The limitation was inconsiderately adopted, and I know not that it answers any valuable purpose.

fund for

of histori

It has been mentioned that the plan of the Society 4. Reserve for the encouragement of British Art included the the encou reservation of ten per cent. upon the amount of its ragement subscriptions as an accumulating fund for the encou- cal and reragement of the higher branches of art, and that the ligious art. small success which this society met with (apparently from causes already stated) made this provision inoperative. It has also been mentioned that a similar provision is very general amongst the continental associations, and has been productive of much good. This excellent feature, thus recommended by experience, has not yet, however, been imitated, either by the Scottish societies or by the Art-Union of London, although the fast-increasing means of all these institutions would now fully warrant the measure.

Until this be done the capabilities of these associations to promote the love and progress of the arts will never be fully developed: and they will remain open to the objection, that—at least, as to their direct effects -they tend rather to encourage mediocrity than to assist the efforts of genius.

By the adoption of this feature-whether by means of purchases or of commissions, or by both-not only would all such objections be answered, and a valuable impulse be given to those branches of the arts which peculiarly stand in need of encouragement, but a step might also be made towards the re-obtainment of that liberal employment of the arts for public, and especially for religious purposes, without which they never have attained, and never will attain, their highest and worthiest excellence.

In addition to the modifications which I have suggested, I think there are one or two other matters in

Other as

sociations

for the en

ment of the

respect of which the Art-Unions might be improved. From the adoption of conversazioni, or periodical meetings of their members-for example-from a more general correspondence between the several societies;* from mutual interchange of engravings, &c., and from a regularly-organized body of provincial agents, increased efficiency would, without doubt, result.

The "British Institution for promoting the Fine Arts in the United Kingdom" was founded in 1805. courage- It proposed to afford a gallery for the exhibition and arts.-Bri- sale of the works of living artists; to form a school of painting for the study of the old masters; to offer premiums for the best original pictures, and occasionally to obtain such by purchase.

tish Institution.

For many years its proceedings were characterized by considerable energy. It presented several fine pictures to the National Gallery, including works both of the old masters and of living artists. It gave many premiums,† and it greatly promoted the sale of pictures from its exhibition, an object, in respect of which, the exhibition of the Royal Academy had been almost wholly inoperative, as far as regarded non-members.

But for some years past this energy has apparently ceased to be put forth. The premiums have been dis

* These societies already possess an excellent medium of communication, in the monthly periodical called "The Art-Union," under the able management of Mr. S. C. Hall.

+ Amongst them a premium of 200 guineas to Martin for his picture of "Belshazzar's feast," and another of 100 guineas to the same artist for "Joshua commanding the sun to stand still." Mr. Martin stated before the committee on arts and manufactures that to this institution, during the earlier period of its existence, he considered himself indebted for "the major part of his success," but that of late he felt himself almost wholly excluded from it on account, as he conceived, of the predominant influence which the Royal Academy had acquired over the Board of Directors. See 2d Report on Arts and Manufactures, § 842-901.

continued; pictures have ceased to be purchased; the character of the exhibitions has greatly deteriorated, -the best places having been given to pictures previously exhibited at the Royal Academy; and even portraits, although nominally excluded, having been admitted under fictitious names,-and this, notwithstanding the frequent announcement that many pictures had been returned for want of room, both in number and in value.* The contributions to the school of painting have also fallen off.

The natural consequence of this retrogression has been great dissatisfaction upon the part both of artists and of that portion of the public which takes an interest in the real progress of the arts. It has been attributed to that too common bane of our public institutions of this nature, the substitution in its practica! management of persons wholly irresponsible, in the place of the nominal directors,-men of high station and character, but many of them, as in so many similar cases, much burthened with other and weightier duties. In particular, it has been confidently and repeatedly asserted that the Royal Academy exerts an undue influence over the Institution, especially as regards the exhibition,t-an assertion but too much countenanced

by the appearance of the walls for several seasons past. This alleged influence is objectionable, be it remembered, not because it is the influence of artists or of academicians, but because it is indirect and unacknowledged, and therefore, irresponsible.

* It is highly desirable that in future exhibitions of the old masters, greater care be taken to exclude works of doubtful authenticity. There is reason to fear that dealers have, in several recent instances, profited by these exhibitions to obtain a fictitious credit for very suspicious claims.

On this point see the evidence of Mr. Martin, referred to in the previous note; and also that of Mr. T. C. Hofland, in the same Report, § 1249.

tists.

But be the causes what they may-the alleged defects are undeniable: and the very benefits which the institution has in past times produced makes them the more to be deplored. The first step towards improvement will be the conviction in the minds of the directors that they have a serious duty to perform towards artists and towards the public, and that if part of this duty must be delegated to others, it should be committed only to known and responsible persons.

The cessation of premiums, so important a feature in the original plan of the institution, is the more surprising, since there does not appear to be any deficiency of funds. There is however reason to hope that their resumption may be looked for during the next season.

The directors of the British Institution never had better opportunities for promoting its admirable object, than now lie before them. I cannot doubt that they will yet profit by these opportunities to their fullest extent, and thus restore the confidence so justly placed in the Institution heretofore.

The limitation of the exhibition of the British Institution to the winter months, together with the confined Society of and inconvenient situation of the Royal Academy in British ar- Somerset House, led, in 1823, to the formation of the Society of British Artists, for the purpose of obtaining convenient galleries for the exhibition and sale of their works. This society was immediately assisted by the liberal donations of Lords Durham, Colborne, Carysfort, De Tabley, and Dover, of Sir Gerard Noel, of Messrs. Douglas Kinnaird, Bond Cabbell, Baring Wall, Soane, R.A.;* and of many others distinguished for their high

* To this list were added, in the second year, the names of the Duke of Bedford, of Lord Glenorchy, and of Messrs. Denison, Hart Davis, Morrison, Broadhurst, and J. Edwards.

character as connoisseurs. A further sum was raised by way of loan from members and others, and in the spring of 1824 the society opened its first exhibition in the new galleries in Suffolk street, which it rented of Mr. Nash, by whom they had been erected, under a provisional agreement with the society.

From the outset it was to be regretted that the members of the Royal Academy (with the distinguished exceptions of Messrs. Soane and Northcote,) refused all assistance or countenance to the new undertaking, although, in the very year preceding, that body had issued a circular expressing their regret that the limited extent of their rooms obliged them to refuse admission to many works of merit. This unworthy feeling of jealousy was strongly condemned by many of the speakers at the inauguration dinner of the new society, 13th April, and especially by H. R. H. the Duke of Sussex, the chairman; and by Lord Durham, (then Mr. Lambton.) "This society," said the latter," is not formed in opposition to any other; it is calculated to promote and encourage the talent that abounds in the land, but it has not originated in any disposition of jealousy or motive of envy."

1824.

1824.

The society had also to struggle with another difficulty arising out of the disingenuous conduct of its landlord, Mr. Nash. Within less than half a year after the opening of the first exhibition, the roof of the large gallery became obviously insecure, and it was found necessary to obtain a bond from Mr. Nash covenanting to secure it for seven years. The mischief soon increased, and an eminent surveyor pronounced his opinion that a new roof was necessary. After repeated and fruitless applications to Mr. Nash, the interference of the commissioners of woods and forests was obtained, and at length the galleries were (at a great sacrifice) 1828.

1827.

25th Oct.