48 FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM 
uses, while not lost sight of, was not fully anticipated, as 
it did not seem probable that the insatiable desire for the 
spoils of public franchise exploitation had yet reached the 
point of utter disregard of public rights and a determina- 
tion to push through the public property appropriation 
scheme at all hazards that afterward followed. 
Another question which the first commission found diffi- 
cult to determine was as to the amount of the appropriation 
that should go into the report and be provided for in the 
new law. Next to the matter of method in providing for 
the selection of the next commission, and of determining 
how the necessary funds for the undertaking should be ob- 
tained, this was considered of paramount importance. At 
first the amount suggested in our deliberations was $1,000,- 
000. This was soon increased by half a million. Later 
$2,000,000 it was deemed should be the limit. 
Finally, when the different factors in the situation had 
been carefully gone over—the needs for a comprehensive 
park and parkway system adapted to, and creditable to, the 
whole county; the probable increased cost of future land 
acquirement after the parks were once established ; the large 
expense involved in the reclamation and parklike embellish- 
ment of the “swamp” lands, such as the lower portions of 
the Branch Brook tract and the triangle tract in Orange; 
the demands that would naturally follow for enlarged parks 
and the inevitably unforeseen contingencies—it was finally 
determined that the amount should be $2,500,000. 
This was with the distinct understanding, as stated in the 
report soon afterward issued in February, 1895, that “the 
amount of money which the commission feels is needed for 
this undertaking, $2,500,000, may seem large for practi- 
cally a single investment in that direction, but it must be 
appreciated that it is for a system of parks in its entirety.” 
This was an equivocal, definite statement, and all of the 
members of the commission thus considered it. I believed 
then, as I have believed since, that it was in the nature of 
a trust obligation between the commission, the people, and 
the Legislature, and that this clearly defined obligation 
