578 



CONSERVATION 



But while discussing analogies we 

 should not forget another. While Nero 

 posed and acted, Rome burned; while 

 the Interior Office strains over legal 

 constructions the forests are burning. 



Does it pav? 



)!i ^ ^ 



The Case oi Congressman Tawncy 



T N Conservation for August (page 

 1 496) Chancellor Van Hise's criti- 

 cism of Congressman Tawney for 

 paralyzing the work of the National 

 Conservation Commission was quoted. 



In the Congressional Record for July 

 27 may be found Mr. Tawney's reply. 

 He criticizes the "enthusiasts" in the 

 conservation movement "to whom so 

 worthy an end seems to justify any 

 means, whether lawful or otherwise," 

 and refers to the Appalachian proposal 

 as an example. "The member of Con- 

 gress who differs with the theoretical 

 conservationists * * * must expect to 

 be singled out as the enemy of prog- 

 ress," or worse. 



In Mr. Tawney's judgment, the con- 

 servation of "our dual system_ of gov- 

 ernment and our national credit," is in- 

 volved in such schemes. 



He would throw the responsibility 

 for conservation work upon the states, 

 instead of having it "foisted upon the 

 Federal Government." 



The reasons why this is not done, he 

 thinks, are that the states may thus 

 escape the burden of expense, and that 

 "the advocates of conservation" may 

 "concentrate public opinion upon Con- 

 gress," which is easier than to concen- 

 trate it upon forty-six state legisla- 

 tures. 



Like Speaker Cannon, Mr. Tawney 

 is appalled by "the ultimate cost" of 

 "reforestation," which "would be so 

 vast as almost to defy computation." 



Mr. Tawney next points to increas- 

 ing public expenditures, culminating in 

 a "billion dollar session." 



True, he concedes that 72 per cent of 

 the expenses of the last fiscal year went 

 for wars, past or prospective, and 

 neglects to show wherein the conser- 

 vationists are responsible for this. Still 

 he advises them to preach economy in 

 army and navy expenditures. 



Mr. Tawney strikes at Mr. Roose- 

 velt's "numerous commissions," stating 

 that "they existed and carried on their 

 work in violation of law," and as a re- 

 sult of "usurpation." He says, "We 

 are not yet willing to return to the old 

 idea that the Executive is the fountain 

 of justice and can therefore do no 



wrong 



Further on he declares these com- 

 missions to have been appointed, "not 

 only without authority of law, but in 

 violation of law," and explains that "it 

 was * * * to prevent the violation of 

 the law by the executive branch of the 

 Government that the provision of the A 

 Sundry Civil Appropriation Act for 1 

 1910 was adopted." 



Mr. Tawney next devotes two col- 

 umns to showing what the Federal Gov- 

 ernment has been and is doing for prac- 

 tical conservation, and again urges the 

 conservationists to turn their attention 

 to the state legislatures. 



Conservationists recognize that the 

 Government has done much in recent 

 years and decades in contravention of the 

 laissez faire policy ; Mr. Vrooman's 

 articles help to make this clear. They 

 realize, however, that every step taken 

 in this direction has been in the teeth 

 of the advocates of a do-nothing gov- 

 ernment ; they also realize that good 

 w^ork well done affords ground, not for 

 desisting, but for doing more good 

 work. 



The theory that conservation is in- 

 finitely costly, they repudiate. The facts 

 show that it yields vastly more than it 

 costs. To sacrifice forests, soils, miner- 

 als, waterways and water-powers rather 

 than undergo the expense of saving 

 them, conservationists hold, is like let- 

 ting one's house burn to save the labor 

 of throwing water upon the flames. 

 The pecuniary argument is altogether 

 upon their side. 



As to the states, conservationists are 

 willing and glad to have them do their 

 part, but they will not accept the new 

 version of the old states' rights doctrine, 

 as voiced by Speaker Cannon and his 

 friends, and agree that Congress may 

 abandon its proper field and throw its 

 duties upon the states. Let Nation and 

 state each do its part ; there is no lack 

 of work ^or either. 



