16 THE NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART 



Up to this period, the gallery of art had, in an abstract sense, 

 been regarded as an independent branch of the Institution, but 

 with a vague existence and disappointing prospects. Congress 

 had placed upon the Institution the burden of building up a col- 

 lection of art which was to be the property of the nation and to 

 include all objects pertaining to this subject which the Govern- 

 ment then or later might have in its possession. The Govern- 

 ment, however, has never had much to contribute nor has it 

 ever supplied means for procuring for the gallery either paintings 

 or works of sculpture. Whatever expenditures were made 

 must, therefore, come from the slender income of the Smith- 

 sonian fund, already overcharged with the expenses of other 

 branches. That these conditions should produce a feeling of 

 discouragement, even of helplessness, was only natural. Since, 

 then, the Institution was not in a position to provide directly 

 for this feature, the gallery of art was made a department of 

 the museum, to which it properly belonged from the very nature 

 of its functions, being amenable to the same form of administra- 

 tion. Its maintenance in conjunction with the other depart- 

 ments of the museum also insured economy, the only distinction 

 needed being the selection of a qualified expert to have charge. 



In his report for 1864 Joseph Henry, the first Secretary, pre- 

 sented the situation as follows: "The impropriety of expending 

 the income of the bequest in attempting to form a collection of 

 articles in this line worthy of the country has had no prominent 

 advocates even among artists; still, in connection with the mu- 

 seum, a collection has been formed which principally consists of 

 plaster casts of distinguished individuals, and a few pictures 

 which have either been presented to the Institution or are the 

 property of the Government." While the contention of Secre- 

 tary Henry was entirely justified, it should be said that 

 the conditions referred to in the last clause of the extract were 

 not as bad as his remarks imply. The distinction between the 

 Institution proper and the Museum was often explained by 

 Secretary Henry, but nowhere more explicitly than in the 

 following statement: 



"The functions of the Museum and of the Institution are 

 entirely different. The object of the former is the establishment 

 of a collection of specimens of nature and of art which shall 



