The Medallic History of the United States of America 1776-1876 | Page 8

eighteenth century down to (p.?xxiv) 1840 John Reich and subsequently Moritz F��rst were the engravers of the national medals. Reich's works are valued; unfortunately they are few in number. They consist of the medal voted in 1805 to Captain Edward Preble for his naval operations against Tripoli, of another voted in 1813 to Captain Isaac Hull for the capture of the British frigate Guerri��re, and of those of Presidents Jefferson and Madison. That of President Jefferson especially deserves attention for its beauty.
But little can be said in commendation of the works of F��rst, whose numerous medals are very inferior to Reich's, and still less worthy of being compared with those of the French engravers. While wishing to avoid undue severity, I cannot but endorse the opinion of General Scott, given in a communication addressed to the Honorable William L. Marcy, Secretary of War, in regard to the medal voted to General Zachary Taylor, for victories on the Rio Grande:
To the Honourable HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY, William L. MARCY, Washington, July 25, 1846. Secretary of War.
As medals are among the surest monuments of history, as well as muniments of individual distinction, there should be given to them, besides intrinsic value and durability of material, the utmost grace of design, with the highest finish in mechanical execution. All this is necessary to give the greater or adventitious value; as in the present instance, the medal is to be, at once, an historical record and a reward of distinguished merit. The credit of the donor thus becomes even more than that of the receiver interested in obtaining a perfect specimen in the fine arts.
The within resolution prescribes gold as the material of the medal. The general form (circular) may be considered as equally settled by our own practice, and that of most nations, ancient and modern. There is, however, some little diversity in diameter and thickness in the medals heretofore ordered (p.?xxv) by Congress, at different periods, as may be seen in the cabinets of the War and Navy Departments. Diversity in dimensions is even greater in other countries.
The specific character of the medal is shown by its two faces, or the face and the reverse. The within resolution directs appropriate devices and inscriptions thereon.
For the face, a bust likeness is needed, to give, with the name and the rank of the donee, individuality. To obtain the likeness, a first-rate miniature painter should, of course, be employed.
The reverse receives the device, appropriate to the events commemorated. To obtain this, it is suggested that the resolutions and despatches, belonging to the subject, be transmitted to a master in the art of design--say Prof. Weir, at West Point--for a drawing--including, if practicable, this inscription:
PALO ALTO; RESACA DE LA PALMA: MAY 8 AND 9, 1846.
A third artist--all to be well paid--is next to be employed--a die-sinker. The mint of the United States will do the coinage.
Copies, in cheaper metal, of all our gold medals, should be given to the libraries of the Federal and State Governments, to those of the colleges, etc.
The medals voted by the Revolutionary Congress were executed--designs and dies--under the superintendence of Mr. Jefferson,[12] in Paris, about the year 1786. Those struck in honour of victories, in our War of 1812, were all--at least so far as it respected the land service--done at home, and not one of them presented, I think, earlier than the end of Mr. Monroe's administration (1825). The delay principally resulted from the want of good die-sinkers. There was only one of mediocre merit (and he a foreigner) found for the army. What the state of this art may now be in the United States I know not. But I beg leave again to suggest that the honour of the country requires that medals, voted by Congress, should always exhibit the arts involved, in their highest state of perfection wherever found: for letters, science, and the fine arts constitute but one republic, embracing the world. So thought our early Government, and Mr. Jefferson--a distinguished member of that general republic.
All which is respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War.
[Footnote 12: This is an error. See page xi.]
Whatever may be the weight of General Scott's opinion on such a (p.?xxvi) subject, and whether or not it is important, as he insists, that medals should possess high artistic value, in order that they may be not only the rewards of merit and monuments of history, but also favorable specimens of contemporary art, it must be acknowledged that those struck since 1840 differ widely, in many respects, from those of the preceding period. While the earlier works are of a pure and lofty style, the later ones are not always in good taste. The former are conceived generally in strict observance of classical rules, and will bear comparison with the numismatic masterpieces of