SHADE TREES AND THE LAW 
243 
states along the line of promoting the planting of trees. 
The weak point in this respect is that the state law pro¬ 
vides no funds for carrying out the provisions of the act. 
The matter of raising funds by taxation is left to local 
option, which has crippled the operation of the law in 
many communities. Some municipalities have officers 
empowered to enforce the shade tree laws, but are not 
sufficiently aroused to the importance of the question to 
appropriate sufficient funds for the maintenance of the 
work. The result is a failure to realize the best possibilities 
in shade tree development. Another criticism of the Mass¬ 
achusetts law is that it is a mistake to have tree wardens 
elected. This subjects the office to political influences, 
which are undesirable and which could be avoided by 
having the office appointive, subject to approval by a 
State officer trained in tree culture and connected with the 
Department of Conservation. 
Perhaps the most important feature of the Massachu¬ 
setts law is its requirement that every town in the state 
must have a tree warden. This provision is tangible 
recognition of the value of shade trees to a community, 
and placing it on the statute books has resulted in arous¬ 
ing new interest in the subject of trees and tree planting. 
The powers conferred on the municipal authorities are 
necessarily broad, but even in this respect attention is 
given to preventing an unsatisfactory use of these powers 
in certain important particulars. In the original law the 
final decision for the removal of public trees rested with 
the tree warden. Under the revised law recognition is 
given the right of the private citizen and property owner 
to have a voice in the disposal of such trees. To this end 
the warden or other official is required to hold a public 
hearing, duly advertised, before any public tree may be 
removed. Even after this hearing there is provision for 
