New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-10-17
English Critics on Barnard's Lincoln"


1t will surprise American readers to
learn that Lord Weardale doubts the real
ity Of popular opposition on this side OF
the Atlantic to the statue Of Lincoln, IN
tended as a gift to Westminster. To most
Englishmen. according TO "The Times OF
London, rumors of dissension in this coun-
try conveyed "the first news that any
thing of the kind was even contemplated
and as a party TO the transaction 1t might
be supposed that Lord Weardale would
know more about it than most of his COM
patriots. Nevertheless, according to his
information. the Presidents son, Mr.. Rob-
ert T. Lincoln, "is the principal, If not
the sole. instigator in America of the agi-
tation in opposition" and even in the
avowed misgivings Of the English con-
noisseur, Sir Claude Phillips, he processes
TO discover 1.-The probable influence" of the
same hand
/ Lord Weardale overrates the influence
of this single opponent, but whatever the
motive power may be it is great enough TO
have promoted a controversy in England
that rivals what we have lately witnessed
here in vehemence and intensity. Mr..
Barnard has powerful supporters there,
foo. and in the eagerness Of their par
tisanship they easily Guido the hostile
group, whose opposition has hitherto been
mild in comparison with the abuse OF
many of our own art critics
8 Npfe
is Mr.. w. Roberts, who comes up again
a. confident as ever and not at all dis
couraged by his recent unfortunate cham
pionship of the spurious Romney in the
case of Huntington UersotS Lewis and Sim
mons. Whether he is the most discreet Is
another question. There are certainly
some points in his argument that the
sculptor himself may look upon obviously.
The comparison with Robins "Balzac'
was doubtless inevitabe-none of Mr..
Barnard's champions has failed to make 1t
hut il is unfortunate that Mr.. Roberts
should refer to this great statue" IN the
same breath with the Lincoln" as show
ing that anything out of the common
order is bound to be adversely criticised
and condemned" 1t is unfortunate, not
because the condemnation of Rodln was
lust. but because it so happened that no
one criticised this particular effort of his
more scathingly and numerically than Mr..
Barnard himself, as his friends Will DOUBT
less remember. To admit that Mr. Bar
nard was wrong in his estimate of his dis
tinguished colleagues work does not in
volve the admission that he is wrong about
his own, but the same is surely true OF
ether critics, who agreed with him on that
occasion and disagree now.
Another of Mr.. Robertss arguments is
that Mr.. Barnard's model was born (as
his father and grandfather had BEEN on
a farm only fifteen miles from where Lin
coin was born" that "he posed in Lin
coins clothes" and that "in mentality, too,
he came as near as possible to being Lin
coins double" The last point is ex-
tremely interesting and deserving of in
ouirv at a time when we are in need OF
such minds. but it is not so easy to see
the relevancy of the birthplace. AT fifteen
miles distance people often differ remark
ABLY from one another in looks.
Another argument advanced by one of
Mr.. Barnards champions is that "a work
cone bv him. even at the early age of nine
teen, occupies d proud position among