Arizona republican., 1904-02-29

we used to see twenty five years ago.
 But the present exhibition signifes-so
 all the art writers seem to be agreed
 that this modern painter, whose views and ways excited so much discussion
 during his life time, has come to be
 accepted as one of the greatest of our
 time. and, possibly as one of the great
 est of all time. Nobody knows, of course, just what the final verdict of
 posterity on MT. Whistler will be but
 there is no doubt that his famehds
 grown steadily ever since his death
 and that there are no signs of his be- ing forgotten even though the news papers have almost stopped printing anecdotes about him. The conviction in fact seems settling down that what ever his peculiarities of manner this artist was not only very interesting as a technician, but that he had a singu- larly fine philosophy of art and life; | that all the leading schools of the past are to an extent summed up in him, | that he is no% like the Creeks now like the great Japanese, while he has
 at all times the power of the modern realists when he chooses to exert 1t.
 It was probably the wide spread re cognition of the mans greatness which has led to such a cordial coop eration on the part of various promi- nent people with the Copley socIety. The honorary committee which had not
 like so many committees of this sort. been composed of notables who merely | allowed their names to be used for the | sake of a good cause but of people who actively assisted in the work of secur- | ing contributions consists of the fol- | lowing members: Governor Bates of
 Massachusetts; Mayor Collins of Bos- 1 ton; Sir Henry Mortimer Durand, ann
 bassador of Great Britain; M. J. ]. 1 JusSerand, ambassador of the French republic; Hon. John Hay, secretary of state: Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge; MT.
 John Colwell, Carnegie Institute, Pitts 1 burg; MT. Edward H. Coates, president of the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine
 Arts; MT. Halsey c. Ives. chief of the department of Art, St. Louis Exposi- | tion; MT. F. w. Rhinelander president
 of the Metropolitan Museum of Art;
 Mir. Samuel Dennis Warren, president i of the Museum of Fine Arts; MT. Ed
 win A. Abbey, London; MT. R. F ] Angus, Montreal; MT. Samuel P. Avery
 New York: MT, Francis Bartlett, Bos-
 ton; Miss Rosalind Birnie- Philip. Lon
 don; MT. Arthur J. Eddy, Chicago;
 Hon. George A. Drummond, Montreal;
 Mir. Charles l.. Freer, Detroit; Mrs John
 Lowell Gardner, Boston; Mir Waltere 1 Gay, Paris; MT. Henry. O. Havemeyer,
 New York: MT. Charles l.. Hutchinson Chicago; Mir. Jobn G. Johnson, New York; Mr. Bryan Lathrop, Chicago;
 MT. Howard Mansfield. New York; Mir. | Harrison s. Morris, Philadelphia;
 Professor Charles Eliot Norton, Cam
 bridge: MT. Joseph Pennell, London;
 MT. Alfred A. Pope, Pennington; MT.
 Edward Robinson, Boston; MT. Den
 man w. Ross, Cambridge; MT. James
 Ross, Montreal: MT. Augustus Saint
 Gaudens, Windsor; MT. John s. Sar- gent, London MT. Joshua Montgomery Sars, Boston; MT. Arthur Studd, Lon- don: MT. George w. Vanderbilt, New
 York; MT. Henry Walters, Baltimore;
 Mrs Henry Whitman. Boston; and Mir.
 Harris Whittemore. Naugatuck.
 No account of this remarkable exni- bition would be complete without some
 mention of the origin of the Copley society As an example of what a club
 originally composed of art students
 may grow into and of the influenceit
 may acquire in an American city the organization is ceretainly impressive.
 The Copley society has outgrown its
 student days. The original members,
 many of them now famous artists, are
 scattered throughout all the art cen- ters and the society itself is becoming an institution of national reputation. It originated back in the seventies, as