New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-05-13
FIGHT OVER ART SCHOOL
fiction of 4cademy Defended by Mr..
Cor-Minority Criticism.

The publication in yesterdays Tribune OF the
bitter opposition among members Of the National
Academy OF Design to the plan of President But
Ter OF Columbia University to transfer the schools
n the academy to the university and form a.
school OF fine arts, indicated by J. Carroll Beck
with OF the National Academy and e-president of
the Municipal Art Commission. made sensation
in art circles AS already published. the carrying
oft Of this plan, which adopted by a vote OF
q 10 at a general meeting of the academy on
Wednesday. is contingent the raising of 10000
BIZ the academy with the aid of the university for
he school buildings, the university furnish the
ste
Replying to some Of Mr.. Beckwith's statements
Kenyon Cox. member Of the council, said yester-
Ssy to Tribune reporter that, while official
announcement had been sent out that the plan
would be brought up at Wednesdays meeting. it
had been talked OF for weeks and was generally
known Mr.. Cox declared he had not heard any
nous arguments against the plan, except those OF
Professor Weir, which were based misappre-
tension The whole question whether it was
worth while for the academy to give up a part of
is government for the creation Of better equipped
art school than it now had He said, in part:
don't think the objections Of certain members
70 the scheme are based on any defects in the de-
thst the opposition exists and the final question is
whether majority should yield to a minority.
The academy has authorized the council TO per
feet and execute the agreement. 1t has not di-
rected the council to do so. There is nothing in
the action Of the academy to oblge 1t TO carry the
agreement however, takes enect ou!y on
the raising and turning over TO Columbia OF the
$50 900 necessary for the building. That must be
Go and unless the money is raised there is
binding force whatever in the arrangement -.
As 10 the document having been drawn up by
ne aiIo It the details of the agreement were
hahd a6b 81 With care by counsel for the
academy to make them as favorable as possible
gos0n is 9ot to 2Ry Weir Pa abes5ed ha t %
- three professors appointed by the academy could
he outvoted by six seven professors Of the uni
f5s5 ihat the academy shall make the nominal
tons in connection with the president on Columpls7
OF professors OF painting, sculpture ana the deco
5ofeover. there IS no reason why professors Of
painting sculpture and the decorative arts should
Sc limited 10 one for each branch
ccIIT,his's property would not be in perpetuity,
mat The building would be called the National
sde f6r G Exhibitions ie As matter Of fact We
considered the termination of the agreement at the
end Of twenty-five years as ADVANTAGEOUS TO the
academy. We declined TO have the building called
We did not wish to consider provisions fo- exhibit
tons. That is We wished to keep the aca 7 as
University.
M Cox's statement read to Mr.. Beckwith.
He made the following comment:
10 preliminary notice was sent to the members
advising them that the subject w2g d be brought ought
with the minority, stated before the meeting that
aeademy ! succeeded with great dificulty in OBJ
tanning copy OF the agreeInent, These copies
academy school Will not be benefited by the uni
versity system. and I opposed TO the conditions
OF the agreement. which I consider most disadvan-
tsgeOus TO the academy.
J. @. Brown. who has been a National Academi
clan forty-two years, a former ce-president Of
the Academy. and who voted with the minority.
declared he Endorsed all of Mr. Beckwith's state
rnents published in yesterdays Tribune. He said
he disguised with the whole plan, and that
such a proposition should not have been brought
before the general body Of academcians for ac-
tion without preliminary notice Mr.. Brown said
he did not a copy OF the agreement in time
TO consider It and declared that at was raroaded
through" 1T would be fine business for Co
lumbia," said Mr.. Brown but what do We get
after twenty-five years.?
S. J. Guy, a National Academician for forty
years. also Endorsed Mr.. Beckw1th's statements,
and said:
Why should we put up building Columbia s
ground when we have ground Of our own, where
We would have no rent to pay and which we would
not have 10 give up at the end Of twenty-five years
think the schools Of the academy would be better
of under the control Of the academy and that the
scheme is more favorable to Columbia than the
academy 1t is contended, believe. that Columbia
is associated with many wealthy men who would
assist If this plan were carried out The question
Is whether they would not do the for US If
our site were further downtown.