put on paper or canvas a drawing from the life with accuracy yet style, giving to the living or the dead object the exactitude of the academical master, yet investing this "truth to nature" with preciousness without a resort to the usual sensational tricks. Cox has known how to handle black and white in such a way as to satisfy the fastidious, although it would be wrong not to acknowledge that many of the younger artists consider his careful, conscientious drawing in the light of unnecessary slavery to methods outworn. For those, however, who are not greatly persuaded of the safety of many of the shortcuts to mastership advocated by brilliant expounders of modern ways it is difficult not to admire the preliminary studies that Mr. Cox will often exhibit along with a mural when he is able to show such work before it goes to the appointed place. They have style and they are beautiful; they are the work of a master.

It may be said, however, that as a colorist he is not so great as he is a draughtsman; his higher talent lies in black and white. This quality comes out in a certain leaning toward sculpture which he has gratified in the statue called “Greek Science" in the museum of the Brooklyn Institute where he has revealed his sensitiveness to the line in a work in the round.

"Plenty" is a gift by Mr. Wm. T. Evans to the National Gallery at Washington and is a free replica

of the large decorative composition at Newark in the Essex County courthouse entitled "Beneficence of the Law." Plenty is a woman of opulent charms with children about her; all represent the abundance of Dame Nature. Plenty herself is a fine symbol of the gifts the land bestows on ungrateful man.

The "Light of Learning" is a decoration in the public library at Winona in Minnesota which was placed there as a memorial to Charlotte Prentiss Hayes by her husband. Mrs. Hayes was one of the founders of the library and for many years was active in the management of the library.

Learning occupies a throne with decorative canopy in the center of the lunette. She has as supporters two little winged boys. The genius on the left takes from Philosophy, the figure in profile, the Torch of Learning; the genius on the right extends the torch toward the outstretched hand of Poetry, the midmost figure of the group to the right. The other figures in the left-hand group are Geography and History; the others in the right-hand group are Romance and Painting. Symmetry is insisted upon by the disposal of all three groups. In the central the little geniuses have a similar gesture; in the other two groups the nearest figures, Geography and Painting, recline in very similar poses. The love of plastic, sculptural composition in the painter comes out very clearly in this imposing composition.

E commend to the public the article by Mr. Howe on page 216, because it has more than a local bearing. It is printed in the interest of the nation. For other cities of the country have or will have subways and should heed the suggestions in Mr. Howe's article.

New York's subway system has done more to brutalize New York, and through it the nation, than any other agency, by all sorts of vulgarity, greed, hypocrisy pushing, shoving, squeezing-sardining, swearing, hating, that it has engendered.

Whom can we strike for all this? A certain ubiquitous person called: The System.

At this late date it would be wasting words to spit fire against the scandalous overcrowding, the horrible canning of men and women, white and black, clean and unclean, non-odorous and evil-smelling, the trampling of children, the aged and infirm. We can only hope that the monstrous Moloch may become merciful enough to alleviate our suffering and lessen our disgrace.

To sustain the plea of Mr. Howe against the unfortunate mechanic who designed the childish decorations and sign-placing of the subways, and to alleviate the suffering of the public, we reiterate that we need in the subways:

stations; at the earliest possible time automatic station-announcers in every car: suppression of the irritating farce of the guards calling out the station names; the right to cross over at Seventy-second Street, or any other station, and take the downtown trains free of charge, in case we are taken beyond our stations by our inability to get out of a car in time on account of the car going beyond the platform and our being prevented from going out by the bestial crowds at the rush hour, or because the guard then fails to call out the stations loud enough to be heard six feet away. Why should a poor man be compelled to pay an extra fare in order to ride back after having been taken beyond his station because of the mismanagement or insolence or stupidity of some of the employees of the Subway Company? It is grotesque!

These things can all easily be done if the Company will but make room in its heart for more of what Abraham Lincoln called: "Goodliness and love of our neighbor."

How long shall we New Yorkers and the longsuffering visitors from other cities be compelled to insult the Company, or humbly implore it—we are willing to do either or both-before we obtain surcease from the savagery that now renders the

SINCE

WORLD will form two closely related volumes and new subscribers may wish to have the two volumes of twelve numbers complete, we take this occasion of

informing those who subscribe during the month. that we have copies of the October and November issues on hand to supply a limited number of subscribers.

IT

is a great question and one that has dogged the steps of man throughout the course of history, how to reward citizens who "deserve well of the republic." In England and Germany they grant hereditary titles of nobility in order to afford decorative stars and name-handles to the descendants; in China they confer such titles and eulogies retrospectively on the ancestors of the worthy citizen, by which they display characteristic wisdom. In England they also spend liberally the tax-payer's money to furnish to these successful admirals and generals the wherewithal to support their new titles with dignity, while other countries, not so plethoric of purse, will confer almost any honor short of royalty that does not draw a dollar from the public funds! The Greeks and Romans had much to say of disinterestedness on the part of public men, citing those who were content with the parsley and laurel crowns of victors in athletic contests as citizens after the proper pattern. All are agreed that some recognition is due the persons who have saved a country from conquest or introduced good laws or made useful discoveries in the arts and sciences. But how is this to be done? Emerson exhorted his generation in these words:

Let picture, statue, park and hall, Ballad, flag and festival

The past restore, the day adorn

And make each morrow a new morn.

Different nations perform this pious duty with variants on the common practice. We have for instance a curious survival of some ancient pagan magic in the colossal wooden image of Von Hindenburg at Berlin-which is being hammered full of nails by the devoted public to afford the latter the pleasure of having a hand in the statue! In Germany particularly there are rules with regard to monuments. For example: Though Prince Bismarck was particularly proud of his uniform as an officer of cuirassiers and liked to have Lenbach paint him in that harness, yet, among a vast number of statues to the Iron Chancellor, you will find none in which he is shown astride of a horse. Nor will you discover equestrian statues even of Moltke or Roon, those idols of the military caste. Why? Because only royalties are allowed to be presented in such commanding attitudes.

HIERARCHY IN MONUMENTS

There is a hierarchy in monuments which cleaves to rank. Below the royalties there are some who may have colossal standing portraits, like Bismarck and Hindenburg, others who must put up with heroic statues, or merely those of life size; the lower ranks must be content with busts-the intellectuals can be fobbed off with bas-reliefs, or simply go without! Ludicrous as these distinctions may appear to us, one must not forget that we benighted outlanders are deficient in many ways and particularly in lacking of reverence for crowned heads, a failing we shall be soundly cured of when all goes well with those mighty captains of war-who conduct campaigns so unselfishly and without hope of an equestrian monument, whether they win or lose.

Frenchmen, on the other hand, show the levity of their nature by hoisting onto the back of a bronze horse some General sprung from the meanest folk, and they put the cap on their frivolity by regarding those people, who fail to honor their benefactors without restrictions as to form, no better than slaves who richly deserve the rulers they support. So difficult is it, in Europe at least, to keep art and politics on separate plates!

The satiric portion of the press follows precedents long ago established among the ancients when it chastens with persiflage or with savage scorn the establishment of such a Hall of Fame as New York University has placed on a hill above the meandering Harlem. Man's vainglory was a topic for reproof long before Noah and his cloudbursts: That pride of family which induced a Roman to spend his substance on busts of his ancestors in bronze, marble, wood and wax and parade them before the public during solemn affairs like funerals, continues to be the butt of moralists and social levellers. It is a tradition that the satirist shall aim his plumed shaft at any deviation from sober mediocrity among the departed great, on the ground that these same famous citizens, held up thus to public approval, have been selected by the foolish! The reproof is not aimed against the creation of pantheons or halls of fame, as if they tended to rouse pride, national or personal vanity, but against the way in which such temples to glory are managed. At bottom what the satirist means is this: If he had been consulted and obeyed, all would have been well! Not so much the purpose of the New York University in setting up a hall of fame has suffered blame from the critics; rather was it the selection that was made of the names to be commemorated.

HARDSHIP IN SELECTION

And truly, this is a difficulty not easily met, whether the choice be left to the head of an institution or scattered over a faculty or solemnly voted upon by hundreds or thousands. The pantheion, the "all holy" Pantheon at Rome contains a monument to Vittore Emmanuele Il Re Galantuomo as well as to Rafaello-but none to Dante or Michelangelo. The Panthéon at Paris was inaugurated as a hall of fame after being a church dedicated to Genevieve, Saint and patroness of Paris:

C'est pourquoi on l'appelait Geneviève de Brrabant!

But Mirabeau, the first to be honored thus, was not permitted by his enemies to leave his bones there. Out goes Mirabeau, in comes Marat! Then, later on, out goes Marat himself! Who cares to count the vicissitudes of the Panthéon at Paris, as the pendulum of politics swings first toward radical and then toward conservative, and turns it first into a religious, then into a secular public building?

Though a Greek word and though the very idea. of a hall of fame was Greek, yet Greece had no specific building called a Pantheion dedicated to portraits of citizens. The nearest approach was the sporadic "treasure house" erected at Delphi by dif

ferent States of Greece where the statues of heroes, kings and eminent men were gifts dedicated usually to Apollo. A similar place was the Temple to Hera at Olympia. And not men alone; for was not the naughty Phryné to be seen in one of these Delphian "treasuries" alongside the statue of a famous Spartan King-Archidamos-having been offered to Apollo in gilded bronze by the grateful inhabitants of her native town? So Pausanias tells us.

We see then that there is plenty of classic precedent for halls of fame. Indeed, it is more than probable that from the earliest times the pagan nations of Europe and Asia commemorated their leaders in war (and perhaps at times their benefactors in peace) by placing rudely shaped effigies of them along with their gods in those sacred places, taboo to the common folk, which were generally maintained in remote and unpeopled spots. This was true to a comparatively late date of the pagan Prussians and Lithuanians near the Baltic.

The German Kaiser has glorified his own ancestors and predecessors in Prussia by a series of statues along the Sieges-allée in Berlin. In this case they are all in the open air, instead of collected into a palace or a temple. But Southern Germany has a hall of fame of her own, entry to which does not require princely or royal rank.

They did these things better in the last century under a permanent monarchy like Bavaria's, it would seem, or at least with greater smoothness. There's the German "Walhalla" at Regensburg on the Danube, erected by Ludwig I after designs by Leo von Klense, a great big gray marble Parthenon with two pediments full of sculpture, decorated with basreliefs and paintings within, together with pedestals for nigh two hundred busts of distinguished Teutons. This hall of fame has subsisted more than three-score years. Then there are St. Paul's and Westminster Abbey in London, which are two pantheons or halls of fame for the English, British and Irish. It is curious to note that both these edifices were and remain churches, in which religious services are held, whilst the Panthéon at Paris and the Walhalla at Regensburg are entirely secular, separated entirely from ideas of religion such as Christianity affords. From this fact should one argue, that Christian ideas are better known and better practised in Great Britain than in France and Bavaria? Or does it merely emphasize the oft-remarked conservatism in the British character?

It is plain enough that with regard to halls of fame there is little to see in Europe which can be taken as precedent fit for our imitation. Prone as our architects and artists generally are to lean hard upon some European original, no matter how unsuited it may be to our needs, habits and climate, there is nothing in Panthéon or Walhalla for us. One may say that to a sensitive lover of art a visit to the Regensburg paradise for the famous is distinctly depressing, while the Panthéon at Paris is hardly better.

Perhaps both edifices are at fault, one carrying the misfit of a Greek temple into Bavaria, the other trying to adapt the misfit of a Christian Church to a distinctively secular building. The unsympathetic interior of the Panthéon at Paris is denoted at the very entrance gates when one sees on its pedestal Le Penseur by Rodin, an interesting statue designed for an entirely different emplacement, which really

comes near to being absurd where it stands! The Louvre, the Bibliothèque Nationale, the Sorbonne, or even Notre Dame de Paris would have been a better place for it.

THE AMERICAN A DIFFERENT PROBLEM

An American building which may serve to recall our departed great must start from a different attitude of mind. Neither royalties, nor men of rank, nor statesmen, nor officers of the army and navy can have precedence; ancestry, wealth, race or nationality are equally immaterial. The only general rule for admission to American halls of fame will be character. Naturally enough, there will be many mistakes which later generations will have to cure. The national Hall of Fame of the American Union as it already exists in the Capitol at Washington is a shining example of the effort to distribute recompenses over the whole country, on a par with the purpose to afford exact equality to citizens and the States. As each State, however small, is represented in Congress by two Senators, so each State has a right to have two pedestals for its heroes in the Hall of Fame. At present that hall is the rotunda of the Capitol at Washington, which is indicated by the dome that dominates the great building as it does the city. The idea that prompted this use of the rotunda was a fine one; for what could be more fitting than to enshrine the effigies of the best citizens of all the States in the heart of that Capitol over which soars the mighty hemisphere crowned by a statue of Columbia? It seems to knit together the ideas of equality in politics, the right of the citizens to the highest offices, popular representation, citizen supremacy! To question the disposition of these statues looks like the profaning of a grand and august sentiment.

And yet, like many another fine thing, this will have to yield to the bald necessity of facts: the Rotunda will have to be given up as a Hall of Fame -for the simple reason that it is no longer adequate to its purpose.

The truth is that the States have grown so numerous that there is not room in the Rotunda to exhibit the statues to advantage. This has been the case for a long time; but a natural dislike to change so admirable a thing has prevented any move to rectify the situation. The truth is that even half a hundred statues are too much for the single hall, if each one is to be given the lighting, the place and the surroundings which a work of art demands-so then, what can be done for a hundred? There lies the insoluble problem offered to the man whose duty it is to keep the Capitol in a state of order and present everything in it to the best advantage, when citizens from every nook and corner of the Union come to see the house in which their representatives carry out the commands of the people! Long ago the officer entrusted with this office raised his hands and wailed: "What is to be done?"

The answer can and must no longer be shirked. Another building is needed, a Palace of Fame, which must form a part of the giant complex in which the old Capitol itself holds the most important rôle.

At present the man who visits the Rotunda for the first time receives the worst impression. Granted that the majority of these statues are not great works of art, but merely effigies wrought from marble by workmen; still, there are exceptions to this