THE PARKS OF SYDNEY. / 



the Government ; these open spaces are used for the move- 

 ments of troops or other public demonstrations or for 

 various State functions. If the executive of a State had 

 not control of some open spaces in its capital, it would at 

 times be inconvenienced and even embarrassed. Such open 

 spaces, although actually within a city boundary, belong 

 as a matter of fact, to the whole of the State, and not to 

 any city in particular. For that reason, as far as Sydney 

 is concerned, there will be State parks and Municipal 

 parks, at all events until such time as New South Wales 

 abrogates its rights as a State. 



In Europe there are, in addition, parks which are the 

 property of wealthy people, and to which citizens are 

 admitted under very few restrictions. We have no such 

 parks here, the unoccupied Crown Lands taking their place. 

 In Europe, land being almost entirely owned by private 

 persons, citizens would in many extensive areas be debarred 

 from the health-giving enjoyment of a park were it not for 

 the consideration shown by the landed gentry. 



The question of park government is of considerable 

 importance. I am acquainted with many gentlemen who 

 are model trustees, but my view is that Park Trusts are 

 now an anachronism in large cities. I think that parks 

 should be administered by State or Municipal officers or 

 both, as the case may be. They are replaceable for incom- 

 petence or malfeasance, and public bodies should interfere 

 with park superintendents as little as possible, if they 

 desire efficient service, the introduction of improvements 

 and the fixation of responsibility. Trustees have performed 

 efficient service in the past, and in many places are indis- 

 pensable still, but, I reiterate my opinion, that a park 

 superintendent should be a paid and responsible officer, con- 

 trolled by enlightened superior authority. 



c. Statistical information: — 



