so that the joins were imperceptible, he would have two right and two left panels.  These would be positive and negative:  in the former pair the metal would represent the figured design with the shell as groundwork, and the latter would have the shell as a design, with a ground of metal.  The terms positive and negative are the writer’s to explain the difference, but the technical terms are “first part” and “second part,” or “Boule” and “counter.”  The former would be selected for the best part of the cabinet, for instance, the panels of the front doors, while the latter would be used for the ends or sides.  An illustration of this plan of using all four cuttings of one design occurs in the armoire No. 1026 in the Jones Collection, and in a great many other excellent specimens.  The brass, or the white metal in the design, was then carefully and most artistically engraved; and the beauty of the engraving of Boule’s finest productions is a great point of excellence, giving, as it does, a character to the design, and emphasizing its details.  The mounting of the furniture in ormolu of a rich and highly-finished character, completed the design.  The Musee du Louvre is rich in examples of Boule’s work; and there are some very good pieces in the Jones Collection, at Hertford House, and at Windsor Castle.

The illustration on p. 144 is the representation of an armoire, which was, undoubtedly, executed by Boule from a design by Lebrun:  it is one of a pair which was sold in 1882, at the Hamilton Palace sale, by Messrs. Christie, for L12,075.  Another small cabinet, in the same collection, realised L2,310.  The pedestal cabinet illustrated on p. 148, from the Jones Collection, is very similar to the latter, and cost Mr. Jones L3,000.  When specimens, of the genuineness of which there is no doubt, are offered for sale, they are sure to realize very high prices.  The armoire in the Jones Collection, already alluded to (No. 1026), of which there is an illustration, cost between L4,000 and L5,000.

In some of the best of Boule’s cabinets, as, for instance, in the Hamilton Palace armoire (illustrated), the bronze gilt ornaments stand out in bold relief from the surface.  In the Louvre there is one which has a figure of Le Grand Monarque, clad in armour, with a Roman toga, and wearing the full bottomed wig of the time, which scarcely accords with the costume of a Roman general.  The absurd combination which characterises this affectation of the classic costume is also found in portraits of our George II.

[Illustration:  Pedestal Cabinet, By Boule, formerly in Mr. Baring’s Collection.  Purchased by Mr. Jones for L3,000. (South Kensington Museum)]

The masks, satyrs, and ram’s heads, the scrolls and the foliage, are also very bold in specimens of this class of Boule’s work; and the “sun” (that is, a mask surrounded with rays of light) is a very favourite ornament of this period.

Boule had four sons and several pupils; and he may be said to have founded a school of decorative furniture, which has its votaries and imitators now, as it had in his own time.  The word one frequently finds misspelt “Buhl,” and this has come to represent any similar mode of decorations on furniture, no matter how meretricious or common it may be.