The Oroville weekly gazette. [volume] (Oroville, Wash.) 1905-19??, 1915-08-27
oRovILLE, WASH. AUGUST 81, 1915.

preceuents. If it would not be 200 un-
KIND, | would suggest that this given
reason Is most diaphanous pretext.
Kermit me to say that | really was
astohlshed when l read in your Letter
the statment that it was necessary to
reserve from disposal the timbered
areas IN order to protect the slopes
from erosion and in a measure. con-
serve the limited water supply so
greatly needed in this locality" If this
statement had come from some indiy-
iuual, OF which, unfortunately there
are TOO many in the government SER
vice TO-DAY, whose information of the
world outside of Washington city is
gained swinging in swivel chair near
steam heater behind a roll-top desk
IN the corner of some government
ouliulng, 1t would have occasioned lit
tie surprise. No engineer of standing.
elther IN this country or Europe, has
ever taken the position thai forests
| i'D'SSNSu Vic SlODeS from efO-
sion or had anything to do with the
'ohserFatlon OF the water supply. This
lheory was invented and urged in Or
der that under warrant of the Con-
lslltutlon the public treasury might be
looted to buy lands so worthless thar
no one else cared to possess them--a
scheme that was successful to the ex
tent OF many millions. But your own
distinguished citizen, one of the fore
most engineers of the world, General
ii. M. Chittendcn, rendered a public
service that cannot be overestimated
by writing an article so clear and con-
Vlnclng with such array of facts and
historical data that since its publica-
ton until now no man of standing has
ever dared to attempt to answer it or
to again uphold the theories advanced
in your letter. We in the west had
concluded since the publication of
General Chittenden's article that this
heresy that had cost the country so
| much, was forever dead and your let
ter is the first time in some years that
the ghost of the unlamented departed
has been made to walk General Chit
tenden's article was of such public i'm
portance that | had it published in full
in the Congressional Record of Feb
| ruary y, 1909. | am certain that if
you will read it, that never again will
an article be signed by you urging as
one of the reasons for forest reserva-
ton that they protect the country from
erosion or regulate in any degree the
| flow of streams or conserve the water
supply.
The one thing in your letter, how
ever, above all othe"s most to be re-
GREETED and deplored, is the spirit run
ming through it all, that inasmuch as
congress has not passed laws that
meet with the judgment of the bureau,
therefore, they refuse to obey the law
Upon what thory of government does
the Indian bureau, a mere subordinate
branch of one of the departments of
government, assume to itself the right
to pass judgment when it shall obey
the laws of congress? Upon what the
cry does it reserve to itself the right to
| ignore a law already passed, if it does
! not meet its approval? AS a lawyer
and as a patriotic citizen, | know that
such proposition is distinctly repug-
nant to you. When the soap box
orator" counsels his deluded admirers
Inot to obey the law, we excuse him in
lpity Oh the ground of ignorance, but
what excuse shall we give for govern
ment officials of intelligence, espec-
| tally charged to obey and carry out
the will of the people as expressed by
| law?
| A former distinguished secretary OF
| the interior taxed credulity and shock
ed common sense by solemnly declar-
ing that the head of an executive de-
lpartment of the government had the
right to do anything that the statutes
did not specifically prohibit. But now
| if seems, from the tone of your letter,
| that one more step is to be taken and
| the doctrine announced that depart
ment is under no obligation to obey a
law that does not meet its approval
even if it is expressly written upon the
statutes. | know that you agree with
me that such doctrine is dangerous and
omen TO strongest condemnation.
1t is apparent, from even super
fetal reading of your letter, that IL
must have been prepared in the Indian
bureau by some subordinate OF great
zeal and little judgment and less learn
ing. and passed upon in the course OF
vour duties without opportunity for
critical examination. For this, you are
NOT IN he criticised for | know, person
allv that your duties are exceedingly
heavy and eXacting and that II Is prac-
tically physical impossibillty for you
TO give personal attention to all these
matters that pass over your desk Tor
personal signature.
Permit me to end by saying that we,
Of this state know you, we have con-