The Express.
London, England, 1855-09-10 00:00:00

OUR NATIONAL MONUMENTS-THE RIGS?

ARTIST IN THE RIGHT PLACE.

In the Daily News of August 28, attention was
invited to a question of art of much interest, but which
appeared to be in danger of injudicious managemest—
namely, the government proposal to erect a monument is
commemoration of the Duke of Wellington in St. Pears
Cathedral, and to aooord to a foreign artist the truly British
privilege of producing this token of the nation's greet&
We could not refrain from treating the latter portion d
this fine•art question as a rumour, not believing thata COW
mittee of English gentlemen could be so forgetful of the
honour and interests of their country as to wander in quid
of talent which presents itself so readily at hand, and whisk
the intenaelynational character of the intended work imps
ratively demands should be sought for at home. it is trill
mortifying to find that so rational a supposition um
erroneous—not only have the committee proposed to caw
mission a foreigner to execute the national monument is
question, but the unheard•ef proposal, we regret to date,

_ .
is acoumpanied by circumstances of a most consureable
clu-
ranter. The biatory, up to the present moment, el this u-
aceountable affair, is briefly as follows :—The governante
having determined that a monument in marble, to cost
5,0001., should be placed in tat. Paul's in ham,
of the Duke of Wellington, caned four sealpton,
Messrs. Baily, Gibs's, Foley, and Marochetti, to
be invited to submit to Sir William Molesworth designs for
the aboveementioned work, upon the usual understanding
that the author of the best model should be commission&
to execute the monument. Mr. Gibson, who we believe
has ever refrained from engaging in competitions, declined
the invitation; Mr. Maroehetti also objected to try hi
strength os the occuion. Messrs Baily and Foley produced
their models at the appointed time, vie. the 31st et Marsh
lat. From two artists of such wellesstablished reputation
as the two last named members of the Royal Academy,
it was but natural to expect meritorious designs,
nor, from what report nye of their respective models,
does it appear that either artist proved inferior to himself
in his tenement of the important theme. The committee
allowed two months to elapse before they vouchsafed a re.
mark upon the works submitted to them ; and then Sir
Benjamin Hall wrete to the two competitors, stating that
it was his "painful duty" to inform them that he bold lot
recommend the execution of either of their designs to the
g 00000 meat. Upon this Messrs. Baily and Foley very
generously offered to prepare fresh models; this liberal
offer from the two accomplished artists was declined, and,
sad to record, the pries was shortly after awarded to one of
the non-competitors—Mr. Marochetti.
Here for the present we leave this " painful" subject,
sincerely hoping that such a change may come o'er the
• dream of the managing committee as shall prove to the pub-
i that they have awakened to the common nose view of a
• question in which is involved the two-told consideration of
honesty and patriotism; and that we may be spared the
painful necessity of further commenting upon a proceeding
which in its incipient state is as lowering to the honour of
the country as it is discouraging to native talent, •