The Sun.
London, England, 1857-08-10 00:00:00

DECISION OF THE JUDGES ON THE

WELLINGTON MONUMENT.

Subjoined is the report of the judges appointed
to examine the models submitted, in competition
for a monument to the late Duke of Wellington,
which was agreed to on Saturday, and presented to
the Government.

WELLINGTON MONUMENT.
Report of the judges appointed to examine the
models, submitted in competition, for a monument
to the late Duke of Wellingt >n :
"To the Right Hon. Sir B. Hall, Bart., M.P.,
First Commissioner of her Majesty's Works and
Public Buildings.
" Sir,—ln the execution of the duty devolved
upon us, we beg to recommend that the prizes
should be allotted to the models corresponding
with the following numbers :
Pram.

No. - MOTTO.
80 Most greatly lived this Star of England!
Fortune made his sword.

Firs{

Second 56 - Avon.
Third
Fourth
honour. Mine honour t. 12 ...{ " 'Tis not my profit i
that leads”mi
18ne
I know of but one art.
20
d A design in clay resembles life.
A stucco copy resembles death.
21 ... The execution in marble, however, is
the resurrection of the work of art.
63
We have thus endeavoured to adjudge the
prizes we have been instructed to distribute (in the
scale of which we have not thought ourselves at
liberty to make any change), in the order which
appeared to us to be that of the relative degrees of
merit in the models, such models falling within the
prescribed conditions, as to the space to be occupied,
and the cost to be incurred.
" In so doing we have not considered ourselves
bound to take into exclusive consideration the pe-
culiar fitness and adaptation to that spot in St.
Paul's Cathedral which appear 3 to be in contempla-
tion for the erection of the proposed monument,
which consideration might possibly have led to some
difference in the selection.
" We cannot, at the same time, forbear suggest-
ing that, before any design is finally adopted by the
government, it would be desirable, considering the
peculiarity of the situation contemplated, and that
it essentially differs from that of all the other monu-
ments now existing in the cathedral, the opinion of
some experienced artists should be called for, who
would be better judges of the local effect than we
consider ourselves to be ; more especially as Mr.
Cockerell, the only one of the appointed judges pro-
fessionally connected with the arts—though we
have derived from him valuable assistance and in-
formation in the progress of the examination—has
declined, on that account, taking a part in the ulti-
mate decision.

Equ

" We may be permitted to add that it is with
much regret that we have found ourselves precluded
from admitting into the competition some of the
models, from the circumstance of their having ex-
ceeded the limits as to space, distinctly hid down
in the prescribed conditions.
" (Signed)
LANSDOWNE, EDWD. OUST,
H. H. MILMAN, W. E. GLADSTONE.
OVERSTONE.
" 6, Palace-yard, August 7, 1857."
The following are the names and addresses of the
successful competitors, with the premiums awarded •

FIRST PREMIUM, 7001.
80. W. Calder Marshall, Esq., R.A., 47, Ebury
street, Eaton-square.
SECOND PREMIUM, 5001.

56. W. F. Woodington, Esq., 22, Richard's-
,errace, Lorrimore-road, Walworth.
THIRD PREMIUM, 300/.
36. Edgar G. Papworth, Esq., 90, Milton-street,
Dorset-square.
FOURTH PREMIUM, 2002.
10. Cay. Giovanni Dupre, Florence.
FIVE PREMIUMS OF 1001. EACH.
12. Mll. Mariano Folcini and 'Miss° Cambi,
Florence.
18. Alfred Stevens, Esq., '7, Canning-place,
Kensington.
20. Matther Noble, Esq., 13, Bruton-street,
Berkeloy-square.
21. Herr Ernestus Julius Hahne], Dresden.
63. Thomas Thorneyeroft, Esq., 39, Stanhope-
street.