EXHIBITION ART GALLERY

Otago Witness, Issue 3775, 20 July 1926, Page 17

EXHIBITION ART GALLERY

’ ACQUISITION BY CITY. On July 14 the City Council considered the report of the special committee regarding the acquiring of the brick building at Logan Park for an art gallery, made possible by the generous offer of Mr and Mrs P. R. Sargood to provide the necessary finance. The committee’s report on the matter was rejected by six votes to five. The Deputy Mayor (Cr Taverner) said that the apparent delay that had taken place in submitting the report had been due to the que3tion being a many-sided one. Details had had to be considered before any recommendation could be made. The committee had regarded the matter in a sympathetic manner. An extremely generous offer had been made by a citizen m connection with the art gallery. Consideration of the completion of the sale of the leasehold property in Cumberland street was mentioned in the report. That building had been erected on leasehold land, and leased from the Railway Department some 20 years ago to the* Art Gallery Society, for the purpose of erecting an art gallery, and a similar lease had been granted to the Early Settlers’ Association for the erection of its building. Therefore, it was possible for the. City Corporation to dispose of the building for any other purpose than that for which it was now used. The council would have to obtain a new lease if it were desired. The lease, he thought, expired next yean, with a right of renewal for 21 years. Another clause in the report dealt with the deed the council had entered into with the Art Gallery Trustees two or more years ago, and a new deed would, of course, be required. Last but not least, the sanction of the Harbour Board would have to be obtained. That was probably more or less a formal matter. He had no reason to think the Harbour Board would regard such an application in any but a sympathetic manner. Questions had been asked him as to what it would be necessary to spend upon the present building. The only report was from the city surveyor regarding repairs necessary to the roof. It had been found that the* roof was in an extremely bad condition, and repairs were urgent!* required. The rain streamed down inside the Art Gallery, and the estimate for the work was £2256. Then thev had been informed by the Art Gallery Trustees that the accommodation was insufficient. To utilise the hall it would be necessary to construct internal walls or erect a new wing. Then the light was most inadequate and unsuitable. They would be compelled to spend £2256, and to that must be added the cost of lighting. The amount to be expended as a minimum would be £6OOG, and as a maximum £BOOO. He understood that one member did not agree to a change being made. It was for the council to say whether the Art Gallery should be removed to Logan Park. The committee, largely a finance committee, looked at the matter from a financial point of view. If they went to Logan Park a certain amount of money would have to be spent. He was not trying to f orce them in the matter, but repairs and alterations were urgently required in the present building. He moved the adoption of the report. Cr Hancock seconded the motion. Cr MacManus said he was convinced that something could be done with the existing Art Gallery. There might be some generous citizens who would be willing to assist in that direction, and he thought that was the better proposition. They had all understood that Logan Park was to be devoted to sport. The present Art Gallery was so near to their Railway Station that visitors would be enabled to spend an hour there. He was informed by those in control of the Art Gallery that they would like to see the pictures remain where they were. He was going to oppose the report. Cr Hayward said he would oppose the scheme. He thought that before the report was placed before the council a report should have been obtained from an architect as to the . roof of the present gallery, compared with that at Logan Park. He considered the locality at Logan Park altogether bad. The gallery there was more than a quarter of a mile from where the cars stopped. The scheme had been pushed for all it was worth. The matter was one that affected the citizens of Dunedin. Cr Sincock said he intended to oppose the recommendation because he believed it to be a violation of the original intention as to the' use of the ground. When the building was placed there, so far as the Exhibition people were concerned, it was for temporary use. It was a substantial building, but that was because the owners of the pictures would not allow their property to go inside any other building, and that building had to be erected. Had the ground not been dedicated to the City Corporation as a sports ground, and had been retained by the Harbour Board for cutting up, the building would, in all probability have had to be removed. That being so, the building could not be looked upon as an asset from the Exhibition directors' point of view. He believed that the 6ite was unsuitable for an art gallery. It would seriously interfere with sports, and it was too far away from the centre of. the city. He could not see that it was going to cost nearly £3OOO to put a new roof on the preseut building. The Deputy Mayor: Not a new one; to ropair the present one. Cr Shacklock said he thought they should look at it from the point of view that they had no art gallery at all. He knew, also, that art galleries in some cities were built on much busier thoroughfares than that on which the present art gallery was built. He thought, too, it would be necessary to provide an area of four of five acres to provide the ground necessary for extensions and for walks. He thought they would be well advised to stay where they were. He would vote ("gainst the proposal. Or Clark said he agreed with a great deal which had been aaid by previous speakers. He was one of those who fully raalisdd the generous gift of Mr and Mrs Sargood. It had been said that, if they agreed to retain the present art gallery, it would involve a very large expenditure to put it in order. He did not think this would be the oaae. The speaker then referred

to the interest the sports bodies had taken 1 in the matter of securing Logan Park for sports purposes. He contended that the council had not kept its word with the sports bodies. Again, there was the distance which the proposed art gallery was from the tram terminua. It must be something like half a mile between the two points. The difficulty about their museum was that it was too far removed from the centre of the city, and in adopting the proposal before them they were going to repeat that error. He could not help thinking that the present site of the art gallery was ideal. The average visitor to our Art Gallery had no desire to spend a day, or even half a day in the building: he wanted to fill in only a short space of time. He was opposed to haying the Art Gallery in an inaccessible position and he was quite sure that the good sense of the council would prevent this being done. Cr Wilson said he was going to support, the motion because the Town Clerk had made it clear in his minute that it should be supported. Many of the speakers had raised bogeys which did not exist. Noise created by the playing of certain games was one of those bogeys. At most they would have only two hours* noise in one week. It would be a crime to blow the building up with dynamite, and this was what would probably have to be done if it were not utilised for an Art Gallery. As far as the sports bodies were concerned it would be a gracious act on their part to stand off and say nothing against the propos il. He intended to support the motion.

Cr Larnadi said he was opposed to the motion. Logan Park was to be a sports ground. Before they allowed the building to remain there it would be necessary to buy the ground. It was difficult to estimate what the cost would be. The noise would certainly be detrimental. He would vote against the proposal. Cr Scott said that he was not prepared to give a silent vote. In the first place he would very much prefer that the new building was on the site of the present one. The Finance Committee had been instructed to lay certain facts before the council, and this had been done. Cr MacManus referred to sport, but he thought that the proper word to use was recreation, and this would include such a proposal as was now before them. Cr Hayward had referred to a violation of the terms of the agreement governing the use of the ground. If they placed the Art Gallery in Logan Park they would not be doing wrong. One reason which prompted him to vote for the propsal was the extremely generous offer of Mr and Mrs Sargood, which placed £4OOO in the coffers of the council.

Cr Begg said he was not enamoured with the deputation which waited on the council, nor was he impressed with the arguments which they had used. The committee put the whole position into the hands of the town clerk to investigate and report, and he had done this thoroughly. He was thoroughly convinced that it was the proper thing to do. He ventured to say that there had not been a single argument against the proposal. If the Harbour Board said the site was not to be used for the purpose of an Art Gallery, they would have to submit to it. He did not agree w r ith previous speakers that noise would seriously interfere with the Art Gallery. He did not agree that the distance from the city was too great. “What,” he argued, “is there to prevent Ma and the twins from going to the Art Gallery while Johnny and Mary are playing their respective parts in the adjoining areas?” The Deputy Mayor said he thought that some of the arguments used by the speakers, were not quite fair. The Finance Committee had considered the matters referred to it by the council. With regard to the question of noise, it was wonderful how good Quakers some of them had become. The fact that a small area was required for this purpose was not going to interfere with the large area to be devoted to sport. The building was on the area set apart for the use of the University. This taking of one acre could not be construed as breaking faith with the sports bodies. There was a clause in the Art Gallery’s annual report which was of interest. This report stated that the accommodation in the present building was inadequate. The motion was lost on the voices. Cr Wilson called for a division, which resulted as follows: —For the motion (5): The Deputy Mayor and Crs Begg, Wilson, Hancock, and Scott. Against the motion (6): Crs Clark, MacManus, Shacklock, Hayward, Larnach, and Sincock. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION. July 16. With reference to the discussion at Wednesday night’s meeting of the City Council, when it was decided by six votes to five that Dunedin’s art collection is to remain in the building in Cumberland street, the following prepared on the subject by the town clerk (Mr G. A. Lewin) was placed before the councillors: — “As instructed, I have given a considerable amount of thought to the question, and have conferred with representatives of the University Council, the Art Gallery Council, and the Early Settlers’ Association. “In the first place, I met representatives of the council of the Art Society. The committee will recollect that the deed between the City Council and the Art Society provides that we make a contribution of not less than £3OO per year to supplement the funds of the society. The primary purpose of this grant was to enable the Art Society to curtail the letting of the hall for revenue purposes. “The first grant of £3OO was made during the society’s financial year ended January 31, 1925. During that year the income from letting the hall was £339 18s, and the society finished up with a surplus Ot £251 11s 4d. This surplus was transferred to the capital account, and has since been used for the purchase of pictures. “To January 31, 1926, the income from letting was £227 2s 2d, and this year the surplus was £IOB 15s 7d, which sum was also' transferred to the capital account. Other items in the accounts for these two years are: On the receipts side for 1925, interest on deposits, etc., £ll9 7s Id, and for 1926 from a like source £136 4s 9d. This source of income arises from the investment of the cash surplus that has accumulated for several years. The whole of this surplus has since been expended in the purchase of pictures from the Exhibition

“It is plain, therefore, that with the elimination of the income from the hire of the hall and also the loss of interest on the accumulated surplus over previous years* working the society cannot carry on under the present scheme unless its income is very largely augmented from some source. If the pictures recently acquired have to be housed in the present building in Cumberland street, tne hall will not be available for hire at all. The only available source of increased income that is apparent is a demand on the City Council to increase its grant at least by an amount equal to the lues in income due to the non-letting of the hall. That can be taken as an additional grant of £3OO per year, or £6OO in all. I am satisfied from a perusal of the balance sheets that the figure I have named is about the minimum. “All these and other matters were discussed at my interview with the Art Gallery representatives. I raised the question of the dissociation of the affairs of the Art Gallery as such from the activities, such as they are, of the Art Society. At present these several functions are not separated in the statement of accounts. I understand that it was agreed that the time had arrived for action in that direction, especially if the proposal to shift to Logan Park should eventuate. “When we came to a more direct consideration of the condition that would exist if the proposal to remove the pictures should take place, we were at once faced with the problem of the existing building in Cumberland street. I put forward the suggestion that the only sound proposition regarding it was to sell it right out, and that was finally agreed upon. Accordingly the Early Settlers’ Association was approached, as it was stated that that society had expressed a desire to own the building. Subsequently I saw Mr Nicolson, of the Early Settlers, and he promised to let me know the attitude of nis people. He now informs me that he thinks it very probable that the society will make an offer of £4OOO for the building. A definite decision cannot be reached until Tuesday next. I do not think they can pay the whole amount down. Probably the offer will be to pay £IOOO in cash and the balance at the rate of £IOOO per year for three years. “If that offer should ultimately be forthcoming, the money could be used in supplementing Mr Sargood’s donation to establish the gallery on Logan Park. It would, I think, be ample to do all that is required. “The estimate of the city engineer and the building surveyor to do what is necessary to the building on Logan Park is £ISBO. That includes £7BO for plastering the walls and £485 for storm water drains, but I regard this as an ultimate expenditure. The plastering of the walls is certainly not necessary to-day, and is not likely to call for attention for many years. Added to this sum is the provision for heating and ventilation, estimated at £IOOO, and the provision for a caretaker’s house. There is a building on the ground that was used as the ambulance quarters. It is offered to us for £l7O. The expenditure of about £l3O would make it quite suitable for the caretaker. It is a sightly structure, and not out of keeping with what the conditions would be on the park. “The cash position would therefore be something like this:— Sum availOutgo. able. Purchase of Art Gallery .. £3500 Estimate for work required 1580 Heating and ventilation .. 1000 Caretaker’s house 300 Mr Sargood’s gift £4OOO Sale of present Art Gallery building 4000. Surplus to cover other incidental expenditure .. .. 1620 £BOOO £BOOO “The further point discussed at the meeting of the Art Gallery Council was what sum they would expect the City Council to provide as a grant to them should the proposed transfer to Logan Park take place. I pointed out that in terms of Mr Sargood’s gift w© were to provide a caretaker and otherwise maintain the place and asked in view of that fact, could the Art Society expect any further grant at all? This aspect of the question resolved itself into * discussion on the necessity or otherwise of a curator in charge of the building. The Art Gallery representatives were emphatic that such an officer was necessary, and, after considerable talk, it was agreed that the minimum the council should be asked to grant was the sum now being paid—viz., £3OO per year. That would make our yearly cost under the conditions that would prevail at Logan Park something like this: — Grant to Art Society £3OO Caretakei’s wages 150 Lighting 20 Insurance 40 Incidentals, say (average) 75 £585 Say, £6OO. “There is another point that calls for remark. The Art Society has a liability of £750 to debenture holders. The debentures mature next July. They are secured on the income from letting the hall, but are not mortgage debentures secured on the building itself. Probably some of these will be ‘thrown in’ at maturity date but there is no certainty on that point. To the extent that the debentures have to be met the money to meet them will have to be provided, and again I see no source but from the city’s funds. “Another point that must not be over looked is that the roof of the present building in Cumberland street is calling for attention. It leaks whenever the rains come. Tho estimate of the building surveyor to renew the roof is £2256.

“To summarise the position, therefore, it seems that on the aspect of the matter with which I am dealing—-viz., strictly the financial aspect—everything is in favour of the transfer to the park. In either case the yearly charge will be approximately £6OO per year, if we are to accept the dictum of the Art Society that in any case a curator is necessary. The difference on a capital outgo is, however, all in favour of the change. On the one hand, if the gallery goes to Logan Park it can be established there without cost to us; indeed, the figures show a probable surplus of £1620 as being available for the purposes of the gallery; if it remains where it is there is an expenditure of over £2OOO that must be found within .a gear or ao

if the pictures are to be adequately protected.

“Furthermore. I am compelled to say that whi.j I had no very pronounced opinion on the wisdom or otherwise of the proposal to change the Ration when I set out on this task, a vis4t to the two buildings on Tuesday afternoon left a strong impression that it wculd be a regrettable thing if the ch»ige were not made. The present building at 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday last presented a cold and positively vaultlike appearance, while at the same time the building at Logan Park was flooded with sunlight, and the contrast was most striking, especially so having regard to the purposes of an art gallery. “The next aspect for consideration was the position as it affected the University Council. Several talks have taken place with representatives of that body, and a new plan was prepared showing the area. Some difficulty has been experienced in getting the views of the Students’ Association, but this forenoon Mr M’Donald and Mr Scurr called and said the University authorities would be prepared to accept the lay-out as shown on th© plan, with certain slight modifications providing a slightly increased area outside the No. 1 football ground. Their leased area would then be as shown in red lines, with the first call on other grounds to 4neet their requirements. Mr Tannock’s suggested lay-out for the Art Gallery surroundings is snown on the same plan.’*