Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1908-05-13

Any rlgnt thinking rather earnest
ly desires and strives to leave his
son both an untarinshed name and
a reasonable equipment for the
struggle of life. so this nation as
a whole should earnestly desire and
strive to leave to the next genera
tion the national honor unstaIned
and the national resources unex-
hausted. There are signs that both
the nation and the states are awak-
ening to realization of this great
truth. on March 10, 1908, the su-
preme court of Maine rendered an
exceedingly important judicial de-
cision. This opinion 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 natu-
raj water supply. and the prevention
of the erosion of such lands, and the
consequent filling up of rivers, ponds
and lakes. The forests and water
power of Maine constitute the larger
part of her wealth and form the basis
of her Industrial life, and the aues-
ton submitted by the Maine senate
to the supreme court and the ans
wer of the supreme court alike bear
testimony to the wisdom of the peo-
Pile OF Maine, and clearly define a
policy of conservation of natural re-
3omrces, the adoption of which is OF
vital Importance not merely to
Maine but to the whole country.
Right Policy.
Such n policy will preserve soil.
forests, water power, as n heritage
for the children and the children's
children of the men and women Of
this generation; for any enactment
that provides for the wise utilization
of the forests, whether in public or
private ownership, and for the con-
servation OF the water resources of
the country, must necessarily be
legislation that will promote both
private and public welfare; for
food prevention. water power devel-
opment, preservation of the soil, and
Improvement OF navigable rivers are
all promoted by such policy Of
.orest conservation,
The opinion OF tho Maine SUI
premo bench sets fort unequivocally
the principle that the property
RIGHTS OF THE 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 II would
the impoverishment OF the state and
Its people and thereby defeating one
great purpose OF government, may
properly be prevented by state re-
strlctions.
The court says there are two rea-
sons why the right OF the public toI
control and limit the use OF private
property Is peculiarly applicable to
property In land: First, such prop
erty Is not the result OF productive
'abor, but Is derived solely from the
state Itself, the original owner; sec
ond, the amount OF land being In
capable OF Increase. II the owners
OF large tracts can waste them at Will
without state restriction, the state
and its people may be helplessly I'M
poverished and one great purpose OF
government defeated.
We do not think the proposed legis-
lation would operate to take private
property within the inhibition OF the
constitution. While IL might restrict
the owner OF wild and uncpltiyated
lands in his use OF them, might de-
lay his taking some OF the product
might delay his anticipated profi's
and even thereby might cause him
some loss of profit. 1t womld never
the less leave him his lands, their
product and increase, untouched
and without diminution OF title, es-
tate. or quantity. He would sun
have large measure of control ana
large opportunity to realize values
He might suffer delay but not depTi-
walton. The proposed leg
islation would be with
in the legislative power and wouid
not operate as a taking OF private
property for which compensation
must be made"
Quotes Decision.
The courts of errors and appeais
of New Jersey has adopted similar
view, which has recently been suS'
tained by the supreme court OF the