Prints are in general designed to illustrate books, but the Editor's part of this volume is written to illustrate Prints. He is apprehensive that the whole will stand in need of much indulgence, but certain that the errors, whatever they may be, do not originate in a want of diligence. To his thanks for the flattering reception of the first Edition, and rapid sale of the first and second Editions of the two preceding volumes, he has only to add his reasons for bringing forward this third. When they were published, he had neither seen the MSS., nor ever heard that Hogarth had written anything for the press, except the _Analysis of Beauty_. When he some time after obtained the papers, he considered them as a very valuable acquisition, and was vain enough to think that by arranging them he could compile a volume which would gratify the admirers of Hogarth; and in the hope that the life, opinions, criticisms, and correspondence of this great and original genius will excite and gratify curiosity, he respectfully submits the following pages to the candour and indulgence of the public. J. I. [Illustration: (end of section floral icon)] HOGARTH. INTRODUCTION. Mr. Walpole (in p. 160 of his _Anecdotes_) gravely declares that Hogarth had but slender merit as a painter, and in colouring proved no greater a master. By the six pictures of "Marriage à la Mode," both these declarations are answered and refuted. Mr. Nichols (in p. 449 of his _Anecdotes_), at the same time that he kindly acknowledges "Hogarth's hand was faithful to character," roundly asserts that as an engraver his merits are inconsiderable; that he wants clearness; that his strokes sometimes look as if fortuitously disposed, and sometimes thwart each other in almost every possible direction. He adds, "that what the artist wanted in skill, he strove to make up in labour; but the result of it was a universal haze and indistinctness, that, by excluding force and transparency, rendered several of his larger plates less captivating than they would have been had he entrusted the sole execution of them to either Ravenet or Sullivan." This is very severe; but is it true? If the "Harlot's" and "Rake's Progress," the "Enraged Musician," "Strolling Actresses," "Medley," and many other prints produced by his own graver, are attentively examined, I think the strokes will not be found to be fortuitously disposed: every touch tells, and gives that expression which the artist intended. As to his striving to make up for his want of skill by labour, I believe him to have been a prodigy of industry, but do not discover the result that is suggested by Mr. Nichols. We may possibly annex different ideas to the words. Johnson describes a universal _haze_ as a fog, a mist; and _indistinctness_ he defines to be confusion, uncertainty, obscurity,--faults which were never attributed to William Hogarth. Neither have I before heard it said that his prints