New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-01-08
MIR. ANEURIY JONES on LANDSCAPES.

/ IL
| The report recently made 10y Superintend-
ent Aneurin Jones is a remarkable document
70 come from an official whose functions, as
defined in the law which creates him, are
solely to " supervise all the forenen, mechanics
and laborc:S IN the parks THIS of itself Is a
work of sufficient dignity and importance to
absorb the energies of Mr. Jones, and II he
would devote himself to it with sngleness OF
zeal and under iudicious direction he would
win the gratitude and applause of the
city. Mr.. Jones has elected, however,
70 disport himself once more before the public
as a landscape artist, and has therefore made
gratuitous exposure of his ignorance and Il
display Of certain congenital mental deformi-
ties which render il impossible for him TO learn
ANYTHING in this direction. The Superintendent
is also moved to lament the low condition Of
tree-cultlre in this country. He has never
heard OF Mr. Sargent or Mr.. Parsons; but then,
| these gentlemen would not bc likely to manage
tie groves and borders Of the Park as they would
cultivate a timber lot. II may be observed
that Mr. Jones's personal knowledge OF trees
is not stupendous. The most accurate reply
he could give a visitor who once made some
INQUIRIES about hemlock was that ait was a
kind OF fir y; and concerning weeping beech,
the most eccentric and fantastic tree of our
zone, he gave the correct but somewhat nm
satisfactory information that "it was not It
weeping willow" This ignorance would not
be altogether discreditable to Mr.. Jones if
he did not take pains to step out of his
sphere to display it. He was not employed
as an expert III trce-culture or landscape art
1t is true, he would make better Superin-
# T.
tiers. But if he is honest, forcelul and faith
full as we think he is, and would restrain him
self strictly within the limits of his authority,
he would prove a valuable public servant.
Perhaps 1t is not worth while to defend the
planting of the Park against the attacks of
Mr. Jones. But 1t ought not to be forgotten
that while the maintenance of the Park has
been most discreditable the planting itself,
which has been entrusted to men Of such skill
as PLAT Hepp and Fischer has been almost
invariably well done
The public would take little interest in the
theories of Nh Jones if he did not boast that
he had been putting them into practice
and threaten to persist in his uespasses He
declares, it is true, that lie has cut down no
live tree. Perhaps he does not consider a tree
alive unless il shows an amount Of leafy vigor
which comes up to the timber standard. But
this would doom some of the most
picturesque specimens in the Park. Per
haps he calls nothing tree which
is less than forty feet high. But why
is shIub according TO his classification, less
sacred than tree and where does he draw
the Inc between trees and shrubs2 In which
list would he rank an andromcda arborea. or
a Ia esia, or chionanthus or an 0mclau-
chierl Perhaps he Jumps all these and
a hundred more together rs constituting
what he terms with hanl. brutality
udcrbush.' 1t is mere "nndcrbrusA - that
ne is clearing ont, while everyone else knows
that ali the dolicacy and Tclncmcnts OF land
scapc gardening are made with this under
growth. The undcrbrush' which he has
grubbcd out i'm order to show the architcc-
turc of the bridges was graceful groupings
of shubDery planted by an artist to mask the
disagrccable connecting line between earth and
masonry. Another "mdcrDrush man, III the
happy days 81 tue Tweed Ring, cleared
the underground from the woods in or
der to uncover the bare trunks OF
the trees. All this was replanted