On the Old Road, Vol. 2 | Page 2

a proper
decorative portion of the National Gallery of Pictures--you do not
admit the term decoration?--No; I should not use that term of the
sculpture which it was the object of the gallery to exhibit. It might be
added, of course, supposing it became a part of the architecture, but not
as independent--not as a thing to be contemplated separately in the
room, and not as a part of the room. As a part of the room, of course,
modern sculpture might be added; but I have never thought that it
would be necessary.
You do not consider that sculpture would be a repose after
contemplating painting for some time?--I should not feel it so myself.
116. Dean of St. Paul's. When you speak of removing the sculpture of
the British Museum, and of uniting it with the pictures of the National
Gallery, do you comprehend the whole range of the sculpture in the
British Museum, commencing with the Egyptian, and going down
through its regular series of gradation to the decline of the art?--Yes,
because my great hope respecting the National Gallery is, that it may
become a perfectly consecutive chronological arrangement, and it
seems to me that it is one of the chief characteristics of a National
Gallery that it should be so.
Then you consider that one great excellence of the collection at the
British Museum is, that it does present that sort of history of the art of
sculpture?--I consider it rather its weakness that it does not.

Then you would go down further?--I would.
You are perhaps acquainted with the ivories which have been recently
purchased there?--I am not.
Supposing there were a fine collection of Byzantine ivories, you would
consider that they were an important link in the general
history?--Certainly.
Would you unite the whole of that Pagan sculpture with what you call
the later Christian art of Painting?--I should be glad to see it done--that
is to say, I should be glad to see the galleries of painting and sculpture
collaterally placed, and the gallery of sculpture beginning with the
Pagan art, and proceeding to the Christian art, but not necessarily
associating the painting with the sculpture of each epoch; because the
painting is so deficient in many of the periods where the sculpture is
rich, that you could not carry them on collaterally--you must have your
painting gallery and your sculpture gallery.
You would be sorry to take any portion of the sculpture from the
collection in the British Museum, and to associate it with any collection
of painting?--Yes, I should think it highly inexpedient. My whole
object would be that it might be associated with a larger collection, a
collection from other periods, and not be subdivided. And it seems to
be one of the chief reasons advanced in order to justify removing that
collection, that it cannot be much more enlarged--that you cannot at
present put other sculpture with it.
Supposing that the collection of ancient Pagan art could not be united
with the National Gallery of pictures, with which would you associate
the mediæval sculpture, supposing we were to retain any considerable
amount of sculpture?--With the painting.
The mediæval art you would associate with the painting, supposing you
could not put the whole together?--Yes.
117. Chairman. Do you approve of protecting pictures by glass?--Yes,
in every case. I do not know of what size a pane of glass can be

manufactured, but I have never seen a picture so large but that I should
be glad to see it under glass. Even supposing it were possible, which I
suppose it is not, the great Paul Veronese, in the gallery of the Louvre,
I think would be more beautiful under glass.
Independently of the preservation?--Independently of the preservation,
I think it would be more beautiful. It gives an especial delicacy to light
colors, and does little harm to dark colors--that is, it benefits delicate
pictures most, and its injury is only to very dark pictures.
Have you ever considered the propriety of covering the sculpture with
glass?--I have never considered it. I did not know until a very few days
ago that sculpture was injured by exposure to our climate and our
smoke.
Professor Faraday. But you would cover the pictures, independently of
the preservation, you would cover them absolutely for the artistic effect,
the improvement of the picture?--Not necessarily so, because to some
persons there might be an objectionable character in having to avoid the
reflection more scrupulously than otherwise. I should not press for it on
that head only. The advantage gained is not a great one; it is only felt
by very delicate eyes. As far as I know, many persons would not
perceive that there was a difference, and that is caused by the very
slight color in