Jean Marie Delattre (1746-1840)
Delattre (his name is occasionally spelled Delatre) was born at Abbeville, France in 1746. In 1770 he moved to London and worked under Francesco Bartolozzi. He produced plates after his contemporaries, including Angelica Kauffmann and Francis Wheatley, and after old master paintings (Bryan’s Dictionary highlights his engraving of St Cecilia after Guercino).
Delattre embarked on an engraving of John Singleton Copley’s (1738-1815) The Death of the Earl of Chatham. Upon competition, Copley disputed the standard of the engraving and refused to pay Delattre the outstanding balance of the commission. Delattre sued. The resulting court case saw fourteen engravers confirm the merit of the work and fourteen painters state the opposite.
The following extract relates the case:
‘This cause occupied the attention of the Court the whole day, and excited a considerable degree of interest. The question was concerning the execution of an engraving from the celebrated picture of ‘The Death of Lord Chatham'. This was originally painted by the defendant. As soon as it was finished, he put it into the hands of Bartolozzi, who undertook to engrave it for 2000 guineas. This print was admirably done; but the price being high, he wished to publish another, which he could afford to sell at a more moderate rate. He therefore contracted with the plaintiff for an engraving about half the size, for which he was to give him 800l [guineas]. After working on the plate three years, Mr. Delatre thought he had brought it to perfection, and sent a proof to Mr. Copley. The latter, however, was dissatisfied with the performance, and refused to pay the stipulated sum: upon this the action was brought, to recover 580l [guineas], the balance due to the plaintiff, he having received 220l [guineas]. during the course of the work. The first witness called was Mr. Bartolozzi, who spoke very much in favour of the engraving; copies of it were produced, as well of Bartolozzi's. Mr. Erskine, in cross-examining the witness, desired him to compare minutely the two prints together. “Do you see, Sir,” said he, “in your own, the younger son of Lord Chatham in a naval uniform bending forward, with a tear in his eye, and a countenance displaying the agony of an affectionate son on beholding a dying father and do you not see, in the other, an assassin with a scar upon his cheek, exulting over the body of a young man whom he has murdered? In the one, you observe the late Minister, a thin, fair-complexioned, genteel-looking young man; in the other, a fat, round-faced, grim visaged negro. In the one, the Archbishop of York appears in his true colours, as a dignified and venerable prelate; in the other, his place is usurped by the Drunken Parson in Hogarth's ‘Harlot's Progress'. In the one, the Earl of Chatham is supported by his son-in-law, Lord Stanhope, a figure, tall, slender, and elegant: and does not the other offer to view a short, sturdy porter of a bagnio, lugging home an ale lecher, who had got mortal drunk?” Mr. Bartolozzi allowed that some of the portraits were not exactly like, but maintained that the piece was well executed upon the whole. “Mr. Pitt's looks,” he said, “had altered much of late years, and this accounted for the dissimilarity of his appearance in the two prints.” This remark caused a loud and general laugh. Mr. Bartolozzi was followed by an immense number of other engravers, who all coincided in opinion with him. After a very eloquent speech for the defendant from Mr. Erskine, as many eminent painters were called, whose opinions were diametrically opposite; among these were Sir William Beechey, Mr. Opie, Mr. Cosway, Mr. President West, and Mr. Hoppner: they, together with several engravers, unanimously pronounced the engraving extremely ill executed, and declared that the defendant could not publish it without materially injuring his reputation. Lord Kenyon professed total ignorance upon this subject: the knowledge of the Fine Arts, he said, doubtless added to the value of human life; but this source of enjoyment had unfortunately never been opened to him. He found himself in a wilderness, and at a loss what path to take to arrive at justice; he found fourteen persons (it so happened that an equal number of witnesses had been called on both sides,) who all advised him to go one way, and other fourteen who insisted on his going another. The strongman, when at a loss whether to follow the advice of Virtue or Pleasure, in his way to the Temple of Fame, had been enabled to make a prudent choice, but his Lordship had no clue whatever to direct his steps: he would not even talk upon this subject, lest he should appear a fool and a babbler, like the man who discoursed on the art of war before Hannibal. In the course of his charge, however, the noble lord laid great stress on the evidence of Mr. West; and, though he gave no direction to the jury, seemed inclined to think that the defendant was entitled to a verdict. The jury nevertheless, after withdrawing for about ten minutes, found a verdict for the plaintiff.’
From Library of the Fine Arts; or Repertory of Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, and Engraving, published by M Arnold, 1831-1832.
Collections
British Museum, London
Metropolitan Museum, New York
National Portrait Gallery, London
Royal Academy, London
Royal Collection Trust
Victoria and Albert Museum, London
Literature
Hind, A M (1963 reprint), A History of Engraving and Etching, Dover Publications
Mackenzie, I (1988), British Prints, Antique Collectors’ Club
Redgrave, S (1970 reprint), A Dictionary of Artists of the English School, Kingsmead Reprints
Delattre (his name is occasionally spelled Delatre) was born at Abbeville, France in 1746. In 1770 he moved to London and worked under Francesco Bartolozzi. He produced plates after his contemporaries, including Angelica Kauffmann and Francis Wheatley, and after old master paintings (Bryan’s Dictionary highlights his engraving of St Cecilia after Guercino).
Delattre embarked on an engraving of John Singleton Copley’s (1738-1815) The Death of the Earl of Chatham. Upon competition, Copley disputed the standard of the engraving and refused to pay Delattre the outstanding balance of the commission. Delattre sued. The resulting court case saw fourteen engravers confirm the merit of the work and fourteen painters state the opposite.
The following extract relates the case:
‘This cause occupied the attention of the Court the whole day, and excited a considerable degree of interest. The question was concerning the execution of an engraving from the celebrated picture of ‘The Death of Lord Chatham'. This was originally painted by the defendant. As soon as it was finished, he put it into the hands of Bartolozzi, who undertook to engrave it for 2000 guineas. This print was admirably done; but the price being high, he wished to publish another, which he could afford to sell at a more moderate rate. He therefore contracted with the plaintiff for an engraving about half the size, for which he was to give him 800l [guineas]. After working on the plate three years, Mr. Delatre thought he had brought it to perfection, and sent a proof to Mr. Copley. The latter, however, was dissatisfied with the performance, and refused to pay the stipulated sum: upon this the action was brought, to recover 580l [guineas], the balance due to the plaintiff, he having received 220l [guineas]. during the course of the work. The first witness called was Mr. Bartolozzi, who spoke very much in favour of the engraving; copies of it were produced, as well of Bartolozzi's. Mr. Erskine, in cross-examining the witness, desired him to compare minutely the two prints together. “Do you see, Sir,” said he, “in your own, the younger son of Lord Chatham in a naval uniform bending forward, with a tear in his eye, and a countenance displaying the agony of an affectionate son on beholding a dying father and do you not see, in the other, an assassin with a scar upon his cheek, exulting over the body of a young man whom he has murdered? In the one, you observe the late Minister, a thin, fair-complexioned, genteel-looking young man; in the other, a fat, round-faced, grim visaged negro. In the one, the Archbishop of York appears in his true colours, as a dignified and venerable prelate; in the other, his place is usurped by the Drunken Parson in Hogarth's ‘Harlot's Progress'. In the one, the Earl of Chatham is supported by his son-in-law, Lord Stanhope, a figure, tall, slender, and elegant: and does not the other offer to view a short, sturdy porter of a bagnio, lugging home an ale lecher, who had got mortal drunk?” Mr. Bartolozzi allowed that some of the portraits were not exactly like, but maintained that the piece was well executed upon the whole. “Mr. Pitt's looks,” he said, “had altered much of late years, and this accounted for the dissimilarity of his appearance in the two prints.” This remark caused a loud and general laugh. Mr. Bartolozzi was followed by an immense number of other engravers, who all coincided in opinion with him. After a very eloquent speech for the defendant from Mr. Erskine, as many eminent painters were called, whose opinions were diametrically opposite; among these were Sir William Beechey, Mr. Opie, Mr. Cosway, Mr. President West, and Mr. Hoppner: they, together with several engravers, unanimously pronounced the engraving extremely ill executed, and declared that the defendant could not publish it without materially injuring his reputation. Lord Kenyon professed total ignorance upon this subject: the knowledge of the Fine Arts, he said, doubtless added to the value of human life; but this source of enjoyment had unfortunately never been opened to him. He found himself in a wilderness, and at a loss what path to take to arrive at justice; he found fourteen persons (it so happened that an equal number of witnesses had been called on both sides,) who all advised him to go one way, and other fourteen who insisted on his going another. The strongman, when at a loss whether to follow the advice of Virtue or Pleasure, in his way to the Temple of Fame, had been enabled to make a prudent choice, but his Lordship had no clue whatever to direct his steps: he would not even talk upon this subject, lest he should appear a fool and a babbler, like the man who discoursed on the art of war before Hannibal. In the course of his charge, however, the noble lord laid great stress on the evidence of Mr. West; and, though he gave no direction to the jury, seemed inclined to think that the defendant was entitled to a verdict. The jury nevertheless, after withdrawing for about ten minutes, found a verdict for the plaintiff.’
From Library of the Fine Arts; or Repertory of Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, and Engraving, published by M Arnold, 1831-1832.
Collections
British Museum, London
Metropolitan Museum, New York
National Portrait Gallery, London
Royal Academy, London
Royal Collection Trust
Victoria and Albert Museum, London
Literature
Hind, A M (1963 reprint), A History of Engraving and Etching, Dover Publications
Mackenzie, I (1988), British Prints, Antique Collectors’ Club
Redgrave, S (1970 reprint), A Dictionary of Artists of the English School, Kingsmead Reprints
Our full selection of antique prints can be viewed here.