FINE ARTS.

PARLIAMENTARY REPORT ON ARTS AND MANUFACTURES.

first Parliamentary inquiry of the kind, as well us a valuable contribu- tion to the history of the Arts in this country : and, though the picture it gives of the national taste is humiliating enough, the manifestations of a growing desire of improvement, on the part of the working classes especially, are hopeful signs of better things.

The Report itself is simply a summing up of the evidence ; directing attention to the more important points, and giving the force of recom- mendation to some of the most valuable suggestions : it does not lay down any distinct plan for legislative encouragement of art. The first portion of the evidence (published last year, but reprinted with the Report) went to establish the admitted fact of a want of popular knowledge of the principles of design : the second relates more particularly to the means of diffusing the knowledge, and of advancing the art in its higher branches. In short, the first part proves the ex= istence of the evil, and the second indicates the remedy.

The principal points upon which the second portion of the evidence bears, are—first, the institution of local schools of design and galleries of art ; second, the want of copyright protection for artists and manufac- turers ; third, the uses and abuses of the Royal Academy ; and fourth, the state of the National Gallery.

The Committee recommend the establishment of Local Schools of Design, in conjunction with the Central Normal School about to be formed under Government auspices ; and of Public Galleries or Mu- seums of Art in provincial towns. These schools and galleries to have the benefit of Government assistance in their formation, but to be en- tirely independent of its control, and supported by the municipalities. 'the proofs of the desire for such institutions on the part of the working classes, and of the expediency, may the necessity of them, to counteract the effect of exhibitions of modern works of art only, are very numerous. Dr. Bowatsu gives this testimony.

" What is your opinion of the shilling exhibitions of the works generally of provincial artists, which are the only ones open in our large towns ?"—" I should think they are perfectly valueless in their effect upon the public mind ; they present to the attention of the people, not superiority, but frequently inferiority, and they must lower the taste, in as far as they have any influence, to the work of the exhibiting artist, instead of elevating the taste to something superior, and which is inaccessible by him." " Have they, or have they not, two faults ? in the first place, may they not mislead the public taste from the genuine principles of art towards mannerism and bad taste ; and, secondly, are they not exclusive institutions, inasmuch as they are only open to such as can pay for them ?"—" They have those two bad characteristics."

The evidence of Mr. HOWELL, one of the Factory Inspectors, is equally strong on this point. " Had you any opportunity of ascertaining the opinion of persons capable of judging of the value of these exhibitions of modern pictures, as instructing the manufacturing population in art?"—" Yes ; and that its value was none at all." " Was that from per sons competent to give such opinion ? "—" Yes; one extremely competent. Ile in fact mentioned, that on the establishment of the Society,• that he had agreed to subscribe to it, and to subscribe largely to it ; conceiving that the funds were to be applied to the purchase of casts from the most celebrated statues of antiquity and chefs d'zuvre of modern artists, and providing masters who should give the requisite hints and instructions in draw- ing from these, and offering prizes for the best works of the pupils of the So- ciety. He stated, he was convinced a greater advantage would be derived from drawing over and over again from one statue of undoubted excellence, as the Apollo or the Venus, thin from copying and studying any number of modern pictures, to the exhibition of which, in fact, this Society seems now to be chiefly devoted." " Generally speaking, did the opinion prevail that the exhibition of these works of modern artists had not been beneficial in diffusing a love for higher art? "—" Decidedly so : and that in fact it had no influence on the manufac- furers of the town. An intelligent workman engaged in chasing, strongly in- sisted on the advantage to be derived from the study of casts from sculpture, as being far more important than any drawings from modern pictures. fie was very desirous that a School of Art should be established on a liberal scale, where opportunity should be afforded to the young artists for drawing from the antique, under the direction of suitable masters, and that prizes should be offered for the most proficient."

Mr. JAMES NASMYTH, a manufacturing-engineer from Manchester, (and a son, we believe, of the celebrated Scottish painter,) also testifies, to the importance of placing beautiful works of art before the- mechanic.

• The Society of Arts at Birmingham, " What are the objects which you would place before the eyes of the me- chanic ?"—" Such a selection from the works of the ancients as exhibits, in the most perfect manner, the entire reconcileability of elegance of form with bare utility, as exemplified in the numerous instances from the most refined works of antique designing down to the most common domestic utensils or implements, comes of which could be obtained at a very low rate,soas to make them become as familiar to the eyes of the mechanic as the wall of the building itself." " Do you think that the exhibition of those beautiful forms to the eye of the mechanic would have a tendency to improve at once the form and the utility of our machinery?"—" Certainly. I would say, in order that the master me- chanic, supposing his mind has arrived at a great state of cultivaticn as regards a taste for the fine arts, in reference to its application to manufacturing pur- poses, requires, in order to bring forward those acquirements into actual ex- istence, to employ agents, those agents are his workmen ; and if there exists, as there does at present, too great a disparity between the taste of the master and that of the man, there is such a difference between the ideas of the two, that in many cases the forms which he wishes his workmen to adopt are rot those pro- duced by the workman, which leads to a very serious inconvenience and fre- quent disappointment, occasioning' in any attempt at introducing elegance of form, a very great loss of time to the master in giving necessary instructions to his men."

" Then you consider the form of machinery would be much improved by the exhibition dwell works as you have alluded to?"—" Certainly."

The subject of copyright we pass by for the present. Dr. Bow- RING'S suggestion of cheap local tribunals, such as the Conseil des Prud'hommes, established in the manufacturing districts of France,— which is a sort of jury, or board of arbitration, composed of master- manufacturers and workmen,—is too valuable to he overlooked.

The evidence as to the constitution and conduct of the Royal Academy is overwhelming. It goes to prove the utter exclusiveness and irresponsibility of this self-elected body ; its inadequacy and un- fitness to represent the interests of art ; the injurious effect of its in- fluence on the British school of painting ; the dissatisfaction and jealousy it creates among artists ; and its inefficiency as a school of in- struction. In fact, the Royal Academy is shown to be a private clique of artists, who, having succeeded in obtaining Royal patronage, enjoy the honours and privileges and exercise the powers of a public and national establishment without being accountable for their pro- ceedings. The utility of academics, except as mere schools of elementary in- struction, is denied by several witnesses ; amongst them,Dr. WAAcII N, the Director of the Royal Gallery at Berlin, whose evidence is strongly against such vicious helps. He shows that the greatest men have not been produced by their means; and that the academic system tends to deaden natural talent, to exalt mediocrity, and mannerize art. See his evidence in the First Part.

Mr. IIAYDON also bears forcible testimony to the baneful influence of the academic system.

" Do you think, from the observations you have extended to the subject, that the arts bare been benefited or injured by the foundation of academies ?"— " They have tended more to elevate mediocrity than to advance genius ; that is the tendency of all academies. I think they have rather obstructed genius wherever they have met it, in consequence of power being placed in the hands of the most inefficient men in all the academies of Europe. I certainly think so from reading, and from observing the state of the arts since the foundation of academies. The academies all over Europe, as Professor Wanglien says, have generated an artificial style of art, which has been called the academic, distinct from what is natural. Ile said that if you compared all the drawings of the greatest number of academical pupils in Europe together, it would be found they bear a very strong resemblance to each other. It is mauuerism, or style by receipt, in fact." "Were there any academics in ancient Greece? "—" I think not ; the arts were all taught in schools."

" Have the artists themselves, since the establishment of academies, been in- ferior or greater than those who flourished before ? "—" Met ior. Giotto, Mas- saccio, Lionardo da Vinci, Bartolomeo, Alichael Angelo, Raphael, Giorgione, Titian, Curreggio, were all produced from schools, and before academics. And there have been no men equal to these great men since in any, way, that must be acknowledged. The inference must be obvious. I consider academies all over Europe were signals of distress thrown out to sup the decay of art, but which have failed most egregiously, and rather hastened it." "Does this result, in your opinion, apply equally to England ? "—" De- cidedly. When the Royal Academy was founded, we had great men; we have never had such men since. Previous to the Royal Academy, there were Wren the architect, Bogard' the satiric painter, Reynolds, Barry, Wilson, Gains- borough, Banks, Gibbons, Roubilliac, &c. ;t and certainly there have been no such amen since; though it has been the fashion of the Academe to run down Barry, because he could not colour, and was deficient in light and shade. Dr. Johnson says, There is a grasp of miud in his works that no other English work possesses.' "

But our " Royal Academy," by the anomalous nature of its consti- tution, has all the vices of other academies without producing - their benefits. Mr. HAYDON puts the case very pithily in his answer to the question, " The Academy has no act or chatter, like other .public bodies ? "—" No ; they only exist by the Royal pleasure. They cunningly refused George the Fourth's offer of a charter, fearing it would make them responsible : they are a private society, which they always put forward when you wish to examine them, and they always proclaim themselves a public society when they want to benefit by any public vote."

In another part of his evidence, Mr. HAYDON rather happily charac- terizes the Academy as " a House of Lords without King or Com- mons for appeal." There is no lack of evidence of the injustice done to individuals by the Academy. Here iS HAYDON'S account of his own case. It appears that it was not he who threw the first stone.

"Have you suffered in your reputation and emoluments by the injustice of the Academy?"—" I was ruined entirely by their injustice. There is a great mistake abroad. I should like to have the power of saying that it is a suppo- sition that I began by attacking the Royal Academy : I lost at first many friends and patrons in consequence of that belief. There never was a greater mistake. I believe a great number of Academicians, may fellow students, know I was industrious and indefatigable; I gave offence to no one. My first pic- ture was painted in 1806, and exhibited in 1807, and was well hung, and pur- chased by Thomas Hope. Then I began a much greater picture, 'Dentatus,' well known in the art, and in Germany, and which was for Lord Mulgrave, my employer. He begged me to keep it for the British Institution. 1 told him I was a student of the Academy, and wished to support the Royal Academy, as I derived the greater part of my knowledge studying there. I

1 Haman, though a student, was refused the gold medal.

then sent sDentatus ' to the Royal Academy. 'rids picture was hung in the Great Room, in the same place as the other ; and after two days it was taken down and put in the dark, on the assertion that I occupied the .place of an Academician, when, instead of an Academician's picture, a little girl in a pink sash was put there to fill the place. Afterwards I put my name down for an Associate in 1810 ; I had not a single vote. I sent the same picture to the British Gallery the year after ; and it beat one of the Committee in contesting for the premium, and won the great prize. The Academy refused me admission in 1810 ; and in 1812 I attacked it. Si) that the honourable Committee will see, I dill not begin, as is generally supposed, by a turbulent and violent attack on the authorities in art."

" In 1812, I attacked them in theExaminer, under the signature of the Eng. lish Student,' which was well known as being myself. I never denied it, I ac- knowledged it. I considered myself as a portion of a class of artists which had suffered by the foundation of the Academy. I knew nothing about them per. serially and individually till I came in contact with them on an election for Professor of Anatomy. The first suspicion in my mind was excited by coming in contact with them on this question. Sir Anthony Carlisle had written in the Artist, that anatomy was perfectly useless ; and he was perfectly con- vinced it was without avail in the art. Sir Charles Bell had published a most beautiful work on the anatomy of expression. There was a contest for the Pro- fessorship; and I myself canvassed several Academicians. I found them de- termined to elect Sir Anthony in opposition to Sir Charles Bell, except Mr. Hummer ; and though he was a private friend of Sir Anthony Carlisle, he told him in his conscience he could not vote for him. Then arose my suspicions of the sincerity of the Academicians for the benefit of high art, or the advance of the taste of the people ; for this was a palpable instance of a most extraordinary nature ; because they rejected the most competent man who had written in favour of a science, and preferred the one who had written against it, for the interest of the artist."

Mr. MARTIN was treated in a similar manner. Speaking of the exclusive privilege the members of the Academy have of varnishing and retouching their own works, he says-

" To show how this works at the Royal Academy, i will instance my own picture of " Clytie," which was exhibited there. This picture was placed high up in a corner of the ante-room, where it was difficult to get at, and where all the care of the linear and the delicacy of the aerial perspective were lost, and in fact the whole principle of the painting counteracted ; but, as if this were not sufficient, it was hung up with all the dust which it had received frotn the time of leaving my room until the varnishing-day, when some kind member did me the favour to spill varnish down the centre of the picture whilst the dust was still upon it, and this was not suffered to be removed till after the private view and great dinner : this was done at the Royal Academy, and I had no means of cleansing my picture until the doors were opened to the public." " These facts have come to your knowledge, by which it appears this privi- lege is not only unfairly given to the Royal Academicians, but damage is in- flicted on the pictures of other artists ?"—" Very great indeed. It was such treatment as I have related, which compelled me to exhibit my pictures almost exclusively at the British Institution ; and from this time I sent my best pictures there. The picture of 4.1oshua,' which was hung in a corner of the ante- room, was so injured by the bad light, that it produced little or no effect in the Royal Academy. I sent it afterwards to the British Institution, where it was placed in an excellent situation ; and I received the principal premium of that year Prom the difference of treatment in the two places, we may suppose that the picture was not ill hung because it was unworthy of a better place."

Mr. Huni.s.rosCs testimony to the injurious influence of the Aca- demy is very pointed- " To what do you attribute this inferiority of art in England?"—" I consider the Royal Academy the principal, if not the sole cause; as a present consti- tuted, it exercises an unbounded and most depressing influence on art."

" You ate now speaking of the higher departments of art ?"—" Yes." " Not as applied to the manufactures of the country?"—" Poetical and his- torical painting principally, but indirectly on every branch of art."

" Can you explain in what sway the Royal Academy exercises this depressing influence ?"—" By its exclusive monopoly of every honour and of the highest patronage; its privileges and advantages, together with its laws, destroying all competition." " Can you specify the privileges and laws to which you allude ?"—" When the Royal Academy was first established, it was not intended that it should be what it has since had the credit of being—a great national institution. Its laws were therefore framed strictly with regard to the interests of a private body, and that private hotly at that moment under the peculiar circumstance of competing with another private body—the Incorporated Artists; from whom they had acceded. These laws are still in force, to the great injury of all other institutions and the destruction of ail fair competition."

The evidence of Mr. GEORGE RENNIE the sculptor, Mr. DONALD- SON the architect, Mr. CLINT late an Associate of the Academy, Mr. IlonaND the painter, and Mr. PTE the engraver, is also very strong against the Academy. The President, Sir MARTIN SlIFE, was voluble and testy in his replies. Even the courtier-like address for which he is famed could not restrain his temper. We are told, (for it does not of course appear in the Minutes of Evidence,) that he questioned the authority of the Committee ; and pointed to Mr. HAYDON, who was in the room at the time, and denounced him angrily as the original cause of this inquiry. If it be so, Mr. HAYDON has reason to be proud of the successful result of his attacks on the Academy, and his brother artists ought to feel grateful to him. Sir MARTIN SHEE can see nothing but what is right and good in the Academy. According to his evidence, it is as perfect as any human institution can be; and Mr. HOWARD, the Secretary, is of the same opinion. Both he and the President con- tradict Mr. HAYDON'S evidence as to the origin and history of the Academy, in the most direct terms. The exact truth is not easy to be got at—perhaps it lies between the two accounts. Mr. HowARD, moreover, undertakes to disprove the charges of " inefficiency in the schools, partiality in the elections, a spirit of exclusion, a disregard of the interests of other artists, and a selfish administration of the funds." All we can say is, that we desire no better evidence of the insufficiency and injustice of the Academy, than his own testimony. As regards the disposal of the funds, except in the matter of the annual dinner, we see nothing to object to. It is not pecuniary cor- ruption with which the Academy is charged, but a narrow and selfish system : and Mr. Howartia's reply to the inquiry, whether he bad eag suggestion for the improvement of the laws and regulations,—" If I were aware that the Academy was susceptible of any improvement on those points, I should, of course, lay it before the Council,"—de- monstrates very forcibly the Academic spirit. If this were really the case, it ought to be at once abolished. But a thorough reform of the Academy must be made; and the plan suggested of making the Aca-

demicians elective by a constituency of artists, seems a good one. That the Academy, as at present constituted, should be suffered to occupy half of the building intended for the National Gallery, is mon- strous ; and even were it reformed, the conjunction of the two institu- tions would be impolitic, if not injurious. The notable proposition of combining the National Gallery and the

Royal Academy, originated, it seems, with Mr. WILKINS himself ; who, knowing that the Royal Academy were on the point of being turned out of Somerset House, and that the public were calling for a gallery to receive the national pictures, thought it a good opportunity to get a job. The unapropriated site of the old Mews was a tempting opportunity : he secured the ground, and Lord DOVER'S interest with the Government ; drew out his plans, and got the approval of the Treasury Committee, the Trustees of the National Gallery, and the Royal Academy ; and the thing was done. Warning was in vain against such powerful in. fluence ; and as due deliberation and publicity would have endangered the success of Mr. WILKINS'S scheme, it was pushed on with indecent haste, and in secresy. Even the Keeper of the Gallery, Mr. SEGUIER, was not consulted, though his advice and assistance in determining the space required and the arrangement and proportions of the rooms was absolutely essential. Never was there a more flagrant instance of offi-

cial negligence and private jobbing. Mark the result ! This Picture Gallery, which will cost the country 70,0001. or 80,000/., is not only contemptible as a piece of architecture, but will not admit the very pictures it was erected expressly to contain ! We expected that when the Cartoons were added to the present collection, there would be very little room to spare in that portion of the building appropriated to the National Gallery ; but we were not prepared to find that the Cartoons can only be properly exhibited in the hall. The noblest productions of the pencil that ever have been or will he, and which are worthy of a palace to themselves, must be hung in the entrance-hall, exposed to dust and damp, and other chalices of injury, and be devoted to the con- templation of the porters or messengers in waiting ! Atrocious !

But this is not all. There are some very fine paintings by RUBENS in the Banqueting-room at Whitehall, which are invisible where they are,

and would be a magnificent addition to the national collection : but the

building will not admit them. The rooms, it seems, are not lofty enough to exhibit the picture of the " Raising of Lazarus," by SEBAS- TIAN DEL PIONIBO, to due advantage. In fact, this gallery is fit only for a collection of cabinet pictures, such as many private gentlemen

possess. It is unworthy of tLe nation, and utterly inadequate to its object. Here is the evidence confirming these disgraceful facts. Mr.

WILKINS and Mr. St:GEIER are the witnesses : the jobber convicts himself.

"Is the National Gallery constructed in such a way as to be capable of taking in any picture that might come into the possession of the public '—" I do not myself know the height of the walls."

" What may be the height of the Sebastian del Pima° ? ' "—" That is eighteen feet.

" And what height do you consider it ought to be raised from the floor, in order to be properly seenl;"—" It ought to be at least three feet ; that would be the very lowest.''

" Would not three fret be very much below the proper height ?"—" I think it would ; but I should like to ask Mr. Wilkins what is the height of the walls of the Gallery ?"—" The height of the walls is about eighteen fe.et." "But to the cove; "—" Twenty-two ; the ball is thirty feet high, and that would contain a great many Moults." " What is the size of the Cartoons? "—" The Cartoons, I should think, are about twelve feet by sixteen ; they are long." " And what is the height ?"—" I should think sixteen feet."

0 And at what height do you consider they ought to be placed from the floor, in order to be properly seen "—" I should say as high as they are now in Hampton Court."

" How high is that? "—" About twelve feet from the ground."

" So that in that ease you would require a space of twenty-two feet? "- " Yes ; which is about the height of the room they are now in." "I believe there are sonic very fine Ruhenses in the Banqueting-room at Whitehall, are there not ?"—" They arc magnificent pictures, and where they are are thrown away ; • in short, nothing can be so absurd as to have those in a:chapel : they would have been very desirable works indeed fur a national gallery."

" And if they should come into the possession of the National Gallery, do you think they will be able to dispose of them ? "—" The centre picture is forty feet by thirty.'

" And what may the height be ?"—" It is an oblong picture, forty feet one way and thirty feet the other." So that it will be quite impossible that those shall be placed in the National Gallery?"—" Quite."

" I think the fine specimens of the Venetian school are, generally, a very large size? "—" Yes, generally ; and for that reason cannot be placed very near the eye."

" Then if the public should ever obtain possession of any specimens of that school, do you think they would be able to dispose of them in the National Gallery ? "—" I do not think in the present building that there would be room." —" Certainly not for pictures of those dimensions.'

The evidence also exposes shameful neglect on the part of the

Keeper of the Pictures. The grand picture of the Raising of La- zarus before mentioned, on which Altman. ANGELO is said to have

wrought, and which is valued at 15,0001., is half eaten tip with insects, that have been extending their ravages for years. Indeed the pictures generally are in a very dirty state.

Here is an extract from the evidence of Mr. JOHN PEEL.

" Have you had occasion lately to visit the National Gallery ?"—" Yes, I have."

" When did you visit it? "—" Last week." "In what state did you find the pictures generally there ?"—" I found nearly the whole of the pictures wanted lining, cleaning, and restoring." " What pictures particularly did you find wanted lining and cleaning? "— " The Sebastian del Piombo is in the worst state in the whole collection."

" In what state is it ?"—" It is going to decay as fast as it possibly can, '^"ing to the worms which have got into it ; which arises from its having been taken off panne!, and I presume a small portion of the wood remains attached to the ground ; the consequence is, the worms eat the ground and colouring of the picture."

" Is the picture suffering from any other cause? "—It is also suffering from a sort of meal-worm, occasioned by a paste that it has formerly been lined with after it was transferred from pannel." " It is suffering both from the worm of the wood and from the worm of the

paste ? Yes."

" Have you any idea how long that picture has been suffering from these two circumstances? "—" No, I have no idea as to the exact time ; I suppose it is four or five years since I saw it before : it was not so bad then, or other- wise I should have observed it ; and therefore 1 think the worms are now eating very fast, and in fact, they are destroying the picture altogether by piece- meal."

" Whereabouts in the picture are the ravages of the worms principally con- fined? "—" Chiefly round the edges." " Any other part of the picture besides?"—" Yes, they are encroaching from six to eighteen inches from the edges partially."

Mr. PEEL'S trade being that of picture-restoring, his testimony re- quires support ; and it is confirmed by the evidence of Mr. EDWARD Sotrv, whose reputation as a connoisseur is a guarantee for its va- lidity. Mr. Sotax is twice usked if he confirms Mr. PEEL'S state- ment with respect to the SEBASTIAN net PIOMBO ; and he answers distinctly that he does. That the neglect has been wilful, too, is proved by Mr. SOI.I.Y and Mr. RENNIE.

" Do you confirm Mr. Peel's statement, with respect to the worms to be found on the Sebastian del Piombo?."—" I do." " !lave you seen any of them? "—" I have had in my possession last year two of the small beetle kind, which were taken off the picture ; they were given to me by a foreign professor, who took them off the picture himself, and who told rue that the Under-Keeper was aware of the damage ; that he had represented it to the Upper-Keeper, but he did not name whether Mr..Seguier or to whom; and was desired to take no notice of it."

" Have you ever seen any of the worms upon the picture, the Sebastian del Piombo? "—" I visited the National Gallery last Thursday ; having heard the Sebastian del numb() was injured by insects ; and the Under-Keeper in the Gallery found one of those insects, which he gave to me. It appears to be of the coleopt!rous genus ; the larvae are very actively engaged at this moment in perforating the picture; the Keeper also told me, that ever since be had been in the Gallery, a period of nine years, the insects had been in that picture."

After this, we doubt the propriety of removing the Cartoons to the new building,—more especially as, though the half that is appropriated to the nation's use is fire-proof, the other half is not ; and there being a resident keeper in the Academy, the building is exposed to con- stant danger of fire, which if it did not spread to the other wing, would be very likely to invade the ball where the Cartoons would be. Here • is another proof of gross mismanagement. The entire building ought not only to have been made fire-proof, but to have been isolated from other buildings. There is also danger from the Barracks in the rear, well as from the adjoining houses.

As regards the injury to the Cartoons from the smoke and dirt and damp of London, opinions differ. Mr. IIAYDON thinks that there is most danger to them from damp:; and that the fountain in the court into which the windows of the Cartoon gallery at Hampton Court open, contributes to the dampness of the rooms. Mr. SEGCIER fears the London smoke would destroy them; Mr. Woonauzu anticipates no risk from their removal ; and Mr. SOI.LY thinks they would be no more affected by the London atmosphere than other pictures. This is an important point for consideration ; and it ought to be defi- nitively settled before the Cartoons are removed. Certainly the Na- tional Gallery, without the Cartoons, would be but a paltry casket wanting its best jewels.