The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-06-28

The REPORTS ON THE CITY PARK-We
doubt very much whether Messrs. Beekman
and Bartlett would have cared about signing
their majority report in favor Of Jones' Wood
Park, if they had foreseen what the dissentient
minority composed of Mr.. Cooley was pre-
pared to say on the subject To use q homely
phrase. it must be obvious to all who read the
documents published in Sundays HERALD that
the Senator from the First district has entirely
FUSED upn the Jones' Park side of the question.
He has regarded the matter in all its various
lights, and, to our mind, proves conclusively
that, horticulturally as well as geographically,
hygienically as well as economically. the Gen.
trail Park is infinitely preferable to its noisy
rival
Disdaining controversial tome the majority
of the committee have confined their report to
an analyt ical examination of the signatures to
the petitions and remonstrances sent in by the
citizens of New York, and q brief sketch of the
evidence taken before them. Now, it is doubt
less very interesting thing to know that out
of the nine thousand circumstances against
Jones' Park, six hundred and seventy three OBJ
ject to any park at all. and several could not or
STRANGE. Such statistics are a very pleasant
theme for reflection. But after all what does it
matter how the remonstrance" was got up, or
| whether four thousand out of the nine thousand
signatures were those of illiterate persons or
even wholly supposititious? The question which
| the committee had to decide was whether jones'
| Wood was or was not suitable site for park
and the only solid grounds on which that deci-
sion could be formed were substantial reasons
drawn from an abstract inquiry into its capaci-
ties horticultural, geographical and hygienical,
for the purpose. If there had been but one
remonstrant, his remonstrance ought to have
prevailed if it was founded on sound and logi-
cal reasons. 1t was the business of the commit
tee to bestow their chief attention on the
grounds which formed the basis of each remon-
STRANGE, and not on the signatures at the bot
TOM Instead of pursuing this natural course,
they have modestly confessed their inability to
weigh conflicting arguments, and assumed the
humber role of endeavoring to find out what is
the will and pleasure of the fifteen or twenty
thousand individuals who have busted them
selves in signing petitions and circumstances
on the subject. We are not certain, after
careful perusal of the majority report, that
Messrs. Beekman and Bartlett have committed
a serious error in this appreciation Of their own
abifities they are, perhaps better judges of
themselves than we should be, and when they
argue that because the Common Council of
New York is already infamous from its corrup-
tion and venality in railroads. Russ pavements,
and contracts" therefore the committee should
not "attach the slightest importance" to are
monstrance from that body, we cannot complain
Of their abandoning logical inquiry for the more
congenial field of autographed criticism.
| Fortunately for the interests of New York,
Mr.. Cooley's report, though slightly disfgured
by pretensious language, contains 80 compre-
hensive and SO unarswerable review Of the
real points at issue, that it must carry eonvic-
ton to the minds of the Senator's We may
cluster the arguments in favor Of the Central
Park in q few lines. 1t is, as it's name desig-
mates, central which jones' Wood is not. 1t can
already be reached by four established railroads;
while Jones' Wood can beseached by none. 1t is
admirably adapted for ornamental purposes,
which Jones' Wood is not It is five times as
large as jones' Wood. 1t would ventilate an
immense area of ground, witch will hereafter
be covered with houses; it would, in short, oc-
cupy' the same position in the city that the
lungs do in the human body, while. to make
jones' Wood the City Park, would be like
placing the lungs in the elbow or the calf of the
leg. 1t has, finally, water in its midst in any
quantity, while the supply in Jones' Wood is
doubtful and limited. On the other hand, the
only argument which the whole army of
advocates for the adoption of jones'
Wood have been able to adduce is the fact that
it is already well wooded while its rival is bare
and destitute Of trees. This would be a for
midable reason. were it not that the forest now
standing in the former would require to be
largely thinned to be converted in park: and
Mr.. Cooley adduces the testimony of the high
est authorities in horticulture and botany, to
show that the process Of thinning would be al
most certain to ruin the trees left standing
Old ancestral oaks, which have lowered to
heaven in the society Of dense array of other
denizens Of the forest, seldom survive sepa-
ration from their early companions. When
these fall under the axe, and their roots are
torn from the earth the unaccustomed exposure
to light and heat deals a fatal blow at the mon
archs Of the woods; as an old king, whose
might knows no equal SO long as he is surround
cd by the close companionship and affection of
his subjects but who grows weak, totters, and
falls altogether when his throne is deserted-so
the old oak, that waves proudly his branches,
overlapping his Hottest neighbors, owes so much
Of his strength to their protection that, when
they are torn from his side, he gradually droops,
withers and exhibits at last bare leaaess
trunk, melancholy spectacle Of desolation.
The advocates Of Jones' Wood, like their own
oaks have not leg to stand upon when the
brushwood which obscures their position is cut
away. We shrewdly suspect that. as Mr. Cooley