In conclusion, it may be interesting to record the fact that no communication passed between du Maurier and Whistler upon the subject, other than that which appeared in print. So much for the episode of the suppressed _Trilby_ illustration, which, as we have seen, was complicated by personal considerations. Let us now turn our attention for a moment to a charming little tailpiece which has fallen a victim, not to the susceptibilities of an individual, but to an undue consideration for the feelings of that most living of Tom Morton’s creations, Mrs. Grundy. It is to be found in the first edition of the immortal _Vicar of Wakefield_ as pictured by Mr. Hugh Thomson. And in, entering our protest against the deference which has in this instance been shown to prudishness, we must at the same time admiringly recognise the spirit by {172} which the action has been prompted. The “young person” no doubt succeeds on occasion in rendering us a little ridiculous. At the same time we must not forget that to her we largely owe our immunity from what would often shock even the moral olfactories of her elders. [Illustration: Suppressed Illustration from _The Vicar of Wakefield_] Surely, however, the tender morals which could bear to read of Thornhill’s attempted seduction of Olivia could not logically find offence in the {173} charming little conceit, which by its suppression has rendered a first edition of the _Vicar_, as illustrated by Mr. Hugh Thomson, an allurement to the modern Mæcenas. Unlike _Coaching Days and Coaching Ways_, illustrated by the same artist, after the first edition of which certain drawings also disappeared, but without others being substituted in the later editions, the first edition of the Thomson _Vicar of Wakefield_, dated 1890, which was published both on small and large paper, contains the same number of illustrations as those which succeeded it. This, of course, is because in this instance the type was not reset, and so it was obligatory to substitute an illustration for that which was suppressed. The tailpiece, here reproduced by the kind permission of Mr. Thomson and Messrs. Macmillan, only appears on page 95 of the issues of 1890. After that date we have a drawing which, though a pretty enough little picture of Lady Blarney and Miss Carolina Wilhelmina Amelia Skeggs (I love, like the Vicar himself, to give the whole name), is to my mind far inferior to that {174} which seems to have given offence to some extraordinarily constructed purists. Mr. Austin Dobson, to whom we are indebted for the enlightening Prefatory account, in this volume, of the more important illustrated editions of the _Vicar_, tells me that he has an impression that the immediate cause of the disappearance of the peccant tailpiece was a certain objection raised by a reviewer in the _Spectator_. In justice, however, to that organ I must at once put it on record that I can find no trace of its having so demeaned itself.