"Fair Exchange No Robbery": William Sidney Mount's Commentary on Modern Times

Author(s): Charles Colbert

Source: American Art, Vol. 8, No. 3/4 (Summer - Autumn, 1994), pp. 28-41
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Smithsonian American Art
Museum
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109170
Accessed: 11-04-2018 11:13 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Smithsonian American Art Museum, The University of Chicago Press are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Art

This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Charles Colbert
William Sidney Mount, Fair
Exchange No Robbery (detail),
1865. Oil on panel, 66 x 85.1 cm (26
x 33 1/2 in.). The Museums at Stony
Brook, Stony Brook, Long Island, Gift
of Mr. and Mrs. Ward Melville
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
Fair Exchange No Robbery
William Sidney Mount's Commentary on Modern Times
The light-filled landscapes and virtuous
rustics painted by William Sidney Mount
(1807-1868) have long been thought to
be an expression of the artist's own sunny
disposition. But much as an image tends
to gain substance with chiaroscuro, so the
portrait of Mount has attained depth by
those willing to draw the artist's darker
side. He was not uncritical of Jacksonian
democracy, and his almost instinctive
response to the centrifugal pull of turbu-
lent times was to gravitate toward the
center. This sentiment appears in his
work as a tendency to impugn the
integrity of anyone whose behavior
diverged even moderately from estab-
lished norms.' Those who ignored
convention were, according to Mount
(fig. 1), prompted by indolence to be less
than scrupulous in their dealings with
others. That Fair Exchange No Robbery
(fig. 2) fits this profile invites inquiry into
the circumstances of its creation. The
story it relates centers on the miscommu-
nication and friction engendered by the
arrival of a group of anarchists on Long
Island. Their eccentricities were soon the
source of much amusement among the
surrounding villages, and the notion of
Mount taking up brush and palette to
join his neighbors in the fun is entirely
consistent with the general tenor of his
social commentary.
29 American Art
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Central to the reassessment of Mount's
work has been the methodology employed
by art historian Elizabeth Johns. By
examining the paintings in light of
linguistic conventions of the day, she has
convincingly demonstrated how seem-
ingly innocuous subjects were often made
to mask pointed criticism of unsavory
practices. Due justice cannot be given
here to the intricacy of her argument, but
two examples may suffice to suggest its
drift. In Bargaining for a Horse (fig. 3), we
encounter two figures engaged in the sale
of a horse, which awaits the outcome of
their protracted negotiations with admi-
rable equine equanimity. During the
1830s, Johns notes, the term horsetrading
was in common usage to designate
expedient political and social transactions
concluded with scant regard for principle.
That such a desire for immediate pecuni-
ary gain has supplanted more pressing
needs is suggested by the deteriorated
barn behind the farmers. A similar
message underlies Raffling for the Goose
(fig. 4), in which a lottery for a plucked
fowl conjures up the contemporary mania
for land speculation and the term raffling
that came to apply to such risky undertak-
ings. Inevitably losers outnumbered
winners, and the individual down on his
luck was called a "gone goose."2 In both
works, protagonists seek to circumvent
 ti:

i:6:iill:i~ i:.r?;9i:::::

-I
:i"::i :::::; :~ -~~:s~~IP~rg,~,:?i3a,~
i _i-;
: : ::: i~~-l:~?~ g~:: ( :i:
E`:::::I':

.-F:i
;:::: :I:i:i 1- :'::::ls:11~

I-

---,:-. ~"- i?:

I:~*?*-I i~'-'--::~ :::::-i

i !_ - as? ?r
r s: ~:::!: :
:':':::I ii;i z `I
:::n:;::i: :r:I:

b
I
r i
?;:

.? a
;:::::::;i I rZ :r;
:::i:s-: :':'-i?:-B:i~l;::::
F:
::;: ::::
i
si::l::
:ill ~ 4:i;

,P j ":~* f ;?
:i

I ~.. if i:
u8:b~ -rir ?r ::~ ::::~=*-:5~5~:?~ :::: :?:?
j: i; r
?~= ::? g
?::::: I~,?:;:a ::I? :??: -?-?-:::4i*C
f C
:B
~il:I 'B
:: :ir
cii
?'Z~ i"

$- --"s4~1S~i~F~8T~O~T ~~~as~

wl
-;i;: :::::II~: -s:
I- ;ir: ,i
Is lii~a~
,a- -? "iBji:? 1:s
Ji'l
a':J:
-::;i?oH~p$lpaar~kacs~ ~
Wiii?:::::

:Bd

This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 the prolonged labor necessary for material
security and chase after get-rich-quick
schemes that bode ill for themselves and
the Republic. The author of this sermon
could not have been entirely comfortable
with the fluid class structure of Jacksonian
America and apparently longed for the
order and probity of an earlier age.
Noting that "money represents
robbery" in its ability to set men
against one another in a form
of "civilized cannibalism,"
Warren sought a fairer means
ofexchange.
Executed around 1865, Fair Exchange
No Robbery was still in Mount's studio
when he died a few years later.3 Similar to
the scenes in the works previously men-
tioned, the incident depicted seems rather
innocent: in a field of ripe corn, a vaga-
bond has momentarily interrupted his
wanderings as he "hastens to exchange,"
as one critic put it, "his own well worn
chapeau for the more presentable Panama
of the scarecrow."4 The title derives from
Byron's The Deformed Transformed (part
1, scene 1), where it appears as "By fair
exchange, not robbery." Invoked as an
adage about equitable transactions, the
quote enjoyed some currency in the
nineteenth century. Alerted to the issues
raised by Johns, however, we are
prompted to examine how the title can
clue us to specific circumstances in the
artist's environment that may have
relevance to the work's meaning.
In contemporary literature, Byron's
phrase was applied to Josiah Warren (fig.
5), a reformer whose utopian theories
earned him considerable fame in his day.5
30 Summer/Fall 1994
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Warren hoped to eradicate social injustice
by going to its root-money. Currency
made speculation possible and permitted
unscrupulous middlemen to manipulate
prices on basic necessities. It encouraged
the nonproductive sector of the populace
to live comfortably off the sweat of the
working class. Noting that "money
represents robbery" in its ability to set
men against one another in a form of
"civilized cannibalism," Warren sought a
fairer means of exchange.'
Central to this theory was the distinc-
tion Warren proposed between value and
cost. Value, the price a commodity brings
on the open market, was not to be
confused with cost, the amount of work
required for its manufacture. The former
was subject to frequent fluctuations
depending on supply and demand, while
the latter remained relatively constant.
What was the value, Warren asked, of loaf
of bread to a starving man? It was worth
all that desperation counseled him to
pledge, but this bore little relationship to
cost. The dollar represented nothing but
itself; it served as the means, however, by
which vast differences in wealth came
about.
By reforming the monetary conven-
tions, then, one could transform society
without resorting to violence. Of critical
importance was the establishment of a
standard free from the contingencies of
value. The obvious substitute was cost, or
labor. Warren's theory revolved on this
axis, that labor be exchanged for labor.
Put into practice, it would prevent the
accumulation of capital, ending forever
those capricious turns of fate that cata-
pulted a lucky few into great wealth and
cast the rest into unending penury and
toil. By eliminating great differences in
income, the bondage of wage slavery
would likewise disappear.
Warren concluded that the best way to
act on his ideas was to open a store. The
first of these appeared in the spring of
1827 in Cincinnati and used labor notes
Charles G. Crehen, William
M " :-:::: Clog::::
Sidney Mount, ca. 1829. Litho-
"Iml'~&li_:i-iiii-:::i
graph, 36.5 x 31 cm (14 3/ x 12 1/4 Sip a SM 0~:
in.), after Charles Loring Elliott.
National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian
Institution

i::_l'I:l':aN O NTO::::::

...........:i~?ii~~~-ii:: :::
_N li2ii?m 'z' l g i-ilii~iiiii~iiiiiil ii~
Ile:~::-::-:-: :iL:_::::: :4--:Y '
oil MIN=--~ -:::::; :

?.R 1 myiilii~~

"IMP A::: ::::::

for a portion the transaction

of all transacti
purchase designed
were tothat
posted so pre
ers could know how much
significantly pr
for each between
item. produ
A surcharge o
percent was Warren
added to called
the h
pri
such "equity
contingent store,"
costs as sh
storekeeper, the public
Warren as "t
himself
pensated by With time,
promissory sev
note
the buyer to evolved.
render The c
service
of time equal bartering
to that spent i
his w

31 American Art

This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

'jut
2 William Sidney Mount, Fair
Exchange No Robbery, 1865. Oil
on panel, 66 x 85.1 cm (26 x 33 1/2
in.). The Museums at Stony Brook,
Stony Brook, Long Island, Gift of
Mr. and Mrs. Ward Melville
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
IL
AMR WT17
AA
most came to prefer labor notes. With
one of these, the holder could require a
given amount of labor from the individual
who had affixed his name to the bill.
Eventually, certain staples could be
acquired by this means solely, thus
precluding the need for the cash
transactions that had served as partial
payment.
The store flourished, but several
nagging questions remained unanswered.
The most persistent of these concerned
the policy of time for time. Was it true,
some asked, that each individual was
equally productive over an hour? And
what about those tasks necessary to the
32 Summer/Fall 1994
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
well-being of the community but distaste-
ful or trying to the practitioner? Were the
butcher and hod carrier perhaps more
deserving than the seamstress and cobbler?
To resolve these issues, Warren relied,
perhaps excessively in the final analysis,
on consensus. He believed that society
could ascertain the relative worth of each
member's abilities and would treat each
accordingly. As to the demands placed on
the laborer by his or her trade, for ex-
ample, he trusted the community to reach
a just evaluation of the degree of difficulty
that was required, which might lead, in
fact, to greater remuneration for some
than others.
3 William Sidney Mount, Bargain- ::-:: :::::I::::::::~::

ingfor a Horse (Farmers Bargain-

:??-?:?::-?::::--?:?

i-liiiiiiiiEiiiiiiii'iii iiiiLii'iiEil-ii~iii':i~i::ii

-----i::i::---:-_-i:---_:- :iiii--::-:iiii- -: :-;:---:i:i~ii:i:iizii:ii

ing), 1835. Oil on canvas, 61 x 75.2

cm (24 x 30 in.). Collection of the
New-York Historical Society
;ii:~i:i:::i:~:::: _:il:i ::-:::::-: : ::::::-:;::?-::::--?::?-:-:-::?--?-::?:-

:-::::-::::-:: -:?:::::::-:~~::::?-?:?::?:?-:::?:-?:

4 William Sidney Mount, Raffling

for the Goose (The Raffle), 1837.
Oil on wood, 43.2 x 58.7 cm (17 x 23 i:xc: :::::i?:::-:: :::-:i:_:: _:~?i:::::i:a:i:i:i:~

1/8 in.). The Metropolitan Museum of

Art, Gift of John D. Crimmins

33 American Art

This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Needless to say, Warren's critics were
hardly placated by these proposals. One
wrote that "to decree equal compensation
to the wise and foolish, the genius and the
looney, the diligent and the lazy, would
be usurious." Further, he concluded,
without the horrors of poverty facing
The vagabond... invites com-
parison not only with his
straw-filled friend but also
with his canine companion. We
know the man by the company
he keeps.
them, men would heedlessly lapse into
dissipation, reasoning, "Well, I'll have my
fun, if I do impair my strength somewhat,
I shall still be as good as the next man
or any other man, when pay-day
comes." 8
How did these developments affect
William Sidney Mount? As it turns out,
in the spring of 1851, Warren and a
number of his followers gathered in the
piney hinterlands of Long Island to found
a utopian society. The village that arose,
known as Modern Times until the name
was changed to Brentwood during the
Civil War, was just twelve miles from the
artist's native Stony Brook. The fledgling
community hoped to live by the ideals
propounded by Warren. Anarchists in the
sense that they rejected any central
government, the utopians believed that
their society, guided by the informal
associations of its members, would serve
as a model to people across the United
States and that the nation would eventu-
ally dissolve into a similar arrangement.9
Established residents, however, were less
34 Summer/Fall 1994
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
than enthusiastic about their new neigh-
bors, whose ambitions and the reactions
they elicited set the stage for Mount's
satire.
The shiftless type at the center of
Mount's little drama is certainly getting
the better end of the deal. Practicing the
sort of barter common at the time store in
operation at Modern Times, he exchanges
one item for another,1o but did he work
for either? Mount suggests that the
vagabond's labors were worth no more
than those of a scarecrow, or, since the
exchange is decidedly unequal, even less.
From this perspective, the artist expressed
in paint precisely the same criticism
leveled by the society's detractors:
Warren's utopian schemes provided no
safeguards against those whose profligacy
encouraged them to take advantage of the
system.
Besides the accusations that his system
coddled the idle and the inept, Warren
had to contend with other, more insidious
charges. Each of his experiments in equity
was the target of whispering campaigns
mounted by those seeking to discredit
him and his advocates. Rumors circulated
that Warren was acting in collusion with
wealthy merchants by assisting them in
disposing their damaged and inferior
stocks in the time stores." That Mount
may have known about these allegations is
suggested by the rather shabby condition
of the hat being offered for exchange. The
theme, then, seems to be that while a fair
exchange may not be robbery, an unfair
one manifestly is.
These circumstances do not necessarily
exhaust the levels of meaning underlying
Fair Exchange No Robbery. In composing
this piece, Mount seems to have also
entertained other more or less private
thoughts about its implications. The
composition is just one of several that
take place in a cornfield. Of these, the
most familiar to Mount's contemporaries
was Long Island Farmer Husking Corn
5 Frank Rowell, Josiah Warren,
portrait photograph. Frontispiece
to William Bailie, Josiah Warren, the
First American Anarchist: A
Sociological Study (Boston: Small,
Maynard & Company, 1906)
IN ..
400~
(fig. 6) due to its frequent appearance as a
vignette on the currency issued by private
banks of the time. This earlier composi-
tion celebrates the fruits of hard labor,
and its depiction of a prosperous farmer
apparently appealed to those institutions
whose cash reserves were dependent on
the ability of such men to repay their
loans. A similar message can be gleaned
from the story appended to this image as
it appeared in a gift book entitled The
Wintergreen. In this forum, Mount's
patron, Charles Augustus Davis, employ-
ing the nom de plume Major Jack
Downing, published a humorous account
of the life of his "Uncle Joshua." We
learn that it is Joshua Downing of
Downingville, Maine, who is portrayed in
the gift book's print (fig. 7) and that he
was "looked up to as one of the foremost
men in town" because of his intelligence
and industriousness.12
An entry in Mount's diary indicates
that he was aware of this particular
35 American Art
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
narrative.13 Assuming that he was also
cognizant of the sorts of interpretations
given to his paintings, the down-and-out
individual in Fair Exchange could be seen
The artist expressed in paint
precisely the same criticism
leveled by the society's detractors:
Warren's utopian schemes
provided no safeguards against
those whose profligacy encour-
aged them to take advantage of
the system.
as a deliberate antitype of the industrious
farmer husking corn.
Significantly, corn came to play a
central part in the economy of Modern
Times. Attempts to put into practice the
doctrine of labor for labor ran into
unforeseen difficulties because it was not
always possible or convenient to render
service on demand. Another means of
exchange was needed, and the Warrenites
settled on corn as the most suitable
alternative. Stephen Pearl Andrews (fig.
8), Warren's foremost disciple and
assistant in his utopian endeavors,
explained, "Hence the price of a house, or
of any other subject, is said to be so many
pounds or so many hours of labor at
corn-raising in the same manner as we
now say so many dollars and cents." He
particularized the virtues of this medium:
Indian corn, wherever it is produced, will
be found to have more of the appropriate
qualities for a standard than any other
article whatsoever, being more invariable in
6 William Sidney Mount, Long
Island Farmer Husking Corn,
1833-34. Oil on canvas, 53.3 x 43.5
cm (21 x 17 /8 in.). The Museums at
Stony Brook, Stony Brook, Long
Island, Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Ward
Melville

:rw
i?.r-

r*i61~ :"

?? i?~$l-l~

quality, more uniform in the amount
produced by the same amount of labor
in a given locality, and more uniform
in the extent ofdemand than any other
article.14
The community's equity notes (fig. 9)
included a succinct statement of this
philosophy: recompense would be
rendered either in labor or corn. Mount
probably handled such bills himself since
they circulated as acceptable currency on
much of Long Island." Given corn's
value as currency, Mount and his contem-
poraries could hardly have ignored the
delightful irony suggested by the contrast
of the prosperous yeoman in one painting
and the vagabond in the other. While the
protagonist in Fair Exchange is surrounded
by an abundance of wealth-that is, the

36 Summer/Fall 1994

This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 ears of corn that were the specie in
Warren's utopian realm--he is apparently Although they welcomed publicity as the
:::;::::: :::i:::i:::~::::::::::: : unwilling to work even for the necessities
of life.
wLDii'?i-i-i.iij?i~ii'i~i;i:iiDi :
Other aspects of Warren's ideology also
served to pique Mount's imagination.
Seeking to found his society on natural
law, Warren turned to phrenology to
furnish a scientific explanation of human
psychology. He particularly favored the
faculty of "individuality," or the "practice
of mentally discriminating, dividing,
separating, disconnecting persons, things,
and events, according to their individual
7 Robert Hinshelwood, after
peculiarities," because it seemed to prove
that anarchism answered the mind's
William Sidney Mount, Uncle
Joshua. Line engraving published in innate yearnings. Here was the source of
Major Jack Downing [Charles
all inalienable rights, every person acting
Augustus Davis], "A Brief Sketch of
Uncle Joshua," in The Wintergreen as "his or her own government, law, and
(New York: C. Wells and Company, church."'6 Modern Times endeavored to
1843). New York Public Library
give the broadest latitude to "individual
sovereignty"; hence, "there was no
organization to set up, no 'bye laws' to
establish, and no constitution to write."
In an effort to inform the surrounding
residents of their intentions, a broadside
was circulated proclaiming:
There is no society formed by us. We are
distinctly individuals in property relations,
in business, in responsibilities, in modes of
thought, opinion, and action, as the citizens
ofNew York or any other city. No one of us
is even as much responsible for the opinions
or conduct ofothers here, as he would be in
a common city, living under a corporation;
for we have no corporation of any descrip-
tion, nor any organization or connected
responsibilities whatsoever; and the only
reason for attaching our signatures to this
circular is, that it is more economical than
for each to issue a circular for himself.17
Difficulties inevitably arose. While
inviting all to join regardless of persua-
sion, the inhabitants sought in advance to
absolve themselves of any collective
responsibility for the antisocial acts
perpetrated by anyone of their group by
37 American Art
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
assigning blame solely on the individual.
primary means of spreading their doc-
trine, the Warrenites were unprepared to
compel a resident to adopt any prescribed
standards should he or she draw adverse
Mount suggests that the
vagabond's labors were worth no
more than those ofa scarecrow,
or, since the exchange is decidedly
unequal, even less.
attention. And, as might be expected, the
newspapers took greater interest in the
antics of a few than in the philosophy by
which most sought to pattern their lives.
The rumors that shadowed Warren's
efforts from the beginning soon spread
through the hamlets of Long Island."8
In 1853 particular notoriety attended
the arrival of Dr. Thomas L. Nichols and
his band of "free love" advocates. Their
pronouncements and practices "disgusted
the surrounding neighborhood so that
even the name of the place was something
like an emetic.""19 Yet it is testimony to
the integrity with which the residents of
Modern Times adhered to their principles
that this coterie was allowed to remain
until their departure was prompted by
dissent within their own ranks. Mount's
distaste for subjects beyond the pale of
propriety meant that such circumstances
were unlikely to fire his imagination;
other events, however, came easily within
his range.
Many at Modern Times who were
eager to assert their individuality did so by
adopting singular modes of dress. Extrava-
gant apparel figured among the first
impressions registered by visitors to the
 little village. One woman paraded about
in male attire, and the newspapers
reported that this fashion was common
among the ladies of the town. Others
rejected clothing altogether. Attracted by
the tolerant mores of the community, one
family of Adamites (nudists) persisted in
this practice through the coldest days of
Mount was a man of decided
political and social views, and
these frequently added bite to his
commentary.
winter. Another benighted soul thought
nudity a preventative to his failing
eyesight. Warren's account of this indi-
vidual is especially intriguing in relation
to Mount's painting. We are told that,
despite his declining vision,
he could see well enough to take a
neighbor's coatfrom a fence where the
owner ofit had been at work. This gave
the idea that we were a nest of thieves as
well as fanatics.20
Here was a public relations disaster of
the first order. To minimize the damage
to the Warrenites' reputation, another
handbill was distributed, this time
informing those who had experienced
the mysterious disappearance of any
article to search for it on the premises of
the suspected party. Warren saw this
solution as the most reasonable answer to
the dilemma, for it "placed the responsi-
bility upon him the thief, Individually,
where it belonged, and put an end to his
pilfering."21
The image of one of the Warrenites
disburdening local farmers of articles of
38 Summer/Fall 1994
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
clothing they may have removed tempo-
rarily is too suggestive to ignore when
viewing Fair Exchange No Robbery. Given
the Warrenites' supposed disdain for
materialism, Mount would have delighted
in the incongruity of utopians resorting to
skulduggery to enhance their sartorial
status. The incident was merely one
concrete example of a whole range of
vague suspicions harbored by neighboring
residents. No doubt tongues wagged
when the handbills arrived in town, and
many must have perceived them as just
another confirmation of their apprehen-
sions regarding the indolence and
unreliability of the utopians.
These sentiments found their way as
well into the compositional format of Fair
Exchange, as a comparison with the Long
Island Farmer Husking Corn demon-
strates. The main thrust of the earlier
piece is the diagonal row of corn that runs
from the left foreground to the right,
inviting the viewer into the setting, much
as in baroque art. Further, the farmer's
figure rises above the relatively low
horizon of the corn so that he looms up
against the clear sky in a heroic manner.
Here is a man who has nothing to hide,
one who enjoys the bounty of his labor, as
the basket in the corner makes apparent.
By contrast, the protagonist in Fair
Exchange is overshadowed by the crop
that surrounds him. He is less easily
observed by those who live or work in the
vicinity, suggesting that he is engaged in
some covert activity. The relative neglect
of the field, with its abundance of weeds,
reinforces the sense of moral disarray that
pervades the scene. The vagabond, whose
left arm mimics the gesture of the scare-
crow, invites comparison not only with
his straw-filled friend but also with his
canine companion. We know the man by
the company he keeps. Most important,
the scene is one of boundaries trans-
gressed: the picket fence separates one
field from another and inhibits the kind
of access provided in the earlier painting.
8 Artist unknown, portrait of
Stephen Pearl Andrew. Brentwood
Public Library, New York
i "
================= ======== ......
::
i~i i, i . . (==============
Although the space is delimited and the
prerogatives of property forcefully as-
serted, the intruder has managed to find
his way, uninvited, into the setting. This
interpretation would bear out Donald
Keyes's observation that "Mount's
scenes are carefully controlled theaters
in which the actors happily partake in
the humorous anecdote while reinforcing
the standards of popular morality."22
No doubt the artist regaled acquaintances
with the anecdote that inspired the
painting, but the work's provincialism
and narrow frame of reference may
explain why no buyer was ever found.
Compared to the irascibility often
apparent in Mount's later political
satire,23 the tone of Fair Exchange No
Robbery shows remarkable moderation.
The message operates on several levels,
which are integrated with unusual finesse.
At its most obvious, it can be considered a
simple anecdote about those who adopt
expedient standards of conduct. But
Mount was a man of decided political and
social views, and these frequently added
bite to his commentary. The circulation
of labor notes on Long Island, with their
promises of labor or corn equivalents,
39 American Art
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
must have reminded Mount of the various
uses made of his Long Island Farmer
Husking Corn, and this in turn apparently
spurred ideas about updating the imagery
to accord with contemporary circum-
stances. In this light, the vagrant who
exchanges his tattered hat enacts the
dictum used to describe the code of the
Warrenites-"By fair exchange, not
robbery." At the same time, the vagrant's
exchange satirizes the notion that labor
could be equitably measured or barter
fairly practiced without dissimulation.
A conservative agenda undoubtedly
guided much of Mount's political com-
mentary, but this should not prevent us
from granting due regard to the complex-
ity of his beliefs. While often allied with
the less liberal factions of the day, he was
also an ardent believer in philosophies
that promised unlimited moral and
physical progress. Spiritualism and
phrenology, both of which he enthusiasti-
cally embraced, were dedicated to the
realization of mankind's potential
perfectibility.24 These doctrines were
also espoused by the residents of Modern
Times, but the Warrenites' advocacy
apparently did not incline Mount to
their cause.
Even though Mount, like Warren,
sought to establish his beliefs about
human destiny on the principles of
"natural law," he had less faith in the
phrenological faculty of individuality
than the reformer. A book found in
Mount's library, T. S. Mackintosh's The
"Electrical Theory" of the Universe, is
particularly suggestive in this regard.
Mackintosh maintained that excesses of
liberty begot a licentiousness that in turn
promoted anarchy. In response he
proposed, "What we can do is to press
forward avoiding violent action and
thereby we may escape the violent
re-action which is sure to follow."25 The
tenor of Mount's imagery reflects this
admonition, and if questioned about the
residents of Modern Times, Mount
9 Equity notes such as these were in
circulation during the 1850s.

~--:iiii~-ii:_iiii-:~i . : :::-::_::_: 8 iiil-~i-: ~ i::::j::::::-::::i*4 :-:-::k

-: -_:::-:--:l::: : : ~ii~ii ii:-~:i-iiiiij i~:: - .. ::"'::::;::-:::~::-::- -:---:;'':';; .-..-iB---:lii _:-: M o .,, M:%2'il~ 8~
i i i l l ..... ':..................................ii~-ic~i::::ri--iia:i::iii
:: -::':I:i -:_ -..'~iiiiiii:ii-i~i~:::::: . . . . . . . . . .: :::: :::::ii~ii:---:,,;~cii
j. . i~i
. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . o ?7. . . r . . ._

.......... i-:ii:iiiiiiii:ii iii-iiii~~?i:~

B':.i ?'l'?iiiii~:'' ' "'i' ' iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiii i : i-iiiii i'iii
. . . . . . . ...-:- -::-- : - .: :::_-W/___ :--/::j-: - ::::

iii~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~:-:;-?i i-~i ............................................... ii iiiiiiiii

ii8iiii ii iii ......... "iiiiiii .............. .. iiiiiiiii-i'-iiiiii~ii -~:l~~ii-ii:~ij i i ~ i ~ :"

!ii~ ............................
.............. - - - - - - - ....- ...- -:~;i:iiiiii~
.... .... .... ...gii.. iiiii
.. ....:ii~:i
... ::i:i.?:-ii::iii~

.01::::::;::::i:_;~:- ::.:::::::

:.X1. Xiii~iiii:iii~-ii: :i:: l- ??: :?:: ?: ii~i::: ?: ii ili'i::~:

That the imagery of Fair Exchange No

probably would have responded that the
extremity of their experiments Robbery operates on several levels should
come as no surprise to those familiar wi
precluded popular approval and thus
doomed them to failure. At the same
Johns's discourse. The painting provid
additional insight into the artist because
time, Mount would have surely agreed
with Warren about the potential of it suggests that Mount's social and
religious (including faith in scientific
humanity when freed, at some future
progress) beliefs could meet on commo
date, from the supervision of a powerful
ground. He was not solely a political
central authority. The purpose of govern-
ment, then, was to maintain order so that and by examining his other
animal,
dimensions, we encounter a complex
its members might improve. This they
could do on their own, but Mountmatrix
saw of ideas and motives mirroring t
vitality of reform thought in antebellum
anarchism inhibiting, rather than assist-
America.
ing, the natural process of evolution.

40 Summer/Fall 1994

This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Notes
I See William T. Oedel and Todd S.
Gernes, " The Painter's Triumph:
William Sidney Mount and the
Formation of a Middle-Class Art,"
Winterthur Portfolio 23 (Summer/
Autumn 1988): 11-27.
2 See Elizabeth Johns, American Genre
Painting (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1991), pp. 28-41.
3 Fair Exchange was listed among the
pictures remaining in his estate in 1871.
See Alfred Frankenstein, William Sidney
Mount (New York: Harry N. Abrams,
1975), p. 462. For the provenance, see
Bartlett Cowdrey and Hermann Warner
Williams, Jr., William Sidney Mount
(New York: Columbia University Press
for the Metropolitan Museum of Art,
1944), p. 30. As is often the case with
Mount, the title has several variations.
According to Frankenstein, p. 388, the
inventory of 1871 includes it as
Exchange is no Robbery. Mount called it
Even exchange no robbery when working
on it in November 1865.
4 Quoted in Cowdrey and Williams, p. 30.
5 Samuel Leavitt associates Byron's phrase
with a workingman's lyceum in New
York that was devoted to the realization
of Warren's ideas. See Samuel Leavitt,
"'A Fair Exchange No Robbery,' " The
Phrenological Journal and Life Illustrated
61 (December 1875): 390-93. On
Warren, see William Bailie, Josiah
Warren, the First American Anarchist: A
Sociological Study (Boston: Small,
Maynard & Company, 1906).
6 Josiah Warren, Equitable Commerce
(Utopia, Ohio: Amos E. Senter, 1849),
p. 29.
7 See James J. Martin, Men Against the
State (New York: Libertarian Book Club,
1957), pp. 13-46.
41 American Art
This content downloaded from 200.144.93.190 on Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:13:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
8 Leavitt, p. 391.
9 On Modern Times, see Martin, p. 80;
and Josiah Warren, True Civilization an
Immediate Necessity and the Last Ground
ofHope for Civilization (Boston: J.
Warren, 1863), p. 106. The local hired
to survey the Warrenites' site was a Mr.
Hawkins, who was apparently a relative
of Mount on his mother's side. See
Madeleine B. Stern, The Pentarch, A
Biography ofStephen PearlAndrews
(Austin: University of Texas Press, 1968),
p. 76.
10 See Moncure Daniel Conway, Autobiog-
raphy, Memories and Experiences of
Moncure Daniel Conway, vol. 1 (Boston:
Houghton, Mifflin and Company,
1904), p. 266.
11 See Martin, p. 22.
12 On Long Island Farmer, see David
Cassedy and Gail Shrott, William Sidney
Mount: Works in the Collection of The
Museums at Stony Brook (Stony Brook,
N.Y.: The Museums at Stony Brook,
1983), p. 51. See also Major Jack
Downing [Charles Augustus Davis], "A
Brief Sketch of Uncle Joshua," in The
Wintergreen, ed. by John Keese (New
York: C. Wells and Company, 1843),
p. 58.
13 See Frankenstein, p. 469.
14 Stephen Pearl Andrews, The Science of
Society (New York: Fowler and Wells,
1852), p. 98.
15 See Martin, p. 82.
16 See Warren, pp. 2-4.
17 Josiah Warren, Practical Application of the
Elementary Principles of "True Civiliza-
tion "to the Minute Details ofEvery Day
Life (Princeton, 1873), p. 7; and
broadside, excerpted in Josiah Warren,
Practical Details in Equitable Commerce
(New York: Fowler and Wells, 1852),
p. vii.
18 See Warren, True Civilization, p. 107.
19 Warren, Practical Application, p. 20. See
Martin, p. 76.
20 Warren, Practical Application, p. 18; see
also p. 20; and Conway, 1:266.
21 Warren, Practical Application, p. 18.
22 Donald D. Keyes, "William Sidney
Mount Reconsidered," American Art
Review 4 (August 1977): 126.
23 See, for example, the commentary on
Mount's Politically Dead (ca. 1867, The
Museums at Stony Brook) in Guy C.
McElroy, "Introduction: Race and
Representation," in Facing History, with
an essay by Henry Louis Gates, Jr.
(San Francisco: Belford Arts, 1990),
pp. xiii-xvi.
24 On Mount's conservatism, see Franken-
stein, p. 201. An instance of his
spiritualist views on progress can be
found in Mount's notes on a lecture by
Judge John W. Edmonds on 25 March
1854; see Frankenstein, p. 290.
Benjamin Nelson Pfingstag discusses
some of Mount's ties to spiritualism and
reviews his interest in phrenology, but
only from the very limited perspective of
the phrenologists' connections with the
temperance movement; see Pfingstag,
"Aspects of Form and Time in the
Paintings of William Sidney Mount"
(Ph.D. diss., The Graduate School of the
State University of New York at
Binghamton, 1980).
25 T. S. Mackintosh, The "Electrical Theory"
of the Universe (Boston: Josiah P.
Mendum, 1846), p. 423.