The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-04-19
BEARDSLEY DISPLAY
CAUSES A DISPUTE
Collection of Unpublished
Drawings Doubted by Some
Art Critics.

Apparently II. s. Nichols, a BOOK
seller Of East Thirty-third street, is in
for considerable free advertising. Some
days ago he placed on view In hia shop
quite large collection OF original but
hitherto unknown and unpublished draw
ings by the famous Aubrey Beardsley.
This was sufficiently sensa tional In ~
self, for the artist died in 1898. and the
world had long ago decided It knew all
that was to be known of tho eccentric
artist But IL now develops that the
critics are not to be unanimous in 60
cepting the attribution Of these draw
inss to the dead master. and hence a
dispute that has q decidedly serious
aspect 10 In the making.
Joseph Pencil, the etcher, who knew
Beardsley well. wrote letter OF protest
to the Evening Post OF yesterday, and
Albert Eugene Gallatin, an authority on
prints. also is quoted as being IN the
opposition. Both OF those writer's, in
the heat OF their astonishment, manage
to be rather vague. Mr.. Pennell wrote
principally to protest ate the drawing
which had been reproduced with the
title, "Beardsley as he lay dying in a
hotel in Brussels." for Beardsley, as he
knew. died In the south Of France.
Mr.. Nichols. In reply to this, says the
title was mistake of the newspaper
and not mistake OF his. He knew, he
said. all the facts of Beardsley's life.
having been Associated with the late
Leonard Smithers in the printing Of the
Savoy Maodcfne, and hence having been
one of Beardsley's principal publishers.
Mr., Gallatin, as quoted, does not re-
fer specifically to Mr.. Nlchols's coTlec-
ton. but makes II quite clear that ne
does not believe that any genuine orig
nv ~.
unknown 90 long.
The principal point he makes IL that
a full catalogue of tho existing draw
ings by Beardsley was compiled and
shown to the artist a year before his
death and that letter from Beardslsy
exists in which he says he revised this
list The mention 10 made in It Of the
huge drawings that Mr.. Nichols now
shows. He states. too. that he had
never seen Beardsley drawings upen
bristol board, and that as a rule this
artists drawings were reduced only
about one-quarter or one-third in print
ing.
In rebuttal to Mr.. Gallatin. Mr.. Nichol
says it Is absurd to claim that all the
Beardsley items have been as carefully
listed as, say, the Whistler etchings. and
that there was much In the Maynard life
OF the artist that not even Smithers, his
associate, knew. He says 1t 10 quite
true that Beardsley generally used What
man paper to work on, and II Mr.. CAL
latin had looked carefully he could
have seen drawings that appeared to
be on bristol board, but were in reality
mounted" on bristol board.
Altogether the quarrel 10 pretty one.
and doubtless both Mr. Pennell and Mr..
Gallatin will be heard from again. M.
Nichols says he obtained the drawings
directly from the artist. He has no
word of attestation from any one in
authority In the art world in regard to
this collection. He has never shown
them to any one, because 1t never oc-
CURED to him to do So" This Is the
part Of his story that will mystify TIM
amateurs, who in these sophisticated
days like to have clear titles to their
acquisitions.
When a Rembrandt Ia found in ian
old barn in Scotland" or IAN abandoned
mill In Ireland" as happened half q
dozen times a year in the good old days
before the war, no one could be found
to look at the picture, no matter how
like a Rembrandt It appeared to be,
until DIR. Bode or DIR. De Groot had
tested II with acids and certified 10 Its
genuineness.