186 FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM 
or at least one hand—in November, 1896, differences at 
once arose as to the attitude of the commission, and what 
position should be indicated to the East Orange authori- 
ties and the public. 
Commissioners Shepard and Murphy were disposed to 
deal very lightly with the subject, and to appear non-com- 
mittal as to any very clearly defined position on the real 
issue, which all recognized was whether we should stand 
independently and firmly for the parkways, or climb the 
neutral fence, trusting the settlement to the localities where 
the contest with the traction interests was actively in pro- 
gress. Commissioner Meeker and myself favored a dif- 
ferent policy. It was my conviction and contention that 
we should clearly and explicitly define our position, as a 
duty both to our charter and the people of the whole county, 
which duty I believed transcended any and all local inter- 
ests. Commissioner Peck was, so far as we could discover, 
already on neutral ground. On November 12, before the 
adoption of the resolution above quoted, requesting the 
avenues’ transfer, I proposed a substitute preamble and 
resolution on the lines of my conviction just mentioned. 
I believed a more explicit statement from the commission 
to the freeholders and governing boards, alike due them 
and desirable. May 15 previous (1896), in writing Com- 
missioner Murphy regarding the general policy of the park- 
ways, and regarding Elizabeth avenue, where the same 
parkway-trolley question was involved, I said: “The mat- 
ter of parkway approaches to our larger county parks is 
so vitally important I believe we should now take the 
initiative and clearly define our position to the local gov- 
erning bodies and to the public. Having accepted the 
trust to locate, acquire, and develop the parks, it appears 
just as incumbent that we take the leadership in defining 
the approaches. Without such approaches and connective 
parkways from the centers of population, the county park 
system will be most defective and always open to criticism.” 
After referring to the plans of the first commission, that 
“new parkway construction in the built-up portions of the 
