PARK AND CEMETERY 
11 
stitute of Architects convened in Washington and dis- 
cussed the improvement of the city and appointed a 
committee on legislation. Consultations between this 
committee and the Senate Committee on the District 
of Columbia were held by order of the Senate for the 
preparation and submission of a general plan for the 
development of the entire Park System of the District. 
The proposal of the Institute of Architects that Mr. 
Daniel H. Burnham, of Chicago, and Mr. Frederick 
Law Olmsted, Jr., of Brookline, be employed as ex- 
perts, was approved. Later, these gentlemen invited 
Mr. Charles F. McKim and Mr. Augustus St. Gaudens, 
of New York City, to act with them in the preparation 
of plans. All of these gentlemen are of the highest 
rank in their respective professions. Acting in an 
admirable spirit of devotion to public duty, sacrificing 
a large and lucrative private practice and applying their 
superior abilities with untiring zeal to the study of 
the entire intricate problem for more than a year with- 
out compensation, they recorded their findings and 
recommendations in the form of a voluminous report 
with accompanying plans, illustrations and appendices 
to the Senate of the fifty-seventh Congress. 
This report was, without exception, cordially en- 
dorsed by all authorities. With the approval of the 
Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the 
Treasury, the Supervising Architect consulted the 
Commission at every stage in the selection of an archi- 
tect for and the location of the new building for the 
Department of Agriculture. The War Department, 
during Mr. Root’s tenure of office, defined its position 
by stating that the plans “have the hearty approval and 
sympathy of the War Department, and will, if they 
shall happily be adopted, have that Department’s cor- 
dial co-operation.” 
The Attorney-General, in his annual report for 1901, 
states : “ due regard should be had to the gen- 
eral plan for the adornment of Washington, which is 
now under consideration by a competent Commission. 
Washington has become a city not only of cosmopolitan 
dignity but of exceptional beauty, and no building 
should be so constructed or located as to mar the sym- 
metry of its development.” 
In their annual report the Commissioners of the 
District of Columbia say : “The Commissioners of the 
District of Columbia have been glad to act in co-opera- 
tion with this [Park Improvement] Commission, and 
trust that its project for beautifying of the national 
capitol will be adopted by Congress as the working- 
plan for the years to come.” 
It was scarcely to be thought possible that any devia- 
tion from plans so carefully prepared, and so widely 
approved, would be made without long and careful 
consideration of the experts who had prepared them. 
Yet we are reliably informed that none of the mem- 
bers of the Commission has been consulted in regard 
to this change. To proceed without affording the Com- 
mission an opportunity to explain the reasons which 
led to definite conclusions and without an opportunity 
to make adjustments or alterations, argues a heedless- 
ness that casts doubt and misgiving over the entire 
undertaking. It is incumbent upon the President and 
the Committee of the House of Representatives to ex- 
plain the motives which lead to their decision and to 
assure the general public that the work in which every 
true American citizen feels a just pride is being prose- 
cuted according to the advice of men of repute in whose 
technical ability and sound judgment it has confi- 
dence. 
Warren H. Manning, of Boston, contributes to The 
Craftsman for February an interesting article, “The 
History of Village Improvement.” He traces the his- 
tory of the work from its early development, from the 
use of the New England village common down to the 
more advanced work of the various organizations of 
to-day. A number of suggestive views are shown, and 
much valuable history of the organization of parks and 
reservations given. 
In closing, Mr. Manning suggests the following lines 
of work for improvement associations : 
“The work of the village improvement societies 
should be directed toward this movement to make our 
whole country a park. They should stop the encroach- 
ment of individuals upon public holdings, urge indi- 
viduals to add to such holdings by gifts of land, fine 
old trees, or groups of old trees, in prominent positions, 
in town or city landscapes. Every association should 
secure and adopt a plan for the future development of 
the town as a whole, showing street extensions and 
public reservations to include such features in such a 
way that they may become a part of a more extended 
system, if this should be brought about in the future. 
These societies should not undertake the legitimate 
work of the town officials, such as street-lighting, street- 
tree planting, repair of roads and sidewalks. They 
should compel the authorities to do such work proper- 
ly, by gathering information and securing illustrations 
to show how much better similar work is being done 
in other places, very often at less cost. They should 
inaugurate activities of which little is known in their 
community : such as the improvement of school and 
home grounds, and the establishment of school-gardens 
and playgrounds. If the policy of such a society be 
not broad enough to admit the active co-operation of 
