[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR:9 'Sra,—In support of
your interesting article under the above title in the Spectator of September 26th I venture to adduce a concrete instance of the useful work which the proposed ROciety, as different from national officials on the one hand, and individual connoisseurs or dealers on the other, might well perform. A few days ago, by the mere chance of a wandering amateur and in the extremely humble premises of a provincial dealer, I was shown a subject-picture "attributed to Van ]yck." While not expert enough to pass final judgment, I do not hesitate to say that the work is that of "a master," which, instead of being guarded (and perhaps damaged) in a timid obscurity, should and would adorn any national collec- tion. I am unaware in this instance if the work has been offered to the authorities of Trafalgar Square or any other 'Gallery. I did not choose to ask, and perhaps should have had no answer. Besides, the susceptibilities of the possessor were not to be lightly wounded. My point is that if, as your article suggests, the amateur members of a Society able to rely on -honest expert assistance could report to its officers the dis- covery or existence of works of art which are either beyond the reach of private purses or would not be shown to even the most upright of dealers, our public galleries would probably `be much enriched. The evil of excessive commissions and fictitious prices would be lessened, and the export of art -treasures to foreign countries considerably reduced. In passing, I would give my vote to your suggestion that a free pass to all national collections, franking members on students' and other close' days, would be a reasonable and gratifying privilege to grant to the subscribers to the proposed Society. It would cost nothing, and might buy much !—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
