Chapter M: C. M.”

In 1859 a Congressional Committee voiced a criticism which undoubtedly refers also to the Cornwallis-Washington painting in the House Chamber. They said,

“Far greater sobriety should be given to these Halls in their general effect, so as to render them less distracting to the eye. Few are aware how disturbing to thought the display of gaudy, inharmonious colors can be made. This very quality renders such combination of colors unsuited to halls of deliberation where calm thought and unimpassioned reason are supposed to reside.”

Mr. Curtis of Pennsylvania rose again in the House of Representatives on June 15, 1860, in defense of Brumidi’s art but with special reference to the House fresco. Said he,

“I have heard with some regret appeals made to the prejudices of the country in regard to the specimens of art taste displayed about this Capitol; and I have been surprised that no one connected with this Branch of service has risen upon the Floor to do justice to those who have devoted their lives and energies to the embellishment of our public buildings. What is more splendid than the fresco in some of the halls and passages around the Senate Chamber and especially the emblem of Religion in the President’s

With its richness of design, its beauty and delicacy of color, the President’s Room represents Brumidi’s supreme effort “to make beautiful the Capitol” of the United States. Facing the portrait of Hamilton we see reflected in the giant golden mirror the portrait of Samuel Osgood. Reflected also are the ceiling frescoes of Vespucius and Religion and the treasured mahogany table at which Abraham Lincoln and many other Presidents have signed legislative bills. The mahogany clock at one time had hands of gold until a souvenir hunter carried them home. Today all sightseers get no further than a railing at the doorway.]

Room? And in this Hall, where do you find room to criticize the combination of colors which you see around you? It is easy to invent a popular criticism and find fault; but I would like to see some of these gentlemen who are so conversant with matters of taste and art as to speak with the assurance of masters, bring forward some design, some specimen from their superior genius that they would themselves insert in place of that which they see around them.”

PRESIDENT’S ROOM

The decoration of the President’s Room in the Senate Annex is thought by many to be Brumidi’s best work in the Capitol Building. Since the President’s Room in the Capitol was to be set aside for the use of the President of the United States at any time duty called the President to the Capitol Building, it may well be supposed that Brumidi wanted that room to be as beautiful as an artist could make it. He is said to have spent more than five years on this room alone, but five years seem not half long enough to create such beauty as is here displayed.

Five colorful ceiling-to-floor panels adorn the walls and in the center of each hangs a portrait elegantly framed. The five members of Washington’s first Cabinet are thus honored--Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, Secretary of State; Edmund Randolph of Virginia, Attorney General; Henry Knox of Massachusetts, Secretary of War; Alexander Hamilton of New York, Secretary of the Treasury; and Samuel Osgood of Massachusetts, Postmaster General. I say these portraits hang in the panels. If you stood at the door looking hurriedly about the walls, as most visitors must do at the President’s Room, you would think the frames as real as the portraits. In truth, though, the beautifully carved frames are painted on the walls as are the portraits. Mr. Fairman calls these paintings, “Portraits of Distinction,” and so they are.

But it is the frescoed ceiling in the President’s Room that showers new light and color and added beauty about the portraits on the walls. Four symbolic groups on this ceiling look down from their large medallion gold leaf frames--four life-size Madonnas, symbolizing Religion, Legislation, Liberty, and Executive Authority--Madonnas of great beauty and rare coloring. Then at each corner of this frescoed ceiling among the symbolism and the cherubs are four life-size portraits, full length, each chosen as representative of a force in civilization. Columbus memorializes discovery; Vespucius, exploration; Brewster, religion; and Franklin, history.

The portrait of George Washington, evidently done with Rembrandt Peale’s Washington in mind, has a position all its own high above the portrait of Thomas Jefferson. A portion of the Annual Report of Captain Meigs, dated October 27, 1859, fixed the completion of the Brumidi frescoes in the President’s Room. Said that report, “The painting of the President’s Room in the North wing will be completed by the next meeting of Congress.”

Even during the years that Brumidi created the beauty of the President’s Room cruel words were hurled against his art. In 1858 a convention of self-styled American artists assembled and drew up an estimate of their own worth which they titled: “Memorial of the Artists of the United States.” This petition of grievance presented to the Congress of the United States carried the names of 127 individuals, chiefly from New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore with only eight from the Capital City. Among the signatures were found the names of Rembrandt Peale, W. D. Washington and Johannes A. Oertel, the latter being the draughtsman who

These three cherubs occupy a position beneath the portrait of William Brewster on the ceiling of the President’s Room comparable to that of the cherub detail beneath the portrait of Benjamin Franklin on the same ceiling. Since Brewster, as the religious leader of the Pilgrims and elder of the Plymouth colony, typifies “Religion” in Brumidi’s over all design in the President’s Room, the singing cherubs with their director, violinist, dove attendant, and music script must be singing hosannas of peace and devotion. (Cherubs in chapter tailpieces are from this ceiling.)]

challenged Brumidi’s right, in 1858, to paint the ceiling fresco in the District of Columbia Committee Room of the Senate.

It is illuminating to know that 88 of the 127 names listed as artists in the above Memorial do not even appear in the National Encyclopedia of American Biography while among those that do appear, less than a dozen are recognized today as artists of note.

The Artists’ Memorial began with these words, “Your memorialists appear before your honorable bodies to solicit for American art that consideration and encouragement to which they conceive it to be entitled at the hands of the general government.” Then the Memorial asked that Congress “establish an Art Commission composed of those designated by the united voice of American artists as competent to the office, who shall be accepted as the exponents of the authority and influence of American art, who shall be the channels for the distribution of all appropriations to be made by Congress for art purposes, and who shall secure to artists an intelligent and unbiased adjudication upon the designs they may present for the embellishment of our National buildings.”

The House of Representatives referred the Artists’ Memorial to a select committee of five. This Committee brought out Report No. 198, March 3, 1859. That Report not only sanctioned the establishment of the suggested Art Commission to protect the “embellishment of National buildings” but it voiced criticism by the Congressmen making up the select Committee of five. Brumidi’s name was not mentioned in the Report but there is no mistaking the artist to whom they referred. Said the Committee in this Report:

“A plain coat or two of whitewash is better, in the opinion of this committee, for a temporary finish than the tawdry and exuberant ornamentation with which many of the rooms and passages are being crowded.... An eagle and the National flag may be discovered occasionally amidst the confusion of scroll work and mythological figures presented to the eye; but the presence of conventional gods and goddesses, with meaningless scrolls and arabesques, albeit they may be wrapped in the red, white and blue, will never suggest to the American, as he wanders among the halls and committee rooms, any idea to touch his heart or to inspire his patriotism.... Should he seek an explanation from those who are manufacturing the cumbrous levities which everywhere appear through the building he will be eminently fortunate should he find among them one who speaks the English language.”

The real fight of the petitioners was evidently against the employment of a foreign artist. However, this was not expressed openly in the Memorial but the select committee of

The theme of Brumidi’s ceiling fresco in the President’s Room, as portrayed by Christopher Columbus, is that of “Discovery.” This subject is intensified by use of the globe and map in the cherub detail above the portrait. At upper left is a segment of the medallion, “Executive Authority,” and at the right a portion of another medallion, “Liberty.” The four small decorative medallions at the portrait corners are State seals. At the upper left is Vermont; at upper right, Kentucky; lower left, Arkansas, and lower right, Michigan.]

five from the House of Representatives made the open accusation. Said they in their Report, “The Committee have not been informed that American artists have been engaged upon the embellishment of the Capitol, but they have been made painfully conscious that the work has been prosecuted by foreign workmen under the immediate supervision of a foreigner. As a consequence the Committee find nothing in the design and execution of the ornamental work of the Capitol, thus far, which represents our own country, or the genius and taste of her artists.”

This unjust criticism of Brumidi found expression in the New York Daily Tribune for May 17, 1858, through that paper’s Washington correspondent. The New York attack on the artist, however, was answered in the Tribune for May 31, 1858, by Guglielmo Gajani, a friend of Brumidi’s. Extracts of this defense of Brumidi follow:

To the Editor of the New York Tribune:

I have lately been at Washington and derived much pleasure from
visiting the National Capital and its splendid buildings and works
of art. I admired them and was much pleased with the frescoes and
decorations of my fellow citizen Signor Constantino Brumidi. But on
my return to New York my attention was directed to a correspondence
of the Tribune (May 17) and to other attacks made against that
artist and his works at the Capitol.

I knew him in Rome, where he was much esteemed and has left
excellent specimens of his artistic skill. I can hardly believe
that ten years of exile could have so entirely destroyed his
capacity or impaired my judgment. Had the attack been confined to
the ground that artists or workmen of foreign birth who are
satisfied with a small compensation should be excluded from the
Capitol in order to have the work done exclusively by natives well
paid, I would have nothing to say for I keep off entirely from your
administrative questions and politics. But on the ground of art and
taste a Roman might be allowed to express an opinion quite
different from that of your own correspondent and his friends.

Fresco painting represents in art what improvisation is in poetry.
The artist must execute his work upon a fresh wall, tracing the
outlines by a steel point and using mineral colors which are
instantly absorbed and do not show their effect until the wall
dries. The artist, therefore, must work with great rapidity and has
no opportunity for corrections. It does not require a greater
capacity than the ordinary painting with oil or water colors on a
dry wall, but the artist must have a peculiar disposition, and this
the Italian possesses to a greater degree than others.

Michelangelo had never practiced fresco painting when Bramante
procured him the commission to paint the ceiling of the Sistine
Chapel with a view to ruin his reputation. Michelangelo called from
Florence his former schoolmate, Granacci, and other fresco
painters, to teach him the art. He was much perplexed at the
beginning but afterward declared it the best style of painting. I
believe that your best painters, by exerting themselves and gaining
experience, might have succeeded in doing the work accomplished by
Brumidi, but it would have required a long time and an enormous
expenditure.

It is a fact that in France, in England, in Belgium, in Italy and
everywhere public buildings have been decorated by competent
artists, you meet the same style and symbols, allegories and
classical memories occasionally adopted by Signor Brumidi. Before
condemning him you must find fault with all the best painters who
preceded him, and especially with Michelangelo and Raphael who

Four Brumidi Madonnas on the frescoed ceiling of the President’s Room are of great interest to visitors. The most lasting impression, however, is made by “Religion.” The story is often repeated that Brumidi painted “Religion” with an “all-seeing eye of God” which will follow any individual from place to place inside the room. The “connections of the pieces of plaster” which help to identify real fresco are easily discernible in this medallion background. The color beauty of “Religion” is illustrated by “Legislation” in this book’s color section.]

Well balanced scales and a sword seem to be necessary attributes of Brumidi’s conception of “Executive Authority” in the President’s Room. The Cherub of Justice and the many other cherubs used so generously in the artist’s Capitol frescoes are favorites with art enthusiasts. All designs and deceptive moldings shown above are painted in oil on dry plaster. The corner of a tall elaborate mirror frame shows at the right.]

Resting midst bundles of papers, bills, and Congressional debates, the Winged Cherub suggests another Brumidi theme, “Legislation,” on the walls of the President’s Room. The signature “C. Brumidi, 1860,” can be identified on the packet of State papers at the feet of this cherub. The two cherubs on these pages fill decorative niches high on the walls on either side of a huge, ceiling-to-floor, gold-framed mirror.]

introduced that style of fresco in the Vatican itself.... It is
absurd, therefore, to despise the works of Signor Brumidi because
“they look foreign and betray the Italian element,” that is to say,
because they are classical in the subject and artistic in the
execution.

I confess that my national feelings were a little wounded when I
saw vituperated to some extent in Washington an artist much
esteemed in Rome. Music and the fine arts are all that remain of
our former greatness, and we are naturally jealous of this glory.
Besides, I am convinced that Signor Brumidi is a good artist and an
excellent fresco painter. He has studied long in Rome, even from
his boyhood, and visited for instruction all the most important
schools of art in Italy. Baron Camucini was his master in painting,
and the great Thorwaldsen taught him sculpture. In both arts Signor
Brumidi has left several specimens of his skill in Rome. For
instance, he was employed during eleven years in making frescoes
and decorations of the villa and of the palace of Prince Torlonia
in Rome. These works are admired by visitors. Should an American
admire the works of Signor Brumidi at home and despise them when he
finds them at Washington?

Signor Brumidi was also employed by the Government in Rome,
together with other distinguished artists, to prepare the
chronology of the Popes, in the new Basilica of St. Paul, and was
allowed to finish his work after the revolution, notwithstanding
that he was persecuted for the part which he took in that movement.
The Republican Government of Rome honored Signor Brumidi with an
important commission as he was much esteemed for his talent and
personal qualities. I am glad, myself, that he has already executed
some works at the Capitol. They speak for themselves to those who
have taste for the fine arts.

GUGLIELMO GAJANI

In the Architect’s Report for 1859 we find this reference to the detrimental influence of the Artist’s Memorial:

“The action of Congress in restricting the expenditure for painting and sculpture to the completion of the painting of rooms in the North Wing already partly done ... and to such paintings and sculpture as shall have been approved, first, by a committee of three American artists, to be appointed by the President and then by the Library Committee of Congress, has prevented the commencement of any new works.”

It seems certain, however, that Brumidi was not often continuously employed on any one picture. As shown by his vouchers, if work was held up in one direction he could easily employ himself in another. For example, he began work in the Senate Library in 1858 and the Architect of the Capitol records

This portrait of Alexander Hamilton is one of the five color representations of Washington’s Cabinet, painted by Brumidi on the walls of the President’s Room. The color and design of the frame and panel are equally as beautiful as those surrounding the portrait of Jefferson in the color section of this book. The portrait of George Washington high above those of his Cabinet evidently was done with that of Rembrandt Peale in mind. All others are thought to be Brumidi’s own conceptions.]

the finish of the Senate Library ceiling in 1875. But during those years the 4,664 square feet of fresco in the Canopy of the Dome was finished as well as the President’s Room and many committee room frescoes and hall decorations in the Senate Annex. References in Reports and letters usually give the finishing date of the fresco while the beginning date is seldom mentioned.

CAPITOL DOME

The huge fresco on the canopy of the Dome of the Capitol Building is signed “C. Brumidi, 1865.” In the Annual Report dated November 1, 1863, of Thomas Walter, Architect of the Capitol (1851-1865), we find this reference to the Dome canopy:

“The cartoons for the picture on the canopy over the eye of the inner dome are being prepared, and its execution will be commenced as soon as the iron work which is to receive it can be put in place.”

Certain letters in the National Archives between Brumidi and United States officials shed interesting light on the 1862 negotiations relative to the Dome Canopy. Extracts from these letters follow:

From Tho. U. Walter, “architect of extension and new Dome,” to Constantino Brumidi, August 18, 1862: “It is intended to have a picture 65 ft. in diameter painted in fresco on the concave canopy over the eye of the New Dome. I would thank you to furnish me with a design for the said picture at your earliest convenience.... You will also submit with the design an estimate of the cost of executing it in real fresco painted on the fresh mortar.”

From Constantino Brumidi to Tho. U. Walter, September 8, 1862. “...I herewith submit to you my design for the fresco picture to be painted on the Canopy of the New Dome of the United States Capitol. The six groups around the border represent, as you will see, War, Science, Navigation, Commerce, Manufacture and Agriculture. The leading figures will measure some 15 feet. In the center is an apotheosis of Washington surrounded by allegorical figures of eminent men of the times of Washington, which latter will be likenesses.

“As this picture will be seen at a height of 180 ft. the painting must be of the most decided character possible. It will cover 4664 sq. ft. and will be worth $50,000 to execute it including the necessary cartoons and every expense pertaining to the painting.”

From Tho. U. Walter to Constantino Brumidi, December 24, 1862. “Your letter of the 8th of September was duly received, together with your design for the proposed picture in fresco, for the canopy over the eye of the New Dome of the United States Capitol. The design meets my entire approval. It has also the approval of Major B. B. French, the Commissioner of Public Buildings. I sent it to the residence of the Hon. Caleb B. Smith, the Secretary of the Interior, where it has been for several weeks. Mr. Smith also expresses himself entirely satisfied with the design. I am therefore free to give it my official approval with but one condition and that is that you will consent to execute it at a greatly reduced cost.

“I am aware, as you have expressed to me in conversation that there is no picture in the world that will compare with this in magnitude and in difficulty of execution, being painted on a concave surface, and I am also aware that it covers about eight times more surface than Mr. Lentze’s picture which cost $20,000. But in view of the exigencies of the times I do not consider that we would be justified in expending so large a sum as $50,000.

“Should you execute this work it will be the great work of your life: it will therefore be worth on your part some sacrifice to accomplish so great an achievement....”

From Constantino Brumidi to Tho. U. Walter, December 27, 1862: “...I have come to the conclusion to expedite a settlement as to the price of the painting to be executed on the canopy over the eye of the Dome of the United States Capitol by reducing my offer to $40,000, which is lower, considering the subject, the curved form of the surface on which it is to be painted and the square feet of painting it contains than any real fresco picture ever painted....”

From Tho. U. Walter to B. B. French, “Distributing Agent of United States Capitol,” December 29, 1862: “...I consider the price ($40,000) exceedingly low in view of the fact that it contains 4664 square feet, that it is all to be painted on a curved surface, and that Mr. Brumidi is the only real fresco painter in this country capable of executing the work. The design is probably the grandest and most imposing that has ever been executed in the world and Mr. Brumidi has proved by his real frescoes in the Capitol extension (all of which were painted by his own hand) that he is fully equal to the task. The grandeur of this picture, the great distance at which it will be seen, and the peculiarity of its light will render it intensely imposing.”

From B. B. French to Tho. U. Walter, January 5, 1863: “...as there is confessedly no artist in the United States, capable of executing a real fresco painting as it should be done, especially so important a work as the one in contemplation, except Mr. Brumidi, and, as we know from experience his excellence in that art, I do not see how we can do otherwise than employ him....”

From Tho. U. Walter to Constantino Brumidi, March 11, 1863. “...I have the honor to inform you that your design for painting the Canopy over the eye of the aforesaid new Dome is adopted. And, inasmuch as Congress has made the appropriation for the completion of that work you are hereby authorized to proceed at once with the aforesaid canopy painting....”

Two letters, one from the Department of the Interior to the Capitol Dispensing Agent and the other from the Architect of the Capitol to the Department of the Interior should be quoted at this time as they verify amounts paid the artist and the length of time used in the actual painting of the Dome canopy.

From J. P. Usher, Secretary of Interior, dated Nov. 6, 1863.

“...$10,000, one fourth the entire cost of the work (for painting the canopy over the eye of the new dome of the Capitol in real fresco), has already been paid to Mr. Brumidi. I am of the opinion that the progress which has been made does not justify any further payments at present. You will therefore suspend any advances to Mr. Brumidi until further orders.”

From Thomas U. Walter, Architect U. S. Capitol, dated December 3, 1864.

“As the canopy for the picture over the eye of the new dome is ready for Mr. Brumidi and as he is now about to commence to work, I deem it proper to say that he has not received any payment on account of his contract since November 6, 1863, and that in the interim he has been occupied in perfecting the full-size cartoons, which are now ready for the work. I, therefore, respectfully recommend that payments to him be resumed in accordance with his contract and that they be continued as the work progresses until he shall have received the aggregate sum of $30,000, after which no further payments to be made until the work is completed and approved.”

In the Annual Report dated November 1, 1865, of Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol (1865-1902), we find reference to the completion of the canopy:

“The picture over the eye of the Dome is all painted in, but the artist is unwilling to have the scaffolding removed until the plastering is thoroughly dry and the picture toned. As it will at times be viewed by gas light, he wishes to have the opportunity of trying it by this light before dismissing it from his hands.”

The following report by Edward Clark written in longhand to the Secretary of the Interior and dated November 1, 1866, is preserved in the National Archives:

“The fresco picture over the eye of the Dome has been exposed to view by taking away the scaffolding. It is not, however, finished as the artist intends to soften down the harshness at the joinings of the plastering. He was under the impression that these imperfections would disappear when the surface became dry. He holds himself in readiness to do the proper toning and blending whenever the scaffolding is in place for the painting of vault of the Rotunda.

“I would call attention to the necessity of ornamenting the ‘Belt’ between the second and third cornices of the Rotunda. The original intention was to enrich this member in basso-relievo, but it is deemed advisable to have it painted in fresco in imitation of basso-relievo. Mr. Brumidi has submitted a design for its embellishment in this manner consisting of a series of natural pictures arranged in a chronological order. It is hoped this subject may receive attention, and that his design may be adapted or modified or other designs invited for this decoration from artists of acknowledged merit.”

Brumidi was sixty years old at the completion of this Dome Canopy. He had made 4,664 square feet of fresco in eleven months’ time on the inner surface of the Capitol’s Dome. This Canopy is 65 feet in diameter, has a concavity of 21 feet and displays its heroic figures as life-size from the floor of the Rotunda, 180 feet below.

The artist called this painting on the Dome canopy “The Apotheosis of Washington.” The outstanding figure is that of our first President attended by Liberty and Victory. Circling the center of the canopy are thirteen female figures in draperies of pastel beauty, bearing a ribbon-like banner which displays our treasured motto, “E Pluribus Unum.” The colors increase in brilliance and depth toward the outer borders of the canopy, blending finally into the intense hues of the six heroic groups about the base.

In these groups we find Minerva, Goddess of Arts and Sciences, as the center of her allegorical group; Ceres, of Agriculture; Mercury, messenger of the Gods, symbolizing Commerce; Vulcan, the God of Mechanics; Neptune, God of the Marine, and Armed Liberty with shield and sword, symbolizing War.

S. D. Wyeth says, “The fresco of Brumidi (on the canopy of the Dome) arrests the gaze as though the sky had opened and it were permitted to look into the beyond.” Wyeth, later, in referring to the same Dome canopy described it in this way: “Clouds of gold, azure and rose seem hanging there spanned by a rainbow, and, floating among them, forms of exquisite beauty. Grand mythological figures, symbolizing Force and Progress, appear there too, titanic, majestic--almost appalling with their great significance.”

A letter from Architect Clark to Artist Brumidi, dated September 18, 1865, should be quoted in order to appreciate Brumidi’s reply one day later:

“I learned in an interview with the Honorable Secretary of the Interior, this morning, that he was very anxious to have the picture over the eye of the Dome finished if possible by the meeting of Congress.

“You informed me when I first saw the work in relation to your July bill, that it was your intention to get it done by that time, and I was surprised to hear from you on Saturday morning last, that this was not likely to be done. You stated that you were unwilling to have the scaffoldings taken away before you had the advantage of trying it by gas light. In this you are certainly right, and I have to inform you that arrangements can be made to give you light whenever you need it.

“Please reply as to when it is likely you will have the picture done.”

Brumidi’s reply in which he tells of the final touches to this huge fresco is still preserved. In this letter the old artist’s concern for the proper finishing and lighting of his masterpiece is uppermost in his thought. The letter follows:

Washington, Sept. 19, 1865

Mr. Clark, Architect of the Capitol Extension Dear Sir:

Your letter of yesterday was received and you will do a great favor
to me in referring to the Honorable Secretary of Interior, that
about my painting in the Canopy of the Dome, I am working at
present the last group, and for the next week I have finish to put
in color every figure upon the fresh mortar.

That remains to do for the completion of it will require only five
or six weeks, but must do it in the proper time, when the mortar
will be perfectly dry, and the colors do not have any more
changement.

This last work will cover the connections of the pieces of plaster,
put up in sections at every day, and giving more union to the
colors at the said junctions for to obtain the artistic effect.

It is the general rule in doing this kind of work to avoid the damp
atmosphere of the winter season, but I will do this last finish as
soon as the weather will permit, early in the spring, as always I
have done in every other painting in real fresco in the Capitol and
everywhere.

Also would be inadvisable to show that large painting without the
proper light, because the windows of the dome are in the rear part
of the painting and must be placed the reflectors already
calculated in the Capitol’s original plan.

I hope when the appropriation will be passed by the Congress the
said reflectors, and the gas apparatus will be completed, and I
will be ready for my part.

I am always at work but I ask only the bill of August last, and you
can assure the Honorable Secretary of the Interior that I never
will claim any other bill after this, till my work will be entirely
completed.

With respect I am Your Obedient Servant C. BRUMIDI

Apparently negotiations with Brumidi for painting the Dome fresco began with the letter from Tho. U. Walter, “architect of extension and new Dome,” dated August 18, 1862. Brumidi was authorized to proceed on March 11, 1863. On December 3, 1864, Tho. U. Walter wrote that the canopy for the picture over the eye of the Dome was ready for the artist and that Mr. Brumidi was “about to commence to work.” On November 1, 1865, Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol, reported that the picture over the eye of the Dome was all painted in but that Mr. Brumidi was unwilling to have the scaffolding removed until the plastering was thoroughly dry and the colors had no more “changement.”

On January 9, 1866, Edward Clark wrote the following letter to James Harlan, Secretary of the Interior:

“I have the honor to state that we are now making preparations to take down the scaffolding over the eye of the Dome to reveal Brumidi’s picture. It becomes necessary to have some canvas, or other strong material to place under the scaffolding to catch the dirt, etc., that would otherwise fall to the floor of the Rotunda which might cause inconvenience, perhaps accident.

“It is possible that some old sails might be borrowed from the Navy Yard for that purpose, and I therefore respectfully ask that you make a request to the Hon. Secretary of the Navy for the loan of such as may be necessary for this purpose which will be returned as soon as this work is done.”

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ROOMS

On the walls of the Senate Military Committee Room--now one of the Committee Rooms on Senate Appropriations--are to be found five large frescoes, lunettes in shape, depicting scenes from American history. These pictures are filled with action and American atmosphere and could have been painted only by a lover of American liberty. The artist gave these titles to his five American lunettes: “Boston Massacre,” “Battle of Lexington,” “Death of General Wooster,” “Storming of Stony Point,” and “Washington at Valley Forge.”

The frescoed ceiling in this Senate Committee Room is conventional in design with victors’ wreaths, shields and other emblems of war predominating. Here we have such outstanding color combinations as to lead many Brumidi enthusiasts to vote this ceiling the Capitol’s best. In this room also are six outstanding panels, rich in color and different in design, displaying American arms of different periods. Never were guns, pistols, sabers, tomahawks, and flintlock rifles displayed with so much beauty and elegance--and the sword across the shield in the center is said to be a copy of one owned by Washington. (Keim attributes these panels to another Capitol artist.)

The north room used by the Senate Committee on Appropriations was decorated for the old Senate Committee on Naval Affairs. The design is that of a Pompeian fresco with marine gods and goddesses scattered about the ceiling and with ancient porticoes and antique vessels adorning the walls. Nine panels in oil with symbolic womanly figures in flowing robes against dark blue backgrounds to represent various attributes of the Navy finish the wall decorations.

On February 24, 1880, Senator Voorhees of Indiana referred to the Brumidi decorations of these two rooms in these words:

“Almost every committee-room announces to the eye by historical or allegorical paintings in fresco the duties to which it is dedicated. Who ever passed through the room of the Committee on Military Affairs without feeling that the very genius of heroism had left there its immortal inspirations? Who would mistake in after ages the use to which the room for the Committee on Naval Affairs had been devoted? The painter has told the whole story in a silent but in an undying language.”

An 1858 newspaper tells that the following statement was posted that year in the Senate Committee Room on Naval Affairs for the “edification of visitors”:

“_Senate Committee on Naval Affairs_--The decorative paintings of this room are a specimen of the manner in which the ancient Greeks and Romans ornamented their splendid buildings, some of which are still extant in the precious monuments of Pompeii and the baths of Titus. America with the sea divinities are painted on the ceiling in real fresco. These mythological figures are delineated agreeably to the poetical descriptions we have received of them, and they are Neptune, the god of the seas, Amphitrite, his wife, Aeolus keeping the winds chained to the rocks, Venus the daughter of the Sea, Oceanus with crampfish claws on his head, Thetis, his wife, and Nereus, the father of the Nereids, drawn by Glacus, and the Tritons by marine horses or swans, or else mounted as sea-monsters.”

SENATE RECEPTION ROOM

Brumidi decorated also the reception room of the Senate where constituents may still call upon their Senators--and admire the ceiling frescoes of the old artist. This room has a vaulted ceiling with two arches. The circular arch has a frescoed center of children and clouds with allegorical groupings about the center designed to represent Prudence, Justice, Temperance and Strength portrayed as beautiful madonnas with pink cheeked children. Four allegorical scenes in the groined arch hold forth Liberty, Plenty, War, and Peace, in the purity of other madonna-like groupings.

The walls of the Senate Reception Room have many empty and unfinished panels but the “elaborate ornaments and gilded mouldings around them” lend their own beauty to this room. The outstanding Brumidi work in the Senate Reception Room is a large centerpiece in oil on the south wall showing George Washington in consultation with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. At either side, according to Brumidi, are “decorative figures in light and shade (chiaroscuro).” The old voucher of 1873, signed by Brumidi, and indicating the sum paid for this mural in the Senate Reception Room, follows:

“For approximate estimate for painting portraits of Washington,
Jefferson and Hamilton on the walls of the Senate Reception
Room--$500.00.”

Two of the Brumidi letters written in 1871 not only date the frescoes in the Senate Reception Room and those in the Military Committee Room of the Senate already described, but also name a lump sum paid the artist for at least a part of this work. These two letters written to the Architect of the Capitol Building and dated 1871 follow:

“In reply to your request about the completion of the decorative
figures in light and shade (chiaroscuro) at the three panels in the
reception room of the Senate according to that already painted in
the last year.

“Also for three more panels in the walls of the Senate Military
Committee room in real fresco with three battles of the American
Revolution, and many other small paintings above a door and at the
ceiling, for the completion of the ibid room, for the sum of
$5,300.”

C. BRUMIDI

New York City

“I read in the Herald the adjournment of the Congress and an extra
session of the Senate will meet again for the tenth of May.

“I think that in this present temporary recess, will be the time to
give orders to the plasterer to finish the panels in the Reception
Room, as the oil work will require the wall to be perfectly dry,
and of course three or four weeks. Every plasterer can do it smooth
like the others already painted.

“I am in attendance of your answer about it, and some information
of Senator Wilson’s decision on the subject, for the fresco of this
room, to prepare some sketch and cartoons.

“I am at work in St. Stephen’s Church and I wish to proceed with it
till you will call me for work in the Senate or if you think
necessary an excursion to fix this preparatory work or directions
to the plasterer.”