No sooner had the United States come into the possession of the Philippine Islands than the War Department set about adapting the capital city of Manila to the changed conditions brought about by the influx of Americans, who are used to better conditions of living than had prevailed in those islands. While fully recognizing the value of the historic public buildings, the Department undertook to have prepared a plan for connecting thoroughfares, open spaces, driveways and promenades which should provide adequate facilities for transportation, improved sanitation, and opportunities for those particular kinds of recreation which the climate invites. As a result the expansion which is coming as the result of American occupation, will proceed on comprehensive lines. Moreover, the necessity of providing a summer capital for the rulers of our new possessions has led to the creation on the hills of Baguio of a city laid out on a plan similar to the plan made by L’Enfant for the city of Washington, in that it provides for such public buildings as may be needed for government offices, for the service of the city itself, and for the healthfulness, convenience, and recreation of the people; and all these functions are so arranged as to make a unified and orderly city. Thus without additional expense, but merely by taking thought for the future, the two capitals of the Philippines, even in their physical characteristics, will represent the power and dignity of this nation. It has been seen that as peace permits the expansion of cities regardless of means of defense against outside foes, and as commerce enriches the people, population increases with such rapidity as to create demands for enlarged facilities for circulation throughout the city; and that these demands are so insistent that they must be met, no matter at what cost. Also, that those cities which have made ample provision for future growth have saved largely in money while at the same time they have accomplished much in the way of convenience and orderliness. Thus it has been well said that Paris is a unified city; whereas London is a collection of towns. Moreover, it is to be noted that throughout the civilized world there is a great forward movement in the direction of transforming cities to adapt them to the improved conditions of living which the people everywhere are demanding, and which, moreover, they feel that they have the power to enforce. As a part of this movement arises the impulse to express in concrete form the feeling of loyalty to and pride in the city; and this feeling finds expression in parks and pleasure grounds, in monuments and fine public buildings, in institutions of art and learning, and in hospitals and other means of alleviating the ills of mankind. Furthermore, there has arisen the conception of the city as an organic whole, each part having well-defined relations with every other part; and the expression of