The Savannah morning news., 1902-08-04
WON'T BEGIN TO-DAY
DELAYED MATERIALS WILL HOLD
BACK EMMETT PARK WORK.
INJUNCTION AGAINST WALKS.
WILL ZEE ASKED BY BAY STREET
PROPERTY OWNERS.

WILL ZEE ASKED BY BAY STREET
PROPERTY OWNERS.
Col. George A. Mercer Said That an
Injunction VIII Be SOught-He
Thinks the Interests of the Prop
erty Owners Should BE Considered.
Wants Such Roadway the
Plan of the Park and Tree COM
sion Could AfOrd-Acting Mayor
Dixon Said That the Material Lack
ing Will Soon Arrive and Work
viii Then BE Started.
Work on Emmett Park will not be
commenced to-day. 1t was expected
that it would begin bright and early
this morning. 1t was also thought
by no means improbable that property
owners who are opposed to the city's
plan for the improvement of the park
would secure an injunction and re-
strain the work as soon as it was
started. The injunction will be asked,
Col George A. Mercer said yesterday,
and it will be used whenever the work
begins Notice of it may be served,
and no further preparations for the
improvement made until the matter
has been settled in the courts.
Acting Mayor Dixon, who Is chair
man of the special committee that has
charge of park improvements, said
yesterday that the work will not start
to-day for the reason that the mate
rails needed have not all arrived They
have been ordered, and were expected.
Alderman Dixon does not anticipate
that the delay will be longer than two
or three days, and he expects to have
the work commenced some time during
this week.
Col. MERGERS Views
One of the most determined oppo-
nents of the city's project is Col
Mercer. who represents his moth
ers estate in the control of a
considerable frontage of property just
across Factors Walk from the park.
In common with other property this
will be entirely cut off from access by
vehicles of any sort directly from Bay
street, should the city's project be car
| ried out
II have no manner of doubt" said
| Col. Mercer, yesterday, that the in
| junction will be sustained and the city
| prevented from executing it's unlawful
purpose. The law on the subject, which
gives the control of parks and squares
| to the Park and Tree Commission, is
| as clear and precise as any law can
| Icssibly be; the city has the same
| right to build walks through Emmett
| Park that 1 have-no more and no
less. If the right We're conceded that
| would be the end of such protection to
the general public as the commission
| affords, for some city administration,
| little worse than another, might see
| tit to spread walks all over a park
| from one end to the other.
A Pointed Question.
What possible objection any body
of sane men, not blinded by passion
| or prejudice, can have to the improve
| ment of the park in such manner as
Will leave roadway along Factors
Walk passes my comprehension. The
plan the Park and Tree Commission
had adopted, before the Intervention of
| Council, was the work of Olmstead
probably the most distinguished land
scape gardener in the country, and had
1t been carried out the park would have
been one Of the most beautiful spots
in the city.
The plan provided for a driveway
around three sides of the park and
from this drive a beautiful view of the
harbor and the shipping in port would
nave Deen AFFORDED. 1t would have been
an attractive place to tourists visiting
the city; it would have been eouaIIv
as attractive to our own people. It
would have enjoyed this further adj.
vantage, seemingly either not apnar-
emit or unworthy of consideration nv
the City Council, that it would have
enhanced rather than decreased prom
erty values in that section.
The Driveway Feature.
And what harm, in the name Of
ordinary common sense, would
the driveway have done? How
would it have destroyed the
usefulness of the park more
IMAM whitaker or Gordon or
Drayton streets destroys that of For
syth Park? How can anyone, not he
sotted by ignoance or blinded by IRE
JUDGE, seriously support such a con-
tention?
Surely it is the duty of the civ
authorities to have some regard for the
rights of owners of property. Not
alone In sense of fairness to them.
put OF regard for the common good,
dictates such policy as will conduce
land in the city limits and the protec-
ton OF property already improved
from efforts to destroy it's earning ca
paclty and, in consequence, seriously
to decrease it's value
Tenants May Quit.
II am told that the tenants of some
of the buildings have given notice to
the owners that they will not renew
their leases in the event the city car
rles out its present arniable project. I
know myself that the property I con-
troll will not be improved if such A.
| calamity should chance, and l presume
| Others feel as | do
Certainly the property owners will
not submit without a fight and as
have said 1 entertain no doubt as to
the result. AS for the statement that
Chairman Daffin, of the Park and Tree
Commission, has surrendered control
OF the matter to Council, it is absurd.
Even If Mr.. Daffin has attempted to
DO this which 1 doubt he scarcely has
the power to surrender on behalf of
the commission, a jurisdiction con-
terred upon it by an act of the Cen
eral Assembly,
So that, the city seeming to be as de-
! termined to carry out it's plan as the
| property owners are to oppose it, there
| is every prospect OF a spirited legal
battle-perhapS, more correctly
campaign, for it is scarcely likely that
| In single combat the issue will be
! determined