M. Michel Chevalier And English Art.

vulgarity ? " and has attempted , with the help of worthy Shakspeare , to define it in words . Material may help both him and us , and certainly my present argument . Vulgarity is insincerity , says Mr . liuskin . I ask , is it vulgarity , or insincerity , or the progress of the art of design , or manufacture , which can induce a fine lady to dress herself up in white "fabric" covered

, all over with huge Mack , dead black , round spots , oihalls , the size of penny pieces , 3-J inches apart ? Is tin ' s Trench or English ? Because M . Chevalier says , that before 1851 , all woven fabric patterns were designed by French artists , but that since then this special work has beeu done hy the pupils of our Art

department . Again , is it design , or what is it , which can see progress or art in ornamenting an article of dress , -with the representation of a " hand at whist , " some ei ght or ten playing cards rauged in a semicircle in rows ? Is it " insincerity " which covers a blue fabric all over with gilt rings , some four inches across . Who will claim the merit of dotting a

surface with small feathers , as picked from a fowl , with dice in twos and threes , with exploding bombshells , postage-stamps , an English invention at least ; rifles , percussion-caps , stripes half the width of the stuff itself , aud hosts of others , which it would take pages to catalogue ? Are all these things French or English " desigus or accidents ? " Are they results of

knowledge or ignorance ? Surel y it is for M . Chevalier , and such as he , to find in these performances either " art" or "progress . " They are things to be ashamed of , whether French or English , and are to he accounted for , in part it is to be feared , by the fact of so enlightened and advanced a man as M .

Chevalier allowing himself to talk of things of which he either knows nothing , or perhaps did not take the trouble to look at a second time . But all this is , as I have said , new to the political economists , and they with him have yet to look with a serious interest at Avhat they have hitherto regarded as childish toywork . The brightest page of their book has yet to be written .

I had thought to have left off here , merely contenting myself with calling attention to the inaccuracies of the French writer , in consideration of his eminent position and the effect his words are likely to have if unquestioned ; but he has said much more . Before ' 51 , says he , everything iu "good taste" Avas French ; we English"though having some celebrated

, artists , have not beeu very remarkable for taste . " After ' 51 came the Schools of the Art Department , or the Schools of Design , ancl to them exclusively , he informs us , is to be attributed his so-called ' and thought improvement in our art manufactures . I have indicated a few of the "improvements , " and

might have gone ou and cited the like improvements mother art trades as little to be proud of as "fabrics ; " but whether all these things are improvements or no , I must , from personal knowledge , deny that the Art Department is to be held responsible for them , either by way of credit or blame . It has had nothing

whatever to do with the matter . All these fabrics may be covered with noble " patterns , " but they are not of the Department ; or they may be foolish abortions , hut they are not of the Department , as he has been led to suppose . The action of that institution I-PP beeu , as far as art , or even art manufacture , is concerned , simply nil . Movement , hit not progress , has been , for reasons

M. Michel Chevalier And English Art.

which mi ght be given , the motto of the Department ; for the very self-same system of work ancl model drawings in use now thirty years back—all . one vast mass of error and falsity—is in use at this very hour . Stagnation the Department may be accused of , hut not the "dulness" before the ' 51 Exhibition , nor the " progress " after it . M " . Chevalier should first look

at facts . One more remark you must kindly allow me . In a number of the same journal , that of the Society of Arts , in which this valuable series of opinions of an illustrious man first appeared , there is a detailed account of a "National Conservatoire of Music and

Elocution . " with a list of regulations , course of studies , salaries and duties of officers , etc ., the whole complicated apparatus being for the simple purpose of teaching people to sing , or play on some instrument . The French are beginning to find out " how not lo doit . " The whole work of the institution as a

school seems to rest with the inferior and assistant professors ; and on looking at the scale of salaries . it will be seen that these working teachers are paid , or to be paid , some five-and-twenfy per cent , less than the " servants " of the establishment . The amount of knowledge required of these professorslow as they

, are , is something appalling ; but however accomplished or able , it will be but to find out that to he able to play on , and to teach to others to play on , even the most difficult instrument is of less " value " than the being trusted with the duty of dusting it . Has M . Chevalier looked at this institution as a

political economist r I mention it for the sole reason of asking whether or no there is not something radically wrong in the present idea of art , action , and teaching . If it be all right , how can such things be ? or how can such able men as M . Chevalier or M . Merimee he brought to talk as they have done . — C . BBUCE AM . EN iu the Builder .

Faithful Unto Death.

FAITHFUL UNTO DEATH .

AN INCIDENT OF THE CHOMRA IN KINGSTON , JAMAICA . Previous to the appearance of the cholera in the beautiful island of Jamaica , not inappropriatel y called " Queen of the Antilles , " the nature of this dreaded and dreadful scourge of nationsand the

, question as to its contagious or non-contagious character , formed the subject of warm aud frequent discussions among all classes of society . Great triumphs have been achieved over the most dreadful maladies hy a proper examination iuto theiv primary causes ; but the cholera seems to have been

too much for the skill of even the most eminent jihysicians . Nothing could stay the onward march of the pestilence . Every M . D . had his peculiar theory . Many persons signified their determination to live under tho Broussais system ; others eschewed all manner of

phlebotomy , and preferred that of Alibert , or other foreign adepts , making the acquisition of their family physician a sine qua non of employment . We have said that it was the all-engrossing subject . Certain it is , that almost every circle broached its peculiar theory . The old cronies , men and women , married and single , racked their brains , and strained their lungs , in finding and stating arguments in sup-