Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1897-02-01
SCULPTORS HUFFY.
Why the National Society viii Not
Make an Exhibition Of the Models
Of the Sherman Statue.

New York, January Silt is defn-
itely announced that the proposed eX-
hibition of the models for the Sherman
statue to be erected in Washington,
between which the award was finally
made and announced by the National
Sculpture Society some months since,
will not be made.
Mr.. Barr Ferree, secretary of the So
ciety, with reference to this, makes the
following statement:
The National Sculpture Society
deeply regrets that it must withdraw
its announcement that the models in
the final competition for the Sherman
statue are to be exhibited, but feels it
is without blame in the matter" The
announcement was not made until all
concerned, including Mr.. Carl Rohl
Smith, the successful competitor, had
consented to this use of their models;
and the delay was caused by Rohl-
Smiths absence in Europe. Every
thing seemed favorable for an effective
exhibition, which must have been not
only interesting but instructive TO the
art world Of America, when letter
from Mr.. Rohl-Smith made further ac-
ton impossible.
Writing from Chicago. under date
of November q, 1896, to the secretary
Of the society, he says:
My last intercourse with the Ma
ton Sculpture Society was an exchange
of kilograms upon the day after my
model was chosen by the Sherman
statue commission, in which | stated
that | would exhibit my sketch model,
together with those of the other COM
peting artists, wlen ] returned from
Europe in the fall. Since then, the
action of the National Sculpture So
ciety towards me, a member of the So
ciety and toward the Sherman statue
commission has been such as to make
it, under the circumstances, impossible
for me to take part in any further eX-
hibition of models.
Mr. Rohl-Smith certainly wrote un-
der a singular misapprehensiOn Of the
case. since the national sculpture So
ciety has never, in any way. reflected
upon his character or standing, per-
sonal or professional, nor questioned
the artistic merit of his work, nor even
criticised his procedure. 1t has not
called him to account in any way, nor
has it taken any steps to which he. as
an artist or as a man. could take the
slightest exception.
What the society did object to was
the manner in which the competition
for the statue was closed and the award
made. 1t objected to the assumption on
the part Of a committee Of soldiers and
civilians that they, the soldiers and
civilians, knew better than a commit
tee of sculptors and architects-men
chosen by themselves and who had es-
pecially studied the original model
which was the right design. 1t object
cd. moreover, to the apparent breach OF
faith by which competing sculptors
who had every right 10 expect that the
award would be given according to that
chosen expert opinion. yet which was
given partly in disregard Of it, partly in
despite of it.
mo one has blamed Mr. Rohl-Smith
for accepting a commission which was
offered him by those having legal pow
er to make the offer. Those whom the
society has blamed are the officials who
selected a work Of art for other than
artistic reasons.
1T is not necessary to speculate as to
the motive of those who have mislead
him into taking such a stand. They
have succeeded. however, in furnishing
another example as to methods which,
in this instance. the society has de-
plored. and have done everything posi-
BILE to preclude even helpful criticism
until it is too late to be of use