Letters to the Editor

MADAM – May I please offer three cheers to your correspondent, Edric van Vredenburgh, who has put his finger firmly on a fundamental flaw in our government’s proposed new legislation on ivory (ATG No 2337).

MADAM – John Lewis’ letter (ATG No 2341) in which the chairman of the Public Monuments & Sculpture Association reveals he is seeking counsel’s opinion, in respect of a legal challenge to the proposed ivory trade ban, raises three key questions:

MADAM – Michael Baggott’s recent letter about the potential adverse impact of the ivory sales ban on the display of ivory pieces by museums is, with respect, misguided.

MADAM – The Public Monuments & Sculpture Association shares many of the concerns which have been expressed in your letters pages since the last statements from Defra on the ivory issue.

MADAM – I have been dealing in Oriental antiques for almost 50 years and have been a supporter of the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) for most of this time.

MADAM – I am sending you a photo of some small sewing tools in carved ivory, made c.1840.

MADAM – We are all devastated at what is being proposed by the government in relation to ivory.

MADAM – Thank you for printing my previous correspondence (ATG No 2337). If I thought that a ban on pre-1947 ivory would stop the death of 50 elephants I would stop writing.

MADAM – My collection of Troika ceramics includes some rare pieces, notably two bowls of fruit.

MADAM – The government’s ill-conceived attack on antique ivory will likely mean that two pieces in my home – a 19th century Cantonese puzzle-ball chess set and my wife’s Corpus Christi acquired shortly after our marriage 50 years ago – now have no value in probate.

MADAM – Last year readers may recall a Victorian presentation ‘ivory tusk’ dinner gong was removed from display in one of the Royal Collection exhibitions.

MADAM – As a dealer (and collector) in antique needlework tools and other small collectables, I am dismayed and angered by the proposals for the ivory ban as outlined in detail in last week’s ATG.

MADAM – Having read the government (Defra) statement on the UK ivory ban (ATG No 2337), it is obvious that far from offering clarity, it is flawed on the following points:

MADAM – I would suggest sending a copy of last week’s ATG guide to the ivory ban to every MP with an appropriate covering letter.

MADAM – I am alarmed at the government’s apparently poor understanding of how the trade works and its relationship with collectors and venerable institutions.

MADAM – I concur with everything that Michael Baggott wrote in ATG No 2235.

MADAM – Defra’s findings outlined in the post-consultation document include an extraordinarily impractical provision for the ‘de minimis’ exemption – requiring registration (with an as yet unspecified fee) of all objects with an ivory content below 10% created before 1947.

MADAM – Re your report on dealer findings in Art Basel’s The Art Market 2018 report (ATG No 2335), I was intrigued by the ‘Average time taken to sell works from dealers’ inventories…’ graph.

MADAM – I sympathise with your correspondent Phil Higginbotham (Letters, ATG No 2335), who decries booksellers’ notes on endpapers.

MADAM – I am an artist and a restorer and have been working with broken Staffordshire figurines for some time now – re-inventing and giving them a new lease of life.