0.4

RESTRICTED GRANTS OF THE COUNCIL MEDALS, &c.

[Class XXX.

useless. The Jury believe, however, that their awardswill give a just idea of the present state of the Fine Artsas shown in this Exhibition; and they here wish to ex-press their gratification hi observing the universallygrowing taste for objects of art, and the increasing esti-mation in which they are held. They have noticed withequal pleasure, that industry directed by science fostersthis popular tendency. By the novel and successfuladaptation of cheap materials and of economical pro-cesses to the multiplication of works of art, the bestmodels are daily brought more and more within the reachof all classes. New and pure sources of enjoyment,hitherto the privilege Of the few, are thus opened to allthe members of civilized society. Again, the diffusion ofgood taste in the Fine Arts cannot but beneficially afifectthe productions of industry generally, so t hat what hashitherto been valued merely for its usefulness may, inmany cases, be rendered an object of attraction to a culti-vated eye and a refined mind.

The Jury of Class XXX. have been most anxious notto pass over any of the numerous objects in the Exhibition,which it might properly be considered to be their duty toexamine. They think it unlikely that any article deserv-ing notice should have escaped their repeated, minute,and diligent inquiries. On the other hand, this Jury haveoccasionally abstained from examining objects, respectingwhich, owing to the necessarily uncertain limits of theseveral classes, doubt might be entertained whether theystrictly belonged to Fine Arts or not. Should the Juryof Class XXX. have been led, in some few instances, tolimit their jurisdiction too much, they have the satisfac-tion of feeling that ample justice has been rendered toexhibitors by those Juries, to whose judgment such objectsas have not been considered to belong to this Class havebeen finally submitted. Thus the Jury of Class XXX.have purposely abstained from judging of such metal-casts as they conceived to have been exhibited merely forthe purpose of showing either the successful result of anew process, or the novel use of a particular metal. Inthis case they were aware that another Jury were aboutto take these points into their consideration, and judge ofthese objects as specimens of mechanical industry. Insome few exceptional cases, such, for instance, as those ofMessrs. Perkz, Weishaupt, See., certain objects haveappeared to possess so strong a claim to be noticed in thisClass, that the Jury have not hesitated to distinguish themby an award, although aware that they had been rewardedby other Juries; but whenever such instances of doubleawards have been made known to this Juit, the fact hasbeen noticed in this Report.

The Jury would willingly have endeavoured to state,as directed by the 20th instruction of the Council of Chair-men, the several grounds upon which four of the GreatMedals have been recommended by them; but it has beenfound impossible to comply with such an instruction withrespect to objects of sculpture, although the Jury felt howdesirable it was that such an instruction should be observedin those cases in which the elements out of which theJuries were to form their judgment, were of a more defi-nite and more uniformly appreciable nature.

At a meeting held on the 5th of June, long before thequestion of individual awards came under consideration,the Jury agreed upon the following resolution *

“ That it is not desirable to assign the Council Medalto every object of art pre-eminently beautiful or excellentin its kind, whether it be executed* in an inferior sectionof the Class or not; but that it should be rather limitedto the highest works of the highest class.” This resolu-tion, consistent with the view of the Fine Arts takenthroughout by this Jury, precluded them from awardingthe highest honours to any but works of art of the highestclass. Their awards must not. therefore, he comparedwith those of other Juries guided by different principles,but must be tested only by the rules which the Jurors ofClass XXX. have laid down for their own guidance. Theholders of the several marks of approbation by which thisJury have distinguished merit ought to appreciate themaccording to the high value set upon these several marksof approbation by those who conferred them.

In forming their judgment upon works in the highest

branch of art coming within their jurisdiction, the Juryhave principally looked for the embodiment of ideas,thought, feeling, and passion; not for the mere imitationof nature, however true in detail, or admirable in execu-tion. They have looked for originality of invention, lessor more happily expressed in that style which has fortwenty-three centuries been the wonder of every civilizedpeople, and the standard of excellence to which artists ofthe highest order have endeavoured to attain. Whereverindications of originality, chastened by a successful adapta-tion of this style, have been met with, the Jury haveacknowledged a corresponding amount of merit; and it isthis originality of conception, improved by such style,which the Jury have recognized by the honours placed attheir disposal. They have endeavoured to record, in themost emphatic manner, their anxious wish that artistsshould study to give their ideas that form and life whichspiritualizes every-day nature, and elevates the work ofart to the place of a type of nature itself. The Jury ofClass XXX. would point to the remains of the Parthenon as embodying the result of the great principles whichthey have been anxious to inculcate, and which theydesire to see universally adopted. The limited numberof Council Medals awarded must not, therefore, be re-garded as a proof of deficiency of talent in the bulk of theworks exhibited, but as evidence of the severity withwhich the principles adopted by the Jury have beenapplied.

It was agreed to recommend that Council Medals shouldbe awarded to the following works:—

To Professor A. Kiss, of Berlin , for his group cast inzinc, and bronzed by M. Geiss, representing an Amazonon horseback attacked by a Tiger. (Prussia, No. 279,p. 1065.)

To Baron Marociiettt, of Turin, now of London , forhis colossal equestrian statue in plaster of Richard Coeurde Lion . (Outside West, No. 76, p. 118.)

To M. J. Pkadikii, of Paris, Member of the Institute ,for his marble statue of Phryne. (France , No. 1407,p. 1343.)

To the representatives of the late Mr. Richard J.Wyatt, for his marble statue of fc Glycera. Exhibited byCaptain Leyland. (Main Avenue East, No. 103, p. 12S6.)

It was the unanimous impulse of the Jury on theawards being taken into consideration, to recommend thatthe same high distinction should be conferred on Mr.Gibson (p. 846), for his marble group of a Hunter andDog, exhibited by the Earl of Yarborocgh. Their in-tention was defeated by Mr. Gibson himself, who, wellknowing that should he accept the office of a Juror ofClass XXX., he could no longer receive a prize from thatJury, preferred serving his brother artists to his ownindividual gratification, and thus disqualified himself forreceiving the honour which he had so well deserved.

Division A.— Sculpture as a Fine Art.*

Section A.—1. In Metals simple, as Gold, Silver, Copper ,Iron, Zinc , Lead, Sfc.

In this section of the works submitted to their judg-ment, the Jury awarded the Prize Medal to the followingwork, it being, however, understood that for this class orreward, when more than one article was exhibited by thesame artist, the Jury might, if they thought it expedient,cumulate in their judgment the various species of meritwhich they recognized in the several productions.

To Messrs. C. M. Weishaupt Sons, of Ilauau (p. 1073),for a Set of Chess-men and Board, in silver and gold,ornamented with enamel. Although aware that the meritof these articles has been acknowledged by another Jury,the Jury of Class XXX. wished to record their opinionof them as objects of art. (Prussia, No. 412.)

The Jury were of opinion that the following artistswere deserving of Honourable Mention :—

Mr. A. Vechte, of London (No. 97, pp. 686-690), forhis designs for silver works executed by him for theexhibitors, Messrs. Hunt and Roskell. Although a

* The classification of awards is according to that adoptedin the “ Head Juries.”