which has only been in existence one year—and that a year remarkable for its paucity of sunshine— the very element upon which the success of photography depends; we may expect great advances in another year. As a word of advice to all who are interested in the art, we would say in conclusion, rest not satisfied with the agents you are now employing, or the mode of manipulation you follow, try other agents and new methods.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1855. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Photographic Society Exhibition.” ART JOURNAL ns 1:3 (Mar. 1855): 85. [(Second exhibition. Hugh Owen, Sedgfield, Fenton, Rev. Kingsley, B. B. Turner, Russell Sedgfield, Ponting, C. H. Waring, T. J. Backhouse, T. D. Llewelyn, Buckle, Stokes, Count de Montizon, Mayall, J. G. Tunney, Hennah mentioned.) “This, the second exhibition of the Photographic Society, presents the state of the art with great fidelity. We do not feel ourselves in a position lo say that we perceive any advance upon the specimens which were exhibited last year. Varieties there are,—and those of considerable interest. We perceive that some of the exhibitors have been zealously striving to overcome the defects of the art; here and there we see the difficulties successfully overcome, but we are not sure that many of the best effects are not accidental. This appears to us confirmed by the irregularity in the results obtained by even the most successful of the photographers exhibiting. Mr. Hugh Owen, Mr. Sedgfield, and Mr. Fenton may be named as most experienced, and certainly most zealous photographers; each of these gentlemen exhibited last year, pictures of equal beauty with any in the*1 present exhibition. These remarks must not be regarded as being in any way disparaging, —we do not intend them to be so; but we earnestly desire that all our photographers should attend to their science, at the same time that they study the art. The peculiar influences wilt which they work—subtitle powers of a mysterious character, influenced by the earth’s position relative to their source, the sun, changing with every variation of the earth’s atmosphere — and the still more peculiar variations in the chemical changes brought about by these radiations, which vary with every alteration in the colour of the medium through which they pass, and of the surfaces from which they are reflected, all show the extreme importance of a scrutinising search into the philosophy of this. We see in the exhibition many most charming effects produced. We scarcely think them reflexes of the natural conditions. To express clearly what we mean, we must refer to a striking picture exhibited by Mr. Rosling last year,—it was a View of St. Paul’s. The aerial effect was perfect,—it was St. Paul’s seen through the light veil of mist which grows over London on a bright summer morning. What was the fact’ The original negative picture was produced by long exposure on a very gloomy day. It would be a most instructive thing if our travelling photographers would note the exact conditions of the atmosphere, and of the light, under which pictures were taken, and append such notes to the pictures exhibited. The Photographic Society, if it is to effect any good, should especially urge upon its members labours of this kind. Photographic pictures are very beautiful, but a large collection of them—all bearing the same mark of uncertainty, a conventionalism of doubt and difficulty—will cease to please. This exhibition contains 664 frames of pictures. The marked advances are in the collodion pictures,—natural clouds and breaking waves being faithfully represented. Many of the large portraits are remarkable productions, though we believe they have been considerably indebted to the hand of the artist since the more delicate pencil of light has done its work. Considerable attention has been directed to a series of copies of drawings by Raphael, in the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle, photographed for his Royal Highness Prince Albert, by Mr. C. Thurston Thompson. The application of photography in this direction is of great importance. In these productions every peculiarity of the artist is preserved with far greater fidelity than could possibly be done by the most skilful engraver; hence, as studies, these photographs are invaluable. The French have been before us in this line, and have for some time past published similar copies, from the drawings of Raphael and other great masters, to those now exhibited. As usual, Mr. Hugh Owen’s works are of great beauty, representing natural objects under the most pleasing aspects of light and shadow. His “Studies in Portugal” are really valuable to the Art student. Few photographers have been more eminently successful than Mr. Rogers Fenton, and as usual he presents us in this exhibition with a considerable number of charming pictures. The Rev. Mr. Kingsley exhibits several of his wonderful microscopic objects, in which the minutest details developed by the microscope are most faithfully preserved. Amongst other successful exhibitors we must, however, name Mr. B. B. Turner, Mr. Russell Sedgfield, Mr. Pouting, Mr. C. H. Waring, Mr. T. J. Backhouse, Mr. T. D. Llewellyn, Mr. Buckle, Mr. Stokes, the Count de Montizon, &c, &c. Our professional photographers have not exhibited largely. Many of the productions of Mr. Mayall are very fine. Mr. Laroche exhibits several of his highly-finished portraits; and many of the works of Mr. Henneman are excellent. There are none, however, which please us more than those of Mr. J. G. Tunny of Edinburgh, whose portraits and landscapes are much to our taste. Mr. Hennah has also some very successful pictures. Photography is now free of all patent trammels, the professional artist may thus pursue his investigations without the fear of legal proceedings, and in the full certainty that any discoveries which he may make he may employ to his own benefit. With this stimulus we can but hope to witness many important results in the next exhibition. The amateur we also hope will cease to remain satisfied with the processes taught in the text-books, and by new combinations aim at new effects, calculated to meet the difficulties which surround this beautiful art.”]

MAYALL.
“Minor Topics of the Month.” ART JOURNAL ns 1:5 (May 1, 1855): 167. [“Mr. Mayall, the well-known photographer, has recently made a novel and interesting addition to his various methods of producing likenesses, by transferring to paper what has been taken by the daguerreotype. His mode of operation as described to us, is exceedingly simple, and the result is most effective. He tikes an enlarged negative copy, which, after undergoing some slight preparations to bring out any of the details that ore faintly delineated, will yield any number of positives. If the copy is to remain black and white, but few touches by the artist will be required; but if colour be desired, the paper surface may be worked upon to the finish of the most delicate miniature. Some of the examples submitted to us could not be distinguished from the work of the most skilful miniature painter. The result is obtained by a peculiar application of the collodion process to photography.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1856. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
Hunt, Robert. “Photographic Exhibitions.” ART JOURNAL ns 2:2 (Feb. 1856): 49-50. [“The Photographic Society has during the month opened its third Exhibition. Fenton’s Crimean photographs (noticed Art-Journal, October) are now exhibited in Pall-Mall; and Robertson’s photographs, taken after the fall of Sebastopol, are to be seen in Regent Street. The fact, that three exhibitions of sun-drawn pictures are open in the metropolis at the same time, sufficiently proves the growing interest in this beautiful art. The present appears a favourable opportunity for examining the state and prospects of photography—and, with these public exhibitions to refer to,we shall find no difficulty in directing attention to illustrative examples of each point with which we shall have to deal. During the last year or two, there have not been any considerable advances in the science of photography, but the art has been greatly improved. When the discoveries of Daguerre and Talbot were first published to the world, several experimental philosophers seized upon the subject, and their industrious researches were soon rewarded by the development of new and unexpected truths. These directed the way to secure improved sensibility in the photographic agents, and pictures were in a little time produced, in a few seconds, superior in all respects to those which formerly required, often, nearly an hour for their development. Herschel, for example, was the first to point attention to the importance of organic bodies in combination with the salts of silver. He showed that the equilibrium was more readily overturned, and the system of chemical decomposition more rapidly carried forward, when the metallic salt was associated with some of those carbon compounds, which especially possess the power of removing oxygen from substances with which it is associated. A knowledge of this fact led to the use of gallic acid as an accelerating agent, aud, although unfortunately the steps are wanting, and we are prevented from tracing the progress of the discovery, we find photographers advancing from the use of paper, to the employment of gelatine and albumen, and eventually to the introduction of that important agent, collodion. Collodion proved so distinguishingly an accelerating power in photography, that almost every other preparation has given way before it. In proof of this the present Photographic Exhibition numbers 606 frames of photographs of various kinds. Of these there are of pictures by the
Waxed paper process . . 64
The Calotype . .     . . 78
The Daguerreotype .   . 3
The Collodion . . . .    461
                  600
This large majority of collodion pictures is, we believe, mainly referrible to the remarkable facility of the process. The preparations required can be purchased ready for use—and it is almost impossible for the veriest amateur to fail of obtaining a picture. We are rather disposed to think that the discovery of the collodion process has had an injurious tendency in stopping enquiry. The pictures obtained are generally so excellent, that little is desired by the photographer beyond the means of ensuring the permanence of his productions. We have had numerous valuable suggestions for the improvement of the collodion process, many of which have been adopted, but no one appears to attempt an advance beyond this. There is no reason why other agents possessing all the advantages of collodion, and some which are yet a desideratum, should not be discovered. It is with some regret that we visited the three exhibitions of the Photographic Society, without discovering, with one exception, any evidence of the study of photography as a science. Amongst the members of the Photographic Society we see the names of men eminent in their especial departments of science; and there are others who, although young, have given evidence of their powers to carry forward original research. Why is it, then, that the exhibition is almost without examples of experimental enquiry? Why is it that the Photographic Journal gives no evidence of the progress of scientific investigation? To produce a picture, the process being given, is excessively easy; any one with industry may succeed in this and even excel; to enquire into the physical and chemical pheuomena concerned in the production, is a task demanding much higher powers. There are, however, two frames in the exhibition illustrating—one, the action of the hydrosulphide of ammonia, and the other of the permanganate of potash on finished photographs, which are excellent examples of one line of enquiry. These are by Mr. F. Hardwick, who has carefully investigated many points in the chemistry of photography, and he, in these examples, seeks an elucidation of the conditions under which photographs are found to give way j these demand a careful study. We have on a former occasion devoted an article to the subject of the fading of photographs, and we still hold to our opinion, that a sun-drawn picture may be rendered absolutely unfading under any of the ordinary atmospheric influences, proper care being taken in the manipulation. So much for the condition of photographic science. Now let us look at the art. The third exhibition of the Photographic Society is an exceedingly satisfactory one. We miss the productions of some wellknown photographers, but they are replaced by others, differing from the older hands in style, but in no respect inferior to them in general effect. We conceive there is more harmony—more delicacy—throughout the pictures than formerly. The printing processes have been more carefully attended to, and we have less of that hard contrast, of intense shadows with high lights, than formerly. We also see that the art of photography has had the advantage of leading its students to look at nature with a more careful eye than was their wont. The results of the camera obscura have not always been found to be quite agreeable; sometimes the sunshine, or rather the effects, upon the landscape, were offensively brought forward, and violent results not unfrequently marked the photographer’s studies. These defects, however, our more advanced photographic artists have learned to avoid. They now select natural objects under their more favourable aspects; they look at nature with an eye to the impression which her illuminated surface will make on the chemically prepared tablet; and they select those conditions of light and shadow which give a pleasing photographic result. Some of the landscapes, especially those by J. Knight (497, 502), several by J. D. Llewelyn (504, 511, 411, 443, &c.); T. W. Ramsden’s scenes in Yorkshire (533, 545); F. Scott Archer’s views (61, 62); those by W. Pumphrey (127, &c.); the delightful little bits of nature by G. Shadbolt (34, 57, and 58) will, upon careful examination fully confirm our remarks. “Inhaling the Breeze” (58)
“breathing from the meadows,
As the west wind bows down the long green grass,
And the light clouds pass as they were wont to pass,
Long time ago”-—
by Mr. Shadbolt, possesses to us an inexpressible charm; there is a quiet poetry, and a fulness of light about the picture which is magical; it is like a picture by Turner, we can almost feel the west wind soft and balmy. Pre-Raphaelites might study this and some other photographs, and learn how the sun paints, disclosing every minute line on trunk and leaf—yet blending all into one—light melting by undulations into shadow, and shade brightening into sunny glow, like the illumination on summer seas. For minute and yet distinct detail of a peculiar kind, charming in its general effect, we would name (557) Ferns and Brambles, by H. White. In one picture by Mr. Archer, and in Bantry Bay (14) by T. Cadby Ponting, we have natural clouds, but we think we have seen more delicate and beautiful copies of “Cloudland” than those. How valuable to the artist would a good series of photographic cloud.studies be, since few know how to paint them! There are many fine examples of “Ruined fanes, relics of hood and cowl devotion,” of crumbling castles and tottering mansions, which show the manner in which Time’s effacing fingers produce disintegration of the solid stone. The weather-worn fragment is depicted with every scar upon its face, every channel which the rain drops and the wind has worn. Scenes from Kenilworth (45, 46), Dolamor and Bullock; Ludlow Castle (10), Rev. H. Holder; several portions of Windsor Castle, by A. F. Melhuish; The Choir, Canterbury Cathedral (183), F. Bedford ; and some similar productions by V. A. Prout, are excellent studies. Few men could paint as the sun paints; it is not to be desired that they should do so, since the expenditure of time in producing all this wonderful detail would swallow up too much of a man’s life, and it would, we fear, as a final result, produce marvellous mechanism, to the sacrifice of mind. Photography has its uses,—we fear we see its evils, or abuses, in the way in which some of our artists employ the photographic copy of nature, instead of looking at nature with their own eyes, and , mentally fixing some of the ever-varying images which are drawn upon the tablets of those wonderful stereoscopic cameras, the human eyes. Yet many are the lessons, if read aright, which are taught by photography. O. G. Rejlander and Lake Price contribute several artistic studies of a far more ambitious kind than we have hitherto seen. They are all wonderfully clever, but after all they are but the images of actors posed for the occasion; they all want life, expression, passion. Passion they have none, and yet these pictures tell a pleasing tale. The three Subjects (4), by Rejlander, are exceedingly well treated. The Breakfast Table, by Lake Price, is a pretty comfortable English interior, in which all is happiness and peace; let us hope it is the artist’s home. The Wolsey—Charles Kean—(135), by the same photographer, is an exquisite portrait and a fine picture. The Monk (150), also by Mr. Lake Price, and its accompanying studies, are good in their way, but they are dramatic representations; and this applies yet more forcibly to the Scene in the Tower (139), in which the murder of the young princes is the subject. We doubt the propriety of attempting to rival the historical painter. We believe, indeed, that such pictures as those will have a tendency to lower the appreciation of Art in the eyes of the public, and unfit them for receiving the full impression intended by, or of seeing the beauties of, the artist’s production. We do not mean to disparage the works of Mr. Price or of Mr. Rejlander, they are excellent of their kind, but our love of High Art leads us to desire not to see too many of this class of subjects. J. Watson & Co. exhibit an Academic Study (227), and the Broken String (259), which must also be regarded as an artist’s study, and both possess very great merit as such. We have in this Exhibition numerous examples of the applications of the photographic art. A Frame containing four subjects of Cuneiform Inscriptions (201), by Roger Fenton, which are copies of the natural size of clay tablets brought from Nineveh, are wonderfully exact. It would be an almost endless labour to draw these relics of Assyrian story by hand—and here we have every character, by one impulse, faithfully depicted in a few seconds. We have Hindoo Antiquities and Egyptian Bas-relief (210) as other examples of the same class. One of the Engraved pages from the German Edition of the Ars Moriendi, Black Book, date about 1470 (198), Mrs. L. Leigh Sotheby, furnishes another example of important applications of the photographic art. There has been some discussion on the question of copying valuable records, manuscript and printed books. We have seen examples sufficiently numerous to convince us that any of those things cau, under almost any conditions, be faithfully copied by the collodion process. Dr. Diamond has shown the antiquary how excellently well coins can be copied, in the Tray of Admiral Smyth’s Roman Coins (434); and C.Thurston Thompson exhibits the application of the art in copying enamels (585, 594), Art-manufactures (597), and furniture (603). Portraits are numerous, and many of them excellent; we hesitate to particularise, but we must mention Mr. Fenton’s Prince Napoleon (213), and Sir Colin Campbell (195), and Mr. Mayall’s portraits of Sidney Herbert (337); Lord John Russell (338); the late Sir William Molesworth (339); Sir George Grey (371); the Earl of Aberdeen (372), and Sir Cornwall Lewis (373). Thus our heroes and statesmen, as they lived and looked, are preserved to us, and their lineaments handed down to future ages. We think we have said enough to prove that the present exhibition of the Photographic Society is well worthy of close examination. Of the Crimean photographs of Mr. Roger Fenton we have already spoken (Art Journal, October, 1855). Mr. Robertson, chief engraver to the Imperial Mint, Constantinople, has produced an interesting series of views taken in the Crimea after the fall of Sebastopol, which are exhibiting at Mr. Kilburn’s, 222, Regent Street, The sad tale of destruction is here told with strange exactness. The Redan with the breach where the great struggle took place; the Malakoff Tower and Battery, and other celebrated scenes of “bloody strife,” are brought home to us, with fascines and gabions, in confusion thrown, in a manner which no artist could realise. We were especially struck with the Barrack Battery, showing the mantelettes for protecting the Russian gunners. Here, we see the excellent engineering of the Russians; and we learn to appreciate the value of these rope protections {mantelettes) for the gunners from the rifle-balls: these we have heard a competent authority declare to be the crowning invention of the war. Sebastopol and Balaklava, with all the strange confusion which distinguishes both, are before the beholder. The curious may find everything here to gratify them. The locality of each heroic or sad event is chronicled. The geologist may study the rocks of the Crimea without crossing the sea; and the architect the buildings which decorated this fine city. The trenches, the tents, the huts, are respectively represented; and —” last scene of all this sad eventful tragedy”—we have the English Burial Ground on Cathcart Hill, with the monuments of the brave men who sleep in the embraces of death, but whose memoirs are dear to the country of their birth, where their names will live and kindle heroic life in the souls of those who must preserve the high character of the Briton for courage and honour. Photography has achieved wonders. Let any one visit each of the three exhibitions which we have named, and we feel conscious they will leave them with a full conviction that the Art which has achieved the end of the enchanter’s mirror, and preserved for us, and shown to us, shadows which cannot fade, of persons and of things which are lost us, or at a distance from us, must produce yet greater triumphs with each recurring year. The sun, which gives light and colour, has answered the call of the evocator, and become the painter of the objects which it illuminates. In obedience to the bidding of the philosopher it will give us yet more truthfulness, and show us still nearer approaches to life. R. H.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Mayall’s Ivory Photographs.” ART JOURNAL ns 3:2 (Feb. 1857): 66. [“The want of a tablet for photographic pictures, which should be, at least, equally as absorbent as paper, and free from those inequalities and impurities which are such constant sources of annoyance to the photographer, has long been felt. Mr. Mayall appears to have succeeded in producing a surface possessing all the required qualities—perfect whiteness, uniformity of absorption, and chemical purity. This well-known photographic nrtist has very properly used the term ivory to express the character of the surface upon which he now produces his pictures. Except ivory itself, we do not think a more beautiful medium could be produced. It appears to be composed of barytes and albumen; and this, when solid, is well rubbed dowu and polished. The photographic portraits which are printed upon this surface are in themselves remarkably fine productions. It is, however, the purpose of Mr. Mayall that all this class of picture should be finished by the hand of the artist. we have examined several portraits, which possess the highest degree of finish—being, indeed, in scarcely any respect inferior to ivory miniatures of the highest class. These are produced at one-fifth the cost of the work of the miniature-painter—the sun, by one impulse, works in all the beautiful and minute details, so that a wash of transparent colour from the artist’s hands is all that is required to produce these truly beautiful pictures. Beyond these points of excellence we were much pleased with the artistic and picturesque arrangement of Mr. Mayall’s figures, each one of which was evidently a careful study. In the place of the cold and formal daguerreotype portrait which used to perplex us, we may now possess portraits of our friends which are truly artistic productions, pleasing in whatever light they may be viewed, and truthful beyond the artist’s power.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Mr. Mayall.” ART JOURNAL ns 6:7 (July 1860): 222. [Mr. Mayall, the eminent professor of photography, has received a mark of high honour from Her Majesty, having been selected to produce a series of photographs of the Queen, the Prince Consort, the several members of the royal family, and of various personal friends. We find the following report in the Journal of Photography:— ” The series is a highly interesting one, embracing as it does the representations of so many illustrious personages; the photographer has not only been a very successful operator upon the occasion, but his artistic skill has been called fully into play, as evinced by the easy and graceful attitudes of his sitters, which add an additional charm to the productions, and testify that the ‘ sittings’ have been submitted to con amore in every instance.”]

EXHIBITIONS: 1861: LONDON: PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Exhibition of the Photographic Society.” ART JOURNAL ns 7:2 (Feb. 1861): 47-48. [“The eighth exhibition of pictures by the members of the Photographic Society is now open, at the Gallery of the Society of Painters in Water Colours, Pall Mall East. There is a large collection of these sun-painted pictures; sufficiently large, indeed, to persuade the observer, that 1860 was not the year of gloom that most persons imagine it, to have been. Although luminous and calorific rays may have been absorbed by the vapoury clouds which hung over our islands, it is quite evident that a fair proportion of the actinic radiations must have readied the rain-soddened earth. There can be no Jack of enthusiasm amongst photographers. Notwithstanding the uncertainty of the past season, we perceive that the camera-obscura has penetrated the wildest moors, the most iron-bound coasts, the bleakest hills, and the recesses of the flooded valleys. The love of the art has carried the photographer onward through rains and storms. Indeed, we are disposed to believe that many of the most striking effects observable in the pictures exhibited, are due to that beautiful transparency of the atmosphere which follows a period of drenching rain. Our catalogue informs us that 622 pictures are exhibited; but there are more than this number of frames, and many frames contain four and six photographs. This is a proof of industry amongst the members of the society; but, when we ask ourselves if there is any distinguishable advance in the art, we are compelled to pause. For several years we have seen photographs which have possessed all the qualities that mark the best of these chemical pictures, in an eminent degree. Minuteness of detail, sharpness of outline, aerial perspective, freedom from the convergence of perpendicular lines, are merits with which we are familiar. The pictures which Mr. Roger Fenton exhibits this year—many of them very beautiful—are in no respect superior to photographs exhibited by that gentleman four or five years since. The Cheddar Cliffs and the views at Lynmouth are very charming,—perhaps Mr. Francis Bedford never produced more perfect works,—but we do not think them superior to many of the productions which Mr. Llewellyn, Mr. Sutton, and others have shown us. We were especially attracted by Mr. Bedford’s interiors. The views of parts of Canterbury Cathedral, of chosen bits of the Cathedrals of Wells and Exeter, together with portions of St. Mary Redcliffc Church, are all of them valuable studies to the artist, the architect, and the archaeologist; but we have now before us views of the interior of St. Mary Redcliffe, taken full ten years since by Mr. Owen of Bristol, which are in no respect inferior to them. So we might proceed from one class of subjects to another, showing, and we believe correctly, that there has not been any real advance in the photographic art for many years. The facilities for producing pictures, under all circumstances, are far greater than they were. Every mechanical arrangement has received, it would appear, the utmost amount of attention. The physical appliances have been improved, and the chemistry of the art, producing extreme sensibility to the solar influences, has been carefully studied. Yet we have not obtained pictures superior to those which marked the productions of the earlier exhibitions of the society. We cannot explain this. Has photography arrived at its maximum power? Can it not, by the aid of physical science—by the optician’s skill,—or the chemist’s experiments—be advanced higher? We believe much may yet be done; and we hope the society will interest itself in lifting the art beyond that dull level of excellence which has marked the exhibitions for several years. It is not possible for us, even were it desirable, to go through the long list of productions, so much like each other, and so nearly resembling the photographs which we have seen in former years. Fenton is good in his landscapes, but we venture to ask him if he has been quite so careful as usual; Bedford deserves praise; Cundall and Downes are in no respects behind; Caldesi has many beautiful studies; Maxwell Lyte has proved what can be done with metagelatine; Vernon Heath has wandered with advantage amidst the woods of Devonshire. James Mudd exhibits many pictures—all of them excellent—many of them may be classed with the best photographs ever produced. Maull and Polyblank require no advertisement for their portraits, nor do the London Stereoscopic Company for their stereoscopic views. There are, as might be expected, a crowd of “album portraits.” Those of Her Majesty the Queen and the Royal Family, by Mayall, are well-known, but we saw none superior to the chosen few exhibited by the London Stereoscopic Society. There are some successful attempts, not so ambitious as many which Lake Price and others have exhibited, in the direction of subject pictures. ‘The Holiday in the Wood,’ is the most successful of these, but the grouping indicates a deficiency of artistic feeling. Some of the small and so-called instantaneous pictures are good, but, with the extreme sensibility of the collodion process, when employed under the best possible conditions, we certainly fancy that better results are to be obtained. The Photographic Society directed especial attention some few years since to the fixing of photographs. This is a most important matter, demanding still the care of the society. We have now before us photographs which have been executed more than twelve years, in which there is not the slightest symptom of decay. We have others which have been produced within twelve months, which are fading rapidly. We have frequently expressed our opinion that there is no reason why a photograph should not be rendered as permanent as a water-colour drawing. These pictures need not necessarily fade. The experienced eye can almost always certainly tell whether a photograph is fixed or not. We do not intend to say that a man so judging may not besometimes deceived, although within our experience this is rarely the case. It is to the interest especially of the seller of a photograph, that it proves permauent. If his pictures fade it shows carelessness, and he loses his customers. If the buyer of those chemical pictures finds, by and by, that he has a portfolio of “vanishing scenes” or of “fleeling images” he will weary of collecting them, and return to less truthful, but to more enduring productions. Is it not possible for the society to give some guarantee, or to insist upon some guarantee, that the necessary amount of care has been taken in washing the pictures sold from its walls? We advise our readers to pay this exhibition a visit, they will be much gratified; there is a great variety of subjects, and many very beautiful works. The solar rays have produced pictures which must ever strike the reflecting mind with wonder. A power has been generated millions of miles beyond this earth, which flows, and gives life and beauty to it. That agency which combines and maintains a living organism, paints, by its occult power, a magic picture. Every picture now hanging on the walls of the Photographic Exhibition, the result of chemical change in the hands of the photographer, is directly due to a physical change occurring in the far distant Sun.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN
“Reviews. The Earl of Derby.” ART JOURNAL ns 7:6 (June 1861): 192. [”…A Photograph by J. E. Mayall. Published by Marion and Co., London. “This is the first of a series of “portraits of eminent men” produced by Mr. Mayall’s photographic process, and an admirable likeness it is of the great Conservative leader. The expression of the face is not pleasing, is not even amiable; it is that of one to whom deep thought, much anxiety, and, perhaps, much political disquietude, have given no stinted measure of severity and sternness; still it is a noble, intellectual head, and, independent of the photograph being one of great pictorial beauty, it will be welcomed by the numerous admirers of the statesman, who, through good report and evil report, look to him as the champion of the highest interests of our country.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1861.
“Cartes-de-Visite.” ART JOURNAL ns 7:10 (Oct. 1861): 308-309. [“Never was a nomenclature based upon the principle of lucus a non lucendo exemplified in a more characteristic manner, than in the instance of the delightful photographic miniatures that now are universally popular under the title of Cartes-deVisile. They are neither regarded nor used as visiting cards, nor does any one think of applying to them a plain English designation to that effect: and yet everybody understands a Carte-de-Visite to be a small photographic portrait, generally a full leugth, mounted on a card; and everybody is also equally anxious both to obtain his or her own miniature, executed in this style, and to form a collection of these Cartes-de-Visite—the portraits of everybody else. For the present, apparently, the most popular, the most deservedly popular also, and by far the most numerous class of English portraits must be content to be known by an inapplicable and indeed an unmeaning French name: perhaps, in due time, the carte-de-visite fashion of to-day may subside into what we certainly hope will prove to be an enduring admiration for sun-miniatures— portraits, that is, of precisely the same order, but hearing a simple and becoming English title. Meanwhile, however strange the misapplication of the term carte-de-visite may have become in its prevailing use, the photographic miniatures themselves, certainly, are most felicitous expressions of the photographer’s wonderful art. They are such true portraits, and they are so readily obtainable, and so easily re-produced, that they may well aspire to become absolutely universal. Few, indeed, are the individuals whose personal lineaments are not regarded with especial sympathy by at least a small group of loving friends; and, on the other hand, no less limited is the number of those persons who do not cherish the associations that are best conveyed by means of the portraits of the loved, and esteemed, and honoured. And then we all have a peculiar liking for our own portraits, and we always like them to be liked. So sun-miniatures are certain to prevail. Already they have attained to a position in the front rank of the Art-productions of the day, and, from their present eminent conditiou of popular approval, they are coustantly making still further advances; and they will, in all probability, continue to increase in pnblic esteem so long as they are executed with skill and feeling, and they remain true to the simple fidelity of genuine portraiture. It seems but the other day that Photography itself first appeared amongst us, sent as on a fresh sunbeam, and took its place with the most recent of the Arts; and now we see several distinct classes of photographs, to each of which may be properly assigned the rank of an independent branch of photography. These cartes-de-visite in themselves constitute what we may even entitle an Art. They multiply national portrait galleries ad infinitum. They produce the family portraits of the entire community. They form portrait collections, on a miniature scale, but with an unlimited range and in every possible variety—family collections, collections of the portraits of friends, and of celebrities of every rank and order, both foreign and of our own country. Nobody now needs to inquire what suchor-snch a person may be like, or to be left to such surmises as written descriptions may convey of features and figures that cannot be actually seen. An ubiquitous carte-de-visite can always find its way with certainty and speed, and it is the best of all possible introductions, as it is the most agreeable of reminiscences. When onr friends leave us, they leave with us these precious images which we can always and everywhere carry about with us, to feast our bodily eves with their graphic representations, as memory is able to treasure up and to pass in mental review incidents that the past has taken with it, and words whose echoes have long ago died away. And when fresh connections are formed, or when new links are added to old chains, the ever-available carte-de-visite is ready to make known to us here at home, in proprid persond, a far-away new daughter-in-law, or the number one (or the number whatever-you-please) of another generation. We now look with commingled surprise and scorn at the painful efforts at family portraiture that preceded the photographic era, and which resulted in either pallid libels, brush-prodnced upon ivory, or black paper reductions of shadows in profile, cut out with scissors, and closely allied to architectural sections. These black paper enormities admonish us that but a single step intervened between that first tracing of a much loved shadow on the wall at Corinth, and the almost breathing and sentient portrait of the carte-de-visite. And, let us be duly grateful to him; the same sun that inspired the Greeks with the happy thought of fixing a shadow, now gives us our perfect portraits—portraits that would have turned the very brain of Apelles himself, and which in common justice we ought to have called, not photo, but helio-graphs. And not only in the case of black profiles and feeble miniature “likenesses ” does the carte-de-visite at once effect the most marvellous of revolutions in collections of family portraits, but also in comparison with the highest orders of miniature-pictures the little sun-portraits are well able to maintain their reputation. Thorbnrn gave up his miniatures just at the right time, as if influenced by a prescient impulse that an artist more potent even than himself would soon be at work, executing first-class miniatures for the million, and reproducing them with a corresponding ease and rapidity. Elaborately painted miniatures now are artistic curiosities, few in their numbers, and rather calculated to associate the present with the past, than to convey ideas in conformity with the spirit of an age that looks forward with so ardent a gaze. Very beautiful little objects are those miuiature paintings, when they are really the work of true artists, and they always will be regarded with a loving admiration j but, reversing the process that acclimatises plants, they have grown into exotics, while the cartes-de-visite are favourites that find a congenial soil in every spot, and flourish in every region, multiplying their numbers daily by tens of thousands. In addition to what they accomplish in providing for us all such delightful miuiatures of our families and friends, and of our own selves also, carles-de-visile confer positive blessings in supplying us with faithful and thoroughly artistic portraits of individuals for whom, without iucluding them in the ranks of our personal friends, we eutertain a profound respect and perhaps a warm regard. And the same feeling which invests with their own peculiar charm the portraits of those whose lot in life is cast in close connection with our own, expresses itself with a suitably modified earnestness in reference to the portraits of the honoured, the respected, and the admired. Second only in our esteem to our private portrait collection, is what we distinguish as our collection of portraits of public personages. Here carles-de-visile expatiate in a field that positively knows no limits; and here also they exhibit in the most striking aspect their peculiar faculty of uniformly excellent reproduction. The production and the reproduction and the diffusion of the carte-de-visite portraits of Her Majesty the Queen, and of the various members of the Royal Family, would furnish materials for no ordinary chapter in the history of popular Art. A second series of these truly royal and truly national gems of sun-miniatnre painting has jnst made its appearance, and the new group raises still higher the reputation achieved by Mr. Mayall by means of their predecessors. It would be difficult to form an estimate of the extent to which these beautiful little portraits may be reproduced. Without a doubt they will be required in tens of thousands. They will have to find their way into every quarter of our Sovereign’s wide dominions, and into every city and town, both at home and in the colonies, and into families innumerable. And they must be welcome always, and they must always be regarded as equally excellent both as portraits and as works of Art. These royal cartes-de-visite leave far behind them all other agencies for enshrining onr Sovereign’s person and her family in the homes of her people. They do for everybody, as much as Winterhalter can do for the Prince Consort himself. We do not now insist upon the positive good that results from the universal diffusion of the carte-devisite portraits of the Queen and the Royal Family, but we do cordially congratulate the nation upon possessing such a means for realizing the popular ideal of our Sovereign, and of the Princes and Princesses of England. While thus rendering a well-deserved tribute of admiration to Mayall’s royal series, we are not disposed to forget to assign their own becoming praise to the other portraits of the same exalted personages which have just been executed and published by Mr. Silvy. This able artist has been eminently successful in his royal cartes-de-visite. They are first-rate, both as pictures and as portraits. The portraits of the Princess Royal (we still adhere to the English title of the royal lady, who was born the eldest daughter of Eugland”), the Princess Alice, and the Prince of Wales (the productions of Mr. John Watkins), have not been surpassed. Then there are foreign princes, and men arid women of eminence, together with the distinguished personages who share with ourselves the prized and honoured home of England, whose counterfeit resemblances these same photographic miniatures bring to us from every quarter. Whatever our special taste in Art, or literature, or science, we can select cartes-de-visite which will form for us our owu collection of the portraits of the artists, the authors, or the philosophers whose names to us are as ” household words.” It is the same in politics— a carte-de-visite is equally ready for us, whether we prefer Derby or Palmerston, Lyndhurst or Brougham, and in either case the portrait sets before us the very man. We might multiply examples in every possible department of public life; we might single out our most eminent officers and our ablest civilians—we might select the individuals who signally adorn the professions, whether of the chnrch, the bar, or of medicine, and we might pass on to public favourites of every varied calling; but, without attempting any such detailed illustrations of the versatile capacities of carte-de-visite miniatures, we are content to refer to the personal introductions which these wonderful portraits have effected for us to two individuals only—two men, not Englishmen, but men whom Englishmen delight to honour, the one still living in the fulness of his fame, and the other lamented as well as honoured—Garibaldi and Cavour. The extraordinary popularity of the photographic miniatures we are considering, naturally has produced a very numerous array of professing artists, ready to execute whatever carte de-visite may be required. In London alone mauy hundreds of establishments of this class exist, and the greater number of them flourish; and, in like manner, scarcely a town can be found which does not possess its own resident photographer. It must not be supposed that all these artists by any means approximate to a common standard of excellence in their several works. We are not able to express any opinion relative to very many provincial photographers; but we certainly have seen many cartes-de-visile from the provinces, that are highly creditable to the artists by whom they have been executed. In London there are many photographers of the highest eminence, all of whom produce in vast numbers these ever-attractive miniatures; and the able artists are well diffused over the metropolis, so that there exists no difficulty in finding out an establishment at which even a stranger to London may have his miniature well taken in photography. Cartesde-visite are executed in first-rate style at the Crystal Palace also; and we presume that a strong staff of photographers, with every appliance for their efficient action, will be attached to the Great Exhibition of next year. Even more numerous than the establishments for producing them are those at which carles-de-visite are offered to the public for sale. They enjoy, too, a peculiar reputation, as it would seem, which leads them into a strange association with other objects, with which they would apparently have no kind or degree of sympathy. These photographic miniatures are exhibited and sold by persons whose establishments have no other connection with works of Art. They are in universal request, however, and so everybody thinks that he may quite consistently take a part in providing the requisite supply j and, if these portraits thus often find themselves in unexpected association with objects between which and themselves there can exist uo possible sympathy, still more singular is that association which is apparent in the portraits displayed by cartes-de-vhite, where they stand at the windows in long rows, tier above tier. The windows of the Photographic Institution, adjoioing Bow Church, in the City, for example, afford abundant materials for reflection upon the contingencies of unexpected aggroupment. There, and in many other places also, the most curious contrasts may be drawn, and the most startling combinations effected. Of course all these combinations are purely casual; but it is their casual origin that constitutes their singularity; and, after all, when even the most hurried of passing glances reveals to us fac-simile images of Lord Shaftesbury and Cardinal Wiseman, and of the French Emperor and Sims Reeves side by side, with those of Florence Nightingale and filondin and Professor Owen forming a trio, we are reminded in a manner the most impressive that carte-de-visite miniatures are creations of the present day, portraits of our own actual contemporaries. These photographs are essentially novelties—they belong to the present; with the past, except with so much of it as has been very recently the present, they have uo connection whatever; as we have said, they are contemporary portraits—portraits of the men, and women, and children of the living generation. And the strange composition of many groups of these carte-de-vistte portraits may not inaptly suggest to the originals that they, like their portraits, might take no harm from associations which now they probably would regard with sentiments of aversion and even of horror: indeed, much of mutual benefit might be derived from very many persons coming into contact one with another, who now stand sternly apart; and certainly, very many persons might confer most important benefits, even though they received nothing more than a fresh lesson in experience, through occasional association with both classes and individuals that now are absolutely unknown by them. We cannot take leave, for a time, of these most interesting photographs, without adverting to the skilful manner in which albums and other receptacles for the portraits have been produced. The novelty of the arrangements for introducing the cards, and the felicitous manner in which the portraits are at once displayed and preserved, merit the strongest commendation. These books and cases abound, in every variety of form and size, and style of embellishment. Like the stereoscope, at least one of them must find its way into every family circle; and, without doubt, both the stereoscope and the carlede-visite album will never cease to enjoy the hearty and cordial sympathy of every intelligent individual.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Mr. Mayall’s,” ART JOURNAL ns 1:4 (Apr. 1862): 110. [“…last series of photographic portraits of the Royal Family, published of cartes-de-visite size, is admirable; it includes every member of the family—not excepting that of the lamented Prince Consort, taken not very long prior to his death—with portraits of the Princess Royal and the Crown Prince of Prussia.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Reviews.” ART JOURNAL ns 3:5 (May 1864): 156. [Reviews. ‘Mayall’s New Series of Photographic Portraits of Eminent and Illustrious Persons: Part 1,’ and `Mayall’s Celebrities of the London Stage: Part 1,’ published by Mayor and Son, Soho Square.” These are new candidates, in photographic art, for public favour. It will suffice to say they are the productions of Mr. Mayall to give assurance of their merit. Among the first to adopt photography as a profession, he has been among the best, if not the very best, by whom it has been upheld; and the art is undoubtedly much indebted to him for the universal interest it excites. We cannot fear that his “selection ” of subjects will be other than good; there are few persons, eminent or illustrious, in Great Britain, who will object to sit to him, for all may be certain of ” mercy *’ as well as u justice ” in the transcripts that will be made. He has made a most satisfactory beginning. Part I. contains portraits— about six inches by four—of their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales and Prince Alfred; others of the Royal Family will no doubt follow in due course. The celebrities of the London stage begin with an admirable “carte” of Charles Matthews. Each portrait contains a well and gracefully-written, and sufficiently long, biography.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Photography at the Dublin Exhibition.” ART JOURNAL ns 4:7 (July 1865): 225-226. [“The pictures exhibited by Mr. Mayall illustrate a new and very important phase in the interesting art of photography. In a series of portraits of the fine head of the poet-laureate, Alfred Tennyson, all printed from one negative, and that negative scarcely an inch square, this accomplished photographer demonstrates a completo mastery over a “new solar camera process by which photographs of any dimensions up to the life-size are produced direct without the aid of hand-work,” and it may be added, entirely free from exaggeration or distortion. The series consists of one small impression same size as the negative itself, and seven or eight enlarged prints each one larger than its predecessor, until the full life size is attained. Except for the difference as to size, the portraits appear to be identical—the same expression, the same warmth of tone, and the same sharpness of detail. In the very largest there is no loss of definition;it appears, indeed, to have been printed direct from some magnificent negative of the same dimensions. Enlarged photographs have long been common enough, but they have also looked common enough, and no wonder, for the old enlarging process yielded but a dirty impression, of a rough blanketlike texture, which had to be worked to evenness by the brush. Mr. Mayall appears to have reformed this altogether. The series representing the poet-laureate, and a smaller series from a new negative of Captain Grant (the fellow traveller of the lamented Speke), also exhibited by Mr. Mayall, conclusively prove that a new and valuable process of printing and enlarging is perfectly under command and at the service of the public. The process of printing and magnifying small negatives by direct printing through the medium of gigantic reflectors and condensers, is due to Monekhoven, of Belgium; its successful adaptation to portraiture in England is due to Mr. Mayall and his clever sons.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1865. DUBLIN. DUBLIN INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION.
“The Dublin International Exhibition. Reports of the Juries.” ART JOURNAL ns 4:11 (Nov. 1865): 361. [“The Exhibition has closed. Without being a large financial success, we understand it has been by no means a commercial failure. Indeed, it is understood, and we hope correctly, there will be a “surplus.” That it has done good is certain: it has induced many strangers to visit Ireland. As we have said often, “for every new visitor Ireland obtains a new friend….” “…In photography, medals were awarded to the London Stereoscopic Company, Mr. Ross of Edinburgh, Mr. Rejlander, Messrs. Mawson and Swan, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, Messrs. Locke and Whitfield, Mr. Robinson, Leamington; the Cashel Portrait Company, the Viscountess Jocelyn, the Amateur Photographic Association, the Earl of Caithness, Mr. Vernon Heath, Dr. Hemphill (Clonmel), Dr. Madox, Mr. Bedford, Mr. England, Mr. J. Mudd (Manchester), Mr. Thurston Thompson, Messrs. Breeze (Birmingham), Mr. Joubert, Major Russell, Mr. Bourne, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Blanchard, Mr. Rough, and Mr. Mayall. Mr. Claudet was excluded, as he was one of the jurors—who has written, indeed, the somewhat elaborate and very learned and interesting ‘Report.’….”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Minor Topics of the Month. Life-size Photographic Portraits.” ART JOURNAL ns 7:10 (Oct. 1868): 226. [“Amongst the most remarkable productions of photography it has lately been our good fortune to examine, foremost places must be assigned to two portraits, the one of the Prince of Wales, and the other of Mr. Disraeli, both of them of full life-size, which have just been executed by Mr. Mayall. In the first instance, both portraits were taken from the life of the common carte-de-visite half-length size; and then, by the enlarging process, which in Mr. Mayall’s hands is employed with such masterly ability, from these small originals the life-size portraits were obtained. Several gradations of intermediate sizes have also been produced by the same process, and all are equally excellent. This enlarging process, while capable of being of infinite value, without judicious and skilful treatment is calculated to be productive of the most unsatisfactory results. Mr. Mayall, having long beon convinced of the possibility of enlarging small portraits, without the slightest distortion, and with exact fidelity in every minutest detail, has devoted his special attention to working out the enlarging process; and he has been enabled, by a happy combination of Science with Art, to produce enlarged portraits with the certainty of complete success. Finer examples than the two portraits we have specified of the Heir Apparent and the Premier cannot be desired, as it would not be possible to produce more truthful, expressive, and characteristic portraitures. A slight degree of colour has been added to some copies of these portraits with excellent effect, and, whether with or without colour, they must unquestionably command the greatest popularity. As a curious illustration of the possible fidelity and verisimilitude of the enlarged life-size portraits, we may state that in the case of more than one popular carte-de-visite portrait of a celebrated personage, one original only has been taken from the life; while life-size enlargements of this one original have done duty for the living person, and have been photographed again and again, so that the small negatives thus obtained have supplied the tens of thousands of copies that have been accepted as all being directly from the life. They have all been just as good portraits and just as good photographs as if they had all been from the life—so life-like was the enlarged reproduction of the original from which they all were derived. The attention he has bestowed upon his production of enlarged portraits has not caused Mr. Mayall to slight or neglect other departments of his profession, as a visit to his studios in either London or Brighton will significantly testily. Amongst the most attractive works there to be seen are some truly exquisite examples of carbon printing, the productions of Mr. John Mayall. These pictures, which are distinguished by their extraordinary delicacy and beauty, possess the all-important quality of certain permanence. Mr. Mayall has also some remarkable photographic reproductions of pictures, produced by Mr. Woodbury’s singular, yet most effective and valuable process in tinted gelatine from metal dyes. The great merit and value, and the truly remarkable qualities of this process were first recognised by Mr. Bingham, the eminent English photographer resident in Paris; and by means of his co-operation, Mr. Woodbury has been enabled to bring his process to its present most efficient condition. It will be obvious that the enlarging process will be of great value.”]

PALESTINE EXPLORATION FUND.
“Minor Topics of the Month. The Palestine Exploration Fund.” ART JOURNAL ns 7:10 (Oct. 1868): 226. [“… at length has taken the important step of opening an office at the West-End of London, for the transaction of its business of every kind, and for the reception of all visitors who may desire in person to seek information concerning its proceedings. The office is in a very good situation, at No. 9, Pall Mall East. There the secretary, Mr. Besant, may be found daily, surrounded by the drawings, plans, photographs, printed papers, and other productions of the Exploration Society. We trust that very many of our readers will visit Mr. Besant’s office. Three excellent carte-de-visite portraits of the present chief explorer, Lieutenant Warren, B.E., have just been executed by Mayall, and they are sold at the office for the benefit of the “Fund.” Thoroughly characteristic as likenesses, as pictures these portraits are amongst the most successful productions of the eminent photographer. We observe with much satisfaction that a popular illustrated lecture on the present exploration of Palestine is announced by the authorities of the ” Fund,” full particulars of which may be obtained at the office; it ought to be delivered through the length and breadth of the land in the coming winter and the following spring. We hope soon to hear that the council of the Exploration Society will be prepared to issue, in the form of a small and cheap popular volume, a clear and explicit explanation of their aims and of their proceedings—in a word, that they will publish their own Handbook of Palestine Exploration.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Fine Arts: Crayon Daguerreotypes.” ATHENAEUM no. 1197 (Oct. 5, 1850): 1048-1049. [“Letter from Mayall describing process.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1203 (Nov. 16, 1850): 1193-1194. [“Fine-Art Gossip.-We have seen two specimens by Mr. Mayall of what he calls his “Crayon Daguerreotypes:” the process of effecting which he described in our columns [ante, p. 1048]. The specimens do not differ in the rendering of the features or the figure from the many excellent examples of this art which Mr. Mayall has previously produced….”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1206 (Dec. 7, 1850): 1286. [“Review of a `devotional subject’ by Mayall – discusses it favorably in comparison to PreRaphaelite paintings.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Photography on Glass.” ATHENAEUM no. 1220 (Mar. 15, 1851): 304-305. [“We have had before us some results of a new process by which photographic negatives are taken on glass-to be afterwards transferred to paper, by means of a lens, on an increased scale,-that transcend everything of the kind which the art has yet produced….” (Commentary, plus a letter from Mayall. Further note in “Athenaeum” no. 1221, (Mar. 22, 1851): 330, that Mayall insists that M. Martens of Paris was discoverer of egg albumen process.)]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Photography – Glazing the Positive Proof.” ATHENAEUM no. 1225 (Apr. 19, 1851): 434.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Enamelled Daguerreotypes.” ATHENAEUM no. 1234 (June 21, 1851): 664.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine Arts Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1249 (Oct. 4, 1851): 1051. [(Note about Mayall’s photographing the Crystal Palace with daguerreotypes and his intent to produce calotype copies.) “Crystal palace which will convey to future generations most lively impressions of its picturesque aspects and marvellous details, a series of daguerreotypes-on what we believe to be an unprecedentedly large scale-taken from the most striking points of the Exhibition,-on which Mr. Mayall, the American photographist, has been for some time engaged,-will hold a conspicuous place….”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine-Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1295 (Aug. 21, 1852): 900. [“Mayall took an outdoor group portrait of the Kew Committee of the Council of the British Association, while they were observing a balloon ascension.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine-Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1335 (May 28, 1853): 657. [“Mayall’s device for smoothing out contrast in portraiture sittings discussed.”]

EXHIBITIONS: 1854: LONDON: PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Photographic Society.” ATHENAEUM no. 1367 (Jan. 7, 1854): 23. [“This Society, which was formed during the early part of last year, has opened its first Exhibition to the public at the Gallery of the Society of British Artists, in Suffolk Street….” (Review of the first exhibition, held at Gallery of the Society of British Artists. Llewelyn, Rosling, W. J. Newton, Viscount Vigier, Stewart, Fenton, Henna, Henneman, C. T. Thompson, Nevill Sisters, Count de Montizon, Dr. Diamond, Delves, Rev. Kingsley, Rev. J. B. Reade, Mayall, Claudet mentioned.)]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Note.” ATHENAEUM no. 1395 (July 22, 1854): 913. [“Brief note of the equipment necessary for Mayall to make life sized portraits. Article mentions that Mayall had an exhibition at the Polytechnic Institute”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Note.” ATHENAEUM no. 1420 (Jan. 13, 1855): 55. [“Mayall delivering a lecture on albumen on glass stereo views to the Photographic Society.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Note.” ATHENAEUM no. 1424 (Feb. 10, 1855): 177. [“Mayall working with a process to secure enlarged collodion copies from the daguerreotypes”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Letter.” ATHENAEUM no. 1424 (Feb. 10, 1855): 240. [“Letter from Mr. Thornton, disputing Mayall’s priority to the collodion process. Mayall’s reply is printed in the March 3, 1855 issue on p. 272″]

EXHIBITIONS. 1856. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“The Photographic Society.” ATHENAEUM no. 1473 (Jan. 19, 1856): 78-79. [“Mr. Mayall stands supreme in portraits, and is unrivalled for breadth, manner and finish. Either from the character of his sitters or the taste of his composition his portraits appear more dignified, self-possessed and aristocratic than those of any other photographer. His likenesses of Sir George Grey, Lord Aberdeen and Sir C. Lewis are particularly admirable (Nos. 371, 372, 373…” (Mayall, Cundall, Rejlander, Diamond, B. Smith mentioned.)]

BY COUNTRY: GREAT BRITAIN: 1857.
“Fine-Art Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1525 (Jan. 17, 1857): 87. [“…have agreed to admit sun-pictures into the coming Exhibition of Art treasures in that city. They have also very wisely given up the arrangement of the photographic department to an eminent photographer, Mr. Philip DelaMotte, as they have yielded the care of old pictures to Mr. Scharf….”, (Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition to display photography, that department under the direction of Philip DelaMotte. Mayall’s work with miniature portraits praised.)]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Our Weekly Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1712 (Aug. 18, 1860): 230. [“Mr. Mayall has put together, in a ‘Royal Album,’ the series of royal photographic portraits made by him from time to time at Buckingham Palace. These exquisite studies from the real life are fourteen in number:…”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Our Weekly Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1758 (July 6, 1861): 21. [Mayall portraits mentioned.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Our Weekly Gossip.” ATHENAEUM no. 1791 (Feb. 22, 1862): 262. [Mr. Tallis, of the “Illustrated News of the World,” went bankrupt April 1861. He was holding a number of Mayall’s portraits for publication. These were sold, as was Tallis’s other assets, at auction. The purchaser issued copies of the prints under his own name. Mayall sued, and won his case. More information on p. 634.]

MAGAZINES. GREAT BRITAIN. 1858.
“The Byways of Literature. Reading for the Million.” BLACKWOOD’S EDINBURGH MAGAZINE 84:514 (Aug. 1858): 200-216. [“…Fame has fled out of those refined circles where everybody professes criticism—fled to take refuge underground, and to bestow itself upon heroes unknown to you; for alas! human nature is narrow-minded, and sees nothing which is not immediately under its own observation. We, for our own part, had supposed ourselves aware of the names at least of all the English lights of literature—but our recent investigations have undeceived us. Here is one personage, for instance, whom rival publications vie for the possession of, and whom the happy successful competitor advertises with all the glow and effusion of conscious triumph,—J. F.; nay? let us be particular, —John Frederick Smith, Esq. This gentleman is a great author, though nobody (who is anybody) ever was aware of it. We have no doubt that nothing but a conspiracy of spiteful critics could have kept his name so long veiled under this envious obscurity. He is “the author of’ Dick Tarleton,’ ‘Phases of Life,’ ‘The Soldier of Fortune,’ ‘The Young Pretender,'” &c.; yet we protest we never read a word of his writings, nor heard a whisper of his existence, until we spread put our sixpenny budget of light literature upon the June daisies. What matter if his portrait, from a photograph by Mayall, may be had in those regions where his sway is acknowledged; and the everybody, who is nobody, bestows upon him that deep-rolling subterraneous universal applause which is fame….” p. 211. “…The million, however, has also its virtuous penny papers, which are so much better printed, better got up, and even, in their way, better written, than their neighbours, that we fear they are rather intended for the well-behaved boys and girls of “genteel” households, glad of the pictures, and not very particular about the literature, than for the classes which they profess to address. The multitude also has, like other people, its prigs and bores—monitors so severely instructive, and ignoring so entirely that principle which makes the life and popularity of the others, that their very existence is a wonder —a short-lived wonder, we apprehend. One of these lies before us now—a small but most pretentious pennyworth, top-heavy with the weight of its title, which is distinctly too great a burden for the little craft to cany. This is “The Public Instructor, Literary Review, and Household Oracle, edited by Professor Wallace, M.A., Collegiate Tutor of the University of London, late editor of the Popular Educator, and Author of many Scientific Works, &c.” This production is only in its third number, so that the miracle of its existence is not, after all, so marvellous as we supposed at the first glance: had it lived to see thirty, we should indeed have been astonished; and it illustrates very well one of the usual mistakes of that most limited and superficial class, the mere technical men of science, who abound in these days. Sugared with an Eastern tale after the manner of Rasselas, this pill of virtue is compounded of articles upon photography, specific gravity, astronomy, chronology, and the radical theory of chemistry — delightfully attractive subjects, calculated to foster quite a little colony of prigs among the mechanics’ institutes, where the soil is highly favourable to that interesting development of human nature. This, we suppose, is the legitimate successor of the Penny Cyclopaedia, as the Family Herald is the unlawful universal-suffrage usurper of the place of that obsolete representative of literature; and we may well wonder at the strange want of perception,— strange, though it is the very fanatics of progress who are guilty of it, as the blindness of any Bourbon or Stuart….” p. 212.]

[Note: BJP has not been completely indexed.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Editorial Note.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 7:119 (June 1, 1860): 157. [Mention that Mayall was asked to photograph Queen Victoria and Prince Albert on May 17th. Brief description of the work.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “On the Construction of a Photographic Glass Room.” BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY 12:293 (Dec. 15, 1865): 632-633. 1 illus.

MAYALL, J. E. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Chronicle of Facts and Opinions. Art in Foreign States. Improvements in Photography.” BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN ART-UNION 3:8 (Nov. 1850): 140. [“We find the following letter in a late number of the Athenaeum:– I beg through your valuable columns, to make known to daguerreotype artists and amateurs the following process.—entitled, as above, Crayon Daguerreotypes. I do this the more willingly from the fact that an attempt in making to patent for producing a similar effect,–and I am a decided enemy to patenting anything in connection with so interesting a discovery, I hope this communication will set the matter to rest. 1st. Take a daguerreotype image on a prepared plate as usual, taking care to mark the end of the plate on which the head is produced. When taken, and before mercurializing, remove the plate from the holder, and place on it a plate of glass prepared as follows. 2d. Cut a piece of thin plate glass of the same size as the daguerreotype plate, gum upon one side of it a thin oval piece of blackened zinc, the centre of the oval to coincide with the centre of the image upon the plate. Having carefully placed the glass thus prepared with the centre of the zinc disk upon the centre of the image, expose the whole to daylight for twenty seconds. The action of light will obliterate every trace of the image from every part of the plate, except that which is covered by the blackened zinc, and also from the thickness of the glass the action will be refracted under the edges of the zinc disk and will soften into the dark parts. Mercurialize the plate as usual; the image will be found with a halo of light around it gradually softening into the back-ground, that will at once add a new charm to these interesting productions. By grinding the glass on which the disc is fixed, and by altering the shape and size of the disc, a variety of effects may be produced which every ingenious operator can suggest for himself. I am, &c. J. E. Mayall.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1851.
“Architecture and Photography.” BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN ART-UNION no. 8 (Nov. 1, 1851): 134. [“To architectural students the art of Photography will be invaluable, particularly since the use of glass plates in connection with it has been invented, A negative picture is taken upon these, from which any number of positive impressions, may be obtained at a cheaper rate than even lithographs or wood-cuts, and infinitely more valuable. No artist can attain in his copy the accuracy of these representations, The large lenses now are so perfectly constructed that there is no appreciable distortion to the pictures, and measurements may be made as exactly from them as from the original building. A Monsieur Eugene Piot is publishing a series of sun-pictures called “Photographic d’ Italia Monumentale,” the first number of which cantains six transcripts from the Campo Santo at Pisa, and the Duomo at Florence, “with a precision of detail and elegance of style,” says a foreign journal, “that would create no little astonishment in the respective authors of these edifices could they revisit the glimpses of the moon.’ We saw two or three works lately brought by a friend from Paris, which, we presume, were a part at this series. They exhibit certain ruins at Rome, and were marvels of delicate and faithful delineation. Accompanying them was a photograph of the Greek Slave most exquisitely finished. The time will soon arrive when we, on this side of the Atlantic, can slt in our drawing-rooms and see displayed upon our centre-tables the collected images of all the great European wonders in architecture and the plastic art. We may mention in this connection that Mr. Mayalt, the American photographist in London, has been for some time engaged taking a series of daguerreotypes from the most striking points of the Great Exhibition. The Athenaeum says, “we can scarcely do justice in words to the charm of their precision in drawing and the Illusion of their perspective.” It Is Mr. Mayall’s intention to reproduce them by means of the glass process we have mentioned above, so as to give them to the world on paper.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1867. PARIS. FRENCH INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION.
“Miscellany: Photography at the Paris Exhibition.” CATHOLIC WORLD 5:30 (Sept. 1867): 858-859. [From the Popular Science Review. “On the whole, the art-science of photography plays its part well at the great French International Exhibition, and in the collective displays of various nations we find its numerous and diverse applications, improvements, and modifications fairly represented. The Austrian collection is a very attractive one, and contains some of the very best specimens of photo-lithography yet produced; its specimens of portraiture from life-size down-ward are of a very excellent character, and, like those of France, Prussia, and Russia, are decidedly superior to the English. In the Darmstadt contributions are some interesting specimens by Dr. Reissiz, exhibited to illustrate his theory of photogenic action. In the Prussian department a large portrait lens attracts attention; it is fourteen inches in diameter, and covers a square of thirty inches. The French department contains some interesting specimens of photographic engraving process, of enameled photographs, and of enlargements from microscopical photographs, amongst which is one of a flea enlarged to the size of a small pig. Amongst the novelties and applications of photography to decorative art are photographs of a singular character, illustrative of a new process called “Chrysoplasty.” They represent goldsmiths’ work, ancient armor, draperies embroidered with gold and silver, bronze statuary, philosophic instruments, etc., and are apparently in the same metals as the originals. This process is a secret one, but the inventor, Mr. Boeringer, is prepared to produce such photographs from any negatives which may be sent to him for that purpose. He is at present making a large collection of specimens from antique curiosities and works of art in metal dispersed in the public and private museums of various nations, and with this end in view appeals to the owners and guardians of such collections, and those who have negatives of the required description, to render him assistance. In photographic portraiture, by universal consent, the French stand prominently foremost, so much so that, as The Times says,’ amongst those articles which are specially called articles de Paris, a good photographic portrait is now to be placed.” In the English department we miss most of our foremost photographers, amongst them Mr. O. G. Reglandes [sic Rejlander] Mr. T. R. Williams, and but too many others. Mr. Mayall, M. Claudet, Lock and Whitfield, Ross, and other of our chief portraitists exhibit largely, but all show but weak and mean when contrasted with their rival portraitists as represented in the French collection. As landscapists English photographers, like English painters, carry off the palm. Why landscapes by English operators so far sur pass others we cannot explain, but no one with any artistic taste or judgment would hesitate to attribute the superiority of the French portraits purely and simply to a more refined taste and greater knowledge of pictorial science in their producers. The English photographs display little merit beyond such as belongs exclusively to the skilful management of good tools, while the French photographers are evidently, as a rule, artists studying such things as lighting, posing and arranging, exposing and developing with considerable artistic knowledge and preconceived design, the former with a view to putting a picture before the lens, and the latter with a view to its faithful reproduction in the operating room. Two of the great secrets of their greater success will, we believe, be found to reside in the much longer exposures they give their plates in the camera, and in the use of a developer not so rapid in its action as to escape control during development. The great cry in England has been for short exposures and powerful developers, things which war against the subtle delicacies of gradations from light to dark, and from darks into reflected lights, which constitute one of the most special and striking peculiarities of the best French portraits. Refer back to past volumes of the English photographic journals, and this craving for extraordinary rapidity coupled with frequent mention of the extraordinary long exposures given on the continent, where the light is more powerful and the atmosphere more pure, will be found. You will also perceive that, while articles tending directly and indirectly to give mechanical manipulation and good tools all the credit of increased success crowd their pages to a wearying degree of sameness and repetition, papers of a truly art-educational character are extremely rare, in consequence, we have been informed, of the little real appreciation they meet with from English photographic students. Hence probably the inartistic and tasteless character displayed by their photographs when contrasted with those of our more artistic and tasteful neighbors.” From Popular Science Review.]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Things Talked of in London.” CHAMBERS’S EDINBURGH JOURNAL ns 500 (July 30, 1853): 78-80. [“Our usual stream of talk-science, sociology, and literature-has of late been swollen by rumours of wars; and whether the nations are to go on snarling at one another’s heels without ulterior consequences, becomes matter for grave consideration, especially for timid people who do business in the money-market. With this exception, matters are following their ordinary course; and those who come to town, for business or pleasure, find enough of either to satisfy the keenest appetite….” p. 78. “…There is something new in daguerreotypy: it is the invention of Mr. Mayall, and is intended to produce crayon effects in sun-painted pictures. The contrivance resembles a fire-screen, the disk of which is adjustable to any height. From the centre of this disk a portion is cut away, leaving an opening in the form of a twelve-rayed star, sufficiently large to admit of the light passing through to a portrait. By means of a clock-work arrangement, the disk, with its star, is kept slowly revolving ¡ and when placed between the sitter and the camera, it repeatedly intercepts all the rays passing through, except those in the centre, which are intended to be the strongest. The effect is, that the tints of the picture are gradually softened off, instead of being, as at present, equally intense all over; and portraits are obtained, in which the severity so often complained of is nearly if not quite overcome. Being made to suit every kind of camera, this apparatus will be acceptable alike to amateurs and professional artists, and it is one of those improvements which prepare the way for others….” p. 79.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901)
“Improvements in Photography.” CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL OF POPULAR LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ARTS s. 3 2:35 (Sept. 2, 1854): 160. [“At a conversazione at the Polytechnic Institution, a curious illustration was given of the capabilities of photography in experienced hands. Two photographs were exhibited—one the largest, and the other the smallest tm produced by the process. The first was a portrait the full size of life; and the last was a copy of the front sheet of the Times, on a surface scarcely exceeding two inches by three. Both pictures were exceedingly perfect, the portrait being more pleasing and for more correct than those usually produced; while the copy, notwithstanding its exceeding minuteness, could be read without the assistance of a magnifying-glass. The photographs were exhibited by Mr. Mayall, the well-known artist of Argyll Place, Regent Street, and excited considerable interest during the evening.—Times.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1855.
“The Month: Science and Arts.” CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL OF POPULAR LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ARTS s. 3 3:60 (Feb. 24, 1855): 124-126. [“The session at the Royal Institution was opened, as usual, by Mr. Faraday with a lecture elucidating still more the science of electricity and magnetism-a branch of natural philosophy which he has investigated for many years with signal success, as demonstrated by his brilliant discoveries. The chief point put forward on this occasion was, that the theories of force-of gravitation-generally accepted since the days of Newton, will erelong have to undergo great and material modifications…” p. 124. “…The Photographic Society’s Exhibition, now open near Trafalgar Square, is the best that has yet been seen in this country, and worthily does it sustain the reputation of British photographers. Whole pages of description would be required to do justice to it; but we can notice only a few of the more prominent subjects. Among these are portraits, life-size, without distortion; highly magnified images of insect structure, as shewn by the oxy-hydrogen microscope; similar images of botanical specimens, valuable for permanent reference, and for educational purposes; stereoscopic pictures on glass, of wonderful beauty; images of clouds, shewing remarkable improvement in that difficult branch of the art; and, last, Mr. Fenton’s landscapes—views in Wharfdate—which are a real triumph of photography. To exceed the fidelity and beauty with which the distances are represented, and the aerial perspective preserved, would seem to be scarcely possible. Our photographers will be able to take honourable rank in the forthcoming Exhibition at Paris. The value of albumenised glass is more and more recognised. Mr. Mayall shews that the best albumen for practical purposes is that of hen’s eggs. It is easily procurable; but the eggs should be fresh, not more than five days old; and country eggs are preferable to those laid in towns. Here are hints which amateurs will do well to profit by- Mr. Vogel, writing from Venice, suggests that by communicating a steady tone to a glass-plate, it might be possible to print photographically the figure of sound. Mr. Gardiner, governor of Bristol jail, continues his photographs of culprits; and has devised a process by which he can take an instantaneous likeness unknown to his captive, and with good service to the cause of justice. A man, for instance, is sent in, whom the governor suspects to be an old offender; he takes his portrait, sends a copy to the other jails of the district, and in most cases gets such particulars in return as enables him to award the proper measure of punishment. If this practice were generally adopted, we should in time get the ‘true effigies’ of our whole criminal population, and might find the result to be a check on crime….” p. 125.]

EXHIBITION. 1855. PARIS.
“The Month: Science and Arts.” CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL OF POPULAR LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ARTS s. 3 3:78 (June 30, 1855): 413-416. [“The season has got into its soirees, and our learned societies, and patrons of science, and promoters of dilettantism, are holding their annual gatherings with the customary appliances. But every one remarks a certain indefinable something about these assemblages which deprives them, more or less, of their former attractiveness, and makes attendance at them too much of a task…” p. 413. “…Mr. Greenough, whose decease we noticed last month, has left a small legacy to the Geographical and Geological Societies, out of his great fortune of L.180,000; besides his maps and books, to be divided between them. Sir Roderick Murchison has accepted the post offered to him, and is now installed as Director-general of the Geological Survey. This appointment gives general satisfaction, as Sir Roderick, besides being the greatest English geologist living, is personally much liked, and sure to assort agreeably with the other officers. To let our Allies see what photographers can do under an English sky, Mr. Claudet has prepared a combination of stereoscopes, mounted on an elaborately carved stand, for the Palais de l’Industrie at Paris. Some of the pictures are exquisitely finished, and are so mounted as to rotate and present a continuous series to the eye. Mayall, too, has sent a number of portraits, which are admirable specimens of the art: one among them, of a lady, life-size, is of rare beauty—a satisfactory proof that a photographic likeness is not necessarily a distorted one. Apropos of the French Exposition, working-men who wish to visit it, are to be furnished with passports free of cost, as announced in a circular issued from the Home-Office. If nothing else, our artisans may gain a few instructive ideas as to the way in which a city should be beautified. Dr. Hofmann, of the Royal College of Chemistry, is appointed assayer to the Mint—another recognition of the claims of science; and there is now a prospect that the right men will be forthcoming for the right places, as a Commission has been named by an order in Council to examine candidates for the civil service….” p. 414.]

MAYALL.
“The Month: Science and Arts.” CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL OF POPULAR LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ARTS s. 3 7:165 (Feb. 28, 1857): 141-143. [“The first month of the new year has been marked by a fair amount of activity: publishers of good books say they ‘mustn’t complain;’ philosophers are all but unanimous in thinking they have made a good start; and artists are worked up to different degrees of enthusiasm by the exhibition-at last-of some of Turner’s pictures in Marlborough House, and by the fact, that government is building a gallery to receive the valuable collection of paintings offered to the nation by Mr. Sheepshanks…” p. 141. “…Mr Mayall’s new material for photographic pictures, noticed some time ago, appears now to be improved to as near perfection as may well be. The glare of a metallic plate is objectionable in photography, and paper, though free from glare, is also objectionable from its absorption of the middle tints, owing to its fibrous nature. By a combination of sulphate of barytes with albumen, Mr. Mayall produces a substance resembling ivory, which gives the surface required, and capability of finish. On this, middle tints and distances come out in perfection, and a portrait can be made ready in a couple of days. The progress made in photography during the past twelvemonth may be seen to admiration in the Photographic Society’s Exhibition now open in Pall Mall….” p. 143.]

MAYALL, J. E.
Mayall, J. E. “Albumen Process on Glass. CHEMIST: A MONTHLY JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL SCIENCE n. s. 2:18 (Mar. 1855): 361-366. [(From Journal of the Photographic Society.) “After describing the sources and properties of albumen, the author goes on to detail the mode of preparation for photographic purposes. “We speak of its two conditions, soluble or uncoagvlated albumen, or coagulated albumen. Animal albumen of the soluble kind may be obtained in a solid form by evaporating at a temperature below 120 degrees; it is then a dry, yellowish, horny and brittle mass. This can be powdered, and treated successively with aether and alcohol, which free it from fat, salts, and other foreign matter, until we obtain it pure. When thus completely dry it is without taste or odor, and has neither acid nor alkaline reaction. In the dry state it may be heated even to the temperature of boiling water, without passing into the insoluble coagulated form. Moistened with water, it swells up, becomes transparent, and by the addition of more water it dissolves into a colorless, tasteless fluid. If this solution be heated to a temperature ot 140°, it passes into the coagulated form. Less concentrated solutions require a heat of 160°, and very dilute solutions even boiling before the albumen will coagulate. Albumen is insoluble in alcohol and aether. It is soluble to a certain extent in distilled water, but much more easily in water that contains an alkaline salt or chloride of sodium. Mulder has given great attention to its analysis. His most recent investigation gives:—
Carbon .           53.5
Hydrogen           7.0
Nitrogen           15.5
Oxygen             22.5
Sulphur.            1.6
Phosphorus       0.4
.                 100.0 parts.
Albumen easily putrefies in the moist state, by the action of the atmospheric agents, for which reason it requires to be used immedidiately after it is mixed with the chemicals; in winter, the time may bo prolonged to forty-eight hours, but in summer not longer than six hours. The greater number of the metallic salts precipitate albumen,* (*Lehmann, vol. i., p. 332, Cavendish Society’s Edition.) the precipitate containing either a combination of a basic s<*lt with albumen, or a mixture of two compounds, one of which consists of the acid of the salt and albumen, and the other of the base of the salt and albumen. The albumen generally passes into the insoluble form. The precipitated and washed albumen when dissolved in 1—400th of caustic potash, and digested for one hour at a temperature of 160″, converts the sulphur and phosphorus into a phosphate and sulphide. The filtered solution, if now treated with acetic acid in slight excess, yields a gelatinous precipitate of protein, which Mulder, its discoverer, designates as the basis of albumen,, fibrin, and casein. For the object of this inquiry it is sufficient to know, that albumen cannot exist in the soluble state in the absence of mineral constituents; that a slight alkaline reaction is the best condition for photographic operations. The phosphorus which it contains is a most important element of success, while the sulphur does not appear to have any prejudicial effect on the subsequent process with the aceto-nitrate of silver. The ernest inquirer is referred to Lehmann’s ” Physiological Chemistry,” published by the Cavendish Society; article Albumen, vol. i., p. 330; and Fluids of Egg, vol. ii. p. 353; a work that ought to be carefully studied by every chemist who desires to obtain accurate and recent information on thia important subject. I need not add, that the utmost care is demanded of the experimentalist ; without this, his labors result in a loss of time aud trouble, besides being a detriment to science. Crude experiments should, as far as possible, be denounced and discarded by the members of the Photographic Society. They serve only to retard progress, and, as Lehmann says, ” It were better for the cause of science had it never been weighed down by the unprofitable and crude burden of these analyses.” The albumen of the hen’s egg is the easiest of access. The eggs must be fresh, not more than five days old. They ought to be kept in a cool place. Those from the country are better than town-laid eggs, and I advise, where practicable, that the hens should have carbonate and phosphate of lime strewn about for them to peck at. This enriches the albumen and renders it more limpid. Each egg must be broken separately into a shallow cup, and the yelk retained in the shell as well as the genu; then pour into a measure until the required quantity of limpid albumen is obtained. To M. Niepce de St.-Victor we are indebted for the first application of albumen to photography. In the latter part of 1848 I first saw an imperfect impression of some chimney-pots, at Cha. Chevallier’s, optician, Paris ; he could not, or would not, tell me how it was done. It was sufficient to know that the thing was possible, to attempt it again. I shall in this paper confine myself to the negative process, merely remarking, that the only difference between the negative and the positive process consists in substituting the chloride of sodium for the bromide of potassium.
1st.—Cleaning the Glass. New patent plate-glass is the best. Get into the habit of placing the face-side towards the wall, and into the boxes with the face towards the left hand. Solution:—
Alcohol …. 30 grms.
Strong liquid ammonia . 10 grms
Water …. 40 grms
Tripoli …. 30 grms
Shake up to mix.
Tie up three pieces of clean cotton wool in round balls, each about the size of a small hen’s-egg; then fix the glass firmly in a wooden screw-vice perfectly flat; with a piece of cotton and the above solution rub hard and evenly the surface of the glass, in a similar manner as for daguerreotype plates; then more gently; rear it up to dry. Take another glass, which rub in the same manner, and so on for twelve dozen. Change the ends to dry the upper edge of the glass. When dry, wipe the edges well with auother ball of cotton, without touching the surface, as also the back slightly, to free it from dust. Rub off the surface with a clean ball of cotton, firmly at first, then softly and evenly; then, with a clean hog’s-hair brush, dust the back and edges, and put the glass into a dry clean box, face towards the left hand. My boxes hold fifty plates each. They must be albuminised the same day; if left, it will be necessary to clean them again. This plan of cleaning is both for negative and positive glass.
2nd.—Spreading the Albumen for twelve dozen Plates.
450 fluid grammes of albumen.
7 ½ fluid grammes sat. sol. iodide of potassium.
1 ½ fluid grammes sat. sol. bromide of potassium.
1 drop of solution of caustic potash.
1 gramme of water.
The iodide and bromide of potassium ought to be each a saturated solution in distilled water, at a temperature of 60°, and weighed in a cup carefully balanced. The utmost care is necessary to observe these proportions ; if too much of the salts is used, they crystallise in the albumen and make spots; the drop of caustic potash renders the albumen more limpid ; pour the above ingredients into a wide-mouthed and rather large bottle (say half-gallon), shake up until the bottle is completely filled with white foam. This will take ten minutes. Let it stand six hours in a cool place; then pour off the clear albumen into a tall glass measure that does not taper towards the bottom, but rather, like a decanting vessel, broader at the bottom, to allow any particles of genu to fall down and not stick to the sides. The solution should be poured into this vessel one hour before it is required. It is now necessary to avoid most carefully any air-blebs, or the formation of any, in the act of spreading, as these deteriorate the impression by making streaks; these are caused by the partial drying and decomposition of the chemicals in the albumen. I have found the following the most effectual way to avoid the above fault. I have a glass funnel with a long beak that just reaches to the bottom of my glass pint-measure, upon which funnel I place a flat plate of glass turned up at the edges, with a hole in the centre ; the whole is lined with moistened muslin, so that when the albumen falls on to the glass dish, in the act of pouring, it glides gently down into the measure placed under. The funnel is supported by a convenient wooden stand, termed in the laboratory a filter support. I place a wet sponge, also covered with clean muslin, on a table near at hand, between the above arrangement and the drying-box. Let us suppose then that the dish is ready, the drying-box placed perfectly level, the plates of glass all clean, a soft flat camel’s-hair brush well dried and at hand. I take a glass, balanced on the tips of the fingers of the left hand, brush off the dust, and from the measure of albumen pour on to the surface sufficient to well cover the plate; keep it as level as possible, then suddenly turn it down on its edge, to allow the excess of albumen to run into the glass dish; wipe it carefully eight seconds on the edge of the muslin, then eight seconds on the sponge cushion, and place it in the drying-box. A few trials will give the exact moment necessary to allow sufficient albumen to remain on the surface; if too much remains, the plate will be streaked and uneven ; if too little, the proof will be thin and weak ; continue this spreading till the drying-box is full. The French albumen dryingboxes are the only ones I can use, and I therefore recommend them. Try each board with a spirit level. The plates will be perfectly dry in three days; put them into boxes where they will keep, in a dry place, for any length of time, though it is best not to prepare more than one month beforehand ; four dozen plates can be coated in an hour.
3rd.—To Iodize the Plates.
As before stated, an alkaline reaction is the best condition for spreading the albumen, as it renders it more limpid; but this alkalinity is detrimental to the silvering process (an acid reaction now being of equal importance).. The plates will now have to be passed over the vapor of iodine, just like a daguerreotype plate, to completely saturate the alkaline reaction; this will take from two to four minutes, according to the temiierature: the albumen surface ought to have a yellow tinge, by the vapor of iodine; this operation ought to be done a few hours before silvering.
Silvering the Plates
1500 grammes of water.
150 grammes nitrate of silver.
150 grammes glacial acetic acid.
Filter: use gutta percha baths as for collodion. I use two baths and a bath of distilled water, and so arrange the dipping that each plate remains in the bath one minute and a half; then put each plate in succession into the bath of distilled water; then wash the back with common water and the face with distilled; rear up to dry in a place free from dust. This operation is quite mechanical, and much easier to do than to describe. At first the operator is afraid to run sufficient water on the plate to wash it, but he need have no fear, as the iodo-bromide of silver is precipitated into substance of albumen, and cannot be washed out. The washing serves to make the operation more certain. Renew the silver bath as follows:—For every 100 plates add 30 grammes of nitrate of silver, 20 grammes of glacial acetic acid, and water to make up the original quantity.
To Prepare the Plates for the Camera.
Pass them over the vapor of iodine half a minute, previous to placing them in the camera slide; expose in the camera from thirty seconds to ten minutes, according to the intensity of the light, the color of the object, and the aperture of the camera; if required to be very quick the plate should be plunged into a dilute bath of gallic acid—1 of acid to 10 of water. This last suggestion is made for plates to be used immediately.
4th.—To Develope the Latent Image.
” B.” A saturated solution of gallic acid.   
“C.” 400 grammes of water.
  30 grammes nitrate of silver.
80 grammes acetic acid.A pint bottle filled with 3 parts of gallic acid solution and 1 part water ; pour into a dish kept expressly for this purpose about half an inch of liquid in deprh, drop into it 8 drops of solution ” C,” shake up; then run distilled water on to the plate from the camera, and plunge it into the gallic acid as above prepared; shake it about, fill the dish with plates, and continue to shake up, and add every hour 8 to 20 drops of solution “C,” until the image is fully developed: the operation may be continued with safety for three days if necessary, though it is l>est to complete the developing in twelve to sixteen hours. Wash well with water, rear up to dry. Another and quicker method of developing is with the pyrogallic acid.
300 grammes of water.
1 grammes of pyrogallic acid.
5 grammes of glacial acetic acid.
1 gramme of formic acid.
The plates will develope in half an hour in this solution, and in warm weather in less time; but I find the half-tone3 arj not so well preserved as in the slow process.
5th. —Fixing.
100 water.
10 hyposulphite of soda.
Continue the fixing till all the yellow iodide disappears ; wash well —dry—it is finished. The hyposulphite solution should be kept entirely apart from the albuminising; in fact, it should not be in the same room. The positive plates are prepared in the same way, only substituting chloride of sodium for the bromide of potassium. The exposure by superposition ought to be in north light ten seconds to one minute and a half, according to the intensity of the negative proof. I find collodion negatives print much quicker than albumen negatives ; collodion is more transparent. I recommend the glass to be an inch larger each way than the desired view, to allow for marginal error. Also, always, if possible, to use new glass, as I find that which has been already used is uncertain. I have taken 100 plates, prepared as above directed, without having a single failure. In fact, each jilate receives precisely the same treatment, and if the directions are strictly followed failure is almost impossible. Should the operator be compelled to use his glasses over again, I recommend that the albumen surface be washed off with caustic potash, and a scratch made with a diamond on the albumen side, so as to use the other; then wash the glass plates with common water, then with nitric acid and cotton, then much water again, then warm water, and rear up to dry, after which, clean as for new glass. The solutions must be carefully corked up to avoid evaporation, the gallic acid bottles kept full, the room free from dust, and dark thick yellow curtains to avoid the actinic rays. The plates will keep excited for fourteen days, and may be developed six days after the view is taken, which, to many photographers, may be an advantage. Never allow any sulphur matches to be lighted in the albumenroom ; avoid vulcanized india-rubber rings, the sulphur from which produces spots; wash the developing dishes every time they are used with nitric acid, and much water afterwards; wash the silver baths with distilled water, and then turn them upside down to avoid dust. I recommend French weights and measures : the gramme weight is 15.43 grains (nearly 15 ½ ), the fluid ounce is equal to 31 grammes.”]

MAYALL, J. E.
Mayall, J. E. “Photography on Dry Collodion.” CHEMIST: A MONTHLY JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL SCIENCE n. s. 2:20 (May 1855): 566-567. [(From the Athenaeum.) “I subjoin a new process, which I have just completed, for using collodion dry. The subject may not be uninteresting to your scientific readers. The usual plain collodion is excited with
(No. 1.) 3 grains iodide of cadmium,
1 grain chloride of zinc,
1 ounce collodion,
1 ounce alcohol.
Dissolve the chemicals in the alcohol, and then mix with the collodion: or,
(No. 2.) 3 grains iodide of zinc,
1 grain bromide of cadmium : or,
(No. 3.) 2 grains iodide of cadmium,
1 grain bromide of cadmium,
1-60th grain bromide of iron,
1-20th grain bromide of calcium.
In the last it will be necessary to dissolve one grain of bromide of iron in one drachm of alcohol, and use one fluid grain of the solution. Similarly, three grains of bromide of calcium must be dissolved in one drachm of alcohol, and use one fluid grain. The excited collodion will require to stand a few days to completely settle. Decant in a dry bottle to avoid sediment. Spread as usual.
Bath of Albuminate of Silver.
16 ounces distilled water,
1 ounce albumen,
14 ounce nitrate of silver (neutral),
1 ½ ounce glacial acetic acid,
2 grains iodide of potassium.
The albumen and water must be well mixed first, then the glacial acetic acid added; shake up and stand three hours, add the nitrate of silver in crystals, shake and filter, stand 24 hours, then add the iodide of potassium, filter again ready for use. Coat the plate as usual with collodion, and use the albuminate of silver bath as an ordinary Bilver bath; wash in another bath of distilled water five minutes, then wash the back of the plate with common water, the front with distilled; set the plate aside to dry, in a vertical position, in a place free from dust. It will keep three weeks. Expose in the camera as usual, from two minutes to ten, according to the light, diaphragm, &c. Pass into the silvering bath again three minutes. Develop with
6 grains proto-sulphate of iron
1 ounce distilled water,
1 drachm glacial acetic acid.
Wash, and fix with
1 cyanide of potassium,
20 water.
It is about as quick as albumen in the camera. The albuminate of silver bath must on no account be exposed to daylight, nor the developing solution. Potassium and ammonium salts will do to excite the collodion; but it will not keep so long as with the metallic iodides. 224, Regent-street, May 7.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1856. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY SOIREE.
“Proceedings of Societies. Photographic Soiree at King’s College.” CHEMIST: A MONTHLY JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL SCIENCE n. s. 4:40 (Jan. 1857): 255-256. [“A Soiree was held at King’s College, Somerset House, on Wednesday, the 17th of December, 1856, under the auspices of the President and Council of the Photographic Society, with a view to the exhibition of a large and highly interesting collection of photographs, daguerreotypes, and scientific and chemical apparatus connected with the art. The large hall was selected for the purpose; the museum and library being also thrown open, the latter as a refreshment-room. Upwards of a thousand visitors were present, including Professor Wheatstone, Mr. Le Neve Foster, Mr. Barlow, and Dr. Booth of the Society of Arts, Dr. Livingston, the celebrated African traveller, whose hardships, privations, and heroic efforts have become so familiar to the public; Dr. Carpenter, Mr. Fenton, whose Crimean photographs have been so deservedly admired; and other gentlemen connected with science and the arts. The largest and most varied among individual collections was that of Bisson, Frères, of Paris, from the Crystal Palace Exhibition, consisting of specimens of architecture, landscapes, copies after Rembrandt, Glacier Scenery from the Swiss Alps, &c, many of extraordinary size and exquisite manipulation. Similar specimens by Baldus, though fewer in number, were by no means inferior in execution, especially an Amphitheatre at Aries. Some cases of small untouched specimens by Mr. F. R. Williams, exhibited great merit and minuteness of detail, and a small collection of colored portraits by Lock and Whitfield, possessed a softness of tone and a delicacj and finish in the coloring peculiarly their own. Two cases of admirably executed portraits of living celebrities by Messrs. Mayall, including several members of the Cabinet, the Bishops of Oxford and Ripon, &c, were examined with great interest. A number of spirited portraits of Crimean heroes, bearded and stern, were exhibited by Mr. Cundall, and several similar subjects of equal merit by Mr. Howlett. Perhaps the most attractive feature of the evening, if numbers may be considered a test, was a series of photographic Views of the Moon, in various phases, by Mr. Bond of Cambridge, U. S., the same gentleman, we believe, who succeeded in the resolution of the great nebula in Orion, and the double-headed or “dumb-bell nebula,” with the aid of the large refracting telescope of the Cambridge, U. S., Observatory, and a Single View of the Full Moon, taken at Liverpool by Mr. Crookes. These, as may be imagined, were “metal most attractive” to the scientific portion of the company, and scarcely less so to the general visitors. Stereoscopes and stereoscopic views abounded; those of Messrs. Murray and Leigh were remarkably fine, especially a set of snow pieces. The cosmorama stereoscope also, possesses a great superiority over the ordinary instrument, both in the quickness of its adaptation to the eye, and the absence of confusion in the objects. A large stereoscope on a stand, with revolving views of “Douro Scenery” by Baron de Forrester, was also well worthy of attention. A most interesting series of beautiful engravings was exhibited, the subjects taken by photography, and engraven on copper by voltaic electricity. This elegant process, combining as it does the minuteness and accuracy of a daguerreotype, with the finish of an engraving, seems likely to add greatly to the resources and popularisation of art . The shew of chemicals was small, consisting chiefly of some fine specimens of nitrate of silver, hyposulphite of soda and chloride of gold, from Messrs. Home and Thornthwaite. Altogether the entertainment was of a highly interesting nature, and there can be no doubt that such reunions, by bringing under comparison the best productions of the best artists, must tend greatly to advance the science of sun-painting.”]

ARCHER, FREDERICK SCOTT.
“Miscellanea. The Archer Testimonial.” CHEMIST: A MONTHLY JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL SCIENCE n. s. 4:45 (June 1857): 572-576. [“Since the short article which appeared in our last number was written, Mr. Frederick Scott Archer, who discovered the application of collodion to the photographic process, which he published to the world in a communication to this journal, in March, 1851, has been called out of this life, to the deep regret of his bereaved family, his friends, and all who are in any way interested in the beautiful art of photography. In The Chemist for September, 1856, in reviewing Mr. Hardwich’s valuable Manual of Photographic Chemistry, we expressed a feeling that some public testimonial ought to be made to Mr. Scott Archer in consideration of the immense benefit he has conferred on the world, and in our last number, knowing that Mr. Archer was seriously ill, but hoping that his life might yet be spared, we called upon our readers to assist in organising a subscription for this purpose. It is very gratifying to us to find that many gentlemen of eminence have entertained the same sentiments, and that a committee has been formed, to which we have been invited to assist, and by which the following circular has been issued:—
“The Archer Testimonial.”
“To Photographers and all interested in the beautiful art of Photography, this most earnest appeal is addressed, on behalf of the widow and children of the late Mr. Frederick Scott Archer, by whose premature death they are left in dependent and straitened circumstances. “The Photographic world must acknowledge a deep sense of obligation to the lamented Mr. Archer, for his wonderful discovery of the application of Collodion to the Photographic process; and which, indeed, brought about—so to speak—a complete revolution in the art, almost superseding every other process. His generosity in unreservedly giving to the public this marvellous improvement, disdaining to secure its advantages to himself and family, enhances his wellearned fame, and entitles him to lasting gratitude. In the words of an able writer in the Quarterly Review, ‘ Not only did the adoption of this vehicle at once realize the desires of the most ardent Photographer,—not only, thus applied, did it. provide a film of perfect transparency, tenuity, and intense adhesiveness,— not only was it found easy of manipulation, portable, and preservable, but it supplied that element of rapidity, which, more than any thing else, has given the miraculous character to the art. Under the magician who first attempted to enlist the powers of light in his service, the sun seems at best to have been but a sluggard; under the sorcery of Niepce, he became a drudge in a twelve hours’ factory. On the prepared plate of Daguerre, and on the sensitive paper of Fox Talbot, the great luminary concentrates his gaze for a few earnest minutes; with the albumen-sheathed glass, he takes his time more leisurely still; but, at the delicate film of Collodion, which hangs before him finer than any fairy’s robe, and potent only with invisible spells, he literally does no more than wink his eye, tracing in that moment with a detail and precision beyond all human power, the glory of the heavens—the wonders of the deep—the fall, not of the avalanche, but of the apple —the most fleeting smile of the babe, and the most vehement action of the man. Further than this, the powers of Photography can never go; they are already more nimble than we need. Light is made to portray with a celerity only second to that with which it travels; it has been difficult to contrive the machinery of the camera to keep pace with it, and Collodion has to be weakened in order to clog its wheels. “Mr. Archer’s early professional career—that of a sculptor—was one to which he was most ardently attached, and in whicji he acquired some distinction. His ever active mind early led him to perceive tha advantages likely to accrue to his art by enlisting the then new art of Photography, and rendering it available for the purpose of arresting the momentary or more permanent expressions of the human face, thereby securing a reference in the studio. The value of such an application of Photography to art, induced him to apply himself to it, and master all its chemical and optical difficulties. He could not long remain content with the slow processes then in use; and one of tho earliest discoveries made by him was the superiority, as a developing agent, of pyrogallic acid over gallic acid; this he was the first to draw attention to.* (*Mr. Archer first published this discovery in The Chemist for April, 1850, In the No. for July, 1850, he contributed another article on the same subject.— Eds. Chemist.) Dissatisfied with paper as a medium, he set himself the task of finding something better, and was eventually rewarded, as before stated, by the discovery of Collodion. A few months enabled him to perfect his process, which- he published and freely gave to all in 1851.* (*See the Chemist for March, 1851, in which this great discovery was first published.—Eds.) Other valuable improvements subsequently emanated from his active, intelligent mind; and up to the last day of his invaluable life, he was engaged in elaborating and perfecting new processes, hoping he might be spared long enough to enable him to complete what he had so well begun. It was ordained otherwise, and he was taken away at a time when success appeared to be more certain than at any former period of his eventful life, and when in all probability he would have been enabled to make ample provision for those nearest and dearest to him. “Mr. Archer’s medical adviser—a friend who knew him well—is of opinion, that he in a great measure sacrificed his life to his love of the art, and his intense desire to improve it. His labor and discoveries gave the means of occupation and of livelihood to thousands of his fellow-creatures; it is, therefore, more confidently hoped that all those who are deriving advantage from his genius, will cheerfully respond to this appeal.” The above circular states the case so ably, that we have thought that we could not do better than insert it here. We have now earnestly to call upon our readers to subscribe liberally to this fund. The readers of The Chemist constitute a very large body of the most eminent men of science in the kingdom, as well as of the largest manufacturers—men who can well afford to contribute handsomely towards a provision for the unprovided wife and children of a departed brother; and we call upon them to come forward, and show by their subscriptions that the bereaved family of a man who had the nobleness of mind to bestow on the world the great discovery by which, had he patented it, he must speedily have realised a handsome fortune, may safely be left to the generous care of those who follow science, whether as a profession or as applied to the arts. Let every one give according to his ability, and at once. Let chemists show that the followers of science are a generous and kindly confraternity; let us take by the hand the widow and children of our deceased fellow-laborer. Let not poverty or the struggles of dependence be the lot of those whose husband and father was so great a benefactor to the public. Scott Archer needs no monument; his name will go down to posterity in honour without any such hacknied and commonplace memorial. We call upon our readers to give us reason to be as proud of their character for generosity and justice as we are gratified by their great and increasing support. The circular we have reprinted states to whom subscriptions may be paid. We also shall be happy to receive and forward to the committee such sums as our readers may think fit to transmit to us, (postoffice orders or cheques to be made payable to Mr. John Watt,) and we will acknowledge receipt in our next number. We also intend to publish an entire list of subscribers to the testimonial as soon as it is complete; and we hope and trust that every one who reads this will immediately forward his contribution. There is one class on whom it is incumbent to come forward liberally; we allude to the great number of persons who procure a living by taking portraits by Mr. Archer’s process. From these alone, a very large sum ought to be obtained. The dealers in photographic chemicals and apparatus, who sell large quantities of collodion for photographic purposes will all, undoubtedly, feel it their duty to subscribe. We have no doubt that subscriptions will also be forwarded from other countries. We trust that the first of our numerous American readers who reads this notice will at once commence the movement amongst his countrymen, and we confidently hope, that the generous and kindly American nation will be behind no other in this matter. The English Government, we should hope, will conceive this a case entitled to its consideration, and we earnestly urge her Majesty’s Ministers, as soon as possible, to recommend the Sovereign to bestow a pension on Mrs. Archer. We believe that the Government has turned Mr. Archer’s process to useful account. We know that the Emperor of Kussia had views taken at Sebastopol, and transmitted to him, from time to time, of the position of our army in the Crimea, and of the state of the beleaguered city itself. Truly, there appears to be scarcely any limit to the utility of this wonderful invention. As a tribute of respect to departed worth, and of deep sympathy with the cause of the fatherless and widow, the following gentlemen have undertaken the duties of a committee, to receive subscriptions, and carry, out in its fullest integrity, the object of this testimonial.
Committee.—Herbert Ingram, Esq., M.P.; Dr. John Diamond; Jabez Hogg, Esq.; P. Le Neve Foster, Esq.; George De Morgan, Esq.; Dr. Hyde Salter; Henry Pollock, Esq.; Robert Hunt, Esq., F.R.S.; J. E. Mayall, Esq ; T. Fred. Hardwich, Esq.; Nathaniel Machin, Esq.; A. Sweeting, Esq. Treasurers.—Sir William Newton aud Roger Fenton, Esq. Hon. Secretaries. —professor Delamotte and Professor Goodeve. The following Bankers have very kindly consented to receive Subscriptions.—The London And Westminster Bank and The Union Bank Of London (Argyll Place).
List of Subscriptions.
Her Majesty The Queen. £20 0s. 0d. The Council of the Photographic Society. £50 0s. 0d. … (This is followed by a list of approximately 80 subscribers, ranging from J. E. Mayall (£21) and Antoine Claudet (£10 10s.) to C. J. Slater (3s.). The list includes Dr. Diamond, Prout, Llewellyn, W. J. Newton, Hardwich, Malone, Shadbolt, Delamotte, Lake Price, Fenton, Sedgwick, Bedford, Johnson, Howlett and others.)]

MAYALL, J. E
Mayall, J. E. “Factitious Ivory for Photography.” CHEMIST: A MONTHLY JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL SCIENCE n. s. 5:50 (Nov. 1857): 115. [(From Lond. Prac. Mech. Journal, Jan. 1857.) “This invention, by the well known photographer of Regent-street, relates to the use of artificial ivory for receiving photographic pictures instead of glass or paper. This artificial material, which possesses all the properties and beautiful finish of ivory, and allows of any subsequent tinting of the image, and the obtainment of superior softness in the semi-tints, is what is known in France as Pinson’s artificial ivory, consisting of a compound of gelatine and alumina. This material is prepared in the form of slabs, for the the photographer’s use, in this way:—The tablets or slabs are composed of gelatine or glue in its natural state, and are immersed in a bath of alumina, which is held in solution by sulphuric or acetic acid; by this means a complete combination takes place between the alumina and the gelatine or glue. The tablets or slabs should remain in the bath a sufficient time to become thick enough for the purpose for which they are required, and to allow the alumina to entirely penetrate them and incorporate itself therewith ; they are then removed and allowed to dry or harden, when they may be dressed and polished by any of the ordinary and well-known processes for polishing ivory. Artificial ivory tablets, capable of bearing a fine polish, may also be made by mixing alumina directly with gelatine or glue; but this process is not so satisfactory as the process hereinbefore described, since the thickening produced by the admixture of the alumina with the gelatine, renders the manufacture of the sheets both difficult and expensive. Another composition of artificial ivory which is employed, consists of equal portions of bone or ivory dust, used either separately or combined, and albumen or gelatine, the whole being worked into a paste, and afterwards rolled out into sheets by suitable rolling or flattening mechanism. The sheets are then allowed to harden by exposure to the atmosphere, and are cut into slabs or tablets of the required size. But it is preferred to use two parts of fine powdered baryta, and one part of albumen, well worked together, and rolled out into slabs. The best plan hitherto discovered for working the materials together, is that commonly used in the manufacture of Parian marble ; this composition may also be used spread upon paper, if desired. These slabs or tablets are then carefully scraped, to give them a perfectly even surface. They are then washed with alcohol, to remove any impurity therefrom, and are prepared in the ordinary manner to receive positive pictures. The pictures having been printed, the entire slab or tablet may be immersed for a few minutes in a weak solution of nitro-sulphuric acid or nitro-hydrochloric acid, for the purpose of rendering the picture more clear and brilliant. It is then fixed in the usual manner with hypo-sulphite of soda, and is washed, and then dried on a marble or other slab, or under pressure, to prevent it from warping.”]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Photography.” CHRISTIAN INQUIRER 9:3 (Oct. 21, 1854): 4. [“Mr. Mayall, the enterprising photographist, has succeeded in producing portraits the size of life! The apparatus to effect this object (says the Athenaeum) is of course little less than gigantic. The largest double achromatic lens in the world is brought into use, and, by a combination of successful arrangements and manipulation, a result is produced that fairly startles. The life-size portrait is produced…”]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Note.” CRAYON 2:14 (Oct. 3, 1855): 211. [“A new Court has been added to the many attractions of the Crystal Palace. Mr. Mayall, the photographer, as lent his assistance in forming a Crimean Court. Besides a number of models, charts, and relics, of the battle-field, the Court now contains a series of photographic portraits representing her Majesty’s ministers, distinguished men connected with the war, wounded officers, &c. Some of the latter, we believe, are duplicates of pictures taken by Mr. Mayall for her Majesty’s portfolio. – Athenaeum.”]

FENTON, ROGER.
Rossetti, William Michael. “Correspondence. Art News from England. – Letter 7.” CRAYON 2:18 (Oct. 31, 1855): 277-279. [“…The little Art proper which stirs in London just at present takes the shape chiefly of war record. Mr. Roger Fenton, the Secretary of our Photographic Society, and one of the first-rate manipulators we boast, has opened an exhibition of photographs, nearly 300 in number, taken in the Crimea, during the recent spring and summer. The collection is admirable and unique. The pictures will be published in a serial form, under the patronage of the rulers of France and England, and in three sub-divisions consisting first of scenery, views of the camp, &c.; second, incidents of camp-life, groups of figures, &c.; third, portraits. I need not enlarge on the details, which, while equally easy to be surmised by an American as by an English public, are less interesting to the former. Besides this exhibition and publication, we have a Crimean Court added to the Crystal Palace, comprising photographs by Mayall, models, charts, relics, &c; Mr. Armitage, a painter of honorable name, has returned from the Crimea with sketches and portraits…” p. 279.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Crayon Daguerreotypes.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 1:2 (Nov. 15, 1850): 46. [Letter. Gives technical information on this process in order to bypass attempts to patent it. Mayall does not believe in patenting “…anything in connection with so interesting a discovery.” (This probably taken from the Athenaeum.)]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1851.
“Our Daguerreotypes.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 1:8 (Mar. 1, 1851): 243. [Gurney; Thompson; H. McBride, operator for Meade & Brother, about to establish a gallery in Albany, NY; Weston (NYC) producing calotypes; A. Morand. T. Antisell, M.D., Finley (Canandaigua, NY) and J. E. Mayall also mentioned on same page.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Photography on Glass.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 1:10 (Apr. 1, 1851): 314-315. [Letter from Mayall, describing his procedures]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Enamelled Daguerreotype.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 2:4 (July 1, 1851): 111.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Letter.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 2:4 (July 1, 1851): 118-121. [Letter from Mayall, describing his processes “for paper.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Photography: Glazing the Positive Proof.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 2:4 (July 1, 1851): 122. [From the Athenaeum, forwarded by Mayall.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine Art Gossip.” DAGUERREIAN JOURNAL 2:12 (Nov. 1, 1851): 378. [From London Athenaeum.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Photograph Publications: Myall’s [sic Mayall’s] Daguerreotypes.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:1 (Apr. 15, 1852): 8. [From Athenaeum.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“J. E. Mayall’s Daguerreotypes.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:2 (May 1, 1852): 23-24. [From Athenaeum.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“One of the London Sights.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:12 (Oct. 1, 1852): 183. [From Liverpool Mail. Praise for Mayall’s Gallery.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Mayall’s Daguerreotype of the Balloon Ascent of the Council of the British Association.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:12 (Oct. 1, 1852): 184. [From Athenaeum.]

EXHIBITIONS: 1851: LONDON: CRYSTAL PALACE.
“Photography.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:14 (Nov. 1, 1852): 213-214. [From “Lectures on the World’s Fair.” Describes the photography at the exhibition in general. Mentions Mayall; Martens; Bayard; Flacheron; Ross & Thompson; Buckle; Hill & Adamson; Henneman & Malone; Owen; Paul Pretsch by name.]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1852.
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:17 (Dec. 15, 1852): 271-272. [Bailey (Winchester, VA); J. H. & J. Selkirk (Matagora, TX);Douglas (St. Louis, MO); Wellington (Nashville, TN); Davis (Cincinnati, OH); Whitney & Denny (Rochester, NY stock-dealers); Mayall (London); Mercer (formerly of Rochester, NY) is dead; North (formerly Boston, MA, now Cleveland, OH); Cooley(Springfield, MA); Wells (Northampton, MA); Brown (Manchester);G. S. Cook (now at Charleston, SC); Wellman (Georgeton, SC); Dr. Barr (Harrisburg, PA) is sick; Brady (NYC); Ellis (formerly Providence, RI, now in Lynn, MA); Gurney & Litch; Churchill (Albany, NY); McBride (Albany, NY).]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN: 1853.
Helio. “Our Foreign Correspondent.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:20 (Feb. 1, 1853): 313-315. [Describes work of Kilburn, Mayall, etc.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“A Convenient Process for Photographs upon Paper and Glass.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:20 (Feb. 1, 1853): 315-320. [Letter from Mayall, defending himself from earlier comments in the HJ, includes his formulae and practices.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Collodion.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:21 (Feb. 15, 1853): 335. [Additional information, received after the first paper was published.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Daguerreotype Movements: Mayall of London.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:22 (Mar. 1, 1853): 352. [From the London Morning Chronicle.]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN: 1853.
Helio. “Our Foreign Correspondent: State of the Daguerreotype Art in London – Photographic Society, etc.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:23 (Mar. 15, 1853): 364-366. [Describes galleries of Beard; Kilburn; Claudet; Mayall; Sherman & Carbanati. Discusses the formation of the Photographic Society.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Portrait of Richard Cobden, Esq., M. P.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:2/3 (May 1 – 15, 1853): 40. [Not credited, but a review of this print, probably from the Athenaeum, with a note that Mayall had sent a copy to the editor]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1853.
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:15 (Nov. 15, 1853): 238-239. [Richards (Philadelphia, PA); G. W. Squires partnering with Thompson’s Gallery, NYC); F. A. Brown (Manchester, NH); L. Buel (OH); O. W. Horton (OH); A. R. Cole (Zanesville, OH); J. F. Ryder (OH); E. Long (St. Louis, MO); Mayall; Barnes (Mobile, AL); Webster & Brother (NYC); Gibbs (Lynchburg, VA); McClees & Germon (Philadelphia, PA) producing paper prints; O. R. Benton (Buffalo, NY); White (Atlanta, GA) shot dead.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:19 (Jan. 15, 1854): 303. [From “Athenaeum.]

BY COUNTRY. USA. 1854.
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:21 (Feb. 15, 1854): 335-336. [A. C. Partridge (Wheeling, VA); Hartmann (NYC); Dr. Wilde (Savannah, GA); Hutchings (NYC) committed suicide; Shaw, of Memphis, dead; Caleb Hunt (Cleveland, OH); C. North (Cleveland, OH); Mrs. Short (Cleveland, OH); Johnson & Fellows (Cleveland, OH); Bisbee (Dayton, OH); Richards (Philadelphia, PA); J. E. Mayall (London); etc.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Albumen Process on Glass.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 6:24 (Apr. 1, 1855): 377-381. [From J. of Photo. Soc., London.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “A New Collodion for Field Work.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:4 (June 15, 1859): 57-60. [From Liverpool Photo. J.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Photographs of Royalty.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:10 (Sept. 15, 1860): 146-147. [J. E. Mayall, Esq., of No. 224 Regent St., London, one of the most eminent Photographers in England, has just published a series of portraits of the Royal family.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Garibaldi and the Photographer.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 16:2 (May 15, 1864): 29. [Garibaldi hounded by photographers during his trip to England, asking for his portrait. Finally he chose Mayall.]

CLAUDET.
“Modern Preraphaelism.” DUBLIN UNIVERSITY MAGAZINE 57:342 (June 1861): 687-695. [“Some years ago a few youqg. English painters rose in fierce rebellion against the artistic rules and traditions of former days. Eager to astonish the world with something new, and filled with youth’s proud consciousness of undeveloped power, they refused to look at nature through Raphael’s eyes, and went forth to glean new lessons of marvellous import in those broad fields which the great Italian himself had not half explored. They would become to painting what Wordsworth had been to poetry, the high priests of a natural truth seeking school, the faithful self-denying worshippers of a mystery which former ages had-” failed, through ignorance, pride, or utter carelessness, to read aright. They seated themselves like children at the feet of a mistress in whom was no fault, whose every word was the highest wisdom, every motion the fairest grace; in whose person could be nothing mean, nor aught unlovely in her adornment. To them this outer world was a book in which every passage was equally beautiful, strange, suggestive; every character equally important, whether by itself or in relation to the whole. Their philosophy allowed no distinctions of great and small, of ugliness and beauty. “A primrose by the river’s brim,” they painted with as reverent zeal, and brought out into as marked a prominence, as the figure that passed beside it, or the wooded heights that threw out grey gleams of rugged cliff beyond. Their worship of the natural displayed itself in an obstinate liking for uncomely forms and staring colours, in a daring disregard for the rules of vulgar perspective, in a painful elaboration of small details, accompanied by utter blindness to the general effect. In their hatred of things conventional they rendered nature with a literal slavishness seldom truer to the sound of her general utterances, than Hobbes’ rendering of the Iliad was true to the poet whom he unconsciously parodied. Striving to raise up a school of art imbued with the earnest spirit of that which flourished before the age of Raphael, they have done little more than produce a series of ambitious failures, which can only displace the masterpieces of other days, whenever good drawing and truthful expression shall have been classed among the strong points of Chinese painting….” p. 687. “…The noble simplicity of a great artist has little in common with that dull meanness which prides itself on the faithful copying of a dead donkey, or a broken chair. A good portrait by Vandyke or Titian contains more essential truth than the best photograph ever yet taken by the lens of Mayall or Claudet. “George Eliot’s” mechanical skill in reporting the emmet-life of her poorer countryfolk, seems to us rather a sorry exchange for the larger insight and manlier graces of Walter Scott, or even for the poetic grandeur that redeems the worst faults of Bulwer- Lytton. For all its close details, and straightforward simpleness of style, few of us seem to remember that the Iliad is a masterpiece of classic art, in its main parts as skilfully composed, and in its outline as nobly proportioned, as the Greek temple of a later time. Only a poet can translate a poet, and only an artistic eye can measure the whole difference between petty treatment of great things, and noble treatment of things great and small. This is the age for glorifying rags and mere muscle. The dignity of labour and the loftiness of mean things have been preached up already far too long, until Teniers has come to be deemed as great as Titian, and Mr. Coventry Patmore finds admirers ready to link his name with that of Homer….” p. 695.]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Improvement in Photography.” ECLECTIC MAGAZINE OF FOREIGN LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ART 33:4 (Dec. 1854): 563. [From London Times. “…at the Polytechnic Institution… two photographs were exhibited—one the largest, and the other the smallest ever produced by the process. The first was a portrait the full size of life; and the last was a copy of the front sheet of the Times, on a surface scarcely exceeding two inches by three. Both pictures were exceedingly perfect… The photographs were exhibited by Mr. Mayall, the well-known artist of Argyll Place, Regent Street,…”]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND.)
“Douglas Jerrold.” ECLECTIC MAGAZINE OF FOREIGN LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ART 42:2 (Oct. 1857): 277-282. [From the London Athenaeum. “Death has taken from among us a man of vast and peculiar force. Heroes dwarf in the eyes of their valets; distance lends enchantment to the view; but Douglas Jerrold was the greatest marvel to those who knew him best. His reading was wide, and his memory for what he read prodigious….” “No first class portraits exist of the deceased. Mr. Macknee, of Glasgow, painted him, but the likeness is a failure. Two or three others tried their hands, with even less success. Mr. Mayall and Mr. Watkins, have made fair photographs of an extremely difficult face. Dr. Diamond has also obtained some excellent studies—taken only a few days before his death…”

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“His Royal Highness Prince Albert.”) as frontispiece. “Prince Albert.” ECLECTIC MAGAZINE OF FOREIGN LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ART 56:2 (June 1862): 282a. [“Accompanying this number of The Eclectic will be found a striking and accurate likeness of his late Royal Highness, Prince Albert, the much-lamented Consort of her majesty Queen Victoria. The portrait has been admirably engraved by Mr. George D. Perine, from a photograph taken shortly before his death by Mayall.”]

UNKNOWN. GREAT BRITAIN. 1860.
1 b & w (“Messrs. Burgess and Key, the Agricultural Implement Makers.”) as frontispiece in:” Messrs. Burgess and Key, the Agricultural Implement Makers.” FARMER’S MAGAZINE s 3 18:1 (July 1860): 1-2. [“Engraved by … from a photograph by ….(illegible –may be Mayall.) “…Mr. Burgess, we believe, was brought up as a solicitor, but be has evinced a great aptitude for mechanics, as the success of the implements selected and the improvements determined on alike tend to show. Sir Kingsmill Key—for the second partner in the firm is a baronet—is a son of the late Alderman Sir John Key, whom he succeeded in 1858. In the print Sir Kingsmill Key sits in profile, while Mr. Burgess faces the photographer. The two bear alike very high characters as men of business, which it is their pride to conduct in the most straight-forward and honourable manner. Certainly, so far, nothing of an inferior or even of second-rate order has been identified with their firm, and, as a consequence, if they have risen rapidly, it has been, pan passu, with a trade and a name now thoroughly established….” p. .]

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Foreign Items.” FLAG OF OUR UNION 13:6 (Feb. 6, 1858): 45. [“Mayall, the celebrated artist in Line, has recently taken in London, a photograph of Lord Palmerston, of the size of life.”]

DAGUERRE.
“Notes for July.” FINE ARTS ALMANACK, OR, ARTIST’S REMEMBRANCER FOR THE YEAR 1852 (1852): 74-78. [“The celebrated Louis Jacques Maude Daguerre, died July 10th, 1851, at Petit Brie, sur Marne, near Paris. Daguerre was favourably known to the world before the announcement of his discovery of the daguerrotype. His attempts to improve panoramic painting, and the production of dioramic effects, were crowned with the most eminent success. The following pictures attracted much attention at the times of their exhibition:— “The Midnight Mass,” “Land-slip in the Valley of Goldau,” “The Temple of Solomon,” and “The Cathedral of Sainte Marie de Montreal.” In those, the alternate effects of night and day—of storm and sunshine— were beautifully produced. To these effects of light were added others, arising from the decomposition of form, by means of which, for example, in “The Midnight Mass ” figures appeared where the spectators had just beheld seats, altars, &c.; or, again, as in “The Valley of Goldau,” in which rocks tumbling from the mountains replaced the prospect of a smiling valley. The methods adopted in these pictures were published at the same time with the process of the daguerreotype, by order of the French government, who awarded an annual pension of 10,000 francs to Daguerre and M. Niepce, jun., whose father had contributed towards the discovery of the daguerreotype. Originally a scene-painter, Daguerre became desirous of executing his works so as to produce the greatest possible illusion. To his exertions for this purpose, the beautiful pictures, exhibited for a succession of years at the Diorama, Regent’s-park, owe their origin. In these great works he was associated with M. Bouton. The view of “Holyrood Chapel,” which was exhibited at the commencement of the Diorama, astonished every one with its complete illusion, although this exhibition docs not combine all the advantages of the Panorama, yet it produces a far greater degree of optical illusion. The peculiar and almost magical effect of M. Daguerre’s invention, arises from the contrivance employed in exhibiting the painting, which is viewed through a large aperture, or proscenium. The spectator is kept in comparative darkness, while the picture receives a concentrated light from a ground glass roof. The transitions from ordinary daylight to sunshine, or to darkness, are produced by shutters attached to the glazed ceiling. Besides which, some parts of the paintings are transparent, admitting of being lighted from behind. The combination of transparent, semi-transparent, and opaque colouring still further assisted by the power of varying both the effects and the degree of light and shade, renders the Diorama the most perfect scenic representation of nature, and adapts it peculiarly for moonlight subjects, or for showing such accidents in landscape as sudden gleams of sunshine or lightning. It is also unrivalled for showing architecture, particularly interiors, as powerful relief may be obtained without that exaggeration in the shadows which is almost inevitable in every other mode of painting. But the scientific acquirements and active mind of Mons. Daguerre has bequeathed a greater benefit to mankind than the Diorama, in the wonderful discovery of a mode of obtaining portraits and views by the action of sunlight upon prepared metal plates, so well known as the daguerreotype. The idea, however, was not original with Daguerre and his co-partner, M. Niepce; for in 1802, Wedgewood, assisted by Sir Humphrey Davy, had obtained sun-impressed images upon glass prepared with nitrate of silver; but not being able to fix them, or prevent the continued effect of the sun upon them, the process was abandoned for a time. In 1827, M. Niepce produced some specimens of pictures upon glass, copper plated with silver, and highly polished tin; after which he soon entered into partnership with Mons. Daguerre. The latter, after repeated, and it would seem fruitless attempts to prepare a sensitive paper, entered upon those experiments which ended in the discovery of the beautiful process on silver plates which bears his name. In the interval, Mr. Henry Fox Talbot made known the results of his inquiries into tho action of light upon salts of silver, in a paper read before the Royal Society, in January, 1839. This invention is called, in compliment to him, the Talbotype. So important was the discovery of Daguerre deemed by the French government, that, in consideration of it being thrown open to the world, they granted annuities for life to Messrs. Niepce and Daguerre; but owing to some ingenious legal construction, England was considered out of the world, M. Daguerre’s process patented, and locked up in this country. Messrs. Claudet and Beard have obtained a patent right in the daguerreotype. It does not appear that M. Daguerre made farther advances in his astonishing discovery, for most of the improvements have originated with other practitioners. The perfection to which photographic lenses have been Drought is due to Voightlander, in Germany; Chevalier Lerebour, in Paris; and Ross, in London. Of daguerreotype, the Americans appear to have produced infinitely the best: and the numerous and beautiful specimens of this art, exhibited at the Crystal Palace, in Hyde-park, surpass in depth of color and definition any other examples sent. Since M. Daguerre announced his progress to the world, a vast body of information has been accumulated by photographists, who have pursued the subject upon scientific principles. A far greater degree of sensitiveness has been produced on the coating of the silvered plates: and portraits are now taken by Mr. Mayall, which bear an expression on the features only to be obtained by an almost instantaneous exposure . An attempted improvement has been introduced recently, called enamelling, but it appears to impair, in a greater or less degree, the exquisite detail which is found in a successful daguerreotype. M. Daguerre, by his wonderful discovery, is destined to exert a great influence upon art, as the truth of nature s autograph admits of no dispute, and the conventionalities of picture making receive no encouragement from the plain truths discoverable in photography. To M. Daguerre is attributable the honor of preserving to posterity, from this time, the portraits of great men, reflected from the originals themselves, such as they would appear in a mirror, divested of colour. The admirers of Daguerre’s art of heliography were much gratified by seeing his portrait, executed by his process, by M. Claudet, and exhibited as one of the chief attractions amongst the photographic views and apparatus in the Great Exhibition, in Hyde-park.” pp. 77-78.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Douglas Jerrold. – Ambrotyped by Mayall.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 4:83 (July 4, 1857): 77.)]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“I. K. Brunel, Chief Constructor of the Steam Ship `Leviathan.’ credited – “Photographed by Mayall.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 5:115 (Feb. 13, 1858): 172.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mdlle. Maria Piccolomini. – From a Photograph by Mayall, of London.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 6:152 (Oct. 30, 1858): 335.

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Virginia and Carolina Ferni. The Italian Violinists.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 6:155 (Nov. 20, 1858): 386. [“…Our portrait is from a photograph by Mayall, taken in 1853.”]

MAYALL.
“Improvement in Photography.” FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 8:206 (Nov. 12, 1859): 377. [“Mr. Mayall, the well-known daguerrean artist in London, has invented an instrument which achieves a very surprising effect in photography. Its novelty consists in the instantaneous action of a hair-trigger spring, which, when touched, produces a correct likeness of the person. It is in the shape of a pistol.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Great Contest for the Championship – America Against England – Sayers as He Appears in the Ring – From a Photograph by Mayall, of London, taken Expressly for this Paper.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 9:225 (Mar. 24, 1860): 263. [Full-page engraving from a photo actually taken in the studio, showing camera, photos, etc., in the background]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“J. O. Lever, Director of steamship line. – From a Photograph by Mayall, of London.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 9:225 (Mar. 24, 1860): 267.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“John C. Heenan, the `Benicia Boy,’ From a Photograph. Now in Training in England to Contest with Tom Sayers, the Present Champion of England, for the Champions Belt.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 9:228 (Apr. 14, 1860): 311. [Portrait taken in same studio as that published on p. 263, in Mar. 24 issue.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Albert Edward, Prince of Wales. – From a Photograph by Mayall, of London.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 10:245 (Aug. 4, 1860): 168-169.

MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
[Advertisement.] “Prince of Wales Portrait.” FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 10:257 (Oct. 27, 1860): 364. [“Full-length Steel Plate Portrait of His Royal Highness Baron Renfrew, from a Photograph by Mayall, of London, taken at Windsor by command of Her Majesty, expressly for the Illustrated News of the World. May be had, and will be sent to any address, for Fifteen Cents, Cash or Stamps, postpaid, by H. A. Brown & Co., No. 14 Hanover St., Boston.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
2 b & w (“Albert Edward, Prince of Wales.”); (“Alexandra of Denmark, Princess of Wales – Photographed from Life by Mayall, Regent Street, London.”) in: “The Royal Wedding in England.” FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 16:393 (Apr. 11, 1863): 33, 34.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Princess Alexandra of Denmark and Her Bridesmaids. From a Photograph by Mayall, of London.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 16:394 (Apr. 18, 1863): 49.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“George Peabody, American banker. – From a Photograph by Mayall, London.”) in: FRANK LESLIE’S ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER 22:561 (June 30, 1866): 225. [“We embellish our front page with a fine portrait of Mr. Peabody, from a photograph taken in London just before he left for this country…”]

MAYALL.
“Obituary. — Richard John Smith, Esq.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (Mar. 1855): 322-325. [“Feb. 1. at No. 7, Strand, aged 69, after a lengthened illness of four months, Richard John Smith, esq. better known as O. Smith, of the Theatre Royal Adelphi…. There have been several portraits of Mr. Smith. The best published, and which is an admirable likeness, is one in his favourite character of Grampus, from a daguerreotype by Mayall….” p. 325.]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1868.
Carpenter, J. “Scientific Notes of the Month. Photography.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (May 1868): 768-769. [“M. Victor Fouque publishes an historical work on the invention of photography, which he claims for Nicephore Niepce. He gives facts showing that twenty years before Daguerre made known his process Niepce had succeeded in obtaining pictures by the camera and making them permanent.—There has of late been a great hue and cry about the unhealthiness of photographic pursuits; but nothing very definite can be gleaned from the evidence that has been hitherto afforded; it consists chiefly of opinions drawn from isolated cases. No doubt ill-ventilated dark rooms filled with noxious vapours, disregard of cleanliness, and want of caution in handling poisons, bring evil consequences; but the same causes will produce like effects in any profession, and the calling must not be blamed for what is due to nothing else than the carelessness of its votaries. But whether their arts be healthy or not, there is talk of the photographers having a convalescent hospital on the finest part of the Sussex coast. It is said that Mr. Mayall has purchased an immense estate there, on which he intends to build a town. The medical profession want a hospital on the spot, and have applied to Mr. Mayall for a plot of ground to erect one, and he has consented to give them a site, on condition that one wing of the building shall be devoted to the reception of members of his profession. A noble example, worthy of emulation in other localities and callings.— Mr. Maclachlan has divulged a part of his secret means for reducing photographic operations to a certainty, and producing uniformly excellent pictures by the collodion process. The chief point of his method— as far as it is yet made known—lies in the use of a collodion and a nitrate bath as nearly neutral as possible, the latter peculiarly prepared and involving delay and trouble in its preparation. Whether other photographers will have the time and patience to work his process as successfully as he has done himself, remains to be known; at present they have their doubts.” p. 768.]

EXHIBITIONS. 1869. LONDON. LONDON PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Notes & Incidents.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (Dec. 1869): 119-125. [“…Again have the photographers invited the public freely to an exhibition of their latest productions. Some four hundred specimens decorated for one week of the past month the walls of the Architectural Society’s Museum in London. There were plenty of things to admire, but nothing to forcibly strike a visitor. The light painters, reporting progress, may say, “As we were.” One might have expected an extensive display of pictures by the carbon and other modern pigment processes; but the majority of the subjects were upon the old albumenised paper, with here and there a sample of dead, or matte, surface printing. No doubt, however, these pigment processes are at present too complicated for small producers. The Autotype Company—an association for working Swan’s method of carbon printing—covered a large space of wall with specimens. An uninitiated visitor, however, would not have distinguished these works from others, for, strangely to my view, the artists persist in imitating the sepia tints of ordinary photographs. Now that they can produce any colour, they might adopt the more artistic tones of rich engravings. Curiously, when blacks were producible with great difficulty and risk of permanence, everybody wanted them; now they are easily secured, and yet the old browns are retained. The Woodbury process, which prints in gelatinous ink from intaglio photo-types, was unrepresented. Portraiture is still under the influence of M. Salomon’s example. Landscape operators have taken to old tricks, such as painting-in skies, and printing in figures which do not belong to the view, and betray their individuality by lights and shadows that are not in accord with the rest of the picture. Some twelve years ago the public were astounded by several large sea and cloud pieces by Gustave Le Gray, which, from their dark moon-light effects, were thought to have been really taken by moon’s light; but they were iky-pictures, and the sun caused the grand play of light and shadow on sea and in sky that was attributed to the moon. A series of revivals of this old ruse was exhibited by Colonel Stuart Wortley—grand pictures of cloud and water, proving the high skill of their producer, but, being ticketed with lunar titles, very deceitful to the popular eye. Old things seemed to have been exhibited for want of new. Mr. Rejlander sent his great “composition print,” entitled “Two Ways of Life,” formed by the combination of thirty negatives, and first exhibited twelve years ago; and Mr. Mayall contributed daguerreotype views of the Great Exhibition of 1851. These had interest, as showing the permanence of what were once thought would prove the least durable of light pictures. Few paper photographs of that date could now be shown in such integrity as these mercurialised plates of silver….” pp. 123-124.]

EXHIBITIONS. 1869. LONDON. LONDON PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Notes & Incidents.” GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE (Dec. 1869): 119-125. [“…Again have the photographers invited the public freely to an exhibition of their latest productions. Some four hundred specimens decorated for one week of the past month the walls of the Architectural Society’s Museum in London. There were plenty of things to admire, but nothing to forcibly strike a visitor. The light painters, reporting progress, may say, “As we were.” One might have expected an extensive display of pictures by the carbon and other modern pigment processes; but the majority of the subjects were upon the old albumenised paper, with here and there a sample of dead, or matte, surface printing. No doubt, however, these pigment processes are at present too complicated for small producers. The Autotype Company—an association for working Swan’s method of carbon printing—covered a large space of wall with specimens. An uninitiated visitor, however, would not have distinguished these works from others, for, strangely to my view, the artists persist in imitating the sepia tints of ordinary photographs. Now that they can produce any colour, they might adopt the more artistic tones of rich engravings. Curiously, when blacks were producible with great difficulty and risk of permanence, everybody wanted them; now they are easily secured, and yet the old browns are retained. The Woodbury process, which prints in gelatinous ink from intaglio photo-types, was unrepresented. Portraiture is still under the influence of M. Salamon’s example. Landscape operators have taken to old tricks, such as painting-in skies, and printing in figures which do not belong to the view, and betray their individuality by lights and shadows that are not in accord with the rest of the picture. Some twelve years ago the public were astounded by several large sea and cloud pieces by Gustave Le Gray, which, from their dark moon-light effects, were thought to have been really taken by moon’s light; but they were iky-pictures, and the sun caused the grand play of light and shadow on sea and in sky that was attributed to the moon. A series of revivals of this old ruse was exhibited by Colonel Stuart Wortley—grand pictures of cloud and water, proving the high skill of their producer, but, being ticketed with lunar titles, very deceitful to the popular eye. Old things seemed to have been exhibited for want of new. Mr. Rejlander sent his great “composition print,” entitled “Two Ways of Life,” formed by the combination of thirty negatives, and first exhibited twelve years ago; and Mr. Mayall contributed daguerreotype views of the Great Exhibition of 1851. These had interest, as showing the permanence of what were once thought would prove the least durable of light pictures. Few paper photographs of that date could now be shown in such integrity as these mercurialised plates of silver….” pp. 123-124.]

MAYALL.
“The Lounger: The Lounger’s Letter Box.” HARPER’S WEEKLY: A JOURNAL OF CIVILIZATION 3:110 (Feb. 5, 1859): 83. [“Dear Lounger,—A disconsolate bachelor, a torment to himself and desirous (if the conditions are not too hard) to be a torment to some lovely woman, requests you to solve a difficulty which has thrown him into the utmost despair: How far does a wife’s ownership over her husband extend? I am not so absurd, you know, as to suppose that a man after marriage has any free-will of his own. But there must be a limit somewhere to female—let us call it supervision; and I did think, until I met with this notice in a recent English paper, that both by law and common usage, a man might go and have his likeness taken without asking permission of his wife. The notice states that “`The National Portrait Gallery of Eminent Personages will commence a New Volume on the 8th of January, 1859, when will be published, by permission of Her Majesty, a Portrait of H.R.H. the Prince Consort, engraved on Steel, from a Photograph by Mayall.’ “I have heard before that Prince Albert is sadly obedient; but to me this is a very serious matter. Suppose I were married—and I assure you the case is easily supposable—I am just about to send to the publishers my great American Epic, and desire to have it illustrated with a portrait of General Washington and one of myself—now would I have to get the permission of Mrs. Brown, Jones, or Robinson (the name is neither here nor there), before placing myself in the hands of the inimitable Brady? ”I await your reply with anxiety. If you perversely decide in favor of the ladies, Matilda will have to wait till my Epic is published. That is decided. “Yours faithfully,B. B.” —Whatever ill-regulated bachelors may think of the duties and limitations of matrimony, and however wild their ideas may be of personal independence, they will be brought to a clear sense of their condition as soon as they are married. Why, evidently, if a husband might go without permission and have his daguerrotype taken, what is there that he might not do? It is simply opening the door of opportunity, which every wise wife keeps locked and the key in her pocket. Wherever the wife has brought her husband under proper control she suffers no step to be taken without her permission. Did B. B. never hear of the striped pig? But if the Queen of every Prince Albert did not insist upon her natural right of veto, does not B. B. see that “I want to go and have my daguerreotype taken, please, ma’am,” would gradually be a mere play upon words, and upon things also? Every self-willed husband would go “for a week’s shooting in the country,” under pretense of having his daguerreotype taken. No, Sir, the Queen is perfectly right. All the Master Alberts must be ticket-of-leave men, or they ought to be arrested, whatever they are doing.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1853.
“Photography.” HOUSEHOLD WORDS CONDUCTED BY CHARLES DICKENS 7:156 (Mar. 19, 1853): 54-61. [“We have been ringing artists’ bells. We have been haunting the dark chambers of photographers. We have found those gentlemen-our modern high priests of Apollo, the old sun god-very courteous, and not at all desirous to forbid to the world’s curiosity a knowledge of their inmost mysteries. We rang a bell in Regent Street—which was not all a bell, for it responded to our pull not with a clatter; but with one magical stroke— and instantly, as though we had been sounding an enchanted horn, the bolts were drawn by unseen hands, and the door turned upon its hinges. Being well read in old romance, we knew how to go on with the adventure. There were stairs before us which we mounted; swords we had none to draw. In a few seconds we reached another open door, that led into a chamber, of which the walls and tables were in great .part overlaid with metal curiously wrought. A thousand images .of human creatures of each sex and of every age—such as no painter ever has produced— glanced at us from all sides, as if they would have spoken to us out of the hard silver. Here a face was invisible: there it burst suddenly into view, and seemed to peep at us. Beautiful women smiled out of metal as polished and as hard as a knight’s armour on the eve of battle. Young chevaliers regarded us with faces tied and fastened down so that, as it seemed, they could by no struggle get their features loose out of the very twist and smirk they chanced to wear when they were captured and fixed. Here a grave man was reading on for ever, with his eyes upon the same line of his book; and there a soldier frowned with brow inanely fierce over a rampart of moustachios. The innumerable people whose eyes seemed to speak at us, but all whose tongues were silent; all whose limbs were fixed (although their faces seemed in a mysterious way to come and go as the lights shifted on the silver wall)—what people were these? Had they all trodden the steps by which we had ourselves ascended? Had they all breathed and moved, perhaps, about that very room? “They have,” answered the genius of the room, “they have all been executed here. If you mount farther up you also may be taken.” The figures in the room were not all figures of enchantment. There were present four unmetamorphosed people; three of them were ladies, of whom of course it would be rude flatly to say that there wan nothing of enchantment in their figures; but the fourth was a belted soldier with a red coat, a large cocked hat, and a heavy sword. Imprudently we had come out without even so much weapon as an umbrella. The taker of men himself came down to us, affable enough; but smiling faces have been long connected with mysterious designs. The soldier was, in fact, a man of peace, a lamb in wolfs clothing; an army doctor, by whose side, if army regulations suffered it, there should have hung a scalpel, not a sword., And the expert photographer—the magic of whose art is fostered by no worse feeling than vanity, or by a hundred purer sentiments —was followed very willingly upstairs. It was all wholesome latter-day magic that we went up to see practised under a London skylight. Light from the sky is, in fact, the chief part of the stock-in-trade of a photographer. Other light than the sun’s can be employed; but, while the sun continues to pour down to us a daily flow of light of the best quality, as cheap as health (we will not say as cheap as dirt, for dirt is a dear article), sunlight will be consumed by the photographers in preference to any other. A diffused, mellow light from the sky, which moderates the darkness of all shadows, is much better suited to the purpose of photography than a direct sunbeam; which creates hard contrasts of light and shade. For in the picture formed by light, whether on metal, glass, or paper, such hard contrasts will be made still harder. Lumpy shadows haunt the chambers of all bad photographers. He who would not be vexed by them and would produce a portrait in which the features shall be represented with the necessary softness, finds it generally advantageous not only to let the shades be cast upon the face in a room full of diffused rays—that is to say, under a skylight—but also by the waving of large black velvet screens over the head to moderate and stint the quantity of light that falls on features not thrown into shadow. For this reason few very good photographic pictures can be taken from objects illuminated only by a side light, as in a room with ordinary windows. The diffused light of cloudy weather, if the air be free from fog, hinders the process of photography only by lengthening the time occupied in taking impressions. Light, when it is jaundiced by a fog, is quite as liable as jaundiced men to give erroneous views of mankind. Photography, out of England, has made its most rapid advances, and produced its best results in the United States and in France; but, although both the French and the Americans have the advantage of a much purer and more certain supply of sunlight, it is satisfactory to know that the English photographers have thrown as much light of their own on the new science as any of their neighbours. Led by the military gentleman, whose cocked hat elevated him in our civilians’ eyes to something like the dignity of general, we mounted to the door; through which we poured our forces into the room under the skylight, where we found several defences thrown up in the shape of folding screens, and faced an unusually heavy fire from a round tower of a stove. To maintain a high and dry temperature is customary in the room used by the daguerreotypist for his operations; partly in order to protect more thoroughly the delicate surface of the plates carried about in it, partly to ensure to the sitter so much warmth as shall make perfect repose of all the features, in the most natural way, quite easy. For while the work of the photographer is done with an astonishing rapidity, he is one of the few men who especially desire of those with whom they have to deal that they should not look sharp. A group was to be made of Doctor Sword, and one lady, his wife. Another lady, probably his mother-in-law, declared candidly that when her turn came she must be held in some way, for she was too nervous to sit still. A younger lady, a friend to Mrs. Doctor S., looked interested. The group of two was to be first executed. Now the lady’s dress was not at all ill chosen for a photographic sitting or a masquerade. It included extensive scalp-fixings of a savage style introduced lately into this country, consisting of a ragged tuft of streamers, knotted with Birmingham pearls nearly as large as coat buttons; a great deal of gauze, wonderfully snipped about and overlaid with divers patterns; with a border of large thick white lilies round the cape. The lady was placed on a chair before the camera, though at some distance from it. The gentleman leaned over the back of the chair; symbolically to express the inclination that he had towards his wife: he was her leaning tower, he was her oak and she the nymph who sat secure under his shade. Under the point of the gentleman’s sword the Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan was placed to prop it up; and one or two trifling distortions were made at the extremity of the proposed picture to neutralise the contrary distortions that would be produced on that portion of the image in the camera. We then peeped under a black pall into the machine itself, where we beheld the gentleman and lady on a piece of ground-glass, standing on their heads. Leaving Doctor and Mrs. Sword to stand at ease and talk to one another, we, Messieurs Pen, departed from the camera for a few minutes and accompanied the artist to his den behind the scenes. The den of the photographer, in which he goes through those mysterious operations which are not submitted to the observation ‘of the sitter, is a small room lighted by a window, and communicating into a dark closet, veiled with heavy curtains. Our sense of the supernatural, always associated with dark closets, was excited strongly in this chamber, by the sound of a loud rumbling in the bowels of the house, and the visible departure of a portion of the wall to lower regions. We thought instinctively of bandits who wind victims up and down in moveable rooms or turn them up in treacherous screw bedsteads. But, of course, there was no danger to be apprehended. What we saw was, of course, only a contrivance to save labour in conveying pictures up or down for colouring or framing. Our consciences having been satisfied on this point, the expert magician took a plate of the prescribed size, made ready to his hand. Such plates consist of a thin layer of silver fixed upon copper, and are provided to the artist highly polished; but a final and superlative polish is given to each plate, with a “buff” or pad like a double handled razor strop, tinged with a fine mineral powder. Simple as it appears, the final polishing of the plate is an operation that can only succeed well under a practised pair of hands, that regulate their pressure by a refined sense of touch. The plate thus polished was brushed over finally and very lightly, as with the touch of a cat’s paw, with a warm pad of black velvet freshly taken from an oven. To witness the next process we went into the dark closet itself, the very head quarters of spectredom. There, having carefully excluded daylight, the operator lifted up the lid of a small bin, rapidly fixed the plate, silver side downwards, in a place made underneath for its reception, shut down the lid, and began to measure seconds by counting, talking between whiles, thus:—” One—that box—two—contains— three — chloride of iodine — four— strewn—five—six—at the bottom. Now!” (Presto, out came the plate in a twinkling, and was held against a sheet of white paper, upon which it reflected a ghastly straw colour by the light of a small jet of gas.) “Ah, tint not deep enough!” The plate was popped into its vapour bath again with magic quickness. “Seven — the action of the iodine ” (continued the operator, counting seconds, and teaching us our lesson in the same breath) “rising in vapour upon the surface—eleven —of the plate—twelve—causes it to take in succession—thirteen—fourteen—fifteen all the colours of the spectrum—sixteen— seventeen; and deposits upon it a film.” As he went on solemnly counting, we asked how long he exposed the plate to the visitation of that potent vapour. “A very short time,” he replied; ” but it varies— thirty—thirty-one—according to the light in the next room—thirty-five—thirty-six— thirty-seven. Adjusting the plate to the weather, thirty-eight—is the result of an acquired instinct—thirty-nine—forty. Now it is ready.” The plate was out, and its change to a deeper straw colour was shown. The lid of an adjoining bin was lifted, and the iodized plate was hung in the same way over another vapour; that of the chloride of bromine, that the wraiths of the two vapours might mingle, mingle, mingle as black spirits with white, blue spirits with gray. In this position it remained but a very short time, while we stood watching by in the dark cupboard. The plate having had its temper worked upon by these mysterious agencies was rendered so extremely sensitive, that it was requisite to confine it at once, in a dark hole or solitary cell, made ready for it in a wooden frame; a wooden slide was let down over it, and it was ready to be carried to the camera. Before quitting this part of the subject, we must add to the preceding description two or three external facts. We have been discussing hitherto the kernel without touching the nutshell in which these, like all other reasonable matters in this country, may be (and usually are) said to lie. The nutshell is in fact as important to a discussion in this country as the small end of the wedge or the British Lion:—In the action of light upon surfaces prepared in a certain manner lies the whole idea of photography. The camera-obscura is an old friend; how to fix chemically the illuminated images formed in the camera by light, was a problem at which Sir Humphrey Davy, half a century ago, was one of the first men who worked. Sir Humphrey succeeded no farther than in the imprinting of a faint image, but as he could not discover how to fix it, the whole subject was laid aside. Between the years 1814 and 1828, two Frenchmen, M. Daguerre and M. Niepce, were at work upon the problem. In 1827 M. Niepce produced before the Royal Society what he then called heliographs, sun pictures, formed and fixed upon glass, copper plated with silver, and well-polished tin. But, as he kept the secret of his processes, no scientific use was made of his discovery. M. Daguerre, working at the same problem, succeeded about the same time in fixing sun pictures on paper impregnated with nitrate of silver. M. Daguerre and M. Niepce having combined their knowledge to increase the value of their art, the French government— in the year 1839—acting nobly, as it has often acted in the interests of science, bought for the free use of the world the details of the new discovery. For the full disclosure of their secrets there was granted to M. Daguerre a life pension of two hundred and forty pounds (he died not many months ago), and a pension of one hundred and sixty pounds to the son of M. Niepce, with the reversion of one half to their widows. Six months before the disclosure of the processes in France, Mr. Fox Talbot in England had discovered a process leading to a like result—the fixing of sun-pictures upon paper. As the English parliament buys little for science, nothing unfortunately hindered the patenting of Mr. Talbot’s method. That patent in certain respects very much obstructed the advance of photography in this country, and great credit is due to Mr. Talbot for having recently and voluntarily abandoned his exclusive rights, and given his process to the public for all purposes and uses, except that of the portrait-taker. By so doing he acted in the spirit of a liberal art born in our own days, and peculiarly marked with the character of our own time. It does one good to think how photographers, even while exercising the new art for money, have pursued it with a generous ardour for its own sake, and emulate each other in the magnanimity with which they throw their own discoveries into the common heap, and scorn to check the progress of their art for any selfish motive. After the completion of the French discovery two daguerreotype establishments were formed in London armed with patent rights, and their proprietors, Messrs. Claudet and Beard, do in fact still hold those rights, of which they have long cheerfully permitted the infringement. Mr. Beard tried to enforce them only once, we believe; and M. Claudet, with distinguished liberality, never. At first the sitting was a long one, for the original daguerreotype plate was prepared only with iodine. We see it stated in the jury reports of the Great Exhibition, that to procure daguerreotype portraits, it was then “required that a person should sit without moving for twenty-five minutes in a glaring sunshine.” That is a glaring impossibility, and in fact the statement is wrong. It is to M. Claudet that the public is indebted for the greater ease we now enjoy in photographic sittings, and it is the same gentleman who informs us that five minutes—not five-and-twenty—was the time required for the formation of a good picture on the plates prepared in the old way. The discovery of the accelerating process, by the use of the two chlorides of iodine and bromine, was at once given to all photographers by M. Claudet; it having been made public by him, in England, through the Royal Society, and in France, through the Academic des Sciences. By the use of this double application, plates are made so sensitive that portraits may be taken in a period varying, according to the measure of the light, between a second and a minute. We have said something about varying the degree of sensitiveness in the plate according to the weather. In the account just given of our visit to a photographic studio, it will be seen that a very skilful artist (Mr. Mayall) lessens at times the sensitiveness of the plate, but in this respect the practice is not uniform. In illustration of the extreme sensitiveness that can be communicated to the prepared plate, reference has often been made to an experiment performed at a meeting of the Royal Society, the account of which we quote from Dr. Lardner. “A printed paper was fastened upon the face of a wheel, which was put in revolution with such rapidity that the characters on the paper ceased to be visible. The camera, with the prepared photographic surface, being placed opposite the wheel and properly adjusted, the room was darkened. The room and wheel were then illuminated, for an instant, by a strong spark taken from the conductor of a powerful electric machine. This instantaneous appearance of the wheel before the camera was sufficient to produce a perfect picture.” In reading of this experiment we are not to direct our attention to the sensitiveness of the plate so much as to the power of the light. Such a spark as was taken for the purpose produced an instantaneous light, greatly surpassing in intensity the ordinary sun light used by the photographers. M. Claudet, in reply to our questions about the adjustment of the sensitiveness of his plates, replied simply, “I always try to make my plates as sensitive as possible.” A walk through his gallery satisfied us that if, by so doing, he increases the demand on his dexterity in sunny weather, the demand is met. His results fully justify his practice. We may say the same for Mr. Mayall, the photographer whose operations led us into the preceding digression. From the dark cupboard, cleared by a strong up draught of escaping fumes, we brought the prepared plate in its frame, carefully excluded from the light by a protecting slide. The frame was made to fit into the camera, but before placing it, the final adjustment of the sitters had to be made. The Doctor and his lady having resumed their positions, we again observed, upon the ground glass of the camera, the artistic effect of the group in an inverted miniature, coloured of course. This observation was made with the head thrust under a black velvet pall. Upon the ground glass we saw drawn four squares, one within another, and we remembered well what pictures we had seen of trines and squares and houses of the planets drawn by Albertus Magnus and Agrippa. These were, however, squares, the adept told us, corresponding respectively in size to the plates, differing in price. on which it is in the choice of the sitter to have a likeness taken. A frame corresponding to each size has the plate so fixed in it that, when placed in the camera, it occupies precisely the position of the square marked on the glass. Our picture was to be of the third size—the third square was to be the house of Mars and Venus—and the object of the operator was to arrange the sitters and the camera in such a way as to procure a telling group within the boundaries of that third square upon the glass. This having been done, and a fixed point supplied, on which the eyes should feast, the velvet pall was thrown over the back of the camera to exclude the light, and a black stopper (the obturator) was clapped over the glass in front, making the chamber of the box quite dark. The frame was then inserted in its place, the slide removed, and the prepared silver reposing in the darkness was laid open to receive the meditated shock upon its sensibility. The sitters were requested then to close their eyes for a minute, that the eyelids might be rested, then to look fixedly in the direction indicated by a little picture pinned against a screen. Then “Now, quite still; try to look pleasant ‘—a little pleasanter! ” The cap was off, and the two figures, fixed as statues, shone upon the magic mirror in the camera, rigidly pleasant. In half a minute,—counted accurately by the operator—suddenly, the stopper was again clapped over the glass in front; the slide was let down over the tablet, upon which light, having done its work, must shine no more until the plate was light-proof. Mars and Venus in conjunction having entered the third house, we retired into the necromancer’s den to observe what would follow. The necromancer there addressed us in manner following: “The chemical action of light has decomposed the delicate compound formed upon this tablet between the silver and the chlorides of iodine and bromine. The decomposition has been greatest, of course, where the light has been most intense, and its action has been manifested everywhere by the piercing of the sensitive surface with minute holes. Where the light has been the strongest, the number of these microscopic holes, contained upon a space equal to the area of a pin’s head, is greater than in those parts on which the chemical action of the light has not been so intense. The portrait is thus minutely and delicately dotted out, dots signifying light. That is the sun picture which I now hold in my hand.” After this brief parliamentary address the adept went on with his labour. Still hiding his dark deeds from the face of day he took the plate to a small bath of quicksilver, from which a subtle vapour slowly ascended, the quicksilver being placed over the faint blue flame of a spirit-lamp. Suspended over this bath it received upon its polished surface the fine vapour; which, penetrating into the minute holes formed by light upon the plate, and there condensing into microscopic drops, tinged out with its own substance the surface on which light had fallen—more abundant where its action had been greatest, and less marked where the decomposition had been less. When this process was complete, the picture was complete; all the lights being expressed and graduated by a white metal, and the shadows by the darker ground. There were the allied images of gentleman and lady revealed suddenly before us with a startling accuracy, only unnaturally sensitive and altogether wanting in stability of character. Nothing remained then but to fix the picture; to destroy the sensitiveness of the surface. This was done by pouring over it some dilute pyrogallic acid, and finally submitting it to the action of a salt of gold; of which a solution was washed over the plate, and warmed upon it for one or two minutes. The portrait was in this way perfectly spellbound. It might be carried about loose in the pocket and indiscriminately handled, without suffering more hurt to its charms than can be worked by those ugly disenchanters, grease and dirt and scratches. For protection, however, against these, and for the better setting off of the picture, it will be delivered to its owner as a well known imp was once sold, in a bottle under glass; and as the Moors were arch magicians, with traditions of Bagdad about them, it will very fitly be enclosed in a morocco case. Truly, a fine picture it is. The lady’s dress suggests upon the plate as much delicate workmanship as would have given labour for a month to the most skilful of painters. The lilies that we did not like upon the cape, how exquisite they look here in the picture! But as this group was destined to be coloured, we were courteously invited to the colouring room, a tiny closet in which two damsels were busily at work, one upon a lady’s dress, the other upon the forehead of a gentleman, putting in the yellow rather lavishly, but with a good effect. “The faces,” she informed us, “must be coloured strongly, or they will be put out by the bright blue sky.” We pointed to a small box labelled “Sky,” remarking that the fair painters were magicians, to carry the sky in a wafer-box. To which one of them promptly answered “Yes; and Ogres, too, for that pill-box contains gentlemen’s and ladies’ “Flesh.” These terrific creatures—who had quite the ways of damsels able to eat rice pudding in an honest manner—then made us acquainted with a few dry facts. The colours used by them were all dry minerals, and were laid on with the fine point of a dry brush; pointed between the lips, and left to become dry before using. A little rubbing caused these tints to adhere to the minute pores upon the plate. Each colour was of course rubbed on with its own brush, and so expertly, that a. large plate very elaborately painted, with a great deal of unquestionable taste, had been, as .we were told, the work only of an hour. On a subsequent occasion, we saw in the same room our picture of the Doctor under the painter’s hands, and undergoing flattery. We admired the subdued tone which the artist had, as we thought, taken the wise liberty of giving to the glare of the red coat. “Yes,” she replied, ” but I must make it redder presently; when we don’t paint coats bright enough, people complain. They tell us that we make them look as if they wore old clothes.” And we may observe here that another illustration of our vanities was furnished to us on a different occasion. Daguerreotype plates commonly present faces as they would be seen in a looking-glass, that is to say, reversed: the left side of the face, in nature, appearing upon the right side of the miniature. That is the ordinary aspect in which every one sees his own face, for it is only possible for him to behold it reflected in a mirror. This reversing, of course, alters in the slightest degree the similitude. The sitter himself is generally satisfied. But M. Claudet has taken up the parable of the poet; and has undertaken to be the kind soul who, by virtue of a scientific notion, “Wad the giftie gie us. To see ourselves as others see us.” Few of us would thank him for it morally, and it is a curious fact that few of us are content to have even our faces shown to us as others see them. The non-inverted daguerreotypes differ too much from the dear images of self that we are used to learn by heart out of our looking-glasses. They invariably please the friend to whom they are to be given, but they frequently displease the sitter. For this reason, though M. Claudet has of course made public the secret of his “giftie,” we are not aware that any other photographer has thought it profitable for his use. Somebody asks, “how are those non-inverted images produced?” The question causes us again to drop the kernel of our story, and apply ourselves to a discussion of the nutshell. A daguerreotype formed in the usual way and inverted, if held before a looking-glass, becomes again inverted, and shows therefore a non-inverted picture of the person whom it represents. If the picture in the camera fell, by a previous reflection, inverted on the plate, it would in the same way be restored by a second inversion to its first position. This object could not be attained by any arrangement of glass mirror in the camera, because a piece of looking-glass reflects both from its outer surface and from the quicksilver behind, and this, though unimportant for all ordinary purposes, would make it perfectly unfit for photographic use. A piece of polished metal would have but a single surface; but the exquisite polish necessary would make the preparation of it difficult and costly, and its liability to damage great. The first reflection is made, therefore, by turning the side of the camera to the sitter and causing his image to fall upon one face of a large prism placed before the glasses otherwise in use: an image is then deflected into the camera, which falls in the required manner on the plate. In the present state of photographic art, no miniature can be utterly free from distortion; but distortion can be modified and corrected by the skilful pose of the sitter, and by the management of the artist. The lens of the camera being convex (in order to diminish the object, and to concentrate the rays of light upon the silver plate) the most prominent parts of the figure to be transferred—those parts, indeed, nearest to the apex of the lens—will appear disproportionately large. If you look through a diminishing glass at a friend who holds his fist before his lace, you will find the face very much diminished in proportion to the appearance of the fist. The clever artist, therefore, so disposes his sitter, that hands, nose, lips, &c., shall be all as nearly as possible on the same plane in apposition to the lens. In a sitting figure hands placed on the knees would seem prodigious—placed on or near hips, no more prominent than the tip of the nose, they would seem of a natural size. It is for this reason that daguerreotypes taken from pictures instead of living figures, are never distorted, because they are actually on a flat surface. Concerning the action of light in the formation of the picture on the iodized plate within the camera, one or two facts are curious. Light contains rays that are not luminous. In the dark spaces above and below the solar spectrum some of the most decided chemical effects of light are manifested. It is probable that the chemical rays of light are, to our eyes, perfectly dark. Cover a picture with a piece of yellow glass, and you can see it very well. But place it before the camera, and you will get no photographic copy. Cover a picture with a piece of dark blue glass, and it is totally invisible; but, placed before the camera, the chemical rays pass through and imprint a photographic image as distinct and clear as if there had been no blue glass whatever. The distinct properties of the yellow and blue rays are manifested as strongly in the germination of plants. Germination is prevented by the action of the yellow ray, while to the blue ray it is mainly indebted. The rays that have passed through to form the picture, have been called the photogenic rays: they refract not quite in the same way as the luminous or colorific rays, and therefore the focus of the photogenic picture and that of the picture thrown on the ground glass will not exactly coincide. For this, allowance has to be made in practice, and accurate instruments for ascertaining the true photogenic focus have been invented, one by M. Claudet, and another by Mr. G. Knight. They are called Focimeters. There are hidden mysteries, however, connected with this portion of the subject. Means have been already here and there discovered, by which the colours of the spectrum may be printed at once on photographic tablets, and the sun—most brilliant of artists—may paint his pictures at the same time that he is engraving them. The process is not yet disclosed. Mr. A. Hill, of New York, affirms that he had taken many pictures from Nature, having all the beauty of natural colouring upon them. A new material is said to have been introduced in aid of this effect. When all mechanical details have been perfected, we may therefore expect this new step to be made publicly, by which Apollo will be raised above Apelles in the world of art. The application of photography to the stereoscope produces an extremely pretty toy, that is of no use except as an elegant and valuable illustration of a train of scientific reasoning. The instrument itself was invented some years since by Professor Wheatstone, to illustrate his discovery of the principles of binocular vision. In 1849 Sir David Brewster exhibited to the British Association at Birmingham a stereoscope adapted to the inspection of daguerreotype pictures. Afterwards he happened to describe the instrument to an optician in Paris, M. Duboscq Soleil, who being an enterprising man, constructed a number of such instruments on speculation. At the beginning of 1851 some of these were exhibited at one of the soirees of Lord Rosse; they excited attention, and the photographers of London, seizing the notion, very soon began to take stereoscopic portraits. In the stereoscope two exactly similar pictures are placed side by aide under a pair of prisms, which are so adjusted, that one image falls on each eye, and the images on the two eyes do not fall on precisely corresponding parts. This gives the idea of distance. For it is to the use of two eyes that we are indebted for the facility with which we derive ideas of form, solidity, and distance. There is only one point before us, to which both eyes can be turned in the same way at the same time. Every other point before and behind that will fall upon both eyes, will fall upon the retina of each eye in a different place, and the amount of variation presents itself through the optic nerve to the brain as the idea of distance. Upon this hint the stereoscope is formed, and the effects of roundness and distance are presented to the mind by a pair of flat photographic pictures. M. Claudet has constructed an ingenious variation on the ordinary stereoscope, by placing under it two plates not perfectly identical. In one, for example, there are two men fighting: one strikes, the other wards. The companion plate contains precisely the same men; with this difference in their attitude, that the one who struck now wards, and the aggressor stands on the defensive. In looking at this group, and at the same time rapidly moving to and fro a small slide behind the glasses, which covers now one eye and now another, the two impressions run into each other and produce the appearance of an active sparring match. Again, a needle-woman, represented on one plate with her needle in her work, and in the other with her thread drawn out to its full length, appears, when the slide is shifted to and fro, to be industriously sewing. Among ingenious contrivances we ought not to omit to rank Mr. Mayall’s very neat method of producing what are called crayon portraits in daguerreotype. His plan it to place between the sitter and the camera a revolving plate, having a hole cut into the middle of it, from which there proceed broad rays as of the sun upon a signboard. The result is a picture upon which the head is engraved with unusual distinctness, and the bust is gradually shaded down into the general colour of the plate, so that the effect is that of a crayon portrait. Photographic processes on glass and paper are even more valuable as aids to knowledge than daguerreotypes. There are many processes by which photographic impressions may be taken upon paper and glass; a book full of them lies at this moment before us: we have ourselves seen two, and shall confine ourselves to the telling of a part of our experience. We rang the artist’s bell of Mr. Henneman in Regent street, who takes very good portraits upon paper by a process cousin to the Talbotype. By that gentleman we were introduced into a neat little chamber lighted by gas, with a few pans and chemicals upon a counter. His process was excessively simple: he would show it to us. He took a square of glass, cleaned it very perfectly, then holding it up by one corner with the left hand, he poured over the centre of the glass some collodion, which is, as most people know, gun-cotton dissolved in ether. By a few movements of the left hand, which appear easy, but are acquired with trouble, the collodion was caused to flow into an even coat over the surface of the glass, and the excess was poured off at another corner. To do this by a few left-handed movements without causing any ripple upon the collodion adhering to the glass is really very difficult. This done, the plate was left till the ether had almost evaporated, and deposited a film of gun-cotton—which is in fact a delicate paper—spread evenly over the surface of the glass. The glass covered with this delicate paper, before it was yet quite dry, was plunged carefully into a pan or bath, containing a solution of nitrate of silver, about eight grains of it to every hundred of distilled water. In about two minutes it was taken out, and ready for the camera. It was a sheet of glass covered with a fine film of cotton-paper impregnated with nitrate of silver, a colourless salt blackened by light. It was removed in a dark frame to the camera. Then an assistant, opening a book, assumed an. attitude and sat for his picture. In a few seconds it was taken in the usual way, and the glass carried again into the operator’s room. There it was dipped into another bath—a bath of pyrogallic acid —and the impression soon became apparent. To bring it out with greater force it was then dipped into a second and much weaker bath of nitrate of silver. The image was then made perfect; but, as the light parts were all depicted by the blackest shades, and the black parts were left white, the courteous assistant was there represented as a negro. That negro stage was not of course the finished portrait, it was “the negative”—or stereotype plate, as it were—from which, after it had been fixed with a solution of the sulphate of the peroxyde of iron, any number of impressions could be taken. For it is obvious that if a plate like this be placed on sensitive paper, and exposed to daylight, the whole process will be reversed. The black face will obstruct -the passage of the light and leave a white face underneath, the white hair will allow the light to pass, making black hair below, and so on. Impressions thus taken on paper, and afterwards fixed, may either serve tor portraits, as they are, or, like the silver plates, they may be coloured. The paper processes, of which we say so little, are in fact practically the most important branches of the art of the photographer. For it is not only—or indeed chiefly—by the reproduction of our own features that we bring photography into the service of our race. One application of the art has produced an apparatus which enables many natural phenomena to register themselves. Mr. Brooke’s little cylinder of photographic paper, revolving in measured time under a pencil of light thrown from a small mirror attached to a moving magnet or an anemometer, tells for itself the tale of every twelve hours’ work, and has already superseded the hard night-work that was necessary formerly at the Greenwich, and at other great observatories. Photography already has been found available by the astronomer; the moon has sat for a full-face picture, and there is hope that in a short time photographic paper will become a common auxiliary to the telescope. History will be indebted to photography for fac-similes of documents and volumes that have perished; travellers may bring home incontestible transcripts of inscriptions upon monuments, or foreign scenery. The artist will no longer be delayed in travelling to execute his sketches on the spot. He can now wander at his ease, and bring home photographic views, from which to work, as sculptors from the model. Photography is a young art, but from its present aspect we can judge what power it will have in its maturity. The mind may readily become bewildered among expectations, but one thing will suggest many. We understand that a catalogue of the national library of Paris has been commenced, in which each work is designated by a photographic miniature of its title-page.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Photograph Publications: Myall’s [sic Mayall’s] Daguerreotypes.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:1 (Apr. 15, 1852): 8. [“From “The Athenaeum.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“J. E. Mayall’s Daguerreotypes.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:2 (May 1, 1852): 23-24. [“From “The Athenaeum.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Mayall’s Daguerreotype of the Balloon Ascent of the Council of the British Association.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:12 (Oct. 1, 1852): 184. [“From “The Athenaeum.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“One of the London Sights.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:12 (Oct. 1, 1852): 183. [“From “Liverpool Mail.” Praise for Mayall’s Gallery”]

EXHIBITIONS: 1851: LONDON: GREAT EXHIBITION OF THE INDUSTRY OF ALL NATIONS..
“Photography.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:14 (Nov. 1, 1852): 213-214. [“From “Lectures on the World’s Fair.” Describes the photography at the exhibition in general. Mentions Mayall; Martens; Bayard; Flacheron; Ross & Thompson; Buckle; Hill & Adamson; Henneman & Malone; Owen; Paul Pretsch by name.”]

BY COUNTRY: USA: 1852.
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:17 (Dec. 15, 1852): 271-272. [“Bailey (Winchester, VA); J. H. & J. Selkirk (Matagora, TX); Douglas (St. Louis, MO); Wellington (Nashville, TN); Davis (Cincinnati, OH); Whitney & Denny (Rochester, NY stockdealers); Mayall (London); Mercer (formerly of Rochester, NY) is dead;North (formerly Boston, MA, now Cleveland, OH); Cooley(Springfield, MA); Wells (Northampton, MA); Brown (Manchester);G. S. Cook (now at Charleston, SC); Wellman (Georgeton, SC); Dr. Barr (Harrisburg, PA) is sick; Brady (NYC); Ellis (formerly Providence, RI, now in Lynn, MA); Gurney & Litch; Churchill (Albany, NY); McBride (Albany, NY).”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“A Convenient Process for Photographs upon Paper and Glass.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:20 (Feb. 1, 1853): 315-320. [“Letter from Mayall, defending himself from earlier commentsin the “HJ,” includes his formulae and practices”]

BY COUNTRY: GREAT BRITAIN: 1853.
Helio. “Our Foreign Correspondent.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:20 (Feb. 1, 1853): 313-315. [“Describes work of Kilburn, Mayall, etc.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Collodion.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:21 (Feb. 15, 1853): 335. [“Additional information, received after the first paper was published”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Daguerreotype Movements: Mayall of London.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:22 (Mar. 1, 1853): 352. [“From the “London Morning Chronicle.”]

BY COUNTRY: GREAT BRITAIN: 1853.
Helio. “Our Foreign Correspondent: State of the Daguerreotype Art in London – Photographic Society, etc.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 4:23 (Mar. 15, 1853): 364-366. [“Describes galleries of Beard; Kilburn; Claudet; Mayall; Sherman & Carbanati. Discusses the formation of the Photographic Society.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Portrait of Richard Cobden, Esq., M. P.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:2/3 (May 1 – 15, 1853): 40. [“Not credited, but a review of this print, probably from the “Athenaeum,” with a note that Mayall had sent a copy to the editor”]

BY COUNTRY: USA: 1853.
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:15 (Nov. 15, 1853): 238-239. [“Richards (Philadelphia, PA); G. W. Squires partnering with Thompson’s Gallery, NYC); F. A. Brown (Manchester, NH); L. Buel(OH); O. W. Horton (OH); A. R. Cole (Zanesville, OH); J. F. Ryder(OH); E. Long (St. Louis, MO); Mayall; Barnes (Mobile, AL);Webster & Brother (NYC); Gibbs (Lynchburg, VA); McClees & Germon (Philadelphia, PA) producing paper prints; O. R. Benton (Buffalo,NY); White (Atlanta, GA) shot dead.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:19 (Jan. 15, 1854): 303. [“From “Athenaeum.”]

BY COUNTRY: USA: 1854.
“Daguerreotype Movements.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 5:21 (Feb. 15, 1854): 335-336. [“A. C. Partridge (Wheeling, VA); Hartmann (NYC); Dr. Wilde (Savannah, GA); Hutchings (NYC) committed suicide; Shaw, of Memphis, dead; Caleb Hunt (Cleveland, OH); C. North (Cleveland, OH); Mrs. Short (Cleveland, OH); Johnson & Fellows (Cleveland, OH); Bisbee (Dayton, OH); Richards (Philadelphia, PA); J. E. Mayall (London); etc.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “Albumen Process on Glass.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 6:24 (Apr. 1, 1855): 377-381. [“From “J. of Photo. Soc., London.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
Mayall, J. E. “A New Collodion for Field Work.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 11:4 (June 15, 1859): 57-60. [“From “Liverpool Photo. J.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Photographs of Royalty.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 12:10 (Sept. 15, 1860): 146-147. [J. E. Mayall, Esq., of No. 224 Regent St., London, one of the most eminent Photographers in England, has just published a series of portraits of the Royal family.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Garibaldi and the Photographer.” HUMPHREY’S JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY, AND THE ALLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES 16:2 (May 15, 1864): 29. [Garibaldi hounded by photographers during his trip to England, asking for his portrait. Finally he chose Mayall.]

ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS (1842–1869) London, England
Anyone who had been diligent enough to go through the ILLUSTRATED LONDEN NEWS page by page from 1842 through 1869 would have found references to photography in its various manifestations mentioned almost three thousand times; and they would also have found that a very high percentage of those mentions were there for indicating the original source of an illustration in the magazine. And one must assume that there were more, perhaps many more, instances when the magazine failed to credit its photographic sources, or failed to mention that photographs from their own gathered image collections or picture files were used by their artists to provide accurate details or backgrounds for some sketch.
Herbert Ingram, a news agent who had noticed that newspapers sold more copies when they carried pictures, published the first issue of the Illustrated London News on Saturday, May 14, 1842, and thus initiated the first pictorial weekly newspaper; an act which subsequently led to a revolution in illustrated journalism. The inaugural issue of the ILN covered political, social and economic news both in England and abroad, with articles as broadly diverse as Queen Victoria’s ceremonial ball, the latest fashions in Paris, a fire in Hamburg, the war in Afghanistan, and sheep farming in Australia; and it thus was already displaying its ambitious intentions to bring the events of the known world to its British audience. There were about twenty wood engravings and an additional number of decorative figures dropped into the three-column format over the sixteen pages of the first issue. Most of the woodcuts are single block, sized to fit within one column, while a few stretch to double column size. They are, for the most part, generic in nature, only abstractly connected to the subject of the article, and basically serve to complement the texts. The exception to this is a two page feature on Queen Victoria’s masked ball. Eight engravings have been placed on two pages, with one of these woodcuts approximately covering the bottom third of one page. This article presents a crude but powerful new dynamic of presentation, an adjustment of balance between its visual and textual features. A simple as this seems, it was attractive to Ingram’s intended audience and the newspaper caught on like wildfire. By the second issue the editor could proudly state that he was publishing the second largest weekly newspaper in Great Britain. And the journal continued to rapidly expand, as Ingram poured more money and energy into acquiring better writers, better artists and better engravers.
The ILN quickly became the pre-eminent illustrated magazine of the era. With its weekly publication schedule, its large 11 x 16 inch page size, its copious illustrations,–it claimed to have printed 7750 illustrations on 876 pages in its first full year– and its firm editorial grip as the unofficial voice of the “Respectable Families of England,” established the standard and created the style that spawned a host of imitators and competitors in England and abroad. At its inception the ILN was committed to cover the four-fold branches of “Literature, Poetry, History, and Intelligence of the Social World.” While the magazine maintained some interest in all of these categories throughout its evolution, very quickly current events became a dominant presence in the journal.
As a luxuriously illustrated weekly requiring a certain lead time for publication, the magazine –as were all subsequent illustrated weeklies– was immediately positioned in a specific place within the structure of the news media of the time. The ILN was seldom the first organ to report breaking news or “hard news.” This was left to the more flexible daily papers.. The ILN’s function came to be to make events and personages already discussed in the dispatches and daily newspapers both more real and more understandable, and thus provide a larger frame of reference for facts already known. The illustrated paper also provided an excellent forum for “softer” news – what have been called “feature stories.”
The Illustrated London News utilized photographic sources for its groundbreaking illustrated formats from the first. Ingram hired Antoine Claudet to climb to the summit of the Duke of York’s Column in London and take a series of daguerreotypes of the city; which were then transformed into a very large (approximately 4 feet by 3 feet) engraved panoramic view of London which was used very successfully by the journal as a publicity/promotional device to early subscribers and a copy of which was apparently tipped-into the Jan. 7, 1843 issue, or at least, an extensive guide for “reading” the various buildings, etc. represented in the engraving was published in that issue. In the August 19, 1843 issue of the journal Miss Elizabeth Sheridan Carey submitted the poem “Lines Written on Seeing a Daguerreotype Portrait of a Lady,” which was illustrated with a woodcut illustration on an “operator” taking a portrait in Richard Beard’s London studio. Poetry did not long continue to be a significant feature of the editorial make-up of the ILN, but this poem’s publication is one indication that the nascent medium was diffusing from the purlieu of the small group of scientists and ardent amateurs into the larger social arena through the channel of the new portrait studios–and the poem also indicates that the very facts of photography were still considered “newsworthy.”
The magazine began, as soon as it was practical to do so, to publish portraits taken from daguerreotype sources – a practice which it frequently extolled as providing the journal with more accurate representations of the individual being pictured. The first portraits taken from the daguerreotype were published on January 13th, 1844, in an article about a series of musical concerts. The article is illustrated with portraits of three musicians. In addition to the notion that professional performers were as quick then as they are now to utilize new technologies for publicity, the editor’s brief comment is instructive. “The portraits of Master Thirlwall and of M. Baumann, are copied from photographic plates, taken by Beard’s improved process,… the portrait of Mr. Richardson is copied from an oil painting, but is, in our opinion, by no means so good as the other two.”
More portraits taken from daguerreotypes appeared slowly, but with increasing frequency in the ILN. During the remainder of the decade approximately twenty additional portraits were so credited, indicative of the still relatively limited scale of the photography being practiced in England — where strong copyright restrictions had severely limited the number of professional studios, restrained the size of the population of practicing photographers, and kept the price of portraits relatively expensive. Undoubtedly the small, mirror-surfaced, and fragile daguerreotypes were also much more difficult for the engravers to work with as well. However, the editors of the magazine were seeking both the specificity and the credibility in their news illustrations that was embodied in the daguerreotype and it was clear that they responded to daguerreotypes with favor. During the next few years both the daguerreotype and calotype processes were improved, the wet-collodian process was invented, the stereoscope evolved from a scientist’s toy into a major educational and entertainment tool, William H. F. Talbot’s copyright was lifted, and the use of photography expanded rapidly throughout England. The number of photographically engendered images in the ILN expanded rapidly as well. From 1850 to 1859 the ILN published portraits by thirty-seven photographers count number, with the major London studios of John Watkins contributing sixty-two images and John Mayall adding another fifty-nine. During the twenty years between 1850 and 1870 the ILN published almost 900 portraits taken by at least 142 photographers. Richard Beard, Antoine Claudet, William E. Kilburn, Maull & Polyblank, John Mayall, and Herbert Watkins each published more than thirty portraits, while the team of John & Charles Watkins contributed 233 portraits.
The ILN also quickly began to use and credit views of objects or events taken from daguerreotypes; although these were, of course, rarer. The first view credited from a daguerreotype, published in the Mar. 2, 1845 issue, was of an “ice tree,” of frozen mist which had been created by unusually cold weather from a small fountain in London. The editors felt it important to note that the fugitive and fragile phenomenon collapsed as the photographer was attempting a second daguerreotype. But the editors were pleased to be able to display a compellingly real image of a fragile aspect of a vanished reality. The strong implication, as the daguerreotype portraitists of the era had already been quick to point out with their slogan to “secure the shadow ere the substance fade,” was that images derived from photography were able to do this convincingly. The next daguerreotype view published in the ILN, on August 9, 1845, a view of the city of Smyrna, foretells the future strength of the magazine’s use of photography to provide careful and accurate visual reportage of events from around the world. Throughout the 1840s other views were published in the magazine. William Kilburn provided two outdoor views of the Horticultural Society’s fete at Chiswick in the July 15, 1848 issue. The same issue printed French daguerreotypes of the huge public funeral of “the victims of June,” at the Place de la Concorde, Paris. On August 19, 1848 the Reverend Calvert T. Jones provided both calotype and daguerreotype views of Swansea, where the British Association was meeting that year. In an article illustrated with several precisely rendered sketches showing the construction of a large statue of General Wellington, published on July 11, 1846, the editor’s comment “… the Illustrations, represented with Daguerreotype fidelity the locus in quo this stupendous work has been designed and executed…” clearly indicated the direction the editors wanted to go with their news illustrations. Thus news illustrations became more accurate and informative.
When the ILN began in 1842 the visual grammar of its illustrations were drawn in a style closely tied to the conventions of representation inherited from 18th century engraving, but the visual grammar or style of this type of wood-engraved illustration moved rapidly from a style of sketchy impressionism influenced by the wood engravings of Thomas Bewick to a more detailed and veristic presentation which presented a more naturalistic interpretation of persons, scenes and events. In an astonishingly short time (only a few years)–the dominant visual mode of representing the everyday world was simply overturned and a new paradigm of representation was established. The advent of photography destabilized or dominated almost all representational media throughout the remainder of the century as the artists of those media responded positively or negatively (or both simultaneously) to this new medium, but never more thoroughly than in the representation of events in the illustrated journals of the period. During the next three decades this visual rhetoric changed radically, moving to a style of reportage that was more strongly influenced by the camera’s codes of representation than those embedded in the inherited modes of representation of the traditional visual art mediums.
This style became so dominant by the 1860s that it is often very difficult to know if the original image which was used to generate the woodcut was from an artist’s sketch or from a photograph –or from a combination of both. For the journal also seems to have begun to build up a visual archive or picture file of photographic sources for its artists to utilize when drawing their own illustrations of distant events or foreign lands; and more than one illustration is credited with the comment that some part of the illustration –eg., an image of a statue in a square, surrounded by crowds of people—was taken from a daguerreotype source. This practice flourished in the mid 1850s, when paper photographs became more readily available, and many of the backgrounds or buildings or specific items in a general scene were drawn by the artists from photographs in the picture file. And obviously, for every instance when the editor took the time and space to acknowledge this practice, there were many more times when it simply happened.
In some ways the interest in photography and the high point of its use by the ILN occurred in the 1850s, while the magazine was under the editorship of Charles MacKay, the popular Scottish poet and editor who took over in 1847. Mr. Kilburn, brother to the famous London-based professional photographer, sent his portraits of Aboriginal Australians to be published in the January 26, 1850 issue. Throughout 1851 both Antoine Claudet and Richard Beard provided many views of the interior and exhibitions of that marvelous phenomenon of the modern world –the International Exhibition at the Crystal Palace. The interest in photography which had been stirred by its use at the Crystal Palace was kept in the public’s attention throughout 1852 in a group of articles on the technical aspects of the medium. [See: “The Stereoscope, Pseudoscope and Solid Daguerreotypes,” (Jan. 24, 1852):77-78; “The Stereoscope,” (Mar. 20, 1852):229-30; “Science: Photography – Its Origin, Progress and Present State,” (July 31, 1852):87, and (Aug. 28, 1852):176.]
On January 1st, 1853, the ILN reviewed the exhibition of photography at the Society of Arts, London –an event that contributed towards the formation of the Photographic Society, in turn reported on in the April 2, 1853 issue. Reviews of the Photographic Society’s annual exhibitions continued throughout the 1850s, and frequently the magazine reviewed publications of the better-known photographers such as Roger Fenton and Philip Henry Delamotte. Then the conflict which would become known as the Crimean War broke out and James Robertson began providing views of Turkey and scenes of the Allied troops there in 1854. These were followed by similar photographs by Roger Fenton and others in 1855.
At the end of 1854 the ILN could, with pride, describe itself and its operations as follows:
“…twenty-four large pages – seventy-two columns – of the most interesting information, carefully selected,… interspersed with a variety of charming Engravings, with Leading Articles on the chief topics of the day. The Illustrated London News has, by its impartial and consistent advocacy of the welfare of the Public, secured for itself a political influence scarcely second to any Newspaper in the Empire,… The means by which the Gallery of Pictures in the Illustrated London News is produced, present striking instances of rapidity, skill, and truthful representation, such as can only be insured in an age whose scientific triumphs, it has been said, bid fair “to annihilate time and space.” The Steamboat, the Railway, and the Daguerreotype have greatly aided the genius of Art in the execution of the enterprise which first projected the Illustrated London News, in which the Pictures and Letterpress possess the same living interest… The production of a Picture in the Illustrated London News is briefly told. The locality, event, or incident is sketched by an eye-witness, one of the professional artists of the Journal, or one of the contributors at home or abroad. Perchance it is a piece of artistic news from the seat of war, sketched in the “tented field,” in the fleet, or before the fortress walls; and is forthwith dispatched by post. In many cases the photographic process is employed,…” [“The Illustrated News: To the 1,000,000 Readers.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 25:719 (Dec. 23, 1854): 681.]
Throughout the century the ILN commissioned a host of authors, artists and draughtsmen to cover the social and cultural events and activities, the scientific inventions and artistic accomplishments, and even the daily events and interests of the British public as well as those of foreigners. It also reported on the many explorations and wars of England and other countries around the world through the period. In the 1850s the ILN also developed a world-wide network of correspondents and illustrators who became, in effect, the core of one of the most effective and widespread information gathering networks in history, which provided the magazine with a steady stream of material about events transpiring all around the globe. The heart of this network was the many British officers of the various military forces and administrative bureaucracies which England used to maintain its far-flung Empire. Many of these men learned photography as an accessory skill to their own professions, and together they provided views from every part of the earth to the semiofficial voice of British policy. The work of these amateur correspondents was supplemented with photographs by commercial photographers and by the efforts of the magazine’s own paid correspondents as time wore on –but that network provided the core of trained observers which provided the wide-ranging international coverage which was never matched by any other journal. In fact, many of the other journals simply reprinted most of their foreign news from the ILN, often without credit. During the second half of the 1850s and through the early 1860s photographs in the Persian Gulf area taken by Major H. Barr, views and portraits from India by Beresford, James Freeman, Fricke & Jung, Robert T. Hickey, H. Hinton, Howard, Shephard & Bourne, G. D. Lyon, Macombie & Wright, James Mandy, R. B. Oakley, Capt. Allan Scott, B. Smith, L. A. Stapley, Lieut.- Col. I. D. Stewart, F. Fisk Williams, A. Williamson, G. Wymann & Co. and others, of Australia by W. Clapham, Davies & Co., Edward Haigh, Arthur Kipling, And Morris & Co., of New Zealand by John Elsbee, Montagu Higginson, J. Kinder, A. E. Smith, W. H. Sutcliffe, And Swan, of Canada by George R. Fardon, C. Flood, Humphrey Lloyd Hime, R. Milne, William Notman, G. P. Roberts, and Capt. W. D. Tompson, of Madagascar by William Ellis, of China by Felice Beato, Fararel, Negretti & Zambra, and W. Saunders, of the Near East by Francis Bedford, of Hawaii by Dr. Brooks, of Japan by Felice Beato and W. Saunders, of South Africa by Rev. C. Clulee, Lawrence & Lawrence, and S. D. Mandy, of Ceylon by J. D. Herbert, and Slinn & Co. are indicative of the strength and diversity of that network. The relative paucity of photographic images from the United States or the countries of Continental Europe also point out that same fact. The ILN’s careful and consistent efforts to credit the many sources of their news items and of their illustrations –a practice not at all prevalent or even common among other journals of the period—must have helped contribute to the feelings of loyalty among this wide spread network.
The ILN maintained an unusually careful and scrupulous policy of reportage and tried to display only verified and accurate illustrations of far-distant events. As a consequence, the ILN valued the implicit veracity of a photograph, and during the 1850s and 1860s would often point out that the illustration was from a photograph, with the implication that this fact added a value to the conjoined image. The ILN’s stately and reserved editorial policy meant that the magazine deliberately chose to display less violent aspects of events, so that while it might report murders, suicides, or violent accidental deaths, it didn’t portray these events in its illustrations. Railway accidents, fires, and explosions were illustrated, and often engravings drawn from photographs of the damaged sites were printed, but these views never contained dead or wounded bodies. Even war reportage and battle aftermath scenes were conspicuously bloodless. The failure to use combat aftermath photographs in this situation was not a matter of the inability of the slow, cumbersome camera to capture the violent action of combat, for, of the hundreds of illustrations from artist’s sketches of the Crimean War that filled the magazine throughout 1854 and 1855, very few were of actual combat and even these were sketched so as to play down the dramatic flag-waving heroic rhetoric that suffused the genre of historical “machine” paintings and, for that matter, the other illustrated journals. During 1857 and 1858, the mutiny of the Sepoy troops in India and the subsequent slaughter of Europeans was reported, but these reports were illustrated with views of the sites of events or portraits of figures associated with the events, often taken from photographs which had been made earlier. That the editors of the ILN followed this policy deliberately can be seen in their decisions of what they chose to exclude. Felice Beato photographed the Indian dead after the Mutiny was broken in 1858, and, in 1860 he also photographed dead Chinese soldiers during the Second Opium War. These photographs were certainly available to the editors of the ILN, since the magazine published other images of Beato’s work during the Chinese War. On the other hand, there were magazines more willing to display less editorial reserve in their search for higher circulation figures. In 1858 the American Harper’s Weekly illustrated their articles of the massacres in India with vivid and tragic artist’s sketches based on verbal descriptions or even rumors of these events. Harper’s Weekly (and the majority of the other weeklies) would also depict victims of violent crimes or bloody accidents or, when possible, florid aspects of conflict. Another point of editorial difference between the Illustrated London News and Harper’s Weekly is that during the 1860s Harper’s would frequently credit an illustration to a photograph that had to have had embellishments added by the engraver — for example, trotting horses or strolling couples would be added to the foreground of views or buildings — while any engraving taken from a photograph in the ILN seems to have followed the original image very closely, even to the point of including the incidental litter found in the views.
The twenty views of the International Exhibition in London, by the London Stereoscopic Company, published through the second half of the year, and W. Saunders photographs of the capture of Ningpo, China, by the allied forces are some of the highlights in the 1862 issues. In 1863 the magazine published sixty-three illustrations derived from “news” photographs. These include George Fardon’s views of the city of Victoria, on Vancouver Island, Canada, Edouard Charnay’s panorama of Mexico City, J. & E. Owen’s views of the railway in North Wales, Capt. Robert T. Hickey’s scenes in India, and scenes of the guano industry on the Chincha Islands off the coast of Peru, which were probably taken by Henry Moulton. In 1864 the magazine published ninety-six “news” photographs, among them A. E. Smith’s “Views of the Seat of War in New Zealand,” Osbert Salvon’s views of the prehispanic ruins of Copan, in Central America, more scenes of the Taeping Rebellion in China, by W. Saunders, J. D. Herbert’s scenes of an elephant catching expedition in Ceylon, and Felice Beato’s scenes in Japan. The peak of the ILN’s use of photography for news reportage is reached in the mid-sixties, then both the volume of usage and the conceptualization of photography’s potentials seems to wane, and the magazine seems to lose the intense interest in photography that it once held. In 1865 the number of such photographs shrank to twenty-three. It went down again in 1866 to fifteen, then reached a low of eleven in 1867. In 1868 the number rose again to forty-two, but slipped back to twenty-four in 1869. 1869 was highlighted by six of Andrew J. Russell’s views of the construction of the Union Pacific Railroad, but was not otherwise a memorable year. Somewhere in the mid-60s the ILN had begun to be less diligent with its citations of the photographic sources for its illustrations. Initially, the term “from a daguerreotype,” or “from a photograph” provided a slight cachet of authenticity. The ILN did still cite such items from its established associates, such as major photographic studios, or from individuals located in distant or esoteric locales; but as photographic portraits and views became far more commonplace in the society at large and an illustration from such a source far less novel and the cachet waned, the journal would publish an illustration from such anonymous sources without comment more frequently than it had done earlier. The ILN still used photographic sources frequently and intelligently, but that usage had become commonplace practice, and thus less cause for comment. By the mid-1870s almost all news illustrations were taken from artist’s sketches, while the vast majority of the portraits were taken from studio portrait photographs. It is interesting to speculate about this change, and although it might never be possible to pinpoint the exact causes, there are some factors which may have contributed to the change that came into play about this time. First, the high cachet that photography enjoyed in England in the 1850s was beginning to fade by the late 1860s. It may be that by the late 1860s the group of young men who were serving as officers either in the military forces or in any of the civil service positions throughout the Empire which had provided the core of the magazine’s foreign correspondents network, may have been thinning out or losing its first strong interest. These amateurs were being supplanted by an increasingly larger number of commercial photographers scattered over the globe, but these commercial photographers didn’t necessarily have the same loyalties as the other group to the ILN.
It may be that the nature of the historical events occurring during this time may also have had their own impacts on the issue. The American Civil War, which had such an impact on American photographers, and on American illustrated magazines, was of absolutely no consequence on the ILN, as that magazine published few photographs from the war. The second half of the 1860s seems to have been a time of relatively peaceful consolidation for the British Empire, and much of the news is given over to reporting the grand tours around the world by various members of the Royal Family. Then, in the early 1870s, the major news event was the Franco-Prussian War, which was fought under conditions of censorship by both parties strong enough to at least make it impossible for a foreign cameraman to operate in the theatre of combat.
It may also be that a new generation of illustrators was coming to the fore at about this time. With the human need to establish itself in the face of its predecessors, these artists looked away from the drawing style that had come to represent the established norm — a style that had been dominated in the first place by the general acceptance of the credibility of the camera’s vision and in the second place by the tightly controlled, linear style of the process block engraver. In the early 1870s, after years of frustrated experiments, a practical way of photographically copying an artist’s sketch to any desired size and then securely bonding that copy to a process block was finally worked out. Thus the engraver could transcribe the artist’s original image more precisely and fluidly, with less concern given to the engravings own transcription codes. One consequence was that artist’s sketches and water-color washes could be more faithfully transcribed, thus giving more weight to the correspondent’s sketch. A style of illustration began to evolve which was both more detailed in execution and yet more impressionistic in interpretation. The ILN suffered its first serious competition with the foundation of the Graphic, which began publication late in 1869. The Graphic based its strength on the concept of artist/illustrators and showed little interest in using photography, which, all at once, seemed old-fashioned. Perhaps the ILN responded to these issues as well — in any case, except for the formal portraits, far fewer images were credited to photographic sources during this time, and this would remain the dominant mode until the 1880s, when the perfection of photographic screen processes would gradually lead to the reintroduction of photographic images into the magazine. WSJ

EXHIBITIONS: 1851: LONDON:CRYSTAL PALACE.
“A Guide to the Great Industrial Exhibition: Light and Its Applications.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 18:485 (Sat., May 17, 1851): 424-425. [“Description of this aspect of the Crystal Palace Exhibition, including a description of some of the photographs displayed. Mentions Whitehurst (Baltimore, MD); Harrison (New York, NY); Claudet (London); Mayall (London); Bingham (GB); Field (GB); Langenheim (Philadelphia, PA); P. V. Fry (GB); camera makers, etc. discussed.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. A. C. Hobbs, picking a lock.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 19:* (Sat., Aug. 2, 1851): 141. [“From a daguerreotype by J. E. Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Scientific Balloon Ascent from Vauxhall Gardens.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 21:571 (Sat., Sept. 4, 1852): 192. [“From a Daguerreotype by Mayall.” (Actually a group portrait of the four members, in the balloon basket.)”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Gideon A. Mantell, L.L.D., F. R. S.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 21:595 (Sat., Dec. 4, 1852): 501. [“From a daguerreotype by J. E. Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w. (“Dr. Pereira.”) on p. 77 in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 22:605 (Sat., Jan. 29, 1853): 77. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Arthur Napoleon, the young Portuguese pianist.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 23:633 (Sat., July 16, 1853): 29. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Bransby Cooper, F. R. S.”) in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons. Bransby Cooper, F. R. S.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 23:641 (Sat., Aug. 27, 1853): 165. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. T. P. Cooke, as `William’ in `Black-Eyed Susan.'”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 23:649 (Sat., Oct. 15, 1853): 320. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Albert Smith.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 23:657 (Sat., Dec. 10, 1853): 493. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Sir John Bowring, Gov. of Hong Kong.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 24:668 (Sat., Feb. 18, 1854): 152. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Vice-Admiral Sir Charles Napier, K. C. B.”) on p. 208 in: “Vice-Admiral Sir Charles Napier, K. C. B., Chief in Command of the Baltic Fleet.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 24:672 (Sat., Mar. 11, 1854): 207-208. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Rear-Admiral Corry.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 24:675 (Sat., Mar. 25, 1854): 273. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Earl of Lucan.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 24:682 (Sat., May 13, 1854): 429. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Edward L. Davenport.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 25:700 (Sat., Sept. 2, 1854): 208. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“J. B. Gough.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 25:700 (Sat., Sept. 2, 1854): 208. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Henry Russell.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 25:701 (Sat., Sept. 9, 1854): 232. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1855. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Royal Visit to the Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 26:723 (Sat., Jan. 13, 1855): 35. [“On Thursday the exhibition of the Photographic Society was visited at eleven o’clock by His Royal Highness Prince Albert. The collection, which is rather an extensive one, has just been completed. The pictures include many by distinguished amateurs, and agreeably illustrate the progress made in the different branches of photography. Not the least interesting and attractive are the stereoscopic pictures. Several were exhibited by professional gentlemen—one stand being remarkable, as it not only exhibited the wonders of the stereoscope in producing the illusion of solidity, but presented wonderfully accurate likenesses of popular and well-known men, such as Mr. Charles Dickens, Mr. G. V. Brooke, Mr. Charles Kean, Mr. Macready, Mr. Charles Mathews, J. B. Gough, &c. These portraits were from the photographic establishment of Mr. Mayall, in Regent-street.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Love, as `Mr. Tranquilius Calm’ in `The London Season.'”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 26:725 (Sat., Jan. 27, 1855): 84. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Late Mr. Joseph Hume, M. P.”) on p. 196 in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 26:730 (Sat., Mar. 3, 1855): 196. [“From a photograph by Mayall.]

MAYALL. (LONDON)
“Copying Daguerreotypes on Paper.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 26:732 (Sat., Mar. 17, 1855): 258. [“A new application of the collodion process by Mr. Mayall, the photographist,… the reproduction on paper of likenesses taken by the daguerreotype… Mr. Mayall’s plan of reproduction throes objections into the shade, for the copies are not only agreeable to the eye, but are as permanent as ivory paintings…”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Roebuck, M. P.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 26:743 (Sat., May 19, 1855): 480. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Arts and Entertainment. Photography.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:751 (Sat., July 7, 1855): 15. [“A new exhibition of photographs and sun-portraits of eminent individuals has been arranged at the gallery of Mr. Mayall, the eminent photographer, of Argyll-place, Regent-street. The collection contains specimens of every branch of photography, and each style of its application. Views, panoramas, fine-art pictures, stereoscopic objects, &c., show the capabilities of the process, while its more immediate value is displayed by a great number of portraits, many of which are life-size. The latter are mostly upon paper, and exhibit a new treatment of the photographic arts.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“W. Farren.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:754 (Sat., July 28, 1855): 100. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Dr. Arthur H. Hassall.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:756 (Sat., Aug. 11, 1855): 173. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1855 (CRIMEAN WAR)
“Photographs at the Crystal Palace.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:759 (Sat., Sept. 1, 1855): 259. [“The Crystal palace has lately received an additional attraction in the shape of a “Crimean Court,” furnished with models, charts, and pictures of the seat of war. A number of relics from the field of battle have been deposited in the room. Among the collections are several copies of pictures of wounded officers and other distinguished individuals, which Mr. Mayall has had the honour of taking for her Majesty.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Hinks, Gov.- General of the Windward Islands.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:* (Sat., Oct. 6, 1855): 413. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Viscount Canning, Gov.-General of India.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:* (Sat., Dec. 1, 1855): 649. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Brandreth Gibbs.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 27:* (Sat., Dec. 22, 1855): 725. [“From a daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Sir General Sir Colin Campbell.” 28:778 (Sat., Jan. 5, 1856): 9. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Private John Penn, 11th Lancers.”) in: “A Crimean Hero, with Eleven Honours.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:781 (Sat., Jan. 26, 1856): 92. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Arts and Entertainment. Photographs of Soldiers and Trophies from the Crimea.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:787 (Sat., Mar. 1, 1856): 225. [“We have been favored with the inspection of a very interesting series of photographs recently taken by Mr. Mayall, for her Majesty at Woolrich. First is a group of two figures…entrusted with the care of the Crimean trophies for conveyance to England…”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“George P. Bidder, C.E.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:789 (Sat., Mar. 15, 1856): 268. (“From a Daguerreotype by Mayall.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1856.
“Metropolitan News. Camden Literary Institution.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:791 (Sat., Mar. 29, 1856): 319. [“On Tuesday evening a literary and musical soiree was held at the above institution,… various works of art, optical instruments, and scientific models… The Photographic Society lent a number of fine specimens, as did also the London Stereoscope Company. The more interesting specimens of photographs, however, were those of Mr. Mayall,… they included remarkably lifelike portraits of…. Most of these portraits have been taken within the last two or three months….”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Hon. G. M. Dallas.”) on p. 348 in: “The Hon. G. M. Dallas, the New American Minister” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:792 (Sat., Apr. 5, 1856): 348. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Photographs of Eminent Men.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:798-799 (Sat., May 10, 1856): 495. [“Mr. Mayall, the photographic artist, has just opened a new gallery of sun-pictures, at 226, Regent-street. During the past year Mr. Mayall has taken photographic portraits of a great number of distinguished and well-known individuals, commencing with her Majesty, Prince Albert, and the Royal family; and Mr. Mayall’s art has been called into requisition by most of the leading members of the aristocracy. The whole of the Cabinet Ministers have followed, as well as many independent members of the two houses of Parliament. He has also taken the portraits of many officers who have distinguished themselves in the late war.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Guthrie, F.R.S.”) on p. 500 in: “Mr. Guthrie, F.R.S.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:798 (Sat., May 10, 1856): 500. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“The Court. Prince Frederick William of Prussia.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS :804-805 (Sat., June 7, 1856): 614. [“On Thursday, Mr. Mayall…was honored with a visit by his Royal Highness Prince Frederick William of Prussia. After passing through Mr. Mayall’s interesting exhibition of photographs of distinguished individuals, his Royal Highness sat for a full-sized picture, and Mr. Mayall succeeded in producing a remarkably fine and characteristic likeness. It will be remembered that the photograph of the Princess Royal engraved in last week’s Illustrated News was also the work of Mr. Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Major-General Sir William Fenwick Williams, Bart., K. C. B.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 28:808 (London, England), Saturday, June 28, 1856): 698 [“Her Majesty the Queen having been pleased to honour General Williams with a command to sit to Mr. Mayall, the artist, of 224, Regent street, for a full-length photographic portrait, in the dress worn by the gallant General at Kars, accordingly, on Wednesday Sir William gave the desired sitting, when Mr. Mayall, with his usual skill and certainty, produced a remarkably fine and characteristic likeness.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. & Mrs. Barney Williams, Adelphi Theater.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 29:812 (Sat., July 26, 1856): 91. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Metropolitan News.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 29:814 (Sat., Aug. 2, 1856): 113. [“Her Majesty’s collection of photographs, by Mayall, of the principal officers connected with the Crimean campaign has just received its last but not least interesting addition in the portrait of General Windham, the “hero of the Redan.” Her Majesty having graciously expressed a wish to have the General’s photograph, a sitting was given on Thursday, and Mr. Mayall succeeded in producing a remarkably fine specimen of the art. The General is represented in the dress worn on the occasion of his celebrated attack upon the Redan. We intend to engrave this portrait next week.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Maj.-Gen. Windham, C. B.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 29:815 (Sat., Aug. 9, 1856): 139. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Buchanan, Pres. of U. S. A.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 29:832 (Sat., Nov. 29, 1856): 554. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1857. LONDON. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY.
“Royal Visit to the Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:839 (Sat., Jan. 10, 1857): 3. [“On Friday last week) H. R. H. Prince Albert, accompanied by the Prince of Wales, the Princess royal, and the Princess Alice, honoured the Photographic Exhibition in Pall-mall with a visit, previous to the public opening on Saturday. The Royal party were attended by Colonel Seymour, and were received at the gallery by the council of the Photographic Society. The walls and screens are this year hung with several hundreds of photographs displaying the improvements recently made in this interesting art, both as regards scenery and portraiture. Without going into particulars, it may be mentioned that conspicuous in the gallery are the tables of stereoscopic pictures shown by Messrs Bland and Long, Mr. Williams, and the Stereoscopic Company; also the portraits of Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street, as they include some interesting pictures of the Royal Family of Oude, the Bench of Bishops, and several well-known statesmen.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Improvements in Photography.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:841 (Sat., Jan. 24, 1857): 61. [“Note that Mayall’s “…substitution of paper for the metallic plate used in the old Daguerreotype.” is an improvement”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Sir A. Ramsay, M. P. for Rothdale.” on p. 386; 1 b & w (“Lord Lincoln, M. P. from Newark.”) in: “The New Parliament.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:855 (Sat., Apr. 25, 1857): 385-386. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Robson, as ‘Daddy Hardacre’ at the Olympic Theatre.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:855 (Sat., Apr. 25, 1857): 395. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Right Hon. John E. Denison, Speaker of the House of Commons.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:858-859 (Sat., May 16, 1857): 455. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Vicount Ingestre.”); 1 b &w (“Sir William Houpell.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. William Coningham.”); 1 b & w (“Sir Brook William Bridges.”); (“Major-General Sir John Mark Frederick Smith.”) on p. 478; 1 b & w (“Mr. Acton Smee Ayrton.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. Alexander Beresford-Hope.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. Robert Handbury.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. Arthur Mills.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. William Cox.”); 1 b & w (“Major-General Sir William Codrington, K.C.B.”); on p. 479 in: “The New Parliament.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:858-859 (Sat., May 16, 1857): 477-479. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (Lord John Manners.”); 1 b & w (“Maj.- Gen. Windham.”); 1 b & 3 (“Lieut.-Col. W. H. Sykes.”); 1 b & w (“James Wyld.”) in: “The New Parliament: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:860 (Sat., May 23, 1857): 499. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Right Hon. Lord John Manners.”); 1 b & w (“Major-General Windham, C. B.”); 1 b & w (“Lieut.-Col. W. H. Sykes.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. James Wyld.”) on p. 505 in: “The New Parliament.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:860 (Sat., May 23, 1857): 504-505. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Grand Duke Constantine of Russia.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 30:862 (Sat., June 6, 1857): 535. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Benjamin Webster as `George Darville.'”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 31:871 (Sat., Aug. 1, 1857): 117. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Prince of Oude, and Suite.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 31:871 (Sat., Aug. 1, 1857): 121. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Sims Reeves.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 31:871 (Sat., Aug. 1, 1857): 128. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Lord Mayor Elect, the Rt. Hon. Sir Robert Walter Carden, M. P.”) on p. 456 in:
“The New Lord Mayor.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 31:886 (Sat., Nov. 7, 1857): 456. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Siamese Ambassadors.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 31:891 (Sat., Dec. 5, 1857): 561.” [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Life-Size Photograph of Lord Palmerston.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 31:893-894 (Sat., Dec. 19, 1857): 610. [“At the first conversazione (this season) of the London Institution, held on Wednesday evening inst., Mr. Mayall exhibited a life-size photograph of Lord Palmerston which created considerable interest on account of its remarkable fidelity and finish.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Earl of Mulgrave, the New Governor of Nova Scotia.”) on p. 200 in: “The Earl of Mulgrave.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:904 (Sat., Feb. 20, 1858): 200. [“from a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“New Ministry:Lord Stanley, Sir. F. Kelly, Sir F. Thesiger, Earl Malmesbury, Sir J. Pakington.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:908 (Sat., Mar. 13, 1858): 260. (“From photographs by Mayall and Watkins.”)

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Harley as `Tony Lumpkin.'” 32:910 (Sat., Mar. 27, 1858): 321. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Mr. I. K. Brunel, F.R.S., Designer off the ‘Leviathan’ Steamboat.”) on p. 352 in: “Mr. Brunel, F. R. S.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:911 (Sat., Apr. 3, 1858): 351-352. [“Our Portrait is engraved from an admirable photograph taken by Mr. Mayall, and included in that gentleman’s interesting exhibition at the corner of Argyll-place, Regent –street.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Henry Thomas Hope, Esq., Chairman of the Eastern Steam Navigation Company.”) on p. 352 in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:911 (Sat., Apr. 3, 1858): 352. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. J. Scott Russell, Builder of the ‘Leviathan.’”) on p. 352 in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:911 (Sat., Apr. 3, 1858): 352. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Erratum.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:912 (Sat., Apr. 10, 1858): 370. [“By an accidental slip of the pen, the portrait of Mr. Henry Hope in our last issue was acknowledged as “from a photograph by Mayall and Son.” Our attention has been drawn to the fact that the words should have been “Mayall and Sun, as that well-known photographer has no partner in business—unless it be the luminary by whose assistance he produces his pictures.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Serjeant John Alexander Kinglake, M. P. from Rochester.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. George Henry Vansittart, M. P. for Berks.”) on p. 561 in: “Parliamentary Portraits.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:921 (Sat., June 5, 1858): 560-562. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mrs. Charles Young, actress.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 32:922 (Sat., June 12, 1858): 589.” [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Lord Berners, President of the Royal Agricultural Society of England.”) in: “Lord Berners, President of the Royal Agricultural Society of England.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:928 (Sat., July 24, 1858): 74. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Mr. Philip Wykeham Martin, M. P. for Rochester.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. Richard Davey, M. P. for Cornwall.”); 1 b & w (“Mr. John Townsend, M. P. for Greenwich.”) in: “Parliamentary Portraits.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:928 (Sat., July 24, 1858): 92-93. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mdlle. Humler, violinist.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:929 (Sat., July 31, 1858): 102. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“The New East India Council.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:940 (Sat., Oct. 9, 1858): 332-335. [(Double-page spread of medallion presentation of fifteen individual portraits.) “…We are indebted to Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street, for the photographs from which eight of the accompanying portraits were taken, namely those of Lord Stanley, Sir Probyn Cautley, Captain Eastwick, Mr. Charles Mills, Sir. H. Montgomery, Mr. Prinsep, Sir H. Rawlinson, General Sir R. Vivian, Mr. Willoughby; and to Messrs. Maull and Polyblank for those of Mr. Arbuthnot and Mr. R. D. Mangles. The Portrait of Sir J. Hogg was taken from a lithograph, and that of Sir John Lawrence from a painting.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Alderman David Williams Wire, the Lord Mayor Elect.”) on p. 427 in: “The Lord Mayor Elect.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:944 (Sat., Nov. 6, 1858): 427. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Photograph of Colonel H. R. H. The Prince of Wales.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:946 (Sat., Nov. 20, 1858): 477. [“Previously to the departure of the Prince of Wales for Berlin on Wednesday last his Royal Highness honoured Mr. Mayall, the well-known photographer, with a sitting for a full-length photographic portrait in his uniform as Colonel in the Army. Notwithstanding a dull November day—by no means favourable for photography—Mr. Mayall exhibited his usual skill in securing a portrait at once artistic in position and faithful to a marvel in expression and likeness.”}

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Henri Wieniawski, the Celebrated Violinist at Jullien’s Concerts.”) in: “Henri Wieniawski.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:946 (Sat., Nov. 20, 1858): 479. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales in His Uniform as Colonel in the Army.”) in: “H. R. H. The Prince of Wales.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:949 (Sat., Dec. 11, 1858): 543. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Country News. Soiree at the Brighton Pavilion.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 33:950 (Sat., Dec. 18, 1858): 565. [“On Monday a conversazione on a very large scale, and attended by nearly 2000 of the elite of Brighton, was held in the Pavilion. The soiree was got up for the purpose of celebrating the inauguration of the University Examination in Brighton. The whole of the handsome suite of rooms was thrown open, having been tastefully embellished and furnished with a choice selection of paintings, and some remarkably fine portraits of eminent characters from the well-known collection of Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Balfe.”) on p.5 in: “Mr. Balfe.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 34:953 (Sat., Jan. 1, 1859): 3, 5. [(Composer.) “Our Portrait of Mr. Balfe is from a very successful photograph from the studio of Mr. Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (Il Duca Castromediano Caballeno.”); 1 b & w (“Silvio Spaventa.”); 1 b & w (“Baron Carlo Poerio.”); 1 b & w (“Cesere Braico.”); 1 b & w (“Avvocata Pica.”) ion p. 419 in: “The Neapolitan Exiles.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 34:971 (Sat., Apr. 30, 1859): 418-419. [Five individual portraits, arranged in medallion fashion on one page, credited “From Photographs by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mdlle. Lotti, Prima Donna at the Royal Italian Opera.”) in: “Mdlle. Lotti.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 34:972 (Sat., May 7, 1859): 456. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Charles R. Leslie, R. A.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 34:* (Sat., May 28, 1859): 509.” [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“The Late Jacob Bell.—From a Photograph by Mayall.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 35:981 (Sat., July 2, 1859): 4. [“

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“The Late Frank Stone, Esq., A.R.A..”) on p. 546 in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 35:1006 (Sat., Dec. 10, 1859): 546, 560. [“From a Photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Miss Clara St. Casse as “Edgar,” in “The Swan and Edgar,” at St. James Theatre.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 35:1008-1009 (Sat., Dec. 24, 1859): 626. [“This Talented Young Actress Was Born at Bridgewater in the Year 1841.” “Our Portrait of Miss St. Casse, in the role just referred to, is engraved from one of Mr. Mayall’s happiest photographs.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1859. EDINBURGH. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND.
“Photography in Edinburgh.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 35:1010 (Sat., Dec. 31, 1859): 632. [“Last Saturday the Photographic Society of Scotland opened their fourth annual exhibition in Edinburgh. The collection is extensive and shows considerable progress over that of last year. The views and landscapes attract immediate attention on account of execution and size. Several of these are by local artists, both professional and amateur while others are due to the skill of their French and American bretheren in the art. Messrs. Brady, of New York, exhibit a series of very fine pictures—a portrait of the President, Mr. Buchanan, and some large heads, being particularly worthy of note. Mr. Mayall, of London, exhibits an interesting selection from the portraits of the notabilities he has photographed during the past year. His portrait of the Prince of Wales (just executed) attracts considerable attention, partly on account of its size and finish, and partly from the fact of his Royal Highness being well known to the citizens from his recent sojourns in Edinburgh.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901)
1 b & w (“Right Hon. Matthew Talbot Baines.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 36:1015 (Sat., Feb. 4, 1860): 101. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“The Court.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 36:1030 (Sat., May 12, 1860): 447. [“His Royal highness Prince Arthur, accompanied by his Royal Highness Prince Leopold, visited Mr. Mayall’s photographic exhibition in Regent-street on Saturday. Their Royal Highnesses afterward sat to Mr. Mayall for photographs.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901)
1 b & w (“Mdlle. Csillag, Royal Italian Opera.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 36:1032 (Sat., May 26, 1860): 509. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Photographs of the Queen and Royal Family.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 37:1045 (Sat., Aug. 18, 1860): 149. [“On Tuesday Mr. Mayall, the photographer, having received her Majesty’s permission, gave a private view, previous to a public exhibition, of his recently-executed portraits of the Queenm Prince Consort, Prince of Wales, Princess Alice, and other members of the Royal family. The collection is somewhat numerous, Mr. Mayall having taken upwards of forty negatives, representing his illustrious sitters in a variety of positions, singly and in groups. The majority are of the carte-de-visite size, now so popular. The series includes the whole of the Royal family. As specimens of the art of photography, and as pleasing likenesses, the photographs are so successful that the Queen has sanctioned their exhibition and publication.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Z. C. Pearson, Mayor of Hull.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 37:1050 (Sat., Sept. 15, 1860): 262. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Right Hon. W. Cubitt, M. P.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 37:1058 (Sat., Nov. 10, 1860): 435.]

MAYALL.
“Literature and Art.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 38:1076 (Sat., Feb. 23, 1861): 161. [“…We would like to know the statistics of the sale attained by Mr. Mayall’s photography of her Majesty and the Royal Family, so condescendly permitted to be published in the Royal Album. There must be a limit even to the productive powers of negatives, and the issue of these delightful little photographs has been so extensive that we do not wonder at the latest copies presenting a somewhat blurred and faded appearance decidedly libelous on the illustrious originals. Lovers of loyal art need not, however, despair. Mr. Mayall has again attended at Buckingham Palace; the Queen, the Prince Consort, and the Princes and Princesses have again passed through the camera; and we may expect from this fresh series of negatives another Royal Album even more interesting than its predecessor.”]

MAYALL.
“Literature and Art.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 38:1090 (Sat., May 25, 1861): 485. [“…and, just noticing en passant that the two chief attractions of the printshop windows are at present Mr. Mayall’s wonderful photograph of Lord Derby—one of the most interesting and artistic portraits we have ever beheld—and the facsimile of Victor Hugo’s Rembrantish drawing of John Brown swinging from his gibbet, we must conclude our gossip.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Lord Campbell.”) in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons. Lord Campbell.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 38:1096 (Sat., June 29, 1861): 611. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Lord Westbury (Sir Richard Bethell).”) in: “The New Lord Chancellor.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 39:1097 (Sat., July 6, 1861): 13. .[“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Visit of the Prince of Wales to the Middle Temple.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 39:1116 (Sat., Nov. 9, 1861): 479. 2 illus. [(Illustrations are views, from drawings.”) “…The day was brought to a close by an evening conversazione, for which the Prince did not remain… In the Library were arranged, under the superintendance of Professor Pepper, a great variety of scientific objects and works of art… Mr. Mayall sent a new series of photographs; Messrs. Negretti and Zambra an interesting collection of meteorological instruments; and Messrs. Bessemer contributed models of new rifled cannon and projectiles…”]

MAYALL.
“A Portrait of His Late Royal Highness the Prince Consort, taken shortly before his death, from a beautiful photograph by Mayall, together with illustrations of the most important points of the funeral ceremony, will appear in the following number of this Journal.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 39:1122-1123 (Sat., Dec. 21, 1861): 620. [“The Engraving is from a photograph…”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Albert, Prince Consort.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 39:1124 (Sat., Dec. 28, 1861): 663. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Mr. Mark Lemon.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1126 (Sat., Jan. 11, 1862): 52. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Wm. Lowndes Yancy, Confederate Commissioner.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1128 (Sat., Jan. 25, 1862): 95. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Fine Arts.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1129 (Sat., Feb. 1, 1862): 112. [“…Mr. Mayall has just produced a photographic portrait of the late Prince Consort, taken from an actual sitting, which may be pronounced one of the happiest and most truthful likenesses of the lamented deceased, as well as one of the most successful examples of photography that has yet been produced. The Prince is seen seated, in profile, in an easy attitude, his expression thoughtful yet pleasing; and in tone the photograph has all the appearance of a first-rate engraving.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Dr. Hawtrey, Provost of Eton College.”) in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons. Dr. Hawtrey.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1132 (Sat., Feb. 22, 1862): 202, 204. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Late Rev. Andrew Reed, D. D.”) in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons. The Rev.Dr. Andrew Reed.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 40:1134 (Sat., Mar. 8, 1862): 255, 257. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“Mrs. Lucy Anderson, the Eminent Pianist.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1155 (Sat., July 19, 1862): 77. [See ILN July 26, 1862, p. 102 for attribution.]

MAYALL.
“Portrait of Mrs. Anderson.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1156 (Sat., July 26, 1862): 102. [“The portrait of Mrs. Anderson, the pianist, engraved in the last Issue of the Illustrated London news, was from a photograph recently taken by Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Archbishop of Armagh.”) on p. 128 in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons. The Archbishop of Armagh.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1157 (Sat., Aug. 2, 1862): 128, 138. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“The Right Rev. Dr. Charles Thomas Longley, Archbishop of Canterbury.”) in: “The New Archbishop of Canterbury.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1168 (Sat., Oct. 11, 1862): 380. [“…Portrait of Dr. Longly… from an excellent photograph of his Grace recently taken by Mayall, of Regent-street…”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Circassian Envoys to England.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 41:1171 (Sat., Oct. 25, 1862): 432, 450. [(Studio portrait.) “From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL, J. E.
“The Royal Marriage. Photographs of the Prince and Princess.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1192 (Sat., Mar. 7, 1863): 239. [“…we allude to a series photographic negatives, taken from life by Mr. J. E. Mayall, of Regent-street and published by Messrs. Marien & Co., of Soho-square…” (Further praise for the series.)]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Daniel Whittle Harvey, Esq.”) in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1192 (Sat., Mar. 7, 1863): 253, 254. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Fine Arts. Bust of Princess Alexandra.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 42:1193 (Sat., Mar. 14, 1863): 290. [“…The model was taken from life, and is, we believe, the only bust for which the princess has ever sat. After a careful study of the photographs lately taken by Mr. Mayall we may pronounce the likeness to be unquestionably faithful, and not in the least degree “treated.”…”]

ROYER. (CAIRO, EGYPT)
1 b & w (“Women of Captain Speke’s Expedition.”) on p. 5; 1 b & w (“. Captain Speke’s ‘Faithful Children.’.”) on p. 5 in: “Discovery of the Source of the Nile.” in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 43:1211 (Sat., July 4, 1863): 5, 8-9, 17, 20-23. 5 b & w. 7 illus. 1 map. [(Captain Speke’s expedition. Photos of native bearers, the British explorers, views, etc. Some illustrations from sketches, some from photos. Group portraits of bearers credited to “Royer Photo – Caire, Egypte.” Portraits of Europeans by Williams and by Mayall. Illustrations. “Speke and Grant at the welcoming reception at Royal Geographical Society,” on p. 1, from a sketch. “Women of Captain Speke’s Expedition,” Group photo of four native women, probably taken by Royer, Cairo., on p. 5; “Captain Speke’s ‘Faithful Children.’”.(Group portrait of 18 armed men, taken by Royer, Cairo, p. 5; “The Ripon Falls, Uganda, –from a drawing by Captain Grant.” p. 8; “Little Windermere, Karagweh—From a drawing by Captain Grant,” on p. 9; “Captain Speke” from photograph by Williams, on p. 17; Captain Grant, from a photo by Mayall. “Waganda Musical instruments –From a sketch by Capt. Grant; on p. 17; 3 scenes of native life –from sketches by Capt. Grant. on p. 20; “Negro Boys of Central Africa,” from a photograph by Mayall.

MAYALL.
“Echoes of the Week.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 43:1214 (Sat., July 25, 1863): 98. [“…Meanwhile we hear that Mr. Mayall, of regent-street, has been graciously favoured by the Prince with sittings for His Royal Highness’s portrait in his robes of the Order of the Garter, as worn at the wedding. The Princess has also given sittings in bridal robes and train, as have likewise Princess Frederick Willliam of Prussia, Princesses Alice, Helena, Louisa, and others of the distinguished party. This new and interesting series of photographs have been submitted for the inspection of her Majesty the Queen, and, having met with Royal approbation, permission has been kindly accorded to Mr. Mayall for their publication, and they will be to the world on the 1st of August next.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Fine Arts.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 43:1216 (Sat., Aug. 8, 1863): 146. [“…series of carte-de-visite photographs of the Royal family… at Windsor Castle by Mr. Mayall.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Right Hon. and Most Rev. Richard C. Trench.”) in: “The New Archbishop of Dublin.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 43:1232 (Sat., Nov. 21, 1863): 513. [“From a photograph by Mayall.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“Mr. Charles Mathewes, as ‘Un Anglais Timide.’”) in: “Charles Mathews.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 44:1242 (Sat., Jan. 23, 1864): 81. [“From a photograph by Mayall & Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
“Fine Arts.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 44:1251-1252 (Sat., Mar. 26, 1864): 302. [“Messrs. Marion, of Soho-square, have just issued a first part of a series of carte-de-visite photographic “character-portraits,” taken by Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street, of “Celebrities of the London Stage,” accompanied with short biographical notices. The first portrait is that of Charles Mathews in the character of “Un Anglaise Timide,” the subject and photographer have conspired to produce a most amusing and in every way capital result. The same publishers and photographers also commence the publication of a series of larger-sized photographs of “Eminent and Illustrious Persons,” which judging by the portraits of the Prince of Wales, in his robes of the Garter worn at his wedding, and Prince Alfred, in his naval uniform, both included in the first number, will likewise be first-rate examples of photographic art.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“Herr Wachtel, the New Tenor Singer at the Royal Italian Opera.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 44:1260 (Sat., May 21, 1864): 501. [“From a photograph by Mayall & Mayall.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“The Late Field Marshall Viscount Combermere.”) in: “Obituary of Eminent Persons.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 46:1304 (Sat., Mar. 4, 1865): 213, 214. [“From a photograph by Mayall & Mayall.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“The Late Hungarian General Kmety, Ishmael Pacha.”) in: “The Late General Kmety.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 46:1318 (Sat., June 3, 1865): 520. [“From a photograph by Mayall & Mayall.”]

WATKINS, JOHN & CHARLES WATKINS.
“Note.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 47:1341 (Sat., Nov. 4, 1865): 439. [“The excellent portrait of Lord Palmerston which has been engraved for this Number of our Journal is one by Messrs. John and Charles Watkins, photographic artists, of Parliament-street, Westminster; it was taken three or four years ago. We have received several other photographs, which deserve great commendation, but which represent the late Minister as he appeared within the last twelvemonth, showing a less vigorous state of body and mind. One of the most agreeable and most faithful we have seen is a full-length portrait, by Messers. Mayall, representing the noble Lord seated in a chair, with his hat in his right hand, and with his left hand resting on a small table beside him, as though he were about to rise and take his leave after a morning call. The well-known photographers of Newcastle, the Messrs. W. and D. Downey (to whom we were indebted for the best portrait of Mr. Cobden), have produced several cartes de visite of Lord Palmerston; one of which, giving the whole figure, in the attitude of reading a letter, is admirable for the unconscious earnestness of the expression of the face.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“Right Hon. Benjamin Samuel Phillips.”) in: “The New Lord Mayor of London.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 47:1342 (Sat., Nov. 11, 1865): 456. [“From a photograph by Mayall & Mayall.”]

MAYALL.
1 b & w (“The Late William Vincent Wallace.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 47:1343 (Sat., Nov. 18, 1865): 488. [See ILN Nov. 25, 1865, p. 510 for attribution.]

MAYALL.
“The Portrait of the Late Mr. Vincent Wallace in Last Week’s Number Was Engraved from a Photograph by Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 47:1344 (Sat., Nov. 25, 1865): 510.

SARONY. (SCARBOROUGH, ENGLAND)
“Metropolitan News.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 48:1353 (Sat., Jan. 20, 1866): 59. [“A meeting of gentlemen interested in photography took place yesterday week, to consider an invention patented by Mr. Sarony, of Scarborough, which seems destined to supercede the old rests, so painfully familiar to sitters. Henceforth a sitter may lounge, loll, or sit ot stand, in any of the attitudes easy to himself and familiar to his friends. Mr. Mayall and other gentlemen spoke warmly in favour of Mr. Sarony’s process.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL
6 b & w (“Sir D. Cooch, Bart., M. P.; Sir C. M. Lampson, Bart.; Sir S. Canning; Sir R. Glass; Sir W. Thomson; Captain Sir J. Anderson; The Newly-Created Baronets and Knights Engaged in Laying the Atlantic Telegraph Cable.”) ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 49:1402 (Sat., Dec. 8, 1866): 558. [(Six individual portraits presented medallion fashion on one page.) “Our Portrait of Sir James Anderson is engraved from a photograph by Mr. J. Thomson, High Park-street, Liverpool; the other Portraits are from photographs by Messrs. Mayall.” Sir D. Cooch, Bart., M. P.; Sir C. M. Lampson, Bart.; Sir s. Canning; Sir R. Glass; Sir W. Thomson; Captain Sir J. Anderson.]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Staff Commander H. A. Moriarty, R.N.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 50:1408 (Sat., Jan. 12, 1867): 41. [“From a photograph by Mayall, of Regent St.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Right Rev. Dr. Milman, Bishop of Calcutta.”) in: “The New Bishop of Calcutta.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 50:1419 (Sat., Mar. 30, 1867): 313. [“From a photograph by Mayall, of Regent St.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“The Late Sir James Emerson-Tennent.”) in: ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 54:1869 (Sat., Mar. 27, 1869): 317. [“From a photograph by Mayall, of Regent St.”]

MAYALL & MAYALL. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
1 b & w (“Edward G. S. Stanley, Earl of Derby.”) in: “The Late Earl of Derby.” ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS 55:1564 (Sat., Oct. 30, 1869): 429, 439. [“From a photograph by Mayall & Mayall.”]

ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES (1858-1861?) London, England
[“Journal subtitle: “From Photographs in Her Majesty’s Private Collections and From the Studios of the Most Celebrated Photographers in the Kingdom, Engraved on Steel by D. J. Pound. With Memoirs by the Most Able Authors.” This weekly news magazine consisted of sixteen 16” x 11” sized pages. Similar to the Illustrated London News in content, design and layout, with an ornate masthead and a generous number of well-executed wood-engraving illustrations throughout. These wood-engravings were taken from sketches drawn by artists of events and scenes; but some, usually portraits, were credited to be from photographs.
However the special feature of the Illustrated News of the World was that it also periodically issued a series of “Portraits of Distinguished Persons” in steel engravings, which were made from photographs. These full page engravings were typically issued two at a time, with each weekly issue of the Illustrated News. However they were also sold separately, and in sets. At least 12 were offered free as special supplements to subscribers; the entire series was apparently also available as a separately bound “gift book.” A “Notice” appeared in the Illustrated London News each week listing the names of the sitters and announcing the forthcoming issue, crediting both the sitter and the photographer.
The following advertisement, on p. 240 in the no. 1639 (Feb. 19, 1859) issue, is one of several typical advertisements.
“The Bishop of Carlisle, exquisitely engraved on Steel, from a Photograph by Mayall, Is presented on Saturday, February 19th. with No. 55 of the Illustrated News of the World, and Drawing-Room Portrait Gallery of Eminent Personages, and a variety of beautiful Wood Engravings On Saturday, Feb. 26, with No. 56, will be presented the Portrait of Lord Ebury. Price 6d., by post. 7d.: the Portrait alone worth 2s. 6d. For List of 40 Portraits already published see Specimen Portraits in all Booksellers and News-venders’ windows, and at the Railway Stations. Fortnightly Parts, 1s.; Monthly Parts, 2s. Vols. I. and 11, beautifully bound, price only 15s. each, now ready. The cheapest volumes ever published. The Drawing-Room Portrait Gallery for 1859, containing 40 of these Portraits and Memoirs, price only 21s., cheap at 1l., 5s.,is now ready. India Proofs, of any of the Portraits, 10s.; Proofs, 6s. each. Office, 199, Strand; West-End Branch, 122, Regent-street, next to H. J. & D. Nicoll’s Paletot Warehouse ; and all Booksellers and Newsmen.”
The following full-page advertisement, published in the American Journal of Education ca. 1859-1860, indicates something of the range of the steel engraved portraits published during that time. This list overlaps, but is not exactly similar, to other lists of sitters published in the ILNW during 1858. As I was unable to index each portrait separately at the time, I have included this listing to indicate some of the illustrations that were published.
“Portraits and Memoirs, which have already been issued with the Illustrated News of the World. Any one of the following portraits, Engraved on Steel from Photographs, and Printed on Plate Paper for Framing, and Memoirs for Binding, already published, may be had for 15 cents each, cash or P. O. stamps, and will be sent post-paid to any address by ordering of the American agents.
His Royal Highness The Prince Consort.
His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales.
The Princess Fred’k William of Prussia.
The Prince Frederic William of Prussia.
The Emperor of The French.
The Empress of The French.
The Duke of Cambridge.
The Earl of Carlisle, K. G.
Lord Panmure.
Lord Stanley, M. P.
Lord Brougham.
Lord Lyndherst.
The Earl of Shaftsbury.
The Earl of Elgin.
The Marquis of Salisbury.
Lord Embury.
Lord Berners.
Lord Bury.
Lord Chelmsford.
Viscount Palmerston.
Lord John Russel, M. P.
Lord Campbell
William Ewert Gladstone, M. P.
Sir O. C. Lewis, Bart., M. P.
Joseph Warney Henley, M. P.
Sir John Somerset Pakington, M. P.
Sir Fitzroy Kelley, Q. C, M. P.
Lord Macaulay.
Viscount Combermere
Gen. Sir Colin Campbell, (Lord Clyde.)
The Earl of Cardigan.
Sir John Laird-Main Lawrence, Bart.
Major-General Sir A. Wilson, Bart,
His Eminence Cardinal Wiseman.
J. A. Roebuck, Esq., M. P.
John Bright, Esq., M. P.
Philip Locke King, M. P.
Frank Crossley, Esq , M. P.
T. S. Dt.’Ncombe, Esq., M. P.
William Scole1teld, Esq., M. P.
Sir Robert Walter Garden, Bart.
David Williams Wire, Esq.
Sir John Ratcliff, Knight.
Baron Alexander Von Humboldt.
Professor Faraday, F. P. S.,
Isambard Kingdom Brunel, Esq., C. B.
Capt. Harrison, of the “Great Eastern”.
Joseph Sturge.
David Livingstone, Esq.
Sir Archibald Alison, Bart.
Thomas Wright, Esq., M. A., F. S. A.
James William Gilbert, Esq , F. R. S.
William Powell Frith, Esq., R. A
John Gibson, Esq., R. A.
John B. Gough, Esq.
Sir Hugh McMont Chairnes, M. P.
Mr. Justice Keating
Mr. Sarj’t. Shee, Q S.
The Hon. Edward Everett.
W. H. Prescott, D. C. I.
General Sir John Fox Burgoyne.
L’t Gen. Sir Geo. Wakelyn Harry Smith.
Admiral Lord Lyons.
Baron Brunnow.
His Hi’n’s The Maharajah Dhl’leep Singh.
Sir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy, Bart.
Marshal PkiIssieh, Duc De Malakoff.
The Hon. George Mifflin Dallas.
The Arch Bishop of Canterbury.
Rev. Henry Ward Beecher.
The Bishop of Carlisle.
The Bishop of Winchester.
The Bishop of Ripon.
The Bishop of Manchester.
S. Wilberforce, D. D., Bishop of Oxford.
The Bishop of St. Asaph.
Walter Farquhar Hook, D. D.
A’chdeac’n Denison.
Rev. J. Cm. Bellew.
Rev Hugh Mcneilf:, D. D
Rev It. Maguire, M. A.
Rev. Hugh Stowell Brown.
Rev. Hugh Stowell, M. A.
Reverend John Cumming, D. D.
Rev. Andrew Reed, D. D.
Rev. John Ancell James.
Rev. William Morlez Punsmon
Rev. Samuel Dousland Waddy.
Thirteen or fifty-two of the above portraits and Memoirs may be selected at once, for a quarterly subscription of $2, or yearly $8, by marking this list and forwarding it to the office, 14 Hanover Street, Boston. N. B. Subscribers for a quarter or a year receive their Portraits free from folds. Cases for binding 52 Portraits and Memoirs, which form a beautiful volume for the drawing room table, are now ready, $1 each. Proof impressions of any of the above, on large paper, for framing, $1.25, on India, $2.50 each. Henry A. Brown & Co., 14 Hanover Street, Boston.
The majority of these portraits were taken by John Jabez Edwin Mayall, the owner of the most fashionable London portrait studio of the period. There were apparently 40 such portraits issued in the first year. This elaborate and expensive publication proved a financial failure. Mr. Tallis, owner of the Illustrated News of the World, went bankrupt in April 1861. He was holding a number of Mayall’s portraits. Mayall had lent prints of his negatives, taken at his own expense, to Mr. Tallis, “… for the purpose of being engraved as a series of portraits in connection with the Illustrated News of the World.” These portraits were sold, as was Tallis’s other assets, at auction. Someone bought Mayall’s prints from the bankruptcy proceedings, made smaller copy negatives from the prints and began selling the portraits under his own name. Mayall sued, and won his case, was but awarded only a small settlement. WSJ

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Tom Taylor, Esq.”, credited “From a Photograph by Mayall.”) in: ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:11 (Apr. 17, 1858): 172.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“The Photographic Portrait of the Prince of Wales.” ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:42 (Nov. 20, 1858): 327. [“Note that Prince of Wales went to Mayall for a portrait to be used in the “National Portrait Gallery,” published by this magazine.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“The Photographic Portrait of the Prince of Wales.” ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:42 (Nov. 20, 1858): 327. [“Note that Prince of Wales went to Mayall for a portrait to be used in the “National Portrait Gallery,” published by this magazine.”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Benjamin Scott, Esq. Chamberlain of London.” credited “From a Photograph by Mayall.”) in: ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:42 (Nov. 20, 1858): 332.

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Alderman Thomas Quested Finnis.” credited “From a Photograph by Mayall.”) in: ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:42 (Nov. 20, 1858): 333.”]

MAGAZINES. ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES. 1858.
“By Special Permission of the Queen,…” ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:43 (Nov. 27, 1858): 342. [“…we shall publish, with No. 1 for 1859, a highly-finished Steel-plate Portrait of H.R.H. The Prince Consort, K.G., from a Photograph taken at Osborne-house for Her Majesty’s private collection, by Mr. Mayall, the eminent Photographer. Mr. Mayall’s Photograph of His Royal Highness, in his garden costume, is acknowledged to be the most life-like Portrait of the Prince yet produced, and we are proud to receive the permission of Her Most Gracious Majesty to introduce it to our Subscribers. The accuracy and exquisite finish of the Portraits already issued will be accepted as a guarantee of the excellence which will distinguish the execution of this important picture. Orders must be given early to insure a supply. We have great pleasure in being able to add the Name of His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales to our National Portrait Series. Mr. Mayall, the Photographer, to whose skill we are indebted for some of the most remarkable likenesses ever produced, has had the honour of taking, for Her Majesty the Queen, a full-length Portrait of Colonel H.R.H. The Prince of Wales in uniform as Colonel in the Army. This Portrait is pronounced unusually successful as a photograph, ant exceedingly happy in pose and expression. By Permission of Her Majesty we shall publish a Steel-plate Portrait from this Photograph early in our series. Next Week, Saturday, December 4, will be issued a Steel-plate Portrait of Major-General Sir Archdale Wilson of Delhi, Bart., K.C.B. from a Photograph by Mayall, engraved by D. J. Pound. (In consequence of the pressure on our space, we are compelled to omit our List of Portraits to be published, Notice to Advertisers, &c, this week.)
The Following 34 Portraits, Already Published, are constantly kept in print, and any of which may still be obtained as a Specimen, with a Back Number of the Paper, Price 6d., Stamped 7d.) of any Bookseller or Newsman, at the Railway Stations, or direct from the Office, 199, Strand.
The Princess of Prussia. The Prince of Prussia. Lord Palmerston. Dr. Livingstone. Sir Colin Campbell. The Duke of Cambridge. Lord John Russell. The Bishop of Oxford. Sir Wm. Fenwick Williams. Lord Panmure. Hon. George M. Dallas. General Windham, C.B. Lord Chelmsford. Sir Fitzroy Kelly. Lord Campbell. Professor Faraday. Marquis of Salisbury. Earl of Shaftesbury. Rev. Hugh Stowell Brown. J. A. Roebuck, Esq., M.P. Miss Amy Sedgwick. Albert Smith, Esq. Miss Arabella Goddard. T. S. Duncombe, Esq., M.P. Lord Stanley. Mdlle. Piccolomini. Charles Dickens, Esq. Madame Alboni. The Duke of Malakhoff. Sir R. W. Carden, M.P. D. W. Wire, Esq., Lord Mayor Rev. Robert Maguire. The Maharajah Dhuleep Singh. General Sir John Inglis.
Parties desirous of taking the set from the commencement are recommended to order it in the 1s. Parts, containing Two of the weekly Numbers and Two of the above Portraits; or, in the Monthly Parts, at 2s., containing Four Numbers and Four Portraits; or, in Half-yearly Volumes, as perfect sets of the Numbers cannot now be guaranteed. Volume I, of this National Undertaking, bound in a beautifully ornamented binding, gilt edges, containing 360 pages of Letterpress, profusely illustrated with Wood Engravings, and 21 Steel Portraits and Memoirs, is now ready, Price 16s. Volume II., also bound in a beautifully ornamented binding gilt edges, and containing 432 pages of Letterpress profusely Illustrated with Wood Engravings, and 18 Steel Portraits and Memoirs, will he ready on January 1st, 1859. The cheapest Volumes ever published….”]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
1 b & w (“Benjamin Webster, Esq..” credited “From a Photograph by Mayall.”) in: ILLUSTRATED NEWS OF THE WORLD AND DRAWING ROOM PORTRAIT GALLERY OF EMINENT PERSONAGES 1:47 (Dec. 25, 1858): 404.

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1868.
“Bits of Chat.” ILLUSTRATED PHOTOGRAPHER 1:10 (Apr. 9, 1868):123-124. [“Steps have been taken for the formation of an Archaeological Society for Birmingham and the neighbourhood, in connection with the Birmingham and Midland Institute, for the examination, study, and preservation of local antiquities. Members of the institute, on paying 5s. a year, are to become members of the archeological section. Donations are to be requested towards a copying fund for providing drawings and photographs of ancient documents and old buildings, and for preserving old relics of the history of Birmingham and its neighbourhood.
It is rumoured that the talented artist, Lake Price, is on the eve of again commencing practice as a professional photographer.
Messrs. Bell and Daldy have in preparation a volume of Scottish scenery, containing views of many of the places of interest visited by her Majesty and the Prince Consort, accompanied by descriptive letterpress, with an essay on the characteristics of Scottish scenery, by a popular writer. According to a paragraph which has gone the round of the press, the illustrations are sun pictures, taken by a process discovered by Mr. Joseph Adam, who has been engaged many years in bringing it to perfection. By this invention the photographs are said to have all the softness of the finest line engravings, and to be works of a very high class.
The Prince of Wales has signified to the committee of the National Exhibition of Works of Art, at Leeds, that he will open the exhibition in the week commencing Monday, the 18th of May. Photography will, we believe, have no place in this collection.
In a letter to a contemporary, M. K. de Roth says :— “A fact interesting to all lovers of the tannin process is published by Herr I. Heinz, viz., that tannin may be entirely freed from all colouring matter by dissolving six parts of common tannin in twelve parts of warm distilled water, and adding one part of ether to it….”
At the ordinary monthly meeting of the Liverpool Amateur Photographic Association, on the 31st ult., Mr. Green said he wished to call attention to one of the minutes of the January meeting, referring to the picture presented to the hon. secretary, which had not been fully reported. The following is the inscriptionupon the picture, and will explain matters fully: —”This photograph, being the largest hitherto taken by the collodio-bromide process, is presented by the Liverpool Amateur Photographic Association to their secretary, Mr. W. Bolton, to whom photographers are mainly indebted for the discovery of the method of producing a photograph without a bath; and in testimony of his zeal in promoting the objects of the association.”
We observed several cameras pointed from windows towards the starting-point of the Oxford and Cambridge boats on Saturday, immediately before the race. The photographers must have been much disappointed, for on such a morning it would have been simply impossible to get anything better than a representation of fog—and that they might have got at home; We observed also a peripatetic photographer plying his vocation with great industry among the carriages drawn up at Barnes. His apparatus and developing box were very primitive looking affairs, and one of his pictures that we saw had very much of the same character.
An art exhibition will open at Darwen, in Lancashire, on Wednesday, May 6th, when the Marquis of Hartington will deliver the inaugural address. It is said that photography will be represented by the works of Bedford, Blanchard, A. Brothers, Eastham, Edwards, Elliot, England, Fry, Kirby, Mayall, McLachlan, Mudd, Nelson, Skaife, Vernon Heath, and Winstanley, and that several leading opticians and apparatus manufacturers will contribute. Communications should be addressed to Mr. Robert Edwards, manager.
The value of illustrations in connection with photographic literature appears to have become generally recognised since the publication of our first number. Not only have English photographic contemporaries attempted, not very successfully, it must be confessed, at present, to follow suit, but several of our foreign contemporaries have also announced illustrations as a valuable and attractive feature. Our excellent contemporary, Photographisches Archiv, announces a series of graphotype illustrations, drawn by Mr. A. H. Wall, H. Rafter, R. A. Seymour, and other well-known artists, to commence with examples of posing in its next number; arrangements have also being made in America to bring out an illustrated photographic serial, with graphotype engravings, and the same idea is under contemplation in Australia.
Art is more properly the study of manhood than of childhood or early youth. It belongs to a riper age, to a period of life at which the mind is sufficiently formed to be capable of receiving strong impressions, and making observations and reflections upon what has been treasured in the memory. On this account it is gratifying to know that the gap left in public information by a defective mode of education might, if proper means were resorted to, be readily filled up. This is a very important matter to be known and reflected upon by those who may be induced to take up art-study.”—Artist and Amateurs’ Magazine.
Fuchs’s method of making inks with the aniline colours may be useful to some of our readers. He takes a quarter of an ounce of the required colour; but as the strength of the colours of commerce varies, more or less must be used at times to keep up uniformity. The colour is digested for about three hours in two ounces and a half of strong alcohol. Then a pint and a half of distilled water is added, and the whole is gently heated, until all the alcohol has been driven off. An ounce of gum-arabic dissolved in eight ounces, of water is then added, and after standing for a timo, for any impurities to deposit, the ink is ready for use.”]

ORGANIZATIONS. GREAT BRITAIN. PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON. 1868.
“Transactions of Societies. Photographic Society of London.” ILLUSTRATED PHOTOGRAPHER 1:12 (Apr. 24, 1868): 141-142. [“9, Conduit-street, Uog»ut-street. J. Glaisher, Sen., F.R.S., in the Chair. After business announcements, Mr. Griggs read his paper on Photo-lithography, and the use of photography in other modes of printing. After a brief history of lithography and photo -lithography, Sir. Griggs said:— “The first important step is to obtain a negative free from deposit on the lines of the subject copied, and moderately dense; it will give the best results if used unvarnished, in consequence of the contact being better than when a film of varnish intervenes between the negative and the prepared paper. The method of preparing the paper is as follows:—…” “…Having given the above outline, Mr. Griggs concluded with some general remarks, and practical illustrations. The discussion was opened by Mr. Mayall, who spoke in general terms of the vast and growing importance of photo-lithography.vA letter was then read from Messrs. P. Le Neve Foster and John Spiller regarding Mr. M’Lachlan’s secret, in which they avoided giving any very decided opinion, and said its real value must be decided by future experiments. Mr. M’lachlan then rose and addressed the meeting in a long, rambling, and discursive speech, which it is impossible to satisfactorily report, and the main features of which will be found in an article by Mr. Dawson in the present number. After some further remarks the meeting adjourned, with the understanding that at the next meeting, May 12th, Mr. M’Lachlan would read a paper on his “great” discovery.”]

BY COUNTRY. GREAT BRITAIN. 1868.
“Bits of Chat.” ILLUSTRATED PHOTOGRAPHER 1:13 (May 1, 1868): 159-160. [“In some remarks on Mr. M’Lachlan’s Novel Process, described in our last—Mr. John Spiller, F.C.S., states his belief that the only new feature in the above gentleman’s scheme consists in the efficacy of nascent chlorine, and says, …
Mr. Nelson K. Cherrill has also commented upon Mr. M’Lachlan’s discovery, and sums up by saying, “that though it is difficult to see how Mr. McLachlan’s plan is better than any other for producing what seems to me a similar result, still, as there is no knowing when we may come to an end of the wonder of photography, it may be that a new light has sprung up among us.
In France, a patent costs £4 at first, and an annual tax of £4 a year maintains it for fifteen years. In England, a patent at first costs £25, and, to maintain it for fourteen years, further sums amounting to £150, besides the fees for agency. This is a tax not upon the produce of invention, because it is levied before anything is produced, but directly on genius itself; and yet there could be no reason why a patent should cost more than the sum necessary to defray its proportion of office expenses. Every application should, as in America, be subjected to the scrutiny of a scientific board, whoso business it would be to refuse a patent when the invention is not distinctly a new one. While in England the number of patents averages 2,000 annually, in America last year, 11,000 were granted. There they last for seventeen years, and cost about £7. A large majority of the English patents are dropped at the end of the third year, when the £50 duty has to be paid.—Scientific Review.
The Darwen Exhibition should be a great success, judging by the character it is likely to assume. A very fine and large collection of modern paintings, such as are rarely got together, will doubtless prove widely attractive. Amongst the works already promised are specimens of Turner, Landseer, Millais, Maclise, David Cox, Ansdell, Clarkson Stanfield, Linnell, Ward, Elmore, Rosa Bonheur, Cooper, Hunt, Coplej Fielding, Rosetti, Cattermole, Birkett Foster, Taylor, and a long list of other eminent painters. Choice works by Vandyke, Guido, Gainsborough, Northcote, and- other eminent deceased painters are promised. A circular informs us, “the art and science of photography will have a locale and an exposition not surpassed, if ever equalled, in the provinces. Photographic apparatus, lenses, and cameras will be exhibited in all their latest perfections, by Messrs. T. Ross and J. II. Dallmeyer, and P. Meagher, of London, a fact which needs no comment to those familiar with the details of this rapidly-developing art. Those eminent opticians will send also fine specimens of work done by their apparatus, and practical photography will be richly illustrated by the following London artists :—Valentine Blanchard, Bedford, Elliot and Fry, Ernest Edwards, Kirby, Nelson, Scaife, Vernon Heath and England, Messrs. Mayall, Heath and Maul, who will send specimens of their latest productions. From Manchester, frames of very interesting pictures are promised by Messrs. John Eastham, Silas Eastham, Mr. Winstanley, Mr. A. Brothers, Mr. McLachlan, and Mr. Mudd. Mr. Edge, of Preston, already familiar to many in the district, will exhibit a case of his fancy cartes. Arrangements have been made to secure a complete illustration of the new and brilliant art of Chromo-lithography. Messrs. Rowney, of London, Mr. Whaite, of Manchester, and other art-tradesmen, will fill a department devoted solely to chromolithographs, and will furnish a display never before attempted in any exhibition.”
An article published in the Mechanics’ Magazine says, “For some months past there has been an outcry demanding small photographic cameras for tourists, because now that enlarging is getting so common, a large picture on collodion may be taken from a very small negative, if needed, Moreover, it is a boon to amateurs, as well as to professionals, to be able to carry landscape apparatus and plates in the pocket, and the legs in the hand in the shape of a walking-stick. Although negatives so taken must be small ones, it is possible to make up in beauty what the positives want in size, by printing them as transparencies upon opal glass. The demand for such small apparatus did not quickly call forth a supply, but Messrs. Negretti and Zambra have just began constructing pocket cameras, which at present sell as fast as they are made, and we hear of two or three other firms about to follow the example….”
The artist, like the poet, must instruct himself by studying the works of those who have excelled in his art; by the accurate observation of nature, and the assiduous exercise of his faculties in every way conducive to invigorate his fancy, correct his judgment, and refine his taste.—Sir Martin Archer Shee, P.R.A.
When embodied in the artistic results, with which every ono is more or less familiar, photography, as an art, is capable of contributing to an exhibition matters of the greatest and most universal interest, embracing every variety of subject which can gratify curiosity and afford pleasure.—Frederick Pollack.
The Photographers, James Proctor, senr. and junr , of Aberdeen, who some months ago were committed to take their trial for forging bank-notes by means of photography, have been convicted. The father was sentenced to five years’ penal servitude, and the son was released on account of his extreme youth. These forgeries were very clumsily executed, and it seems surprising that any one could have been deceived by them for a moment. Yet several of these forged notes got into circulation.
The New York Photographic Convention.—We have received a full account of this great mass meeting of photographers, which took place on the 7th ult., as announced by our American correspondent. About 100 delegates from every part of the Union were present. The chair was taken by Mr. Bogardus. Officers were nominated, and a committee appointed to draw up the resolutions, four of which were unanimously adopted; but respecting the last two, an animated discussion ensued. Subscriptions poured in. The meeting was resumed on the following day, and energetic steps were taken to combat the bromide patent, and take other steps to improve the position of the photographic community. Over 400 dollars were subscribed on the first day. The Government tax on photographs has been withdrawn.”]

EXHIBITIONS. 1868. LONDON. CONDUIT-STREET PHOTOGRAPHIC EXHIBITION.
Wall, A. H. “The Late Conduit-Street Photographic Exhibition.” ILLUSTRATED PHOTOGRAPHER 1:43 (Nov. 27, 1868): 513-515. 2 illus.[“…but I think an explanatory and critical review of some of the best photographs exhibited will not, because of this exhibition’s closed doors, be the less useful to those who, young in art, and seeking technical knowledge, are striving to attain artistic excellence….” “…To those who honestly desire to understand art-principles and their applications, as I have reason to believe the larger number of photographers now do, I fearlessly address myself; and taking first that class of picture which, by virtue of what it aims at, should rank highest, I commence my task with what I may call
Subject Photographs.
Amongst painters the class of pictures I am about to speak of are commonly termed genre, and the accepted meaning of this term, so applied, is subjects of real or ordinary life, as distinguished from the ideal or the historical….” “…Some-of the earliest attempts in this direction were made, in the days of the daguerreotype, by Mr. May all; and I remember very well the anxiety with which I—then a boy—posted off to the Strand to see them, after reading a very glowing account of their beauty in a morning paper. That I was sadly disappointed may have been the fault of the writer rather than that of Professor Highschool, the name by which Mr. Mayall then sought to be known. Most prominent amongst those who have aimed successfully in this direction are two gentlemen, both painters, as well as photographers—Mr. Rejlander and Mr. Lake Price. In his “Holiday in the Woods” and ” Fading Away,” executed at a time when his productions were not merely puffed, like some tradesmen’s goods, but fairly criticised, Mr. H. P. Robinson also achieved some good things in this direction. But the promise of these works has certainly not been fulfilled in his latter efforts, which exhibit nothing above or beyond a knack of manufacturing artificial effects which, striking enough to the uninitiated, are truly offensive to all lovers of natural truth and real artistic beauty. I regret this the more, from believing that if Mr. Robinson had worked in the spirit of an earnest, unpretending student of natural truth and beauty, rather than with an arrogant and presumptuous dependence on his own superiority,* (*We think no one who has read Mr. Robinson’s papers on “Pictorial Effect” in the pages of a contemporary will question this statement. Nearly every line in these papers exhibits the author’s want of knowledge and study, and his intense self-satisfaction. It is only fair to add, however, that we derive our opinion on these points from this source alone, having no personal knowledge of this gentleman.—Ed.) fostered and encouraged, if not created, by the fulsome adulation of a purpose-serving clique, he would have achieved much higher and better things long before this. But I must not recall all the examples of work in this direction that I have met with in my time, but rather turn to its consideration in connection with the late exhibition. On the walls, as I entered, and in a folio on the table, I found a great number of Mr. Rejlander’s photographs. Many of them were dear old friends of mine, and from some of them this journal has already published engravings; a few were new. To this collection I shall first give attention. When I criticise a work of art of the genre class, I ask myself first, Is it a good and suitable subject? next, is it well or naturally represented? and, thirdly, what was the artist’s intention, and to what extent has he expressed it? * (*The reader will perhaps excuse me if I here append a note in the shape of an extract from a short paper of mine, published last year. “One critic, representative of a class, looks only for those qualities in a picture whieh are exclusively photographic, and denies or applauds its artistic merit as these are present or absent. The representative of the mere artistic, or technically artistic, judges it by its truth of drawing and finish, by its pictorial composition, its unity, breadth, proper balance of parts, and so on. The other representative judges it as he would a work of fine art. He will not perhaps pardon ignorant or slovenly manipulation, nor overlook a want of artistic knowledge in the selection, treatment, and composition ; but all these things he regards as mere aims, having for their end the expression of sentiment and feeling. He regards a photographic work of art as he would a literary work of art. The manuscript may be clean, legible, and neatly written, but has it good grammar and composition? It may be in good English, and be graceful and smooth to the reader’s ear, but does it tell a story worth hearing? and, next, does it express that story cleurly, forcibly,and effectively?”—A. H. W.”) Let us take one of these pictures, called “Appealing.” This is a good subject, a little bit hackneyed, perhaps, and certainly open to very many different kinds of treatment. By endeavouring to embody it in the mere expression of a face, and the simple action of the head, the artist set himself no easy task. No patchwork printing dodges could help him here; no extreme contrasts of intense light and shadow, cunningly brought together d la Salomon; in short, no mere mechanical dexterity or manufacturing process would serve to convey this meaning, or express it forcibly and eloquently. But the upturned profile, with its half-parted, slightly curved lips, the eager bend forward, and the suplicatory turn of the head, did it at once. But the doing of this implies more than mere mechanical skill; it could only result from the artist’s habits of observation and his individual realisation of the sentiment and feeling. Perhaps the reader thinks he could get a model to do as much for him. If so, he would get a very wholesome lesson by trying the experiment. Models are the most unmanageable things extant, as a rule ; and for my own poor part, I could always get more expression out of a lay figure than I could infuse into an ordinary model. In fact, it would be no bad plan for a photographer to purchase one of the small lay figures, sold at the price of a few shillings by most dealers in artists’ material, and study posing by its aid; the proportions of such figure are generally accurate, and there are very few positions assumed by the human figure which these art-dolls will not give. Great painters have found them advantageous, thus used, in the 6tudy of posing, and even lighting—why should not photographers do so? Here is another kind of subject, called “She’s Looking at Me, the Dear Creature,” a good, humorous subject, but expressed in the same way—viz., by the facial expression and pose of a single figure. The ungainly attitude, and grotesquely ugly face, combined with the expression of gratified vanity, has been admirably expressed. Of the same humorous class is “Did she?” of which a wood engraving appeared on p. 469, which if it did not do full justice to the original, attained more than a description in words could do. One specimen, a very fine example of a family group, called, we believe, ” Preparing for Church “—which I am graphotyping for this journal— illustrated how much could be done in the way of grouping, harmoniously and naturally, numerous figures, without having resort to the inefficient process of masking-out and printing-in, called “composition,” or, more properly, “combination,” printing, a process which Mr. Rejlander appears for many years—I think very wisely—to have altogether abandoned. That largely successful works have been produced by such a mechanical system must be patent to all who remember this artist’s “Two Ways of Life;” but the time spent in carrying it out, or the supervision of its tedious and very troublesome mechanical processes, must be most distasteful to an artist like Rejlander, who must feel that his time and talent can be, and ought to be, more worthily occupied. Most of Mr. Rejlander’s contributions were studies of heads or single figures, composed to embody, each, some distinct sentiment or feeling. They did not in their treatment, as has been already said, aim at the sensational or startling, nor overstep the modesty of nature. “Is it true?” was only a sweetly innocent and charming face, and gracefully draped and posed figure, yet the artist’s meaning was at once seen. The fresh, young imagination having realised so fully the well-wrought scenes of some stirring novel, she can hardly credit the work in which she takes so deep an interest is a mere fiction. A profile study of the same sweet, innocent face, with the drooping, beautiful head massed in delicate half-shadow, and a softly brilliant light just catching the outlines of her profile, was, in its general effect, quite poetical. “When the cat’s away, the mice will play” is another humorous, but terribly hackneyed subject. It does not, I think, tell its story very successfully, as a picture should, although it is decidedly good. “The Rehearsal” shows Hamlet toying with his dagger, and absorbed in the “To be or not to be” soliloquy. “Houseless,” a vagrant outcast asleep on a doorstep is too well known to be again described. A small copy of the “Two Ways of Life” was contained in the folio. This celebrated photograph, although the first, is the best specimen of combination printing ever produced, and is sufficient to at once pronounce its author a great artist, but it also demonstrates not less clearly how unconquerable are the difficulties of the process of using various negatives for the production of a perfect whole. As a subject I do not think, much as I admire it, that it was suitable for photographic treatment. The literal matter-of fact representations of the figures, suggestive of sensuous pleasures, would be better idealised, and the mother’s head vignetted against the grotto has nothing in it suggestive of a spiritual presence. The numerous groups of figures, with their accessories, are composed with singular ability— the forms of each separate figure and separate group, with their combined effects, harmonise wonderfully well. The massive vine-wreathed pillar on the one side, and the pure and simple Corinthian shaft on the other, are very suggestive, and the story—a most difficult one to tell pictorially— is well expressed. Women, wine, gambling, quarrelling, murder, shame, and, finally, the ignominy of a felon’s doom, are all suggested, clearly and distinctly, without confusion of subject or imagery, on the one hand, and on the other we have piety, charity, modesty, study, learning, industry, science, and, as a crowning result, domestic happiness. I do not like the festooned curtain drawn up across the top of the picture; it is too suggestive of that of which the whole picture, owing to its prominently matterof-fact character, &c, is just a little too suggestive, viz., the pose plastique affairs got up at certain questionable places of amusement. Some critics consider this the finest picture Mr. Rejlander has produced—it is unquestionably the most ambitious; but there is hardly a picture of consequence that he has done since, that, as a work of art, I do not prefer to this. The very obvious defects in the arrangement of the draperies I do not pause to notice, because we all know the unavoidable circumstances of haste and want of proper appliances and costumes under which it was produced. 1 notice this work with subjects of the genre class, although it really belongs to the ideal, a class of subjects for which I think photography is quite unfitted. Inferior to no works in the exhibition of this genre class were some of those exhibited by Mr. Hubbard. A cottage interior, representing an old woman peeling potatoes, displayed a breadth of treatment, force, brilliancy, and picturesque effect very unusual in photographs. I have never before seen an artificial background so cleverly blended with real accessories. Another little picture by the same artist, representing a young girl who has been reading, looking pensively out of a window into the street, was truly admirable—the expression of the pose, the face, and the general effect were all full of harmonious artistic feeling. In this we had an example of legitimate double printing, the softly aerial street view being, of course, from a separate negative. The lines of the open window rendered the printing-in of the view a very simple matter, and its effect showed it to be quite justifiable, for no one, ignorant of certain technical difficulties in securing such a view with the figure, could guess that both were taken at once. This is as it should be. On the left as we entered the inner room, we found a subject-picture called “Watching the Lark,” first introduced to photographers as Mr. H. P. Robinson’s, but here assigned to Messrs. Robinson and Cherrill. How much belongs to the one gentleman or how much to the other I have no means of learning, but whoever owns the idea of its composition has very little to be proud of. The forced, painfully-constrained attitude of the figure, the stiffness of which is echoed by the formal placing of the hat intended to complete the balance, and the formal repetition of lines crossing the picture horozontally (see fig. 1) sadly mars many beauties due to the good nature of the little model, the beauty of the landscape, and the excellent photography. One wonders how the poor little thing could have contrived to smile so sweetly in such a very uncomfortable position, and one wonders why it is that every composition picture by Mr. Robinson has such intensely dark foregrounds. Of course, as most of us know, this helps to give aerial delicacy to the middle and extreme distance; but when such a very simple “dodge “—it is nothing more—is made use of in precisely the same way on every occasion, and for all subjects, it smacks somewhat too strongly of manufacture and working to a given recipe, which is just the end to which all Mr. Robinson’s art-teachings in print tend. I give, in the style Mr. Robinson adopts in a contemporary, the leading lines of his figure’s pose. Could a set of lines be put together in a more inartistic way? (Fig. 2.) It is a pity Mr. Robinson does not apply in his own practice the rules he has laid down for the practice of his pupils. There is another little “dodge” in this picture which damages it, and that is the morsel of hair which the operator has pulled forward just to relieve the face from the distant hill, and so give the one more prominence and make the latter seem more distant. Of the object in view I have nothing to say; it was in itself legitimate enough, but the great object of all good art is the concealing of the art employed. Now, as no accident could have produced this little, dark, formal patch; everybody sees exactly why it is there, and how it got there. The same may be said of the position given to the hat. It does not appear to have been cast carelessly aside by the child, whose position is unmistakably suggestive of the headrest,* (*In which Mr. Robinson is so staunch a believer.—Ed.) but to have been carefully placed where it is to complete the cone. The absence of the child’s other hand or arm is also too suggestive of its being held back in just the same constrained position as its fellow has. I have not intentionally exaggerated these points in my diagram, (sketched direct from the original, although I expect to be accused of having done so by “the clique;” and I dwell upon the faults of this work, not only because they are instructive, but because, in all the loud praise which has been lavished upon this little picture—and some of it was really deserved—no one has dared to hint these glaring faults, although many have discovered them, * (*I heard tbem pointed out, when the photograph was first exhibited, at a meeting of the Photographic Society, by many, and by some who have since spoken publicly of this picture as simply perfection.—A. H. W.) so powerful is fear of “the clique” in certain photographic circles. The choice of the subject betrays a plentiful lack of originality ; but, nevertheless, the idea and the general effect of the light and shade, aerial perspective, &c, are very good. Hanging in the post of honour—Mr. Robinson was chief man of the hanging committee—is another of this photographer’s pictures—a large work, called “Returning Home.” The cut-out effect of the figure, and the other tricky dodges to which we have above alluded, are even more conspicuous in this than in the smaller photograph. We have the same very dark, made-up style of foreground—ferns, with all the grace and freedom of their lines and masses “composed” out of them, &c., &c. The figure, one can see at a glance, was taken in the studio, and the ingenuity of this artist’s most ingenious partisans have been unable to find an excuse for the “half-and-half effect of the subdued light and the deep shade on the face. There is no action in the figure, although this has evidently been aimed at, the drapery falls into folds unmistakably indicative of her stillness, and the artificial sky is more suggestive of a style of painting with cut-out papers, a brush, and some black-lead, which once used to be very popular with young ladies, than anything real or natural. But is it effective? Yes; and the why thereof is simply the picturesqueness obtained by rearing a dark, forcibly-marked, well-rounded figure against a clear, luminous mass of light. But this again is no difficult task. It is a mere manufacturing dodge. The art is not in getting such striking effects by mere contrast, but in so getting them that they are pictorially effective, natural, and true. This kind of thing may pass for cleverness with some and for talent with others, but it is, in fact, a mere display of very ordinary dexterity, hosed upon two or three very simple recipes. You take a certain quantity of light, so much dark, oppose and blend them in accordance with some one or two rules, and—there’s your “picture.” But this is not art; and I hope no one will persuade you to believe in it as anything at all worthy of your imitation or emulation. It really is not a gracious task to point out these things; but if the younger students are not to be misled, and their generous enthusiasm and earnestness converted into foes to their progress, it must be done ; and even if no one thanks me for doing it now, they will by-and-by, for nothing has been more convincing to me than this exhibition has been, that there is a real wakening up to the importance of art culture amongst photographers at large, and that it is leading them on in the right path towards excellence. (To be continued.) “]

MAYALL. (LONDON, MA)
“Foreign Miscellany. Playing Chess Blindfold.” INDEPENDENT 13:675 (Nov. 7, 1861): 7. [From the London Dial. Report on a chess demonstration by Mr. Paulsen, American chess player played against ten opponents without seeing the boards, in which is mentioned that “Mr. Mayall, of the well-known photographic firm, acted as secretary…”]

ILLUSTRATED BOOK. 1863.
[Advertisement.] “The Crystal Palace.” INDEPENDENT 15:764 (July 23, 1863): 6. [“The Crystal Palace and Exhibition of the World’s Industry of 1851; Illustrated by beautiful steel Engravings from original Daguerreotypes by Beard & Mayall of London. 3 vols. Cloth $15, full mor., 27; or in paper covers, $12. London Printing and Publishing Company, 487 Broadway. H. A. Brown, Managing Agent.” (Is this a reissue, a new edition, or just clearing the backlog?]

MAYALL, JOHN. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Foreign Gleanings.” INDEPENDENT 21:1059 (Mar. 18, 1869): 3. [A velocipede journey from London to Brighton, 50 miles, has lately been accomplished on some of the new two wheel machines. The rate of speed was eight miles an hour. Mr. John Mayall, Jr. son of the celebrated London photographer, was the organizer of the expedition and leader of the race. Three velocipedes made the journey.”]

MAYALL, JAMES E. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
Mayall, J. E. “Photographs on Factitious [sic fictitious?] Ivory. Patent, dated October 24, 1855.” JOURNAL OF THE FRANKLIN INSTITUTE 63:3 (Mar. 1857): 189-190. [From the London Practical Mechanic’s Journal, Jan. 1857. “This invention, by the well-known photographer of Regent Street, relates to the use of artificial ivory for receiving photographic pictures instead of glass or paper…. Known in France as Pinson’s artificial ivory, consisting of a compound of gelatin and alumina… prepared in the form of slabs, for the photographer’s use…” (Chemistry and process follows.)]

MAYALL, JOHN JABEZ EDWIN. (1810-1901) (USA, GREAT BRITAIN)
“Note.” JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON 7:105 (Jan. 15, 1861): 76. [Note that Mayall’s small photographic portraits of the Royal Family have sold considerably more than 100,000 copies]

BY COUNTRY: GREAT BRITAIN: 1863.
“Photography as an Industry.” JOURNAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF LONDON 8:137 (Sept. 15, 1863): 361-364. [From “London Review.” London Stereoscopic Co.; Mayall; Bedford; De la Rue; Bisson Freres; others mentioned.]

MAYALL, J. E. (LONDON, ENGLAND)
“Patent Law Amendment Act, 1853. Applications for Patents and Protection Allowed…” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 1:13 (Feb. 18, 1853): 155. [“Dated 25th Jan. 193. J. E. Mayall–Daguerreotype and photographic processes.”]

MAYALL, J.
“Meetings for the Ensuing Week.” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 3:106 (Dec. 1, 1854): 47. [“…Thurs. Antiquaries, 8. Photographic, 8.—Mr. J. Mayall, “On a New Albumenized Process on Glass.”…”]

ORGANIZATIONS. GREAT BRITAIN. CAMDEN LITERARY INSTITUTION. 1856..
“Proceedings of the Institutions. London.” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 4:177 (Apr. 11, 1856): 370-371. [“The first annual meeting of the Camden Literary Institution was held on the 25th ult., and was presided over by M. A. Garvey, Esq., LL.B., one of the vice-presidents. The meeting was numerously attended, and the entertainments, which comprised both literary and musical variety, passed off most satisfactorily. The chairman gave an interesting description of the process of Nature Printing, illustrating his remarks by exhibiting specimens of the plates employed in the process and impressions taken from them, kindly lent by Messrs. Bradbury and Evans, together with specimens belonging to the Society of Arts, also lent for the occasion. At a later period of the evening a short address, on the Microscope, was given by John Gamgee, Esq., medical lecturer at the Institution,… Several rooms were decorated with paintings, contributed by Fred. Goodall, Esq., A.K.A., Geo. Lance, Esq., Geo. Cruckshank, Esq., J. Absolon, Esq., and others, also with some beautiful photographic portraits, exhibited by Messrs. Aglio and Absolon, of Piccadilly, and Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street. The London Stereoscopic Company contributed an interesting collection of stereoscopes and slides, and Mr. Geo. Gray, and Mr. F. C. Partington, lent several working models. The committee report favorably of the prospects of the Institution….”]

ORGANIZATIONS. GREAT BRITAIN. SOCIETY OF ARTS. 1857.
“Conversazione.” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 5:219 (Feb. 27, 1857): 222-225. [“The first Conversazione of the present Session was held on Saturday evening last, when the attendance was unusually large. All the rooms were thrown open, and contained a fine collection of objects of interest. In the lower rooms were arranged numerous specimens of Art-manufactures in enamel, gem work, gold and silver plate, bronzes, electr deposits, stained glass, fictile wares, tapestry, &c. The following were the principal contributors to whom the thanks of the Society are especially; due:— (This is followed by almost six full columns of listings of the varied items on exhibition, among them the following: –) “…In the suite of rooms on the first-floor, were exhibited a fine collection of water-colour drawings, by Turner, J. D. Harding, Cattermole, Corbould, Stanfield, Danby, Warren, De Wint, Cox, and other eminent artists, as well as photographs, of unusual size, by Bisson frères, Baldus, and other distinguished French photographers. On the tables were displayed several sets of philosophical apparatus, optical instruments, &c. The Crystal Palace Company lent from their picture gallery:—Several fine water-colour drawings, and a series of the most recent and finest French photographs in their collection. From the Literary Department, the following rare and splendid books:—The King of Prussia’s Testament, of which only four copies exist in England. The Dresden Gallery, Vol. I. Dickenson’s pictures of the Exhibition of 1851. Progress of the Sydenham Palace, two vols, (photographs). Miss S. Durant contributed a fine bust in marble, by herself, of Mrs. Beecher Stowe. Mr. W. Essex exhibited three enamels, painted by himself….Mr. Chief Justice Temple—25 Indian antiquities from British Honduras. Messrs. Bland and Long exhibited stereoscopes and stereoscopic pictures. Messrs. Elliott and Co., of Charing-cross, exhibited a set of philosophical apparatus for educational purposes, as approved by the Committee of Council for Education. Also Professor Willis’s apparatus for teaching mechanics. Messrs. Horne And Thornthwaite, of Newgate-street, a similar set of apparatus. Messrs. Knight and Co., of Foster-lane, some improved stereoscopes. Mr. Laud, of Chancery-lane, some microscopes and microscopic objects. Mr. Mayall, of Regent-street, stereoscopes and specimens of his patent artificial ivory photographs. Mr. Williams, of Regent-street, some photographic portraits.” Etc., etc.]

ORGANIZATIONS. GREAT BRITAIN. SOCIETY OF ARTS. 1857.
“Conversazione.” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 5:233 (May 8, 1857): 359-362. [“The Second Conversazione of the present Session took place on Wednesday evening last, when the pictures and sketches of the late Thomas Seddon were collected for exhibition under the superintendence of the Committee for the ‘Seddon Subscription Fund,’ and of Mr. W. M. Rossetti, the Honorary Secretary….Several cabinet pictures of the French School from the gallery of J. Anderson Rose, Esq., were kindly lent by that gentleman Original drawings, by M. Callow, II. Gastineau, J. D. Harding, W. Hunt, D. McKewan, Oakley, &c., together with copies by the Chromo-lithographic process, were exhibited by Messrs. George Rowney and Company, and in many instances the copies were placed by the side of the originals, sо as to show the perfection to which the art of reproduction has arrived….Specimens of photographic miniatures, coloured in transparent colours, were contributed by Messrs. Lock, of Regent-street, and photographic portraits of Members of the present Parliament by Mr. Mayall. Some portfolios of photographs of Indian temples, &c., were contributed by the East India Company…. Specimens of carving for the Sultan’s new palace at Constantinople, were contributed by Mr. Rogers, as well as some photographs of Jerusalem, and a fragment of engraved marble from the Mosque of Omar….”]

MAGAZINES. THE NATIONAL MAGAZINE. 1862.
[Advertisement.] “The National Magazine.” JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS IN UNION 10:479 (Jan. 24, 1862): 154. [Beautiful Photograph of the Unbroken Circle of the Royal Family, Photographed by Calder. is given with the February Number. The November Number (first of the New Series) contains a Photograph of the New Westminster Bridge. The December Number contains a Photograph og Ripon Cathedral. The January Number contains a Photograph of Raglan Castle. The March Number will contain a beautiful Photograph entitled “A Fine Spring Morning.” The April Number will contain a beautiful portrait of H. R. H. The Prince of Wales, Photographed by Mayall. “As separate Illustrations, these Photographs would freely sell at Half-a-crown.” – Photographic Journal. The National Magazine is p