March 2, 1863, The New York Herald
The same influences that have enhanced the price of stocks and given an impetus to speculations in real estate are for the moment helping greatly the interests of art. Whenever there is a sale of really good pictures the prices realized compare favorably with those of any former period, even in the most prosperous times. It would seem as if almost every one was desirous of investing something in a description of property which, where discrimination is used, gains, instead of losing, by being kept. There are few instances in which a picture by an artist of reputation will not sell for more than was originally given for it. Like old wine, its marketable value increases with age. This fact was never more appreciated than it is just now. In the doubt which exists in regard to the safety of securities, whether rightly or wrongly, people rush to investments which are not liable to be affected by political events. As an evidence of this we need only point to the results of the sale of the collection known as the International Art Institution, which took place last week. Foreign works of a fair average character brought unusually large prices, whilst many of an inferior class realized sums considerably beyond their value. For one picture alone – a portrait of Humboldt – by Schrader, of Berlin, Mr. A. T. Stewart paid fifteen hundred dollars – in this instance not too much for a work of so much merit.
The tendency to speculate in this direction will lead to the formation of a great many private collections, which will in their turn react favorably on the interest of American artists. The gentlemen whom we have just named, Mr. Stewart, is, we understand, purchasing extensively, with a view to the formation of a large gallery to be attached to his private residence. He could not expend a portion of his immense wealth to more advantage, either in reference to the gratification of his individual tastes or to its speculative results. Another of our citizens has, since his retirement from business, been quietly purchasing up all the good pictures that he can lay his hands upon, with what purpose is not exactly known, but it is believed to be for a highly praiseworthy and patriotic object. The galleries of Mr. Aspinwall, Mr. Lennox, Mr. Belmont Mr. Wright and other patrons of the arts are constantly receiving fresh accessions from abroad, and we only wish that a larger share of their orders was bestowed on American works. There never was, and never will be, perhaps, a period when it will be more in the power of such men to give an impulse to American art. We are passing through one of those great national ordeals which is especially favorable to the development of native genius. In that branch in which our artists have hitherto been most deficient – historical painting – it is perhaps of all things the best calculated to stimulate their latent ambition.
We know that it is objected by some of our most munificent patrons of art that the events of a civil war are not those that it is either desirable or praiseworthy to perpetuate on canvass. This is a mistaken view to take. All the episodes of life, whether individual or national, whether joyous or mournful, whether calculated to elicit the smite of pride or the flush of humiliation, are alike fit subjects for the artist’s pencil. They each serve to convey their lesson and their learning. The civil wars of England, Germany, and France contributed to art some of its greatest names and some of its most effective subjects. We regret to find that the efforts of those of our native artists who have attempted to strike into this new and prolific vein should have been discouraged by such narrow minded reasoning. The field which Delaroche, Horace Vernet, Ingres and Phillopoteaux occupied with so much credit to themselves is surely one in which they may venture to labor.