DEAR MR. CAEMMERER: A short while ago I called you relative to the presentation of drawings, in their preliminary stage, to the Fine Arts Commission for criticism. At that time we had not received approved preliminary drawings so were not in a position to come before the Commission meeting in May. However, we now have these plans and I am forwarding them to you in duplicate.

The Government of Canada is very anxious that the building they propose to erect shall meet with the approval of the Fine Arts Commission.

We would appreciate having you notify us of the time and place of any meeting at which this project will be considered so that we may attend as well as a representative of the Government of Canada.

Sincerely,

JOHN W. STENHOUSE.

re

Certain additional information was quested and was furnished by the architects, namely, a plot plan in more detail and an elevation of the retaining wall to face the Rock Creek Parkway. The building will be erected at 2450 Massachusetts Avenue NW.; the rear of the building will front on the Rock Creek Parkway.

The design was considered at a meeting of the Commission of Fine Arts held on June 24, 1953. In addition to Mr. Stenhouse, there were present Mr. Morris of the firm of Marani & Morris, of Toronto, architects, and Brigadier Bishop and Captain Milligan, of the Canadian Joint Staff, representing the Government of Canada.

Mr. Morris explained the design and presented a photograph of the perspective, which showed that the building will have a frontage on Massachusetts Avenue of 180 feet and a height of about 60 feet. All four sides are to be faced with limestone. The basement will have a garage for 52 cars. In addition to the specially designed retaining wall in the rear, facing the Rock Creek Parkway, the rear yard is to be developed as a garden.

The Commissioners were well pleased with the design and approved it.

MARBLE VERSUS GRANITE AS BUILDING MATERIAL

Under date of June 2, 1953, the following letter was received from the Department of Commerce:

DEAR MR. FINLEY: In connection with our work in the Department of Commerce, we have run into a problem which requires some analysis as to the merits of marble versus granite as a building stone.

We would appreciate it very much if you could give us a brief note as to your opinion in this matter. As far as you know, you might include a word on relative costs of the two materials. I believe emphasis should be placed on a comparison as to the durability of the two stones. We would appreciate any assistance you can give us on this matter. Sincerely,

B. ALLEN ROWLAND, Special Assistant to the Secretary.

The subject was discussed at a meeting of the Commission of Fine Arts held on June 24, 1953, and a reply was sent to Mr. Rowland, as follows:

June 24, 1953.

DEAR MR. ROWLAND: Your letter of June 2, requesting to be advised as to the merits of marble versus granite as a building stone, was considered by the Commission of Fine Arts at its meeting today.

Where the materials are exposed to the elements, granite is considered to be more permanent than marble. In general, also, granite is more expensive than marble. On the other hand, marble has the greater beauty and variety.

The question is too broad for a detailed answer without more information as to the condition under which the two materials are to be compared. A decision must rest on many factors peculiar to the problem, including climate, budget, purpose, suitability, and harmony with other surrounding materials.

Granite's unchallenged qualities as a high-grade building material have long been recognized by architects and engineers. Its natural qualifications of exceptional strength and durability its inherent beauty and character are well-known facts. Recent technological developments have resulted in new methods of quarrying and fabrication of granite, thereby reducing cost and widening its field of application. Granite is available in a wide range of colors and textures.

As for marble, it has never been found wanting in adaptability to architectural design. From the ancients and the classics to the modern trend it is foremost, serving artistic, and practical demands. Nature's inimitable quality in the wide range of colors of different marbles, the subtle veining, gives the decorative effect desired. Centuries of use for exteriors establishes permanence, though there are some marbles which can only be used in the interior.

As above stated, granite will outlast marble; it is an igneous rock. But marble has been known to last for 2,500 years, as in the Parthenon, the Theseum, the Roman Temple at Nismes.

For the Commission of Fine Arts:
Sincerely yours,

DAVID E. FINLEY, Chairman.

Under date of June 25th Mr. Rowland expressed his appreciation of the above letter.

THE PROGRAM OF THE AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION

URING the period covered by this report, the Commission of Fine Arts assisted the American Battle Monuments Commission in matters of design and in the choice of architects, sculptors, painters, and landscape architects.

From the fifteenth report of the Commission of Fine Arts, it will be observed that the American Battle Monuments Commission has been entrusted by the Congress with the erection of chapels and embellishment of the grounds of each American military cemetery overseas resulting from the action of World War II. As in the similar projects after World War I, the Battle Monuments Commission will consult the National Commission of Fine Arts in the choice of architects, sculptors, painters, and landscape architects, and will submit the designs of the memorials to the Fine Arts Commission for approval, as provided by law of Congress.

During the period beginning July 1, 1948, the Commission of Fine Arts has passed upon the designs for cemeteries at Henri Chapelle in Belgium; Margraten, Holland; Draguignan, France; St. James, France; Suresnes, France; St. Avold, France; St. Laurent (Normandy Beachhead), France; at Hamm, Luxembourg; Carthage, near Tunis, North Africa; and Manila, Philippine Islands. A revision of the design for Manila, suggested by the Commission, will be presented on completion of restudy.

During this period the Commission has passed upon the designs for sculpture at Draguignan, France, Suresnes, France, Cambridge, England, Anzio, Italy, and for Epinal, France.

The Commission's Chairman, Mr. Gilmore Clarke, was designated by the Commission in January 1949, to represent it on an inspection trip to several of the sites of these memorials. Mr. Clarke was thus able to advise the Commission, and the American Battle Monuments Commission through its Secretary, Brigadier General Thomas North, and Consulting Architect John F. Harbeson, during the discussions at Commission meetings.

During these years the Commission has approved the selection of the following architects and artists to act as teams collaborating upon the several projects.

SURESNES AMERICAN CEMETERY, SURESNES,

FRANCE

The memorial at Suresnes, France, a suburb of Paris, is an enlargement of the World I Chapel. The original chapel was designed by the late Charles A. Platt, the father of William and Geoffrey Platt, architects, of New York City, who were selected to carry on the work. This memorial has been completed and has been dedicated. The new wings were designed so that the completed composition now successfully gives the appearance of the design having been so intended from the first. The new project required little change as regards the trees and landscaping of the World War I design.

The Commission approved the interior sculptural embellishments. There are two figures in the round; one is "Meditation" by John Gregory, and the other is "Memory" by Lewis Iselin; both were carved in Carrara marble and mounted against a background of Greek Tinos, a green marble. They are very effectively placed at the ends of the loggias. On the wall of each loggia is a low relief panel by Lewis

Iselin. The subject is homage to those who have no known graves and depicts processions of soldiers in battle dress carrying empty litters.

LORRAINE AMERICAN CEMETERY, ST. AVOLD, FRANCE This cemetery is located in eastern Franch. A model was made for this chapel to show how the design has been adapted to the location chosen for it. The chapel is to be 80 feet wide and 80 feet high, with a pool behind it. The graves area is in front of the chapel. The Commission suggested that study be given to the use of some sculptural decoration in high relief. A relief figure of an angel, 18 feet high, will accordingly be placed over the door as the main feature of the facade, facing the graves area. Construction bids for this memorial project were taken in 1953. The Commission also suggested the provision of a method to get on the roof of the chapel for purposes of repair work when necessary.

NORMANDY AMERICAN CEMETERY, COLLEVILLE (ST. LAURENT)

St. Laurent Military Cemetery is located at the site where the American soldiers landed in crossing from England to France on D-Day,

June 6, 1954, by direction of the Supreme Commander General Dwight D. Eisenhower. The cemetery lies at the edge of the bluff, above the beach where the soldiers landed. The area was known as Omaha Beach Head. The plans call for a memorial chapel. Part of the composition will include two large battle maps in the two buildings at the sides of the hemicycle of the memorial, these to be executed in mosaics. One will depict the convoy operations of the Atlantic as well as the air bases and missions and the landings on Africa and Europe. The other battle map will give in detail the landing operations on Omaha Beach. A sunken garden will be panelled with the names of the missing. Graves numbering 10,000 will be located here.

The Commission approved the plans as shown by the model and drawings, and recommended that granite be used instead of limestone for the chapel and panels, as the gales and salt sprays are very strong at this place.

The project is nearing completion. Budget limitations having prevented the use of granite for the entire memorial, it was decided to use Brittany granite for the base, and for the upper portions Vaurion (compact) limestone.