EXPOSITIONS OF 1851,'55, AND '59.
Tire weakest part of the British portion of the Great Exhibition in Paris was the machinery ; manufactures were better represented, Manchester in particular. But there was much caprice in the de- gree of representation : stockings stood forth before Europe ; car- pets made themselves apparent; glass was more diffident; jewel- lery made a full.display ; watches were shy. Perhaps one motive for this diversity may be found in the degree of necessity which different trades feel for advertising their wares, or . the reverse. The machine-makers of this country know that they are known throughout the world, and they had no occasion to make a shop- front in the Paris Exhibition. British watchmaking is to some extent in the same condition. Manchester is well known, but is excessively anxious to push off goods. In a report to the Crown, "presented to both Houses of Parliament by command-of her Ma- jesty,' Mr. Henry Cole notices the tendency of these exhibitions to assume the purely commercial form, with approval rather than otherwise ; but at the same time advises that the endeavour should be to make them means of pure display rather than-sale—to make them exhibitions rather than fairs. In some respects the advice is good ; and yet we conceive there are strong reasons why it should be much qualified. Let us note some of the facts which Mr. Cole himself mentions.
"A great feature of the London Exhibition was its comprehensiveness, embracing as it did the display by foreign exhibitors of numerous classes of objects not directly matters of general commercial interest such as the Queen of Spain's jewels, the Austrian furniture, the malachite of Prince Demidoff, &c. Such objects were more rare in the Paris Exhibition. There was no royal jewellery from Spain ; malachite from Russia could hardly be expected. There was very little costly Austrian furniture, but an increased quantity of Austrian cloth."
There was another characteristic of the French Exhibition which distinguished it from the London. It was a .rule that glass cases should be used. as much as possible, probably in order to give greater uniformity to the general view. They were ri- gorously enforced in the main aisle ; the foreign exhibitors, par- ticularly the English, were very obedient. The French, who 'tolerate so much centralized interference, displayed their usual disobedience, and disregarded the regulation. The -effect was, that in the Parts where the glass oases were numerous, the rigor- ous uniformity became very tiresome ; the tops of the oases pre- sented a dull appearance from the galleries, and the coup d'cil was marred. Where the rule was disobeyed, this fault was not apparent ; but the general view of the Paris Exhibition was greatly inferior to the open, tasteful, and picturesque aspect pre- sented by the London show. The -circumstances of the day were also somewhat different. In 1851 we had peace, which some of the exhibitors expected to be eternal ; there was war during the Exhibition of 1855. - Nevertheless, this diversity of circumstances does not entirely account for the great difference in the numbers attending the Ex- hibition,. The total number of visitors to the Paris Exhibition was 4,153,464, of which return more than 900,000 visits were made to the fine arts section : the total number of visitors to the London Exhibition of 1851 was 6,053,135. The number of fo- reigners that visited Paris during the Exhibition was nearly 160,000, of whom 40,000 were British ; of the visitors to the London Exhibition, 70,000 were foreigners. It is supposed that 6,000,0001. may have been spent in Paris during the year 1855 by visitors. The larger attendance in the English Exhibition was not due to lowness of price. The French scale ranged from four shillings to twopence, the English from five shillings to one shil-
a. Thus notwithstanding the additional attraction of a fine rts department, there would appear to have been diminished at- tractiveness in the French-show. It was in many respects more complete ; we have pointed out how much it was inferior as a pic- ture. A part of the moral effect of such exhibitions must be their popularity; a gigantic popularity on the scale of millions must always have its effect. Mr. Cole speaks of the tendency which these exhibitions have to become fairs, as if that were to depart from their purpose. No doubt, one of the objects was to compare the products of one country with the same products of another, and thus to supply the in- centive of an honourable emulationin reciprocally adopting ideas. The ideas of new materials, of different methods, of improvements have been caught both in France and England. In this country we but nOw begin to feel some of the results of the Exhibition of 1851: the Exhibition' of 1855 was a lesson to the exhibitors, but both Exhibitions had an important lesson for others besides ex- hibitors--they were lessons to publics and to governments. With our free trade, we Rresented no obstacle whatever to the admission of goods from foreign countries : prohibitory Russia, prohibitory Austria, and protective France, might come in as easily as free- trade TUrkey, or our own Colonies. If there were duties to pay On taking the goods out of bond, they were duties that would not obstruct the commercial transactions. Was that lesson entirely Mit on the merchant-exhibitor, or on the officials acting for their Government ? •
In Paris we have had the converse of this lesson. The duties were temporarily reduced ; some goodi which had been prohibited, such as earthenware, linen, or manufactured steel, were admitted on reduced duties of 20 per cent ad valorem. The English Com- missioners tried to remain neutral between buyei: and seller and to keep the Exhibition only to the business of exhibition, without passing into that of fair ; but it was impossible to resist the pur- cliasing impulse in France.
" The Imperial Commission, the French Customs, and the French. Go- vernment, all behaved mSlt hbetally in -admitTinglarge quantities of Bri- tish goods to the Exhibition, which were not very necessary to it, but whiCh were allowed to enter to oblige exhibitors and to gratify the desires of the French purchaser, who eagerly sought to make the Exhibition the channel for obtaining those. things which were otherwise prohibited. Of course,. British manufachners were not backWard to avail themselves of these concessions, and were only too eager to supply any quantity of pottery, -alpacas, woolleh cloths, cotton goods, agricultural machinery, Re., which the French consumer would purchase. Even the large quantity sent, sup- plied but a very limited amount of the orders (especially for prohibited ar- ticles of the cheapest kind) which were given by all classes, from the lowest
i
td the very highest, in France. Large purchases of earthenware were made. The delicate cotton quiltings of Manchester and cotton fustian attracted great notice even from the nobility of France, and all the population of Paris seemed willing to clothe themselves in black alpacas. But many more eiders were refused than executed."
. There cannot be a better example of the effect of this prohibi- tory law than alpaca. The better qualities of the stuff are endur- ing, both in texture and colour ; they fall into very handsome folds ; they are not extremely expensive to produce : but the scale of the duty is such as practically to prevent any extensive trade for the commodity in France. Speaking generally, it is scarcely to be obtained. Presents of it from this country, if they can be carried over by any kind of evasion, are greedily and gratefully .accepted. . What a trade, then, is prevented for this country, what a denial inflicted for the French purchaser, and how considerable a return trade in some other French article is denied to 'the French producer ! The lesson has not been without immediate effects in f ranee. "The advantages in the formation of new connexions to be derived from an exhibition must be prospective in a great degree ; and many exhibitors appear to anticipate future benefit from the steps which they took during the Exhibition to establish them, especially if modifications of the French tariff should continue to be made, and actual prohibition removed, as is con- fidently expected, in the present French session. During the Exhibition reductions were made in the duties on machinery and metals, and since the Exhibition, modifications have been made in the duties on wool and worsted. Other reductions are in progress, and a statement of all will be furnished in the Second Fart of these. Reports. Mr. Evelyn Denison has pointed out that the imp:Oat reduction of the tariff made during the Exhibition in favour of agricultural implements is due to the representations of the Jury on Agriculture." These appear to be ample reasons for endeavouring to maintain in any future Exhibition, whether in Vienna or elsewhere, all the most attractive characteristics, aesthetical as well as commercial. The 50,0001. allowed by Parliament to assist English exhibitors in Paris, of which only 40,0001. was required, was certainly a good investment. 'If even further assistance were needed to promote the pictUresque attractiveness and popularity for any new 'Exhibition in some other European centre, such as that contemplated at Vienna in 1859, policy would commend it for the sake even of commerce itself.
Previous page
