In Chapter I of this Report there is given a brief summary of several sporadic efforts made long before the coming of Walter Smith, at dif ferent times and in various places in the United States, with a view of demonstrating that there is a consensus of intelligent minds as to the right methods of disseminating instruction in art among a people; and, also, to show that those who are competent to speak upon the subject agree in recognizing a direct connection between a general knowledge by the people of art, and of the methods of its applications to industry, and the manufactures and prosperity of the nation.

For many reasons it has been thought well, in this appendix, to supplement these American authorities by an account of the like efforts of one of the most distinguished among the English artists of the early part of the present century, to whom, more than to any other private individual, is to be credited the initiation of the movement which has resulted in the present development of art education and of artistic manufactures in Great Britain; and, also, to quote the indictment drawn up by Mr. Sparkes against the instruction promulgated by the authori ties of South Kensington, during the early years of that institution.

It is, of course, quite possible that, though they have not fallen under the observation of the present writer, abundant testimony may have been given, by English art educational authorities, to the powerful and long continued appeals for the general dissemination of art education among the people of England, made during his whole art life, by Benja min Robert Haydon.

It would not, on the other hand, be very strange if this silence was intentional; for, to a mind sensitive to the honor of England, the story of that life is one of the saddest in her annals. He gave himself to art with an absorbing devotion, employing all his powers on whatever efforts seemed to promise anything of good to the advancement of art in England or to the honor of the country.

In view of this absolute devotion of a life to such a purpose, there can be little satisfaction in remembering that this man, whose art pow ers were recognized by Europe, was denied employment by the state, and so poorly employed by the wealthy nobility of England that, in this boasted nineteenth century, again and again, through the working of the barbarous law of England, he was thrust into prison for debt-debts incurred not by reason of wasteful extravagance or ow.ng to self-indulgent idleness, but due simply to the providing the necessities of life and the cost of models, etc., during the time necessarily given to the production of a great painting; and, further, that when his unaided efforts had compelled the public, the authorities, and the nobility to take such action as he had urged; the petty spite of some, and the contemptible subservience of others to those high in authority, effected that this man, who had thus proved himself a public benefactor, should always be ignored, although his plans were accepted.

It may be well to reflect on the outcome of this injustice, since it invariably happened that, by a just Nemesis, the public was defrauded of the legitimate benefit of those plans; because, despite Haydon's published protests, they were not honestly or effectually carried out!

However strange the indifference of the American public, years ago, to the efforts of Mr. Peale, Mr. Minifie, and others, in their endeavors to introduce an element of art training in the public schools, may now seem to the readers of to-day; the obstacles they met with were slight, as contrasted with the dense stupidity, prejudice, and selfishness that in England opposed Haydon at every step.

At last, worn out by endless struggles, convinced that there was no success possible for one who, in his sincere zeal for the true interest of

art and of England, had aroused so many antagonisms, had exposed so much of hypocrisy and ignorance, this brave enthusiast was overborne, and ended the struggle by his own band.

In reading the romantic story of his life, the wonder is, not that this happened but that his indomitable will held out so long.

This self-immolation of Haydon was more pitiful, even, than the much lamented death of Chatterton; for this man, who thus miserably perished in the full possession of his powers, had proved his value. He had painted works that the whole world united in calling great. Again and again he had won new victories for England, and had made direct contributions to her advancement. He had trained a whole school of distinguished artists. He had been honored with the friendship of Scott, Wordsworth, and Keats. He was on terms of association with the states. men who ruled the England of his day. He was one of the most powerful controversial writers of his time. He had painted some of the most famous works of the era.* By his published writings and his spoken addresses he had, again and again, moulded public opinion and forced the advance of civilization. And yet, though they knew he had done all this; though at times all England would throng to the exhibitions of his paintings; England had then no better use for such a remarkable man than to let him suffer the ignominy of a prison, and force him by neglect, to the dread alternative of suicide.

Of course society was horrified at the shocking catastrophe, and a concourse of distinguished people paid him the last rites of sepulture. He had asked for bread and they gave him a headstone!

Had the nobility and the rulers of England, been as wise in their day, as were the Greeks under Pericles, or the Italians of the times of Lorenzo the Magnificent, or Pope Julius II, they would have seen to it that their palaces and public buildings were made glorious with the art of this man; who only asked of them employment, but asked in vain!

The contrast thus shown between the countries and the eras, is certainly not to the credit of the much lauded civilization of our modern days.

This incapacity to recognize and to utilize that rare being, a great creative artist, resulted, as Haydon realized, from the utter ignorance of the ruling classes of England in all matters relating to art, of which they knew nothing except the art of portraiture. This ignorance arose, in Haydon's judgment, largely from the fact that in the universities, where they were educated, and where the private tutors and instructors of the children of the higher classes were also educated, no attention was given to the fine arts; not even to their history and literature, a knowledge of which would seem to be an essential part of any education having the slightest claim to being called "liberal." With this conviction, Haydon constantly urged that art professorships should be established in the universities. The depth of this general ignorance of art, both on the part of the ministry and by the members of the two Houses of Parliament, is shown by the fact that, incredible as it now seems, England was on the point of rejecting the sculptures of Phidias, rescued by Lord Elgin from the ruins of the Parthenon, and it is largely due to Haydon that, after years of delay, they were finally secured; but the transaction was accomplished in a way, that not only shows that this action was not based on any sure knowledge or appreciation of the

*One of his most famous works, "The Entry into Jerusalem," is now in the cathedral at Cincinnati, Ohio. For reference to this, see letter from Mr. John Sartain, in note to the account of the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Part IV of this Report.

real value of these marvellous treasures, but which, from its penuriousness, seems contemptible.

Lord Elgin, who for his country's sake had refused to sell these priceless relics to Napoleon, or to the King of Bavaria, which latter monarch had deposited a large amount with a banker in London to secure them in case England declined, was paid a sum less by £16,000 than the expenses he had incurred in securing and in bringing them to London-something of a tax for his patriotism.

An account of this curious episode in the art history of England and of Haydon's part in it, will be found in the appendix to Part IV of this Report.

In the record of the disastrous effect on Haydon's fortunes, resulting from the antagonisms aroused by his single-hearted devotion to what he believed to be the true interests of art, there are thrown some curious and interesting side lights upon the English society of that time.

He first exposed himself to class hostility by the fact that, in some of his outspoken efforts in behalf of art and of the honor of England, more especially in his efforts to save the Elgin marbles, his intelligence, opposed to the dense ignorance of the higher classes in all matters relating to art, so exposed the incompetence of some aristocratic connoisseurs, who had been looked up to by society as art authorities, that neither the shallow pretenders, nor their dupes, ever forgave him.

In the hostile attitude of the Royal Academy to any thorough instruc tion in art of their artisan pupils, as well as in their opposition to the dissemination of any general training in art among the people; in the incredible difficulties that were opposed by successive ministers to the promotion of any consideration of art matters by the Parliament; and in the surprising inability of all classes to see that there was any connection between an intelligent cultivation and patronage of the arts of design, and the manufacturing and commercial prosperity of Eng land; there may be seen some of the obstacles that, early in the nineteenth century, opposed themselves to any full and free development of the natural abilities of the common people of England. Ample evi dences of the all-pervading influence of caste and class distinction, in England, appear incidentally throughout Haydon's autobiography, as, for instance, in his constant looking to the nobility for patronage, as something admittedly due from that class to the interests of the country in general and of the artists in particular; in his naïve admiration of the gracious and refined manners of the nobility, in contrast with even those of the more gifted and cultured of the people; and in his noting, when a member of the royal family, the late Duke of Sussex, visits his painting room; that his manners, were as superior to those of the highest nobility, as were theirs to those of the common people!

With the impression produced by these cumulative instances, in contrast with the different social conditions then and always existing in the United States, there is borne in upon the mind of an American some sense of the far reaching and beneficient influence of the wise action of the founders of our institutions in prohibiting primogeniture and orders of nobility.

Through what pains and penalties the present freedom of the common people of England has been won, going back no further than the year 1800, can hardly be comprehended by Americans.

This sense of class distinction must indeed have been closely inwrought in the English nature, since it is so plainly apparent in the thoughts and actions of a man gifted with such clear perceptions.

That Haydon, who continually contended that the art sense and judg ment of the common people were to be trusted; whose whole life was

spent in the endeavor to demonstrate, contrary to a prevalent impres sion, that art was possible in England, and that the English people needed only the opportunity to develop a noble art; who earnestly strove to popularize and disseminate art training among all classes and conditions of men; who again and again successfully appealed to the judgment and art feeling of the common people, whose shillings, paid in at his exhibitions, so often averted disaster; should still have been so dependent upon the patronage of the nobility, so exposed to the senseless caprices of fashionable society, that when these classes failed to support him in his high calling, he must, perforce, perish; is indeed pitiable.

Haydon saw clearly, and taught everywhere, that there could be no excellence of design without thorough training in high art; that the artist and the designer needed exactly the same kind of art knowledge. He urged this at a time when the Royal Academy, with incredible narrowness, on reluctantly admitting artisan pupils to its schools, refused to let them draw from the nude, and made them stipulate that they would never practice the fine arts. Could the selfishness of monopoly further go?*

In the light of such a revelation it is possible to realize the all-pervading influence of class distinctions in England, since a man of such rare genius, combined with unusual vigor of intellect and loftiness of spirit, recognizes as a matter of course the controlling power of royal and noble patronage.

Such being the case, it is easy to understand that Prince Albert's word on art education was all powerful, so that it is only to be expected that Englishmen should date the origin of the modern renaissance of artistic industries in England to the influence of such royal patronage; and truthfully, for without this patronage, if we may judge from the experience of Haydon, the successful inauguration of the new movement must have been long deferred.

In the United States, many of the obstacles encountered by Haydon in his efforts to develop English art do not exist; nevertheless there are for Americans most valuable lessons to be drawn from the story of Haydon's life and efforts.

The result has demonstrated that in all questions relating to the artistic education and development of the people, on which Haydon opposed himself to the existing authorities in art, and in the Government, he, was wholly in the right; and they, lamentably in the wrong. It follows from this that there are ascertainable principles in art which must be the basis of all sound art education; so that, these having been thus clearly shown, there will be no excuse for any other people to commit the errors then made by the English.

Haydon seems instinctively, from the first, to have comprehended that the one essential knowledge for an artist was the knowledge of form. To be able to draw accurately, and then to know thoroughly the construction of the human figure, so as to be able to distinguish the essential characteristics from the accidental phenomena, was, in his judgment, the only sure foundation of artistic knowledge.

He ever inculcated a thorough knowledge and persistent practice in drawing and anatomy; not the anatomy of the surgeon, but that of the artist; and not only the anatomy of the human figure, but also of the

*The recent imposition of a duty of 30 per cent. on all works of art imported into the United States, as a protection to the American artists, savors somewhat too much of a like spirit of monopoly. It is due, however, to the great majority of American artists, to record the facts that they have publicly protested against this duty, and have petitioned Congress for the repeal of the law authorizing it.

animals, so that, by comparing them, the essential differences between man and brute could be recognized. In proof of the value of such training and such practice, he triumphantly pointed to the pupils trained by him in these severe preliminary studies. "Eastlake was my first pupil; then the three Landseers, Harvey, Bewick, Chatfield, and Lance, all distinguished men subsequently." (Letter to Miss Mitford, 12th July, 1843.)

Let us briefly recapitulate the art principles he announced as fundamental, and the consistent series of efforts made by this indefatigable man to promote the art development of his beloved native land; for his patriotic devotion to England is as pronounced is as his fealty to high art.

Haydon declared that the lack of any great art in England was due not to any want of ability in the people, but had resulted from definite and preventable causes. He proved this by showing that, before the Reformation, England had, in works of art, been on an equality with, if not superior to, the other nations of Europe.

He asserted that English equality in art could only be restored by definite action for that purpose. To this end he urged a comprehensive plan for art education, with a central school in London and branch schools all over the country. He insisted that to draw the human figure was as essential for a designer for manufactures as for a professional painter or sculptor.

He advocated the teaching of some knowledge of art in the univer sities, so that those who were to be the legislators and rulers of the country should have some knowledge on these subjects.

As the only means for developing a noble school of English art, be urged the necessity of the employment by Government, of artists to decorate Government buildings; showing how, of necessity, private patronage was unequal to this work.

When the narrow influence of the Academy prevented thorough art teaching for artisans in the new schools of design, he predicted their failure; and, not content with this, devoted himself with energy to es tablishing in various places similar schools in which art was thoroughly taught.

He wrote to ministers and petitioned Parliament unceasingly; on the subjects of Government employment for artists on Government buildings, and on the need of adopting a comprehensive system for the general art education of the people.

At length his plans prevailed, but himself and his methods were ignored. The artists who were chosen for the work of adorning the new Houses of Parliament, few of whom had given proof of their ability to paint historical pictures, and all of whom were wholly inexperienced in the art of painting in fresco, had begun their work. Haydon, who closely watched their processes, saw that these were fatally defective, and at once publicly warned those in charge of the works of the danger aris ing from the wrong methods in which the frescoes were being painted. He declared that, unless proper methods were at once adopted, the paintings would not last fifty years.

No attention was paid to these words of warning, spoken by the only artist then in England who had ever shown that he could paint in fresco, as the old Italians painted; and whose fresco, a wonderful painting of the archangel Uriel, painted on the wall of his painting room-to prove that a genuine fresco could be painted in England and by an Englishman, which the connoisseurs had denied-had surprised and delighted the town, for "all the world," when it was first painted, made a pilgrim age to Haydon's painting room to see this wonderful fresco; which still remained, after a lapse of twenty-five years, as fresh as when first painted.