The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1897-04-06
WHISTLER'S CAUSTlC WIT
FAMOUS ENGLISH ARTIST CON-
VULSES n LONDON COURT.

1t Was at the Trial of Critic of the Satur-
day Review Who Had Impugned the
Honesty of Artist Pennell's works-Mr.
Whistler Modestly Alludes to Himself
and Others AS Illustrious Persons.
London, April 5.-The Queens bench
division of the high court of justice to-
day heard an action for libel brought
by the artist, Joseph Pennell, against
the Saturday Review and Walter Sick
ert, writer on that paper, for the pub
lication of an article commenting upon
Mr.. Pennell's s. exhibition of etchings il~
Illustrating Washington Irving's "Vala-
bro" The ground Of the suit was the
statement in the Reviews article,
| which was written by Siclzert, that
Pennell had sought to palm off as litho-
| graphs of his own works mere trans
fers of the works of others.
| Among the witnesses who testified in
| behalf of Pennell were J. McNeill
| Whistler, Alfred Gilbert and Sydney
| Colvin. The case raised the question,
| what is a lithograph? In his answer
| to this question, Mr.. Whistler said
| that to an artist there was no distinc-
| ton between work on stone, zinc or
paper so long as the result was his
own work.
| The article in the Saturday Review
which was the cause of Mr.. Pennell,a
action against that publication, alleged
that Mr.. Whistler pursued the sanna
course as that which Mr.. Pennell took
in the manner of doing his work, and
the witness was asked his opinion of
the papers references to himself. Mr.
Whistler replied:
| Il am not angry over it. but merely
vexed that distinguished people like
ourselves should be brought here bysa
gentleman who Is absolutely unknown
to u.s." Mr.. Whistler added that he
was not surprised to hear that the
royal academy had rejected the trans-
fer Autographs, but he was not au falt
with the limitations of the royal acad-
emy. Iaughter) The case was still
on when court adjourned.
While giving his testimony Mr..
Whistler kept the court in very merry
|
acteristic manner than by his actual
language. At the beginning Of his evil
dence he essayed to address to tho
jury dissertation upon art and an In
cidental explanation Of the real issue
involved In the case
The judge, amid laughter, interpcsed.
tsaying that he could not allow the wit
ness to make a speech. The drily sar-
til, NJ ix4l.
ferred to the Royal academy convulsed
the court. When, with a shrug Of hts
shoulders he decided he was not ifr
| the smallest degree angry with Mr..
Sickert, but was only vexed that dis
| tinguished persons, including himself,
had been brought to court by gentle-
man who was absolutely unknown. the
! laughter of the court officers and the
audience generally was uncontrolled.
In the course Of his testimony Mr..
| Whistler declared that Mr.. Sickert'a
article had done much harm. 1t had
been quoted in New York and had in-
duced papers there to attack Mr.. Pen-
nell's lithograph exhibition.
When questioned as to whether he
objected to Mr.. Sickert's writing
whistler Is a genius" the witness re-
Piled:
1T all depends upon who says It,"
He was also asked whether he dis
sented from the remark "Whistler's all
most nothings are priceless" To this
he replied with mixture of calm ego-
tism and cutting irony:
"It is very simple and very proper
that Sickert should say such things
but I do not attach any Importance tQs
them"
Referring to other extracts that were
read from the article Mr.. Whistler
dubbed the series as frivolous imper-
tinences" covering b certain obsequioua
reproach.
Mr. Bingham, counsel for Mr.. Sicln.
ert, tried to elicit an admission from
the witness that he was pecuniarilY
backing Mr.. Pennell
Ex-Soricitor General Sir Edward
Clarke, counsel for Mr. Pennell, also
asked the witness IL there was any,
thing in the suggestion that he was
sharing in Mr.. Pennelrs expenses.
Mr.. Whistler replied: "Oh, nothing,
except the delicacy of the question it,
self"
Everybody, including Justice Sin
James Mathew, before whom the case
was heard, hugely enjoyed the manner
in which this reply was delivered.
Before quitting the stand Mr.. Whist
Ter asked Judge Mathew to give him
permission to explain to the jury why
they were there. This the judge de-
clined to do, declaring that all the
1urymen were there because they could
not help 1t.
|