HOME GOSSIP.

Thames Star, Volume VI, Issue 1768, 2 September 1874, Page 2

HOME GOSSIP.

(FROM OUa OWN' COEBESPONDENTJ.

.... London, July 1,1874 Epsom is over, Ascot is over, Henley i regatta is over, the Oxford and Cambridge Cricket Matcb, is over, the' Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh are over —to the Continent—everything seems to be over; yet it is just; .the time when everything is on-for the final b^ whatever we may call it, of the season. Yesterday everybody who is anybody ...was at the Priuce-and Princess of. Walesgarden party at Chiswick, except everybody who was at the Oxford and Cambridge cricket match, and everybody else who attended the score of cricket mate' 1 es being played elsewhere at tho same tinie. Being, therefore, a comparatively quietday in town—which, is to say that any of the principal thoroughfares might be crossed without coming in contact with, nibrq than a'dozen vehicles at'the sarae time, and that the complete blocks did' not occur more than once in every ten minutes—it was a good opportunity for taking a second look at the great picture of " The Tichborne Trial.'' A great pi V ture it is surely; and riot'one of the least proofs which we haye of its greatness is that the art critics have been compelled to leave all their art jargonbehind, them, arid bow'dowii to simple genius. A-great picture pf. on/^.7bf;th.e■•mqst^Te- (- markab i fe'proceedihgs in our domestic history; and let us be thankful 4or. such a thing, for it is very scarce. Of paintings we have tooiinany./ We are sick of them. We are more; we are heartsore and wearied of. them^; Excellence in painting is an exquisite and glorious thing, but we are;cursed atthe present day by aspirit which pervades artists, critics and wouldbe critics, all alike df putting mere excellence of painting above everything else; and>the consequence is,as we, the the public,,know, but hardly daresay, that bur I'artists waste their time upoii subjects—if they deserve to be called/ subjects—not worth taking brush in hand for. . The stems of a couple of fir trees may be " very fine," but we'd rather have a scene in the pine forest; a scene suggestive to thought and fancy. A lady's brocaded gown may be marvellously done; but we don't care a hang for the lady or her gown. Not being an ait critic I don't pretend to decide whether there. are or are not shortcomings in the mere painting of this picture; something wanting of perfect finish; but we may fairly suppose it does show, to critical judgment, some evidence of young work; that it has not the complete polish which long practice will give. What then? Assuredly it was by the practice of suck work as this that the old masters gave us the works, equally perfect in thought and execution, which they did. Here are sixty-three portraits, every one almost as correct as could be produced by photography, and all' with the precise expression which each wore at a particular moment of a scene in 1 which each was in-1 terested in a different manner. Here (is the " Great Tichborno. Trial" fixed for ever for us by that superiority of art over literature, which Lord. Byron admitted when he said " Oh! • that I were a painter, to be grouping all that a poet .drags into detail." At present painters despise grouping.' They won't give us a story any more, indeed, than some poets will. Their bits of paintings are much tho same, with' reference to pictures, as "The Beauties of Shakespere " arc with regard to one of Shakospere's plays ; or "as the " Beauties of Scott" would be. with' regard ■ to ' one of Sir Walter Scott's novels; the mere accessories which should embellish the' design and illustrate tho characters, only they have tho additional disadvantage of nevor having been previously used for the embellishment or the illustration; thereforewe i lack even the association of ideas which makes the writer's "beauties" tolerabls. Wo have got one more picture maker; we have, or rather had, a few others, for some of those we most relied on are be- ! coming depraved by the prevailing taste. I May he never degenerate into a manufac- ' turer of painted scraps. If there is any l finish or delicacy yet to come in his works, i he may be sure that the finish which fol-'' lows thought and design, wkich accon-1 panics accuracy (of that there i 3 no ques-' tion), and the power of realisation, will be better worth than the 'finish whjch has been pursued to the obliteration of any idea or 'meaning whatever in the mind of the artist, and almost of his power to discern any "meaning in the scenes, around him, most certainly of his power to coayey such meaning to others. The picture is to be engraved of course;', and Mr. Lincoln Alldridge has had an offer of purchase from Mr. L. Smith, member of the Legislative Assembly at , Melbourne, through Mr. B. Smith, Kensington Park, London, for £2,000. • But the price is ridiculously low. Treble that sum for the i copyright would give the purchaser an immense profit, since probably there has been no picture ever painted for which ,the demand for engravings will be sogreat. - • ! The; House of Lords having decided in favour of the Mordaunt case being allowed to go on during the lunacy of the respondent, we are to have all that extrenuly dirty family linon washed, in .public! fpr -our amusement or disgust; as our tastes may be, at no very distant period';' ' I'jTo doubt, had the decision been adverse to the 'further hearing of the cause, Sir' Charles Mordaunt would, be a much aggrieved man, supposing his wife to be guilty; indeed, even supposing her to be innocent, because, in the latter contingen qy, it is only by a full trial that he can clear himself of acting from feelings of causeless dislike or hasty jealousy, instead of on principle, and after full and calm reflection.' :And yet the precedent is felt to be a dangerous one by almost everybody, not excluding, .most likely, even those who decided in favour of it. No one questions

but that Lady Mordaunt, or anyone in a similar position and circumstances to Lady Mordaunt, can have as fair a trial as anyone in full possession of her or his senses ; able to answer such an accusation personally, and to command every legal means of defence; but how about those who are not in a similar position and circumstances ? How about the wife or husband, who, without wealth or position or influential friend —one, who having unhappily gon<> elemented, is in almost a worse position than " the pauper whom nobody owns,'' • inasmuch' as 'the one human being who does "own" her, or him, may be glad of the opportunity of being 'released of the possession? ' Will it/not be extremely easy in such a case to make, and support, too,'by any amount of suborned evidence; an accusation'; arid so to get a judgment which will free the husband or wife of the lunatic from a marriage no longer profitable or palatable P What's to be done though ? Our laws, it seems, were not framed to meet such acase as this which has arisen. An action for divorce is a civil action, andlunafcics can be proceeded against in other civil actions ; indeed, they must be proceeded .against,; in a; certain, sease,;, when r it is necessary that themselves or their properties should be placed ,under control; ,and the framers of the special act; called the Divorce Act, forgot to make for, its administration differing—necessarily differing—from the .administration of other branches of civil law; as, indeed, ' the framers of Acts of Parliament always do forget the most important point; a feature of legislation which is being developed to its fullest extent at present in the bill for the regulation of public worship.;; That that bill in its present shape should have scarcely an iota ofresemblanpti to its shape when first put into form, is a mere matter of course ;■ also,; it is! a matter of course that in its first form it'should nave had -many fatal imperfections, notwitkstanding the ability oithe/fr.amer thereof: but, further than this,, it,.itaay-, bo taken to be as completely a patter 'of that after both Lords arid Commons have harangued upon it>' and> committees r sat upon it, and their members;; moted upon it, and objected, amended, and substituted; and done everything that both-houses and their commitees cando; if it becomes law,, there will be found some screw op bolt, or wheel wanted in the machinery, which will set, and keep it perpetually .out of gear. Meantime it is a great measure for the public. Scarcely a man, lay or cleric, but has something to say about it; and does say it, if he can-by any effort at composition string ten or twenty lines together. 'Nobody reads these letters, of course. Isn't it .quite enough for ua to feel obliged to say something ourselves without being required to attend to the sayings of other people ? Consequently, as far as can be judgod by a glance at one or two of those J which appear every day, there is no attempt at controversy. Every man simply—very simply, indeed, in some cases— merely states his own views. If anyone j could be at the trouble of collecting and ' collating- those views I; dare* say .some ' among them might be found curious enough to reward the labor, but nobody* does and nobody will. Mr. Buskin havV ing snubbed the 1 authorities of the Glas4 gow Athenamm for entreating him td) favor their city" with his presence and a I course of lectures,, made himself so popular thereby to the "Boyal Institute of British Architects," that that body recommended him to the Queea for the medal of this year;'it being the custom of Her Majesty to bestow amedaleyery, year on some one, - recommended bj^the Institute. Mr. Huskin, however, failed to see this recommendation in' the light in which it was intended; for he refused the medal, and snubbed the Institute and its president, the learned, accomplished, and truly estimable Mr. Pecksniff, late of Salisbury, even more,, severely than ha had previously snubbed the members of Glasgow Athenaeum. '' '' ■;