THE SOCIETY OF BRITISH ARTISTS.
OUR attention has been called to a paragraph, containing some severe strictures on the conduct of this Society, that appeared in the first edition of the Spectator last Saturday, but was omitted in the second to make room for the afternoon additions to the Postscript. In that paragraph, the Society of British Artists were harshly censured for having " appended, in the form of signatures" to their petition to the Queen for a charter, the names of persons who had contributed to the funds for erecting the gal- lery, or had purchased pictures at the Society's exhibitions.
This was a very incorrect account of the position of the names. A printed copy of the petition or " memorial " to the Queen is now before us: it contains 126 names of noblemen and gentlemen who " have honoured the Society by becoming purchasers of works at the Society's exhibitions": then follow 59 names of donors. No signatures follow the prayer of the petition, and the actual signatures we have never seen. We are, however, assured that every one of the signatures attached to the original memorial " was either written by the party himself, or pursuant to an express au- thority in the party's own handwriting."
We are bound to believe this statement, which leaves no room for doubt; and, as the assumption on which our censure was founded proves to bare been erroneous, we willingly retract the offensive comments, and exprem our sincere regret at having, through misapprehension, imputed blame which was undeserved.
Our mistaken impression was derived from a hasty glance at the dam- ment, in which the names figured conspicuously, though, we now know, not as signatures, as it hung up in the lobby of the exhibition-rooms on the day of the private view: we had not seen the printed copy.
As the Spectator never knowingly resorts to misrepresentation of any kind, it is due to the character of this journal, no less than to the parties aggrieved, to make this reparation for an unintentional misstatement- And the writer cannot let the occasion pass without disavowing, in the most unreserved manner, the existence of any hostile feeling on his part towards the Society of British Artists as a body, or to any individual mem- bers. Whatever animadversions he may have offered on proceedings of
Society have been dictated solely by a desire to raise the standard and emote the iuterests of art. And no one would more heartily rejoice to d the Society of British Artists holding the high position that it ought to attain by proper management, insuring the confidence of artists generally, and those of superior talent in particular: for without the cooperation of men of first-rate talent, an exhibition loses its hold on public attention, and the exhibitors insensibly deteriorate instead of im- proving.
Previous page
