Bonners Ferry herald. [volume] (Bonners Ferry, Idaho) 1904-current, 1922-12-07
BY EDWARD 3. CLARK


Washington.-It seems to be possi-
BILE that all the work which has been
done preliminary TO a proposed reor-
ganization of the government depart
nents has been in vain. 1t Is said
now that because of the opposition of
various cabinet chiefs TO the proposed
changes. the President will not send
the report of the reorganization COM
mittee to congress.
Now, all rumors In Washington
are subject to discount. Some money
has been spent and large amount of
work has been done TO prepare for a
reorganization of the departments
which 1t is held would result in great
saving of money to the government
and in great increase in the efii-
cheney of governmental work. The
rresidenr, therefore, may still be OF
a mind to submit the plan to congress
and the. fate of reorganization may
rest with congress rather than with
the administration.
What is the trouble? Well, there
are a good many troubles. For years
there has been duplication of work in
the different departments of the
United States government. 1t is held
by the proponents of reorganization
that much of the work of one depart
ment should be consolidated with sim
liar work In another department, and
that one chieftain should have control
over the whole thing.
Personal jealousy enters into this
matter to some extent No cabinet
officer likes to part with bureau of
his work over which he and his prede-
cessors in office have had contrnl for
years, and of course il goes almost
without saying that no bureau chief
likes to see himself eliminated and his
work turned over to the bureau chief
of another department whose author
lty will be doubled even if his pay Is
not increased accordingly.
Sample Case of Trouble.
1t is possible to take one cause of
trouble as an example of many causes.
1t was proposed at the outset of the
work of the committee to transfer the
bureau of forestry from the Depart
ment of Agriculture to the Depart
ment of the Interior. Last spring it
became known that Secretary Wallace
of the Department of Agriculture OBJ
jected strongly to losing the direction
of the bureau of forestry, and 1t has
been known for years that the forest
ers themselves prefer to remain I'M
der Agriculture rather than to be
transferred to Interior.
Secretary Fall of the Department of
the Interior has certain thoughts on
the subject of making it possible to
use portions Of the national domain
so that, he believes. both the country
and the individual businesses may
profit. The forestry bureau has held
that the result of Mr.. Falls plan
would be to benefit private businesses
more largely than the business of the
government.
1t is the old story over again. Most
j people who have passed the voting age
will remember the so-calied Ballinger-
Pinchot row of the Taft administra-
ton. That largely was a forestry
bureau row with the officials of the
4 Department of the Interior. 1t was
charged at the time that the Interior
department was willing that private
interests should gain at the expense
of the peoples interests
The result OF the trouble was that
I Clifford Pinchot. now governor-elect Of
Pennsylvania. resigned from the office
of chief forester of the United States
government. There were some compro-
misses made intended to aliay the fears
OF those who sided with the forestry end
Of the trouble and feared that the gov
eminent was to turn over its domain
for private exploitation.
Fear Alaska May Suffer.
The trouble today is not as serious
as 1t was in the time Of President Taft,
but in a way there Is resemblance
between the controversy Of 1922 and
the controversy Of 1910. Alaska en-
tiers largely into this trouble matter.
There are great forest reservations In
Alaska. The forestry bureau seems
e. fear that If the Interior department
shall gain control of the forestry serv-
Ice the reservations in Alaska may
suffer In order that private business
interests may gain a larger foothold
in the territory
There is another side to this mat
ter and the friends OF the plan 70
change forestry from one department
To another are not backward at all
in presenting their view of the case.
They point to the nndoubted fact that
the population Of Alaska has de
creased, that the natural resources of
the place cannot be utilized SO long as
present conditions exist. They say
Alaska will regain in population and
that the United States proper will
benefit if capital be given full
chance to enter into the northwest