THE THREE PICTURES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19133, 26 September 1925, Page 13

THE THREE PICTURES.

ARE THEY REPRESENTATIVE? REAL PROOF WANTED. SILENCE ABOUT THE LEIGHTON. ■ * Mr. W. Page Rpwe writesl am sorry that Mr. Tipton declines to discuss this question in an amicable spirit Ha begins his reply to my last letter by roundly accusing me of impertinence and of making a false statements I am afraid he has allowed his chagrin to run away : with his discretion. I still adhero to |mv remark that "Mr. Upton tas the selection of pictures op behalf of the trustees entirely in his hands."® I do not think that either of the other trustees will deny that they are content to leave this part of their duties to Mr. Upton, and there is no impertinence in my statement, either expressed or implied. I merely state a condition which is common to many trusts, but I do not therefore suggest that, the other trustees liavo no minds of their own. I am fully awaro that the other trustees, tts a body, have been very active in improving the finances of the trust, and I do not suggest for a moment that any of them are indifferent to their responsibilities. It is surely not aji impertinence to suggest that they have made a mistake of judgment or that their policy is open to improvement. Mr. Upton says that he thought ho "had made plain how the greater part of the contents of the gallery had been acquired," but he declines to discuss the results, or to admit the possibility of imperfections, which resulted from the choice of the particular advisors mentioned. Ho also still declines to say why the trustees have since como to the conclusion that it is better for them to bo guided by Mr. Payton—who is practically isolated from the great art centres, and whose personal acquaintance with art in Europe is both limited and remote—rather than at least to carry on their former policy. Staading on Their Dignity. With regard to the three pictures, Mr. Upton states the issues very plainly when ho says: " The question for the trustees was, first, were the pictures offered to us what they purported to be; second, were the pictures distinguished, and third, were the subjects suitable for our gallery?" That is, if by the last question he "means, were they suitable in the sense that they adequately represented the three artists named ? Because the subject of a picturo might be quite suitable, without the picture having any artistic merit whatever. But why does ho so persistently refrain from telling us what those proofs are? He merely says that, "the trustees satisfied themselves on these points." No one doubts that. If those proofs are forthcoming, what good reason do the trustees give for not producing them ? They must realise that if those proofs are conclusive, .they would bo a most effective means of disposing of adverse criticism, and at the same time of proving the validity of their judgment and the soundness of their policy. I suggest that such would be a more creditable course than tho present one which they hold to, of standing on their dignity and scorning their critics. He who stands too much on his dignity is always in danger of trampling it flat. Mr. Wadham's Complaint.

Mr. Wadham's letter helps his own and the trustees' case very little. Like his customers,, he takes refuge in generalities, although the former cannot compete with his eloquence—oll his own behalf. He complains pathetically that " a brothel' artist" has dubbed him "an itinerant drt dealer." Well, isn't, he one? Does he wish us to believe that lib buys pictures, and travels round with them, solely that he may satisfy the yearnings of his artistic ana philanthropic soul, so that other people shall enjoy thmn also; or that he consents to sell thein only that he may cover his' expenses ? Was hfs sale to the trustees of " Sweethearts and Wives " for £220-r-and for which he asked much moro than that figure—quite consistent with his pose ? Does that sale, not to mention the price he got for the three pictures, not ( justify my calling him a dealer, and a Very competent one at that ? He cannot object to my saying that ho is also of the itinerant order.

Mr. W&dham is anxious to prove his Qualifications, not only as an' artist, which is somewhat irrelevant to the present issue, but also as a judge of art. He has an excellent opportunity ready to hand. Ho is strangely sileiH about, tho alleged " Leighton, whibh is the most doubtful of the three purchases. It will be manifestly greatly ■ tct his advantage to tell us, without any more beating about the bush, when thai; picture was exhibited? as a work of Tifeighton's, at the Royal Academy. Further, let him give us real proofs, by comparison, that all three of these pictures are : "' superb examples of British masters." His proofs shall be submitted to such authority at Homo as even Mr. Upton will not be able to brush aside with contempt.