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
Constitutions grow—they are not made. We never knew one from any
manufactory, paper-made, that could hold together; yet we go on with the
conceit that we have consummate skill in that line; we make ourselves,
as it were, sole patentees for all people and nations, and wonder at the
folly of those who reject the commodity, and yet we never attempt the
thing on a small scale at home, or a large one abroad, but the result is
a failure. The School of Design is a parallel case with the National
Gallery. The committee of management of that school was in the same
relation with the Board of Trade as the National Gallery with the
Treasury. The action of the body was stopped if no official
representative of the Board of Trade was present; and if present, the
council felt themselves to be a nullity. Yet the council could not at
once be easily dismissed, for the Parliamentary grant was voted for the
council of the School of Design. In 1842, therefore, this constitution
is remodelled. The School is put “under the _management_ of a director
and of a council, subject to the control of the Board of Trade.” But
here again is a failure. The council and director cannot arrange
responsibilities. The director resigns, another succeeds: as before,
there is no working together. The constitution has to be remodelled
again. The Board of Trade takes the management, assisted by the artist
members of the old council. This fails also; and at last that is done
which should have been done at the beginning—an officer is appointed,
“under the authority of the Board of Trade, to superintend and be
responsible for the business of the schools.”
In our democratic tendencies we are jealous of one responsible director;
and, on the other hand, with our aristocratic tastes and habits, we
devolve upon men of rank and wealth, solely on account of their rank and
wealth, duties which they are not qualified to perform (and, we think,
the greater honour would consist in their declining such positions), and
which, if in other respects qualified to perform, they will not, simply
because it is not their distinct personal business, and of a paid
responsibility. And thus it is that the really qualified persons,
eminent for their knowledge in art, science, and habits of business, are
ever excluded. Can we be surprised if there be perpetual failures?
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