FROM THE ARCHIVES:Sir Hugh Lane's gift of Impressionist paintings to Dublin on condition a suitable home was found for them caused controversy in the early 1910s. Lane and his architect Edwin Luytens favoured a gallery spanning the Liffey at the Hapenny Bridge, which few others supported as this editorial indicated. – JOE JOYCE
THE PROJECT for a municipal gallery of modern art in Dublin is in grave danger. The Corporation at its meeting yesterday considered, and “shelved”, the recommendations of the Mansion House Committee and of Sir Hugh Lane’s eminent architect, Mr Lutyens.
The latter recommended, and the committee strongly endorsed, Sir Hugh’s persistent scheme for a gallery across the Liffey. But he produced a new fact which greatly increases the cogency of the case against a bridge site. The Corporation has pledged itself to find £22,000 for the provision of a site and for the upkeep of the gallery; the citizens have subscribed £11,000 for the building of the gallery – £33,000 in all. Mr Lutyens now states that the total cost of the scheme will be £43,000 – an unexpected and most serious addition of £10,000. This means, as we have said, that the gallery project is in serious danger. The whole controversy will begin anew. Matters like the value and number of the pictures about which no real doubt exists, will be re-opened ad nauseam. The enemies of a municipal art gallery have been presented with an opportunity of which they will take full advantage.
We believe that, on this question of a municipal art gallery, the citizens are divided into three classes – a large majority which is really grateful to Sir Hugh Lane for his generous offer, and really anxious to accept it; a considerable minority which is ignorant and apathetic; and a very small minority which, for reasons that we regret and cannot appreciate, is bitterly hostile to the scheme. All these classes are represented in the Corporation. We said two months ago that Dublin strongly disliked the idea of a bridge site, but was extremely unwilling to offend Sir Hugh Lane. We appeal to Sir Hugh Lane to save the situation. In doing so, we wish to apologise to him, on behalf of the whole city, for certain cruel and unfair things which have been suggested about his offer and the motives that have inspired it. Even if these pictures are lost to Dublin, the city will always be grateful for the munificence and patriotism which gave it the opportunity to lose them.
We are absolutely confident that Sir Hugh wants these pictures to remain in Dublin. We ask him, therefore, to add to his gift of art masterpieces a gift of self-sacrifice [. . .]We ask him to realise that the citizens, rightly or wrongly, do not desire a bridge site, and that the cost of such a site is now shown to be almost prohibitive. The pictures will be saved if Sir Hugh will allow the Corporation to revoke its acceptance of a bridge site. Beyond any doubt, the scheme of a bridge site is now dead.
http://url.ie/bxu8