After Dinner Gossip and Echoes of the Week.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXXII, Issue XXI, 21 May 1904, Page 16

After Dinner Gossip and Echoes of the Week.

Municipal Duty in Regard to Art. At the risk cf being considered something of a bore —but, after all, nobody need read who does not like —1 must return to the question of the municipal encouragement of art, and the raising of a school of New Zealand artists, with Which I dealt at some length last week. And, though the remarks I am going to make concern Auckland chiefly just at the present, they are applicable to every city in the colony, and the same project should be taken in hand in every important centre in the colony in proportion to its population and its means. Since last week’s art icle a citizen of Auckland, Mr E. .Earle Vaile, has bought for presentation to the city a picture by Messrs. F. and W. Wright, of “The Gap, Piha,” a bold and effective coastal marine subject, which at once caught the popular taste at the recent exhibition, and which critics and publie opinion united in pronouncing “the picture of the year.” The public-spirited and generous character of the donor certainly deserves all the recognition which tho press and the people of Auckland can bestow, but further than this the gift should be as widely chronicled as may be, in order that the citizens of Auckland and of all our greater cities should by force of so excellent an example feel constrained to do likewise. The amount which the artists received for their work has not transpired, nor is it a matter for publication, in any event, but the work is an important one, and Mr Vaile is no niggard in his support of art, so it may be taken for granted that the sum was a handsome one and more than the average even amongst our successful business men could afford for such an object, in addition to the many and equally deserving calls upon their purse. And this brings me to the point which I have been obliged to thus preface at some length. It is not competent to all of us —to the majority, in fact —to donate a picture to our townsfolk worthy of acceptance. But practically we could all help. There is usually at the annual exhibition in Christchurch, Wellington, Auckland, and Dunedin one particular picture which attracts universal attention, and which by a concensus of public opinion should be acquired for the town. Now, there are two ways in which this might be done. Let the city authorities vote a sum annually for the purchase of a work of art—one or more —providing always that a picture or pictures of sufficient merit to be hung in the permanent collection offers. In Auckland, where they are thinking of raising the rates, the cry of many of the Council would be “Poverty. To this there is but one retort, “RUBBISH!” The vote need not be a large one — £lOO could do very w’ell to start with—but the educational value of art is ns great as that of literature and (in due proportion) money spent on adding to the city's collection of paintings is as important as that devoted to our streets and water supply, and is just as good an investment as that earmarked for the flower-beds and lawns of publie parks and gardens. It is high (time the Councillors faced their responsibilities iu this matter. The Corporations of every large provincial city in the United Kingdom annually vote their thousands for the purchase of pictures to add to their permanent collections in their art galleries, and in Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham the wise policy is already bearing its reward in the visits of people interested in art from all the world over. Auckland (and our other cities) can begin

in a small way. The time to do so has arrived. But there is, as I mentioned, a second alternative. Let the Council assist on the “help those who help themselves” principle. Let them donate pound for pound on public subscriptions, which, you will observe, is the method by which I suggested we can all help. If the artists of New Zealand know there is a fund which will render possible the purchase of pictures up to say £ 100, or perhaps £ 150, it is certain the standard of work will advance amazingly, and works would be submitted from which selections would be made, which would do credit to our own gallery, but which we would be proud to loan to New South Wales and Victoria, etc., etc., receiving in exchange some of the fine pictures they have acquired. May one hope that some of the more enlightened Councillors will take the matter up and not rest till it is carried through?

A Notable Abuse.

Apropos of Art in Auckland, there is another subject on which a word needs to_ be said, however briefly. The manner in which students—or alleged students—making replicas for sale of the most popular and more notable pictures are allowed to carry on their trade is as astonishing as it is reprehensible. In all the famous galleries of the world students are allowed to copy the old masters, and special students’ days are set apart for them, while the attendants give every help in their power; hut in the case of modern pictures by living artists such a thing is undreamed of, and would not be tolerated for a moment. The study of a head, an arm, or-a single figure from a picture may in some galleries be made by special permission, but never anything approaching a replica. Even, for such publications as the “Academy Pictures,” or such reproductions of famous pictures in the possession of private individuals as occasionally appear in the Home illustrated papers, the consent of the artist as well as the

owner of the picture is usually necessary, for the artist, as a rule, retains the copyright, or more probably sells it separately to some engraving firm. As for the making of large reproductions in oil, and publicly disposing of the same, such a preposterously- unfair idea would never for one moment bo tolerated, either by the gallery authorities. or, indeed, if one mistakes not, by the law. But the Auckland City Council allows it, and may quite possibly land itself into a very pretty mess by its complaisance. Whether the city hold the copyright to Mr. Blair Leighton's picture “In Time of Peril,” I am not. aware, but think it improbable. Yet they allow replieas to be made from it and sold. One copyist, having spent a perfectly unconscionable time over a huge replica, to the exclusion of everyone else who wished a glimpse of the picture, succeeded in disposing of her filched production for something like £4O. This may or may not be legal and right to Blair Leighton, it depends who holds the copyright, but it is most emphatically morally wrong, and to the last degree indiscreet. Fancy allowing the country- to be flooded by more or less rubbishy copies of a picture which is supposed to be, and rightly, one of the attractions of the gallery. Moreover, the second-rate art of the copyist demands no thought, no originality, and more knack than real skill. It is, therefore, not to bo tolerated tlint they should be encouraged to see copies of the city’s pictures when original art is languishing for want of patronage.

• he Kitchen L»acer»' Crtuade. The outery against the excessive boisterousnees, not to say absolute violence, which has during the last couple of seasons been imported into what are known as “Kitehen Lancers,” is apparently as spontaneous as it is universal. From the Bluff to the far North, there is not a paper of note in which the matter is not' under discussion, and in which the outrageous state of affairs which reigned last winter is not more or less severely reprobated by correspondents. While agreeing that matters have reached a pitch where protest is not merely justified, but urgently needed, it seems to me rather unjust to lay the blame for the larrikinism displayed wholly- on the shoulders of the dancing man of to-day. Yet this seems the universal opinion. The girls are, it is made to appear, unwilling victims, and have no option but to submit to whatever treatment they may be subjected. Now, surely this is not truly the case. That men are neither so courteous in manner or language, and not so particular in regard to what they talk of before the modern girl, is not, unfortunately, to be questioned; but in this the fault, while none the less reprehensible, is not all with the men- The girl of to-day is to a large extent responsible for her own treatment. If any girl, however shy, dislikes romping, she can get out of it by a word. It is something approaching nonsense to aver that girls cannot put a stop to excess, for they have only got to refuse to dance and the matter is at ah end. They have tolerated the affair in its growth, have not snubbed men when they could have done, or applied the cheek when it could have been done, and when the matter has got out of hand and beyond control, they turn round and lay the blame entirely on masculine "shoulders. As a fact; in many cases "the girls are ringleaders. The life has gone out of waltzing, the livelier dances are by stupid fashion voted out of date, and the lancers arc evoluted into the present romp in order to let off superfluous energy and to warm sluggish blood. If there were less sitting out after three or four turns round the room in each waltz, if the sehottische, the polka, aye, and the old-fashioned galop, were given their proper share in the programme, there would be no temptation to “larrikinism” in the lancers. No doubt, now there will be a reaction, but it will be accelerated if persons giving balls include some of the dances named, and if their guests once grasp the feet that it is insultingly rude to dance a waltz to a polka tune when the hostess has set that dance on the programme 4> A Promised Will. Questions constantly arise out of wills which have been duly made, but not clearly expressed, so that you cannot be sure ■what the testator meant to do with his property upon certain contingencies. In the realms of uncertainty thus created the lawyers havo ample opportunity for exercising inventive talent, and the final result not infrequently is a serious depletion of the total of the assets available for the beneficiaries —an outcome due, as a rule, to the anxiety of the testator to save the guinea or two which the proper preparation of the will would have occasioned. Another and less common aspect of the matter occurs where a will has not been made at all, or is made in violation of a previous promise about it. For instance, there may be circumstances under which a man or woman may quite legitimately promise that if a given person consents to do certain things, he or she will leave to the person in question a share of assets under his or her will. Suppose tlia(7 after such a promise has been given and acted upon, the will is not duly made, what is tl»e resulting legal position? Take, for example, this ease. A man says to his servant that if the latter will look af-

ter him for the reet of his life, without wages, ho will devise, in recompense, • given block of land. That seems a fair enough bargain. But will it stand? The lawyer at once objects that the bargain is not in writing, and that therefore the servant cannot, on the death of the employer, without having effected the devise, claim either to get the land, or damages in lieu of it. Some years ago a servant under such conditions sought to enforce such a contract, and when the want of writing was set up the legal advisers replied that as the servant had partly performed the bargain by continuing in the service without payment, it would be a fraud for the executors to rely on the want of writing, and that therefore they could not do so. Finally, the contest went to the House of Lords, and there it was held that as tho services of the claimant were not proved to be solely referable to the alleged bargain, but might have arisen from other reasons, there was no part performance of the bargain by the servant to meet the objection of want of writing. Besides, the part performance suggested had been by the servant only, and the law requires that part performance, in order to get rid of the want of writing, must be by the person who is being charged under the contract. Now here the part performance was wholly by the other party, that is, the claimant, and so on that ground, too, the action failed. Bargains as regards any, sort of property may be defeated in the same sort of way if they are not to be carried out within a year, or if the value of the subject matter of the bargain exceeds £lO. So, if any agreement is to be made for leaving you property by will, see that you get it put into writing, or the genuine wishes of the testator, at the time when he made the bargain, may be defeated, after he is dead and gone, by the absence of legal formalities. Sensible people have their bargains reduced into writing in almost all instances, so as to avoid disputes. But in contracts to take effect after death need for writing stands out unquestionably.

The Autograph Fiend.

They tell us that the present age will be known as the “Science Age,” just as we have the stone age, the iron age, and so on. The collecting age would also be a most appropriate name, if the other one doesn’t “stick.” Every other man, woman or child you meet collects something nowadays. There was a time when philatelists were peculiar in this respect, that is, of course, always excluding the wealthy old gentlemen of ample means who have from time im-i memorial (comparatively speaking)' made a hobby of collecting articles of “bigotry and virtue,” but now one feels really quite de trop in the drawing-room if one doesn’t collect. Parenthetically I may remark that I turned numismatist in ,eer self-defence, and am now ardently collecting all the coins bearing the effigy of Edward Rex that I can find. Formerly one looked with tolerant good-humour on the somewhat odd people who carried the stamp collecting habit beyond school days, but the disease has spread to other things besides stamps, and when you *' mt polite hints about being bored, is'positively hardly anyone in the room to sympathise with you. I wonder what misguided mortal started the post-eard craze? One’s only hope is that he was a man of many friends and relations, and that he has become (like some more of us) heartily sick and tired of the eternal “Now don’t forget to drop me a card from So-and-so,” and that he is now on the stool of repentance. And may it be a hard one! But the worst bore of all is the one with an autograph album. Truth compels me to say that the fair sex must take the lion’s share of the odium for this inane hobby. The sweet creatures trot up with a neatly-bound gilt-lettered little volume, a pot of ink, a pen (invariably a cruel bad one), and crave the honour of your name or names. The more you have the more they like it —it fills up the book. For the first time or so, it is all very well. You feel somebody for the nonce. "Just like Kipling and those other writing fellows, don’t you know,” but that soon, very soon, wears off, and then they always supplement the demand for your slgntv

tore with a smiling request to “write something fumy’.” One would have thoqght the autographs were fuuuy enough themselves at times. How »it thht you must always be facetious in an autograph album? Some people do write sensible things (you can always tell where they are, the pages are always turned over quiekly), but only to excite pity in the bosoms of the guest who lias the precious volume thrust into his hands. No, if you are anxious to shine in the autographic line you must be funny first and last. The old hand who knows how to preserve his reputation takes the book home, cribs something from “Ally Sloper’s Half-holiday,” or some other repository of wit, and copies it in with a mild adaptation. Voila! his reputation is prodigious. The greenhorn, however, starts to work right away. Fancy being funny on paper in a roomful of afternoon-teaers! If he be an average young man, he chews naif the penholder away, looks worried and warm for five minutes, and dashes off in a clerkly hand some feeble squib. The child of his brain is handed round, and excites a gushing “Oh, how veryfunny,” or “Quite too droll, Mr So-and-so,” and the like, and he inwardly curses the day he learned to write. Yes, the autograph fiend is rhe fiercest of all collecting fiends, and, speaking personally, I would much prefer being asked for my name by a policeman than by, the fair possessor of an autograph album.