HL Deb 18 July 1844 vol 76 cc997-9
Lord Monteagle

moved the second reading of a Bill, to which he anticipated that no objection would be offered, namely, a Bill for the purpose of legalising Art-Unions—for on a former occasion, in introducing this Bill, he had stated in a few words the nature and objects of the Bill. These Art-Unions might be simply described as voluntary associations of individuals who contributed their money, with no interest of a pecuniary nature connected with the money subscribed to form a fund to be expended in the purchase of works of art, which were to be afterwards distributed among themselves by lot. These institutions had now for some years existed in this country. In 1835, a Parliamentary Committee sat to consider the subject of the promotion of the Fine Arts, and before this Committee were examined many persons of eminence, and amongst others, Dr. Waagen, who was so well known throughout Europe by his acquaintance with the fine arts. This gentleman stated, that so far back as 1825, Art Union Associations of this kind had existed in Prussia under the name of Kunstverein, and they had since been introduced into Hanover, Bavaria, and Wurtemburgh and other parts of the Continent; and it was upon the plan of these associations, that the Art Union of London was formed. Although at first they were coldly received, yet in no place had Art Unions made a greater progress than in this country since their establishment. The number of the subscribers had rapidly increased—from a few hundreds to 14,000—and the present contributions of the Art Unions of London for the purchase of works of art, amounted to a larger sum than was appropriated to the purpose by the munificence of Parliament. He believed that no less than 30,000l. had been expended by these associations in the encouragement of art in this country during the past year. The illustrious Duke (the Duke of Cambridge) who was present in the House, was a patron of the Art Union of London—many Members of both Houses of Parliament—many of the learned Judges of the land and others, were members of it; and the number of members and subscribers altogether amounted to 13,612 persons. Now, it had been discovered that under the provisions of an Act of Parliament, every one of those persons was liable to the pains and penalties incident to a prosecution for belonging to that association. Now, it would be admitted that this was a state of things that ought not to be allowed to continue, and it was to provide a remedy that he introduced this Bill. Their Lordships had already given parties relief with respect to actions arising out of horse racing, as soon as they made out a case—but here was a case which much more strongly called for interference. This association had been formed under the opinion that it was legal, but it turned out that it came within the provisions of an existing Act of Parliament, and Government had given notice to the parties that they would be liable to penalties if they continued Members of this society. It was right that the Government should give this notice, for if they had not done so, all the evils incident to lotteries might, be revived under the colour of Art Unions, by connecting money and pictures as prizes to be drawn for. Therefore lotteries might have been revived under the colour of Art Unions, and for the benefit of speculators. The Bill which he proposed to remedy the present state of things consist of two provisions. The first provision had for its object the legalizing the past transactions of those Art Unions, those Unions existed at London, Dublin, Edinburgh, Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, and in almost all the great towns of the country, this provision would give an indemnity with respect to all past transactions. The other provision would go to enact that in future a Royal charter of incorporation might be given to any of those Art Unions, or that the approval of the Board of Trade of the rules and regulations of any Art Union should be sufficient to legalize its practical operation. He could not avoid adding as he was desirous to place Art Unions under the direction of the Board of Trade, because at present all the schools of design in the country were under the control of that department. The Bill provided that from and after the 1st of January next the Board of Trade should be empowered to sanction the operation of any Art Union of the rules of which it approved. He hoped that their Lorships would consent to allow this Bill to be read a second time with the least possible delay. The subject had no political bearing, but it was intimately connected with the interests of an important and most respectable body—the artists of this country. The purchases for those Art Unions were generally made during the annual exhibitions, and for many years the artists had found these Art Unions to be their best customers. It would be a grievous disappointment to many of these individuals if this Bill was not carried. As this Bill might have some modification in the House of Commons, he did not ask their Lordships to pledge themselves to the words of the Bill—what he wished was, that the Bill might be read a second time, so that they would be able to give it full consideration, and secure its passing in the present Session.

Bill read a second time.