1
June 8. 04
ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS,
LONDON, W.
190
Dear Lord Wemyss

I have read Lord Lytton’s article, & I
suppose it will form the basis of his
motion in the House of Lords.
The merit of a work of art or
of an artist being ultimately a matter
of opinion, the competence of the Royal
Academy to judge in such matters
must therefore be also a matter of
opinion.
Lord Lytton goes further than questioning
the competence of the Royal Academy; -
he more than hints that we “have consciously
misused our power to the advantage of
our own society & to the detriment
of the Nation”. He puts that in fact

as the only alternative to ignorance
of our powers under the will. (p.613 of
the June number of the National Review)
The assumption is therefore that the
Administrators of the Bequest
purchase by preference the works
of Members of their own Society.
Considering that the Royal Academy
comprises & has comprised within its
body the large majority, to say the
least of it, of the best artists of
the country, it would not be sur-
-prising if the majority of the works
purchased were by its members.
Let us see however how the case
stands by comparing the proportion
of purchases from artists who are

or have been members of the Academy
- i.e. associates or Academicians –
with those bought of artists who
are not connected with the Academy.
The number of works of art
purchased since 1877 (the year
when the Academy took up the
administration) is 119.
Of these
31 are by artists who have
arrived at the full honours of the
Academy
28 are by artists who have arrived
at associateship.
Of the 31 by R.A.s
7 were bought before the artist
was a member of the Academy.
of

Of the 28 by A.R.A.s
23 were bought before the artist
was a member of the Academy
Thus out of 119 purchases, 29
have been made from members of
the Academy
30 have been made from artists
who have since been elected into
the Academy, and
60 have been made from artists
as yet outside the Academy.
So much for Lord Lytton’ contention
that “we have constantly used our
powers to the advantage of the
Society”
Lord Lytton’s next point is in the
additional words “& to the detriment
of the Nation”. With respect to this,
the nation is in a position to judge, for

2
ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS,
LONDON, W.
190
the pictures & sculpture are in the Tate
Gallery for the public to see how far the
purchases justify the action of the
Academy. The merit of the pictures is
no doubt a matter of opinion. To
say that no mistakes have been made
of “omission” or “commission” would
be to assume infallibility for the Academy;
but I distinctly affirm that the
majority of “mistakes” _ or at least of
those purchases which I shd. consider
mistakes, _ are to be found not among
the pictures by members of the Academy
but among the works of those who have never been
elected. And when is “infallibility” to be
found? If the money were handed
over to Messrs McColl & Harry Quilter
& the clique of journalists who appear

to have captured Lord Lytton, would
the public have more confidence in
their expenditure of the money than
in ours? I doubt it.
Lord Lytton further point is that we
have not bought pictures by certain
artists whom he names. Of these
there are French artists working
in France. It is certain that Chantrey
when he referred to foreign artists, never
contemplated the purchase by the Council of the
works of foreigners who
have happened to do some work in
England; he was thinking of those who
foreigners by birth as Zoffany, Fuseli, Cipriani, Bartolozzi were resident in
Great Britain; he distinctly
states that the money shall be devoted

to the encouragement of British Fine
Art. The names of Claude Monet,
Fantin Latour, & Dalou are added
no doubt by Lord Lytton to make
out an imposing list of omissions on
the part of the Academy.
As regards the others mentioned by
him the conditions of the will are such
as to make purchases extremely
difficult. It is distinctly stated
that “no Commissions” are to be given.
The Council therefore must not go to
an artist’s studio before his pictures
are finished & sent in to the Exhibitions
& say “Keep that picture for us”. The
Council cannot buy until the work appears in
an exhibition completed & for sale.
By that time the work is, if a good
& important work of the artist probably

sold; if not it may not be one of
the artist’s best works. In this way
many pictures which we shd. have wished
to buy have escaped us: notably we
have never for this reason been able
to acquire a picture by Sir L. Alma
Tadema; they have always been pur-
-chased beforehand. (I notice that
Ld. Lytton does not include Tadema’s
name in the list of neglected artists)
Burne Jones’s pictures at his best time
were all painted as commissions; he
had more commissions than he could
carry out. As for Whistler, he rarely
had a work of sufficient importance in
an exhibition, & it must be remembered
that not every one is agreed as to
Whistler’s position as an artist; the
journalists now most vehement in his
praise lavished abuse on him in his

3
ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS,
LONDON, W.
190

life-time. Rossetti & Madox Brown
had practically ceased to produce
purchaseable works before the Chantrey
Fund fell into the hands of the Academy
to administer, Alfred Stevens painted
but few pictures; a portrait which
was offered for sale a few years ago was
bought by the Natl. Gallery. His
sculpture was never in the market
at all. Holman Hunt is considered
a great artist by a large section of
the public no doubt, but there are
those who differ from the public on
this point, & it must be remembered
that the Council of the Academy
is a shifting body, & is composed
differently every year; what one

Council might think desirable
to purchase, another might
object to & let pass. The Council
for the time being is the authority
whose decision is final by the
dispositions of the will; for
better of for worse the purchases
are in their hands, & it is at
best a somewhat cumbrous
arrangement. The objection
may be made for example
that the Council ought to
buy at Christies’ such fine
works as may show up from

time to time: but the pictures
a Christies’ are on view generally
but four days (or five at the most)
before the sale: the purchases
from the Chantrey fund have to
be proposed at one meeting
of the Council & voted on at a
second meeting summoned for
the purpose. How is a Council
(ten members) to be got together
for two meetings, both to be held
before the sale takes place? purchases
at Christies’ (the only way,
unless in very exceptional circumstances,
of buying pictures except from
the exhibitions) are therefore

impracticable.
The fact is that in Chantrey’s
time there was but one exhibition,
that of the Royal Academy, & there
is little doubt that Chantrey
only contemplated such purchases
as could be made from the
Academy exhibition.
Purchases however can be
made & have been made from
other exhibitions, from the
Grosvenor Gallery & the New
Gallery : but, whatever the
journalists may say, the best
pictures of the year do go to the

4
ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS,
LONDON, W.
190

Royal Academy Exhibitions, &
the public know it; although
it may suit the journalists
for the purpose of attacking the
Academy to make out that
the other exhibitions are full
of the works of neglected genius,
they cannot alter the fact
that the best men send their
work there, & that it is therefore
the most advantageous place
from which to make the
purchases.