AT the time my former publication was in the press, the Art of Landscape Gardening was attacked by two gentlemen, Mr. [Richard Payne] Knight,* of Herefordshire, and Mr. [Uvedale] Price, ** of Shropshire; and I retarded its publication till I could take some notice of the opinions of these formidable, because ingenious, opponents. Having since been consulted on subjects of importance in those two counties, I willingly availed myself of opportunities to deliver my sentiments, as particular circumstances occurred, and therefore, with permission of the respective proprietors, I insert the following observations from the Red Books of SUFTON COURT, in Herefordshire, and ATTINGHAM, in Shropshire:- "My opinion concerning the improvement of SUFTON COURT involving many principles in the art of landscape gardening, I take this opportunity of justifying my practice, in opposition to the wild theory which has lately appeared; and shall therefore occasionally allude to this new system when it bears any relation to our objects at SUFTON COURT."
*[Mr. Knight has endeavoured to ridicule all display of extent of property, which I consider one of the leading principles of the art. I contend, that it is impossible to annex the same degree of importance to a modern house, however large, by the side of a high road, that may be justly given to one surrounded by an extensive park. To this principle of improvement I have given the name of appropriation.].
**[Mr. Price builds a theory of improvement on the study of the best pictures, without considering how little affinity there is between the confined landscape exhibited on canvas, and the extensive range which the eye at once comprehends; and argues, that the best works of the painter should be models for the improver.]
