ACADEMY vs. LIBRARY

The year is 1881,
one year before the Chicago Academy of Design
reorganized itself with its 1882 Constitution
(copied in the previous post)

and a clipping from a
Chicago newspaper,
"The Inter Ocean",
runs as follows:


A Rumored Attempt on the Part
of the Academy of Design
to Defeat


The Public Library-Dearborn Park Project,
Unless the Academy Can Get a Portion
of the Land.

What there is to the Institution Which Thus
Threatens a Very Valuable Public
Institution.

A Charter, $12,000 in Debts and Brazen
Effrontery Their Whole Stock in
Trade.

ACADEMY VS. LIBRARY

The passage of that most worthy measure, the Public Library Bill, by Congress, is being hampered and impeded by a gentleman named John F. Stafford, who represents an at one time very creditable institution called the Academy of Design, and which has been forgotten by well nigh all men except its creditors. There is no doubt about this Stafford's possession of the charter of the defunct academy of Design, and in that case he also assumes ownership of some $10,000 or $12,000 of debt under which that once well meaning institution went down. All this is nothing strange nor out of place, but when an attempt is made to trade upon the good name and splendid reputation of the present Academy of Fine Arts, it is time that the truth should be known. The Academy of Design is dead and well nigh buried; the Academy of Fine Arts is one of the best art schools in America, well managed, prosperous, and patronized by the best classes of society of Chicago and the West and South. The Academy of Design, a name, a charter, and a debt of $12,000, with no local habitation, and no existence except upon paper and in the pocket of Mr. John F. Stafford, now assumes to say that Dearborn Park shall not be given to the people for a site for a public library except the land thus acquired be shared with Mr. John. F. Stafford, who owns the charter of the dead and gone institution. The only danger in the matter is that Congressmen may be induced or allowed to think that the Academy of Design or its memory and the Academy of Fine Arts are one and the same.

Is there a confusion between the two similar names ?
Just why do you think
the founders of the new institution
chose a name so similar to the
one they was trying to replace ?

John T. Stafford, nicknamed "The Watchdog of the Lake"
presumably for keeping the lakefront free from development
was also noted for his participation
in the Chicago Art Exposition of 1875

Note: the "Inter Ocean" began as the
morning Chicago Republican (1865),
and was renamed the Chicago Inter Ocean in 1872
an upper-class arbiter of cultural tastes.
It went into decline after 1895, when it became the property
of Chicago politician, Charles T. Yerkes.

To put this matter properly before the public, a reporter for THE INTER OCEAN yesterday interviewed various officials of the Academy of Fine Arts and the result will be found below.


Mr C. L. Hutchinson, President of the Academy of Fine Arts, was found at his office, No. 15 Chamber of Commerce. When asked to define the difference between the Academy of Design and the Academy of Fine Arts, he said:

"The Academy of Design is dead. The Academy of Fine Arts Succeeded them"

"Did you use their charter?"

"Certainly not: we organized under the laws of the state. We had nothing to do with them, whatever. It is a sad and yet a ridiculous thing that the general public should be continually mixing the two names up. The Academy of Fine Arts is on good, solid, substantial basis, while the academy of Design is entirely bankrupt"

"How long has the Academy of Fine Arts been in existence?"

"Three Years. The school is a on a paying basis and one of the best in America"



"Have you heard anything of the effort to get part of Dearborn Park for the Academy of Design?"


"I have heard that Mr. John F. Stafford is in Washington urging amendments to the library bill, which asks for 125 feet fronting on Randolph Street"


"In this you academy has no interest?"

"No, unless it be to wish the library to get the entire block. We are constantly annoyed at being confounded with that defunct institution, and suffer constantly from its reputation."



"Do you know Stafford?"


"No, but I presume he is a very nice fellow"


The reporter looked keenly at Mr Hutchinson, but he never smiled.

"What is his object?"

"Why I suppose to resurrect the old concern and put it on its feet by a land grant, but I am afraid he will never be able to do it"

"The Academy of Design is very successful, is it not?"

(note: the reporter himself has confused the names here,
and the editor never caught the mistake )

"Very, as a school, and in all other ways. The present premises on State St. opposite the Palmer House , are too small. We are hoping nows to buy the corner. We are hoping now to buy the corner of Van Buren street and Michigan Ave, erect there a suitable building and transfer the school, and open a permanet art gallery.That is the spot formerly occupied by the Old Academy of Design. The present building is 54 feet front and 100 feet deep. We want to erect a new building with the same front but 175 feet deep. If we can't do that we will put up a temporary
building in the rear to which the school will be transferred as soon as completed.

"This will cost something?"


"Yes, $50,000, but we have $40,000 already subscribed for the purpose. It is a most feasilbe scheme. I don't believe in castles in the air, but this is a solid brick and stone reality."


"Who is president of your academy?"


"L.Z. Leiter, and C.L.Hutchinson is Vice President"


"Then I understand that you do not oppose the Library's getting control of the Dearborn Park?

"Certainly not. We want the library to have it. It is a very excellent and praiseworthy object"

(Note: Charles L. Hutchinson was President of the Board of Trade,
director of the Northern Trust Bank,
and first President of the Art Institute of Chicago
until his death in 1924)

The next gentleman seen was Mr. James H. Dole, who was found in his office at #27 Metropolitan Block.

"Mr. Dole, you are one of the trustees of the Academy of Fine Arts and a member of the executive committee?"

"Yes"

"You were also a trustee of the Academy of Design?"

"Yes. There were 15 of us appointed, and I was selected for President. After it had been running a year or so the question of the old debs came upo, and the trustees becoming disgusted dropped the thing and started the institution -the Academy of Fine Arts"

"Then there is no connection between the two institutions?"

"Of course not. The present academy is on of the best and most prosperous schools of the kind in America. The other is dead."

"What remains of the old academy?"

"Nothing but the charter and a lot of old debts"

"What good is the charter?"

"It allows them to hold personal property without taxation"

Another gentleman present during the interview said: "The old academy of Design is all broken up . The only man who takes any interest in it now is John F. Stafford, and he has no influence whatsoever."

"How did it happen to "bust""?


"Debt"


"How much?"


"Some $10,000 or $12000"


"And that still hangs over the charter ?"


"Yes, the effects of the Academy of Design were all sold out on an auction, and all that remains is the charter and the claims against it."


Mr. Homer N. Hibbard, United States Register in Bankruptcy in this city, was also interviewed.

"Mr. Hibbard, I understand you are familiar with the past history of the old and defunct institution known as the Chicago Academy of Design, whose supporters are now endeavoring to secure the passage in Congress of a bill granting to them equally with the Public Library, the
right to the Dearborn Park as a site for an academy building. What do you know of this old institution?"

"I know that there was such an institution, and that I paid a considerable amount of money which has never materialized anything. It never did amount to anything and finally it go financially weak in the back that all its things were sold - what little it did have in the way of room fixtures, art collections, study appurtenances etc. These were purchased by the parties who organized the present Academy of Fine Arts, which is in a prosperous condition, and which, if any art institution should share in the Dearborn Park lot, should do it.

"You think then, that the parties who claim to constitute the Old Academy of Design should not be considered in any bill for the alienation of the Dearborn Park lot?"

"I do. There is nothing of it left that can be called an art academy. It has no property. It is doing nothing for the encouragement of art, and has not done anything in that direction for years. It has nothing now but its name. It is simply a name tucked under the skeleton of the past, and has no real existence, and in fact never at anytime amounted to anything. Whereas the present Academy of Fine Arts has been working faithfully for years and is now in good working condition and doing good work for the promotion of a taste for art in this city; and yet this new art society has not asked for, and does not now ask for a site on the Dearborn Park lot. I cannot
see, indeed, that the body of men who call themselves the Academy of Design

HAVE ANY CLAIM WHATEVER

even the slightest, to a sight on the property. They have no capital at their back - no substantial supporters to warrant us in hoping that it would ever be able to effectually to utilize such a site should be given to them, for the wealthy friends of art in this city are the friends exclusively of the new organization - the Academy of Fine Arts -- which has practically shown its value and is now showing its value as a promoter of a taste for art in this city.

It is interesting to note that Homer H. Hibbard,
an attorney, does not claim that the Academy of Design
is still in debt.

It is also interesting to note that in 1885
he was on the Executive Committee of the Art Institute
of Chicago