ENCOURAGEMENT OF ART IN SCOTLAND.

THERE are three public bodies in Edinburgh for the encouragement of the fine arts in Scotland; but the manner in which they contrive to frustrate their professed purpose is remarkable. It is to be feared that those which make the highest pretensions, and have the highest official con- nexion, have degenerated into persecutors of art. This we gather from several documents,* which have recently been put into our hands with a request for an impartial opinion. The merits of the case will be best set forth by a simple narrative of facts; and if we go back to rather an ancient date, the reader need not be alarmed, for the story will not hold him long, and it is not without interest.

Under the fifteenth article of the Treaty of' Union, a Board of Trustees for Manufactures in Scotland was established; and, about the middle of last century, this Board set on foot a school for teaching the arts, chiefly in the mechanical branches of damask weaving, carving, ornamental paint- ing, and the like. Divers attempts at a more direct encouragement of the fine arts properly so called may be passed over as failures, partly through want of judgment in the projectors, partly through want of preparation in the public mind.

In 1819 was set on foot the Scottish Institution for the Encouragement of the Fine Arts; the idea probably being taken from the British Institu- tion of London. The Scottish Institution was composed of amateurs of rank or influence, who subscribed among them 3,0001.; their object was to open in Edinburgh a yearly exhibition of pictures by the old masters, bor- rowed from whomsoever would lend them. There were two such exhibi- tions in 1819 and 1820; but they had little success, barely paying their expenses. In 1821, the Institution invited the living artists of Scotland to furnish pictures for a modern exhibition: this was eminently successful, and was repeated yearly; only one other attempt at an exhibition of an- cient pictures being made down to the year 1828. Thus the Institution was rescued from perishing of inanition, by the living artists. They by no means obtained their share of the honours and advantages: the amateur members, who did not scruple to use the artists, refused to allow them any share in the management, especially in pecuniary matters, under the pretext that the directors must be men of " rank," and personally disinterested, in order to secure the public confidence.

Disgusted with that treatment, several artists seceded, in 1826, and laid the foundation of what became the Royal Scottish Academy. They opened in annual exhibition at a gallery in Waterloo Place, which was highly sac- cessfuL At the end, of that year, the artists applied for a charter of incor- poration, and obtained a marked expression of good-will from Sir Robert Peel; but the opposition which they encountered delayed the charter.

It was otherwise with the more favoured Institution. Emulous of the Academy, they too applied for a charter; and it was granted, in 1827. In obtaining this charter, the Institution continued to use the artists who re- mained in alliance with it. The process was very curious. A circular was sent round to a dozen or so of the more eminent, inviting them to become "associates"; thus raising the idea that the artists were at length to re- ceive honourable recognition. Among the grounds for demanding incor- poration, were mentioned the fact that the Institution had acquired consi- derable property—we shall touch upon that point presently—and the hope that " exhibitions would annually take place under their superintendence." It will scarcely be believed, but all share of management was still with- held from the working-bees of the Institution—the artists; to whom- no- thing was secured by the charter—not even the title of "associate": the very existence of " artists " or " associates " is absolutely unmentioned in the document. This arrogant behaviour on the part of the dilettanti mem- bers effectually estranged those artists, twenty-four in number, who had still adhered to the body: in 1829, they followed the seceders and joined the Scottish Academy.

The " property " of which the Institution boasted was made up in a singular way. At what time their original capital was finally dissipated does not appear; but after 1829, the Institution was obliged to confess itself so little in a solvent condition as to be unable to pay its rent; having in fact no substantive property of its own. It had no doubt profited by the exhibitions of the artists of whom it had so unscrupulously made use, and a very imperfect account of the proceeds was forthcoming. Yet such an ac- count was due not only to the artists, but to the reputation of the Institution for common honesty. Before the commencement of the modern exhibitions, it was stipulated that, after deducting the actual and needful expenses, the proceeds should be paid into a fund for the benefit of the widows and chil- dren of artists: it is calculated that the whole gross proceeds of eight ex- hibitions could not have been less than five or six thousand pounds; the nett proceeds available for the fend, probably something between two and four thousand: the sum paid to the artists as the nett proceeds was four hundred. This strange result has been accounted for, in Edinburgh, by the existence of a collection of pictures, a library, and other purchases in possession of the Institution; whose directors have in vain been challenged to produce the accounts.

Nor is that all. The Institution had also acquired, in trust, other pro- perty, through its connexion with the artists. Mr. Peter Spalding, who had been Superintendent of the Mint at Calcutta, took up his residence in Edinburgh; where he cultivated the society of artists, his intimacy being altogether with the professional men and not at all with the official dilettanti. In 1825, he executed a will, leaving 10,000/. to the Directors of " the Institution for the Encouragement of the Fine Arts in Scotland"— ' "Scottish Art and National Encouragement. Containing a View of Existing Controversies, and Transactions during the last twenty-seven years, relative to Art in Scotland. With an ample Appendix of Documents." An octavo volume, published by Blackwood and Sous, 1846. " Correspondence betwixt the Honourable Board of Scottish Manufactures and the Royal Scottish Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture. Accom- modation in Royal Institution Building." 19th March and 27th April 1846. " Memorial of the Royal Scottish Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Archi- tecture, to the Right Honourable the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Trea- sury." 6th August 1846.

"for creating a fund, the interest or annual proceeds whereof to be applied for ever for the support of decayed or superannuated associated artists be- longing to the Institution for the Encouragement of the Fine Arts in Scotland."' Mr. Spalding died in October 1826, before the Institution, by its contumelious slight upon the " associated artists," had driven them 4= its ranks. It still professes to administer the fund, however, and does so by a contrivance: having no "associated artists " in the sense contemplated by its own circular of 1827 and by Mr. Spalding, it makes " associates" of any persons whom it pleases, simply as recipients of its bounty—mere pen- sioners. One " associate " thus benefited, we understand, is the manager of the Institution, who was formerly unpaid: he receives 1001. a year.

The Institution succeeded in obtaining from official favour not only a charter but a home, estimated to have cost 45,0001. In 1825, a building was erected on the Mound, facing Prince's Street, for purposes connected with art; exhibitions being one of those purposes. There are many ano- malous circumstances involved in the ownership and destination of this building; but we will mention only the most prominent. At first, the Institution professed to have built it, with the " cooperation" of the Board of Trustees; and it received the name which it still bears—" the Institu- tion Building." But afterwards, when the Academy advanced claims on the edifice in virtue of claims on the Institution, the Board of Trustees for Manufactures said, through its Secretary, that " they [the Trustees] are the sole proprietors of the building." The joint Secretary of the Institution, Mr. Skene, corroborates that newer statement: he says— "It was erected, it is understood, [an odd expression!] with funds exclusively belonging to the Board of Trustees, as appears. from public reports made from time to time to the Crown, and by it communicated to Parliament, with funds i

collected by the Board, altogether independent of the separate grants made an- nually under authority of various legislative enactments, and elected with the express sanction of the Sovereign and his official advisers, but without union, aid, or cooperation from the Institution, or any public body whatever."

The Institution had its charter and its new mansion; but with the art- ists departed its real prosperity. After 1829 the exhibitions ceased. But the incorporated amateurs had not yet done with cajoling the artists. In 1835, advances were made to the Scottish Academy, for oblivion of the past and a new union. The Academy was to be allowed rooms for its ex- hibitions—two at once, and a third "to be agreed upon"; a fourth room for a Life Academy—a school in which the pupils should study from living models; access to a collection of casts, to a library, and other facilities. The return was to be a certain rent payable by the Academy, and of course the advantage derivable from the public support which the artists would carry with them. The union was effected: the usual success followed the Academy ; it opened evening exhibitions for the working classes at a cheaper rate; its exhibitions were crowded; and ultimately it began to feel the want of room, both for pictures and visiters.

The position of the several bodies occupying "the Institution Building", at this time is to be noted. There were the Board of Trustees for Manu- factures, the Royal Institution for the Encouragement of the Fine Arts in Scotland, and the Scottish Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Arabi-, tecture—which acquired its charter and its title of " Royal" in 1839. The Academy enjoyed popular favout and support, and was the active source of profit. The Institution was virtually superseded. On the one hand, it had shown, throughout its history, that it could do nothing in art without the artists. • When it was left by the artists, it could not even pay its rent, but obtained an annual grant of 5001. from the Board, to pay its rent of 4301. to that very Board,—a specimen of munificent land- lordism which would be much admired in Ireland just now! On the other hand, the Institution had neither power nor resources without the BOWL It had not even a substantive existence. Several membgrs of the Institu- tion were also members of the Board: Mr. Maconochie (better known as a Lord of Session by the title of Lord Meadowbank) was an active member of both, and represented either on remarkable occasions in the disputes with the Academy; Sir Thomas Dick Lauder was, and is, Secretary to both. If the artists had popular support, they could not boast of other advantages enjoyed by the rival bodies: the Academy comprised but a single titled man, and he only a Knight [Sir William Allan, the President]; while the Board and the Institution comprised Peers, Judges, Baronets, and other persons of "rank"; not having been degraded by the admission of a single professional man. "Professional," we mean, in respect of the arts; for there were several belonging to the profession of the law—but then that is not derogatory from rank. The " Board of Manufactures" had altogether ceased its annual exhibition of manufactures, and had settled down into an, official double of the Institution—the alter ego, in the shape of which the Institution could forgive itself its rent, or, which is the same thing, pay it with public money. It also carried on the trade of landlord; having for tenants under the same roof, the Royal Society of Edinburgh, the Society of Scottish Antiquaries, and the Board of Herring Fisheries: so that there was no want of room in the mansion.

In a letter to the Treasury, the Board makes a most singular disclaimer on behalf of the Institution: it is speaking of the [unpublished] accounts of the Institution-

" By these it is shown, that no part of the [500/.] grant is appropriated either for behoof of the corporation or of any of its members or their families, but is solely applied in the most liberal and beneficial form for the public which the Directors of that body can devise, or this Board, acting under the sanction of my Lords Commissioners, can point out and recommend."

We do not question this remarkable disclaimer. It is understood in Edinburgh, indeed, that members of the double body have been so happy in the choice of domestic servants, that divers valets and butlers happened to be the very fittest persons for posts in the official establishment, at stipends of fifty or a hundred pounds a year. But that kind of arrange- ment does not violate the terms of the disclaimer above.

The last arrangement with the Academy has been followed up with the usual jealousy on the part of the Institution. The third room, allowed in pursuance of the agreement of 1835, had been used for hanging a permanent collection of pictures, including several by Mr. Etty, which' are highly valued: it was revoked, on the pretext that the room was to be painted! The Academy was allowed to hang this permanent collection in a room occupied by the Institution for a similar purpose: the Aca- demy's collection therefore virtually merged in the collection possessed by the Institution, which was exhibited to the public for about eight months in the year at a charge of one shilling on admission : the Institution and the Board thus augmented their separate resources at the expense of the Academy. A room was offered for the Life Academy; but it was so small that it could not be used. The stipulated access to the gallery of casts was clogged with conditions which the artists deemed so insulting that in fact the privilege was useless. In 1838, the revoked room and another were allowed in addition at the usual season, from the 1st of February to the 1st of May, for the annual exhibition of the Academy: but even that partial concession has recently been revoked—the use of the rooms is to be discontinued in 1847; a restriction of space which is virtually notice to quit.

. A curious incident occurred at the exhibition season of 1844. It was a by-law of the Academy, that no stranger should enter during the process of hanging the pictures. In that year, among the pictures was one by Mr. George Lauder, a son of Sir Thomas. This picture was hung in a cer- tain place, but on a review of the whole collection the Council decided that it injured the general effect; and, in accordance with another law in that behalf, they determined to remove it to a different spot; which was, it is to be inferred, less advantageous to the particular picture. In the mean time, Sir Thomas Lander had entered the rooms and had seen the picture; and, learning that fact, the Council resolved to waive their objection rather than hurt his feelings. Other members of the Academy, who came to view the collection before it was opened to the public at large, saw the injurious effect of the picture in the spot where it hung, and by a formal vote induced the Council to revise their second decision and to remove the picture. Sir Thomas sent an angry letter, written upon the official paper of the Board, protesting against the change, and imputing unworthy motives. The Council protested against his right to interfere officially, or even to be in the place. Sir Thomas dis- claimed the right to interfere, and said that his having used official paper was an accident; but he explained, that he had entered the rooms as Secre- tary of the Board, to see that the premises were safe from fire! It is appa- rent that from this time the correspondence between the Academy and the Board or Institution took a bitterer tone.

In the next year, the Board had found a use for the two additional rooms annually allowed to the Academy: they were wanted for the " Torrie Col- lection," a set of pictures given in keeping to the Institution, and for the " colour-class " of the school which the Trustees had established to study the arts. It is true that the trustees of the Torrie Collection (the Lord Provost of Edinburgh and the Sheriff of the County) were willing that it should be removed every year to make way for the Academy's exhibition of modern pictures; it is true that such a plan is adopted every year in the Louvre; it is true that not only the " colour-class " but all the classes of the Royal Academy in London are suspended during the exhibition; it is true that the Institution had stipulated to allow the Academy in all four rooms: all these facts could not prevail: the Board and Institution evi- dently owe the Academy a grudge, and desire to turn it out of the home, reared at the public expense, to which they invited it in 1835. Meanwhile, the Academy's old quarters in Waterloo Place, having been diverted to other purposes, are no longer available; and a suitable place is not to be had.

In August last, the Academy forwarded a memorial to the Treasury, preferring the reasonable request that the Lords Commissioners should ap- point some neutral and competent persons to investigate and report on the whole subject of encouragement of art in Scotland."

The Treasury can do no less. Whatever official help may be given to the Board and the Institution is evidently perverted. Thus far, whatever feeling for art haS been produced in Scotland is due mainly to the artists; the -Institution has evidently and confessedly been unable to get along without the artists: yet it is the artists who have been selected for dis- couraging slights, if not for persecution. While the Academies of London and Dublin have enjoyed State patronage, that aid, which was no doubt meant by the Imperial Treasury for the cognate body of Edinburgh, has been intercepted by the double association.

Now, the professed object of the three bodies, the encouragement of art in Scotland, is too good to be lost in a paltry bickering between the work- men of art and the self-appointed dispensers of other people's patronage. The Academy has set about its task in a worthy spirit. We observe none of the merely mercenary taint which is apt to beset artists, especially the exclusive pretension for "native talent." This is wise and politic. Art is not "native " to any locality; it is not to be encouraged by patent, but is developed best by the freest growth, deriving strength from every source. In moat countries it has been imported, whether we take the word as ap- plying to the liberal or mechanical arts. Italy imported her art of paint- ing from the Greeks, and beat them; we imported our art of cotton- weaving, and have beaten the countries from which we borrowed. Art is to be encouraged by "protection " against none but disturbing influences ex- ternal to itself: its strength lies in the full apprehension of its beauties, in skill of eye and of hand, in the popular taste which guides and stimulates the artists; and all those things are promoted chiefly and best by art itself in its highest possible state. If there is any stuff in a people capable of development—if any real demand for art arise among them—their native artists are sure to have many advantages, of contiguity, affection, numbers, knowledge of the local taste, which must always give them a sufficient start of foreign artists; whose importation, nevertheless, to meet the de- mands of the very highest taste in the same country, contributes power- fully to expand and strengthen the very art by which the native artists live. We do not therefore advocate any exclusive or " protective " favour for the Scottish Academy.

But we do insist that those with whom the authority lies should choose the most intelligent and most efficient channel for the encouragement of art in Scotland, as well as everywhere else. It is a most desirable object. We are only beginning to comprehend the full power of art as an engine for social improvement and discipline. Its effect on manufactures is obvious. The study of drawing—to say nothing of a more continued practice after the period of scholarship—is a most important branch of education; developing in a peculiar manner the natural faculties of ob- servation, and serving in physical matters the office performed by the study of mathematics in intellectual matters, by accustoming the mind to seize distinctions and bring them to the test of exact scrutiny. The eyes of a man who has studied drawing bear to his mind ten times the information that is received from untutored eyes: for all purposes of observation and comparison he sees ten times as much.

The moral effect of art, although long felt, although proverbial since Horace asserted it in an epigram, has been less distinctly and analytically understood. Duly examined, it will be found to act aesthetically in train- ing the mind by very perceptible and effective means. The contem- plation of that which is beautiful and harmonious begets a disposition of mind harmonious and congenially alive to excellency—a disposition which may be so cultivated as to grow into a habit. By a more positive reaction, the continued familiarity with the aspect of dignity and grace tends to produce, through outward imitation, similar qualities. And those two pro- cesses set a third in motion: the mind which is familiarized with excel.- lence and harmony acquires a keener perception of what is discordant and base, and revolts the more from it.

Of course, to produce all these influences in their fullest activity, it is requisite to have the most familiar intercourse not only with the works but with the practice of art. A summer or winter visit to the Metropolis is not enough. Art should be carried into the provinces, and diffused throughout; and when one of its main channels, as at Edinburgh, is suf- fered to be choked up, the Government neglects one of its functions, waives one of its best instruments of governing. It is possible that the Ministers in London are not really aware of what is done in their name— for the Board of Manufactures professes to act in the name of the Lords of the Treasury. And the Board itself is but a pageant. All unpaid commissions are apt to fall into the management of the few who take out their remuneration in satisfaction for their self-importance: one rest- less busybody, who supposes himself to possess all the knowledge and taste which are lacking in all the collected artists—the Sir Frederick Trench of Edinburgh—has not scrupled to say that he is the Board and the Institu- tion too: ergo, in this matter, he is also " My Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury." My Lords had better see what they are doing per aliens in Scottish art.