Michael D.Heath-Caldwell M.Arch.

1823 - 1824 - 1825

-----------------------------------------------------------------

James Heath R.A.  aged 66/67                                   
Mary Heath (ne Phillipson)   aged 66/67   

              
George Heath   aged 44/45                                      
Anne Raymond Heath (ne Dunbar)  aged 36/37    

 
Julia Anna Harrison (ne Heath) aged 16/17        
John Moore Heath aged 15/16              
Douglas Denon Heath aged 12/13                
Dunbar Isidore Heath 8/9                   
Leopold G. Heath 6/7                
Emma Jane Whatman   2/3

George Heath

---

The Heath Family Engravers 1779-1878, Volume 2. James Heath A.R.A. by John Heath
The Works of Benjamin Franklin - two plates engraved by James Heath after G.Hughes, published by W.Baynes ad Son, and others. Published in the Dove's English Classics Series

1. - Frontispiece: 'When they were about to satisfy their hunger...' - plate size 8 x 6cm.
2. - Title page: 'But if when the Husband rises in the morning...' plate size 6 x 6cm.

--------------------------------------

Young's Night Thoughts, or The Complaint - Two plates engraved by Charles Heath after Henry Corbould - published by W.Baynes and Son, and others. Published in Dove's 'English Classics series, and reprinted in 1845 by Thomas Allman. 

1. - Frontispiece: 'What numbers...' - plate size 8 x 6cm.
2. - 'Warning for less...' - plate size 6 x 6cm.

--------------------------------------

Roderick, the Last of the Goths (Robert Southey) - Six plates engraved by Charles Heath after Richard Westall R.A.- published by Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme and Brown.

 
1. - 'Before the cross...' - plate size 9 x 7cm.
2. - 'Well it was...'
3. - To Roderick then...'
4. - 'His loose robe this day...'
5. - 'Behold the man...'
6. - 'With firm ese...'

--------------------------------------

Illustrations to Irish Melodies (Thomas Moore) - six plates engraved by Charles Heath after Thomas Stothard R.A. -  published by Robert Jennings and S.Robinson. The Balmain copies are marked (in pencil) 'never published.'

1. - 'Come send round the wine...' - plate size 10 x 7cm
2. - Come rest in this bosom...'
3. - But while o'er the roses...'
4. - 'Rich and rare...'
5. - 'Oh the heart that has truly loved...'
6. - 'Beauty lies...'

--------------------------------------

Gems of Devotional Poetry - Engraved by Charles Heath after Thomas Stothard R.A. - published by Thomas Tegg. 
1. - Title page - plate size 7 x 6cm - Dated 'Sept 1824.'

--------------------------------------

Gems of Lyric Poetry - engraved by Charles Heath after Thomas Stothard R.A. - published by Thomas Tegg. 

1. - Title page - plate size 7 x 6cm. - dated 'Sept 1824.'

--------------------------------------

Poetical Sketches (Alaric Watts) - Two plates engraved by Charles Heath after Thomas Stothard R.A. - published by Hurst, Robinson. 

1. - Frontispiece: 'Then they fling the snow-white veil aside...' plate size 9 x 7cm.
2. - 'Upon his brow the damps of death...'

--------------------------------------

The Improvisatrice and other Poems (L.E.L.) Laetitia Landon) - Four plates engraved by Charles Heath after J.M.Wright - published by Hurst, Robinson. There was 'A New Edition'in 1831. 'L.E.L.' was editress of Heath's Book of Beauty' from 1833 until her death in 1838. Disraelie described Miss Landon rather unkindly as 'the snub-nosed Brompton Sappho.' 

1. - Frontispiece: 'He heard her prayer...' - plate size 9 x 7cm.
2. - no caption
3. - Rosalie.
4. - no caption

--------------------------------------

Tales of a Traveller (Washington Irvine) - Five plates engraved by Charles Heath after Thomas Stothard R.A. - published by John Murray. 

1. - no caption - plate size 10 x 8cm
2. - German student.
3. - The Young Italian
4. - Wolfart Webber, or Golden Dreams.
5. - The Bold Dragoon.

--------------------------------------

Poems (Samuel Rogers) - Six plates engraved by Charles Heath after Richard Westall R.A. - published by Hurst Robinson. 

1. - 'Oft as he turned...' - plate size 9 x 7cm - oval prints
2. - 'Want with her babes...'
3. - 'So thro' the grove...'
4. - 'Her sense had fled...'
5. - 'If o'er the mead...'
6. - 'Flies from her home...'

--------------------------------------

A Critical enquiry into Ancient Armout (Samual R. Meyrick) - Three plates engraved by Charles Heath after H.Bridgens -  published by R.Jennings. 

1. - Frontispiece. - plate size 9 x 18cm. 
2. - Vol.II
3. - Vol.III
--------------------------------------

Separate print - engraved by Charles Heath "Shakespeare." 
 

---

Tuesday 3 February 1824
Morning Chronicle

Insolvent Debtors' Court. - Monday

Thomas Walter, an elderly man of respectable appearance, came up to be heard on his petition to be discharged, and was opposed by Mr.Heath, for Mary Walter.

Mr.Pollock, who was Counsel for the insolvent, stated to the Court that there was but one creditor, named Mary Walter, in the insolvent's schedule, and she was his wife. He submitted to the Court that a wife could not  oppose her husband's discharge. 

Mr.Heath said the facts of the case were, the wife had sued the insolvent in the Consistory Court of Litchfield, for alimony, and obtained a decree of that Court of Litchfield, for alimony, and obtained a decree of that Court against him., and if she could not oppose his discharge, that decree would be a nulity; besides the insolvent had inserted his wife's name in the schedule as a creditor, from whose claim he sought to be discharged - let him strike out her name, and the opposition would be given up.

The Court asked Mr.Heath whether a wife could oppose her husband's discharge for having contracted a debt fraudulently with her?

Mr.Heath said, the opposition in the present case merely referred to the insolvent's property, not to any fraud in contracting the debt. He would be equally satisfied to have the wife's name left out of the schedule. 

Mr.Pollack said the Act of Parliament would not permit the insolvent to omit his wife's name in his schedule, even if he were willing to do it.

The Court referred to the Act of Parliament, by which it appeared, that an insolvent was required to insert in his schedule "the names of all persons to whom he was indebted, or who to his knowledge or belief claimed to be his creditors." 

The Chief Commissioner said, it appeared to him, that under the words of the Act, the insolvent was bound to insert in his schedule the name of his wife, who had sued him in a court of competent jurisdiction, and obtained its decree for a debt against him; and her name being properly inserted in his schedule as a creditor, it was competent for her so far to oppose his discharge, as to obtain satisfaction on the subject of his property; if Mr.Pollack thought otherwise, the Court would be glad to hear him argue the point.

Mr.Pollock declined entering into any argument.

Mr.Heath then moved, that the case should be referred to the Provisional Assignee of the Court for investigation, to report thereon to the Court. The motion was granted as a matter of course.

---

Tuesday 3 February 1824
Morning Herald (London)

Insolvent Debtors' Court

Thomas Walter came up to be heard on his petition to be discharged, and was opposed by Mr.Heath, at the instance of Mary Walters, his wife, on the ground that he had not conformed with the terms of a certain decree issued by the Ecclesiastical Court for the payment of a certain sum at specific periods by way of alimony. The Learned Counsel observed that he should not pursue his instructions further than to pray that the Insolvent's case might be referred to Mr.Dance, the professional assignee of the Court, for investigation.

Mr.Pollock, for the insolvent, wished to know by what law a wife had power to imprison her husband for a debt.

Mr.Heath explained that his client was not the person at whose suit the insolvent was detained.
Mr.Pollock - Be it so: yet if any doubt exist, she might have been a detaining as well as an opposing creditor.

Mr.Heath submitted to the Court that if a decree has issued in favour of a wife, she was entitled by law to sue for her alimony, and the party liable to pay having giving notice of application to the Court, she had a right to come pro tanto, and recognise her claim, and this she might do either by her proctor or her next friend. 

The Court intimated that this insolvent had admitted the claim in a certain degree; hence the creditor was entitled to come in.

Mr.Heath said he only prayed a reference to inquire as to property supposed to be in his possession, which would enable him to discharge his client's claim. He would, however, consent that the defendant should be struck off the schedule.

Mr.Pollock said this could not be consented to, inasmuch as the insolvent was bound to swear that it contained every demand to which, in law or conscience, he thought himself liable.

After a long desultory conversation, the Court referred the case to be investigated by Mr.Dance, pursuant to the prayer of Mr.Heath.

---

Thursday 15 April 1824
Charles Heath, 6 Seymour Place, London to Dawson Turner.

My Dear Sir,
I enclose a bill on Messrs. Hurst, Robinson & Co. which if you can oblige me by cashing it will very much serve me. And the obligation would be greater if I could have it by Monday next.

I shall very shortly have the pleasure of sending you a Proof of Puck from Sir Joshua and any small prints I have engraved since I last sent to you. I am most happy to say that Mr.Perkins engine will succeed most completely. He has completed a sale to a Banker in London and another Gentleman for one third for which he is to receive £25,000. 5,000 will be paid down in a few Days indeed he has received 2,000.

All our other business increases so rapidly that we are compelled to build 6 more presses making in all 34 and I feel concerned that by the time they are up and at work we shall want as many more.

With best respects to yourself and Family believe me Dear Sir,
Yours most sincerely,
Charles Heath

Be so good as to address the answer to Fleet Street as I shall [collect it?] some Hours earlier.

 

---

Tuesday 11 May 1824
Sun (London)

Extraordinary Case.

Bow Street - Yesterday, John Foster, the landlord of the Prince of Wales public house at Brompton, and William Horne and John Bradley, two officers of the County Court of Requests, of Middlesex in Kingsgate Street, were brought before Sir R.Birnie by Wootton, one of the patrol, charged with committing a most extraordinary outrage upon the person of Miss Sidney Cowell, a lady residing also at Brompton. 

Miss Cowell, who appeared to be in very delicate health, and gave her evidence under the influence of strong agitation, was ordered by the Magistrate to have a chair, and having been sworn, she stated that she resides with her mother, who is a widow, and keeps the house No.20 York Place, Queen's Elms, Brompton. She stated that the officers had behaved with great outrage and indecency, but as the case will be subject to legal investigation, we do not think it proper to detail the particulars. After this outrageous conduct, Miss Cowell was finally driven to Whitecross Prison, where she was found on Saturday by her mother in a deplorable state. - - - 

Horne, in his defence, denied that he had used the violence imputed to him, and produced his warrant, alleging that he had only acted in the performance of his duty in taking Miss Cowell's person. - - - 
Miss Cowell and her mother said they had lived for years in respectability in the neighbourhood, and could adduce ample proof of their integrity.

Sir R.Birne - I think this is the grossest instance of violation of the liberty of the subject that ever came under my cognizance. Bind over the parties to prosecute, Mr.Richmond (the Clerk), and I shall write to Mr.Heath, the Judge of the County Court, to acquaint him with the conduct of his officers.  - - 

---

Sunday 16 May 1824
Weekly Globe

The King v The County Clerk of Middlesex.

This was a rule obtained last Term by Mr.French calling on George Heath Esq., to show cause why a criminal information should not be filed against him for supposed corrupt conduct in his office of County Clerk of Middlesex.

Mr.Scarlett now showed cause. The rule was obtained on the joint affidavits of James Hulme, a pawnbroker, of No.55 Museum Street, Bloomsbury, and Charles Perry, his servant. 
From this, it appeared that a person named Joseph Brock, who had been in the service of Mr.Hulme, at a salary of £30 per annum, and having been suddenly dismissed in December last, summoned his master in the County Court, Kingsgate Street, (appointed by the statute of 23 George II.) for a month's wages, on the ground that he was entitled to a month's warning. 

The sum claimed was 11.19s.11d..

On that occasion of Hulme and Perry attended for the purpose of disproving Brock's claim, but George Heath Esq., the County Clerk, or his deputy, who then presided, prevented Mr.Hulme, as was alleged, from entering into his defence,and upon  persisting in his desire to be heard, he and his servant were desired to hold their tongues and quit the Court; whereupon the County Clerk, or his deputy, or the Register or Clerk , made out an absolute order for the payment of 11.19s.11d. debt, and 5s.6d. costs; and on the 24th of January he (Hulme) was arrested, and he then paid the debt and 8s. 10d. costs, for which he obtained a receipt form an officer. 

The affidavit then stated,that in two other instances (dates not mentioned) Hulme had been summoned twice in the same Court, by two persons, named Gent and Griffin, respectively, for debts, and that, although in one instance he had been summoned before the Commissioners of Requests, in Castle Street, Leicester Square, who determined that there was no pretence for the demand, and in the other he had been summoned before the Magistrates of Marlborough Street, who also determined that the claim in that case could not be supported, yet G.Heath Esq. or his deputy, then presiding on those occasions respectively, refused to hear Hulme in his defence, telling him that the County Court had nothing to do with any other Courts, and desiring him to hold his tongue. 

From this statement three heads of complaint were to be collected.

First, the supposed refusal to hear Mr.Hulme in his defence, to the summonses taken out by Brock; second, the supposed refusal to hear him in his defence to the summonses of Mr.Gent and Mr.Griffin, respectively;and third, a demand of more fees than were authorised by the statute by which the Court was constituted. 

The affidavit mentioned a fourth complaint, namely, that the cases in question were determined by a Jury of only three persons, instead of twelve as required by the same statute. 
Now, in answer to this case there was a decisive objection in point of for, which, as Mr.S thought would be alone sufficient to dispose of the rule. The rule was obtained against Mr.Heath, whereas the supposed misconduct was imputed to the Deputy County Clerk,for whose supposed criminal act his principal could not be liable. 

It was curious that the affidavit imputed the supposed misconduct of Mr.Heath Esq., or his deputy then presiding; the fact being that the deputy alone had presided; and, in conclusion, the affidavit alleged that Mr.Heath, in the conduct adopted by the deputy, was actuated by corrupt motives towards the complainant.

The Court, after hearing Counsel in support of the Rule, discharged it with costs, the Judges having given their opinion seriatum, that the answer made to the charge was a complete acquittal. 

---

Wednesday 13 October 1824
New Times (London)

Insolvent Debtors' Court. Oct.12

John Theobald, an elderly man, was opposed by Mr.Heath on behalf of two creditors of the names of Farquharson and Bevan.

The insolvent stated that he considered himself heir-at-law to Charles Rampan Esq., and entitled to considerable freehold property in Milbank Street and Peter Street, Westminster, and also in the West Indies - beyond the Westminster property he had no claim to other property in this kingdom, nor had he ever represented that he had. He never said that Theobald's in Hertfordshire was his property, but might have said that he knew where the writings were lodged; never said that Theobald's Row was his, but that it once belonged to his ancestors. 

He also denied that part of the Bedford Harpur Charity was his, and that the Duke of Bedford or his steward had offered to purchase it. 

He swore positively that he never told Mr.Farquharson so, or any other perosn. 
He had lodged some documents which he collected from the West Indies with Mr.Franklin in 99, Holbourn Hill, for safety; others were lodged with persons of the names of Young and Masson. 
The insolvent further stated that he considered Mr.Farquharson to be indebted to him although he was detained in prison at his suit.

Mr.Pope, an attorney, produced the answer of the insolvent to the interrogatories filed against him, and the account of moneys received and paid on account of the deceased.

The insolvent state that the Duke of Bedford had received 190/. out of the assets, and he denied that the opposing creditor had any further claim in the estate, although he did not deny that he was minus to the estate in the sum set down in the answer. Charlotte Young had received her share by taking the furniture, plate &c. 

The Court held that the insolvent was entitled to his discharge, which was directed to issue.
Mr.Heath - Then I'll refer this case to Mr.Dance, for it is too much for the insolvent to bring an action and get non-suited,  and then come here and again claim a debt.

It further appeared, on reference to the schedule, that it was entirely blank as to the documents in question, whereupon it was ordered that the papers should be filed in Court, and that the case should be referred to the provisional assignee.
 

---

Tuesday 23 November 1824
English Chronicle and Whitehall Evening Post.

Partnerships Dissolved
Jacob Perkins and George Thomas Heath, of Regent's Park, engineers.

---

Wednesday 8 December 1824  circa
The Heath Family Engravers 1779-1878, Volume 3. by John Heath

Letter from Longmans to Charles Heath

To Charles Heath

Dear Sir,

We have suffered so much loss and inconvenience from not being able to get a regular supply of plates for Mavors Spelling Book and the plate is now so much worked that we have been under the necessity of getting another plate engraved.
That there may be no loss to you on that head we will if you desire it pay you any portion of the cost of the drawing.

Yours faithfully,
Longman & Co.
Paternoster Row.
Pray have you found the India Drawing.
[ie India paper or? engravings on India]


 

---

1825