The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1918-08-08
HART, THE RELENTLESS SCRUTLNlZER
OF AMERICAN PORTRAITS
Destroyed He Helped Increase the Our
Early Artists

being a right and the other a left view
As up to the last he had been no,
quite sure OF certain date, he did M,
consider his opinion complete enough
to Justify his telling anybody about n
until the last detail had been supplied
which was a day or so before publlca.
ton. One OF these portraits was sub.
sequently published as a full page
illustration in THE Sun rotogravur.
section. 1t Is the property OF Charles
Allen Mum Of this city.
The name and fame Of Gilbert
Stuart will always have attached to II
the memory of Charles Henry Hair,
The critic has been referred to In the
obituaries as the discoverer OF Stuart
He might be said to have been a pio.
neer in the appreciation OF the art Of
the American portrait painters. Art
historians OF high standing had for
years made 1t a practice to slur our
early limners. They referred to them
as coach or tavern sign painters who
incidentally had taken to canvas
There never was a more unjust attack
upon the memory Of men who. despite
the fact that they lived in an age
which was not friendly to art, were
often artists Of fine abilities. 1t was
the fashion In the days OF our ance,.
tors to attribute the works OF these
humble disciples to Lely, to Kneller,
to Raeburn and to many others OF the
English schools. Many paintings sup
posed to have come over from Ho.
land. as Is shown in an unpublished
work by Mr.. Hart on which he was
working at the time OF his death, were
from the brushes of some OF these OBJ.
scure geniuses whose names were not
known to the public Of the time.
American art of all kinds has had
tardy enough recognition, but certainly
the palm was belated as far as our
early American portrait painters were
concerned. Such men as Mr.. Samuel
p. Avery, Sr.. through whose nhu.
ence the Gibbs Charming portrait Of
Washington by Gilbert Stuart found
its way to the Metropolitan Museum
Of Art, and Mr.. Thomas b. Clarke.
who Is the owner OF n splendid Stuart
portrait of Washington, were among
those who blazed the way for the
understanding and appreciation OF the
work Of our eighteenth century mas.
ters of portraitu.e. Charles Henry
Hart, unrelenting foe Of sham, was no
perfect nor no gentle knight, but he
was the unrelenting and memorable
champion Of the rights Of Stuart, OF
West. Of Vanderlyn and the Peales.
When he drew attention to the rare
technique Of Stuart the works OF the
painter were not considered OF great
value. Stuart himself used TO refer
to his unfinished Athen9um portrait
Of General Washington as his $50 bill.
because from his likeness. painted
state to keep him from selling II, he
was accustomed to make replicas. at
, the moderate price named, when he
needed the money. In recent years
portraits by Stuart have been sold
at from $4,000 to $4,000 each.
II was only natural that man OF
MIR. Harris temperament should feel
sense Of personal responsibility in
preventing spurious paintings from
being foisted upon collectors. The cat
alogues of the collections OF private
owners which he prepared are Of espe-
| cial value in that he would never pass
any work unless he was absolutely
sure as to the artist. When he saw a
chance to vindicate Stuart he was as
delighted as a schoolboy who has
found a new pupil with whom to lSat
on the first day OF the term.
1t was only a few months ago, in
| preparing the catalogue for a wealthy
| collector of this city. that he found 4
$4,000 so-called Stuart and refused 70
| go on with his work until he had made
the man who sold 1t take 1t back and
| refund the money.
When he felt that the two portraits
in the Metropolitan Museum Of Art
representing the first Spanish Ambas.
| sador to the United States and his
wife were not works OF Stuart. as thi
gilt tablets announced. but from the
brush of an Iberian artist named
Lopez. he made the welkin Of ar
criticism ring for many n day. H.
maintained that although the face Of
! the woman might have been painted
| by Stuart, the great American would
| never have worked up such details Of
costume, and that there was little oil
nothing to justify the attrlbution. HI
controversy with Sir Caspar PurdoI
| Clark was a memorable one
In the same way he insisted tina
the exquisitely finished Self Por'Ta'
Of Malbone." which was purchased hi
the Metropolitan, was in reality
clever copy of an original now in IN
Corcoran Art Gallery, and was from
the brush OF an American artist name
Mason. The work was subsequent!
returned TO the dealer from whom !
was acquired, and Charles Henry Har
added a few more enemies TO us
already long.
Mr.. Hart was one OF those rcs0onSi
BILE for the recent housekeeping u
Independence Hall, Philadelphia " cH
portraits were adjudged by the curdto
to have crept in with wronG lalols
Nobody but Charles Henry Har
would have signalized his election Z
the fellowship of the staid i"nns}
vania Academy of Fine Arts by t'i'.h'
it that Philadelphia had permitted y
narrow provinCialism to cause II !
lose its place in art and letters, lie
marks like that caused tn" GN"N'
. journalists not to go into much 5r'h
when Mr.. Hart died. He spoke oa'1
New York also homely truths "a'I
did not tend TO increase his popIl1r.'1
All these are ephemcral th'HI
, as far as he was Con''rh'.
however. for the good that th""'
Henry Hart did for early Amer
lean portraiture cannot die. II" '''
only a small collection Of choice 'N
L,,, no