Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1908-03-18
The Legislature Can Do 1t.


From the Portland Press.l
The opinion of the Maine supreme court on
the questions submitted by the Senate rela-
tive to restrictions of free-eutting on wild
lands, is no less luminous than important.
1t opens the way to q plan of forestry regula-
tion such as never has been attempted in this
State and such as may be of incalculable
benefit. The questions:
In order to promote the common welfare Of
the people of Maine by preventing or dimish-
ing injurious droughts and freshets, and by
protecting, preserving and maintaining the
natural water supply of the springs, streams.
ponds and lakes and of the land, and by pre-
venting or diminishing injurious erosion of
the land and the filing up of the rivers, ponds
and lakes, and as an efficient means necessary
to this end, has the legislature power under
the constitution
l. BY public general law to regulate or
restrict the cutting destruction of trees
growing on wild or uncultiyated land by the
owner thereof without compensation therefor
to such owner;
2. To prohibit, restrict or regulate the
wanton, wasteful or unnecessary cutting Or
destruction of small trees growing any
wild uncultivated land by the owner
thereof, without compensation therefor to
such owner, in case such small trees are of
equal or greater actual value standing and
remaining for their future growth than for
immediate cutting. and such trees are not
intended or sought to be cut for the purpose
of clearing and improving such land for use
or occupation in agriculture, mining, quarry
ing, manufacturing or business or for pleas
ure purposes or for building site; OF
5. In such manner to regulate or restri'
the cutting or destruction of trees growing on
wild uncultivated lands by the owners thereof
as to preserve or enchance the value of such
lands and trees thereon and protect and
promote the interests of such owners and the
common welfare of the people:
4. Is such regulation of the control, man
agement or use of private property taking
thereof for public uses for which eompensa-
ton must be made?
Six Ct the eight justices unite in the
opinion that ''the proposed legislation for the
purpose and within the limitations named
would be within the legislative power and
would not operate as tai king of private prop
erty for which compensation must be made.
As Justice King not appointed until
after the Senate order had passed, he did not
consider that any opinion from him was
required.
Justice Savage declined to render an
opinion because he did not think the occa-
sion solemn within the meaning Of the
constitution. The majority took another
view, however, and they have evidently given
the subject an exhaustive examination. Their
opinion is fortified by numerous presidents
and they argue not only that the proposed
legislation would not be the taking of prop
erty without compensation in the constitu-
- L L.
IN exercise Of the police power for the COM
mon welfare.
These are propositions which must COM
mand general assent and approval. Evidently
there is taking of property, for it re-
mains for the use and behoof of the owners.
There is restriction of such use, or it might
be called abuse, as would tend to public in
jury. Lumber production is but one use of
the woods. They are also the natural reser-
voirs of the water supply. A large part of
the States natural resources consists in its
water power. 1t is an established fact that
wasteful cutting. or deforestation, njuriously
affects the water supply by allowing the rain
fall to run off quickly instead of being re-
tanned and given out slowly, and that the
effects are generally as stated in the Sepate's
order. 1t is a truism that one mans rights
end where another mans begin; otherwise
there would be wrong and oppression. The
rights of many men are bound up in the water
power OF Maine-rights of capital and labor,
rights of whole manufacturing cities and viii
lagos that depend for prosperity and even ex-
istenee on the force of falling water. These
rights have a claim on the State for protec-
ton, and the State must give it by projecting
the headwaters.
1t is perfectly clear case, and now that the
ground has been admirably cleared, it is to be
Supposed that the Legislature will proceed to
act along the lines suggested and take meas
ures for the regulation and restriction of lum-
bering operations.