The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1903-03-22
PRIZES FOR ART
ARE HELD BACK
Row in Institute Over the State
Awards.
COURTS NAY BE CALLED ON
SCHEME OF FAvoRITIsM IS
HINTED AT BY SOME.
COURTS NAY BE CALLED ON

The awarding committee of the Utah
Art Institute has refused TO award the
$500 prize for oh paintings and the $50
prize for water color pictures. AS a
result all IS not as peaceful and har-
m0nious so the ranks Of the institute
as might be indicated by the quiet
pastoral scenes that adorn the walls
at the exhibit A storm cloud has APP
peared on the art horizon, and the indi-
cations are that there viii be some
cyclonic phenomena.
Troubles? They are many and varied,
according 20 the tales of woe told by
various members of the institute. Who
did it2 The awarding committee is re-
spOnsible. according to the statements
OF some. Others say the exhibition
committee is 20 blame. The awarding
committee admits refusing 20 award
the prizes. and explains its action by
stating that they believe the state is
entitled 90 value received when awards
are made thus lntlmating that none Of
the pictures in the disputed exhibits
was worth the amount of the prize Of
fered. III It's asserted. however. and
members of the committee do not deny
&c. that this course was the result of
the exhibition committees admitting
certain pictures 90 the competition and
barring others considered by the
awarding committee 90 be more
worthy. Owners of pictures barred say
there was "a cut and dried scheme TO
let the big prizes so Co other artists
and they were shut out. This. they as
sert was the reason for the awarding
committees refusal TO give the $500 and
$50 prizes go any one AS a result Of
the action of this committee the at
torney general has been appealed 90 for
an opinion as To- whether. under the
law. the committee Is not required 20
award these prizes. Attorney General
Breeder has handed down am opinion
that the prize must be awarded. Never
theless. the committee is standing by
its original report, and the matter Hlay
yet have 10 be settled iu the courts.
Members of the awarding committee
and the exhibition committee were not
Inclined 60 talk about the trouble when
seen yesterday. but they admitted the
existence of conditions such as have
been indicated.
Adams Picture Causes Trouble.
The affair is traced back 20 a paint
ing placed on exhibition by Willis A.
Adams. This picture. according 10 the
statement of Dir. Adams was sent in
with a card stating that 10 was 10
Doe entered for the $500 prize. When
the awarding committee commenced to
make awards they found that the pic
ture had not been entered for the con-
test They also found that a picture
by John Hafen had not been entered
for the $50 water color prize. An In
vestigatiOn was commenced by the
awarding committee 20 see why these
pictures had not been entered, espe-
cially as Mr.. Adams picture had been
pronounced By artists to be one Of the
finest In the exhibit
tThe members of the exhibition COM
mittee" said George NJ. Ottinger,
chairman of the awarding committee,
Informed me that both Mr. Adams and
Mr.. Hafen En- sending their pictures TO
the committee had placed the cards.
indicating that they were 20 be en-
tered for prizes. on the backs of the
pictures. and they had not been seen
by the committee. AS a consequence,
they were not entered In the con-
test"
Mr.. Adams told a different story Of
why his picture was not entered for
the contest. He iutimates that there
was a scheme somewhere 10 let him
out of the contest
II sent my picture with a card in
dicating that 90 was TO be entered for
the $500 prize and ] placed a $500 value
on the picture. After seeing other pie
lures much larger than mine marked
for $500. and suppOsing that the prize
was awarded for merit and not ac-
cording 90 the price of the picture,
told Mr. Evans, chairman Of the eX-
rHrHH ID
ture al $50. Well. my picture WASH
entered for the prize I was told that
the committee had not seen the en-
trance card on IT, But Mr. Fairbanks
OF the committee told me that he read
the card 20 The committee. Mr.. Evans
and Mr. Fairbanks having pictures en-
tered for the prize of course had no
vote on the exhibition committee. This
left Mrs. Alice Merrill Horne and Miss
Mary Teasdel with the only votes. I
8m told that when i changed the price
ON my picture the committee thought
D did not want 90 enter for the prize
Mrs. Horne told me afterwards that
she did not know i wanted TO cOu-
test for the prize at an but added that
oven had tho committee known 10. The
picture would not have been passed by
them. because they did not consider 9!
ub t0 standard that would entitIC
30 to compete for the state prize.
am told that the awarding COM
mittee refused t0 award the $500 and
$50 prizes. claiming that III my picture
was not admitted because 90 was not
worth $500 that the prizes should not
De awarded TO amy pictures not con-
sidered by the committee 20 be worth
the amount of the prize"
Says There Is Squabble.
When Chairman Otuneer OF the
awarding committee was asked about