PARK AND CEM ETER Y. 
157 
THE PLACING OF PARK FOUNTAINS AND MEMORIALS 
The question of the invasion of city 
parks by monuments, statues and 
buildings is always coming up — - 
Brooklyn, just recently protested against 
has also disappeared. The protestants 
assert, quite truly, that Central Park 
needs no more memorial monuments 
or statues; that the Art Commission 
hand, the memorial advocates claim 
that the placing of their structure has 
been carefully planned so as not to 
interfere with the monument already 
UNVEILING COLUMBUS MEMORIAL FOUNTAIN, WASHINGTON, D. C. 
Lorado Taft, Sculptor. 
a proposed invasion of Prospect Park 
by a new Public Library, and some 
criticism has been expressed in New 
York City by the selection of a site just 
inside the southwestern entrance of 
Central Park, for the great monument 
to commemorate the sinking of the bat- 
tleship Maine in Havana harbor. 
To many, the erection of such a 
monument, recalling the outbreak of 
international hatred and an unneces- 
sary war, is regretable; and the sacri- 
fice of a small part of the greenery, 
including four or five trees, of the 
park, has increased this regret. The 
subject has been discussed and for- 
gotten for twelve years — the original 
design for the monument was officially 
disapproved by the Art Commission 
of the city in 1898. 
The recent breaking of the ground 
for its erection, and the destruction of 
three or four trees, to make room for 
it, has caused a new outburst of pro- 
test. The rural “Rest House,’’ at the 
southwestern entrance of the park, 
of the city, which approved of this 
site, would probably not do so again 
if given a chance to reconsider, and 
that at least one member of the Com- 
mission is of the opinion that one 
green tree is more valuable than many 
monuments of stone, and that Mr. 
Samuel Parsons, while landscape ar- 
chitect of the park, gave his assent to 
the selection of this site very reluct- 
antly, and is on record as disapproving 
the design of the monument as, in his 
judgment, it would not be in harmony 
with its surroundings. That “certain 
dignified isolation from surrounding 
structures,” which the Washington 
Commission for the National Lincoln 
memorial advocated, will certainly not 
be attained here, nor the “complete 
and undisputed domination over a 
large area.” The shaft of the Columbus 
Monument, in the center of the circle 
or open place before the park en- 
trance, is about 77 feet high, while 
the central pylon is to be 44 feet tall 
in the new monument. On the other 
in place; that the approval of the Art 
Commission is sufficient guarantee of 
the fitness of the location; and that 
“the design was selected by judges 
eminent in the artistic profession 
from among sixty or seventy sub- 
mitted in competition.” 
The defenders of the Maine monu- 
ment assert that its intrinsic artistic 
value would seem to be assured by 
the fact that the design was selected 
in open competition from among sixty 
or seventy others by competent 
judges, and approved by the Art 
Commission of the city, and has been 
modified expressly by the architect to 
meet the exigencies of the new site 
and not compete with the Columbus 
monument. While the height of the 
shaft of the latter is about 77 feet, 
the central pylon of Mr. Magonigle’s 
will be only about 44; and the whole 
structure, designed to form a hand- 
some architectural entrance to the 
park, will be set so far back from the 
Columbus monument as not to inter- 
