Editorial J^ote and Comment. 
A Convention Month. 
Notice was given last month of the annual meetings 
of the American Park and Outdoor Art Association 
and the American League for Civic Improvement, to 
be held at St. Louis, and in this issue considerable 
space is devoted to a report of the proceedings. June 
8-9 the Ohio State Association of Cemetery Superin- 
tendents and officials held its second annual convention 
at Springfield, O. This is the first state association of 
the kind ever organized, its founders having been 
active members of the national association, who, realiz- 
ing the benefits to be derived, sought to bring the cem- 
etery men of their state into closer relationship, so as to 
reach such cemeteries as were not represented in the' 
Association of American Cemetery Superintendents, 
the parent body. This state association is in a flourish- 
ing condition, is doing good work, and it is an excel- 
lent example for all other states to follow. The New 
England Association of Park Superintendents hold 
their seventh annual convention at New Haven and 
Meriden, Conn., June 14, 15, 16. Though young in 
years, its membership comprises many of the best 
known park experts, and the influence of its practical 
consideration of park improvements and affairs is year- 
ly becoming more apparent and of great benefit to the 
New England states. 
Parks For Nevo York City. 
A comprehensive and valuable report has recently 
been made by the Park Committee of the Municipal 
Art Society of New York, on the future needs and 
requirements of Greater New York in respect to new 
parks and park areas. The park question for all cities, 
great and small, has proven to be a paramount one, 
involving as it does the welfare of the citizens from 
standpoints never considered of much importance in 
former years, but regarded as vital to-day. The report 
concisely discusses the matter in its relation to the sev- 
eral districts of the city, and valuable conclusions are 
reached and suggestions made, important for all inter- 
ested in park development. The advisability and ne- 
cessity of looking ahead to provide for the location and 
acquirement of park areas are strongly emphasized, and 
the remark that : “The haphazard manner of munici- 
pal growth is discreditable and should be no longer 
permissible,” is a slogan for a campaign throughout 
the land for park improvement and municipal reform. 
^ 
Cemetery Superintendents and Monumental Sates. 
The question whether a cemetery superintendent 
should be permitted to sell or influence the sale of mon- 
umental work in his cemetery is an open one so far as, 
to a certain extent, the common practice is concerned ; 
but it is a foregone conclusion that if a philosophic 
commission should be called upon for an opinion, the 
most impossible to believe that perfect harmony can 
be maintained uninterruptedly for any length of time 
between superintendent and lot owners, were the super- 
intendent to be engaged in any capacity in influencing 
the choice and purchase of monuments ; and it is essen- 
tial to the welfare of any cemetery that the superin- 
tendent should be free from embarrassing conditions, 
which might interfere with his official position. It is 
quite certain, however, that it is considered by many 
to be the proper prerogative of the superintendent, 
while, on the other hand, it is absolutely forbidden fn 
possibly the majority of cases. On general principles 
it is unquestionably objectionable, as it undoubtedly 
militates against the independence of the superintend- 
ent. That official should be entirely free to give un- 
prejudiced opinions to his lot owners concerning ma- 
terials, construction, design and appropriateness of pro- 
posed memorials, as well as to the responsibility of 
manufacturers. He should be competent to give 
only the best advice, and should be free from the en- 
tangling alliances of all side issues. 
* * * 
The Control of Monumental Construction in Cemeteries. 
An important rule that should be more generally 
adopted and enforced in cemeteries is that requiring 
that the plans for all monumental construction, includ- 
ing enclosures, headstones, monuments, vaults, etc., be 
submitted to the cemetery officials for approval before 
erection. Such a rule is enforced only in comparative- 
ly few cemeteries, but its general adoption would re- 
sult in less monotony, more appropriate designs, and in 
vastly improved conditions in the landscape. The 
other side of the question is equally important : the 
qualifications of those in charge to pass intelligently 
on the plans and designs submitted, and in the larger 
cemeteries expert taste and judgment would be re- 
quired to decide in cases of large expenditures and pro- 
fessional productions. No architect or designer of rep- 
utation would tolerate decisions based on crude judg- 
ment or uneducated taste, and trouble would result. 
In smaller cemeteries lot owners should be required to 
confer with the cemetery officials before placing their 
orders, and power should be vested in the officials to 
refuse to permit monumental work to be erected that is 
not approved by them. Materials, designs, location, di- 
mensions, harmony and appropriateness, are all mat- 
ters in which the cemetery as a whole is much more to 
be considered than the individual personal preferences 
of the lotholders. Backed by efficient rules, a compe- 
tent superintendent or other official in charge can ad- 
just questions in such a manner as to secure co-opera- 
tion of the lotholder without friction. 
