KING GEORGE V

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 140, 15 June 1936, Page 10

KING GEORGE V

NATIONAL MEMORIAL

THE TWO-FOLD PROJECT

MANSION HOUSE APPEAL

The general committee of the King George National Memorial Fund has accepted proposals to clear the Abingdon Street site and erect a statue thereon, as the Londox memorial to King George, and to appeal for funds to provide "King George's National Playing Fields" all over the country, said "The Times" on May 36.

The Archbishop of Canterbury presided over the meeting of the general committee at the Mansion House after a meeting of the executive at which the schemes had been adopted. He expressed regret at the absence of the Lord Mayor and the sympathetic hope that the Lady Mayoress, who was making as good progress as could be expected, would soon recover from her illness. ... Lord Macmillan said the executive committee was instructed that the memorial should take the form o£ a statue in London in some noble setting, and a philanthropic scheme of a specific character which would benefit the whole country and be associated with his late Majesty's name. Two sub-committees were appointed and had placed unanimous reports before the executive that afternoon. Some time was spent in discussing tnose reports, and as a result he was in the happy position of being able to state that they had arrived at unanimous conclusions as to both forms of memorial. - • •

INDEFINITE EXPANSION. Dealing first with the philanthropic scheme for which the Lord Mayor proposed to appeal, he said the committee had decided on a plan for playing fields all over the country. Of the many attractive' proposals before them it appeared that on the whole- that was the one likely to appeal, most largely to the people of the country. It had many attractive features. It associated .with happiness and welfare, and one would like a memorial to his late Majesty to be associated with something which stood for the general happiness' of the rising generation. That was from. the sentimental side. From the- practical .side it had the advantage that according to the generosity of the response it was capable of almost indefinite expansion. If funds were adequate such benefits could be distributed throughout the length and breadth. of the land. There was another advantage. It was adaptable for small schemes as well as large. It was a matter capable of local adaptation. It would probably attract gifts of land as well as of money, for there | must be many landowners who found that landowning was a liability rather than an asset. Then there were in the hands of some municipalities areas of land which could be dedicated for the purpose. There need not be a large expenditure locally, for after the ground had been laid out the only other expense would be a gateway on which the name of the late King would be engraved to remind all that it was King George's ground. That would not be costly. It was much more important to have many fields than much stonework. The services would be engaged of distinguished architects and artists to design some form of gateway. GOOD WILL.

The scheme would inevitably engage the good will of the localities themselves. There would be in each region people who would interest themselves in the work, who would form local committees and see that the grounds were kept 'up; that, games were organised; and that the fields became permanent, well-managed centres of recreation. It would also enable the scheme to come to an end. It was an advantage to complete a work and wind it up. . . The other project was concerned With a statue in a noble setting in London. In such a matter it was obvious that there would be many ideas. It was to some extent a matter of taste as well as of local interest. The committee had: carefully considered various projects- and had come to, the opinion that, taking ail the circumstances into consideration, j the merits of the Abingdon Street site presented the greatest attraction. The scheme was' attractive in the sense that the spot was at the very heart of the British Empire. It was desirable that the memorial to the late King should be on the spot with which' the great events of his life were associated. The site was just opposite the Victoria Tower, to which he came from-time to time to open his Parliaments. It was close to the great national fane of Westminster Abbey, where the great events of his family life and his association with the State were celebrated, and near by was the famous Hall where he paid his last visit to Westminster and where so many of his people came to pa> their last tribute. The site, therefore, was associated with the greatest events of his Majesty's life.

architecture. There were great attractions also from the point of view of architectural amenity. If the scheme was realised it would' result in the demolition of a number of old buildings which had no particular architectural distinction to commend them and would throw open a wonderful vista of the Abbey buildings. In association with the Victoria Gardens just across the road it would provide a large open, space where the gardens might be arranged and where open air might be. enjoyed. By the demolition of the buildings a beautiful spacwould be provided for the King statue—which it was hoped would bo the work of some distinguished ana gifted sculptor—facing the Houses of Parliament. Surely that was a most, appropriate" place for the statue oE a great constitutional Monarch. Both the statue and the plulamhropu. scheme would depend for their success I on the extent of the response wmch the public made to tho appeal. That appeal would emanaU from' the Mansion House, ana ht hop~u it would meet with such enthusiastic support that there would not only bean enduring and dignified memor..al in London but many heppy and smiling playing fields throughout the length and breadth of the land. The Archbishop moved the adoption of the report presented by Lord MacmThenLord Mayor of Cardiff seconded the motion. _ ~ Sir William Davison thought t.u, committee had reason to the absence of a report and th; manliness of the information fciven. 1,1 ; matter of such importance he « have expected a written report setting out the various schemes and their relative merits and costs. He considered the ideal site to be the tyestnunstei House site in Parliament Square. Lord Macmillan, lie said, had given reasons why the Abingdon Street site had been chosen—that it was the heart of the Empire, and so on: but all the arguments applied equally to the Westminster House ■ site. In addition Parliament Square would become u real square .for the first time and WciLminsfer House, which had disfigured it

for so long, would be removed. If it was not considered desirable that the statues now there should be in the same square as that of his late Majesty thev could be removed to the Canning enclosure. He thought it important thai the Abingclon Street scheme wouia cost £500,000, while the cost of Parliament Square scheme , would bs negligible.

LONDON OFFER. The London County Council had undertaken to contribute if the Government made a grant, and the Government had undertaken to make suc:i a grant. There would also be a contrioution from Middlesex. The total sum involved in the purchase of the site was £370,000, and if each of the three authorities mentioned gave £100,000 (apart from Westminster; the cost would be practically nothing. He moved that the report be taken back so that the matter could be further considered and information about cost given to the general committee. The Archbishop of Canterbury said there was no written report because it was desirable to avoid delay in making the appeal. The executive committee had thrashed out all the points made by Sir William Davison. They had been urged with great ability by £*-' Howard Button, but he had allowed the -.report to come forward as unanimous. When it came to choosing between two equally good schemes it was decided to recommend the Abingdon Street proposal. It was a case of "how happy could we be with either or both." But both would be prohibitive. Mr. Ormsby-Gore, M.P., said that both in the sub and the executive com* i mittees careful consideration was ! "iveti to both schemes. The attitude i of the Government was that it would i take no side in the controversy be- ! tveen Abingdon Street and Parliament i Square. It either or both, were ! adopted by the Lord Mayor's CommivI leu . the Government would consider sympathetically any appeal made by the Lord Mayor to assist finan-rr-— Lord Shaftesbury, said he could not help being a little iil sympathy with Sir William Davison. He would like to know the reasons for the final choice of the Abingdon Street site. He seconded the amendment.

Lord Macmillan said that one of the reasons for the choice was the feeling that the statue should not be in close proximity to other memorials, and that the territory should be new and distinctive with a character of its own. His position in the matter was that of a moderator.

The amendment was lost, receiving no support apart from the proposer and seconder.

The executive committee was reappointed to carry out the proposals of the report and to assist the Lord Mayor in making his appeal to the nation and the Empire.

The executive committee is to consider how far funds should be allocated between the two. schemes — whether by the subscribers or the committee itself. That would be determined before th; appeal was issued.