Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1908-05-14

But all these vasious uses of our nat
nral resources are so closely connect
ed that they should be coordinated
and should be treated as part of one
coherent plan and not in haphazard
and piecemeal fashion.
Praise FOR Plnchot.
1t is largely because of this that |
appointed the Waterways Commission
last year and that i have sought to
perpetuate It's work. | wish to take
this opportunity to express in heart
lest fashion my acknowledgment to
all the members of the commission. At
great personal sacrifice of time and
effort they have rendered service to
the public for which we cannot be too
grateful. Especial credit is due to the
initiative, the energy, the devotion to
duty and the farsightedness of Gift
ford Pinchot, to whom we owe so
much of the progress we have
already in handling this matter
of the coordination and conservation
of natural resources. If it had not
been for him this convention neither
would nor could have been called.
judicial Rulings Affecting Question
Any right thinking father earnestly
desires and strives to leave his son
both an untarnished name and
reasonable equipment for the struggle
of life. So this Nation as whole
should strive to leave to the next
generation the national honor I'M
stained and the national resources un-
exhausted. There are signs that both
the Nation and the States are waking
to a realization of this great truth. On
40 no wi Of
Maine rendered an exceedingly i'm
was rendered in response to questions
as to the right of the legislature to
restrict the cutting of trees on private
land for the prevention of droughts
and floods, the preservation of the
natural water supply, and the proven
ton Of the erosion of such lands, and
the consequent filling up of rivers,
ponds, and lakes. The forests and wat
er power of Maine constitute the larger
part of her wealth and form the basis
of her Industrial life, and the question
submitted by the Maine senate to the
supreme court and the answer of the
supreme court alike bear testimony to
the wisdom of the people of Maine,
and clearly define a policy Of con-
servation of natural resources, the
adoption of which is of vital import
ance not merely to Maine but to the
whole country.
Such policy will preserve soil, for
ests, water power as a heritage for
the children and the children's chill
dren Of the men and women of this
generations; for any enactment that
provides for the wise utilization Of the
forests, whether in public or private
ownership, and for the conservation of
the water resources of the country,
must necessarily be legislation that
will promote both private and public
welfare; for flood prevention, water
power development, preservation Of
the soil, and improvement of navig-
able rivers are all promoted by such
a policy Of forest conservation.
What Maine Decision Means.
The opinion of the Maine supreme
bench sets forth unequiyocally the
principle that the property rights of
individual are subordinate to the rights
of the community and especially that
the waste of wild timber land derived
originally. from the State, involving
as it would the impoverishment of
the State and its people and thereby
defeating one great purpose of govern
ment, may properly be prevented by
State restrictions.
The court says that there are two
reasons why the right of the public
to control and limit the use of private
property is peculiarly applicable to
property in land: First, such property
Is not the result Of productive labor,
but Is derived solely from the State
itself, the original owner; second,
the amount of land being incapable
of increase, if the owners of large
tracts can waste them at will, without
State restriction, the State and it's
people may be helplessly impoverished
and one great purpose Of government
defeated. We do not think the
proposed legislation would operate to
take private property within the
inhibition of the Constitution. While
it might restrict the owner of wild
and uncultivated lands in his use of
them, might delay his taking some of
the product, might delay Ills anticipat-
ed profits and even thereby might
cause him some loss of profit it would
nevertheless leave him his lands,
their product and increase, untouched
and without diminutlon of title.
estate, or quantity. He would still
have large measure of control and
! large opportunity to realize values.
He might suffer delay but not de-
privation. s The proposed legisla-
| ton would be within the legisla-
tive power and would not operate as
taking of private property for which
compensation must be made"
The New Jersey Case
The court Of errors and appeals of
New Jersey has adopted a similar
view, which has recently been sustain
ed by the supreme court of the United
States. In delivering the opinion of
the court on April 6, 1908, Mr.. Justice
Holmes said: "The state as quasi
sovereign and representative Of the
interests of the public has a standing
iii court to protect the atmosphere,
tho water, and the forests within its
territory, irrespective OF the assent or
dissent Of the private owners Of the
4