Our land = La Nostra terra. [volume] (Hurley, Wis.) 191?-1913, 1913-04-19


impressed upon the committee the mas
nitude of their duty and asked them t
deal fairly with the question before
them. The state he said had already
some 400, 900 acres to reforest and this
in his opinion, would keep the state fo.
rosters busy for 200 years. He also told
the committee that if the lands men
toned were not agricultural. so many
farmers from the north would not be
here protesting against the action of
the forestry board and that the matter
would keep until such time as the COM
mission appointed had time to report.
the bill he thought should be passed in
order that, thorough investigation
might be made before so much proper
ty should be included in the non tax
able property thereby increasing the
amount of the taxes on the tax payers
/ of the state.
/ Justice Barnes also showed the falla-
cy of the opinion of the Forestry de-
partment that in case these counties.
mentioned above were not retimbered
the southern part of the state would
be in danger of being flooded with the
water from the north in the spring
time.
Mr.. E. L. Luther, Agricultural Re-
preventative of the University of Wis
consin who is located in Oneida county
and who has charge Of the state expert
mental farm near Rhnelander showed
what could be produced in grains,
grasses roots and vegetables in the so
called non agricultural lands. Mr.. Lu-
ther had samples with him Of the SOIL
in the proposed reserve and also SAM
pies of grains. roots ana vegetables
raised on the reserve. He showed pho
tos of silo corn twelve feet high. He
also had with him certified bills of the
amount of produce sold by Ethe differ
ent farmers from the lands classed by
the forestry board as non agricultural.
The showing made by him was so con-
elusive that it could not help but bring
conviction to the minds of all who
heard him of the agricultural possibili-
ties of the section.
On account of the short time given
by the committee for testimony only
about one fourth of those who wished
to be heard had this opportunity of go
ing before the committee. Our repre-
sentative Mr.. Wm. Sherman was one
of these who had the opportunity. Mr..
Sherman told the co mmittee of the op-
portunities of Iron County open to the
farmer; showed what he had done
since he settled in the proposed forest.
reserve; and his argument made a good
impression on the minds ot the com
mittee men.
Against the bin were the state em-
pIoyees only. the opposition was CON
Quoted under the management Of Pres.
Van Hise of the University OF Wiseon-
sin. Frequently the opponents to the
Bin were asked why thee did not want
the commission appointed. Pres Van
Hise would interpose and ssy that they
need not answer that qsestion, or that
explanation would be given later The
question was not answered later nor at
any time during the hearing
Dean Russell denied that soil sur
yey had ever been made as claimed in
the report cf the state forester, and
said further that the board of forestry
was not responsible for the report as
the same had never been accepted by
them or in fact submitted to the board.
Practically every time the speakers
against the bill got on thin ice Pres.
Van Hise so1ght to come to their res
cue by asking if the time Of the ques
tion was to be taken from that side or
by volunteering the information tfat
some one else would answer the ques-
tion but the some one else failed 10 ap-
pear.
Assemblyman Whiteside and Senator
Stevens were very active during the
visit Of toe delegates in helping thefo
to secure a hearing and in doing every
ta.n2 that was possible to secure for
.aen fair aud just treatment Taev
Here On the Job all the time.
See Prout and shanJ' advertisement
in this week Is lssHe of The REQ. Auto
mobile. People who have owned REQ
machines inform US tiiat no better Au-