Mount Royal, Montreal 
treated as forest with numerous openings. The 
natural growths of maples in the lower parts and 
pines and birches above were to be left. The 
mountain meadow called “The Glades” was to 
have no planting, except such as was necessary to 
secure a more pleasing appearance to the bordering 
woods. “The Piedmont” was to be planted with 
groups of lowland trees, and with underwood to 
obscure the poorest rocky parts. Here trees of each 
group were to be of one kind, and the adjoining group 
not too dissimilar, the object being to obtain a softer 
charm enhancing by contrast the characteristic 
quality of the fells and crags. The district of gentle 
slopes below “The Piedmont,” called the “Cote 
Placide, ” was to represent the opposite note to the 
necessary sternness of the “Upperfell.” It was, 
moreover, to form a rich, open and consistent fore¬ 
ground to the views down the great valley from the 
mountain height, and the planting at its boundary 
was to obscure somewhat the buildings in the ad¬ 
joining quarter of the town. 
In addition to such intelligent planting as that 
described above, plants in general were to be so 
selected as to increase the apparent height of the 
mountain itself. This was a great artistic idea. In 
the lower and less rugged parts the predominant trees 
were to be such as attain their most perfect character 
only under conditions still lower, more fertile and 
softer. On the other hand, in the most elevated, 
exposed and Arctic regions the predominating trees 
were to be those that occur naturally in even more 
trying situations—certain 
pines, for example, with 
firs associated. Between 
the crown of the mountain 
and the lowlands, trees 
were to be used that were 
characteristic of the 
different intermediate 
altitudes. And so the 
mountain would appear 
more mountain-like and, 
at the same time, gain a 
natural and appropriate 
variety. That all of this 
is supreme art, free from 
fault of omission or com¬ 
mission, needs scarcely to 
be said. 
As with all public parks, 
the question of boundaries 
was one requiring knowl¬ 
edge and good judgment. 
“Mount Royal” being a 
mountain, it was not pos¬ 
sible to establish bound¬ 
aries that would make its 
landscape self-contained 
in any complete sense. This is one of the objec¬ 
tions that might reasonably be made against the 
selection of such a tract for a city’s “country 
park.” For the purposes of an outlying reserva¬ 
tion, it might serve admirably, but as a more or 
less immediate relief from the sights and sounds of 
the city it is not so well adapted. The two prin¬ 
ciples that Mr. Olmsted laid down for establishing 
the boundaries of “Mount Royal” are absolutely 
sound. They were: (i) that the boundaries should 
be such as were suggested by the topography. (2) 
That they should be so determined that a good, 
broad road of easy grade could everywhere follow 
them. These principles were reiterated with clear¬ 
ness and force and their importance insisted upon, 
especially for the future. But it is to be regretted 
that they were not followed, partly for lack of money 
to buy the necessary property, and partly because 
the rectangular system of streets and roads that pre¬ 
vailed in Montreal, a system that ignored grades 
completely, made the natural boundary road for 
the park more difficult to secure. 
Mr. Olmsted’s consummate skill as a landscape 
architect, as well as his interest in humanity, is no¬ 
where more evident than in his provisions for public 
comfort and convenience—in designing roads and 
walks, seats and shelters, inns and so on. In all 
these there is a nicely balanced two-fold purpose: 
to make all such provisions adequate and straight¬ 
forward, but at the same time to unite them with the 
design in such a way as to preserve the beauty and 
CHARACTERISTIC VIEW OF THE NATURAL WOODLAND OF MOUNT ROYAL 
ENHANCED IN ITS BEAUTY BY ART 
8l 
