THE MODERN CEMETERY. 
THE MODERN CEMETERY. 
AN ILLUSTRAIfD MONTHLK JOURNAL DEVOTEO TO THE INTEREST OF CEMETERIES 
Jf. t-" xj. 1 i ® Va e: IT , 
334 Deartaopn Street, CHICAGO. 
Subscription |i.oo a Year in Advance. Foreign Subscription $1.25. 
Special Rates cn Six or More Copies. 
VoL. III. CHICAGO, NOV. 1893. No. 9. 
CONTENTS. 
SHOULD ALL LOTS FRONT ON PATHS OR AVENUFS 97 
HARDY SHRUBS AND THEIR PROTECTION AGAINST 
DROUGHT 98 
TREES AS MEMORIALS rg 
’'FALL EFFECTS AT GRACELAND 100 
A CEMETERY OF THE HUNS-THE APPROACHING MIL- 
LENIUM ,0, 
’'RIVERSIDE CEMETERY, ROCHESTER, N. Y 102-10.I 
CEME TERY NOTES ,o4 
'THE YOUNGLOVE MONUMENT, CLEVELAND, O io 5 
THE SUPERINTENDENT 106 
VACATION REMINISCENCES 107 
THE QUESTION BOX ,08 
NOTICE TO CEMETERY OFFICIALS 108 
PUBLISHERS DEPARTMENT 108 
’'Illustrated. 
Should all Lots Front on Paths or Avenues? 
“Is it essential with the lawn plan that every 
lot should border on a drive, path or alley ? If so, 
what width?”- To this question, after a free discus- 
sion the members of the Association of American 
Cemetery Superintendents in their recent conven- 
tion at Minneapolis, replied by voting it to be “es- 
sential that all lots should front on an avenue or 
path.” The question really at issue was whether 
every lot should be separated on all sides from the 
adjoining lot by a path or alley. The resolution 
which followed the discussion, as given above, 
deems it necessary that all lots should have an av- 
enue or path frontage, but does not imply that it is 
desirable that a lot should be entirely surrounded 
by a path. A subsequent resolution was adopted 
to the effect that spaces between lots were not es- 
sential. 
The question was presented by Mr. Cline, of 
Dayton, Ohio, who at the outset of the discussion, 
stated that he had propounded the question for the 
practical purpose of finding out what members who 
had had more experience than he, would do in lay- 
ing out his new territory, and in relaying old terri- 
tory that was not originally provided with alleys. 
Would it be essential ti have the lots front on alleys 
or outlets of some kind? 
Mr. McCarthy, of Providence, R. I., speaking 
for his own cemetery, said that they formerly plat- 
ted their ground with a two-foot space around ev- 
ery lot, but as these spaces became depressed and 
were a receptacle for all kinds of rubbish they soon 
became a nuisance. They were then filled up and 
sodded, but in the newer parts of the cemetery no 
paths or spaces were left between lots. One lot 
abuts against an adjoining lot, and the boundaries 
are marked with granite posts, one post answering 
for two lots . To furnish access to all the lots they 
front either on an avenue or a path. The path is 
continuous and intersected occasionally, but it fur- 
nishes a frontage to all the lots that do not fronton 
a drive. If a small piece of ground anywhere is 
without frontage, it can be reserved for planting 
with trees or shrubs. 
The argument in favor of walks all around lots 
was supported by Mr. Stephens, of Columbus, O. 
He thought this the only plan whe'reby the lawn 
system could be carried out successfully. He sug- 
gested a two-foot grass walk around three sides of 
every lot. Gravelled paths are out of the question, 
because they are not in harmony with the lawn 
plan and people will not keep on the walks, no mat- 
ter how stiffly defined. The best method is to have 
all the walks needed but not to define them sharp- 
ly by shrubbery or any other means. Each tier of 
lots would border on an avenue or walk, so that 
monuments could be got in, but the two-foot space 
all around each lot would appear as part of the 
lawn. The lots would simply be made two feet 
wider and longer, only that the space reserved for 
a path on three sides could never be used for graves 
or monuments. The cemetery thus gains more 
lawn, and the lot-owner pays for it, just as he 
would pay for walks or any other improvement un- 
der the old system. 
President Salway said that in his cemetery the 
original plan was to provide walks of from tv/o to 
four feet around nearly all the lots, but experience 
had made the directors more economical, and now 
they allow to each lot an alley on one side only. 
The future ought to be provided for as well as the 
present, but with the landscape plan in view at, all 
times, liberal spaces should be reserved for ap- 
proach to the interior lots from one side. There 
must be some definite way of getting to the interior 
lots, because, though the erection of monuments 
does not always follow soon after the purchase of 
