ART AND SCIENCE.
WE cannot let the Parliamentary debates on Science and Art pass even for a week without a hasty note, to mark the singular position in which both Parliament and Government are left by the discussion. The whole administrative question was raised again very strikingly on the Civil Estimates when Mr. Glad-
stone admitted that the whole system of administration was ex- • travagant and mean. What we require is unity and uniformity of administration, and men of real science and real art to administer.
The idea of a National Museum of Science or Art is a noble one, and, if worthily elaborated, the expenditure would be a hundred- fold reproductive. It is virtually a caput mortuum—any result being almost accidental or exceptional. As for the Kensington Museum, its officials overstep their just limits and functions, which are those of control and direction; while, by a too osten- sible activity and small interferences they dwarf the action of the department. Kensington is, in fact, a West-end exhibition room. And, what is the Royal Academy ? It is also little more than an exhibition, with a drawing school or academy attached to it. It occupies, however, a public building, to the exclusion of the public. It has great public privileges, as if it were a national institution' and yet it is a private society, resisting the investi- gations of the public. Imagine a literary academy of forty full members electing a number of other literary half members humbly engaged in waiting upon the Forty, cringing, crawling, and canvassing them for promotion, instead of trusting to them- selves and to the appreciation of the public. It almost forces artists to become sycophants. Imagine Thackeray, Macaulay, Dickens, Hallam, &c., canvassing court nominees for election or promotion ; yet it is this to which you condemn artists ; and as a school the Academy is a complete failure. Let us have the site then, and cut the Society adrift to sink or swim on its own merits.
The National Gallery is a national disgrace. The purchasers ac- tually deteriorate the collection. The Beauvoisin collection was purchased in London Auction-rooms within a few years for 5000/., and is now sold to the Gallery for double that sum. The Ariosto portrait by Titian, was known here as Tasso by Giorgione ; one of the 1200/. RuysdaeLs is spurious. The 10,0001. vote last year for the Northwick sale has produced four very indiffer- ent pictures. Under these circumstances Parliament should have stopped all expenditure until next year ? It is worth noticing that the Government, last year and this year, have attempted no defence of the National Gallery.
The decision come to in reference to the occupany of the National Gallery by the Royal Academy is, that the Academy are not only to retain their position, but that a proper sculpture room is to be built for their accommodation. The alterations in the building will not extend to the outside, and will be confined principally to making use of the large space now occupied by the central hall. The argument employed by Lord Palmerston in the recent discussions was, that it would be inconvenient at present to spend a large sum upon a public building on the Burling- ton House site ; and that, as the Royal Academy had certain claims, it should partake of the benefit of the outlay upon improving and enlarging the National Gallery. This step would give some increased space to the old masters, and be so far a boon to the public, as it would show the works of our sculptors to greater advantage. We cannot help regretting, however, the policy of this decision, as it implies that the question of bringing all the National pictures together is thus postponed indefinitely, while a kind of sanction is given to the claim of the Academy for a place of exhibition at the public expense. The position of Sir Charles East- lake in the matter is peculiar; he is just now reelected for another five years trustee and director of the National Gallery, at the same time being President of the Royal Academy. -
Previous page
