DEAR SIR,--It is a source of regret to me that I am unable to be present as a listener at the discussion to-morrow. Meanwhile the question of the base, though a very important one, is in my mind very secondary to that of the site, and the (in my poor opinion) radical wrongness of the present selection much mars my interest in the whole affair. A monument which, intended to be conspicuous, is not the _focus_ of the avenues that lead to it, I think against the most primary perceptions of effect. Two magnificent avenues give access to Cleopatra's Needle, the finest river and the finest embankment in Europe; _both of these run past it_ as if they had forgotten it. I may add that what would only have been feeble is rendered worse than feeble by the (of course accidental) semblance of matching with the short tower over the way.

Pray excuse the great haste in which I write and the consequent abruptness of my expressions, and believe me, yours very truly,

FRED LEIGHTON.

Mr. J. Goodall, in his Reminiscences, says: "Many years before it was removed from Egypt I used to see it lying on the seash.o.r.e near Alexandria. I agree with Lord Leighton's opinion that it was not erected on a suitable site. It is a pity it was not put up in front of the British Museum."

Leighton, needless to say, took infinite interest in Sir Henry Tate's splendid scheme for memorialising the success of a commercial life, by presenting to his nation a gallery in which the best British works of art might find a home, and, moreover, by the gift to the public of the nucleus of such a collection. It was truly amazing to see the amount of time and trouble which Leighton devoted to this scheme, considering how full to overflowing his life already appeared to be.

But, whether it was a question of a splendid enterprise, or a struggling artist of whom the world had never heard, or even an earnest amateur, once his sense aroused that he could be of help, Leighton manufactured time somehow to give that help.[78] But the high-minded, public-spirited view Sir Henry Tate took of the responsibilities of wealth specially enlisted Leighton's sympathies, and he evinced an intense interest in helping to work out the great idea.

Another matter which concerned him very seriously was the fact that a work by the greatest sculptor England can claim--Alfred Stevens--purporting to memorialise our great warrior, the Duke of Wellington, was allowed to remain unfinished and shunted away in a side chapel of St. Paul's Cathedral, instead of being completed and placed in the position for which it was designed. The following letters to Mr. Henry Wells show that in 1888 Leighton had induced others to view the matter in the same light:--

2 HOLLAND PARK ROAD, _August 12, 1888_.

DEAR WELLS,--The list for the Memorial Committee is practically complete, and though it is not in every particular the list which you or I might have drawn up, it is a good one, and as I told you I think in a previous note, I have not liked to interfere too much, as Agnew has so zealously taken the work on himself. I meant to send you the list, but have cleverly come away from home (I am writing at the Senior United Service Club) without it. I have of course asked Agnew to add his own name; for the Academy I have proposed to him the four Trustees--not as Trustees, but because they offer a ready-made group in a body where none is afore or after--Sir J. Gilbert, Linton, and Coutts Lindsay will complete the artistic section for the present. The next step, as I have suggested to Agnew, is to get at the Dean of St. Paul's--this I have offered to do. A chairman will have to be appointed; I should suggest, or rather have suggested, the D. of Cleveland--if he joins; I believe his answer has not yet come in. And there must be a banker: then a letter from the Committee should appear in the _Times_ inviting adhesions and subscriptions, to be published from time to time: is all this in harmony with your own view? Are you not afraid that the moment when "everybody" (for _our_ purposes it _is_ everybody) is leaving town or has left it--I go myself in a few days--is a very bad one? Many people lose sight of their _Times_, or would not write from the country or foreign parts. How would it strike you to wait a month or two, having now laid the foundation? It is a nice point. There are pros, but there are also cons. With all good wishes, yours sincerely,

FRED LEIGHTON.

You have seen no doubt in your _Times_ that we mean to exhibit our lamented friend's work in a worthy manner.

_P.P.S._--By-the-bye, _S. Kensington_ ought to be represented. I will ask Agnew to write to T. Armstrong.

[Ill.u.s.tration: "BACCHANTE." 1892 By permission of Messrs. Henry Graves & Co., the owners of the Copyright]

[Ill.u.s.tration: STUDY IN OILS FOR "BACCHANTE." 1892 By permission of Mrs. Stewart Hodgson]

2 HOLLAND PARK ROAD, KENSINGTON, W., _November 2, 1892_.

DEAR WELLS,--Best thanks for your cheque and kind note. You will be glad to hear that the removal is going on capitally. I did not wait for the full money-promise; I had _determined_ to do the thing, and I set it going on my personal guarantee when we were 300 short of the full sum. _Now_ we have the money, young Lehmann munificently sending a cheque _for that amount_.

The great monument having been moved to its right position, the next question was to raise funds for the completion of the work. This was perplexing Leighton during the last weeks of his life. Having written a letter to the _Times_ in 1895, and the donations having come in but scantily, he was puzzled to know what further steps to take.

Leighton himself, so distinguished a sculptor, took a special interest in all efforts to promote the knowledge and love of plastic art. When, therefore, his old friend Mr. Walter Copland Perry called a meeting at Grosvenor House--at which the late Duke of Westminster presided--to lay before it his scheme for the formation of a gallery of casts from all the best Greek and Roman statues, Leighton was one of the most zealous and active promoters of the scheme.[79]

Leighton was commissioned by the Government to execute the medallion for Queen Victoria's Jubilee in 1887. M. Edouard Lanteri, now Professor of Modelling at the South Kensington schools, a.s.sisted him in carrying out the design, and became an ardent admirer of the President. M. Lanteri described to me how certain difficulties occurred in the casting. Leighton said they must work on till these were set right--and they _did_ work eighteen hours on end.

All to whom the work of Watts, Burne-Jones, and Rossetti has appealed, owe Leighton a debt of grat.i.tude. Before the Grosvenor Gallery Exhibition of his work took place in 1882, Watts, in talking to me of the unpopularity of the pictures he felt most inspired to paint, would often give as a proof of this that, with one exception, no one had ever cared to engrave his pictures; and truly, without Mr. Fred Hollyer's photographs the general public would have known little of the special value of this work, nor of the art of Rossetti and Burne-Jones. Mr. Hollyer's photographs are not merely copies--they have as art an atmosphere of charm in themselves; they render what may be called the _soul_ of a picture. He writes:--

"About 1875 I received a letter from Baroness ----, requesting me to call upon her in order to arrange to photograph the collection of works of art in her country house. She had employed other photographers, but the results had not been satisfactory. I carried the matter through, and not only received a considerable amount in remuneration, but was given great encouragement to persevere with my work at a time when I had nearly decided on going to America. The Baroness never mentioned who it was that had recommended me, and though I had been constantly working for him during many years, it was not till six months after his death that I discovered it was Lord Leighton who had been my good friend. I should be glad to bear testimony to his great heart and loving kindness, and do regret not having been able to thank him myself."

Leighton was made a Baronet in 1886. The following letter from Gladstone, written in 1885, refers to Leighton having submitted to him the names of Millais and Watts as artists worthy to receive the honour, at the same time begging him earnestly not to include his own:--

_Private._]

10 DOWNING STREET, WHITEHALL, _June 17, 1885_.

MY DEAR SIR F. LEIGHTON,--Your letter has given me much pleasure. I can a.s.sure you that I in return highly appreciate the generous spirit you have shown, and I value the advice you kindly tendered in this matter of Art Honours. I am reporting rather fully to Her Majesty on our conversation of Monday, and on the personal abnegation on your own part, which commands my cordial respect.--I remain always, very faithfully yours,

W.E. GLADSTONE.

On Watts declining the honour, Leighton was at first much vexed; but Watts, having explained to him the reason which made it inadvisable for him to accept a baronetcy, Leighton fully, as he told my husband and myself, saw the necessity of his declining.

Since the first years when Leighton settled in London he had been favoured by the personal friendship of many members of the Royal family, who very greatly esteemed him. He not only attended the State banquets and entertainments to which he was summoned, but was frequently the guest at receptions of a private and a more intimate character at Marlborough House and elsewhere.

In these pages there is only s.p.a.ce to note a few, among the very many directions in which he served the Art interests of his country. In foreign lands, and in the Colonies no less than in England, he extended the knowledge and appreciation of the best English Art by his unwearying exertions; and yet it must always be remembered he ever remained "a workman first, an official after."

Professor Church, appointed in 1879 to the Professorship of Chemistry in the Royal Academy of Arts in London, has preserved letters and notes from Leighton on the subject of pigments.[80] It is almost incredible that his mind could have penetrated with such accuracy into all the details of his craft as fresh questions arose as to the value of new vehicles and colours, considering his endless labours connected with the wider interests of Art, and the absorbing nature of his own work. But there exist over sixty letters, and more than twenty cards, dating from 1880 to November 1895, two months before his death, in which he proves his insistency to master thoroughly every detail of his craft. He wrote: "It is, I feel, rather a duty in me to ascertain about these various new vehicles."

The following extracts may prove of interest and value to painters.[81]

_8th._

DEAR PROF. CHURCH,--I write to acknowledge your letter of the 6th, the information in which (Jaune de Naples) is to me of very great importance indeed. I believe Hills to be really anxious to help us in the matter of medium. I should be peculiarly glad if we could send forth a thoroughly trustworthy, hard-drying, supple, and not yellowing vehicle. Let us consider it. I find myself using a mixture, roughly, of equal parts of amber varnish (Roberson's) and oil of spike; and, say, a sixth of the whole of poppy oil (Roberson's): that is, 3/7 amber, 3/7 spike, 1/7 poppy; but I vary according to the work; and again I don't know what Roberson's amber varnish is, it does not seem _very_ drying. Of course one would want a good middle drying power, to which, _mixing the ingredients_, one might add any one at will. I think that "Siccatif de Haarlem" has about that middle quality, if I remember it rightly. It is, I think, copal, poppy oil, and turps.; but it seemed to me to yellow a little, why, I don't know; poppy should not darken. Chromophile is delightful up to a certain point, and then the work sinks extraordinarily blind and tallowy; and as you want something in the way of varnish at the end, it seems desirable to carry that or _some_ varnish in a moderate degree right through. Chromoph.

becomes a little _milky_ in a bottle with spir. of turp., and turns bright green when left in a dipper.

Your proposal to _report_ to us annually is very valuable, and could be worked to the _general_ advantage.

I am delighted to find that you are in co-operation with my friend Mr. Hills, who has a warm and genuine desire to serve Art and his friends the artists. I find his poppy oil _clarified with charcoal_ very delightful stuff. Am I wrong in thinking the action of the charcoal on it has been to render it more _drying_? I think that a vehicle made with that oil, amber varnish, and oil of spike will be a very satisfactory vehicle indeed; particularly if you can, between you, _bleach_ the oil yet more. Chromophile is quite colourless. The mastic varnish _that won't bloom_ will be a great triumph. _Pace_ our detractors, it shall, I hope, be seen in time that the R.A. is not unmindful of the needs of artists even in the matter of material appliances.

I observe that you speak in your valuable manual of Aureolin as a _very slow-drying_ colour when ground with oil; finding, in use, that _Roberson's_ Aureolin dries, on the contrary, extremely quick--it is always absolutely dry the next day, and I use no vehicle but Bell's Medium, _i.e._ linseed and oil of spike and turps.--I wrote to ask him what he grinds the colour in. He answers "_pure linseed oil without the addition of any drier._" This puzzles me. Where is the solution? Are there different kinds of Aureolin? When you have a leisure moment send me a post-card.

Among the madders in your handbook _scarlet_ madder does not appear; I hope it is not a treacherous colour; I use it freely, but only mixture with other _dark_ colours, to give them richness. I also use cadmium _red_; is that wrong? A line on a post-card will greatly oblige.

_P.S._--Of course I only use cadmium red when I want a _very_ deep orange in drapery or sky--nothing could replace it.

_Feb. 2, 1885._

Here is a little problem: I thought all _burnt_ colours were _ipso facto_ sound. Roberson tells me that burnt white (Chremnitz do.), a lovely colour _like ivory_, plays most amazing tricks, darkens and lightens again in rapid succession.

WHY? When you are in Long Acre make him show you his samples.

Thanks for your letter. I don't use any particular colours other than those you mentioned in your lectures, although I thought of trying deep yellow madder again; I used to like it very much. I suppose you have the list--it is a very long one--of Edouard's colours. Smith is his agent here (14 Charles Street, Middles.e.x Hospital). I use one or two colours (Tadema I think _all_) from Mommen's in Brussels; his burnt sienna is _superb_. Asphaltum would reward study; it was _universally_ used by the Venetians, and seems never to have cracked with them. I am very glad that you are steadily pursuing your collection of specimens and experiments, which I hope will by degrees become an exhaustive one, and of infinite value to the profession. _Grounds_, too, will deserve much attention.

Kindly tell me whether there is any harm in putting a _thin_ coat of mastic, softened perhaps with a drop or two of oil, over works _finished quite recently_ but _begun_ a year or more ago?

If I understand rightly, cracking is caused by atmospheric action through the _back_ of the canvas, by _distension_ of underlying partially soft paint and, consequent disruption of the upper, harder layer of varnish. If the first painting is a year old, is it not tough enough to resist the atmosphere, and is it not _anyhow_ pretty safe when the canvas is _backed_?

I suppose "Mutrie yellow" is quite safe alone and mixed with other pigments?