, 1873-11-12

with stating, that the king had learnt with
great displeasure, that the former Ordi-
nance had not been obeyed or at least but
impertectly, and that on the contrary the
trees had been felled and destroyed worse
than before etc. The Government forbade
the expectation of wood, encouraged the
importation, sent for German fOrest-ofh-
Gals and improved the system of %instruc-
ton in the treatment of forest, but all to
no purpose.
At the end of the 18th century large
tracts, which were only fit for forests,
were destroyed, and barren heath and mis-
cradle dwart-trees occupied in a great
measure the place Of the ancient forests.
In Western Seeland and JutIand, forests
which had yielded protection against the
destroying wind, had fallen by the axe of
greedy spectators fertile and beautiful
districts lay buried under quick-sands,
to which access was given by the destruc-
ton of the woods in places were fuel had
been abundant, people were driven to
make use of horse-dung as a substitute /;
the few remaining forests had been Sc
verely handled and thinned, and the new
growth was stunted and kept down by the
cattle. At last came the Ordinance Of
27th September 1905, which forbids all
pasturing in as we'll as the clearing of the
woods, %enioins fencing and preservation OF
the same, and finally makes 1t unlawful tor
any one who has purchased fOrest-land, to
cut down in the first 10 years more wood
for sale than what is assigned by the
Government authorities.
Scarcely half a century had elapsed after
the PRONUNCIATION Of this law, and the
generation, which had hailed it with salts
faction and sincere gratitude had not died
out, when q younger generation began to
express its displeasure with the =" system
of compuIsion." The few defects, which
are inseparable from similar regulations,
were brought under notice, but its many
advantages were lost sight Of. 1t was
looked uponas an Infringement on the free
right of property, but it was overlooked,
that it was a protection of the property
itself. People fixed their eyes upon the
law, but forgot the state of distress. which
had called it forth. After a short fermen-
tatioD, which found vent at agricultural
meetings and in newspaper articles, the
Minister of the Interior introduced into
the Diet in 1866 a proposal to abolish the
Ordinance of 1905, but the proposal found
so little favour and the matter had been so
badly considered, that in reality it had
only two advocates, of which the one, the
Minister of the Interior, who as a large
owner of forest-Iand himself and well
versed in matters relating to forests, felt a
warm interest in them, took for granted,
that Others felt the same interest, and
therefore considered all restrictions on
private forests as superhuous. The other,
a professor in political economy, confined
his view to the purely economical side Of
the question; according to him, where
corn could grow, wood ought not to be
allowed to stand, as the cultivation of the
land gave a higher interest and more
opportunity for labourers wages. These
two gentlemen exerted themselves to
attain the same purpose, pretty much
like two men who desire to move some
object, but each draw it towards himself
and thus counteract each other. When
the Minister urged in defence OF the free
action of the proprietor, that the know
ledge of the beneficial effects of forests is
now so universal, that there is no risk that
people will be hewing away on them," the
other added his argument, that Gin sub
stance all what is advanced of the impOr-
lance of the forests on climate, mounts to
a. LA -l-1Jo- kbnnnio1 1ooArSoOa