HL Deb 14 July 1924 vol 58 cc524-35

LORD CARSON rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether they are now in a position to make a statement as to their intentions of restoring the French pictures of the late Sir Hugh Lane to Dublin in accordance with the wishes expressed in a codicil to his will, which he signed shortly before he was drowned in the "Lusitania," but which was unfortunately not witnessed; and whether if legislation for that purpose is necessary the Government propose to bring in a Bill to enable this to be carried out.

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, may I say that this Question has no political significance whatsoever, which is not always the case in business relating to Ireland. In point of fact, the question embodies the views of every Party, and there are many even at the present date, in Ireland. I have been associated with the matter from long before the Treaty which created the present system of government in Ireland. In truth, the facts which I have to place very briefly before the House bring back to recollection one of the great tragedies of the war—the sinking of the "Lusitania" in May, 1915. Sir Hugh Lane was a passenger in that vessel and lost his life. It is really out of that calamity that the whole of this matter has arisen.

Sir Hugh Lane was an Irishman who had devoted himself to art. He became a great art expert and from the earliest time that ho was able to spend money upon pictures (amongst which, I may say, he lived) he began to endow in Ireland a gallery of art to which he added from time to time. He became possessed of one of the most valuable collections of more or less modern French pictures, sixty-two in all, I think. I am not quite sure whether they were all French, but they are at the present moment in the custody of the National Gallery in London and can be seen at any time. What happened was this, and this was the origin of the Question I have placed upon the Paper. Sir Hugh Lane was very anxious that a proper building should be erected on a suitable site in Dublin for housing the pictures he had already presented to Ireland and these pictures which were on loan at the time to the National Gallery in London. Unfortunately, there was at the time a Corporation in Dublin whose hearts were not altogether set upon art. That Corporation refused to give any assistance, and when Sir Hugh Lane procured a most beautiful design which was to cross the Liffey as a foundation in the Florentine fashion it was immediately turned down by the Dublin Corporation.

Sir Hugh Lane, being an enthusiast in art and most enthusiastic about this particular design, made a will shortly afterwards, on October 11, 1913, in which he left a number of pictures to the Dublin Gallery, the gallery which he had founded, but excepted from the gifts to it— the group of pictures lent by me to the Loudon National Gallery, which I bequeath to found a collection of modern Continental art in London. Later on, in 1914, Sir Hugh Lane became a director of the National Gallery of Ireland and once more returned to, if he had ever departed from, his great desire to encourage art in his own native country. The result was that on February 3, 1915, he executed a codicil to his will, in which he said: This is a codicil to my last will to the effect that the group of pictures now at the National Gallery which I have bequeathed to that institution I now bequeath to the City of Dublin provided that a suitable building is provided for them within five years of my death. He left as sole trustee his aunt, Lady Gregory, to whose enthusiasm in trying to have the wishes of her nephew carried out I can bear testimony, as well as to the great work she has done in trying to get these pictures back for Ireland.

The whole matter that raises the difficulty is that Sir Hugh was drowned in the "Lusitania" without ever having had the codicil witnessed. He had signed the codicil; indeed, it was in his own handwriting. He had put it in an envelope addressed to his sister and placed it in his drawer in the most appropriate of all places, the National Gallery of Ireland, lilt he was either unaware of, or had forgotten, the necessity of having the codicil signed by witnesses. There is not only this codicil in his own handwriting and signed by him, as I have stated, but there is overwhelming testimony not only to his having expressed the desire that the pictures should go to Dublin but to the fact that he had made this codicil leaving them to his aunt for the purpose.

I have here a quotation from a statement made by the noble Lord, Lord Glenavy, a member of your Lordships' House who was Lord Chancellor for Ireland and who went into the whole of this matter. The noble and learned Lord said that he had had before him the documents referred to and they established an overwhelming case in favour of the proposition that the late Sir Hugh Lane not only intended to leave these pictures to Dublin and the Irish people, but he believed he had effectually done so. I could quote, though I will not trouble your Lordships with it, what seems to me to be overwhelming testimony as to the intentions of Sir Hugh Lane.

The circumstances have been put before one Government after another, who from time to time have made half promises in the matter. At one time a Bill had been actually prepared, or at all events bad been largely gone into, when Mr. Macpherson was the very excellent Chief Secretary for Ireland. But in one way and another, and one can well conceive why, the matter has been deferred by successive Governments. Of course, the war was going on. In 1916, the next year, there unfortunately came about a rebellion in Ireland, particularly in Dublin. Then there was the ending of the war and the outbreak of a fresh and more extensive rebellion in Ireland and those terrible burnings of all the beautiful places and beautiful things in Ireland. Then, of course, nobody would have thought of building a gallery for the purpose of housing these pictures as was required in the codicil, unless they had some assurance that some Government would set right what was, after all, only the misfortune that happened to this distinguished gentleman, and would make an effort to have his last wishes carried out.

Meanwhile, the pictures remain with the National Gallery. So far as the National Gallery is concerned it had, and it has now, no other course than to insist upon retaining the pictures. The Trustees have them under a will properly attested. Dublin claims them under a codicil unattested, and, therefore, the National Gallery, as public trustees of property entrusted to them, have no option but to keep the pictures in their custody until some action is taken by His Majesty's Government, or some other Government. From time to time members of the National Gallery have been approached, and have taken up a perfectly fair and proper attitude. I have an extract from a letter written by the late Lord Plymouth, in March, 1920, in which he states:— I do not think it fair to approach the National Gallery Trustees individually asking them to act upon their own personal opinions in a matter where their duty is to act as trustees for the nation. Their action as trustees cannot he governed by sentiment but by motives of generosity, or, if you prefer the expression, ' moral right.' Legal authorities, having settled what the position of the trustees is, it becomes the duty of the Government to carry the matter further if they think it desirable and fair, and by a deliberate Act of Parliament they should restore that to which they think Dublin has a good moral claim. The responsibility for that decision should not be placed upon the National Gallery Trustees. I hope I have made my meaning clear. The Government must take full responsibility, and I should acquiesce at once in their decision. The late Lord Brownlow wrote at the same time: The National Gallery have no power to relinquish property which is legally theirs, but of course Parliament can do so, and I can assure you that any Bill introduced for that purpose will not meet with any opposition from me. I have said enough, I think, to show that the position of the National Gallery is a perfectly accurate one, and that no move can be made in the matter unless the Government agree to some legislation to settle this question.

There have been many petitions to His Majesty's Government, there have been meetings of all shades of opinion in politics of Irishmen both in Ireland and here, and there have been petitions from a large number of artists—not all Irishmen—asking that the will of this gentleman, who had devoted his life to art, should be carried out by the nation, and the pictures returned to Dublin. I hope I may receive some encouragement from the present advisers of His Majesty's Government. May I say, as an Irishman who hates the whole system of government that has been set up in Southern Ireland, that I have received more encouragement, in trying to help some of my fellow-countrymen over there who were abandoned in the hour of stress, from this Government than I received from either of the two Governments which preceded them. I say that frankly, because I think it is due to a Government, however you may disagree with it in politics, to acknowledge the efforts it makes to relieve those who are in distress and grave difficulties.

I admit that an Act of Parliament must be passed to deal with these pictures. I do not know whether the noble Lord who will answer me is prepared to say that the Government will pass such an Act of Parliament. I should welcome the fullest enquiry into this matter with a view to ascertaining the facts of the will of Sir Hugh Lane in order that, having ascertained them, justice could be done to his memory and to his wishes by taking such steps in the nature of legislation as would give back to Dublin, as he undoubtedly intended, these pictures which would be a valuable memorial to a great Irishman.

THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (LORD ARNOLD)

My Lords, the Question of the noble and learned Lord furnishes an opportunity which His Majesty's Government welcome to make a statement about this matter. The circumstances relating to it have been broadly put before your Lordships by the noble and learned Lord with his accustomed clarity. My reply, therefore, can be a brief one, but I hope it may be a satisfactory one. On October 11, 1913, Sir Hugh Lane made a will by which the thirty-nine pictures—I am advised that the number is thirty-nine—to which the noble and learned Lord refers were bequeathed to the National Gallery in London. As your Lordships have been told, Sir Hugh Lane lost his life in the "Lusitania" disaster on May 17, 1915, and there was subsequently found in his desk at the National Gallery of Ireland, of which he was director, a codicil, to which the noble and learned Lord has referred, in the handwriting of Sir Hugh Lane, altering his previous disposition as to these pictures and bequeathing them to the City of Dublin.

As Sir Hugh Lane's signature to this codicil was no witnessed, it had no effect in law, and there is conflict of evidence on the question of fact whether Sir Hugh Lane intended this codicil to be legally valid and thought that it was so. His Majesty's Government consider that this question of fact ought to be settled by an impartial tribunal, and have, therefore, decided to appoint a Committee, consisting of three competent and impartial persons to report whether in their opinion Sir Hugh Lane, when he signed the codicil, thought that he was making a legal disposition, and, if so, whether it is proper that, in view of the international character of the matter at issue, the legal defect in the codicil should be remedied by legislation. His Majesty's Government hope shortly to be in a position to communicate the names of the three persons to be appointed to serve on the Committee.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

My Lords, as an old Trustee of the National Gallery I feel compelled to say a few words on this subject; it has on more than one occasion called for my attention. So far as I am able to speak for my colleagues, not one of them would shrink from a full inquiry into the circumstances which have been mentiond to your Lordships to-night. I will go further and say that I hope we may usefully co-operate with the Committee, in bringing evidence before them, in considering question of procedure, and in other ways. I rather stress that, because when I called at the National Gallery this afternoon to inquire whether the authorities there had been approached on the subject of this Question I found that not a word had been said to them about it. That is rather an unusual proceeding where a great public Department is having its conduct impugned in Parliament.

I was much comforted by the noble and learned Lord's explicit statement that the action of the Trustees of the National Gallery was the only action they could possibly have taken in the circumstances. I am strongly of that opinion. We had before us these two instruments—Sir Hugh Lane's will, written in the year 1913, in which he bequeathed this group of pictures to the National Gallery here, and the later un-witnessed codicil, in which he changed his mind and desired that the same pictures should go back to Dublin. It was contended that the codicil represented Sir Hugh Lane's real mind and that it should be allowed to prevail over the will. I need not say that it was impossible for the Trustees to listen to a proposal of that kind. It would have meant that the incomplete and ineffectual instrument should be preferred to the properly executed and complete will; that the destination of the pictures should follow not the properly executed will but the incompletely executed codicil. No Trustees could possibly listen to such a proposal, and the advice we received was very strongly indeed in that direction, I think it would have been a very grave decision to allow the codicil to prevail even if we had been perfectly sure that it represented Sir Hugh Lane's mind. We took a considerable amount of evidence on that point, and the effect of it was to lead many of us to suppose that it was not the case that the codicil did by any means represent the last views aid wishes of Sir Hugh.

The fact is that Sir Hugh Lane had several minds upon this subject. At one time undoubtedly he wished these French pictures to go with his other pictures to the Dublin Corporation. The noble and learned Lord has very humorously told us how it came to pass that Sir Hugh Lane fell foul of the Corporation. He was deeply incensed by their treatment of him. They turned down his design, objected to his architect, and altogether refused to help him in carrying out what was undoubtedly the wish nearest to his heart—namely, to found an important collection of pictures in the City with which he had been so honourably connected. I think I may add that, just as he had quarrelled with the Dublin Corporation, he possibly might have quarrelled or been dissatisfied with the authorities of the National Gallery here.

What was constantly present to his mind was a desire somehow or other, either in Dublin or in London, to set up a good exhibition of modern art, and it is most important to remember that in his last days and subsequently to the date of the codicil ho had good reason for believing that, largely in consequence of the munificence of Mr. Duveen, his wish would be realised and that his pictures would, as I hope they will, find a home in an adequate collection of foreign pictures. I cannot, therefore, quite accept the noble and learned Lord's contention that there is before us anything that can be described as "overwhelming evidence" (those are his words) to show that Sir Hush changed his mind and wished the pictures to go to Dublin instead of London. That is a matter which can be looked into. Nor can I accept his statement that so far as the National Gallery is concerned Sir Hugh Lane, or his friends, or anybody else, ever received what he called a half promise that the pictures should so to Dublin.

LORD CARSON

The noble Marquess has misunderstood me a little. I said he had received a half promise from the Government.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

I am glad to have that correction; I accept it. There remains to be discussed and examined what can be done in this case. As at present advised it would surprise me to find that the incomplete codicil is to be preferred to the complete will. There are other ways by which it would be possible to give effect to Sir Hugh Lane's wish that this collection of pictures, which he so greatly prized, should be exhibited in Dublin.

There is the question of lending pictures, which is very important, and I am sure that, if it was merely a question of lending, and if the status of the Irish Free State renders it qualified under the Act of Parliament to receive loans from the National Gallery, that is a proposal that would be regarded by most people as eminently reasonable. But you will remember that Parliament, and this House in particular, looks with rather a jealous eye on proposals of this kind, and I recall a Bill introduced in this House by Lord D'Abernon for encouraging the exchange and loan of pictures in the National Gallery. It was passed, not without considerable criticism, through your Lordships' House, but it never got any further in its way through Parliament. Those are the kind of obstacles which might possibly be in our way. I need say no more except this, that if the Inquiry is set up with reasonable terms of reference, and is not an Inquiry which prejudges the issue—I am glad to see my noble friend. Lord Parmoor, signifying his assent—I, for one, should certainly not raise any objection to it, and should wish that it may possibly bring about a generally acceptable solution of a question which unfortunately has created a good deal of resentment and ill feeling in the past.

THE EARL OF MAYO

My Lords. I welcome the answer that the noble Lord who speaks for the Government has given in reply to this Question. At last we have something definite concerning these pictures, upon which there has been much contention, much talk and much sentiment expressed in the country from which I come, and I shall feel it my duty when I go back to Dublin, which will be very shortly, to inform my friends of this result. May I say that Sir Hugh Lane was one of my oldest friends? I was associated with him in starting the Municipal Art Gallery in Dublin that still exists. Both my noble and learned friend. Lord Carson, and my noble friend. Lord Lansdowne, are quite right in saying that the will stands, and that there is a codicil in existence but not witnessed. Therefore I welcome this Inquiry, which is the first sympathetic reference we have had from any Government concerning these pictures. At last we have something definite, and I put myself and my friends on the other side entirely in the hands of that Committee. We shall, I am certain, abide by its findings and be satisfied with the way—and I am sure it will be a just way—in which those findings are brought about.

THE EARL OF CRAWFORD

My Lords, I should like, if I may, to say one word upon this matter, because I am one of those who are quite convinced that the terms of the codicil in question do not represent the final opinions of Sir Hugh Lane. The codicil, in the words of this Question, was signed "shortly before he was drowned in the 'Lusitania'" disaster. I take the word "shortly" from the terms of the Question, but, in point of fact, it was fourteen or fifteen weeks before his death. The codicil is not the last recorded document of Sir Hugh Lane's desires. The noble Lord who addressed us just now has no doubt seen the sworn affidavits of responsible and public officials in this country, dated long after February 5, which was the date of the codicil.

LORD CARSON

There have been a great number the other way also.

THE EARL OF CRAWFORD

I think the noble and learned Lord did not indicate that there had been any adverse expressions of opinion after the date of the codicil, and I merely say this in order to let people know that which apparently is not generally known, and which, but for what I say, would not be recorded in your Lordships' debates—that there are subsequent documents, precise and explicit. The reason for this was that Sir Hugh Lane was not merely interested in his canvases, but was concerned, in a way, even more with their unity, that they should be exhibited as a great block of art, representing different phases of European painting; and they were chosen for their relation one with another. For his purpose it was all essential that a proper gallery should be provided, and, throughout the controversies, "Who will provide me with a gallery?" was really the basic question which Sir Hugh Lane kept on putting before himself.

In Dublin he was in positive despair. They could not, perhaps, afford to provide a gallery—a costly thing, no doubt—but the contumely and neglect with which his offers were received disheartened him and tiling him into despair. As everybody knows, he was domiciled for years in this country, and after the codicil was signed he again entered into negotiations, as I say, with responsible and public officials in this country, about providing a building. He wanted an assurance, and he received an assurance. It is quite true that the gallery was not there and then built.

LORD CARSON

Or since.

THE EARL OF CRAWFORD

The crisis of the war came, and, for very good reasons, money could not be thrown into bricks and mortar during that period. But the gallery was promised and, as all of your Lordships know who are interested in these affairs, the gallery is actually approaching completion to-day. I merely say this in order to justify the Trustees of the National Gallery, who are not merely relying upon some technicality of an unsigned document. Something really very much more than that is involved. Sir Hugh Lane, as we know, was greatly attached to Ireland and to Dublin. The bequest in question is a mere fraction of the public bequests which he made, and for every pound's worth left to England under the will I should imagine that two or three or four pounds' worth have already been left to Ireland under other clauses of the will. Ireland has not come out badly.

I have no doubt that the noble Marquess, Lord Lansdowne, correctly expressed the view of the Trustees of the National Gallery, that they would contribute all that they can to the elucidation of a very difficult problem. I did not quite catch the terms of reference of this Committee, but I would make this one observation about it. It is to be composed of competent and impartial gentlemen—one is always glad to hear that—but I hope that the Government is not going to consider this question quite in isolation. It is not merely a matter of whether there is a greater balance of opinion in favour of an unsigned codicil than in favour of sworn affidavits by people who believe that Sir Hugh Lane wanted his pictures ultimately to end here. A very much bigger question than that is involved, and I hope that the competent and impartial gentlemen will remember that any judgment they give will have a strong bearing upon the attitude of benefactors to the State in future. That is really very important. I know case after case where people have refrained from leaving gifts or money—but particularly gifts—in their wills until positively satisfied by the authorities that the terms of the will cannot in any circumstances be abrogated. It is a very serious thing to abrogate wills. We have done that, I believe, occasionally in the ease of our great collections and galleries, but it is a very dangerous thing to do, and I hope that in settling the personnel of this Committee the noble Lord and his colleagues will bear in mind that the question is far wider in its bearings than is involved in the actual destiny of these forty or fifty pictures.

LORD CARSON

My Lords, with the permission of the House I should like to say one word to thank the Government for the offer which they have made, and which I most gratefully accept. I did not go into the controversial matters raised by the noble Earl who has just addressed us. Had I done so I would have taken the whole evening and late into the night, because I know that there have been a great many conflicting statements upon this matter. I have some of them in my hand, made the very day before Sir Hugh Lane, left for America, which must have been the very last he saw of anybody in this country. These are matters which, if they are investigated, ought to be investigated impartially, and with no preconceptions of any kind on one side or the other