Evening star., 1870-02-15
Hiram Powers and the New Orleans
Framklin Statue.

Some Of the southern papers have been made
the channels lately for sharp attacks upon the
sculptor Powers, and these attacks would seem
from their bitterness to have been inspired by
some personal hostility. One of the charges laid
against him was that he had received q large
proportion Of the money to make a statue of
Franklin for the city of New Orleans, and had
failed to either 60 on with the work, or refund
the money. Mr.. Powers made a conclusive
answer to that charge in a letter that appeared
in THE STAR some time since. Following upon
that answer the New Orleans Times In the
course Of an exceedingly abusive article against
Mr.. Powers, stated that the editor of that paper
was authorized bv the origina subscribers
to the Franklin statue fund to offer 90 900 in gold
to Mr.. Powers If he would complete the statue.
Subjoined will be found letter from Mr.. Pow
ers accepting the offer, which is not a very
tempting one, considering that the original
agreement was to pay him IS 900, and it seems
he has received but 81 800. Mr.. Powers writes
TO his correspondent in this city that he has
already ordered the block OF MARBLE and that
the model, finished so many years ago, will be
sculptured with the least possible delay. The
letter we publish below is a copy Of that sent
direct from Florence to the editor Of the ~ o.
Times:
To the Editor Of the N. O. Times:
SIR:-Since receiving, through my kind friend
Mr.. AtLee, Of Washington city, your article i'm
which you have proposed to pay me So 900, in
gold, for q statue of Franklin, to be placed, bv
the concurrence Of surviving subscribers to the
Franklin Statue fund, in a niche in the front of
your printing Office in New Orleans, I have
looked over my old papers, for statements of
the sums already paid to me, and can nnd only
two instalments sent out hither by the treasurer,
Mr.. james Saul. The first was f225 remtted
August lS, 1Sa4, the second was f57.l4.0 remit
Mr.. Saul says in his first letter that only about
one half Of the s. ,Ooo-the price of the statue
had been subscribed, and, in his letter of Nav
10, 1851, he says:
v"Epslosed you will find LIST Of exchange, Samuel
Ss Isds.sS: in aSndSn n & order
gagged TO execute in lS44 greater part of this sum
mas been on hand long time but was not remtted
that further collections might be made from the
mitance You need not doubt, if the statue e be ex
ecnted, that II vii be paid for altho Mr. Wilde,
you IN such manner rs was calculated to excite
Now, unless MT. Saul did send me some money
twXt the dates of 1874 and 1s51-of which
nave no recollection, and of which can find no
account-all have ever received on account OF
the Franklin statue commission, amounts to
only about 81 500, besides some books and a
copy Of miniature of Franklin, sent for my
guidance in executing the work.
In my letter to Mr.. Saul, many years ago.
PioPosiuS 10 pay Ddck tne amount had
ceived if the subscribers would consent to re-
ceive 1t, proposed, as an alternative, If more
acceptable TO them, to execute three colossal
busts-viz: Of Washington, Franklin and Jack
son-for the money had received. But Mr.
saul has never answered my letter. Indeed, /
have not heard, directly or indirectly, from him
since, nor do L know if he is living. OF one
thing am quite sure, however, and that is that
he Is or was an honest man, and that his books
VIII show true account of all have ever re-
celved on the Franklin commission.
But 1t is OF no great moment what has already
been paid, since accept your proposal as the
authorized agent of the original subscribers-
rho hare paid to the Franklin statue fund, viz
to pay me 3d. 900 in gold, according to the terms
You have printed in the Times, OF which have
an impression.
Thus far you will perceive, sir, that have
used respectful termsfOr to the representative OF
the surviving subscribers to the Franklin statue
fund gratitude to them binds me to strict courte-
ssy, even If felt inclined to use other language
put, perhaps, may venture to suggest that YOU
should review this case, re-examine all that
have said and done, and compare your own con-
Duct with that OF your obedent servant,
Florence, January 23 1870.
p. SIN regard to Mr.. Slocomb, who wa
here, it appears, in 1853, and not year or two
ago as You have stated, l had forgotten the name
Of the gentleman who, so long ago, came to INV
studio and talked with me about the statue He
testifes to the truth of my statements, however.
as lar as his letter goes except in respect the
want of courtesy in his letter to me; i'm which
letter he alludes to my pecuniary embarrass-
ments-"distress'-a the time of the subscrip-
tion. Strict courtesy would have left that out
1t was reproachful. IL. p.