Michael D.Heath-Caldwell M.Arch.

Michael Heath-Caldwell M.Arch
Brisbane, Queensland
ph: 0412-78-70-74
alt: m_heath_caldwell@hotmail.com

1827 - 1828 - 1829

James Heath R.A. aged 70/71
Mary Heath (ne Phillipson) aged 70/71

George Heath aged 48/49
Anne Raymond Heath (ne Dunbar) aged 40/41

Julia Anna Heath (later Harrison) aged 20/21
John Moore Heath aged 19/20
Douglas Denon Heath aged 16/17
Dunbar Isidore Heath 12/13
Leopold G. Heath 10/11
Emma Jane Heath (later Whatman) 6/7

The Heath Family Engravers - Volume 2 - by John Heath

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

The Keepsake (edited, W.H.Ainsworth)

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

Paul and Virginia Elizabeth and the Indian Cottage.

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

Byron's Poems (Lord Byron)

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

The Heath Family Engravers - Volume 2 - by John Heath
March 1828
Article about claims made by a painter to be paid for copyright if an engraving is made; thought 'there was too much concern.'

'An Amateur' writing on 30 March 1828 supported this idea of copyright payment to artists. "The Engravers are to the Painters what booksellers are to Authors. The Engraver gets all his celebrity from having good pictures to copy; and far from engraving becoming extinct, the high state of perfection to which it has arrived at the present moment arises chiefly from the liberal conduct of the Painters. The whole of his objections are puerile.'

Sunday 6 January 1828
Weekly Dispatch (London)

Law Intelligence.
Insolvent Debtors' Court. Monday
John Henry Goodinge, sometime an attorney and formerly a schoolmaster in Newgate was brought up on his petition to be discharged; and was opposed by Mr.Heath on behalf of Messrs.Cowie, silversmiths of Long Acre.

The insolent underwent a long examination from which it appeared that he had practised as an attorney since 1809 and that in 1813 he was tried and convicted at the Old Bailey for obtaining money on false pretences and was sentenced to be imprisoned for seven years; but after passing three years in Newgate where he exercised the calling of a schoolmaster, an application was made to the Secretary of State and the petitioner obtained a full pardon and a remission of the remainder of his punishment on the ground of his good behaviour whilst in prison.

The petitioner was discharged from Newgate in 1816 and subsequently contracted debts to the amount of £15,000/. His schedule contained the description of various estates of considerable value in which he claimed an interest; and amongst other things he claimed the title of Earl of Annandale with all the property annexed thereto. In answer to questions put by Counsel the insolvent stated that he received about £1,300/. whilst in Newgate out of his wife's property and that he settled a small sum. now in the Three per Cents., on his wife to which settlement the Rev.Mr.Cotton, the Ordinary of Newgate was one of the trustees.

The insolvent's petition did not contain a sufficient account of his estate and effects and his further examination was therefore postponed.

Friday 11 January 1828
London Packet and New Lloyd's Evening Post

Insolvent Debtors' Court, Jan. 8.
In the matter of John Marsh, and insolvent debtor who has been remanded for 12 months at the suit of William Rawlings Esq. upon a verdict and costs obtained for criminal conversation with the plaintiff's wife.

In this case Mr.Heath having obtained a rule nisi for the opposing creditor to show cause why the judgment should not be set aside and a rehearing granted. - - -

Mr.Heath, in support of the rule, contended that the affidavit sworn to by Mr.Reid corroborated that of his (Mr.Heath's ) client. Mr.Reid had stated the question put by the insolvent with great precision but he was very guarded to the replications made by himself to Marsh. - - -

30 January 1828
Sir Walter Scott
Heath Family Engravers - Vol.2

After Court hours I had a visit from Mr.Charles Heath, the engraver accompanied by a sone of Reynolds, the dramatist. His object was to engage me o take charge as editor of a year publication called 'The Keepsake' of which the plates are beyond comparison beautiful, but the letterpress indifferent enough. He proposed £800 a year if I would become editor and £400 if I would contribute from 70 to 100 pages. I declined both but told him I might give him some trifling thing or other and asked the young men to breakfast the next day.

31 January 1828
Sir Walter Scott

I received the young gentlemen to breakfast and expressed by resolution which seemed to disappoint them, as perhaps they expected I should have been glad of such an offer. However, I have since thought there3 are these rejected parts of the 'Chronicle' which Cadell and Ballantyne criticised so severely, which might well enough make up a trifle of this kind, and settle the few accounts which will I nill I have crept in the this New Year. So I have kept the treaty open. If I give them 100 pages, I should expect £100.

1 February 1828
Sir Walter Scott
I had my two youths again to breakfast but I did not say more about my determination save that I would help them if I could make it convenient. The Chief Commissioner has agreed to let Heath have his pretty picture of a study at Abbotsford by Edwin Landseer.

24 February 1828
Robert Southey, Poet Laureate - letter to his daughter

Charles Heath, the engraver, who is the Keepsake, was here last week . . . He . . has bespoke 4,000 yards of red silk at 3/- a yard, for binding the next volume. . .

Charles Heath proceeded expeditiously to business, presented me with a 'Keepsake' from his pocket, said that he had been into Scotland for the express purpose of securing Sir Walter [Scott's] aid, that he had succeeded, that he now came to ask for mine, and should be happy to give me fifty guineas for anything with which I would supply him.

Money, money, you know make the mare go - and what at all is Pegasus but a piece of horse flesh? I sold him at that price a pig in a poke; a roaster [sic? rooster] would have contented him; perhaps it might prove a porker' I said: improvident fellow as I was not to foresee that it would grow to the size of a bacon pig before it came into his hands!

I sold him a ballad poem entitled 'All for Love, or a Sinner well saved' of which one and twenty stanzas were then written. I have added fifty since and am only halfway through the story. It is a very striking one, and he means to have an engraving made from it.

First come, first served is a necessary rule in life; but if I could have foreseen that you would come afterwards, the rule should have been set aside; he might have had something else and the bacon pig should have been yours. Heath said that Sharpe was about to start a similar work of the same size and upon the same scale of expense; this I take if for granted is yours [ie...the Anniversary].

28 February 1828
Sir Walter Scott
I got a letter from the young man Reynolds accepting on Heath's part my terms for article to the 'Keepsake,' namely £500. I to be at liberty to reprint the work after 3 years. Mr.Heath to print it in the 'Keepsake' as long and as often as he pleases but not in any other form. I shall close with him.

10 March 1828
Sir Walter Scott
Received letters from the youth who is to conduct the 'Keepsake' with blarney on a £200 bank note. No blarney in that. I must set about doing something for these worthies.

13 April 1828
Sir Walter Scott
Amused myself by converting 'The Tale of the Mysterious Mirror' into 'Aunt Margaret's Mirror' designed for Heath's what d'ye call it. Cadell will not like it, but I cannot afford to have my goods thrown back upon my hands. The tale is a good one and is said actually to have happened to Lady Primrose, my great-grandmother, having attended her sister on the occasion.

Tuesday 11 March 1828
Saint James's Chronicle

Vice Chancellor's Court, March 8.
Murray v The Assignees of Heath, a Bankrupt.
The Attorney General in this case applied to the court to give directions for the trial of the right claimed by the plaintiff to certain impressions from engravings executed by the defendant.

It may, perhaps, be recollected that the plaintiff (Mr.John Murray, the bookseller of Albermarle Street) some time in 1826 applied to the court to restrain the defendant (Mr.Heath, the engraver), or his assignees, from selling certain prints or copies of engravings executed by him for the plaintiff from designs drawn by Westall to illustrate Crabbe's Poems and a costly edition of Lord Byron's works.

The application for the injunction was made upon Mr.Murray's own affidavit which declared him to be the sole proprietor of the drawings and plates for which he had paid and that the engraver had no right to take a single impression, either to sell or for his own use, without his (the bookseller's) permission.

Mr.Heath answered this affidavit by another in which he swore that he had always understood that by the custom of the trade, with which he had invariably complied, the engraver had a right to take ten or a dozen impressions from his own engraving and dispose of them as he thought proper without asking any consent from the bookseller or publisher

In this instance he had taken ten sets of impressions from the plates in question. He also produced the affidavits of nine other eminent engravers, who all swore that it was the recognized custom of the trade to take a certain number of impressions from their own engravings. They, however, differed as to the number which they considered themselves entitled to take. The highest stated a dozen to be the established number; the lowest, half a dozen.

Under these circumstances his honour directed the master to frame an issue to try the question; and counsel attended from both parties before the master to settle the terms of this issue. The court below were then directed to try whether it was the practice or usage of the trade of engravers to take for their own use, without consent of the purchaser of the engraving, a certain number of copies.

The jury were directed to state whether eight or twelve was the customary number of copies taken without consent of the owner of the plate. The case was tried in the Court of Common Pleas and the jury found that a custom existed under which eight was the number of impressions taken by the engravers without the consent of the proprietor or publisher.

When the case came back again to this court, it was discovered (as is constantly done where issues have been sent for trial to a common law court) that the issue had omitted the most material question - namely, whether by the custom of the trade the engraver had a right to sell or dispose of in whatever manner he thought proper the impressions which were so taken.

The Attorney General now stated that this question was one of the greatest importance to all booksellers and engravers, and that his client, both for his own sake and for the sake of the trade whom he represented, was determined to carry it to a final settlement.

The Court had already expressed an opinion that the question of right would be better tried by an action of trover than by another issue. The more effectually to bring the question of right to a decision, the learned gentleman said he had to move that the court would restrain the defendant from defeating the action by any formal objections either to the proceedings or to the evidence by which the case was supported. The question as the action was at present shaped in the court below might be defeated by such an objection as that the paper and ink with which the impressions had been taken were the defendant's property, and that he had therefore a right to retain them.

Mr.Hill, who attended from the common law courts on behalf of the plaintiff, stated that he had framed the pleas in the best manner he could to try effectually the right - first, of the defendant to retain impressions of the plates; secondly, of the right to retain and sell them; and thirdly, he had introduced a count for piracy.

Mr.Horne (with whom was Mr.Girdlestonne senior). on the part of the defendant made a cross motion that the injunction should be dissolved; and if this motion were not granted that the name of Mr.Heath should be struck out of the cause and those of his assignees allowed to stand as defendants by themselves, that he might be examined as a witness.

Mr.Horne also moved that the plaintiff should not be allowed to try over again the question as to the custom of the engravers to take a certain number of impressions from their works. This question had been settled by the verdict of the jury, which ought not now to be disturbed. - - -

April 1828
Thomas Unwin - Naples
The pictures . . . sent by the "Lady Keith" brig, which I hope will be delivered in about six weeks, are a "Confession" I intended for Charles Heath, and I want for it, frame and all just as it is, 25 guineas. If Charles Heath does not want to buy it, you will obliged me by not offering it to anybody else . . . Charles Heath and Ackermann are the two persons I can depend upon not being acted on. They judge for themselves.

Thursday 22 May 1828
Perry's Bankrupt Gazette

Insolvent Debtors' Court. May 14.
Esther Spendlove, a young lady who lately kept a respectable seminary in Sidmouth Street, Gray's-Inn-Lane, was brought up to be heard on her petition, when the facts elicited verified the truth of the old adage, - "Be poor, and keep poor."

It appeared by the evidence that the Insolvent was in arrears to Mr.Depree, her landlord in the sum of £25/. 5s. for rent, due at Christmas last, and to recover which a distress was put on her premises on the 19th March in the present year, when part of her effects were condemned, but could not be sold until the 24th. - - -

Mr.Such, the broker, was now examined, when it appeared that although he had only condemned part of the property in the first instance, the whole had been sold, and that the total the property sold, or rather sacrificed, for £63/. amounted to no less a sum than £22/. and a fraction!! and the balance in hand was only £7/.4s.: and that he retained because he did not know who to pay it to.

Mr.Commissioner Harris - Pay it into Court immediately. Sir: had the petitioner been at large, you must have paid it to her.

Mr.Heath submitted that this was a case of great oppression, and the brokers had acted illegally, by selling property under an alleged distress, and upon a consent obtained by mere stratagem; with that illegality the Court had nothing to do, it might be a matter of which the parties might hear something another day.

The Court coincided in these and many other remarks made by the learned counsel, and expressed their disapprobation at the manner in which the petitioner had been treated. Her discharge was ordered to issue instanter.

Thursday 5 June 1828
Star (London)

Insolvent Debtors' Court, June 4
Crim. Con.
James Mason, a medical student of respectable appearance and connexions, was opposed on his application to be discharged by Messrs. Adolphus and Cooke on behalf of Alexander Baynes Esq. of Edinburgh who had obtain a verdict against the insolvent for criminal conversation with his wife. - - -

Mr.Pollock (with whom was Mr.Heath) was heard in reply. It was not his intention to justify the conduct of the insolvent, but to regret his conduct in this unfortunate affair. It was the transgressions of a young man whose hopes and occupation had been blasted by the present action and for which he could only express his sincere regret. - - -

6 June 1828
The Heath Family Engravers 1779-1878, Volume 3. by John Heath

Letter - Charles Heath to F.J. due Roveray, publisher

'I sent you the bill the moment I received your letter which was not till Tuesday morning as I was out of London - as for risk that is out of the question as the partners are as respectable in Paris as 'Longmans' in London - they pay me large sums every year.

I had the Bill made payable here for the convenience of discounting as I found to turn Bills in francs made payable in Paris but if you think there is risk you are quite right not to do it - for myself I never mean to run any if I know it.'

Wednesday 30 July 1828
New Times (London)

Insolvent Debtors' Court
Friend Wickham, an insolvent who had been examined on a former occasion was now brought up to give an account of a mortgage to the extent of £1500/. which he had given to a Mr.Jeffreys upon some leasehold property.

Mr.Cooke, who in the absence of Mr.Heath acted for the Insolvent said that he now had evidence to explain the nature of the mortgage.

The Commissioners said that insolvent ought to have been able to have given every information upon the subject. A mortgage which had been executed so recently ought to have been fresh in his recollection and he ought to have been able to state the consideration he received for it without calling upon others to do so. However the witness might be called.

Mr.J.C.Jeffreys was then called and examined by Mr.Cooke.

Mr.Cooke - What is your name? Witness - Jeffreys.

Mr.Cooke - What are you? Witness - What am I?

Mr.Cooke - Yes; it is a plain question. Witness (after a pause) - I am a man.

Mr.Cooke - Well, I presumed as much. But you must know, Sir, that I did not ask you whether you were a man or a woman. What business are you? Witness (after another pause) - I don't know.

Mr.Cooke - What do you mean, Sir? Again I ask you what is your trade? Witness - Well, I am a witness.

The Commissioners - Witness, it is fit you should be informed that the Court, like others, has the power of committing those witnesses to prison who will not answer properly, or who are insolent either to the Counsel or the Court.. Now, Sir, answer a plain question after this caution. Witness - I do not understand the question.

The Commissioner - Take care what you are about, Sir, or we will put it into English for you.

Mr.Heath here entered the Court, and took up the examination.

Mr.Heath - What trade are you? Witnes - I do not know.

Mr.Heath - You are on your oath, Sir; do you mean to swear that you do not know what you are or have been? Witness - I have been a farmer by trade.

Mr.Heath - Have you been anything else? Witness - I do not know.

Mr.Heath - So you do not know whether you have been anything else - remember you are on your oath. Witness - I may have been a gentleman besides.

Mr.Heath - I doubt it. (A laugh.)

The Commissioner - He is a witness for the insolvent.

Mr.Heath - Yes; but still he must not be permitted to set the Court at defiance.

The Commissioner - Better go at once to the mortgage.

Mr.Heath - You are, perhaps, still a farmer? Witness - Yes, I have been a farmer all my life.

The witness here produced the mortgage.

Mr.Heath - How long have you had this mortgage in your possession? Witness - Look, and you will see.

Mr.Heath - No, Sir, I cannot see; and, therefore, I ask you? Witness - I have had it since it was executed.

Mr.Heath - I perceive you live at Shoreditch now? Witness - No, I do not.

Mr.Heath - How long since you left there? Witness - Not long; I live here now. (A laugh.)

The Commissioner again intimated that he must answer questions properly, or take the consequences.

The witness, then, in answer to other questions, stated that the mortgage was given for £1,500/. advanced to the insolvent.

Mr.Heath - When did you advance this money? Witness - I do not recollect.

Mr.Heath - In what year was it? Witness - I do not recollect.

Mr.Heath - Come sir, you must recollect

The witness here pulled a paper out of his pocket and then said he made the first advance in November 1826.

Mr.Heath - Is that paper an account of the monies you have advanced? Witness - It is.

Mr.Heath - Let me have it? The witness handed it over with evident reluctance.

Mr.Heath - Did you advance all these monies? Witness - I did.

Mr.Heath - Did the insolvent pay you nothing off the account? - Witness - No.

The Commissioner - The schedule makes a balance of £1/.10s. against the witness.

Mr.Heath - You first gave a lease of the premises to the insolvent and then he gave you the mortgage? Witness - Yes.

Mr.Heath - When were they executed? Witness - Both were executed at the same time last September.

(The paper was handed to the Commissioner)

The Commissioner - What was the largest sum you ever advanced to the insolvent at one time? Witness - the paper will tell you.

Commissioner - Have you no recollection upon the subject? Witness - Yes I have (A laugh.)

Commissioner - Have you lent him £500/. at one time? Witness - You have it all in the paper.

Commissioner - Yes, but I want to know from you.

The insolvent here interfered and explained to the Court that he had purchased various other sums for the whole of which he gave the mortgage in question.

The Commissioner was satisfied with this explanation but while yet considering and examining the documents the witness twice asked for his paper, and was told not to interrupt the Court. The Commissioner then handed the paper to the attorney of the insolvent and told him to copy it before returning it to the witness in order to compare it with the schedule of the insolvent. All this time the witness was eagerly stretching out his hand for the paper but the attorney still held it in his hand, and was explaining to the witness the desire of the Court and promising him that it should be returned to him in safety, when the latter caught it suddenly in his hand and it was almost instantaneously lodged in the lowermost recess of is breeches pocket.

The insolvent was declared entitled to his discharge.

14 September 1828
Samuel Taylor Coleridge - letter to Alaric Watts.

Mr.Frederick Reynolds called on me with a letter of introduction from Wordsworth in which Wordsworth informed me that he had been introduced [sic.? induced], as likewise Southey and Sir Walter Scott, to furnish some poems to a work undertaken by Mr.Heath, with Mr.Reynolds as his editor; that the unusually handsome terms would scarcely have overcome his reluctance had he not entertained the hope that I might be persuaded to give my name; and that besides Sir Walter Scott, Southey and Wordsworth and myself, Lord Normanby, as Mr.Reynolds believed, and Mr.Moore were to be the only or all but only, contributors. I

n short, he hoped I would write. Mr.Reynolds offered me £50, more by way than all my literary labours if I may except my salary from the Morning Post, and Courier had procured me. [The only condition was that Coleridge was not to write for any other annual except the Literary Souvenir]

Tuesday 23 September 1828
Kentish Weekly Post or Canterbury Journal

Insolvent Debtors' Court - Sept.17
The Rev.Henry Morgan Say, late of Sutton Vallence, Kent, was brought up this day for re-hearing and adjudication, when his discharge was opposed only by Mr.Cooke on behalf of Nicholson and others. It appeared (from endorsement of the schedule) that the case was adjourned to file a new special balance-sheet - - -

Mr.Pollock, who held Mr.Heath's brief (the latter gentleman being on the continent) informed the Court that the case would not occupy their time long - - -

The Heath Family Engravers - Volume 3 - by John Heath
5 November 1828

Morning Chronicle

A remarkable tribute to the development of steel engraving and the literary annuals.
'The number of illustrations in the various annuals exceeds 200; and it may fairly be expected that the demand will grow every year; so that here is at once a regular and permanent employment for all our eminent artists, and a diffusion of the finest specimens of art almost beyond the power of calculation. This is a patronage before which the patronage of Royalty... sinks into perfect insignificance.

The book now sold for a guinea could not before be sold under ten or twelve guineas. The reasonableness of the price, together with the beauty of the article secures a sale of almost indefinite extent.

No one of these volumes, but for the art of engraving on steel, could be published except as such a price as would put it beyond the reach of any but the most opulent classes.

There are two of these Annuals which appear to leave all their competitors behind - the Keepsake edited by Mr.Reynolds and the Anniversary by Mr.Allan Cunningham.
The engravings . . . may be proudly produced by Englishmen as decided proofs of the superiority of English engravers over those of any country on earth.

Wednesday 12 November 1828
Morning Chronicle

Court of Chancery - Tuesday
Murray and Heath and Others - This case, and all the facts and points of it, have been repeatedly discussed: the matter at issue is this - whether there is a usage or practice among engravers to retain a certain number of plates engraved by them for their own use and benefit and for the purpose of sale. Mr.Heath had been employed by Mr.Murray to engrave certain plates to illustrate Lord Byron's and Crabbe's Poems. He did engrave them, and reserved for himself a number of copies of the plates; he subsequently became bankrupt and his assignees proceeded to sell the engravings of which he was possessed and among them the impressions of the plates to illustrate Lord Byron and Crabbe. Mr.Murray accordingly applied to the Vice-Chancellor for an injunction to restrain the sale; that injunction was granted on condition that an issue should be tried to ascertain whether it was the usage and practice of engravers to retain a certain number of copies for their own use and benefit. The case came to the Court of Common Pleas before Mr.Justice Gaselee and a verdict was found in favour of the usage and practice.

When the verdict was delivered the foreman of the jury enquired whether they were to find also the right to sell? and the Learned Judge informed him that that point was not referred to the Jury by the issue; it was therefore only found that the usage and practice existed for engravers to retain copies " for their own use and benefit."

After this decision a motion was made before the Lord Chancellor to dissolve the injunction; to which it was answered that although the verdict had settled the right of the engraver to retain, it had not found the right of the engraver or of his assignees to sell and that in this case the sale was the injury.

The Vice Chancellor refused to dissolve the injunction; but left Mr.Murray to bring an action of trover in order to determine the question of the right to sell. - - -

The Lord Chancellor was at first inclined to think that he could not interfere until the order had been formally drawn up at the suggestion of one party or the other. However, the case proceeded; and after some discussion whether Mr.Heath should be continued as defendant or examined as a witness on the trial, the Lord Chancellor directed that the parties to the cause should remain the same as when the issue was tried, and that Mr.Murray should bring an action on the case, with a count of trover in order to determine the right to sell as a matter of fact - this action to be tried at the Sitting after Term; and in the meantime the Injunction to stand.

The other motions on the paper of arrears possessed no public interest.

28 November 1828
The Heath Family Engravers 1779-1878, Volume 3. by John Heath

Letter - J.M.W.Turner to Charles Heath

My dear Sir,
I think of leaving here about the first of January and therefore supposing that early in returning I shall have the pleasure of seeing you again in Queen Anne (St.). So it will not be worth while to send any prints after you receive this without very urgent cause, or so that it can be in Rome by Xmas day or end of December.

Wishing you the compliments of the season, Keepsakes, etc.

Believe me yours most truly,
J.M.W. Turner.
12 Piazza Mignatelli, Rome.

Tuesday 11 December 1828
Law Chronicle, Commercial and Bankruptcy Register

Law Reports - Court of Chancery

Murray v Heath & Others.
Horne moved, by way of appeal, against an order which the Vice-Chancellor had recently made in this cause. An injunction had been obtained by Mr.Murray, the bookseller, against the assignees of Mr.Charles Heath to restrain from selling certain engravings which were a part of his estate. It appeared on that occasion that Mr.Murray had employed Mr.Heath to engrave for him certain plates illustrative of the works of Lord Byron and Mr.Crabbe, and that Mr.Heath had retained a certain number of impressions for his own use in accordance with what was said to be the practice of the trade in this respect.

When the injunction was granted, the Vice-Chancellor directed an issue to be tried at law, for the purpose of ascertaining whether such an usage existed or not. On the trial of the issue, which took place in the Court of Common Pleas, the jury found that it was the practice of the engravers to retain impressions of their works "for their own use and benefit," and they were about to pronounce upon their right to sell these copies, when Mr.Justice Gaselee told them that there was no such point in the issue, and their verdict was confined therefore to the usage. On a motion being made to dissolve the injunction restraining the sale, the Vice-Chancellor said the verdict of the jury was not sufficient, and directed an action of trover to be brought for the purpose of ascertaining the right to sell the copies, at the same time continuing the injunction.

The Lord Chancellor said it was clear that an action of trover could not ascertain the point in question, because the right of possession, which the jury had already found, would decide such an action.

Horne concurred in this, and enlarged upon the great hardship which the assignees sustained, in being led into such expensive proceedings about a matter so unimportant, the whole value of the plates not amounting to 8/.

The Attorney-General (with whom was Stewart) opposed the motion, and insisted that the question, however unimportant it might seem to be in value, was of great consequence to Mr.Murray as a publisher, and to the whole trade, because the principle would extend to matters of much greater moment than that now in dispute. He contended also, that the motion ought not to be entertained, because the order against which it purported to be an appeal had not yet been dawn up. It as true, that the Vice-Chancellor had pronounced such an order, and it had been entered in the register's book, but it had not yet been reduced into such a form that the Court could deal with it.

A discussion ensued on this point, when

The Lord-Chancellor said, if the parties insisted on it, they had a right to have the question decided, notwithstanding the small value of this particular subject. He thought an action on the case should be brought with a count in trover, which would raise the point, and he therefore directed such an action, which should be tried at the sittings after the present term; and in the mean time, he ordered the injunction to subsist.

1828
Alaric Watts

The immoderate and injudicious expenditure of these sums... was unsuccessful in securing in any commensurate degree the success of Mr.Heath's speculation; and the work passed out of his hands into those, I believe, of his publishers. He, however, continued to superintend the engravings of this and other similar enterprises. Conducted with more prudence and moderation, the 'Keepsake' continued to maintain for many years an important position among the Annuals and was, I believe, the last survivor of them.

1828
Charles Heath to B.P.Gibbon -

I have a picture by Mr.Edwin Landseer of two dogs belonging to Sir Walter Scott, it was undertaken by Mr.Westwood and is etch'd by Mr.Webb. and 'bitten in;' if you could take it up directly and get it me finished in time for my 'Keepsake' of this year, I shall esteem it a favour, as it is necessary we should not be idle even for a day...'

1829