Blackwood's Edinburgh magazine, Vol. 75, No. 462, April 1854Various
History
Blackwood's Edinburgh magazine, Vol. 75, No. 462, April 1854
Various
England -- Periodicals; Scotland -- Periodicals
upon them, did not resign their appointments, which, if honourable in
other respects, were now marked with the character of incompetency. We
have already strongly insisted that picture-dealers should in no case be
consulted. They are too much interested, and wish to keep up the value
(artificial) of pictures; and the world knows too well the nature of
their trafficking, to place implicit confidence in their decisions. We
say not that a judicious choice might not be made of skilful and
honourable men; but looking to all times, and with some knowledge of the
temptations of trade, we should be sorry to see the practice of
consulting dealers become a habit or a rule. Take the case which has
occurred—the Treasury nominate judges; at a subsequent meeting of the
trustees these very judges have pictures to be recommended—are other
trading judges to be called in? In that case decisions will have to go
the round of these dealer judges. They will either be shy of pronouncing
against the interests of each other, or be under the temptation to give
each other a good turn, or, at any rate, keep up the market, which they
themselves supply. The public have of late been let a little too much
into the secrets of picture trafficking, and of picture manufacturing.
Is there truth in the exposure that an overbaked would-be Raffaelle was
spoiled for that master, but would make an admirable Correggio? With all
the respect we owe to individuals, we confess that there is a strong
resemblance between picture-dealing and horse-dealing. The habit of
appointing dealers as judges would certainly end in a council of
dealers, who would, in actual operation, supersede all others. The fiat
of the Treasury transferred to the fiat of Wardour Street. We are glad
to quote Mr Dyce on this subject:—“This, then, is the present state of
matters. The right to entertain a proposal to purchase any picture rests
with the trustees; the ultimate opinion of its merits, on which the
purchase depends, is not theirs, but that of certain ‘eminent judges’ of
such points. The trustees decide what may be and shall be purchased, if
it be worth purchasing; the eminent judges decide whether it be worth
purchasing, and worth the money asked for it. It may be said that this
is an extreme and exaggerated case; that the Treasury, though reposing
confidence in the recommendation of the trustees, might nevertheless
think it desirable, on several accounts, to have this recommendation
fortified by the opinions of eminent judges. True: but as it cannot be
supposed that the trustees would press a recommendation, in any case, in
the face of an adverse opinion given by the judges they had summoned to
their assistance—in other words, since they cannot make a recommendation
at all without both summoning such assistance, and obtaining a
favourable opinion—it is perfectly clear that the favourableness of
opinion they have obtained, not their concurrence in it, must be looked
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account