56 
PARK AND CEMETERY 
and for the reasons indicated should be realized 
by all. 
T HEI Boston Herald takes exception to the 
statement in our editorial in the March issue, 
that “apart from the burial of the dead the re- 
quirements for the cemetery are largely those of the 
park, and that more often than otherwise the rural 
cemetery is practically the village park.” It then 
says: To make a park of a cemetery should be as 
sternly discouraged as the other tendency toward 
ostentatious, and consequently, vulgar display in 
the way of mortuary monuments that, as a rule, 
disfigure our modern burial places. There is some- 
thing unspeakably repugnant in the idea of convert- 
ing a ground for burial, which should be character- 
ized by an air of peace and serene beauty, either 
into a place of public recreation, or for the assem- 
blage of costly examples of the stone-cutters art set 
amid gaudy flower beds.” These views have been 
expressed in other words time and again in these 
columns, and we therefore cordially endorse them. 
But the fact remains that in many villages the Cem- 
etery is the only public place of a park like character 
with natural adornment, and it is sought for quiet 
reflection rather than the character of recreation 
the reviewer evidently had in mind. 
Park Building. 
Mr. George R. Cook, Superintendent of Parks, 
Cambridge, Mass., in an article under the above 
head in The Prospeet Union Revieiv, gives some 
interesting matter on this subject. In referring to 
the contract executed between the President and 
Fellows of Harvard College and the city of Boston, 
whereby it is provided that the Arnold Arboretum 
shall be set apart and maintained as a public park 
for a thousand years, he says: Think of a spot of 
land upon which it is solemnly agreed that nothing 
but beautiful things shall flourish for a millenium! 
The imagination can hardly conceive so long a con- 
tract. Think of the generations which will tread 
the paths and enjoy the shade of those oak trees! 
Everything which can change will change before the 
end of the thousand years. Yet it is not folly to 
plan that this park shall endure, for that which is 
really beautiful now will be beautiful then; and men 
then will be as anxious, yes more anxious to pre- 
serve that which ministers to a more beautiful pub- 
lic life than they are now. 
Continuing, he says: “Nothing endures like 
earth work, we are told. The history of the older 
portions of the earth proves this. When man moulds 
a spot upon the earth into picturesque and beauti- 
ful forms; when he builds solid roads, so skilfully 
planned that nature shall adopt them for her own; 
when he plants trees upon the hillside and covers 
the meadows with turf, he has done the most per- 
manent work which it is possible to do with mater- 
ial things. 
“Park building is, therefore, different from al- 
most any other public enterprise. A park cannot wear 
out. If wisely planned at the outset, it cannot deter- 
iorate in value.' Instead, its value constantly increas- 
es. The more ancient a park, the more its value. De- 
cay adds to its wealth. It is least valuable when 
new. Not so with many other things for which pub- 
lic money is spent. Public buildings, bridges, sew- 
ers are worth most when new, and then at once be- 
gin to deteriorate and finally become entirely use- 
less. But a park never ceases to increase in value 
as long as there are people to enjoy its benefits. 
“This element of permanency in parks means, 
therefore, that in building parks we are building 
final things for our city. Very little of our municip- 
al work is anything more than transient. We out- 
grow our public buildings. Streets, which are the 
principal thoroughfares for one generation, become 
the by-paths of the next generation, as fashion 
changes or trade advances. Sewer systems become 
antiquated and useless. * * * But a wisely-locat- 
ed park is a finality. It is the highest and best use 
to which land within city limits can be devoted, and 
future generations can be trusted to preserve it from 
any lower uses. 
“The cultivation of the beautiful has ever been 
found to be a good municipal investment. History 
cannot show that any city ever made a mistake in 
cultivating the beautiful in art or nature. Painting, 
sculpture and the Groves of the Academy, attracted 
to ancient Athens all that was best in Greece. Her 
schools were crowded, her marts of trade enriched, 
because she arrayed herself like a queen in her 
beauty. So it was with Florence and the free me- 
diaeval cities; and so it is today preeminently with 
Paris whose drives and parks and splendors of art 
have attracted the wealth of the four quarters of the 
globe to herself. What has not the investment in 
the Sistine Madonna been worth to Dresden? What 
but its marvellous beauty, was the great attraction 
at the World’s P'air that brought millions of pil- 
grims to Chicago? 
“Of course the most beautiful cities in the 
world did not become so through any commercial 
instinct. They cultivated beauty for its own sake. 
Nevertheless, it is true that wealth and refinement 
and the good things of this life have flowed into 
those cities. 
“It is an old saying that has given inspiration 
to many that ‘We should do our utmost to encour- 
age the beautiful, for the useful encourages itself,’ 
but it would be more to the point if in our public 
