Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-09-20
The Judiciary Square Site.

The star puOllSneS on announcer page q
letter from a correspondent In which
points worthy Of careful consideration
are raised in the matter of the site
chosen by the superintendent of the
Capitol for the proposed addition to the
courthouse Of the District.
There are two reasons which cause the
people of Washington to view this propo-
sition with concern and to hope that the
superintendent will be sure that he Is
right before going ahead. The first rea-
son is the opposition to spollation of park
space as sites for public buildings Wash
ington's park space is not over great for
a city, one or the main assets Of which is
beauty. There is no paucity of sites for
public buildings on privately owned land.
and the price of this land Is not dear. 1t
is worth less and is generally less useful
than the land owned by the people. Men
with sense of civic pride and vision
that can peer a short way into the future
know that the policy of taking park lands
for building sites 10 poor policy. 1t Is
false economy, takes a narrow view Of
things as they are and forgets the flu
ture. 1t ignores the part that parks play
in the life of a city. A public park Is
more valuable than public building, and
If the building Is needed the park ought
not to be sacrificed to provide the site.
The proposed addition to the city hall
is not in itself q very great assault on
park rights, but 1t shows the pernicious
and persistent tendency in some high
quarters to regard park land as vacant
building lots rather than as lungs Of the
city, recreation grounds for the people and
natural beauty spots.
The second reason why Washingtonians
hope that there will be no too-hasty
action in the matter to which The Stars
correspondent directs attention is that 1t
involves not only the invasion of park
space, but the destruction of valuable
park trees. Citizens are beginning to
look on a city tree as something worth
having. It Is not so easy to grow a tree
in Washington al when tho capital was
a village with unpaved and scantily built
up streets. Therefore, the loss of q tree Is
a more serious matter. Again. the strict
ly utiitarian enemies OF the city tree are
moro numerous as the city has become
more compact, and thus greater vigilance
is demanded Of the trees friends.
The Stars correspondent makes the ar
gument that as there is no appropriation
for removing the trees from the projected
site to another part Of Judiciary Square,
there Ia also no appropriation for cutting
them down. II it is unlawful to spend
public money for the hire OF transplant
ers, it is also unlawful to spend public
money to hire woodchOppers.
OF course, when q site for a building
has been determined on It follows that
the site must be prepared. and this would
call for the destruction OF the trees. but
The Stars correspondent raises an issue
as to the legality of the site selection made
by the superintendent of the Capitol. He
quotes the law OF May 80, 1905, author
izing the erection Of q fireproof addition
to the courthouse" and contends that
by the word addition" the lawmakers
intended that the new structure should
be Joined to. or added to. the present
building. The superintendent OF the Capt.
toll eonstrues 1t to mean a separate and
detached building, and selects site In
Judiciary Square northwest OF the old
court building.
The Stars correspondent holds that no
appropriation has been made for the new
building, and that consequently there Is
no money to pay for cutting down the
trees, and that the superintendent of the
Capitol should wait until the Secretary
of the Treasury approves the contract for
the building and until Congress appro-
PIRATES the money.
All the points raised by The Stars cor
respondent should be weighed well There
Is no wisdom In rushing headlong into a
dilemma or a snarl. There is no reason
to be precipitate. The superintendent Of
the Capitol should know that he is on
solid ground before he strikes an AK into
q tree or sinks q spade into the turf.