E 
PARK AND 
AND LANDSCAP 
CEMETERY 
GARDENING 
VOL. XXIII JUNE, 1913 No. 4 
EDITORIAL 
Reactionary Legislation in Pennsylvania 
Pennsylvania cities have always been known as leaders in the 
work of advanced park and cemetery improvement, so that it is 
rather surprising that two measures of such reactionary character 
now before the legislature of that state should be given any con- 
sideration at all in such an enlightened commonwealth. The 
Campbell bill for the repeal of sections of the Act of 1907 allow- 
ing cities to condemn and resell property within two hundred feet 
of parks is before a committee in the Legislature. The bill 
forbidding cemeteries to exclude outside gardeners from work- 
ing on the grounds, fortunately defeated, was another example 
of the present tendency with certain classes of legislators to 
allow the individual undue freedom in preying upon the public 
at large. “I do not want Philadelphia to become beautiful at 
the expense of an individual,’’ says the man who introduced 
the Park Bill referred to above. He is, however, perfectly will- 
ing that the individual should for his own private gain sacrifice 
the interests of the entire people and injure the growth of his 
city. This bill is designed to do great injury not only to Phila- 
delphia, but to every city in Pennsylvania that has a program for 
park improvements. Philadelphia has spent more than four mil- 
lion dollars on its parkway plan on the strength of the power 
conferred in the Act of 1907. Eliminating the provision for re- 
selling land that is condemned would make this act largely use- 
less and nullify a large share of the work that Philadelphia has 
planned. There is altogether too much legislation brewing, allow- 
ing the individual to do as he pleases with public property. 
Making the Best Use of the Parks 
The recent bulletin on Park Utilization issued by the American 
Association of Park Superintendents shows definitely and forcibly 
the great increase in the useful activities, that are now being con- 
ducted by parks. That these services of the parks, which would 
not have been thought of ten years ago, are meeting a real 
demand is evidenced by the fact that wherever they are installed 
they are in immediate use far beyond the capacity of the facili- 
ties at hand. In discussing the comparative use of the large 
landscape reservations and the play or service parks, a Boston 
paper makes the following interesting comment : 
The Metropolitan Park Commission has a very definite idea of 
its purpose in the economy of things. When asked what the 
great tracts of land, which the state has set apart to form its 
park system, are for, the representatives of the commission 
reply that these tracts are to be kept as nearly as possible 
in their natural state and are to be open for trampers and 
picnic parties to use as they see fit, for purposes which are 
legitimate for trampers and picknickers. The conception which 
the commission has of its duty to the people does not include 
opportunities to play the national game, with certain excep- 
tion, which will be mentioned later, nor does it include the 
offer of opportunities to play the royal and ancient game of 
golf. There can be no doubt that when the reservations were 
first taken by the people of the state, the conception which 
prevailed was that which the commission holds today. It is a 
question, however, whether this is all the people want of the 
parks. Certain parts of the park system are used to capacity, 
if not beyond capacity. The beaches are crowded as soon as 
the weather is warm enough for the bathers. The Charles 
liver basin is becoming a center for water sports. There are a 
number of boat clubs along its banks, and the canoeing on the 
upper Charles is increasing. The persons who use the Charles 
in this way do not for the most part live within walking dis- 
tance of the river or of the basin. They find they can afford 
to take long journeys for the pleasure to be had at the end of 
them. Would not the same thing be true if the policy of the 
commission were less “constitutional” and more human? To 
be sure, any such changes would require larger appropriations 
from the legislature, but the great barrier to such appropria- 
tions is not the attitude of the legislature, but the attitude of 
the park commission. 
The whole question is one of policy, in the large sense. There 
can be little, doubt that Boston needs light and air, and that 
the children of Boston and of closely built sections about it 
need more chance to play. It is true that such organizations 
as the Municipal Athletic Association have given an impetus, 
which, is sending many persons on long tramps, but is this to 
be the chief purpose of the city parks? Should not there t 
more of an effort made to educate the people in the opportuni- 
ties which the reservation might offer? And how is it pos- 
sible that such an attempt can be useful until the park commis- 
sion becomes sensible that the great tracts of land which be- 
long to the state are not being used to anything like their 
capacity, even though they are being more used each year? 
Cemeteries in Cities 
The history of the long drawn out fight that has been made- to 
abandon cemeteries within the city limits of San Francisco points 
a very instructive moral as to the probable future of many other 
cemeteries that have been located in closely populated districts 
in the larger cities. The pressure of the growth of population a 
number of years ago forced the abandoning of interments in all 
the cemeteries within the city limits of San Francisco. There 
are now several bills before the California legislature providing 
for the removal of bodies from the cemeteries within the city 
limits that have not been making interments. These bills do not 
provide for the removal of the cemeteries, but merely are en- 
abling acts to provide a way for the removal of bodies under 
the direction of the governing powers of the city. There is a 
strong fight being made against them and the first of the bills 
was recently passed in the senate, but defeated in the lower house 
of the legislature. It is argued by some that the cemeteries 
ought to be left undisturbed for their sentimental influence over 
people who may visit them and walk among the tombs of the 
early settlers of the city. A number of real estate men also 
spoke in favor of the cemeteries, declaring that the land was 
not desired for factories or residence purposes or for public 
buildings or parks and, therefore, it should be let alone. This, 
of course, is merely a preliminary skirmish for the removal of 
the bodies. There is no doubt that at some time in the future the 
growth of population will be so strong around these grounds that 
they will necessarily have to be abandoned as cemeteries and 
probably have to be converted into parks or building sites. 
