The McKinley Memorial Competition in Philadelphia 
surprising when 
we remember that 
a photograph ot 
the proposed site 
was sent to all 
intending to com¬ 
pete. Some sup¬ 
pose the monu¬ 
ment to be seen 
only from the 
front, others that 
it shall he a resting 
place, and still 
others conceive it 
to he a focal point 
approachable 
from all sides. 
These types are 
represented in the 
five premiated 
designs. That 
submitted by 
M essrs. Augustus 
Luke man, C. 
H oward Walker 
and George B. 
H owe is clearly 
intended to be 
viewed only from 
the front, and the back ot the architectural 
feature behind the figure is ornamented by 
inscriptions alone. On account of its pro¬ 
nounced dignity and refined outline this 
design would appropriately take its place in 
SUBMITTED BY H. N. MATZEN 
the line of trees 
and would make 
an excellent sculp¬ 
tural and archi¬ 
tectural ornament 
amid the existing 
highly finished 
landscape. 
The design 
submitted by H. 
N. Matzen is not 
more impressive 
than the foregoing 
one. The promi¬ 
nence of the two 
secondary figures 
is of doubtful suc¬ 
cess, although 
they give a very 
harmonious out¬ 
line to a compo¬ 
sition whose mol¬ 
lified lines are 
somewhat sug¬ 
gestive of the new 
art. 
The model sub¬ 
mitted by Messrs. 
Isidore Konti and 
Lewis P. Hobart belongs to a class of 
designs of a different monumental character 
than those already mentioned. Here an 
exedra supplies a resting-place where a visitor 
may more thoroughly admire the personality 
com mem orat¬ 
ed, from the 
marble embod¬ 
iment of which 
he is separated 
by allegorical 
female figures. 
Still another 
motif is that of 
a tall enriched 
pedestal rising 
from a square 
platform, as we 
see it in the de¬ 
sign submitted 
by Messrs. H. 
A. MacNeil 
and Lord 
& Hewlett. 
THE MODEL SUBMITTED BY AUGUSTUS LUKEMAN, 
C. HOWARD WALKER AND GEORGE B. HOWE 
262 
