[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 154 (Friday, November 18, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13311-S13315]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRIBUTE TO LILY STEVENS
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, last night, as the Senate was working into
the late hours of the night and tensions were running high, our
esteemed and beloved colleague, the former chairman of the Senate
Appropriations Committee, took me by the arm and pulled me aside. There
was something he wanted to show me. There was something that my
esteemed and beloved colleague, Ted Stevens, wanted to say to me and
wanted to show me. There was something he wanted to show me. It was an
article that his daughter Lily Stevens had written about the U.S.
Capitol, and he wanted to share it with me.
I was touched by this. I know Lily. What a prodigious memory she has.
Ah, what a rose in full bloom, what a lovely woman, Lily. She adores
her father. He adores her.
With everything that was going on in the Senate at the time, Senator
Stevens was showing a father's pride in his daughter's accomplishment.
I have literally watched Lily grow up. In her article, she points out
that her father was already a Senator when she was born, and while she
was a baby, her father would bring her to the Capitol--I have seen him
many times--and carry her around in a basket. I remember that, just as
I remember how she attended a number of my parties, and I attended a
number of hers.
I watched her grow into the remarkably--talented person she is today.
She is a graduate of Stanford University and is currently a law student
at the University of California at Berkeley. Lily is not only
prodigious and intelligent, but she also is a polite, courteous,
gracious, and charming young lady. Senator Stevens is so proud of her,
and he has a right to be.
The article his daughter wrote is an outgrowth of her senior thesis
at Stanford University, and as I read it, I understood why Senator
Stevens was so excited about it and why he wanted to share it with me.
Titled, ``The Message of the Dome: The United States Capitol in the
Popular Media,'' the article explores the ways in which the Capitol has
served and communicated with the general American public over the
years. It discusses the Capitol as a symbol to the American people and
how the meaning of that symbol has changed over time.
This beautifully written article skillfully conveys the sense of
wonder that awaits every first-time visitor to Capitol Hill. With a
trip to the Capitol, Lily points out, a visit to Washington goes well
beyond ``a vacation in the leisure sense.'' It becomes ``an education
journey, one in which the visitor can learn more about the government
and the history of the United States.''
And Lily's article makes fascinating and intriguing points about this
building in which her father, Senator Ted Stevens, and I work. Visitors
to the Capitol, Lily Stevens writes, while sharing certain common
experiences, still find their own individual interests. As she quotes
one author: ``The Capitol means many things to many people.''
Lily Stevens makes the point about how the Capitol functions as a
``national shrine,'' a place for appreciating our democratic form of
government and for praising our Nation, our history, and our national
leaders. And she explains how, over the years, the Capitol has
functioned as a church. Indeed, religious services were once held in
this building. And the Capitol still performs many functions that are
religious in nature, like funeral services for certain national
leaders. Statuary Hall, she points out, can be seen and interpreted as
``an American Westminster Abbey.'' How about that?
There is so much fascinating reading in this article, I could speak
long about it. I am asking that it be printed in the Congressional
Record, and I urge all my colleagues to read it. I promise you, you
will enjoy it.
Senator Ted Stevens is also entitled today to his own personal
congratulations. Why? Today, November 18, is Senator Stevens' birthday.
How about that? Senator Stevens' birthday, today. A wonderful man, a
great legislator. Today Senator Stevens is 82 years young. Oh, to be 82
again. Just to be 82 again, oh, my. I said to Ted: ``The next 5 years
are going to be the heaviest, Ted.'' I know. Five years ago I didn't
need those canes, no. My feet and legs were still good.
Senator Stevens and I have worked together in the Senate since 1968,
and we have been on the Senate Appropriations Committee together since
1972. In all this time together, I have always known Senator Ted
Stevens to be an
[[Page S13312]]
outstanding Senator, a great colleague, and a trusted friend. Oh, I
realize he may grumble every now and then. He is getting a little bit
grumbly. But you can forgive him for that.
You never have to be concerned about turning your back on him. He is
honest. He is straightforward. And his word is his bond. Over the years
we have had our spats, but never once did I doubt our friendship, our
admiration for this country, its flag, each other, and our ability to
work together.
So today, Ted, I say in the words of the poet:
Count your garden by the flowers,
Never by the leaves that fall.
Count your days by the sunny hours,
And not remembering clouds at all.
Count your nights by stars, not shadows,
Count your life by smiles, not tears.
And on this beautiful November afternoon,
Senator Stevens, count your age by friends, not years.
I conclude my remarks by again congratulating Senator Stevens on his
82nd birthday and on his beautiful daughter's marvelous work. I thank
Ted Stevens for being a superb colleague and a great friend, a great
servant of his people in Alaska, and for sharing Lily's article with
me.
I ask unanimous consent to print the article in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
``The Message of the Dome:'' the United States Capitol in the Popular
Media, 1865-1946
(By Lily Stevens)
Anyone who has spent a considerable amount of time in the
nation's capital has a particular experience with the white
building on the Hill. Growing up in Washington D.C., I never
lost the wonder and excitement of visiting the Capitol. I
cannot remember the first time I entered the building, as it
was in a small basket carried by my father. He was elected to
represent the state of Alaska in the Senate before I was
born. As a little girl, I loved walking up the marble stairs
within the building, feeling the grooves worn into the center
of each step. I would run my hand up the shiny round
banisters attached to the wall and shuffle my feet along step
after step. The Capitol was a wondrous place that always
seemed to be changing. I could have run for hours around the
big tile circles on the floor, following one pattern until it
made me so dizzy that I lay on the ground laughing, staring
at the tall ceiling, until I got up to start my game again.
There were just so many things to look at: the marble heads
on stands that towered above me, the paintings on the walls
and ceilings, the many people who crowded the halls. Every
time I walked into the Rotunda, I would lay my head down on
the white circle that represents the center of Washington so
that I could see all of the figures on the ceiling. My next
stop in the Rotunda would be my favorite painting so that I
could count the eleven toes on one barefooted man. In
Statuary Hall, I would look for King Kamehameha, with his
brilliant gold clothes. When I left the room, my neck would
hurt from looking up at his enormous face, looming over six
feet above mine. As I grew older, I knew every ghost story,
and loved to tell the tales of Lincoln being spotted in his
tall hat before stepping through walls, of the large cat that
would appear in the Rotunda and continually grow larger until
it would finally disappear. I knew where alcohol was hidden
during Prohibition, where the bomb had gone off in the early
1980s, and where to stand to hear the whispering secrets of
Statuary Hall.
My fascination with the Capitol led me to this project for
my undergraduate honors thesis at Stanford University. I
wanted to explore the ways in which the Capitol has served
and communicated with the general American public. I wondered
why so many visitors had entered the Capitol, and what they
were looking to find. In my thesis, I explored what the
Capitol had symbolized to Americans and whether its meaning
had changed over time. I thought of the many images and
references to the Capitol that I had seen in the popular
media and wondered how the building had been shown and
described since its construction. In this excerpt, which
include the first chapter, ``All Roads Lead to Washington,''
we will look at Washington as a figurative center of the
country, as the destination for anyone interested in learning
more about the government and the nation.
Authors throughout the early part of the twentieth century
described Washington as a natural destination for any
traveler. In 1940, Marion Burt Sanford offered advice for a
trip to the nation's capital to readers of Woman's Home
Companion. She declared the city to be the country's focal
point: ``In front of the White House is the zero milestone
from which all distances in the country are measured, so all
roads lead to Washington.'' Her article rested on a puzzling
premise. She claimed that Washington was a ``zero
milestone,'' and yet the nations's capital was certainly not
at the geographical center of the country. Some capitals sit
at a central location, convenient to every part of the
country: Paris, France and Madrid, Spain for example.
Washington, D.C., however, is on the eastern seaboard, and
certainly not accessible for the western portion of the
country. Yet taken in a figurative sense, Washington D.C. is
a location that draws many visitors. As the federal capital,
it is a destination for politicians, lobbyists, tourists,
school groups, and others. Every person in the United States
has a tie to the city, as the place where the laws are made
and enforced and where the country is governed. Therefore,
though Sanford's claim that ``all roads lead to Washington''
is, in the literal sense, a misstatement, it does offer an
interesting way of looking a the nation's capital as a
magnet for many types of people.
While the White House was the ``zero milestone,'' Sanford
suggested that the first stop for any traveler must be the
Capitol. Even before any organized visits, the Capitol was a
starting point for a memorable walk in the city: ``If you
arrive at night and are not too weary take the taxi to the
Grant Statue below the Capitol and walk a mile down the wide
silent Mall to the illuminated Washington Monument and the
Lincoln Memorial. You will never forget it.'' Making a memory
of visiting the monuments at night was the first on her list
for a woman to do when coming to the city. The reader she
addressed was a casual visitor, one who would be interested
in seeing the major monuments as well as in experiencing the
social side of the city. Sanford advised her readers: ``The
first day in Washington should be given to the Capitol and
the surrounding buildings.'' She warned that in order to have
a successful trip to the nation's capital, the visit must not
be too hasty: ``You can't see the House and Senate in action,
or the rare private collections in the vast Library of
Congress, or saunter past the embassies on Massachusetts
Avenue on a hurried bus tour.'' Her proposed tour was a
casual one in which women, their husbands, and perphaps their
families could enjoy as much time as possible at different
points of interest.
Sanford's article reflected a common practice of any
Americans, that of a short journey to Washington to visit and
experience the monuments and nation's government. Central to
this journey was a trip to the U.S. Capitol, for the visitor
to wander the halls, see the building, and watch Congress in
action. Many articles such as Sanford's described in detail
the functions of the Capitol, the sculptures of Statutory
Hall and the paintings of the Rotunda. All offered a virtual
paper tour of the pubic monuments. These articles suggested
that the Capitol and Washington D.C. were a major point of
interest to Americans. Authors like Sanford encouraged a trip
Washington. But what did the travelers hope to learn or find
in the Capitol, and what types of visitors came? Why, in
particular, was the Capitol such a popular destination for
the traveler?
A trip to Washington was not usually a vacation in the
leisure sense; rather, it was an educational journey, one in
which the visitor could learn more about the government and
the history of the United States. Some articles focusing on
the Capitol or Washington referred to travelers as
``pilgrims.'' This term for visitors to the Capitol evoked
both a religious tone and a reminder of the country's
history. In one definition of the word, pilgrims are
religious devotees, often covering large distances to reach a
particular sacred spot. In his essay on ``Geography and
Pilgrimage,'' Surinder Bhardwaj defined the religious pilgrim
in terms of three characteristics: ``. . . the religiously
motivated individual, the intended sacred goal or place, and
the act of making the spatial effort to bring about their
conjunction.'' Pilgrims can also be travelers in search of a
spiritual revelation or enlightenment, wanderers without a
concrete destination. One dictionary entry for ``pilgrim''
declares that the word is applicable to any traveler, whether
on a religious mission or not. A pilgrim can be anyone who
leaves home behind to make a journey. In another definition,
the term ``pilgrim'' labels the early European settlers of
the United States who fled their countries, suffering
hardships on their trip across the ocean to be able to
practice religious freedom and develop their own communities.
This definition is perhaps not as relevant to the idea of
visitors to the Capitol, but the reference to the founding of
the United States is poignant and instructive--and would not
have been lost on American readers.
What constituted a ``pilgrimage'' to the Capitol, and who
were these ``pilgrims''? They all came to the nation's
capital to see the workings of the government and the history
of the buildings, but pilgrims were may different types of
people. They were schoolchildren brought to the building by
their teachers to learn a civics lesson. They were
historians on a pilgrimage to see the sites where certain
senators sat and certain documents were signed. They were
mourners who came to pay last respects to assassinated
presidents and unknown soldiers. They were also women like
Clara Bird Kopp, who wrote an article for the National
Republic describing her daylong journey around the
Capitol. Entitle ``A Pilgrimage to the Capitol,'' her
article showed ways in which an everyday person could make
a casual pilgrimage to the Capitol, see their senator or
congressman and make a connection with the building.
Pilgrims, therefore, could come with a specific interest,
could be on a trip to learn something new about the
government, or could just come to experience the Capitol.
What did these pilgrims hope to find? Certainly not on a
religious mission, they went to Washington in search of
knowledge about
[[Page S13313]]
the government. The idea behind many of these trips was that
the complex structure of the United States Government and its
three branches could somehow be slightly decoded, slightly
more understood if one traveled to Washington. Seeing parts
of the government in action, whether Justices presiding in
the Supreme Court or Senators arguing on the floor, would
lead to a deeper understanding of the functions of the
government. Along with the live experience of viewing the
Congress within the Capitol came the opportunity to peruse
the architectural, artistic, and historic elements of the
building. Not only did the Capitol present highlights of the
country's history through artwork, it also held memories of
great events that took place within its walls, whether joyful
or sorrowful. While some who entered the Capitol and wrote
about their experience saw themselves as pilgrims of
democracy, others were casual visitors. Still others were
professionals in search of a certain statute or room. Some
were visitors on a mission, at the Capitol to lobby, protest,
or otherwise participate in the process of democracy.
One of the most visible and common groups of ``pilgrims''
in the Capitol was schoolchildren. Every American education
included an exploration of the federal government, and often
a trip to Washington accompanied this lesson. In an article
for National Geographic Magazine, Gilbert Grosvenor included
a picture of group of young Americans, with a caption that
read: ``A group of proud pilgrims on the steps of the
Capitol.'' The paragraph of explanation below the image spoke
of the phenomenon of pilgrims, of visitors to the Capitol:
Tens of thousands of Americans take a short course in
patriotism and government annually by making a pilgrimage to
Washington; but none of them get more of happiness and
inspiration out of it than the members of the boys' and
girls' clubs of the rural high schools. The boys and girls in
this picture hail from the parishes of Louisiana and won a
national poultry judging contest. They are seeing Washington
under the guidance of one of their Senators and the Secretary
of Agriculture.''
For the students and their companions, presumably their
teachers or guardians, the trip to Washington was a special
honor. Grosvenor used them as models for his idea of the
pilgrimage, which he described as ``a short course in
patriotism and government.'' These pilgrims were becoming
better, more faithful citizens through their trip to the
Capitol and Washington. Grosvenor equated enhanced patriotism
with a first-hand experience in Washington, as though
visiting national buildings like the Capitol would naturally
inspire feelings of pride in the government and in the
country. While most visitors did, in effect, take ``a short
course in . . . government,'' not all necessarily left the
Capitol with patriotic feelings, as we will later discuss.
Several articles in education periodicals complemented
Grosvenor's positive view of the school-age child's reaction
to a pilgrimage to Washington by suggesting knowledge of the
Capitol should be basic like reading, writing, and
arithmetic. In the National Education Association Journal as
well as in School Life, articles highlighted the Capitol and
suggested reasons why a visitor might be interested in the
building. One unidentified author of such an article spoke of
the general visitor to Washington: ``Next to himself and his
home town or city, the average citizen is interested in his
country, its laws and lawmakers, its seat of government. In
April and May . . . Washington's parks and drives reflect the
lavish mood of nature and countless visitors climb the steps
leading to the Capitol.'' The author boldly stated that any
``average citizen'' has a natural interest in the government
and that the trip to Washington, DC was a trend of
``countless visitors.'' Most of the articles in education
magazines took this interest of the ``average citizen'' as a
given, and described aspects of the Capitol or Washington for
the pilgrim. Behind all of these articles was the idea that
children and adults alike would become better, more
knowledgeable citizens by being pilgrims, thus partaking in a
common experience with many other Americans.
Although many shared in the common experience of visiting
the Capitol, each individual might have found a different
interest. Writing in the National Education Association
Journal, Mildred Sandison Fenner suggested: ``The Capitol
means many things to many people.'' Her article appeared
during World War II, at a time when Washington had become a
center of focus for the world. She used the Capitol, as a
house of government and a national monument, to reach out to
many types of Americans and world citizens. She divided
people into seven categories and addressed a section to each,
explaining what aspects of the U.S. Capitol would be of
interest to those people. Her categories: travelers,
architects, artists, historians, teachers, ``all American
citizens,'' and ``all Citizens of the world who believe in
the four freedoms.'' By commenting on all of these specific
interests, she was able to describe almost every intrigue
about the Capitol, as well as explain her ideas about what it
meant to all people. Travelers, she said, would remember the
Capitol as their first sight if they arrived at Union
Station. Speaking of the architects' interests, she was
able to describe the basic appearance and dimensions of
the Capitol, as well as speak of the architects who
contributed to the building. Artists, she said, would be
interested in the ``paintings and sculptures of great
historic and patriotic interest.'' Her passage ``to
Historians'' was the longest, mentioning several moments
in the Capitol's history. She wrote of the laying of the
cornerstone, the move of the national capital to
Washington, the burning of the Capitol in 1814 by the
British, the completion of the dome during the Civil War,
and more.
According to Fenner, the Capitol embodied a variety of
meanings for the various visitors. For those who led the
school trips to Washington, the Capitol could be seen as a
key to a broad history. ``To teachers,'' she wrote, ``the
story of the capitol is an even broader one, embracing the
history of the country itself.'' Of course, she also admitted
that ``[t]o all American citizens,'' the Capitol represented
the basic actions of government, the legislative body and the
basic process of democracy. She expanded this idea in her
last section, addressing ``all citizens of the world who
believe in the four freedoms.'' To these people, Fenner
claimed, ``the Capitol of the United States is the `arsenal
of democracy.' To these millions it is a symbol of hope and a
prophecy of the future.''
As a symbol of hope and prophecy, the Capitol became a
``national shrine,'' a term that appeared in a 1947 article
in the Saturday Evening Post. Author Beverly Smith remarked
upon the ways in which the building served as a center for
praising the government, for remembering the past: ``The
Capitol is part shrine, part hangout. It has been called `the
Caaba (holy of holies) of Liberty,' . . . Rufus Choate said,
`We have built no temple but the Capitol.' '' The Capitol
served as a national shrine, or civic temple, in a variety of
ways. As a mostly secular shrine, the Capitol assumed a role
of a place for worshipping democracy, for praising the
nation, its history, and its leaders. In addition to the
artistic remembrances of great moments past, it embodied a
certain history of its own, from the burning of the Capitol
during the War of 1812, to the memories of documents signed,
deals arranged, and people who visited. It was a shrine that
celebrated the past, present, and future of the country.
Like the idea of a ``pilgrim,'' the use of the word
``shrine'' to describe the Capitol conveyed religious
connotations. Though it did not function as a religious
shrine, and though the United States on principle supported a
separation of church and state, the Capitol did have some
involvement with religion. Gilbert Grosvenor described one
way in which the Capitol functioned almost like a church:
``For some years religious services were held in the old Hall
of Representatives on Sunday afternoons; Lincoln attended
them during the war period, when the hall was crowded because
many churches had been converted into barracks.'' The
national shrine also held funeral services for leaders, in
addition to the national tradition of leaders laying in state
within the rotunda. Grosvenor also commented that the placing
of statues in that ``old Hall of Representatives,''
transformed the room into more than just Statuary Hall: ``The
floor of this room was raised to its present level when the
hall was converted into an American Westminster Abbey.''
Relating the room to an American Westminster Abbey certainly
had religious overtones, but he was most likely referring to
the memorializing of leaders and notables that took place in
the room through sculpture.
Aside from memorializing American history through art, the
history of events within the Capitol itself reflected
important moments in the development of the United States. As
the National Education Association Journal declared, ``The
history of the Capitol is the history of our country.''
Memories of the great and disappointing moments of the past
that occurred in the building illustrated various times in
the country's history. ``If you study this building long
enough,'' Beverly Smith wrote for the Saturday Evening
Post,
``. . . you can learn America's history since Washington's
day. In the very first Congress which sat here, Jefferson was
elected over the devious Burr on the thirty-sixth ballot,
saving the young republic from who knows what oblique
destiny. Here Andrew Jackson escaped assassination when two
pistols missed fire. Here Representative--formerly
President--John Quincy Adams died, on that couch now in South
Trimble's office. In this building were voted all our wars
since 1800. Lincoln worked here as a congressman. Here
Woodrow Wilson pleaded, and Franklin Roosevelt spoke, tired
and tense in his chair, after his return from Yalta.''
Her readers received a crash course in some highlights and
low points of American history and pride. Notable events
include the deaths of officials within the building, the
actions of the Congress, and the presence of great leaders.
These events were not readily apparent to the tourist. In
order for a visitor to appreciate what history the building
held, they had to have a tour guide, or a literary tour guide
such as Smith, explain these moments.
Many of these articles gave an insider's account of the
past, including both popular and little-known stories of the
Capitol's history, for it was not through the casual
pilgrimage that a person could notice these spots and
instinctively know what happened in the past. Gilbert
Grosvenor also included some stories of moments past in ``The
Wonder Building of the World.'' He wrote of Statuary Hall,
the former chamber of the House of Representatives: ``Here
Lincoln, John Quincy Adams, Horace Greeley and Andrew Johnson
served in the same Congress. Here Henry
[[Page S13314]]
Clay welcomed Lafayette, who replied in a speech said to have
been written by Clay. Here John Marshall administered the
oath of office to Madison and Monroe.'' The preservation of
the country's history through memories such as those Smith,
Grosvenor, and Fenner described was an essential element to
the appreciation of the shrine.
In addition to holding stories, the national shrine
preserved key moments in American history through art. For
the artistic ``pilgrim,'' the halls of the Capitol were
filled with visual history. Visitors could peruse the art
within the Capitol and learn something about the past
entirely on their own. Fenner mentioned her own preference
for some of the works: ``Among the better oil paintings are
those of Stuart, Peale, and Trumbull.'' Congress had
commissioned Trumbull's paintings in the early nineteenth
century to commemorate scenes of the American Revolution.
Throughout the Capitol, frescoes offered allegories of great
leaders or of basic principles of the republic. Works of art
hung on walls in offices and hallways, all portraying
different moments in America's past. However, the paintings
that hung in the Rotunda were not of particular interest to
authors, perhaps because any visitor to the Capitol could
observe them. More important to these literary pilgrimages
were little known stories and facts about the national
``shrine.''
Both preserving a memory of the past and praising great
leaders through sculpture, Statuary Hall was the center
of much debate on the early twentieth century, and a
common destination for the ``pilgrim'' especially
interested in the arts. Dedicated by the House and Senate
to be a place where each State could send sculptures of
two people of accomplishment, the Hall became a source of
many extreme opinions. While some people enjoyed the
sculptures and admired the idea of placing leaders from
each State within the Capitol, many others described it as
a `` chamber of horrors,'' due to the poor quality of the
sculptures and the bad arrangement of figures. Gilbert
Grosvenor was of the former opinion, and gave a positive
view of Statuary Hall. ``An unwarranted phrase,'' he
wrote, ``has made it popular to call Statuary Hall a
chamber of artistic horrors. Such designation does
injustice to the art and the history of the room where the
House of Representatives met for 40 years and which now
exemplifies a really fine memorial idea. Setting clear his
feelings about the hall in the beginning, he continued on
to explain how it came to be. A law was passed in 1864 to
create Statuary Hall, which he said was so that: ``the
States could use it as a place to do national honor to the
memory of their sons and daughters renowned for civil and
military service, each State being entitled to place two
statues here.'' At the time that most of these articles
were being written, there was but one woman among the
collection of statues, Frances E. Willard. Statuary Hall
attracted many visitors who came to gaze at the statues as
well as to experience the ``whispering'' phenomenon of the
elliptical room; a person standing at one focus of the
room could hear a person whispering at the other.
Many authors, artists, and other citizens did not view
Statuary Hall in so pleasing a light as Gorsvenor. Lambert
St. Clair wrote an article for Collier's, ``The Nation's
Mirth-Provoking Pantheon,'' in which he described the Hall in
detail, attacking it artistically. Not only were the
sculptures themselves terrible, but their placement around
the room also left much desired: ``The arrangement obviously
is bad. Forty-one statues are crowded into a space which
might accommodate ten artistically . . . Guides expect to
grow wealthy rescuing lost tourists when the entire ninety-
six are placed.'' He did not merely dislike the positioning
of the statues, but also the statues themselves. He explained
that they had no artistic continuity, as a wide variety of
artists had completed them, and that State Legislatures had
often favored cheaper statues over ones that were more
aesthetically pleasing:
``Zachariah Chandler, the latest addition to the hall,
wears neatly creased trousers and a new white topcoat with
fashionable roll lapels. Lewis Cass, who stands beside him,
is clothed in a suit so badly wrinkled that one look will
make a tailor's hands twitch. General Lew Wallace's right
coat sleeve is laid open halfway to his elbow and rolled back
while his left sleeve is drawn tightly about the wrist.
Daniel Webster's coat is woefully in need of pressing. The
dress worn by Miss Frances E. Willard, the only woman in the
group, appears to have been slept in.''
St. Clair maintained that he was not alone in his opinion,
and related the story of a ``merry war'' that was ensuing at
the time. The conflict arose between the lieutenant governor
of Kansas, Sheffield Ingalls, and an artist who had completed
one of the statues. St. Clair explained that Ingalls was
attempting to have the statue of his late father, Senator
John J. Ingalls, removed from Statuary Hall. Ingalls'
motivations reflected his worry about the sensation
surrounding the room: ``Reverence for his parent made such
action imperative, the son said, inasmuch as the entire
collection of statues had, due to their poor arrangement and,
in many cases, inartistic execution, become ridiculous and
mirth-provoking curiosities to tourists.'' Ingalls' concern
that his father would become the source of ridicule and
mocking shows the impact that the phrase ``chamber of
artistic horrors'' had on how Americans thought about
Statuary Hall. Though it originally was intended to honor
great leaders, the artistic failings made it a controversial
room.
Former leaders were also honored in the ``national shrine''
through the tradition of laying-in-state. On these occasions,
the Rotunda was turned almost into a funeral home or church
as Americans came to pay last respects to the deceased. Many
presidents have lain in the center of the Rotunda, mostly
those who died in office. The ceremony had a strong impact on
the participants, as Catherine Cavanagh described in an
article for Bookman:
``The solemn Rotunda of the Capitol has been made almost
unbearably solemn by funeral services which have been held
there--notably those of the three presidents who died by the
hands of assassins--Lincoln, Garfield and McKinley. And one
who has looked upon the silent form of one of our rulers
lying under the lofty canopy of the dome can never forget the
awe of the occasion. The long black line in front, and the
long black line behind, in the procession of reviewers are
forgotten--one seemed alone with the august dead in the vast
grandeur of the chamber typifying the core of the Nation.''
To Cavanagh, visiting a leader lying in state not only was
a solemn occasion, but also was an opportunity to have
solitary time within what she sees as the Nation's figurative
heart. As one waited in line to visit the coffin, it was an
occasion to ponder all of those who have passed. Authors
strongly associated the Rotunda with these services: to the
National Education Association Journal, mentioning the
tradition of laying in state was a natural part of a
description of the rotunda. A general explanation of the size
and shape of the Rotunda was accompanied by a reminder of
several services that had taken place within the room: ``Here
Lincoln's body lay in state; here multitudes passed before
the flower-laden catafalque of the unknown soldier prior
to interment at Arlington.'' The ritual of paying respects
to the unknown soldier began after World War I, and has
continued to be a part of the post-war tradition for all
major conflicts. By placing the coffin of the Unknown
Soldier in the Rotunda before it is interred at Arlington
Cemetery, the country has been able to symbolically mourn
for all those who died in war. At the same time, this
tradition makes the statement that deceased presidents as
well as those who die fighting for the United States
deserve the same respect and honors.
The national shrine did not only praise those leaders and
notables of the past. As a way of honoring the nation and
democracy, some revered the leaders who worked within the
Capitol at the time. Grosvenor concluded his long article on
the Capitol by saying that the present deserved as much
attention and commendation as the past. He included members
of the House, Senate, and Supreme Court in his praise. He
began by stating a common practice of people to overlook the
present: ``Amid the glamour of history, some are prone to
discount the achievement of the present and the abilities of
those to whom have been entrusted the duties of lawmaking and
law-administering. But the student of the past knows that the
wail of the `decadence of the times' is one which has gone
forth in every age.'' Grosvenor concluded his article by
reminding the reader that those current leaders could some
day be given great honor: ``The men of to-day who are making
the history of America will, in turn, have their meed [sic]
of recognition, and in some future time their effigies in
bronze and marble will be placed in Statuary Hall as comrades
in glory with the Founders and Preservers of the Republic.''
In some ways, Americans paid tribute to the actions of
their leaders every day by listening to debates on the
floor of the House and Senate and by visiting their
delegations' offices.
However, not all who came to the ``national shrine'' found
people, or actions, worth praising. In one book, Historic
Buildings of America, ``famous authors'' took a critical look
at American institutions and traditions that were generally
accepted and praised. A chapter by Charles Dickens, ``Within
the Capitol,'' attacked the motivations of all politicians
within the chambers. Though Dickens' excerpt was likely
written during the early 19th century, its inclusion in this
early 20th century book suggests its message resounded with
readers years later. Dickens wrote:
``I saw in them the wheels that move the meanest perversion
of virtuous Political Machinery that the worst tools ever
wrought. Despicable trickery at elections; underhanded
tamperings with public officers; cowardly attacks upon
opponents, with scurrilous newspapers for shields, and hired
pens for daggers; shameful trucklings to mercenary knaves
whose claim to be considered, is, that every day and week
they sow new crops of ruin with their venal types, which are
the dragon's teeth of yore, in everything but sharpness;
aidings and abettings of every bad inclination in the popular
mind, and artful suppressions of all its good influences:
such things as these, and in a word, Dishonest Faction in its
most depraved and most unblushing form, stare out from every
corner of the crowded hall.''
Dickens would have been one of the critics who Grosvenor
attacked in the conclusion to this article. Writing an
impassioned account of the characters of leaders within the
building, Dickens was far from praising those who made or
enforced the laws. Though Dickens was not praising the
actions of those politicians within the shrine, he was
exercising the right of free speech, a basic principle on
[[Page S13315]]
which the democracy was founded. As a British citizen, he
brought a slightly different perspective to his view of the
Congress, but his attack reflects the basic right to offer
criticism. Therefore, though he did not admire the actions of
these particular leaders, he was valuing an ideal that the
``national shrine'' was intended to represent.
Just as Dickens criticized the government openly and
thereby enjoyed one of the privileges of democracy, so have
millions of Americans come to the Capitol in order to express
their grievances. Their roads led to Washington for a
different purpose: for a pilgrimage of protest. These
protests could easily be the subject of an entire paper, and
so I will just take a look at one of the protests as an
example of the many that have occurred. In an article for New
Republic in 1931, John Dos Passos described a ``hunger
march'' that took place at the Capitol. The situation was
tense as a group of men proceeded up Constitution Avenue to
the expanse between the Capitol and the Library of Congress.
Dos Passos gave a picture of the scene to the reader:
``The marchers fill the broad semicircle in front of the
Capitol, each group taking up its position in perfect order,
as if the show had been rehearsed . . . Above the heads of
the marchers are banners with slogans printed out: `in the
last war we fought for the bosses: in the next war we'll
fight for the workers . . . $150 cash . . . full pay for
unemployed insurance.''
These men had come to the Capitol to seek government aid
during the Great Depression, and though the banners may have
changed for each different group that came to protest, the
general process of a protest pilgrimage was familiar. This
group had come to Washington, like many, to raise awareness
about their plight and to get the attention of lawmakers
within the Capitol. In his article, Dos Passos took a highly
cynical tone, describing the dome of the Capitol that
``bulges smugly'' and the Senate Chamber as a ``termite nest
under glass.'' He also suggested that the Capitol building
itself played an active role in the protest, for as the men
shouted their demands, Dos Passos claimed that ``a deep-
throated echo comes back from the Capitol facade a few beats
later than each shout. It's as if the status and the
classical-revival republican ornaments in the pediment were
shouting too.'' For Dos Passos, the Capitol took on a human
quality, with the status seeming to participate in the march
as well. The pilgrimage of protest such as this ``hunger
march'' was but another way that the ideals embodied in the
Capitol, the ``national shrine,'' could be expressed.
Underlying many of the articles that discussed the Capitol
as a pilgrim's destination was the idea that the building
belonged to the American public. These articles attempted to
relate a more human side to the Capitol, one that could
describe the formal white building as a familiar place. The
American public should think of the building as theirs.
Beverly Smith suggested throughout her article that though
the Capitol was a shrine, it should also be thought of as
accessible, even as ``a friend.'' She quoted a fellow
journalist: `` `I am not one of those who can sneer at the
Capitol,' wrote Mary Clemmer Ames, a lady correspondent in
Washington 70 years ago. `Its faults, like the faults of a
friend, are sacred.' '' Her entire article contrasted the
Capitol as shrine with the Capitol as a hangout, which
created a picture of the building as a national space that
should be a comfortable place for pilgrims. She declared that
the building was a friendlier place than its image suggested,
an idea that appeared in other representations of Washington
from the time. Similarly, in an article entitled ``Nerve
Center of the World,'' Albert Parry wrote that Washington
could still be thought of as a small town, even though its
importance was growing on the national and international
scene, ``If anything,'' he wrote, ``Washington is a
charming Southern town which has grown large and
cosmopolitan without losing its drawl.'' In these and
other articles on the Capitol and Washington, journalists
were demystifying the formal ideal of the Capitol, making
it a more accessible place.
Smith in particular wanted Americans to see ways in which
the Capitol belonged to them. In one story she related a
physical way in which everyday Americans left their mark on
the building:
By day in the sunshine or at night under its floodlights, the
great dome looms white and pure. But, if you climb the long
spiral stairs to the little galleries around the dome, you
see that every inch of the surface within human reach is
covered with writing, in pencil, ink, crayon and lipstick--
all the small familiar chirography of the American people:
Jimmy loves Marge . . . Kilroy was here . . . Mr. and Mrs. G.
Wallace Shiffbaur, of Minesota . . . Hubba, hubba. Hearts and
arrows. Periodically the writing is painted out, but a new
swarm of tourists and honeymooners covers it up again, quick
as magic. ``What can you do?'' says a guard. ``It's their
Capitol, ain't it?'
Though the dome appeared to be completely ``white and
pure,'' she informed her readers that upon closer look, it
was filled with graffiti, the kind that normally covered
bathrooms and college hangouts. It was quite an image that
she presented; as a whole, the Capitol seemed formal, pure,
and stately, and yet on close inspection, it was partially
made up of the marks of everyday Americans. The guard who
watched people daily write upon the dome merely shrugged his
shoulders at the practice. he saw no problem with the
signatures, as he believed the building upon which they were
writing was their property as citizens of the country.
The Capitol as a destination and a place for pilgrimage
drew countless number of Americans to its step. The roads and
paths of many different types of pilgrims led to Washington
and to the United States Capitol. Pilgrims to the Capitol
were sometimes eager, sometimes critical. They came to see
their leaders in action, to wander the halls, to view the
places where certain events occurred, and to participate in
the democratic process. They encountered or red about a space
that could become as familiar to them as an ``old comfortable
home.'' By appealing to different interest, these journalists
made the building understandable and intriguing to all types
of readers and visitors. The Woman's Home Companion offered
advice on how to organize a trip to Washington and the best
times to visit the Capitol; the Saturday Evening Post wrote
stores full of human interest, including both formal
descriptions and little-known facts. Besides the stories of
contemporary life, articles focused on the Capitol's
interior: paintings and sculptures that celebrated great
moments in the history of the United States and great leaders
past. Mentor published articles specific to its readers,
focusing on the art within the Capitol. Through these
articles, authors reached out to readers to make the Capitol
more accessible to all. The civic space, the ``shrine,''
offered visitors and readers alike a glimpse of the past, the
present, and the future. Authors invited readers to consider
the building as belonging to all Americans, and not as an
untouchable place. While Americans no longer participate in
the ritual of signing their name on the dome, they still come
to experience the Capitol as countless have done before them.
The Capitol remains a central destination for all who find
themselves on a road that leads to Washington.
____________________