A LEGISLATIVE TRAVESTY 269 
new trouble,” that “the board has been informed that it can- 
not pass,” and again “positively declines, as it has repeat- 
edly done before, to be drawn into a partisan quarrel be- 
tween two factions of citizens, each of whom it represents, 
and for the interests of all of whom it is earnestly working.” 
As the two factions of citizens at “issue” on this par- 
ticular question were, in reality, the general public, and 
supposedly the Park Commission on the one side, and the 
avaricious corporation octopus, with its widely extended 
tentacles on the other; and as the two interests were in 
this instance in direct and unavoidable opposition to each 
other, this statement tended to make the matter of the Park 
Board’s previous uncertain attitude still more uncertain; 
and to enlarge, rather than curtail, the confusion that this 
“new straddle” occasioned. 
The effect of the statement upon the Board of Freehold- 
ers was also, to all appearances, unfavorable. When the 
communication was read at the meeting of that board on 
April 14, 1904, Freeholder W. Ougheltree, referring to the 
condition of Park avenue, since its transfer, expressed his 
“surprise at the ‘cheek’ of the Park Commission in suggest- 
ing such a thing” as the transfer of another avenue. The 
Park Board’s communication was then “placed on file.” 
The situation was also made interesting about this time 
by an informal conference between one of the former Park 
Commissioners and the Park Board over the avenue ques- 
tion. Four of the commissioners were present. They were 
appealed to to state definitely and conclusively: First, if 
» they still believed that Central avenue should be secured as 
a parkway; and, second, did they “consider it a necessity” 
in properly carrying out their plans? Each of the four 
commissioners gave an affirmative response to each of these 
questions. On March 22 this ex-commissioner wrote the 
commission at length on the subject, concluding the letter 
as follows: 
PLAIN STATEMENT WANTED. 
“To offset the adverse influence now applied at Trenton, 
in the councils of Orange and East Orange, and in the 
