TO THE EDITOR

Sir - As none of the gentlemen connected with the above establishment have felt inclined to explain the wonderful coincidence of the extreme likeness between the work of some American artists that of Professor Piglhein of Munic, I have been compelled to write to the latter artist, and I am waiting for an answer, which I shall publish as soon as it arrives. Herewith I beg to hand a short translation of an article which I found in one of the German papers received by yesterday’s mail: - „On the 1^st of February, 1865, the firm Halder & Co. made a contract with Professor Piglhein, of Munich, for the production of a large panorama, „The Crucifixion of Christ“, for the sum of 145,000 marks, under the condition that he should travel to Jerusalem to study the locality, Oriental costumes, &c., &c., and to enter into an engagement not to produce a similar work for any other party for the next ten years, and to hand over to the firm of H. & Co., all plates and drawings“. Professor P. engaged the painters Karl Frosch and Joseph Krieger as assistants, in whose company he visited Palestine, and the result was the beautiful work of art which South Australians admire so much at present in Hindley-street. On June 1, 1886, the panorama was opened to the public of Munich, and created quite a sensation. In September, 1886, Karl Frosch went to Milwaukie, and in conjunction with some American painters reproduced six or seven copies of the now famous work. By this time an English firm (Fishburn Brothers) in North Shields had contracted with Halder & Co. To show the panorama in London, for which privilege they had to pay a heavy rental. They built costly premises for the purpose, but before these were finished there appeared in December, 1890, in Niagara Hall, London, one of Frosch’s plagiarisms, and the propietors took upwards of £ 100 per day for entrance fees. To cut the story short there was a lawauit-Fishburn Brothers versus „The Buffalo Cyclorama Company“ - for damages and confiscation in accordance with the Convention of Berne for the protection of work of art. The English Judge gave a verdict against the defendants, who appealed, but it is be hoped without success. I’m, Sir, &c.,

OSKAR ZIEGLER.

Osmond-terrace, Norwood.