whereas, works selected by a committee however judiciously-if disseminated by lot, must occasionally fall mal-a-propos; a work of high value will sometimes fall to the lot of one by whom it is little estimated, as being not to his taste or unsuited to his residence, and is willingly disposed of for one-sixth of its value: the contrary will as often happen, and thus discontent or indifference be ultimately generated. On the other hand, it is urged by the committee advocates, that the interests and advancement of the arts are better cared for when the selections are made by an elected few of acknowledged taste that there is less chance of personal favouritism to artiststhat a stamp of merit is given to the works thus selected that it is a more convenient plan for prize-holders not residing in the vicinity of the exhibition-finally, that the division of the money into prizes is attended with many dangers and difficulties; for if done with reference to the prices of particular pictures, the objects of the society must often be defeated by the winner of any certain prize differing in judgment or taste from the committee, and if divided so as to give the best distribution of the funds, the results would be to encourage the lower priced pictures, or to cause a compromise of price on the part of the artists. To these arguments we would reply that a committee elected as are the committees of art-unions, have no right to arrogate to themselves the censorship of art; they are appointed by a public society to disburse funds under certain regulations-in so doing to exercise their taste and judgment. Any factitious stamp of merit which may be thereby given to the works selected, we conceive to be a positive evil-inasmuch as in the constitution or election of such a committee there is no sufficient test of the capabilities or suitableness of its members for so high an office; further, they are irresponsible beyond the conscientious expenditure of the society's funds; whilst their judgments are as liable to be influenced by their peculiar tastes as those of more extended bodies; and taste or zeal not being always commensurate with knowledge, there can be nothing in such selection of particular works, or the omission of others, that ought to mark them with the stamp of taste or the fiat of judgment. It is pretended that it is necessary to lead the public taste; we deem that the selection of works of art by a committee so constituted, is not the way to do so. We know that the public taste soon educates itself, and that in any exhibition the works of most merit are those generally most admired by the public. There is, moreover, an injustice to the artists in the prestige of judicia! power on the part of the committee, beyond its unfitness in constitution; so long as its decisions must be influenced by the amount of funds at its disposal, the best division thereof, and many other matters extraneous altogether of the question of merit. Even were the committee properly organized, and admitted to be the arbiter elegantiarum, there would be little gained for the interests of art generally, so long as works so selected were to be distributed by lotteryliable as that mode of distribution is to the evils before pointed out. These evils are clearly obviated by the exercise of choice by the prize-holders-silly choices might, it is true, occasionally be made; but as the editor of the "Art-union" remarks, in allusion to this same topic, "the best of us have prejudices and partialities, and a wrong judgment in them (the committee) would be a thousand times worse than a score of silly choices on the part of so many private and irresponsible individuals, selecting according to their own foolish fancies." With reference to the chances of personal favoritism to artists, we think there are as many, if not more, of such resulting from a committee as the reverse; the members of a committee are necessarily few and generally known, so that if any artist should meanly seek to win favour for his works on personal grounds rather than on their merits, he knows more easily where to direct such unworthy applications, when the right of selection is centered in a small body, than when it is more widely distributed. As to the probability of prizeholders being influenced in their choice by personal friendship for particular artists, we cannot see the matter as a very heinous offence, or likely to be of frequent occurrence. The chances against any individual's obtaining a prize are as the number of shares to one-or whatever number he may hold; it would be difficult to calculate their complicated proportion against any prize-holder's just obtaining such a prize as would enable him to gratify his personal regard, without either an advance of money or a sacrifice as to pecuniary interest-of which men are not over fond. Nor even supposing such instances to occur, can much harm be done; nay, the greatest good might often result therefrom, for many young artists have been stimulated and aided in their progress by timely purchases, dictated more by friendly feeling than cul- | amongst us; at least, so far as that sufficient tivated knowledge of art. The inconve- encouragement was held out, in such nience to prizeholders residing at a distance branches of art as were then most generally is obviated by empowering a committee to encouraged, to induce men of talent in choose for such. With regard to the dif- each, to reside in Ireland. Although even ficulty of the division of the funds, we then the crying evil of absenteeism was would say it is to be taken for granted, felt, yet enough of rank and property-the that all subscribers to such societies are in- natural and legitimate fosterers of refinefluenced by a taste for the objects they ment generally, remained to give occupaseek to promote; and it then results, that tion to many able artists. It is the high the prizeholders are so many of those privilege, nay, the duty, of those possessing lovers of art who are fortunately enabled to wealth and station to lead and to refine pubindulge their taste by purchases to an ex- lic taste; placed by the hand of fortune tent not limited by the degree of taste, but above the pressure of mere ordinary wants, by the means at their control. It will often they naturally turn their minds to the culhappen that the person having most money tivation of those intellectual enjoyments, is not he of most taste; but it is clear that which, whilst they afford wholesome exerevery man is called upon to exercise his cise to the faculties, combine instruction judgment, whilst no man is obliged to take with gratification; they build noble mana work of which he does not approve. And sions, and for their internal decoration many, very many are stimulated to add to naturally recur to the sister arts, painting the amount of their prizes a sum necessary and sculpture. Family affection and anto procure works according to their taste. cestral pride alike dictate the perpetuation, We think, by this system, that private pur- by the aid of mimic art, of the good and the chase will be collaterally much increased; illustrious; their mansions thrown open to which we would esteem the great desidera- admiring friends, or to the wondering gaze tum and the most beneficial result of the of humble tenants or passing strangers, act establishment of art-unions. As to the as the pioneers of art, lead the public to objections of encouraging low price works, its contemplation, and instil the desire of or cutting down in price, they are results, surrounding themselves, as far as circumas far as they go, of both systems; but stances may permit, with similar enjoyments. even more likely to occur when there is a It would be waste of time to seek to prove committee anxious to give the most general an admitted axiom, that the advancement satisfaction-who to increase the number of of the arts is in intimate connexion with prizes, must purchase many works from two the existence of rank and property in any to twenty pounds, and will not scruple to country; therefore, it will be easily conurge the limit of their funds or previous ceived how as absenteeism increased in Irearrangements, as a reason for offering prices land, the arts "paled and drooped;" when below those demanded by the artists; in to the absence of a first class is added the fact, they will feel called upon, as acting for total preoccupation of those classes, who others, to drive a good bargain-whilst of the must thereby have been forced forward in prizeholders who come into the market, the scale of society—a moral vacuum being though some may plead the amount of as impossible as a physical; when we contheir prize as the limit of their means, a template how completely all classes have far greater number will be found to add been absorbed in political strife-in a wastwhen necessary a sum to equal the price of ing struggle for contested rights, we cannot the work which they desire to obtain, which wonder that the fine arts should have fallen thus becomes, as it were, enhanced in value. into the shadow of neglect. Indeed that We come now to the introduction of art they have continued to exist at all in this unions into Ireland. In testing the appli- country, is mainly attributable to the exertcability of the various systems, or any mo- ions of the artists themselves, in their indification of them, to the promotion of the defatigable struggle against growing public fine arts at home, the precise state of the apathy; nothing but that undying hope, arts should be understood; for that purpose which is a main ingredient in all mercurial we think a short retrospect of their history, temperaments, could have supported the during the elapsed portion of the present Irish artists through the long night of necentury, necessary. glect which they have encountered. The schools established by the Dublin Society afforded the young student the means of acquiring the mere rudiments of his art The close of the last and the commencement of the present century found the arts of painting and sculpture somewhat prosperous which, when after long years of anxious study he came to profess, he found-placed no where in society. The want of professional position was long felt by the Irish artists; they felt the necessity of that link of association which should force them as a body into a positive and recognised place, and they endeavoured to win the public favour by exhibitions of their works, which were successful in proportion as they were few and far between. At length they determined on forming themselves into a body, constituted similarly to the Royal Academy of London. In 1823 a royal charter was obtained, giving certain immunities and privileges to a body of artists, consisting of fourteen constituent members and ten associates; to be entitled the Royal Hibernian Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture. This was a step in advance; but not much was gained thereby; for though a grade of merit was thus established-a rank conferred on the most meritorious artists by ther brethren, and confirmed by royal charter; although the members were entitled to write R. H. A., and esquire after their names, no virtual rank was conferred-the public felt no sympathy with or interest in the Royal Hibernian Academy, which had thus a name indeed, "without a local habitation." It is to the munificence of an individual; to the high-minded and well-timed liberality of a member of their own body, that the academy, and through them the artists of Ireland, for ever owe the deepest debt of gratitude. FRANCIS JOHNSTON, a man to be revered by every man to whose heart the interests of his country are dear-FRANCIS JOHNSTON, the eminent architect, erected a temple for the fine arts, at an expense of not less than £6,000; and with a munificence, enhanced in proportion as the arts were then neglected, presented it to the members of the Royal Hibernian Academy, and to their successors for ever. That this act is not so generally known as it ought to be; that this good citizen-shunning the bright glare of political distinction, liberally, yet unostentatiously working out practical good to his country, is not more often heard of, is a natural result of the depressed state of the arts. When, however, the turmoil of political strife shall have subsided; when the arts shall have assumed their wonted soothing influence over the minds of men; when that temple of the arts shall be more frequented, the name of FRANCIS JOHNSTON emblazoned on its walls will be more often read, more highly prized, and fame borrowing the pithy epitaphic motto of another great architectmay, pointing to the edifice, breathe aloud, "Si monumentum quæris, circumspice!" The A great benefit was thus effected. artists became a recognised body, and they possessed suitable accommodations for an annual exhibition of their works. The first exhibition excited much public interest; an interest, alas! which has gradually declined. The artists struggled to maintain their annual exhibition: but, few in number and without the encouragement of a market for their productions for purchasers there were almost none-it became a matter of yearly encreasing difficulty to find works to cover their walls. The public, when by chance they did turn their attention to the subject, only deplored the decreasing interest of the exhibition ; in fact it became the fashion to decry even the modicum of merit to be found there. But the public never supplied the necessary stimulus; no purchases were made, and native talent continued, as it had long been forced, to migrate to other markets where something might be gained. While matters gradually assumed this disagreeable phase, as regarded the advancement of art generally, the academy was not unmindful of its greatest function-the instruction of rising artists. Mr. Johnston had not long been spared to watch the progress of the profession which he had so essentially benefitted; but the mantle of his fostering care fell upon one worthy in every way to wear it. His widow, a lady whom even the fear of being thought to flatter, cannot prevent us from naming as one claiming the warmest gratitude of her fellow citizens, with a similar spirit of enlightened liberality, ministered to the wants of the arts of her country; the academy are indebted for their sculpture gallery, and for many of the splendid specimens of ancient art that adorn it, to the munificence of Mrs. Johnston. By this addition to their internal accommodation-by presents of casts from the Marquis of Anglesea, Sir Thomas Lawrence and others, and of a valuable library from the late Mr. Edward Haughton, the academy were enabled to found the various schools for the instruction of students. The "sinews of war," needed in proportion as the exhibitions were unremunerative, have been in some degree supplied by a small annual grant from government of £300, which barely sufficing for the pressing wants, is so far of moment, as shewing that even in the highest quarter a certain importance is attached to the objects of the academy. It ought perhaps to be If we have been somewhat lengthy in this retrospect, it is because we believe it bears essentially on the matter in hand; it affords us our best guide to the selection of a principle of art-union suited to Ireland, and it leads inevitably to the conclusion that that system should be purely national. This brings us more immediately to the discussion of what we conceive to be the errors in the constitution of the Royal Irish Art-Union. In common with all the friends of art, we hailed with hopeful pleasure the establishment of such a society amongst us, because we thought it was their intention to spend their money at home; to devote their capital to the exploitation of native talent. Well, what has been the result? In round numbers* £1,235 was collected, a sum quite equal to, if not exceeding anything anticipated, in the first year; of this fully two-thirds-£816 78. leaves the country, while only about £275 is expended at home. Surely this is not a common-sense mode of encouraging native talent! It is no answer to say that a portion of the money sent out of the country was to Irishmen; though we should ever and every where wish to see Irish genius estimated and encouraged, we think it a primary principle to encourage residenceto discourage absenteeism; and so long as a work of merit is to be found, produced at home, the funds of the society should be We quote from memory, but we believe accurately, there being as yet no published report of the transactions of the society. Why is this? all other associations print their report; it is necessary for the satisfaction of members, and useful even as advertisement. devoted to its purchase. "Be just before you are generous," is a wise adage: to expend the money of an Irish art-union in the purchase of works produced in Ireland is justice; to expend it in the purchase of foreign works is that degree of showy generosity, spurning the shackles of domestic claims, which the short-sighted admire— the wise condemn. The line of conduct which has produced the above-mentioned results has, of course, its conscientious defenders; nor must we lose sight of their arguments; they are simply these. They wish to raise the standard of taste in art by the introduction and diffusion of English works; to enhance the interest of the annual exhibition; to elevate the criterion of merit, and by allowing our young artists to view their works in juxta position with the works of their more favoured brethren, to stimulate them to exertion and improvement. That these are objects of paramount interest we are all agreed. The mode of their attainment is that concerning which we differ; we will entertain them seriatim-premising that in our advocacy of the exclusive system, we do it in no illiberal or narrow-minded prejudice against the talents of other countries, but from a sincere desire to see the talent of our own worked out; from a conviction that this can only be obtained by that fostering care, which we bold to be the peculiar province of art-unions to afford, and which they can only effect by a judicious expenditure of their funds at home. To raise the standard of public taste in art in Ireland is, indeed, "a consummation most devoutly to be wished;" but we deny that it is likely to be effected by the introduction and purchase of such English works as would fairly come within the sphere of artunion patronage. The purchase of a few fourth or fifth rate pictures might insure the influx of many such to the annual exhibition; but it is just in those classes that the vices of any school are to be found; and the public taste taught to admire such works -unbased on the great models of art-is more likely to be vitiated than elevated; to mistake manner, a pleasing tone of colour, and captivating surface, for the sole ends of art. That it is most desirable to have first class pictures of other schools constantly presented to the public eye is undeniable. The Royal Hibernian Academy sustain the truth of the position by even seeking such works to adorn their exhibition, and by proposing to pay the expense of transport of all works of eminent artists; but these are such position, we have but to look to the exhibition of this past year, which, taken but as a promise of brighter things to come, we fearlessly assert to be most creditable to our resident artists. We regret to say that there were there, works of art, produced at home, in every way worthy of approbation, left unpurchased, while the funds of the society were diverted to other objects not so legitimately forming the objects of its attention. This we think particularly hard on Irish artists-so long struggling against public apathy, to a certain degree in comstill more suffered under a baleful absenteeism, while they have struggled to preserve a position for the arts through all. When the public at length came forward to aid them by an art-union, they had surely a right to have their claims admitted, nay more, to have the exclusive advantage of fosterage from the society's funds, at least until a few years fair play should have placed them more upon a footing with their more fortune-favoured brethren at the other side the channel. works that for the most part must exceed in price the limit of art-union expenditure; it is evident that artists will not be tempted to send over such works by the circumstance of an art-union's existence amongst us. How then is the object to be effected? In the first place, much is gained by attracting the public mind to the subject. The human mind is eminently endowed with a longing after excellence, and the moment it becomes interested in any art or occupation it begins to discriminate; it rejects the bad and seeks the good. Incidentally we may remark here that the true basis of pub-mon with their British brethren; they have lic taste the true school would be a national gallery, with a selection of the best works of antient and modern art; constantly and gratuitously open to attract and instruct the public mind. It would be beyond our purpose to dwell upon this subject here, as it does not fairly bear upon the question of art-unions; we may perhaps recur to it at some future period, it being one of great national importance. The main influence that art-unions can have on public taste is by the direct encouragement of a national school of art. Hold out sufficient inducements to your native artists to work out their talents enable them to live at home; the residence of men of talent amongst you, with the exhibition and diffusion of their works, will do more to form a correct taste, than any occasional introduction of inferior foreign works. Besides, the majority of the picture loving public consists of persons who travel, and in these days of railway facility, have constant opportunities of seeing the best specimens at the fountain head. Artists, too, must frequently go abroad, to see not only the works of modern schools, but to study the great old masters; they return with improved powers, with elevated tastes, and if they find sufficient encouragement to remain at home, their works will be the best means of improving the public taste. The argument for the purchase of English or other pictures, based on the consequent influx of such works to our exhibition, is connected with another consequence put forward by the supporters of this system; which is the advantage to resident artists of seeing their works in such juxta position. We think we have shown that by art-union patronage, no influx of works can be obtained, truly beneficial to the public-still less so to the artists; the argument, to have any weight, is based on the supposition that there is nothing produced at home worthy of public patronage. In refutation of any Were a society to start for the encouragement of native manufactures, would not common sense dictate the propriety of closing the market for a season against foreign productions, until by a proper irrigation of capital-by a home competition for premiums judiciously distributed, they might be fairly able to compete with productions resulting from a long enjoyed similar system? Does not the same reasoning apply to art? It is said, "shew the young artist clever works—tell him, when you can paint like that, we will purchase your productions;" this could only discourage and damp his spirit. But purchase any work of his that evinces talent, you give him therefore the first spur to exertion; he feels that he can produce something of value-his first work purchased is to him an event-it marks an era! not-if he have the genuine spirit of art about him, which is essentially unworldly and disinterested; not, we say, for the value of the money, but as an evidence of approval does he prize it. It stimulates his ambition; if he continues to improve, continue to purchase; if his works fall off or indicate negligence, let him suffer; the purchase of his works will soon become a test of approval; and he will gladly expend a portion of his earnings in visiting those emporiums of art, where his taste may be elevated and his judgment matured. It is here, therefore-as to home pa |