New-York tribune., 1912-05-27
RICHARD BELT ALIVE
Ex-Convict Objects to Being De.
scribed as Dead.

| copyright. 1912, by the Brentwood Company
The recent announcement In the London
papers that Richard Belt sculptor and ex.
convict, is still alive, will come as a sur.
prise to many who remember the famous
Belt-Lawes trial, which took place in ia
and which was the occasion Of one OF the
most extraordinary scenes, in the way Of
evidence, that ever was witnessed in q
British court Of Justice.
The information that Mr.. Belt Is not
dead, but, on the contrary, Is leading q
particularly active life In London" is con.
| tributed In his behalf by one OF his
friends. presumably. the reason therefor
being that in an obituary notice Of Sir
| Charles s-Wittewronge reference
was made to the latters lawsuit against
"the late Mr.. Belt"
The lawsuit referred 70 made tremen-
dous sensation, not only In London, but
in artistic circles all over the world. Sir
| Charles Lawes- -Wittewronge pronounced
Wit-rong) was then known simply as Mr.
Charles Lawes, not having succeeded to
his fathers bsronetcy and estates, as we'll
as the additional property which caused
|
will Of the relative granting the bequest.
to assume the name of Wittewronge in ad-
dition to his own. which he did by royal
license in 1902.
| Charles Lawes was an eminent sculptor
and won fame as such In England and IN
France He was also the foremost athlete
Of his day, first az Eton. and afterward at
| Cambridge where he rowed stroke in
| two successive years in the tnter-univer-
sitv race On leaving college he adopted
the artistic profession, becoming in course
of time the president Of the Incorporated
Society OF British Sculptors Among his
most notable works was that exhibited at
| the Franco British exhibition In London
| three years ago, when his superb marble
group. The Death Of Dirce." was the
| feature Of the Fine Arts Palace and was
described as one Of the greatest trtumphs
! oF British plastic srt. II Is, indeed,
subject that lends itself 10 the most spir-
tied treatment anl calls forth In the high
est degree the talent. or the genius. Of the
sculptor Dirce, I need hardly remind my
readers was. according to the Greek
legend. tied 10 the horns Of a wild bull,
which dragged her about TIL she died
|
| century Charles Lawes had In his studio
a pupil named Richard Belt who, II would
seem, was a very pushing and ambitious
| young man, for he left his instructor and
set IN for himself accepting and execut-
ing-or obtaining the execution of-orders
for busts OF prominent persons, memorial
statues. etc. Now, Charles Lawes had
opinions OF his own regarding the abilities
OF his late pupil. and did not hesitate 70
express them. A paragraph appeared IN
the London paper. Vanity Fair intimat-
ing that Richard Belt was not actually the
author Of the statue OF Dean Stanley OF
| the Byron monument, nor OF the busts OK
Charles Kingsley and Canon Conway; that
he had merely employed others to execute
these works Cor him.
! Belt took no notice OF this paragraph
But when Charles Lawes wrote to the LORD
Mayor OF London, avowns himself the su-
thor OF the paragraph in VANITY Far
and warning the Mayor against employing
Belt in certain art work then in contem-
plation, the friends of Belt insisted on MS
commencing a libel suit against Lawes
This he did and II came on for trial IN
1855, lasting forty-flve days, and engaging
the services OF the most eminent lawyers
Belts preliminary expenses were betrayed
| bv subscriptions furnished by his friends
and admirers, mostly people Of the so-called
aesthetic" cult, who were very active just
about that time and who are so emusfnglJ
satlrized by Gilbert and Sullivan in their
popular operetta, Patience; or Bunthornes
Bride"
1t was during the course Of this trial that
the curious scene I have referred 10 took
place Belt. I'm order to support his asser-
ton that he was sculptor, and not mere
employer Of sculptors undertook then and
| there to execute bust under the very
eyes OF the Jury. His challenge was sc-
cepted; table, clay, water. etc. were
brought in, and judge, counsel and jury
watched the shapeless mass gradually as
sumo, under the busy fingers of Belt, re-
semblancs TO human head and shoulders.
Belt certainly had produced bust. But it
was a matter Of opinion whether this was
work of art. Lord Leighton. then the
president of the Royal Academy, himself
an eminent sculptor; Sir John Millais, the
famous painter, and the well known sculp-
tor Thornycroft, all three declared this
handiwork of Belt to be utterly devoid OF
any artistic merit and manifestly fash
loned by different hands to those which had
produced the Byron memorial etc
| However. the jury, which was composed OF
petty Hendon tradesmen, absolutely devoid
OF any knowledge OF or taste for art, and
who would probably have been unable to
pass on the rival merits of tobacconists
sign and a masterpiece of Praxiteles, had
been deeply impressed as they watched
! Belt model something that they could see
for themselves looked exactly like human
| head and gave a verdict In his favor for
S25. 900 damages
Many well informed people derided the
result OF this trial as proving the utter in
competence of a British jury TO come 10 a
| sensible decision on matter or at.
Charles Lawes appealed TO a higher cour:,
but as there was not sufficient proof OK
any failure of justice I'm the court below
the decision was affirmed. Convinced with
In his own mind, however, that he had right
on his side, Charles Lawes refused to pay
a penny OF the $4,000 damages or of Belts
costs, for which he was liable as the losirs
party to the suit. Therefore. on the ao-
vice of his lawyer Sir George Lewis. he
resorted 10 the bankruptcy court. and. ha'-
| ing no fortune Of his own, easily obtained
discharge Of all his debts including tbs
SIS 900 damages and costs owing 10 Rc1.
ard Belt A few months later Belt was
arrested and tried at Old Bailey, in Lon
| don. on the charge Of defrauding the lste
| Sir William Abby Of some $4,000. he
was convicted and sentenced 10 long term
of penal seryitude,
=, ha Charles