Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-04-21

To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
read the protest of Lover Of Nature"
against the removal of tree in the Smith
sonian grounds, as l infer from his state
ment, to make room for the statue to be
erected to DR.. Gross.
One would suppose. from reading his pro-
test, that he was suffering intense mental
and bodily pain in consequence of the re-
moval Of that tree, and every now and
then 1 have noticed similar articles con-
demning the trimming of the trees on the
streets. Why shouldn't the tree be re-
moved If 1t is in the way? Are trees more
sacred than human beings, or the interests
of science and humanity? l have no SYM
pathy or patience with such cant, and 1
imagine I am much lover of nature as
the writer of that protest. We are taught
that man was given dominion over the
earth and all there was on 1t, land every
tree" and he was given mind to enable
him to and determine what he Shout
do with the trees and all the other thinl l
upon the earth: and l fall to see any re-
son for this outcry and wall over the re-
moval of that tree. On the contrary, 1 am
very clearly Of the opinion that there are
many more trees which ought to be re-
moved. For instance. when trees were
planted on East Capitol street they alter
mated with the elms quick-growlng pop
lar. with the intention of removing the lat
ter AS soon as the elms had attained a
reasonable size. 1t has not been done. and
the consequence is the trees are very much
crowded and the elms greatly injured.
So, too, 1t would be decided advantage
IL many of the trees in the Capitol grounds
were removed. AS they are now no one
can get an unobstructed view Of that mag
nificent building except when close up I'M
der 1t, where, Of course, no fair or proper
view can be had.
Even in looking down PENNSYLVANIA ave-
nue. from the treasury one can see only the
upper portion of the Capitol. because Of the
trees, which shut off the view. They ought
to be removed sufficiently to give an unob-
structed view Of the building from all sides.
at least as far off as the edge Of the
grounds.
The objection to trimming tree to make
1t symmetrical and well balanced is as abb
surd as 1t Is for a man to object to trim
ming his hair or beard because nature has
provided him with those appendages.
In many places In the city trees are too
thick producing a shade so dense as to
prevent the growth of grass or plants I'M
der or near them: and In other cases SO
shading dwellings as to render them damp
and unhealthy. Sunlight Is absolutely
necessary for the growth and health of
both living beings and plants, and wherever
trees are so thick as to shut out the sun
light they should be removed.
Only few years ago l had to cut down
a row of naples in my own yard, which 1
had planted, for that very reason, and
though I was sorry to lose them, common
sense, reason and my doctor all told me 1t
was best.
So, too, IL the trees on our streets were
kept properly trimmed they would suffer
far less by the wind and storms.
What would the experienced nurseryman
and fruit-grower say IL told that he must
never trim his trees? Why, simply that
you didn't know what you were talking
about.
1 would never advocate the wanton de-
struction of a tree or shrub but l would no
more hesitate to remove them when neces-
hon I a n a
stream fill a mud hole or do anything else
that reason and common sense should tell
me was best.
ANOTHER LOVER OF NATURE.