Chapter 16

This unrolling was begun in very cold weather; if the temperature had been a little higher, nothing of this kind would have taken place. The picture now shows no sign of defect or injury, and is in perfect condition. By substitutingceresin, a paraffin obtained from ozokerite or earthwax, for crystalline paraffin, the chance of cracking is obviated. The ceresin, which should have a melting-point of 150° or 160° Fahrenheit, constitutes a safe substitute for the beeswax commonly employed in Gambier Parry's Spirit Fresco Medium.

Foggia,October 15, 1895.You will be surprised to get a letter from me with an Italian superscription; I am writing thus early before my return to save time. When I was in Venice the other day, Van Haanen spoke to me,with approval, of a certain vehicle, of which I had already heard before vaguely, the invention of the French painter, Vibert. You probably know of it, as the subject of media has occupied you. There are, it appears, three forms of this medium: the vehicle for painting, the medium for paintingintoin retouching, and the finalvarnish. As far as I understood Van Haanen in a hurried conversation—he was a little vague—the painting medium contains no gum, only, he seemed to think, petroleum and oil; I assume that in the final "vernis" thereisgum of some kind.I am perfectly satisfied with Bell's medium and fresh turpentine for the very little use I make of vehicle in painting; but there is always the difficulty of thefinalvarnish in the Academy. I don't like risking mastic or copalso soonon work which containsnothingbut oil (and if I ever do use a little, I put poppy oil with it), and the result is that I generally varnish with Roberson's medium, which is safe, but I fear a little inclined toyellowin time.Now what I want you kindly to tell me, my dear Church, is the exact composition of thethreeVibert media, and your opinion about the safety of usingall threein the prescribed order; and this I should like to know on my return at thebeginningof November (hence my haste in writing), and also whether I can safely use these vehicles on workbegun in my usual medium.It is just possible you may not have heard of the Vibert vehicles; if so, I would ask you to be so kind as to obtain (of course atmyexpense) a bottle of each of the mixtures and to test them carefully.A line to say this has reached you would find me at the Hôtel Royal Mazzeri, Via 20 Settembre,Rome.With kind regards and anticipated thanks.Hôtel Royal Mazzeri, Rome,October 22, 1895.Many thanks for your prompt and amiable answer. I shall be interested to hear on my return the upshot of your analysis; but Ihate vernisin painting, as Bocchini tells us the Venetians did,comme la peste.I am very glad you are getting on so satisfactorily with your work on the frescoes.In haste (for I have many letters before me).P.S.—No; I am sorry to say I am no better of my special ailment though mygeneralcondition is good.2 Holland Park Road, Kensington, W.,November 8, 1895.Excuse the hand of my secretary.Many thanks for your note about Vibert's varnishes, which I shall accordingly dismiss from my mind—the varnishes, I mean, not your note.

Foggia,October 15, 1895.

You will be surprised to get a letter from me with an Italian superscription; I am writing thus early before my return to save time. When I was in Venice the other day, Van Haanen spoke to me,with approval, of a certain vehicle, of which I had already heard before vaguely, the invention of the French painter, Vibert. You probably know of it, as the subject of media has occupied you. There are, it appears, three forms of this medium: the vehicle for painting, the medium for paintingintoin retouching, and the finalvarnish. As far as I understood Van Haanen in a hurried conversation—he was a little vague—the painting medium contains no gum, only, he seemed to think, petroleum and oil; I assume that in the final "vernis" thereisgum of some kind.

I am perfectly satisfied with Bell's medium and fresh turpentine for the very little use I make of vehicle in painting; but there is always the difficulty of thefinalvarnish in the Academy. I don't like risking mastic or copalso soonon work which containsnothingbut oil (and if I ever do use a little, I put poppy oil with it), and the result is that I generally varnish with Roberson's medium, which is safe, but I fear a little inclined toyellowin time.

Now what I want you kindly to tell me, my dear Church, is the exact composition of thethreeVibert media, and your opinion about the safety of usingall threein the prescribed order; and this I should like to know on my return at thebeginningof November (hence my haste in writing), and also whether I can safely use these vehicles on workbegun in my usual medium.

It is just possible you may not have heard of the Vibert vehicles; if so, I would ask you to be so kind as to obtain (of course atmyexpense) a bottle of each of the mixtures and to test them carefully.

A line to say this has reached you would find me at the Hôtel Royal Mazzeri, Via 20 Settembre,Rome.

With kind regards and anticipated thanks.

Hôtel Royal Mazzeri, Rome,October 22, 1895.

Many thanks for your prompt and amiable answer. I shall be interested to hear on my return the upshot of your analysis; but Ihate vernisin painting, as Bocchini tells us the Venetians did,comme la peste.

I am very glad you are getting on so satisfactorily with your work on the frescoes.

In haste (for I have many letters before me).

P.S.—No; I am sorry to say I am no better of my special ailment though mygeneralcondition is good.

2 Holland Park Road, Kensington, W.,November 8, 1895.

Excuse the hand of my secretary.

Many thanks for your note about Vibert's varnishes, which I shall accordingly dismiss from my mind—the varnishes, I mean, not your note.

One chapter in which is revealed Leighton's serious inner life closed during the years he was President. The last letter which has been preserved from his beloved master, Steinle, is dated 22nd November 1883, Frankfurt:—

Dear Friend,—Yesterday evening I received your letter from Florence, and answer at once, partly to tell you how delighted I am at the result of the consultation with Quarfe, as also at your comfort and well-being, and partly because this part of your letter has greatly roused my curiosity for a second,which shall also tell me something about Vienna, Verona, and Florence. At the same time, however, I want to make use of a pause in my work to tell you that the first three coloured contours are completed. To the painting I dedicated all my small skill, and would have died in order to secure that the drawing and composition should produce a life-like effect; I believe also that these pictures will look like frescoes in their surroundings.

Some time after this Leighton wrote to Mrs. Pattison the following letter, which proves that to the end he retained his great affection for Eduard von Steinle. This friend and master died in 1886, but whether Leighton made this inquiry before or after that date I do not know, as his letter is not dated:—

Dear Mrs. Pattison,—I saw a paragraph not long ago in theAcademywhich concerned me deeply; it did notsay, but it implied that my dear old friend and master, Ed. Steinle (professor at Frankfurt a/M) is dead. Did you by chance write the note? and do you know when or how he died, if he be indeed dead? His wife has not written to me. I am anxious to have some certainty in the matter.

(Influenced) "—for good far beyond all others by Steinle, a noble-minded, single-hearted artist,s'il en fut... Steinle's is the indelible seal." In making any estimate of Leighton's character these words should ever be remembered. They prove how deeply rooted were those feelings on which his principles were grafted. These words were no mere outlet for youthful enthusiasm and affection, but were noted with reference to an account of his life about to be written for publication; therefore we may consider them to be a deliberate statement made for a purpose, when he had reached the zenith of his fame and was already President of the Academy. The design by Steinle here produced, calledDer Winter,in which the artist has drawn his own portrait when old, throws a light on the mind and nature of Leighton's master, whose influence on him for good was greater "far beyond all others."

Written on the drawing are these lines, penned by Steinle:—

Giunto è gia 'l corso della vita mia,Che tempestoso mar per fragil barcaAl comun porto ov 'a render si varcaGiunto ragion d'ogni opera trista e pia.Indi l'affettuosa fantasiaChe l'arte si fece idola e monarcaConosco ben quant 'era d'error carcaCh' errore è ciò che l'uom quaggiù desia.. . . . . . . .I pensier miei già de' miei danni lietiChe fian se s'a due morti m'avvicinoL'una m' è certa, l'altra mi minaccia?. . . . . . . .Ne pinger ne scolpir fin più che quetiL'anima volta a quell' amor divinoCh'aperse a prender noi in croce le braccia.

Der Winter by Steinle"DER WINTER"Drawing by Eduard von SteinleToList

"DER WINTER"Drawing by Eduard von SteinleToList

No other member of Leighton's family was ever known to have been an artist, and neither his parents nor his sisters pretended to any knowledge of painting; but respecting literature he had an interest in common with both his sisters, also a very strong sympathy existed between Mrs. Matthews and Leighton in their love for music. In answer to a letter from Mrs. Orr relating to Mr. Augustine Birrell's well-known book, Leighton wrote, "I have read 'Obiter Dicta,' and am much charmed with its delicate humour and ease of its style. I thought 'Truth Seekers' charmingly written." With reference, however, to the Browning chapter he continues:—

Browning's obscurity hides a shorthand of which he keeps the key inhispocket. A matter of form,notof matter, as"O.D." hath it. Browning is not abstruse; he is adeepthinker, whotherefore(vide"O.D.") requires obscure language; he is a most ingenious dialectician and a subtle analyst; but he is not a great poet onthataccount—he is a great poet because of his magnificent central heat, and the surface of interests over which he sheds it. All this is rather late in the day to remark, and one would not be exasperated by his friends if one had not a sort of feeling that theyhavedone something to mar him. You say he would not be obscure if heknewit?—distinguons. His obscurity is not intentional—of course—it is inherent in a style which is strongly personal, and therefore sincere—but is it in no degreewilful?—does henotaccept, virtually, some such (absolutely false) view of his obscurity as "O.D.'s"? A pity it certainly is; Browning is the last man who in his heartwishesto touch only the few—nobody knows better than he does that that is not the characteristic of the greatest poets, and that not for that is a poet's soul kindled to a white heat. Meanwhile, hereisthe fact that men of average culture and average brains (I claim both, for an example), anddesirousofunderstanding, as well as full of admiration for his powers, often get at his meaning only by considerable effort, and sometimes not at all, and that not because the thought is obscure, but because it is wilfully written in cypher.

The following letter to a friend of his sister's contains a criticism of Leighton's on Goethe'sSprücheunder the head of "Kunst":—

Private.]2 Holland Park Road, Kensington, W.,17/8/91.Dear Mr. Bailey Saunders,—Complying with your wish, expressed through my sister, Mrs. Orr, I have gone carefully through theSprücheunder the head "Kunst," and have marked certain passages. I have, however, deferred writing till the last moment (I am starting presently for the Continent), partly because I have been overwhelmingly busy, and partly because I am a good deal "exercised" on the whole matter.To speak with entire frankness, I cannot feel sympathy with the idea of the publication, and feel that the connection of my name with it would imply an adhesion which does not exist. On re-reading more than once the maxims and sayings in question, which I had not seen for many years, I find myself confirmed in my earlier impression of them, that their value is in no way commensurate to the authority of Goethe's great name. Some of them are, in my opinion, wholly misleading and some obscure; some commonplace, some irrelevant to the subject. Again, my markings do not by any means always mean assent; and, on the other hand, the discrimination between the value of a marked paragraph is often a nice one, and is not represented by the difference between selection and omission, which,on the face of it, seems assent and dissent. In sum, I ask myself what the outcome is—whatisthe selection? it does not give to the world an important or instructive intellectual possession; itseemsto express the selection of the best by a particular individual (who does not spontaneously desire to make such selections), and inrealitydoesnotrepresent anything that he assents to throughout.But why a selection at all? I cannot refrain from asking myself. The interest of these particularSprüchelies in the fact thatthey are utterances of Goethe's(and he gave them with a context)—but then what is the meaning of a selection?You see I speak very bluntly in the matter, but also sincerely; and I have at all events shown my good will.—In much haste, yours faithfully,Fred Leighton.I am, as I said, just off, but if you wished especially to communicate with me, a line sentherewould reach me after some delay.

Private.]

2 Holland Park Road, Kensington, W.,17/8/91.

Dear Mr. Bailey Saunders,—Complying with your wish, expressed through my sister, Mrs. Orr, I have gone carefully through theSprücheunder the head "Kunst," and have marked certain passages. I have, however, deferred writing till the last moment (I am starting presently for the Continent), partly because I have been overwhelmingly busy, and partly because I am a good deal "exercised" on the whole matter.To speak with entire frankness, I cannot feel sympathy with the idea of the publication, and feel that the connection of my name with it would imply an adhesion which does not exist. On re-reading more than once the maxims and sayings in question, which I had not seen for many years, I find myself confirmed in my earlier impression of them, that their value is in no way commensurate to the authority of Goethe's great name. Some of them are, in my opinion, wholly misleading and some obscure; some commonplace, some irrelevant to the subject. Again, my markings do not by any means always mean assent; and, on the other hand, the discrimination between the value of a marked paragraph is often a nice one, and is not represented by the difference between selection and omission, which,on the face of it, seems assent and dissent. In sum, I ask myself what the outcome is—whatisthe selection? it does not give to the world an important or instructive intellectual possession; itseemsto express the selection of the best by a particular individual (who does not spontaneously desire to make such selections), and inrealitydoesnotrepresent anything that he assents to throughout.

But why a selection at all? I cannot refrain from asking myself. The interest of these particularSprüchelies in the fact thatthey are utterances of Goethe's(and he gave them with a context)—but then what is the meaning of a selection?

You see I speak very bluntly in the matter, but also sincerely; and I have at all events shown my good will.—In much haste, yours faithfully,

Fred Leighton.

I am, as I said, just off, but if you wished especially to communicate with me, a line sentherewould reach me after some delay.

Though Leighton persisted in affirming that he hardly ever read, the number of letters, and answers to letters from scholars, referring to poems and general literature, which exist in the correspondence he preserved, prove that if he did not read he nevertheless somehow got a knowledge of the inside of books. To a question havingreference to the Nine Muses (he was then painting his frieze "Music") which he asked Swinburne, he received the answer:—

The Pines, Putney Hill, S.W.,August 21, 1885.Dear Leighton,—I doubt very much whether Shelley himself could have answered your question to your satisfaction. His scholarship was that of a clever but idle boy in the upper forms of a public school. His translation from Plato, as Mr. Jowett tells me, and his translation from Euripides, as I know by personal experiment, having carefully collated it with the original text, absolutely swarm with blunders, sometimes, certainly, resulting in sheer nonsense. I fancy he may have been thinking of Aphrodite Urania, and perhaps confounding (as indeed it seems to me that a Greek poet might possibly and pardonably have done) the goddess of divine love with the Muse who wasnotthe Muse of astronomy when she first made her appearance in the Theogony of Hesiod, but simply the "heavenly one" in a general way, as I gather from a reference to the lexicon. I should have thought Calliope or Euterpe a fitter head mourner for Keats: but probably Shelley wished to introduce the most distinguished in the rank of the Muses in that capacity, on such an occasion. And if Urania was in a certain sense the chief of the Nine, she would naturally be most musical of mourners.—Ever yours sincerely,A.C. Swinburne.

The Pines, Putney Hill, S.W.,August 21, 1885.

Dear Leighton,—I doubt very much whether Shelley himself could have answered your question to your satisfaction. His scholarship was that of a clever but idle boy in the upper forms of a public school. His translation from Plato, as Mr. Jowett tells me, and his translation from Euripides, as I know by personal experiment, having carefully collated it with the original text, absolutely swarm with blunders, sometimes, certainly, resulting in sheer nonsense. I fancy he may have been thinking of Aphrodite Urania, and perhaps confounding (as indeed it seems to me that a Greek poet might possibly and pardonably have done) the goddess of divine love with the Muse who wasnotthe Muse of astronomy when she first made her appearance in the Theogony of Hesiod, but simply the "heavenly one" in a general way, as I gather from a reference to the lexicon. I should have thought Calliope or Euterpe a fitter head mourner for Keats: but probably Shelley wished to introduce the most distinguished in the rank of the Muses in that capacity, on such an occasion. And if Urania was in a certain sense the chief of the Nine, she would naturally be most musical of mourners.—Ever yours sincerely,

A.C. Swinburne.

As years went on, Leighton became more and more enamoured of the beauty to be found in our own islands, and longed, as can be traced in his letters, that his sisters should share with him his intense love of nature.

To his elder sister, who was in Yorkshire, he wrote in 1887:—

"A broad shoulder of moor, lifted against a great field of sky, is one of the grandest and most pathetic things in nature (see Leopardi). The beauty of moorland is that it has a particular poetry and impressiveness foreverycondition of atmosphere and weather."

Again:—

"I am very glad you like Ilkley so much—moors have an immense fascination for me, but all English scenery of whatever kind has charm for me. It has two immense virtues: first, being entirely of its ownkind, it never suggests a, to itself, disparaging comparison with the scenery of any other country, and secondly, it is steeped, every fold and nook of it, in English poetry, and is haunted with the murmur of the prettiest of peace-suggesting words:home. I wonder whether you both feel as I do the endearing quality in our old green-brown country."

It became his habit, in these later years, to visit Scotland in September before flying off to his second home. More and more did he realise the marvellous beauty of the scenery there. He told me, shortly before he died, that the most beautiful vision he had ever beheld on earth was the one he saw when approaching Skye by sea from the south, when the sun was setting and illuminating the range of the Cuillin Hills with magic light and colour. He wrote to his father from:—

The Highland Railway Company's Station Hotel,Inverness.Accurately thecharmingnessof Scotland, it is the starting-point for everything. But I observe that at the rate of writing I should fill a volume before I had given you the hastiest account of my journey, so I will e'en cut it short and simply say that, taking it altogether, my too brief stay in the Highlands has been a source of very great enjoyment to me, if not of any particular benefit to my health, for which indeed it has been too short. I have had more than the usual proportion of fine weather, and am corroborated in my old opinion that for beauty of colouring nothing north of the Alps will compare with this most lovely country, and that the wealth and variety of effects of light and shade is altogether unrivalled. Unfortunately, working here is very difficult, all the effects are so bafflingly fugitive; nevertheless, I have made three little sketches which, though hasty, willbe of value if only to revive my recollections of the effects they very feebly render; they were all done in one day; and no one day since I did them has been such as to make sketching possible—except this the last and one of the most enchanting, which I have spent delightfully but fruitlessly on the top of a coach.

The Highland Railway Company's Station Hotel,Inverness.

Accurately thecharmingnessof Scotland, it is the starting-point for everything. But I observe that at the rate of writing I should fill a volume before I had given you the hastiest account of my journey, so I will e'en cut it short and simply say that, taking it altogether, my too brief stay in the Highlands has been a source of very great enjoyment to me, if not of any particular benefit to my health, for which indeed it has been too short. I have had more than the usual proportion of fine weather, and am corroborated in my old opinion that for beauty of colouring nothing north of the Alps will compare with this most lovely country, and that the wealth and variety of effects of light and shade is altogether unrivalled. Unfortunately, working here is very difficult, all the effects are so bafflingly fugitive; nevertheless, I have made three little sketches which, though hasty, willbe of value if only to revive my recollections of the effects they very feebly render; they were all done in one day; and no one day since I did them has been such as to make sketching possible—except this the last and one of the most enchanting, which I have spent delightfully but fruitlessly on the top of a coach.

From Gressoney, St. Jean, September 1, 1891, he wrote to Mrs. Matthews:—

Many thanks for your letter received last night; as it crossed one from me to the Dad, which I hope he could read (it was writ large), I should not write again at once (having, of course, nothing to say—except that it is,pour changer, a splendid afternoon, and I ought to be out of doors) but that I want you at once to tell the poor old Dad how concerned and sorry I am to hear that he has been so ailing, and ailing so long, and how I wonder at his superb power of recuperation. I don't ask inthisletter how the Dad is, because I am sure he will send me a line in answer to my note to him. But I have another reason for writing at once; I want you, please, to thank Lina with best love, for her nice long letter (she does not want a letter written from here), and tell her, before it is too late, that I hope she won't give up her Ballater withouta very full trial, because I know that it takes many people a considerable time to get acclimatised to that bracing air. Tell her also that I was myself going to suggest anAusflugto Braemar; if she goes to the Invercauld Arms let her use my name, and she will be well treated. I shouldpeculiarlylike her to see the Lynn of Dee—she will only have to scramble five or six yards off the main road to look down into the stream from under some of the grandest old Scotch firs in Scotland; and I verily believe that the watching for a silent bit of those dark, dark, seemingly bottomless, noiselessly swirling pools,tinyas they are under the hollow grey craig, will, somehow, whisper a big peace and a strange wondering fascination into her being; the whole thing is not bigger than an expensive toy, but it lays a never-failing grip onme.[82]—Affectionate brother,Fred.

Fred.

To Mrs. Orr when in Scotland:—

August 22, 1891.If you can manage it go to a favourite haunt of mine, the Lynn of Dee, quite a tiny tumble of green waters in fantastically scooped grey rocks, no higher than a cottage, under astounding old Scotch firs (by-the-bye the grandest tree in the world to my thinking), where I have sat interminably long looking down into the dark deep pools, from which now and then a salmon leaps. To me no spot about there is so fascinating.

August 22, 1891.

If you can manage it go to a favourite haunt of mine, the Lynn of Dee, quite a tiny tumble of green waters in fantastically scooped grey rocks, no higher than a cottage, under astounding old Scotch firs (by-the-bye the grandest tree in the world to my thinking), where I have sat interminably long looking down into the dark deep pools, from which now and then a salmon leaps. To me no spot about there is so fascinating.

Grand Hotel, Brufani, Perugia,October 3, 1891.Dear Lina,—Well, I am glad you got to the Lynn of Dee, though sorry that you could not be there in solitude and see it without sitting in a pool of water. I am glad, too, that you saw the salmon leap; I did not mention that most exciting spectacle because it is not by any meansalwayson view—you were in luck; but what you must make for another time is the bit three or four yardsbelowthe fall where the vehemence of the winter torrent has scooped and worn pools so deep that as your eye is drawn down past half-hidden submerged rocky shapes you come at last to absolute dark brown night, and whilst you are conscious of a rapid, swirling current, nosound, no faintest gurgle even, reaches your ear; the silent mystery of it all absolutely invades and possesses you; that is what I faintly tried to put into my "Solitude," of which a photogravure embellishes your staircase. I am vexed that you had so much rain; however, you had a few fine glimpses, and if a rainy day in Scotland is like the Scotch Sawbath, a fine one throws you the gates of Heaven. It is curious how much clearer the air is (when clear) than we get it south of the Tweed.I am glad that the Dad has rallied so satisfactorily; tell him, with my love, that I have heard from the gentleman in Copenhagen for whom I carved the marble "Athlete." He is benighted enough to say that in his opinion it is one of the most important statues of modern times; and he wants my bust, if there is one, for his collection of portraits.

Grand Hotel, Brufani, Perugia,October 3, 1891.

Dear Lina,—Well, I am glad you got to the Lynn of Dee, though sorry that you could not be there in solitude and see it without sitting in a pool of water. I am glad, too, that you saw the salmon leap; I did not mention that most exciting spectacle because it is not by any meansalwayson view—you were in luck; but what you must make for another time is the bit three or four yardsbelowthe fall where the vehemence of the winter torrent has scooped and worn pools so deep that as your eye is drawn down past half-hidden submerged rocky shapes you come at last to absolute dark brown night, and whilst you are conscious of a rapid, swirling current, nosound, no faintest gurgle even, reaches your ear; the silent mystery of it all absolutely invades and possesses you; that is what I faintly tried to put into my "Solitude," of which a photogravure embellishes your staircase. I am vexed that you had so much rain; however, you had a few fine glimpses, and if a rainy day in Scotland is like the Scotch Sawbath, a fine one throws you the gates of Heaven. It is curious how much clearer the air is (when clear) than we get it south of the Tweed.

I am glad that the Dad has rallied so satisfactorily; tell him, with my love, that I have heard from the gentleman in Copenhagen for whom I carved the marble "Athlete." He is benighted enough to say that in his opinion it is one of the most important statues of modern times; and he wants my bust, if there is one, for his collection of portraits.

Solitude studySTUDY IN COLOUR FOR "SOLITUDE." 1890By permission of Mrs. Stewart HodgsonToList

STUDY IN COLOUR FOR "SOLITUDE." 1890By permission of Mrs. Stewart HodgsonToList

Leighton also particularly desired that his sister should see Malinmore, County Donegal, when visiting Ireland. He wrote from Kensington, "I am bent on your seeing Malinmore."

And again, from Scotland:—

Inverness,September 13.Dear Lina,—I can't help feeling a good deal of responsibility about the melancholy, treeless wilds to which I have sent you, because I happen to like them vastly; and I particularly feel thateverythingwill turn on your seeing, not indeed all or nearly allIsaw—that is impossible—but as much as your strength will allow; take your courage, therefore, in one hand, your goloshes in another, and your umbrella in a third, andfromthe car—abseits—see thewhole coast-line closeto the rocks overlooking the sea; there is not an inch that won't reward you. There is a bit not more than half a mile from Malinmore (to'ardsMalinhead), that is, thoughsmall, quite Dantesque in its grim blackness (a few wet feetim Nothfallwon't hurt you). Of course, to do this well you must be in carseveryday to take you in all directions to the pointfromwhich to make yourAbstecher—sometimes towards Glencolumskill and the Hog's Back beyond (magnificent), sometimes towards Malinhead, where you must see every little bay, including the Silver Strand.At first sight the breaking up of the weather is a bore,mit Seitenblick auf Ihnen—but is not as bad as it seems; bad (dirty) weather suits these parts, and the day will not dawn in which I shall have forgotten certain dramatic sunsets and the swooping of certain storm-clouds like the flight of huge fiery birds of prey, more than once witnessed and deposed to on canvas by me, over this treeless tract of moor.

Inverness,September 13.

Dear Lina,—I can't help feeling a good deal of responsibility about the melancholy, treeless wilds to which I have sent you, because I happen to like them vastly; and I particularly feel thateverythingwill turn on your seeing, not indeed all or nearly allIsaw—that is impossible—but as much as your strength will allow; take your courage, therefore, in one hand, your goloshes in another, and your umbrella in a third, andfromthe car—abseits—see thewhole coast-line closeto the rocks overlooking the sea; there is not an inch that won't reward you. There is a bit not more than half a mile from Malinmore (to'ardsMalinhead), that is, thoughsmall, quite Dantesque in its grim blackness (a few wet feetim Nothfallwon't hurt you). Of course, to do this well you must be in carseveryday to take you in all directions to the pointfromwhich to make yourAbstecher—sometimes towards Glencolumskill and the Hog's Back beyond (magnificent), sometimes towards Malinhead, where you must see every little bay, including the Silver Strand.

At first sight the breaking up of the weather is a bore,mit Seitenblick auf Ihnen—but is not as bad as it seems; bad (dirty) weather suits these parts, and the day will not dawn in which I shall have forgotten certain dramatic sunsets and the swooping of certain storm-clouds like the flight of huge fiery birds of prey, more than once witnessed and deposed to on canvas by me, over this treeless tract of moor.

[58]"Athlete Strangling a Python," exhibited in the International Exhibition, Paris, 1878.

[59]"The Arts of War."

[60]"Addresses delivered to the Students of the Royal Academy by the late Lord Leighton." Publishers: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. 1897.

[61]"Not everybody," wrote the late Mr. Underhill, who for some time, as private secretary to Sir Frederic Leighton, had special opportunities of knowing, "is aware of the tax upon a man's time and energy that is involved in the acceptance of the office in question. The post is a peculiar one, and requires a combination of talents not frequently to be found, inasmuch as it demands an established standing as a painter, together with great urbanity and considerable social position. The inroads which the occupancy of the office makes upon an artist's time are very considerable. There is, on the average, at least one Council meeting for every three weeks throughout the whole year. There are, from time to time, general assemblies for the election of new members and for other purposes, over which the President is bound, of course, to preside. For ten days or a fortnight in every April he has to be in attendance with the Council daily at Burlington House, for the purpose of selecting the pictures which are to be hung in the Spring Exhibition. He has to preside over the banquet which yearly precedes the opening of the Academy, and he has to act as host at the annual conversazione. Finally, it is his duty every other year to deliver a long, elaborate, and carefully prepared 'Discourse' upon matters connected with art, to the students who are for that purpose assembled. It is a post of much honour and small profit." "To administer the affairs of the Academy, to fulfil a round of social semi-public and public engagements, and to paint pictures which invariably reach a high level of excellence, would, of course, be impossible—even to Sir Frederic Leighton—were it not for the fact that he makes the very most of the time at his disposal. 'That's the secret,' remarked a distinguished member of the Academy to the present writer some little time before the President's death; 'Sir Frederic knows exactly how long it will take to do a certain thing, and he apportions his time accordingly.'"—"Frederic, Lord Leighton, P.R.A.: His Life and Works." By Ernest Rhys.

[62]While writing this discourse Leighton wrote to his father:—Perugia,October 5, 1889.Dear Dad,—You will be surprised to hear that your letter (for which best thanks) only came to my handsyesterdayon my arrival here; it had apparently, after enjoying a junket through Spain, returned to England before its final despatch here. The envelope, which I enclose, will amuse you; Ulysses himself did not visit more cities of men! I am glad my Spanish tour is at an end; the insufferable heat, the long journeys, the frequentnighttravelling, have conspired to make it rather trying to me physically. I have never been thoroughly well the whole time. Here it is absolutely cold, and I shall probably soon begin firing; it rains also, and I fear the weather is altogether unpromising; but the air is magnificent, and I am very fond of the place, and I shall enjoy my stay as much as the necessity of writing my (adjective) Address will allow.My journey through Spain, though fatiguing, was extremely interesting and very profitable to me for the matter in hand. My stay in Madrid was made more enjoyable by the extreme amiability of my very old friend our ambassador, who brought me into contact with two or three interesting people, from whom I gathered valuable information in regard to things Spanish; to say nothing of getting compartments reserved for me in trains, &c. &c. It is rather fortunate that our diplomatic representatives abroad are mostly personal friends of mine. Post is just going, so good-bye for the present.—Your affectionate son,Fred.Leighton mastered the Spanish language completely in the course of the few weeks he spent in Spain in 1866. A friend who was present gives an amusing account of an incident which occurred when Leighton dined with Mrs. Adelaide Sartoris after his return. He was sitting next Señor Garcia (only now just dead at the age of 102); the conversation was being carried on in Spanish. Mrs. Sartoris, in astonishment and admiration at the fluent manner in which Leighton was talking the language of which he did not know a word a few weeks before, exclaimed, "But, Señor Garcia,dosay he makes some little mistakes!" "But hedoesn't," replied Garcia; "he hasn't made one!"

[62]While writing this discourse Leighton wrote to his father:—

Perugia,October 5, 1889.Dear Dad,—You will be surprised to hear that your letter (for which best thanks) only came to my handsyesterdayon my arrival here; it had apparently, after enjoying a junket through Spain, returned to England before its final despatch here. The envelope, which I enclose, will amuse you; Ulysses himself did not visit more cities of men! I am glad my Spanish tour is at an end; the insufferable heat, the long journeys, the frequentnighttravelling, have conspired to make it rather trying to me physically. I have never been thoroughly well the whole time. Here it is absolutely cold, and I shall probably soon begin firing; it rains also, and I fear the weather is altogether unpromising; but the air is magnificent, and I am very fond of the place, and I shall enjoy my stay as much as the necessity of writing my (adjective) Address will allow.My journey through Spain, though fatiguing, was extremely interesting and very profitable to me for the matter in hand. My stay in Madrid was made more enjoyable by the extreme amiability of my very old friend our ambassador, who brought me into contact with two or three interesting people, from whom I gathered valuable information in regard to things Spanish; to say nothing of getting compartments reserved for me in trains, &c. &c. It is rather fortunate that our diplomatic representatives abroad are mostly personal friends of mine. Post is just going, so good-bye for the present.—Your affectionate son,Fred.

Perugia,October 5, 1889.

Dear Dad,—You will be surprised to hear that your letter (for which best thanks) only came to my handsyesterdayon my arrival here; it had apparently, after enjoying a junket through Spain, returned to England before its final despatch here. The envelope, which I enclose, will amuse you; Ulysses himself did not visit more cities of men! I am glad my Spanish tour is at an end; the insufferable heat, the long journeys, the frequentnighttravelling, have conspired to make it rather trying to me physically. I have never been thoroughly well the whole time. Here it is absolutely cold, and I shall probably soon begin firing; it rains also, and I fear the weather is altogether unpromising; but the air is magnificent, and I am very fond of the place, and I shall enjoy my stay as much as the necessity of writing my (adjective) Address will allow.

My journey through Spain, though fatiguing, was extremely interesting and very profitable to me for the matter in hand. My stay in Madrid was made more enjoyable by the extreme amiability of my very old friend our ambassador, who brought me into contact with two or three interesting people, from whom I gathered valuable information in regard to things Spanish; to say nothing of getting compartments reserved for me in trains, &c. &c. It is rather fortunate that our diplomatic representatives abroad are mostly personal friends of mine. Post is just going, so good-bye for the present.—Your affectionate son,

Fred.

Leighton mastered the Spanish language completely in the course of the few weeks he spent in Spain in 1866. A friend who was present gives an amusing account of an incident which occurred when Leighton dined with Mrs. Adelaide Sartoris after his return. He was sitting next Señor Garcia (only now just dead at the age of 102); the conversation was being carried on in Spanish. Mrs. Sartoris, in astonishment and admiration at the fluent manner in which Leighton was talking the language of which he did not know a word a few weeks before, exclaimed, "But, Señor Garcia,dosay he makes some little mistakes!" "But hedoesn't," replied Garcia; "he hasn't made one!"

[63]Mr. Norman Shaw wrote the following letter the day after he heard this address in 1891:—6 Ellerdale Road, Hampstead, N.W.,December 11, 1891.Dear Sir Frederic,—I was so sorry I missed you last night. After the election I went into the galleries to find my people, and when I came out you had gone—and quite right too, for you must have been very tired.I thank you very sincerely for your most admirable address. I had heard that it was to be on the subject of French Art, but I had not realised that it was to be entirely about Architecture! and as an architect I naturally feel very deeply its great and permanent value. It is altogether a new sensation to have a Presidential address devoted to the Mother of the Arts! and I am sure its influence will be wide, deep, and lasting.Amongst the many regrettable phases of modern art, there is none that I feel more than the isolation that the three great branches of art exist under in this country (for in France I am sure it is quite different), and I cannot help feeling that your address is a tremendous step in the right direction; but, alas! I don't believe one in twenty of our colleagues understood what you were so clearly explaining, and I fear not one in fifty cared! But it is absurd to suppose that with the advancement of knowledge this state of things can last, so it is intensely satisfactory to have it on record that not merely have we had a President that knew all that is to be known about the art, but who also cared and loved it!I thought your remarks on the French apse quite delightful. I have always felt this strongly, and though as an Englishman (Scotchman!) I like our square east ends, still I am bound to admit that there is a logical completeness about a chevet that the square end cannot claim. But I shall only weary you if I go on in this prosy way! so thanking you again most heartily for your grand contribution, believe me to remain,—Yours very sincerely,R. Norman Shaw.Sir Frederic Leighton, Bart.

[63]Mr. Norman Shaw wrote the following letter the day after he heard this address in 1891:—

6 Ellerdale Road, Hampstead, N.W.,December 11, 1891.Dear Sir Frederic,—I was so sorry I missed you last night. After the election I went into the galleries to find my people, and when I came out you had gone—and quite right too, for you must have been very tired.I thank you very sincerely for your most admirable address. I had heard that it was to be on the subject of French Art, but I had not realised that it was to be entirely about Architecture! and as an architect I naturally feel very deeply its great and permanent value. It is altogether a new sensation to have a Presidential address devoted to the Mother of the Arts! and I am sure its influence will be wide, deep, and lasting.Amongst the many regrettable phases of modern art, there is none that I feel more than the isolation that the three great branches of art exist under in this country (for in France I am sure it is quite different), and I cannot help feeling that your address is a tremendous step in the right direction; but, alas! I don't believe one in twenty of our colleagues understood what you were so clearly explaining, and I fear not one in fifty cared! But it is absurd to suppose that with the advancement of knowledge this state of things can last, so it is intensely satisfactory to have it on record that not merely have we had a President that knew all that is to be known about the art, but who also cared and loved it!I thought your remarks on the French apse quite delightful. I have always felt this strongly, and though as an Englishman (Scotchman!) I like our square east ends, still I am bound to admit that there is a logical completeness about a chevet that the square end cannot claim. But I shall only weary you if I go on in this prosy way! so thanking you again most heartily for your grand contribution, believe me to remain,—Yours very sincerely,R. Norman Shaw.Sir Frederic Leighton, Bart.

6 Ellerdale Road, Hampstead, N.W.,December 11, 1891.

Dear Sir Frederic,—I was so sorry I missed you last night. After the election I went into the galleries to find my people, and when I came out you had gone—and quite right too, for you must have been very tired.

I thank you very sincerely for your most admirable address. I had heard that it was to be on the subject of French Art, but I had not realised that it was to be entirely about Architecture! and as an architect I naturally feel very deeply its great and permanent value. It is altogether a new sensation to have a Presidential address devoted to the Mother of the Arts! and I am sure its influence will be wide, deep, and lasting.

Amongst the many regrettable phases of modern art, there is none that I feel more than the isolation that the three great branches of art exist under in this country (for in France I am sure it is quite different), and I cannot help feeling that your address is a tremendous step in the right direction; but, alas! I don't believe one in twenty of our colleagues understood what you were so clearly explaining, and I fear not one in fifty cared! But it is absurd to suppose that with the advancement of knowledge this state of things can last, so it is intensely satisfactory to have it on record that not merely have we had a President that knew all that is to be known about the art, but who also cared and loved it!

I thought your remarks on the French apse quite delightful. I have always felt this strongly, and though as an Englishman (Scotchman!) I like our square east ends, still I am bound to admit that there is a logical completeness about a chevet that the square end cannot claim. But I shall only weary you if I go on in this prosy way! so thanking you again most heartily for your grand contribution, believe me to remain,—Yours very sincerely,

R. Norman Shaw.

Sir Frederic Leighton, Bart.

[64]From a boy, without any effort or thought on his part, he exercised an unquestioned domination over others. Speaking of the days when he, as a boy of seventeen, first made friends with Leighton in Rome, Sir E. Poynter said, "He knew he was clever, but he hadn't a particle of conceit. I never saw him cast down, he was always jolly and noble; none ever thought of refusing him obedience." Again, Sir E. Poynter refers to these early days in his Dedication to Leighton of "Ten Lectures on Art": "I came to-day from the 'Varnishing Day' at the Royal Academy Exhibition with a pleasant conviction that there is, on all sides, a more decided tendency towards a higher standard in Art, both as regards treatment of subject and execution, than I have before noticed; and I have no hesitation in attributing this sudden improvement, in the main, to the stimulus given us all by the election of our new President, and to the influence of the energy, thoroughness, and nobility of aim which he displays in everything he undertakes. I was probably the first, when we were both young, and in Rome together, to whom he had the opportunity of showing the disinterested kindness which he has invariably extended to beginners; and to him, as the friend and master who first directed my ambition, and whose precepts I never fail to recall when at work (as many another will recall them), I venture to dedicate this book with affection and respect." Signor Giovanni Costa wrote: "I remember once in Siena there was an unemployed half-hour in our programme. Leighton happening to go to the window of the hotel, exclaimed, 'The Cupola of the Duomo is on fire!' and as he said it he rushed downstairs to go there. I, being lame, could not keep pace with him, but followed, and on arriving in the Piazza attempted to enter the Duomo past a line of soldiers who were keeping the ground; but they would not allow me to. Seeing them carrying wooden hoardings into the cathedral, I shouted. 'You are taking fuel to the fire! Let me in—I am an artist and a custodian of artistic treasures.' The word 'custodian' moved them, and they let me pass. When I got inside the Duomo I found Leighton commanding in the midst. He was saying, 'You are bringing fuel to the fire.' There was a major of infantry with his company, who cried out, 'Open the windows!' Leighton exclaimed, 'My dear sir, you are fanning the flames; you must shut the windows.' He had placed himself at the head of everybody, and the windows were shut. From the cupola into the church fell melting flakes of fire ('cadean di fuoco dilatate falde'—Dante) from the burning and liquefied lead, which would certainly have ignited the boards with which they had intended to cover thegraffitteby Beccafumi on the marble pavement. Our half-hour was over. Leighton looked at his watch and said, 'In any case the cupola is burnt; let us be off to the Opera del Duomo; Duccio Buoninsegna is waiting for us!'"

[65]Sir George Grove wrote after the banquet in 1882: "Dear Leighton,—Let me say a word of most hearty congratulations on the brilliant way in which you got through yourHerculeantask on Saturday. You are really a prodigy! Your last speech reads just as fresh and gay and unembarrassed as the first, and every one of the nine is as neat, as pointed, as perfectlyà proposas if there were nothing else to be said! Thank you especially for the reference to the music business."

[66]The following is one of many letters of regret expressed when Leighton resigned:—19 Queen Street, Mayfair, W.,June 24.Dear Sir Frederic,—I trust you will allow me to express to you the sincere regret I feel at your being compelled to give up your command of the "Artists." To myself volunteering has always been so inseparably connected with your command, that I cannot at present realise the extent of the blank which your resignation will create. I shall ever remember with pride that it was under your auspices that I rose through the ranks and obtained my commission.—Believe me, dear Sir Frederic, very truly yours,W. Pasteur.Sir Frederic Leighton, P.R.A.

[66]The following is one of many letters of regret expressed when Leighton resigned:—

19 Queen Street, Mayfair, W.,June 24.Dear Sir Frederic,—I trust you will allow me to express to you the sincere regret I feel at your being compelled to give up your command of the "Artists." To myself volunteering has always been so inseparably connected with your command, that I cannot at present realise the extent of the blank which your resignation will create. I shall ever remember with pride that it was under your auspices that I rose through the ranks and obtained my commission.—Believe me, dear Sir Frederic, very truly yours,W. Pasteur.Sir Frederic Leighton, P.R.A.

19 Queen Street, Mayfair, W.,June 24.

Dear Sir Frederic,—I trust you will allow me to express to you the sincere regret I feel at your being compelled to give up your command of the "Artists." To myself volunteering has always been so inseparably connected with your command, that I cannot at present realise the extent of the blank which your resignation will create. I shall ever remember with pride that it was under your auspices that I rose through the ranks and obtained my commission.—Believe me, dear Sir Frederic, very truly yours,

W. Pasteur.

Sir Frederic Leighton, P.R.A.

[67]The following correspondence took place between Leighton and Mr. Henry Wells, R.A.To SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.January 27, (?) 1880.I will avail myself of this opportunity to remark upon the statement you made in your summing up, viz. that if women were made members under the existing law they would not have the right to sit on Council.If you can establish this, if you can show us that any one elected a "member" under our law can be debarred on the score of sex from taking a seat on the Council, then I will instantly allow that our laws do provide for the election of women, and that the very ground of our argument is proved to be a quicksand. When you endorsed the statement that came so naturally from Millais, Calderon, and Leslie, I felt the matter was serious, for I saw at once that you could not do justice to our argument in the summing up because its very foundation was misapprehended by you. Although the question is now disposed of, I beg of you to look closely into the matter and assure yourself of it. I only wish I had known beforehand where your doubts were centered, for I would have done my best to remove them. I know you will find, beyond all doubt and controversy, that any one made a "member" by election can make good a claim to a seat on the Council, just as Mr. Tresham made good his claim; and it is because our laws provide for only one kind of members—a Council-sitting kind—that we felt the necessity of providing for the election of a non-Council-sitting kind.In making this distinction we follow the example of George the Third and the founders of the Academy (who presumably knew something of the understanding upon which the two ladies became connected with the Society), for their decision, when theyadministeredthe law in the Tresham case, excluded women from a privilege which could not be denied to a "member" elected under the law. Of course their and our interpretation is open to dispute; but this much is beyond dispute, that if the law is interpreted as providing for women being "members," then it also places them (against the intention, as we see, of the founders) upon the Council; and as the great majority of the present Academicians have made up their minds that women shall not sit on Council, legislation would be necessary on either reading of the law.The schedule of privileges to be given on the one hypothesis, would on the other give place to a subtraction of privileges, and either schedule would be determined according to the varying shades of opinions of the members.There would remain only this difference in the result; one schedule would be based upon a law that is open to varying interpretations, whereas according to our method the schedule was based upon a positive resolution providing for the election of women, thus removing the question from all future discussion and doubt.H.T.W.From SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.January 30, 1880."In regard to the women question, I perfectlysawyour contention and the logical cohesion of your view, and I was familiar with the Tresham episode, only I dissent from your view; I maintain that there were from the first non-Council-sitting members—for 'members' the women certainly were. 'It is the King's pleasure that the following forty persons be the originalmembersof the Society,' and they did not serve on Council, as the roster shows,though all memberswere supposed to have sat; of course the laws were for the original as well as the elected members, and if the privilege could be refused to an original member whose name stands on the paper that says that all members shall serve in Council, it can and must on the same grounds be refused to elected female members after the custom is consecrated by Royal sanction."January 31, 1880."Dear Wells,—I should much like to hear what you wish to say about the office of Treasurer—there are several points connected directly or indirectly with the office which it will be well to consider before I ask the Queen to appoint, and I have called a Council forThursday(the funeral is not till Tuesday), at which these matters may be considered. It would seem advisable and convenient that the Treasurer's work be done at the Academy, and not away from it. I think also that the wording of the clause appointing a Surveyor might be made clearer; it ought not to bepossiblefor any one to misunderstand or misinterpret its bearing. Unfortunately I have an appointment to-morrow afternoon at 4.30, and my work in the day is so urgent, having to be handed over on a fixed day, that I cannot leave it—wouldTuesdayatfivedo? say at the Athenæum, or here a little later? we should still be forty-eight hours in advance of the Council. In regard to the women question, I perfectlysawyour contention and the logical cohesion of your view, and I was familiar with the Tresham episode, only I dissent from your view; I maintain that there were from the first 'non-Council-sitting' members—for 'members' the women certainly were: 'It is Her Majesty's pleasure that the following forty persons be the originalmembersof the Society,' and they did not serve on Council as the roster shows, thoughall memberswere supposed to have sat. Of course the laws were for the 'original' as well as for the 'elected' members, and if the privilege could be refused to an original member whose name stands on the paper, that says that all members shall serve on Council, it can and must on the same grounds be refused to 'elected' female members after the custom is consecrated by Royal sanction.—In haste, yours very truly,Fred Leighton."I have said nothing in this letter about poor Barry, but you may imagine whether the tragic event has moved and haunts me."To SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.February 1, 1880.I am very glad indeed to have the statement of your views which you have given me on the women question. Everything is now clear, side matters are disposed of, and only a single point remains on which we have to join issue. On my part I hold that our laws are in a definite and unequivocal form. That their foundation is in the "Instrument" and that every addition to, or modification, or annulment of the provisions in that document has been made in the manner prescribed, viz. by "resolutions" passed by the General Assembly and afterwards sanctioned by the Sovereign. These acts of legislation are all drawn up in a special way (as to size and pattern), to receive the sign manual of the Sovereign; and the tablets arranged in the order of their dates constitute our Statute-Book. I hold that no law can be changed or privilege taken away except by a subsequent act of legislation done in the prescribed manner.On your part you hold that laws can be changed and privileges taken away by a "custom consecrated by Royal sanction." Thus the issue raised is very clear and distinct indeed.I will point out that the question as to women sitting on Council was only on one occasion, and then only incidentally, before the Academy. Until the Tresham case arose the ballot had been used in forming the Council, and consequently no question of rights could appear while that process remained unchallenged. But whether we are discussing a single act of adjudication, or such a succession of acts as may be called a "custom," is really immaterial, because the sole question before us is this—can any act or acts other than those of legislation override and supplant the enactments of our law?If it could be established that our laws must give way to the class of acts you point to, it would then be the first duty of the Academy to have our records minutely searched to ascertain what other laws have been supplanted by administrative actions sanctioned by the Sovereign; and the historical method so much discountenanced at our last Assembly would in truth rise into paramount importance. Many cases would most probably be found. We have one in suspense before us at this moment—the case of the engravers.The laws of the Academy distinctly provide (but not more distinctly than that without discrimination "members" shall sit on Council) that a vacancy in the case of R.A. engravers shall not be filled up until the assent of the General Assembly has been taken by vote. Since the making of that law only two vacancies have occurred. They were both filled up without a preliminary permission, and the Sovereign sanctioned the election. On your contention, therefore, the custom consecrated by these sanctions must override the law itself, and nothing at this time stands between Barlow and the Queen's signature to his Diploma.The Constitutional question you have raised is certainly one of the highest importance, and I shall watch its development with great interest. It is a matter of little moment what the view of an ordinary member like myself may be, but not so with the President, and I offer no apology for endeavouring to throw light upon the subject.H.T.W.

[67]The following correspondence took place between Leighton and Mr. Henry Wells, R.A.

To SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.January 27, (?) 1880.I will avail myself of this opportunity to remark upon the statement you made in your summing up, viz. that if women were made members under the existing law they would not have the right to sit on Council.If you can establish this, if you can show us that any one elected a "member" under our law can be debarred on the score of sex from taking a seat on the Council, then I will instantly allow that our laws do provide for the election of women, and that the very ground of our argument is proved to be a quicksand. When you endorsed the statement that came so naturally from Millais, Calderon, and Leslie, I felt the matter was serious, for I saw at once that you could not do justice to our argument in the summing up because its very foundation was misapprehended by you. Although the question is now disposed of, I beg of you to look closely into the matter and assure yourself of it. I only wish I had known beforehand where your doubts were centered, for I would have done my best to remove them. I know you will find, beyond all doubt and controversy, that any one made a "member" by election can make good a claim to a seat on the Council, just as Mr. Tresham made good his claim; and it is because our laws provide for only one kind of members—a Council-sitting kind—that we felt the necessity of providing for the election of a non-Council-sitting kind.In making this distinction we follow the example of George the Third and the founders of the Academy (who presumably knew something of the understanding upon which the two ladies became connected with the Society), for their decision, when theyadministeredthe law in the Tresham case, excluded women from a privilege which could not be denied to a "member" elected under the law. Of course their and our interpretation is open to dispute; but this much is beyond dispute, that if the law is interpreted as providing for women being "members," then it also places them (against the intention, as we see, of the founders) upon the Council; and as the great majority of the present Academicians have made up their minds that women shall not sit on Council, legislation would be necessary on either reading of the law.The schedule of privileges to be given on the one hypothesis, would on the other give place to a subtraction of privileges, and either schedule would be determined according to the varying shades of opinions of the members.There would remain only this difference in the result; one schedule would be based upon a law that is open to varying interpretations, whereas according to our method the schedule was based upon a positive resolution providing for the election of women, thus removing the question from all future discussion and doubt.H.T.W.

To SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.

January 27, (?) 1880.

I will avail myself of this opportunity to remark upon the statement you made in your summing up, viz. that if women were made members under the existing law they would not have the right to sit on Council.

If you can establish this, if you can show us that any one elected a "member" under our law can be debarred on the score of sex from taking a seat on the Council, then I will instantly allow that our laws do provide for the election of women, and that the very ground of our argument is proved to be a quicksand. When you endorsed the statement that came so naturally from Millais, Calderon, and Leslie, I felt the matter was serious, for I saw at once that you could not do justice to our argument in the summing up because its very foundation was misapprehended by you. Although the question is now disposed of, I beg of you to look closely into the matter and assure yourself of it. I only wish I had known beforehand where your doubts were centered, for I would have done my best to remove them. I know you will find, beyond all doubt and controversy, that any one made a "member" by election can make good a claim to a seat on the Council, just as Mr. Tresham made good his claim; and it is because our laws provide for only one kind of members—a Council-sitting kind—that we felt the necessity of providing for the election of a non-Council-sitting kind.

In making this distinction we follow the example of George the Third and the founders of the Academy (who presumably knew something of the understanding upon which the two ladies became connected with the Society), for their decision, when theyadministeredthe law in the Tresham case, excluded women from a privilege which could not be denied to a "member" elected under the law. Of course their and our interpretation is open to dispute; but this much is beyond dispute, that if the law is interpreted as providing for women being "members," then it also places them (against the intention, as we see, of the founders) upon the Council; and as the great majority of the present Academicians have made up their minds that women shall not sit on Council, legislation would be necessary on either reading of the law.

The schedule of privileges to be given on the one hypothesis, would on the other give place to a subtraction of privileges, and either schedule would be determined according to the varying shades of opinions of the members.

There would remain only this difference in the result; one schedule would be based upon a law that is open to varying interpretations, whereas according to our method the schedule was based upon a positive resolution providing for the election of women, thus removing the question from all future discussion and doubt.

H.T.W.

From SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.January 30, 1880."In regard to the women question, I perfectlysawyour contention and the logical cohesion of your view, and I was familiar with the Tresham episode, only I dissent from your view; I maintain that there were from the first non-Council-sitting members—for 'members' the women certainly were. 'It is the King's pleasure that the following forty persons be the originalmembersof the Society,' and they did not serve on Council, as the roster shows,though all memberswere supposed to have sat; of course the laws were for the original as well as the elected members, and if the privilege could be refused to an original member whose name stands on the paper that says that all members shall serve in Council, it can and must on the same grounds be refused to elected female members after the custom is consecrated by Royal sanction."

From SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.

January 30, 1880.

"In regard to the women question, I perfectlysawyour contention and the logical cohesion of your view, and I was familiar with the Tresham episode, only I dissent from your view; I maintain that there were from the first non-Council-sitting members—for 'members' the women certainly were. 'It is the King's pleasure that the following forty persons be the originalmembersof the Society,' and they did not serve on Council, as the roster shows,though all memberswere supposed to have sat; of course the laws were for the original as well as the elected members, and if the privilege could be refused to an original member whose name stands on the paper that says that all members shall serve in Council, it can and must on the same grounds be refused to elected female members after the custom is consecrated by Royal sanction."

January 31, 1880."Dear Wells,—I should much like to hear what you wish to say about the office of Treasurer—there are several points connected directly or indirectly with the office which it will be well to consider before I ask the Queen to appoint, and I have called a Council forThursday(the funeral is not till Tuesday), at which these matters may be considered. It would seem advisable and convenient that the Treasurer's work be done at the Academy, and not away from it. I think also that the wording of the clause appointing a Surveyor might be made clearer; it ought not to bepossiblefor any one to misunderstand or misinterpret its bearing. Unfortunately I have an appointment to-morrow afternoon at 4.30, and my work in the day is so urgent, having to be handed over on a fixed day, that I cannot leave it—wouldTuesdayatfivedo? say at the Athenæum, or here a little later? we should still be forty-eight hours in advance of the Council. In regard to the women question, I perfectlysawyour contention and the logical cohesion of your view, and I was familiar with the Tresham episode, only I dissent from your view; I maintain that there were from the first 'non-Council-sitting' members—for 'members' the women certainly were: 'It is Her Majesty's pleasure that the following forty persons be the originalmembersof the Society,' and they did not serve on Council as the roster shows, thoughall memberswere supposed to have sat. Of course the laws were for the 'original' as well as for the 'elected' members, and if the privilege could be refused to an original member whose name stands on the paper, that says that all members shall serve on Council, it can and must on the same grounds be refused to 'elected' female members after the custom is consecrated by Royal sanction.—In haste, yours very truly,Fred Leighton."I have said nothing in this letter about poor Barry, but you may imagine whether the tragic event has moved and haunts me."

January 31, 1880.

"Dear Wells,—I should much like to hear what you wish to say about the office of Treasurer—there are several points connected directly or indirectly with the office which it will be well to consider before I ask the Queen to appoint, and I have called a Council forThursday(the funeral is not till Tuesday), at which these matters may be considered. It would seem advisable and convenient that the Treasurer's work be done at the Academy, and not away from it. I think also that the wording of the clause appointing a Surveyor might be made clearer; it ought not to bepossiblefor any one to misunderstand or misinterpret its bearing. Unfortunately I have an appointment to-morrow afternoon at 4.30, and my work in the day is so urgent, having to be handed over on a fixed day, that I cannot leave it—wouldTuesdayatfivedo? say at the Athenæum, or here a little later? we should still be forty-eight hours in advance of the Council. In regard to the women question, I perfectlysawyour contention and the logical cohesion of your view, and I was familiar with the Tresham episode, only I dissent from your view; I maintain that there were from the first 'non-Council-sitting' members—for 'members' the women certainly were: 'It is Her Majesty's pleasure that the following forty persons be the originalmembersof the Society,' and they did not serve on Council as the roster shows, thoughall memberswere supposed to have sat. Of course the laws were for the 'original' as well as for the 'elected' members, and if the privilege could be refused to an original member whose name stands on the paper, that says that all members shall serve on Council, it can and must on the same grounds be refused to 'elected' female members after the custom is consecrated by Royal sanction.—In haste, yours very truly,

Fred Leighton.

"I have said nothing in this letter about poor Barry, but you may imagine whether the tragic event has moved and haunts me."

To SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.February 1, 1880.I am very glad indeed to have the statement of your views which you have given me on the women question. Everything is now clear, side matters are disposed of, and only a single point remains on which we have to join issue. On my part I hold that our laws are in a definite and unequivocal form. That their foundation is in the "Instrument" and that every addition to, or modification, or annulment of the provisions in that document has been made in the manner prescribed, viz. by "resolutions" passed by the General Assembly and afterwards sanctioned by the Sovereign. These acts of legislation are all drawn up in a special way (as to size and pattern), to receive the sign manual of the Sovereign; and the tablets arranged in the order of their dates constitute our Statute-Book. I hold that no law can be changed or privilege taken away except by a subsequent act of legislation done in the prescribed manner.On your part you hold that laws can be changed and privileges taken away by a "custom consecrated by Royal sanction." Thus the issue raised is very clear and distinct indeed.I will point out that the question as to women sitting on Council was only on one occasion, and then only incidentally, before the Academy. Until the Tresham case arose the ballot had been used in forming the Council, and consequently no question of rights could appear while that process remained unchallenged. But whether we are discussing a single act of adjudication, or such a succession of acts as may be called a "custom," is really immaterial, because the sole question before us is this—can any act or acts other than those of legislation override and supplant the enactments of our law?If it could be established that our laws must give way to the class of acts you point to, it would then be the first duty of the Academy to have our records minutely searched to ascertain what other laws have been supplanted by administrative actions sanctioned by the Sovereign; and the historical method so much discountenanced at our last Assembly would in truth rise into paramount importance. Many cases would most probably be found. We have one in suspense before us at this moment—the case of the engravers.The laws of the Academy distinctly provide (but not more distinctly than that without discrimination "members" shall sit on Council) that a vacancy in the case of R.A. engravers shall not be filled up until the assent of the General Assembly has been taken by vote. Since the making of that law only two vacancies have occurred. They were both filled up without a preliminary permission, and the Sovereign sanctioned the election. On your contention, therefore, the custom consecrated by these sanctions must override the law itself, and nothing at this time stands between Barlow and the Queen's signature to his Diploma.The Constitutional question you have raised is certainly one of the highest importance, and I shall watch its development with great interest. It is a matter of little moment what the view of an ordinary member like myself may be, but not so with the President, and I offer no apology for endeavouring to throw light upon the subject.H.T.W.

To SirFrederic Leighton, P.R.A.

February 1, 1880.

I am very glad indeed to have the statement of your views which you have given me on the women question. Everything is now clear, side matters are disposed of, and only a single point remains on which we have to join issue. On my part I hold that our laws are in a definite and unequivocal form. That their foundation is in the "Instrument" and that every addition to, or modification, or annulment of the provisions in that document has been made in the manner prescribed, viz. by "resolutions" passed by the General Assembly and afterwards sanctioned by the Sovereign. These acts of legislation are all drawn up in a special way (as to size and pattern), to receive the sign manual of the Sovereign; and the tablets arranged in the order of their dates constitute our Statute-Book. I hold that no law can be changed or privilege taken away except by a subsequent act of legislation done in the prescribed manner.

On your part you hold that laws can be changed and privileges taken away by a "custom consecrated by Royal sanction." Thus the issue raised is very clear and distinct indeed.

I will point out that the question as to women sitting on Council was only on one occasion, and then only incidentally, before the Academy. Until the Tresham case arose the ballot had been used in forming the Council, and consequently no question of rights could appear while that process remained unchallenged. But whether we are discussing a single act of adjudication, or such a succession of acts as may be called a "custom," is really immaterial, because the sole question before us is this—can any act or acts other than those of legislation override and supplant the enactments of our law?

If it could be established that our laws must give way to the class of acts you point to, it would then be the first duty of the Academy to have our records minutely searched to ascertain what other laws have been supplanted by administrative actions sanctioned by the Sovereign; and the historical method so much discountenanced at our last Assembly would in truth rise into paramount importance. Many cases would most probably be found. We have one in suspense before us at this moment—the case of the engravers.

The laws of the Academy distinctly provide (but not more distinctly than that without discrimination "members" shall sit on Council) that a vacancy in the case of R.A. engravers shall not be filled up until the assent of the General Assembly has been taken by vote. Since the making of that law only two vacancies have occurred. They were both filled up without a preliminary permission, and the Sovereign sanctioned the election. On your contention, therefore, the custom consecrated by these sanctions must override the law itself, and nothing at this time stands between Barlow and the Queen's signature to his Diploma.

The Constitutional question you have raised is certainly one of the highest importance, and I shall watch its development with great interest. It is a matter of little moment what the view of an ordinary member like myself may be, but not so with the President, and I offer no apology for endeavouring to throw light upon the subject.

H.T.W.

[68]SeeChapter III.

[69]Now in the Tate Gallery, purchased under the terms of the Chantrey Bequest.

Back to Index Next