Evening star., 1920-05-02
RIGHTS IN LINCOLN
STATUE IGNORED
Correspondents View Of the
Disposal by Congress of
Districts Property.


To the Editor Of The Star:
In hearing before the library COM
mittee of the House of Representa-
tives on the Cd instant certain testf-
mony was presented which 1t seems
to me should be given. through the
Washington who, otherwise, might
not know the reasons presented by n
few members Of Congress for the re-
| moval Of our Lincoln statue to their
several states. SO far az / know. no
notice was given to the 100000 dis
franchise mortais of this place to
appear before said committee to pre-
sent their views or offer objections
regarding the re-erectiOn of this
precious monument, erected by them
to the great Lincoln, and to advise as
to what should become Of their prop
erty. bought by them as a purely
local patriotic project. ani erected In
front of what WAS then their city hall.
now the nattons courthouse. OF
course. the lack of knowledge of this
committee meeting, on our part
would not have been. If we our
selves had have been represented in
Congress. as we should be. and as you
have always persistently and
rightly advocated.
Decided by Less Than Quorum.
1t IS indeed Interesting to read some
of the statements made at this hear
ing. IT was brought out that when
the deficiency bill. which authorized
the removal Of the statue, was on the
House floor in 1919 1t was passed by
a vote of 55 to 0. not even quorum
being present. and that the fact that
7 lyr u%n n%,,$ 1T
to be removed was not understood.
and apparently unknown. and that
II It had. the chances were, the bill
would not have passed with the statue
clause in 1t. Mr.. Fess of the library
committee acknowledged himself that
he did not know the statue was to
be removed. and yet the people of the
District of Columbia are blamed for
this act. Indeed. the most outrageous
part Of it all is that one-half Of the
cost OF its removal was charged up
against the revenues of the District.
This was surely rubbing 1t in good
and hard.
Mr.. Luhring in his testimony said:
"One reason against the claims of
the District, and think q very potent
one. is that the District authorities
and the people who are now interest
ing themselves in this Lincoln statue
were absolutely and utterly fndfffer-
the work of removal in progress. and
not one word of protest was uttered
by the people or by the newspapers,
and the newspaper that now editori-
ally insists that 1t should remain here
was absolutely silent"
Mr.. Rainey puts it thus: Il am ask
ing that this statue which has been
rejected and discarded by the authorl-
ties of the District Of Columbia, be
re-erected in Illinois," and "it ought
to leave the District Of Columbia IL
the authorities here think so little
Of it that they box it up and put it
away In some government warehouse"
Mr.. Graham Of Illinois, said the Dis
trict had no more claim on the statue
than the people of the United States
generally. and Mr.. Classon proceeds
to kick over a perfectly good pail of
milk by saying he does not like the
idea of allowing the people of the
District Of Columbia to take down
this statue.
Analyses the Facts.
As to these statements let us analyze
the facts: AS soon as the intimation
leaked out that this statue might be
removed. certainly months prior to
1920, protest was forwarded through
the Brightwood Citizens Association
against the removal Of this statue,
urging, however. If there was no pos
site that at least it be placed at Fort
stevens. This letter was sent to the
Judges of the Supreme Court of the
District of Columbia. who were at
that time understood to be suggesting
the removal. To at least one Of these
came back that no knowledge was
had on the subject. and that, so far
as that reply indicated, the statue was
not to be removed. Through the pub
nc press and iii other ways protest
after protest was made; first. that it
should not be removed at all, and sec
ondly. that If this was absolutely
necessary and unavoidable it should
be placed at Fort Stevens
among the organizations protesting
were the Federation OF Citizens AS
soclations and nearly all the individual
citizens associations of the District:
by the Grand Army. Department of
the Potomac. and the different Grand
army posts located here. as well as
the Sons Of Veterans and other
branches affiliated with the Grand
Army. including the survivors Of the
6th Army Corps. the Columbia His
forical Society, the Association Of
Oldest Inhabitants. and by other So
trlct OF Columbia. What more could
we do? We are entirely in the hands
of Congress.
In statuary hall are number of
statues which will not compare from
an artistic standpoint with this statue
but just let some one suggest the re-,
moVal OF one of these and a good
sized riot would Immediately be pre-
cipitated in Congress. Whyo SimpIy
because these statues are guarded
had been 30 guarded such a suggestion
as the removal OF this statue would
never have been thought of-the cues
ton OF its artistic merit notwithstand-
ing.
Information Is Sought.
Who are the District authorities who
suggested its removal. who rejected it,
and caused it to be stored in some gov
ernment warehouse? Point out. II you
will. the people who were utterly in
different to what became of ii. | have
heard the people Of Washington excori-
a'ed on other occasions, but never were
they SO unjustly accused as in this in
stance. The judges Of the Supreme
Court Of the District Of Columbia, who
are credited with originating the sug-
gestion that the statue be removed-a
statement l sincerely doubt-are, as is
well known, appointed by the President
of the United States and confirmed by
Congress. and in only rare instances
have they been legal residents Of Wash
ington.
The fine arts commission. SO Mr.. Fess
said. had as Its dominant motive the
placing Of the statue where it would
not disfigure anything. and along this
line was read 4 letter from Charles
Moore, chairman of that commission
which, under date Of February 20, 1920,
reads Replying to your letter Of Feb
ruary "A. relative to the re-erection or
the statue of Abraham Lincoln, removed
from in front Of the District courthouse,
I will say that the judges occupying that
building requested the removal Of the