The Rock Island Argus and daily union. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1920-1923, 1922-02-02
Frederick Haskin's Letter
tepeaG cuvsapead1s ArsuAl
Saue the Woods.
tepeeaai CoRve@esdnes af TMa

state governments would he tha
same in principle as leaving To tbs
states the creation of forest reseT-
vations. The states failed in The
latter duty and most of them havs
done nothing adequate to protec,
private timber lands.
The principle of cooperation he
tween state and federal govarn-
mentS in this matter is obviously q
compromise, and one which has
been made before. Since, however
it leaves all real power in the STAT
government, it is not a very effect
ual compromise, the conservation
lists urge. 1t is merely an oppor-
tunity for the federal power IN
make suggestions and for the tay
payer to contribute little money To
the protection of forests in private
ownership, without any assurance
as to what he will get for his money
1t may be argued very plausibly thai
the federal government should have
authority in proportion TO the
amount of money it spends in any
given case. If the protection of the
forests is a function of the state
governments, which they ara can
able Of performing, then there
should be no need for federal an
preparations to help them do it.
1t is also argued in this connec-
ton that the federal government
has impaired the local autonomy OF
the states in many other WAYS.
When, for example, national pro
hibition was substituted for local
option, states rights were abolished
in the vital matter of sumptuarv
Legislation. 1t is argued that when
the states rights advocate accents
national prohibition, but objects to
federal authority in the protection
Of a natural resource, he is swal-
lowing camel and straining at a
gnat-
The Capper Bill
Those who believe that the fed
eral government should have auth
ority in proportion to the amount il
appropriateS for the protection Of
forests privately owned, so that it
may know just what is being done
with the tax payers money, prefer
the Capper bill to the Smell bill.
The Capper bill provides, in the
first place, for the taxation of for
est products, so that federal rev
enue will be raised for providing
the federal protection. This is GER
tainly a business-like arrangement,
but perhaps does not make as much
difference to the tax payer as
would appear at a glance, for the
lumberman will merely add the tax
to the price and the ultimate con
sumner will pay it after all. IN addi-
ton to this, the Capper bill would
give the secretary OF agriculture
authority to make and enforce regu-
lations as to the protection Of for
ests and the methods of cutting the
timber. In this way, the federal
government would at least be sure
of getting its moneys worth Of
protection.
The Capper bill, however, has not
even been honored by hearing.
The Smell bill, with the lumber in
terests back of it, and the states
rights advocates appeased in the
traditional manner, is probably the
best measure than can be got
through congress. The conserVa-
tionists therefore are inclined to
favor it as the best that can be had
for the present. 1t will undoubted-
" mean better fire protection for
the 70 per cent of our forests which
are in private hands, and better
methods of numbering. 1t will prob
ably therefore be worth to the tax
payer in the long run more than it
costs him. And it may be super
seeded by a more thoroughgoing
piece of legislation at some time in
the future.