In drawing to a conclusion I come now to refer to a subject which is naturally embraced in an address intended to review the progress of culture in this country, and that is what should have, perhaps, been spoken of before, the condition of Art in the Dominion. As our public libraries[63] are small compared with those in the neighbouring union, and confined to three or four cities—Montreal being in some respects behind Toronto—so our public and private art galleries are very few in number and insignificant as respects the value and the greatness of the paintings. Even in the House of Commons, not long since, regret was expressed at the smallness of the Dominion contribution, one thousand dollars only, for the support of a so-called National Art Gallery at Ottawa, and the greater part of this paltry sum, it appeared, went to pay, not the addition of good paintings, but actually the current expenses of keeping it up. Hopes were thrown out by more than one member of the government, in the course of the discussion on the subject, that ere long a much larger amount would be annually voted to make the gallery more representative of the best Canadian art, and it was very properly suggested that it should be the rule to purchase a number of Canadian pictures regularly every year, and in this way stimulate the talent of our artists. Montreal at present has one fairly good museum of art, thanks to the liberality of two or three of her rich men, but so public spirited a city as Toronto, which numbers among its citizens a number of artists of undoubted merit, is conspicuous for its dearth of good pictures even in private collections, and for the entire absence of any public gallery. In Montreal there are also some very valuable and representative paintings of foreign artists in the residences of her wealthy men of business; but whilst it is necessary that we should have brought to this country from time to time such examples of artistic genius to educate our own people for better things, it is still desirable that Canadian millionaires and men of means and taste54 should encourage the best efforts of our own artists. It is said sometimes—and there is some truth in the remark—that Canadian art hitherto has been imitative rather than creative; but while we have pictures like those of L. R. O'Brien, W. Brymner, F. A. Verner, O. R. Jacobi, George Reid, F. M. Bell-Smith, Homer Watson, W. Raphael, Robert Harris, C. M. Manly, J. W. L. Forster, A. D. Patterson, Miss Bell, Miss Muntz, J. Pinhey, J. C. Forbes, Paul Peel—a young man of great promise too soon cut off—and of other excellent painters,[64][G] native born or adopted Canadians, illustrating in many cases, as do those of Mr. O'Brien notably, the charm and picturesqueness of Canadian scenery, it would seem that only sufficient encouragement is needed to develop a higher order of artistic performance among us. The Marquess of Lorne and the Princess Louise, during their too short residence in the Dominion, did something to stimulate a larger and better taste for art by the establishment of a Canadian Academy and the holding of several exhibitions; but such things can be of little practical utility if Canadians do not encourage the artists who are to contribute. It is to be hoped that the same spirit of generosity which is yearly building commodious science halls, and otherwise giving our universities additional opportunities for usefulness, will also ere long establish at least one fine art gallery in each of the older provinces, to illustrate not simply English and Foreign art, but the most original and highly executed work of Canadians themselves. Such galleries are so many object lessons—like that wondrous "White City" which has arisen by a western lake as suddenly as the palaces of eastern story—to educate the eye, form the taste and develop the higher faculties of our nature amid the material surroundings of our daily life. No doubt the creative and imaginative faculties of our people have not yet been developed to any noteworthy extent; the poems and paintings of native Canadians too frequently lack, and the little fiction so far written is entirely destitute of the essential elements of successful and permanent work in art and literature. But the deficiency in this respect has arisen not from the poverty of Canadian55 intellect, but rather from the absence of that general distribution of wealth on which art can alone thrive, the consequent want of galleries to cultivate a taste among the people for the best artistic productions, and above all from the existence of that spirit of intellectual self-depreciation which is essentially colonial, and leads not a few to believe that no good work of this kind can be done in mere dependencies. The exhibition of American art at the world's fair is remarkable on the whole for individual expression, excellent colour and effective composition. It proves to a demonstration that the tendency is progressive, and that it is not too much to expect that a few decades hence this continent will produce a Corot, a Daubigny, a Bonnat, a Bouguereau or a Millais. Not the least gratifying feature of the exhibition has been the revelation to the foreign world—and probably to many Canadians as well—that there is already some artistic performance of a much higher order than was believed to exist in Canada, and that it has been adjudged worthy of special mention among the masterpieces that surround the paintings of our artists. This success, very moderate as it is, must stimulate Canadian painters to still greater efforts in the future, and should help to create a wider interest in their work among our own people, heretofore too indifferent to the labours of men and women, whose rewards have been small in comparison with the conscien............