Public Memorials to our Fallen Soldiers.

Progress, Volume XII, Issue 8, 1 April 1917, Page 919

Public Memorials to our Fallen Soldiers.

The question of erecting memorials to our gallant soldiers who have given their lives to their country is occupying the minds or many patriotic committees in New Zealand at the present time, and, while it is fitting that the people of this country should do their utmost to place on record their debt to our soldiers who have given their all to a noble purpose, we feel it our duty to point out to the many generous minded folk who think that the erection of a memorial is the best method of showing their feelings of gratitude, that they arc apt to fail entirely in their purpose if they are not careful to see that

when they do erect a memorial it shall be something that will be worthy of the object they have in view. We read in a Southern paper of a memorial being erected which is described as being "no flimsy structure." It is to have a base of 17-ft. square, and 70 tons of concrete will be used in its construction. The monument is described as being "already 20 feet in the air," and its total height is to be 30 feet. The figure on the top of this magnificent pedestal will be 5-ft. 7-ins. high, and will be composed of cement and sand cast in a block and chiselled out! The figure represents an infantryman practically at the position of attention, and is described as being "a monument to local skill and workmanship." We arc not favoured with any information regarding the general design, nor is the designer's name mentioned, but "an architect and designer's" name is given. It does not strike us

that the proportion of the figure to the base is likely to produce an impressive result, such as to make the beholders revere the memory of the fallen soldiers, nor do we feel quite sure that a figure composed of “cement and sand” is likely to have much permanence, but the information available is not sufficient to enable us to offer any criticism. We sincerely hope that the memorial, when erected, will not appear as we anticipate it will from the description given. Our motive in writing at the present time is to offer a note of warning to those responsible for the spending of public funds, especially on memorials such as these. There is a simple way to get a good job done, as has been shown in Auckland. The Victoria League spent the sum of £I,OOO (which was a vote from Parliament) as a memorial to the soldiers, sailors, and friendly Maoris who fell in the New Zealand wars in the early days of colonization. The League called for competitive designs about two years ago with the result that 20 designs were sent in. Out of these that of Mr. T. Eyre Macklin, Sculptor, of St. John’s Wood, London was chosen, with the result that Auckland will have a worthy memorial artistically designed. The bronze statue is now in Auckland, and Mr. Gerald Jones, Lie. R.1.8.A., of that city has been placed in charge of the erection. In his hands we feel sure that the designer’s work will get its proper setting, and the work of the stone mason will he properly overlooked. Is there any reason why other public bodies should not place their work in the hands of a capable artist to design, instead of handing the work over to a local stone mason, who has probably had practically no training in design? What possible hope is there in New Zealand to educate the general public and particularly its youth, when the eye is continually offended by such glaringly bad examples as are so frequently found among our public statues? Public bodies must realize that the money donated for such purposes is trust money, and the public is entitled to the best obtainable irrespective of whether a local stone mason wants the job or not.