[ 144 1 IAN R* STEWART committee would also look at the merits of the central site. How fair a hearing the central park site would receive is not clear, for at the very outset the report undermined its objectivity by noting: It will be sufficient to call the attention of the Senate to the fact that the Common Council of New York, already infamous for its corruption and venality, in railroads, Russ pavements, and contracts, has been repudiated by its constituency at a recent election, by a vote of ten to one; thirty three thousand to three thoufiad. Any recommendation from such a source may fairly be suspected, and your committee do not attach to it the slightest importance.85 The committee had called at least six professional witnesses who were gardeners, nurserymen, botanists, or landscape designers, and while there was no firm consensus, there was a numerical preference in favor of the Jones's Wood site. In addition, the senate had received numerous petitions from groups in New York City. More than ten thousand citizens had signed an endorsement for the east side site. Nine thousand more remonstrants prayed that Jones's Wood not be taken because it was not sufficiently central. This petition was called into doubt, however, when it was noted that eleven hundred of the signatures were in the same handwriting. A much smaller group petitioned for no park whatsoever. Having considered all the positions argued before it, it was clear that the senate committee was at least in agreement that New York City should have a park. At this point the committee even went so far as to suggest that the acquisition of both sites might indeed be desirable. But, with classic political dexterity, seeing that it might not be wise to intervene in such a controversial local issue—one that had moved so many voters to align themselves in conflicting positions—the committee's final recommendation was to urge that the issue be passed back to the common council by permitting it to make the final choice after the upcoming election.88 This decision hardly satisfied anyone, and one of the committee members, Senator James Cooley, immediately issued a sharp minority report. In it he reviewed all the positive arguments in favor of the central site and also called into question the motives of those many thousands who had endorsed the Jones's Wood site. As he saw it, this move 8» Ibid., 185. 88 Ibid., 184-85,189.