DISPUTE OVER PORTRAIT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17942, 18 November 1921, Page 7

DISPUTE OVER PORTRAIT.

SIR WILLIAM ORPEN'S FEE.

LORD LEVERHULME OBJECTS,

A few mouths ago a lively controversy was provoked by Lord Leverhulmo's action in cutting tho head out of a portrait of himself painted by Mr. Augustus John. Recently publicity has been given to a dispute between him and Sir William Orpen regarding tho fee to be paid for a portrait of his lordship in mayoral robes, which was to be presented to tho town of Bolton and hung in tho Town Hall.

Tho matter was introduced to public notice by the Paris correspondent of tho Daily Chronicle, who apparently gathered some of tho details from Sir William Orpon. His account of tho matter was that tho sum agreed upon was 3000 guineas, and that it was at first intended that tho painting should bo a, full-length portrait standing. Subsequently, however, Sir William Orpen suggested that a full-length portrait sitting would make a better picture-, and Lord Leverlmhne acquiesced. However, Lord Leverluibne tendered in payment. 1500 guineas for the portrait, on the ground that it was only half the length of the one originally commissioned.

Art, Not Wall-painting. "I am an artist," said Sir William Orpen to tho correspondent, " and not a merchant prince, and I care littlo about monetary recompense. But it is the principle I objeet to, for I feel that art is not exactly & merchantable commodity, to bo paid for at so much a foot as if one were painting a wall Tho portrait ol Lord Leverhulme is a- very big canvas, and, to say nothing of my artistic labours, there is just .is much paint and varnish used in it as if lie had been standing and not sitting." The correspondent added that Lord Levcrhuhne had suggested Sir David Murray, tho landscape painter, who is a friend of both parties, as arbitrator, and Sir William Orpen says he is willing to abido by Sir David Murray's decision.

Tho Other Side of tho Case. A somewhat different version of tho affair was immediately furnished by Lord Leverhulme, who quoted from letters that had passed between him and tho artist. " I am quite at a loss to understand what is the motive, that induced Sir William Orpen to make the statements which aro printed in the Daily Chronicle to-day/' said Lord Levorhulme. " I feel that "no must be under a misapprehension on the whole mattor, and especially have forgotten the arrangement ho himself suggested in his last letter to myself as to the price. " When I decided to have my portrait painted in 1919 I wrote to my friend Sir David Murray, and ho recommended mo to Sir William Orpen."' I then wrote to Sir William, in July, 1919, and this was his reply: '. . . . My prices ar 0 as follows: Head and'shoulders £1000, half or three-quarter length £1500, full-length £2000.* Full-Length Preferred.

"At this timo Sir William was away in France," continued Lord Leverhulme, " and so ho did notggi n mo any sittings until tho spring of 1921. " I informed Sir William Orpon that I would prefer a full-length portrait, but ho said that a sitting-down portrait would be belter. Nothing was said as to whether tho sitting-down portrait would be considered a full-length or threoquarter length, but my impression was that it would be considered a three-quarter lenfilh. " On September 2 Sir William Orpen wrote to my secretary stating that tho portrait would be 2Oo6kiis." Lord Leverlmlmo replied recalling tho prices originally quoted, though by an oversight, ho stated them as guineas in stead of pounds. In a further letter, Sir William Orpen stated, "Your canvas must be aboutßsin. by 55in.," but Lord Loverhulmo showed the interviewer a bill from tho framemaker stating that tho actual size of the canvas is 75in. by 55in., " so that it is evident that Sir William is under a misapprehension in lliis respect." Arbitration Proposed.

Sir William Orpcn'a letter of September 5, continued:—"However I leave tho matter entirety to Your Lordship. If, after due consideration, you still aro of the opinion that you are satisfied in considering the picture a. half or threequarter length, and wish to pay for it as sueh, let it be so." "My reply to this letter," said Lord Leverhulmo, "was as follows:—I am obliged for your?, of the 7th. I very much regret this misunderstanding lias arisen. Would you like the matter to bo decided by Sir David Murray? If, was Sir David Murray who introduced me to yourself. If you decide on this course, then I suggest'we each put our views down in writing for Sir David Murray to decide, and I will agree to ad upon his decision. Hut if you prefer to seftlo t.ho matter between ourselves entirely, I would be pleased to send you a cheque for 1500 guineas and so end tho matter. In any caso, whatever may coino or go, I hope we shall always bo L'ood friends, and that this little misunderstanding will not in any way sully our friendship.—Yours sincerely, Lovorhulme." Lord Leveihuline added that l 0 bin Idler Sir William Orpcn had sent him no reply, and that lie wag surprised that tho mailer should develop in |,|ie way il had. Lord Leveihuline thought it had all been satisfactorily arranged.

"DIGGER" CORED OF PILES. " A fellow ' digger' swears by your Zaun Doublo Absorption Cure for Piles, l'lciiso forward me a course." So writes an inmate of a soldiers' hospital. Send threo penny stamps for a new booklet containing many similar letters and fully describing this scientific treatment for piles. Learn how piles can bo quickly cured in your own homo without operation. Address: Zunn Proprietary, Box 052, Wellington. Local residents can obtain " Zann " from Bridge Drug Stores, Karangahape Road, and A. Ecdes, chemist, Queea. Street and branches, Auckland.