sensitive among the public to appreciate them. In smoothness and "softness" consists the acme of technical perfection in the eyes of the untrained, who, as regards figure subjects, prefer something which appears to the artist to be inane and commonplace, and as regards landscape subjects, insipid prettiness is always preferred to greatness or originality of view. In either case an excess of detail is a "sine quâ non," and such "plébiscites" as have been taken in England have almost invariably proved that the inferior painters are the most popular,
Yet, occasionally a great artist arises who will upset these canons, and compel the admiration of connoisseur and public alike; such an one is Steinlen.
Just as it may be presumed that J. F, Millet's popularity extends to all classes, so is it certain that the "Millet of the streets" will be equally widely and lastingly appreciated.
'The pioneer work that Millet did m interpreting the toilsome life of the French peasantry has been extended by Steinlen to the denizens — reputable and disreputable — of the nearer suburbs of Paris.
Born in Lausanne, he was trained for the church; and we may feel sure that had he joined that profession he would have been a forcible advocate of the poor and the ili-favoured, and that his blunt honesty of diction would have dealt his congregation some rude shocks indeed.
This was not to be, however, for the art in the
