The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1894-12-14
Mr.. OLMSTED DECLINES.
Hs WoNr EoRE UNDER TIE PAHk
COMBINATION.

Tshs- ~ . Landscape Architect q. Lay
i-s Out the Speedway ~ vsris-es-No
Ahzious fer the Job OF s>eothins Owe
the Rs-eh spet. Len By the E.s,,s.r.
The Park Commissioner received from Fred
erick Law olmsted yesterday = letter in which
he absolutely declines the invitation Of the Com
mlssionerst 10 assist In treating the Harlem Rlvei
Speedway. lie writes the history Of the connec
tlon Of the landscape architect with the Parl
Department, showing that Il was intended thai
the engineers Of that department should Away,
be subordinate to the makers Of Landscape
effects;
NJ; essr,s. 10 2 sags. ~s,egre,gyy q ne Roa;d g
DEAR SIR! | have a. Of NOR to submit the foi.
lowing observations III reply to your letter Of the
For many years before the city OF New York
had a PARK Department u was carrying on va
works Of engineering. some OF these had gov.
erntng Boards, as. for example, the Croton
Water board. the Presidents Of which were
The plans OF the works which these Boards
supervised were invariably prepared by engi-
neers. and engineers were invariably made re-
spnnsihle for the carrying out az their plans
The, chief executive %oficeof each VI these was
called the engineers Office; the occupant of IL
was called the engineer and was n man who,
before he was placed In that office. had acquired
u regulation and professional standing as AN en-
Kincer. There was no ambiguity In the use OF
the term.
There was no qucstlon Of its slgnincnnce: none
term.
hut in the year 1887 u public work was begun
Independently OF any of these engineering de-
p%artnents. II was In general charge ofa Board,
no member OF which was nm engineer.
The plan OF the work, to- control which this
new Board was constituted. was not drawn by
an engineer. The men employed to organize It's
working force were not engineers, and were not
officially styled engineers. They were called
landscape architects.
The plan Of organization adopted provided for
rho mnlpNInnnt nI RnYinHaFG an hpr1innfa ga
the Landscape architects. There was not an
engineer ON the. work who did. not receive his
appointment either directly from the land
scape architects or from the Board acting upon
the, nominatinl aud advice Of the landscape
architects. There was not one who did not re-
reiye his pay upon the certificate Of the land
tcape architects.
Under this arrangement several million dol
lars were expended with results that were then.
and have since. for more than thirty years. CON
those OF works planned and managed by en-
gi2Sssrs; c,... altar ,.v r,,.. a,u,,.n.
period known rs the Tweed administration Of
the city Government. this original Commission
was superseded. n new Commission established,
and a new organization of the work effected.
Under this new organization it was provided
that engineers should no longer work subordl-
nately to the landscape architects, but should
receive their orders directly from. and report
directly to. the Commissioners.
This action Of the new Commission was not
for n time communicated to the landscape
architects. Their first knowledge of ii came to
them when they found that their instructions
" - dlh- Nllul llb
work WAS proceeding In a manner for which
they could not allow themselves to be RESPONSE
Thereupon they presented their resignation
and at once Withdrew wholly from the work. In
ment more than justified the course that had
been taken by the landscape architects, and the
fact that they did SO became, a little later, SO OBJ
viDus that public opinion compelled not simply
An abandonment of the arrangement. but the
breaking up OF the second Commission and sub
stantially. the. reappointment OF the first. As
soon as this had been accomplished the land
scape architects were asked to return: several
works which had been undertaken in the inter
val were abandoned; buildings which had been
begun were torn down; plans which II had been
landscape architects were given np; details Of tie
original design that had been discarded were re-
adopted, and great efforts were made to recover
ground that during the absence OF the landscape
architects had been lost. These efforts, II may
be observed, were not wholly successful, and the
million dollars than IL otherwise would have
been. while IT has cost tine taxpayers some mil
Tho facts that have been thus recalled surely
do not indicate that the Park Commissioners
dence, and whose work is to this day most val
ued by the people of New York. took a view of
Their duty under which LANDSCAPE architects, as
trimmings to De applied to the surface of engi-
neering constructions.
the name OF the Speedway has been given. is
not so far exceptional that it is to be dealt with
primarily ms a work OF engineering. and but
subordlnately as a. work of landscape? | can
only answer that this question seems TO have
been decided by the Legislature when the work
was given In charge of the department. III
otherwise, 1t must not be concluded that the
department Of Parks II n supertiuityp Are the
engineering departments of the city not allowed
TO decorate their works. II they are not, how
are the sculptures. and the plantation OF trees
aud shrubs, and the flower beds Of the Forty
second street reservoir to be accounted fOrp
Have these decorations not been paid FOR out OF
FUNDS appropriated 70 a work, the distinctive
purpose Of which IL IL thcdistinCtlve professional
functions OF engineers to deal with
IL II my opinion that the end, with reference
WAS not an engineering End. but an end To
engineering ends were intended to be
sutsidiary. IL -. my opinion, further. that ii IL
had been intended that the speed way should be
made p work OF engineering. to which some sun
Elementary work Of gardening decoration might
be nfterward applied, the business uf making IL
City Government which would be classed as a
Department. OF Engineering, not u Department
of Parks.
In my Interview with the Board on Nov. 81. it
the Speedway a. n work OF engineer
Ing Ia which ornamcntHtion might DO applied.
ana that they wished my service only with ref
ercrCc 10 this Orn0meEtatiOH
A. ! cannot take this view of the functions OF
my profession, | respectfully decline the invita-
ton nf the Board. Your obetlient servant.
FREDERICK LAW OLMsTED.
Commissioner Happen refused Yesterday after
noon ~ discuss the letter or tell what the Board
would dol regard to engaging another land
Commissioner Bell said that he thought the
engineering work should DO subssrvient 10 that
or the landscape architect as far as possible. lie
In thorough accord with Mr.. Olmsted's
ns stated last month to the Park board.
lie did not think Mr.. Naux would lie asked 10
do the work. the Board will meet to discuss
the matter on Dec. "a,
DEITEWAF CONTRACTS.