The Express.
London, England, 1856-04-09 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9.

NOBODY who understands or eares about the mat-
ter will maintain that eighteen tboamod a year is an
exorbitant sum to be spent by so wealthy a nation as
Oust Britain opera the formation of a National Gal-
lery. Nohrdy maintain that about three thou-
sand a year rear exorbitant remuneration for throe
eenarnent Lffieinla—give them what titles yos pleaos
—to take charne of so important an institution. Few
wcarld seen rut* such rAcials additional pickings
(is moderatior), in the shape of occasional bills for.
travelling •xper Oita. &c. These are not the
issues that were intended to be raised by Mr.
°TWAT'S notion, on Monday, in Committee of
Supply, to reduce the vote for the National
Gallery by 6301. The object of the boo. Member, as
we underrtvcd him, was to call the attention of the
House of Commons to the manner in which the
money voted by the House of Commons for the for-
mation of a National Gallery is expended. To spend
money in accutnula•ing a .iollection of bad or indif-
hront pictutes is worse than to refuse any grants
for the promotion of a taste for art among the people.
It is throwiog away the mosey extorted from a not
very ligtuly tax. d people upon what is worth
nothing; it it making the nation a laughingstock
in the eyes of tho world—holding it forth in a chi-
ncter analo,totia to that of some vulgar and tasteless
parreou who, because he hears others praised for
t! air taste, throws away money in the purchase of
works of art which he neither understands nor cares
for, and makes a fool of himself by ostentatiously
parading an a•sortment of worthless rubbish.

This is exactly the predicament into which the
House of Commons is allowing the country to drift,
by voting greets of money, year after year, towards
the formation of a National Gallery, without taking
the trouble to inquire whether the acquisitions made
for the collection deserve to have a place in it. Not
one of the speakers on Monday evening ventured to
my a word in favour of the egregious "Paul Vero-
nese " that has recently been added to the Gallery.
Not one of them attempted to defend the spa
rions "If olbein " of an older date, for the pur-
chase of which the country is indebted to
the same director who has palmed off the
so-called "Paul Veronese" upon them. It is
not enough to tell us that Sir C. EASTLUER is an
agreeable, gentlemanly, accomplished man : the
question is whether he is a person whose judgment
can be relied upon in the eollectioo and preservation
of paintings ? In like manner, it is not enough to tell
ne that Mr. MUNDLIE is "a man of high reputation
among the artistes of Paris :" the question is, whether
his services to the National Gallery are worth the
money that has been paid for them P With regard to
Sir CHARLES, there is absolutely nothing in the insi-
filiation that "any artist of eminence would be liable
to similar attacks from disappinted men." The con-
viction that he is unfit for the ofiloe he fills rests upon
his own evidence, not upon the testimony of
others. His snggeatioo, when examined before a
Committee on the proposed decorations of the New
Honors of Parliament, that the death of WAT TTLLE
would be an appropriate subject for the walls of
the House of Lords, because the doublets and hoes
of the period afforded floe opportunities for striking
contrasts of colour, betrayed an utter want of that
impassioned imeginatioo, and that seam of fitness,
which are indispensable in the true artist. His evi-
dence before the cleaning committee betrayed an in-
capacity to appreciate the merits of the works of
other artists. The contradictory opinions he has at
different times expressed of the spurious HOLDEN
show that he is incapable of forming a sound and
abiding judgment on the chanteuse of a picture. The
antecedents on Sir CHARLES EASTLAKE—his an-
consei.sa revelations of his own deficiencies--ought

to have prepared everybody for the blander
he has committed is recommending the pur-
chase of the " Paul Venom." As for Mr.
Motrotaa, the "Correggio" which he attempted to
sell, and the "Paul Veronese" which he has actually
p■rchaeed, prove that as a judge of paintings he is
utterly untrustworthy. But the idea of appointing
travelling agent for the Gallery is In itself aboard
and iedirlsoatb!e. " Mr. MUNDLZI,* it was said os
11enday evening, " was better qualißsd for that adios
lee sneerer, because as a foreigner hie prima
@eyeing skied would excite less cariosity sad
mllemtaw des if he were an English artist of rem
Ineems Dag the gentleman who uttered these
lessis lame, in his pimp laity, that there is no
imisesimmunication among the great picton-dealing
kneimest of Europe ? Does he believe that the appoint-
's/sof a gentleman to be travelling agent for the Na-
da& Gallery of England can rentals • secret to any
on picture-dealer, high or low, honest or dishonest P
The mere appearance of Mr. Moutimm, or of Mr.
Anybody holding the same post, would be enough to
produce • feverish excitement in any town or city
where there was a picture to dispose of, and to raise
it. pries • hundred per cent. The travelling agent
moat necessarily become the despotic eriikr degas-
liana's of England in such matters, and all his
movements telegraphic intimations that English
money is about to he thrown away upon pictures.
The official appointments are not the only qua-
tionable part of the management of our National
Gallery. A rare felicity of blundering appears to be I
displayed in everything connected with it. For ex-
ample, the principle upon which the eslectios of plo-
tting is made is a most qtrestiociable one. The
Gallery la only in its infancy : the collection is
• small one; and additions can only be slowly
made to it. This being the oars, the Int
care of the director and trustees ought to be to pad►
care works of a high and striking character in thaw
salves. In a complete collectioa it ie tisimlle tin*
specimens of every school—prodnutims dreary ern—.
should find a place. But it will ke Dwaine@ forty
purchase of complementary mediocrities. mil* ens
only valuable as eoutributiom to the hinny at ens
after a oolkction of really meritorious weeks bas bus
nada. 'Magmata part of the moist acqvisidem,llser
no value, except seemliness date
. certain ages sod mis Mies. Tlie
art, bot to simslelh • prig* spill
research—a prelimsos of the fOIO fai
really artistically valuable. AMY,
the mistaken spirit mike p►
formation and mantreagga
he found is the insidious alb.*
made to remove it from its pungell
goisite in such a collection is UM
accessible to all. We need not dwell
recommendations of a central pad-
classes. But a National Gallery
the use of the less wealthy of the
highly educated who agrast
indulgense of private Mellsms. Is Gs

harry and turmoil of business the most intellsetwal
and the most highly educated are too apt to become
valorised in their thoughts and esetiments. It is
WI a counter-agent to this teadeaey that the cold-
!ration of a taste foe art is most especially valuable.
With reference to this troth, Goering has made
one of the characters in his "Wilhelm Meister" assert
that it is expedient for us all " to hear a song every
day, or read a poem, or look at a fine picture, ea&
if possible, to speak a few words of common nage."
Now, the man who has no pic•ures of his own awl
when a National Gsllery is in a central position,
frequently steal a quarter of an hour to refresh him-
self with the examination of one or other of the
masterpieces it contains. If the situation of the
Gallery is remote, he can only visit it at rare inter-
vals, and take hurried surveys of the whole. Its I
remoteness reduces its utility for him to a minimum.
In palliation of the intrigue in progress for
transporting the National Gallery to the " far
West," it is alleged that is the present building
the pictures stiffer from the smoke of the Qty.
Do the treeP, shrub., and flowers in the
adjacent ornamental enclosure of St. James's•perk
suffer from this smoke ? Are living plants less sen-
sitive than dead canvas? Hu the Duke of NORTH..
emexau•D found it necessary to remove his pie-
tures to the pure country air of Sion I' The pretext
is utterly untenable. We have the most perfect faith
in the integrity and good intentioes of the gentle-1
men to whom the charge of the Gallery has been 4.-
legated ; but their whole policy suggests painful sur-
mises that their innocent ignorance has betrayed
them into the hands of quacks and jobbers—of
critics who, without any real feeling for art, can
descant upon plamible theories, and architects (in the
present state of architecture in England perhaps
" builders" or " contractors" would be the more appro.
priate word in search of jobs.

ever, have little Olin
condition of art in I
is not to promos ar
of antiquarian resell
curious to tLe reall
illustration of the
sides over the 1
the Gallery is to b
that are being ma
site. One great r. ,
1 it should be accirem
upon the superior r
tion for the poorer
is also intemded for
'middle, or more hiu
afford the indulge!'