New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-08-08
art Of a wel-known man will buy 1t. even If 20

art OF wel-known man will buy It. even II 20
per cent be added to its price.
10 resume all that have sald we few Amer
lean artists living abroad Will not suffer pc
cuniarily, but we shall be grieved to see Ameri-
can art students hindered by their own govern
ment. while studying in free schools under
professors whose careful training OF their pupils
has enabled Americans In the last twenty years
to show that our people are capable Of high art
development. and has made American art an
important element In all the best exhibitions of
the world.
II the object Is to augment the revenue. why
only tax paintings and sculpture? tax might
as well be put on every architects plan, every
musical or literary work composed abroad. even
to lectures and kilograms of foreign newspaper
correspondents Very truly yours,
RIDGWAY KNIGHT.
FROM PAUL wAYLAND BARTLETT.
No As Rue du Docteur Blanche.
Passy, Paris July 81. 1897.
Dear Sir If the object of the new tariff on
works or american artists living abroad Is to
protect and foster our National art, it seems to
me that 1t could be done more effectually by
enacting laws which would tend to heighten the
standard OF demand and production in our coun-
try, instead OF taxing precisely the students and
artists who are laboring to produce. and who
are producing. good works and whose years
abroad have for their primary object the desire
to elevate their standard Of understanding and
production.
In sculpture law regulating government
competition and preventing statues Of monuu-
mental form being put in the hands of persons
who, If perchance honest, neither prepared
by their education or natural capacities to have
a sane judgment In art matters. would have
more beneficial effect on our monumental art
than any protective tariff could possibly have
Again, national commission, composed of
learned. responsible men, whose talents and
life work have given undoubted knowledge and
understanding, and who would have power to
control and advise the representatives Of the
Government in the expanding Of moneys on
works of art of all kinds. would have the great
est value In the development OF good taste In
the public art of the United States. Perhaps
even. such a commission might he well able to
advise members OK Congress when and where
and how to tax works of art. If such tax was
necessary for revenue They might have been
told this time that it was an absurdity to tax
for the good of art those who are working with
the best will toward It's progress in America and
who are, after all. the embryo of its future.
II such regulations competitions existed
and such commission in power we would
not n committee of ignorant and country
generals finally judge the models for a S1OOOD
monument. and the Sherman disgrace and
others would not exist Neither would we see
the portrait of Lincoln pronounced to be au-
thentically painted from nature. proposed to
the Senate for $4,000 or $4,000 chance alone
bringing to light that it was painted in Berlin
from a photograph by a person who had never
seen Lincoln. and was as a matter of fact only
painted few months before It's presentation
Very truly yours, PAUL W. BARTLETT.
FROM CHARLES SPRAGUE PEARCE.
Auvers-sur-O ise July 90. 1897.
Dear Sir: In reply to your request for my
opinion Of the proposed tariff CT American works
OF arr. / must say that fear its worst effects
will be felt in America. as il will prevent many
students coming al, cad. and thus deprive them
of the advantages Of study In the great European
schools and galleries.
do not think that the artists residing here
will feel 1t unfavorably after the first state OF
uncertainty has passed
The French artists never sold more pictures
than when a duty was imposed on their works.
The worst side of the tariff question is in the
being the fourth tariff in thirteen years Very
truly yours. CHARLES SPRAGUE PEARCE.
FROM WALTER MEwEN.
II Place Pigalle Paris, July %, 1897.
Dear Sir: In reply to your inquiry can say
very little in regard to the new tarif on WORKS
Of art until know exactly what II is to be ana
how 1t is to be applied.
IF n dUty has been put on the works Of Ameri-
can artists residing abroad (which seems TO be
generally UNDERSTOOD, | think it a serious mis-
take Although of little interest to me person
ally it will make II almost impossible for an art
student, living over here. to add TO MS income
by the occasional sale OF picture or statue, or
by making illustrations for American publishers.
as many Of them do under the existing tarlit.
This If not absolutely wrong. would surely De
very unfortunate Very truly yours; ,,.rwrN
The above letters frank expressions OF the
feeling prevailing among American artists living
IN Paris. They are unanimously opposed to any
dutv on pictures and statuary They believe
such a duty to be detrimental to the true inter-
ests of their country judged from an arusuc
and educational point Of view. They also 1eei
convinced that the new duty Will hano'cap
American students now pursuing their stuoies
abroad and will in some cases prevent theih
from profting by the advantages gratu'ousV
offered them by the governments or FRANCE "er-
MANY. Italy, Holland, Belgium and Spain
.rur[C DEW