New-York tribune., 1886-01-08
FREE IMPORTATION OF WORKS OF ART
A PETITION FROM AMERICAN ARTISTS ABROAD
DESIRING NO FAYORS.

DESIRING NO FAVORS
WASHINGTON Jan. 7 (SpecidD Mr. Evarts
presented the Senate to-day petition of number OF
American artists living which states reasons why
they favor repeal Of the 80 per cent duty works OF
art By foreign artists imported In the United States IL
is dated at Rome and Is signed by such men as W. W.
Story Dwight Benson, Elihu Yedder, Charles q Cole
man, r. 8. Greenough. william s. Haseltine, Randolph
Rogers W. A. Shade Waldo Story and Eugene Bensoh'
Tho petition says IN part:
this duty be levied for the purpose OF revenue We
submit that 1t Is not required by country nor Justified
by any necessity If 1t be levied for the purpose OF pro-
tertion of American artists submit that they are op
posed TO such protection. They neither need 1t
nor desire It; on the contrary they consider
,t IN be Mt variance with their
personal interests we'll with the general interests
OF American art and be injurious to the public at
home as it is irritating offensive to artists and gov
ernmens abroad The published statistics plainly prove
that since the enactment Of this duty the sales OF WORKS
Of art by American well foreign artists have ser-
ously declined. This dlminuton, though induced by
other and various s VIC submit In considerable
measure to he attributed to the almost pro-
hibitory duty OF 30 per cent which
by abating in our country the general interest in art,
and turning It's expenditures into other channels, has
seriously affected. not only foreign artists, but also
American artists and the American public. The appll-
cation the principle Of protection to products OF art
is. in opinion, serious mistake not
absurdity. Ihe protection OF American MAD
ufactures may enable finally to produce at
home works Of an equal Of superior
merit executed by foreign nations, and so similar
AS scarcely be distinguished from IT but no amount
OF protection will enable American artist to produce
works similar those OF any foreign artist or undstin
tinguishabe from them. Manufactures are one thing
Art is another The character and value OF work OF
art depends upon the individual genius aud ability
OF the artist himself and this neither be transferred
to another nor can he be deprived OF II by
any law or any prohibition. BY weighing with heavy
works OF the great masters OF the past such
ms Titan TntOretto by virtually prohibiting the
works Of noiern masters such rs FOrtuny or Mlllet,
Meissoper IDENTITIES max. step toward creating
In our country Titians TintOrettOs FOrtunys
Mets Melsseniers On the contrary, by preventing
the free Introduction OF the works deprive
our artists at home OF opportunities or study.
comparison and training NO force them 10 90 abroad
for their education, and under the preeDce o hrping
them we burden them with difficulties and not only the
artist TIM, Injured but the public also suffers ana art
Is thus handicapped,
Tue discrimination favor OF American artists by
of foreign artists is not ouy injurious to
American art but peculiarly impoiic and
imp oper. While foreign couptrlrs open freely to us
their galleries and schools giving equal opportunities
with their own artists for study aud exhibition
more admit "a footing Of equality To contend Tor
their prizes ami h0nOrs II uo Ony wanting In common
courtesy and comfy To exclude them from elna rights
in country but such course directly tends 10
induce foreign governments to retalac, ana exclude
American artists from the privilege now so generously
accorded TO Them -
hdcnt future and jealous NJ Its honor ami credit.
uppOsed To oil special privileges aud determinations
In behalf We ask protection, deemlns II worse
than useless Artis universal republic. OF which all
are citizens Whatever be their country or cline
All thatve ask IL there should be free Held and no
favor. and tho prize adludgcd TO the Dcst.