179 
PARK AND CEMETERY. 
A SURVEY OF AMERICAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 
Read by Prof. F. A. Waugh, Amherst, Mass., 
before the Massachusetts Horticultural Society 
Some other ideas have recently 
begun to overlie those of Downing, 
but his work still exercises a tremen- 
dous influence. This influence, espe- 
cially in the recent past, has been so 
plain and so easily traced that we 
may fairly allow it to be the chief 
support of Downing’s reputation as a 
landscape artist. From such sources 
we may draw certain definite conclu- 
sions as to Downing’s work; 
1. He aimed at an informal or 
“natural” style. His main walks and 
drives were usually curved and his 
trees were not placed in straight rows 
except where the circumstances plain- 
ly demanded it. This informality, 
however, was decidedly restrained, 
we might even say constrained and 
stiff. It fell far short of the free and 
easy natural style of the present day. 
2. Trees were used chiefly as in- 
dividuals. Each one was given room 
for its complete development. There 
were few groups and no masses. It 
will be remember that this principle 
has been most strenuously supported 
by all the disciples of Downing, 
though it is now being generally aban- 
doned. 
3. Lawns are small and scrappy, 
the space being taken up very largely 
with trees and flower beds. Each de- 
sign therefore presents a somewhat 
jumbled appearance. 
4. Trees of many kinds were used 
in nearly every place, and, as these 
were all treated as specimens, the 
whole assumed the air of an arbor- 
etum. This arboretum scheme is 
highly characteristic of the disciples 
of Downing. These principles, 2, 3, 
and 4, in the hands of men of limited 
taste, led directly to what Professor 
Bailey has aptly characteristized as 
the “nursery style” of landscape gar- 
dening. 
5. Considerable numbers of fruit 
trees were used on the grounds, be- 
ing placed in such a manner as to 
become a part of the decorative scheme. 
We have not time to-day to review 
the remarkable changes in industrial, 
social, and artistic matters following 
the Civil War; but we can easily re- 
member their vastness and can real- 
ize their importance as bearing on 
landscape gardening. 
Unquestionably the leading land- 
scape designer of the period was 
Frederick Law Olmsted, to whose 
(Concluded) 
work we may now give our attention. 
Olmsted was engaged on many works, 
of which the following are a few : 
Central Park, New York. 
Prospect Park, Brooklyn. 
University of California, Berkeley. 
Washington Park, Brooklyn. 
South Parks, Chicago. 
Morningside Park, New York. 
Muddy River Parkway, Boston. 
Mount Royal Park, Montreal. 
Capitol Grounds, Washington. 
Commonwealth Avenue, Boston. 
Belle Isle Park, Detroit. 
Capitol Grounds, Albany. 
Franklin Park, Boston. 
Charles River Bank, Boston. 
Delaware Park of Buffalo. ■ 
Wood Island Park, Boston. 
Marine Park, Boston. 
Lynn Woods, Lynn. 
World’s Fair, Chicago. 
Of these perhaps the best known 
are the World’s Fair at Chicago (es- 
pecially the Wooded Island and La- 
goon), Mount Royal Park, Montreal, 
Biltmore, N. C. and the railway 
station grounds of the Boston & Al- 
bany railroad. If we add to this list 
Franklin Park, Boston, and the Mud- 
dy Brook Parkvay we have a reas- 
onably representative selection of his 
best and most characteristic work. 
However, in any consideration of 
Olmsted’s work careful attention 
should be given to his written re- 
ports. Amongst these should be 
specially mentioned his report on 
Franklin Park and his “Considera- 
tions of the Justifying Value of a 
Public Park.” With these various 
works in hand we may be justifled 
in a few generalizations regarding his 
methods and their results. 
1. He revitalized the natural style. 
Brown, Repton, Downing, and all 
their followers had professed the nat- 
ural style, but the works of Olm- 
sted were so much more truly like 
the best of Nature’s work that the 
whole doctrine of naturalness in land- 
scape art received a new meaning 
at his hands. Today, at least in 
America, the natural style and the 
Olmstedian style are synonymous., 
while the works of all his predeces- 
sors would be rated artificial. 
2. Olmsted introduced a new ap- 
preciation of natural scenery. Other 
men had been gardeners or improv- 
ers on Nature. He first taught us to 
admire Nature in her own dress. 
Downing was of course a lover of 
natural landscape, but this element of 
his character was not brought strong- 
ly forward in his landscape gardening. 
3. Adaptation to site and surround- 
ings was the keynote of Olmsted’s 
work, and this also amounted to a 
new discovery in landscape art. In 
this direction Olmsted had a peculiar 
gift which is everywhere recognized 
as one of his distinguishing character- 
istics. It will be readily seen that this 
faculty was closely associated with his 
appreciation of natural scenery. 
4. He discovered the native flora. 
Though artistically less important 
than other contributions of Olmsted, 
this was the most revolutionary of his 
innovations. Downing was a collector 
of plants, with a fondness for what 
was rare and exotic. Gardeners every- 
where were planting Japanese magno- 
lias, purple beeches, and Camperdown 
elms. Olmsted turned boldly, and not 
without violent opposition., to the 
commonest roadside shrubs. He 
adopted the outcast weeds. Peter 
after his vision could not have been 
more completely converted to what 
had previously been thought unclean. 
Up to this time, strange as it may 
seem, American plants had been more 
used in Europe than here. With the 
richest indigenous flora of any coun- 
try in the world, we were still plant- 
ing the species and varieties of Euro- 
pean nurseries. We may remark fur- 
ther that this use of the native flora 
was the one Olmstedian principle 
most quickly acclaimed and adopted 
by others. It has had a tremendous 
vogue in this country. It is the point 
in which Olmsted has been most fully, 
successfully (and sometimes slavishly) 
imitated. 
5. The native plants were used in 
large quantities. Common dogwood 
and viburnums were put in by car- 
loads. For the first time in the his- 
tory of landscape art, plants were ade- 
qua.tely massed. This principle was 
not carried to extreme, however; and 
in fact it has not yet received the de- 
velopment which it merits. While it 
received less popular approval than 
item 4 above, its intrinsic importance 
from the standpoint of good art is 
much greater. 
6. Indigenous plants were given 
their natural environment. Much at- 
