Viewing page 16 of 37

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

16

cient art. Whether my caution was unnecessary or premature, and whether the evils to be apprehended to taste are too highly colored, every one must form his own opinion. But if our country is to be saved from that scourge to taste in other countries the plausible dealer in virtu, it will not be by lulling the connoisseur into a false security, or flattering his self complacency on the fancied possession of the work of a master. 

I cannot pass without notice a misquotation by the reviewer, which after having altered the sense, he pronounces absurd, and then spends a page in combatting the mistakes he himself has produced. 

"He cites twice," says the reviewer, "with great applause from Opie's Lectures, one of the grossest absurdities that ever were uttered, viz. 'that he who employs the humblest artist in the humblest way of his art, contributes more to the advancement of national genius than he who imports a thousand chef d'œuvres, the produce of a foreign land.' This passage I do cite twice, and in the first citation, (which is not the one used by the reviewer,) it reads "his art," by a very obvious typographical error for "history." In the second citation, (and this is the one used by the reviewer, as the context proves,) it is printed correctly, "history;" and why he should have gone out of his way to quote the erroneous passage, when the correct and rational one was before him, I cannot say. No one could be so misled as to suppose for a moment, that Mr. Opie here meant that the humblest artist in the humblest way of history, was to be sought out, and specially encouraged, or that I quoted him in support of such a sentiment. The spirit of the passage is plainly this: "the encouragement of national genius is more directly promoted by giving practice to our own artists in the highest department of painting, than by any efforts to place before them the best models.' This sentiment I would extend to the other departments of the art, and then let the reviewer have it as he has misquoted it, and I think it could be proved not so absurd as he pronounces it.