Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1884-06-28
THE ART RETALIATION AGAINST AMER.
ICA IN FRANCE.

Full reports OF the friction IN the jury OF
award of the French Salon, where 1905
works of art were placed for examination,
are at hand. The jury was prevented by
strong party from considering the pictures
of American artists. Among those thus
excluded and insulted are Constant, Dan
nat (who sold his chief picture for 10000
francs before it entered the Salon, on con-
dition that it be sent to America), Harrison,
Sargent, Stewart, Boggs, Bridgman, Pick
nell, Wood, Howe, Dubois, Davis, Gay,
Donoho, Chambers, Coolidge, Dellenbaugh,
Blair, Bruce, Vail, Dana, Eaton, Poor,
Kennedy, Dodson, and A others. We sug-
gested, when speaking of the subject some
days ago, that this was probably due to our
tariff embargo upon works of art Now
comes NJ. Bouguereau, President of the
Salon, and in an interview with Herald
correspondent confirms this view. Hesays
that from the outset there was very bitter
feeling in the jury against the American
artists, and it constantly augmented in
force and ill-will. 1t was due to the report
of our levy of a tax of thirty per cent. on
works of art This was denied and affirmed
over and again. and the doubt irritated the
Jury and its electors, the members of La
Societe Libre DIES Artistes, who were very
SOLICITORS to know definitely just how the
American Government proposed TO treat
French art products. Finally motion
was made that no American artist should
receive an award under any pretext. The
President thereupon told the body fatty
that it had no right to consider such @
proposition, and that its only duty was to
look upon pictures and make awards, ire
spective of their authorship, or the ques
ton of an impost upon French art in
America. Thereupon the greatest confu-
sion arose violent remarks were INDUCED
in and general disorder prevailed. The
Jury refused to listen to reason, the motion
was not voted on, but if it had been il GER
tainly would have prevailed.
Out of the forty jurors only fifteen had
the courage to consider the claims of our
American pictures NJ Bouguercau, how
ever, apologies for the majority, saying
that France has been the great school of
art for America; American artists have
been admitted to equal privileges in France
in the art institutes, and in the Salon, and
in return for this hospitality America de-
clares she will not receive the work of
French artists, when its introduction would
really be a great and good agency for adj
vancing American art NJ Roll defended
the Americans, holding that while the 80
per cent. tax is detestable, France cannot
Justify herself in the policy of making re-
prisals. But for this feeling of retaliation,
il is admitted, an American artist would
have received the second medal. NJ. Bou-
guereau certainly made strong point when
he said 1t is for the real interests OF
American art that many of the best works
of French art should be sent to America.
1t is solely by importation that cities or in
dividuals can form those schools and mu-
| seums of painting that are an absolute ne
| cessity to America if she ever wishes TO
| cease being the artistic tributary of Europe.
The tax will not prevent one or two Ameri-
can millionaires from buying fine pictures
III France, but it will diminish the number
of fine pictures sent to America, and will
thus greatly retard the artistic education OF
the American people
But whatever may he the outcome of this
| trouble, the French Salon has set a very
bad example. 1t amounts to this: that
our young artists need no longer seek cult
ure in art circles in France, and this eX-
| clusion makes the French artists an ex-
elusive class so far as America is concerned
and the Salon no longer an impartial and
free school of awards for merit, but pro
tective institution for artists according
| to nationality. What the jury has
done in this matter will Justify ii in
retaliating for other causes, against the
artists of still other nations, and thus
the wall of exclusion will rise higher, anC
art must suffer in consequence. The bittel
feeling is not confined to art circles alone
! The advices show that it extends into the
community of Paris generally, and to {
| considerable extent affects the people in
outlying districts. So far has it gone thai
those artists and scholars who do battle fol
the Americans are assailed with tongue
lashings, and are forced TO take punish
ment for their friendship. NJ. Roll believes
the bitterness will increase each year, anC
the exclusive policy be still m ore vigor-
ousIy prosecuted each season, until the
! United States recedes and consents to 9
reciprocity arrangement as to art works
Certainly, despite the i'll policy of the boy
cotting attempted by the jury, there is force
in the argument of the Frenchmen, and
this people ought to see ii and acknowledge
its justice. But it may be 4 long time
before an American Congress will be as
semblcd that will have the courage TO take
hold of the question with an eye single tc
| justice, and actuated by high resolve &c
advance art tastes in the United States
The French reprisals will not hasten the
day when an adjustment will be had we
are a stubborn people when threatened
and not likely to yield, even for the sake of
an culture, to any kind of boycotting pro-
cess, and we may consent to see the Ameri-
can artists driven out of France rather than
yield to the anger of the Gaul
Me-. f. J. DoNNELL, who recently adj
dressed the Brooklyn Revenue Reform
Club, has no friendship for the schemes
and theories of Mr., Henry George. He
objects TO his proposed remedy" because
it is so violent in character and so out
RACES natural justice that he dares not reach
his purpose by the direct road, but adopts
the circuitous route of taxation 1t would
destroy the moral power of ownership in a
homestead, or the hope of acquiring it, as
creator and sustainer of civic manhood.
| II ,rou1d raduca tho standard of rauaS nv,