.Mjk4MQ.MzA0Nw: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "January Thirteenth 1917. Charles Henry Hart, Esq. 472 West End Avenue, New York City. Dear Sir: Although we took considerable pains in our letter to you of July 10th, 1916....") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Dear Sir: | Dear Sir: | ||
Although we took considerable pains in our letter to you of July 10th, 1916. to draw to your attention certain facts concerning the Houdon Bust which you saw at Mr. Henry C. Frick's, you have not up to this time favored us with an answer. We have, however, learned that you did see fit to communicate with Monsieur | Although we took considerable pains in our letter to you of July 10th, 1916. to draw to your attention certain facts concerning the Houdon Bust which you saw at Mr. Henry C. Frick's, you have not up to this time favored us with an answer. We have, however, learned that you did see fit to communicate with Monsieur P. Vitry, the Director of Louvre, Paris, who is recognized as the greatest living expert on Houdon's works. We think that it was the part of courtesy, to say the least, for you to have notified us of the fact of your communication to Monsieur Vitry and of his reply, if any, to you, as we have assumed that your unjustifiable criticism of this great work or art was based upon look of knowledge rather than a malicious | ||
Latest revision as of 15:46, 6 May 2020
January Thirteenth 1917.
Charles Henry Hart, Esq. 472 West End Avenue, New York City.
Dear Sir: Although we took considerable pains in our letter to you of July 10th, 1916. to draw to your attention certain facts concerning the Houdon Bust which you saw at Mr. Henry C. Frick's, you have not up to this time favored us with an answer. We have, however, learned that you did see fit to communicate with Monsieur P. Vitry, the Director of Louvre, Paris, who is recognized as the greatest living expert on Houdon's works. We think that it was the part of courtesy, to say the least, for you to have notified us of the fact of your communication to Monsieur Vitry and of his reply, if any, to you, as we have assumed that your unjustifiable criticism of this great work or art was based upon look of knowledge rather than a malicious