Let us then make the crucial test of the utility of Chicago's park system f^"* 1 test of 

 as compared with the utility of systems in other localities. Let us figure the 

 number of inhabitants to each acre of park in several American cities. 



For this comparison I wrote to the proper officials in nineteen cities fn d cago at the 

 known to have large park area. When the figures were received and tabu- 

 lated Chicago was found at the bottom of the list — nineteenth — and 

 eighth below the general average for all. 



Here is the table with population on the basis of the Federal estimate 

 for 1903: 



City. Inhabitants to each Acre of Park. 



-.«--, r. Inhabitants to 



i Menden, Conn 25 . 1 park acre. 



2 Los Angeles, Cal 31.6 



3 Lynn, Mass 34.6 



4 Boston, Mass 46 . 2 



5 Newark, N. J., Oranse and E. Orange 88.8 



6 St. Paul, Minn 98 . 9 



7 Washington, D. C 100.7 



8 San Francisco, Cal 104.4 



9 Minneapolis, Minn 131 . 5 



10 Omaha, Neb 153-8 



11 Hartford, Conn 160.3 



12 St. Louis, Mo 280. 5 



13 Providence, R. 1 324. 1 



14 Detroit, Mich 323.6 



15 Philadelphia, Pa 390. 1 



16 Baltimore, Md 425.4 



17 New York 460. 3 



18 New Orleans, La 508.6 



19 Chicago 590 • 4 



Average of all 206 . 6 



Going a little deeper into this matter it was found that in a comparison Still worse for 

 with cities in the United States, of a population of 100,000 and upward, 

 Chicago stood in the limelight as No. 32 ! 



This certainly is a bad showing for the second city in population, the Certainly a bad 



J ° J r r ' showing. 



second city in miles of boulevards, the seventh city in park acreage, and, 

 as some believe, the first city in destined greatness. Yet I believe most 

 Chicago people would be surprised to learn that we do not possess the most 

 effective park system in the United States. 



Why is Chicago far Behind? 



Having found by comparison that Chicago needs a much amplified park Chicago needs 



...... . . shown. 



system, let us inquire why it is that comparatively little cities like Meriden, 

 Connecticut, Lynn, Massachusetts, and Los Angeles, California, have more 

 recreation area for each inhabitant than Chicago affords its population. 



This inquiry, srentlemen, brings us face to face with the reason why we others have out- 



J lying preserves. 



are here to-day. Many of these cities have outlying park preserves. They 

 have realized the need of country and forest recreation area and have pro- 

 vided it before the stress of an unsatisfied population was upon them. 



Cities with Outlying Parks. 



Of the nineteen American cities, listed in the foregoing table, which cities with outer 

 exceed Chicago in the matter of park area, the following already have out- r 

 lying systems of the acreage indicated : 



