Evening star., 1957-08-28
Second Look Advisable

Speaker Rayburn was right in his
stand against any laSt-minute effort to
railroad the controversial Freedom
Wall" bill through the House. And Rep
reSentative Sheppard of California was
right in contending that Congress
should know more about the proposed
shrine before authorizing its conStruc-
ton near Arlington Cemetery. A care
ful second look at this legislation should
be taken before final action.
The belated move to stampede Con-
gress into approving legislation for the
SOO-foot-long, 250-foot-wide, 90-foot-
high shrine to American freedoms has
left the public with little detailed infor-
nation about the project. The Senate
and House Interior Committees reported
the bill favorably without holding any
public hearings, although the legislation
VIII affect longtime plans for the de-
velopment of the Washington area. And
the Senate, before voting in favor of
the bill last week, was misinformed as
TO actions taken by the National Capital
Planning Commission and the Fine Arts
Commission on the Freedom Wall de-
sign. Senator Allott, a member of the
sponsoring group, in urging approval,
said: After lengthy considerations run
ming into three years, the Fine Arts
Commission formally approved the
Freedom Shrine plan which we have
selected. It was also approved by the
National Capital Planning Commission,
after extensive studies and hearings"
Senator Allott was mistaken as to what
the two commissions approved, however.
Spokesman for both agencies say that
approval was given only to the general
concept of freedom Shrine-not to any
particular design, including the wall
plan. 1t was the understanding of both
commissions, officials have advised The
Star, that specific designs would be pre-
sented later for approval.
The whole history of the freedom
monument project has been a curious
one. Apparently originated by the
Freedoms Foundation of Valley Forge,
Pennsylvania, the shrine idea was
pushed through Congress in 1854 with
out benefit of advice from either the
Planning Commission or the Fine Arts
Commission. Neither commission, we
learn, was consulted about the proposal
to put the monument on the so-called
NeviuS tract, acquired by the Federal
Government to prevent private develop
ment there. Congress, ignoring the basic
Mcmillan plan for keeping that area
clear of structures, in Difference to the
neighboring national cemetery, pre-
Sented both commissions with a man
date to abandon that plan in favor of
the freedom monument. 1t is under
stood that at that time the Fine Arts
Commission protested to the Budget
Bureau the bypassing of the commits
sion by Congress - which created the
agency to advise it on such matters.
But, favored with the blessing of
President Eisenhower, who contributed
the first dime toward a $3.50 million
private subscription fund to finance the
project, and by the cooperation of
General Omar Bradley, chairman of the
fund-raising committee, the sponsors of
the undertaking have had remarkable
success in obtaining congressional and
executive support. However, we do not
think that an impressive list Of hackers,
headed by the President, is any justifi-
cation for approving proposal of such
magnitude without careful study and
competent advice. We hope the Free
dom Wall project will be the subject Of
adequate public hearings at the next
session of Congress, at which there will
be full disclosure of detailed plans for
the shrine and full discussion of its
effects, good or bad, on the long-range
DEVELOPMENT of the National Capital.