THE NATION versus THE ROYAL ACADEMY.
WE shell come at the knowledge of all the delicacies contained in Sir Mame SHER'S epistle to Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in good time, without being at the trouble of perusing the precious document itself. Mr. RENNIE, the sculptor, has published a temperate reply to Sir MARTIN; from which we have picked up one or two more choice momenta., in addition to those served up with such pungent condiments by the indefatigable Academy-hater HAYDON, in his Letters to the Home Secretary—the
second of which we subjoin. The courtly President cannot conceal his chagrin at being called to account ; and (alas for his assumption of dignity !) he betrays it by vulgar insolence and waspish impertinence. To facts and arguments he only replies by sneers and vituperation ; decrying the evidence; attempting to malign and defame the character and motives of the witnesses ; and even endeavouring to depreciate the valuable and disin
terested testimony of Dr. WAAGEN, the Director of the Berlin Gallery— a man whose acquirements and experience entitle his opinion to the highest respect. Sir MARTIN also presumes to impugn the motives of the persons who took a leading part in the meeting at the Freemason's Tavern, the result of which has given rise to his foulmouthed and bare-faced defence of the Academy. Such men as the Marquis of WESTMINSTER, Lord FRANCIS EGERTON, Mr. HOPE, Mr. RIDLEY COLBORNE, not to mention the names of EWART, HULWER, and other every-day Liberals, may be content to smile at the impotent spleen of Sir MARTIN SUER in assailing their conduct in this matter with the imputation of sinister motives ; but the animus of the charge shows to what wretched shifts the poor little President is reduced to ward off attacks. He is widely mistaken, however, if he cal:acts to cover the weak points by directing a volley of abuse against those who are arrayed against the Academy monopoly. It is plainly evident that the stronghold of the Academy is their treasury. Sir MARTIN may say with Shylock, You take my house when you do take the prop That sloth sustain my house : you take mylire
When you du take the means %%hereby I live."
The sore evil that is apprehended is the loss of the Exhibition.sbillines. Thus plaineth Sir MARTIN against the very moderate and reasonable proposition to throw open the Academy Exhibition gratuitously to the public for a few days only—" Mr. Hume's ingenious device would soon degrade its character, and deprive it of its preeminence of profit." Hine illw lachrynta ! Sir MARTIN is horrified at the bare idea of submitting the works of Academicians to the gaze and comments of "an assemblage of connoisseurs from Field Lane and St. Giles's ;"
yet he does not object to the throwing open the Cathedrals, Museums, and National Gallery, to the " coalheavers and rabble." The works of
RAPHAEL and TITIAN, Of CLAUDE and COERLGIO, may be open to the criticism of the "connoisseurs of Field Lane and St. Giles's," (we wonder the fastidious President is not shocked to avows knowledge of such low places,) but for the productions of Royal Academicians to be exposed to the vulgar stare is profanation ! Though even this indignity may be submitted to "for a consideration :" the nation may purchase the privilege of entering the Gallery built at its own expense at the moderate rate of 10,000/. or 12,0001. a year. Sir MARTIN coolly
says that if such a sum could be appropriated for the maintenance of the Academy as a state establishment, the Academicians might perhaps consent to admit the public gratis, and condescend, "at great per sonal sacrifice," to undertake the management of it. Matchless modesty !
Mr. RENNIE, in his Few Observations, takes up the leading points in discussion fairly, and sets them in a clear light. The subject is well
nigh exhausted, and little new can be said. In the following passages the case is succinctly stated.
"The Royal Academy was favoured by its royal founder, on the same footing that a bounty is conceded to foster an infant institution, not to maintain an ascendaat monopoly ; in which character the Academy may now be considered, having an accumulated fund of about 50,000/., and a bazaar or National Gallery provided for it by the public, to enable that bully to extract a revenue from the public." * * *
" It is well known that the attraction of the works sent by those artists educated there, infinitely more than repays all the cost of the instruction received by them ; that the proceeds of the exhibition are entirely managed by the Academicians: that the hanging. the pictures, the feasting, the private view, the earni.hing and retouching, as confined to the R.A.'s alone; that in fact the Whole institution is a commercial privilege, upheld by the nation, to the exclusion and destruction of all fair competition by rival societies."
Previous page
