38 
PAB.n AND CEMETEIVY 
ends in the long run. It is quite certain that too many 
large monuments, and overcrowding of stones of all 
varieties, must eventually disgust thoughtful people, 
and turn their minds toward trees and other gracious, 
living memorials. 
It were a lesser evil, as well as a lesser sin, to over- 
charge for suitable stones — stones small and low in 
proportion to the size of lots, of good material and 
excellent in design, than to urge anxious mourning 
friends to decide on something that not only advertises 
the poor taste of seller and of buyer, but which is 
sometimes beyond the purchaser’s means. 
Number one of the accompanying illustrations aptly 
points our moral. Does any one see beauty or any 
good thing in the big, obtrusive square markers which 
it shows ? Does not the monument sufficiently express 
the respect and love of the living and the qualities of 
the dead? Would not inconspicuous markers, at least 
S. THE SAME LOT WITH A BACKGROUND OF PLANTING. 
as low as those seen in cut number two, serve to 
locate the individual graves? The large ones clearly 
detract from the dignity of the monument, as shown 
in number one, and it would look still better in num- 
ber two if the markers were set level with the ground, 
so as to be invisible at a short distance. Concerning 
the third view, an attempt has been made to indi- 
cate the advantage of introducing a background and 
partial setting of shrubbery for the monument, which 
shall also serve to screen from view part of the sur- 
rounding grounds ; an effect of privacy has been 
sought as well as a foil of foliage to relieve the white 
marble. Although not entirely satisfactory in detail, 
it is readily seen that planting serves admirably for this 
double purpose. 
These views emphasize three facts : First, that monu- 
ments and other stones must be limited in size and in 
number to suit the dimensions of the plot on which 
they are to stand; second, that visible markers are 
superfluous in connection with monuments, and that 
they should in all cases be very low (say four inches 
high), or, better still, be set level with the surface 
of the ground ; and third, that lots, if possible, and 
certainly sections should include reserve space for 
planting, such space to be so placed as to secure a 
leafy background for monuments and to enhance the 
general effect of the entire grounds. 
Here, again, the spirit of commercialism, that dan- 
gerous germ which infects the debatable borderland 
where the artistic and the practical meet and merge 
and for which no specific has yet been discovered, al- 
though some scientist may even now be on its track, 
but infrequently spares any part of such grounds for 
ornamental planting. The more’s the pity, since such 
planting alone makes possible the beauty their pur- 
pose demands, and without which one would as soon 
choose to be buried in an abandoned brick yard. 
Frances Copley Seavey. 
MONUMENTAL ART IN WASHINGTON. 
A serious question is looming up in Washington, one 
that will demand more and more consideration as prog- 
ress is being made in maturing the scheme of a “beau- 
tiful Washington.” It is that of monumental art. If 
we are to have our national capital the finest city in 
the country, so far as well organized forces can create 
it, it is plain that every feature of such improvement 
must be harmonious with the balance, and this means 
some drastic treatment of the public statuary. It is 
unquestionably true that there are comparatively few 
of Washington’s public monuments that are truly ar- 
tistic creations ; as a whole they are a mixed lot, and 
in many cases will have to be removed to less obtrusive 
sites in order that their demerits may not be made more 
conspicuous by their surroundings. We do not have 
far to seek for a cause for such poverty of art ; the 
methods of procedure of recent years in providing and 
passing upon designs have simply invited such results, 
and the poor statues of earlier days must be excused 
on the score of our inexperience. It is nevertheless a 
deplorable fact that with all the wisdom supposed to be 
centered at the seat of our government such a con- 
glomeration of mediocre art should have been possible. 
There will be work in the years to come to remedy 
it. The Republican of Springfield, Mass., has recently 
contributed some caustic comment on the statues of 
Statuary Hall, which are well-deserved considering 
the ridiculously faulty method of providing them. 
Each state is allowed to contribute two statues of her 
representative sons, and when all have availed them- 
selves of this privilege, the resulted overcrowding of 
the limited space, does not promise well for the artis- 
tic improvement of the capitol. 
i 
k 
