Society Approves Recent Letting Of Art Gallery

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29985, 21 November 1962, Page 20

Society Approves Recent Letting Of Art Gallery

After brisk exchanges and some blunt opinions the annual meeting of the Canterbury Society of Arts last evening passed a vote of confidence in its council on the decision it made recently to let the Durham Street Art Gallery for an anti-Commu-nist exhibition.

The president (Mr Paul Pascoe) in his annual report said that members would have noticed the controversy in the newspapers over the exhibition held on behalf of the Assembly of Captive European Nations in the gallery earlier this month. "The council was concerned at the discussion, but wishes to point out that the special views of the people who hire the gallery are generally speaking not its concern,” Mr Pascoe said. “The following is the guide

which the council adopts in these matters: ‘The council reserves the right to decline any application to hire the gallery without giving any reason therefor, but in principle is not concerned with the political or religious beliefs of the hirer.”' Recent Resignation Mr W. A. Sutton: I am very sorry to hear of tihe resignation of Mr E. J. Doudney, and would like to know his reasons for resigning. Mr Pascoe said that the council had been most unhappy at Mr Doudney’s resigning and had passed a unanimous resolution asking him to reconsider. Mr Doudney had adhered to the stand he had taken.

"Mr Doudney objected to the gallery being let for anticommunist display which had nothing to do with art. The council had a long discussion on it and reaffirmed that it should not take into account the views of the organisation or persons applying to hire the gallery. "Because Mr Doudney sincerely thought the council was wrong in its majority opinion, he resigned.” Mr Pascoe said. Mr Sutton: Was that one exhibition worth the loss of one of our most able councillors? Right in Principle Mr Pascoe: The majority of the council felt we had to preserve the freedom of speech and so on. We had let the gallery to a left-wing organisation, and this was a right-wing one. Perhaps subsequent events have proved we were wrong. . . . Mr A. A. G. Reed; No!

Mr Sutton: It appears we have now lost the only councillor who has had foresight. Mr G. C. C. Sandston: I cannot agree that the letting of the gallery was wrong in principle. We agree on freedom of speech, both left-wing and right-wing. We could not take sides. What happened afterwards was no concern of ours. The person who persistently interjected

was wrong, and the persons who pummelled him from the gallery were wrong. Mrs G. Hennessy: I move a vote of confidence in the council in its action in letting the hall. “I second that,” said Mr Reed. "It would be impertinent for us to judge whether a meeting should be held. There are other bodies much more competent to do that. We must let the gallery. We need the money. You will notice £473 for rent in the balance-sheet, and we cannot do without that. The gallery is let for art exhibitions by preference. They have preference in bookings and pay only half the standard rent. Apart from that it is only a question of whether a hirer will pay and if he will not damage the building. We have let the gallery for dolls’ shows and caged bird shows. "Muddle-Headed" “It was not for us to sit in judgment on the exhibition to be opened by the hirer, and that has been our policy all through. If anyone is sufficiently muddleheaded and wrong-minded to think otherwise, well, let him go," Mr Reed concluded. Mr Sutton: I take exception to the last speaker’s remarks. If he thinks that anyone who does not think the same as the majority is muddle-headed and stupid, then the last speaker is muddle-headed.

Mr J. Coley: I support Mr Sutton on this matter. Mr Doudney was a most valuable member. Mr J. C. W. de la Bere: I think the gallery should not only be not let to those who do physical damage to it, but also to those who will collect mud that will stick to them and this society. The society has suffered badly in this letting, and has collected a lot of mud. This is a vote of no-confidence in Mr Doudney, and I move that we proceed with other business.

Mrs Hennessy said she would not withdraw her motion. It was not a vote of no-confidence in Mr Doudney and could not be interpreted as that. The vote was taken, and declared carried on a show of hands.

Mr Coley said that there should have been a vote on his motion to move to the next business. If that had been carried the vote of confidence would not have been put. Mr Pascoe, after consulting Mr Sandston, ruled that the vote of confidence had been properly put. Nobody had seconded Mr Coley’s motion.