144 



\.\iI':rican forestry 



it should be reor.^anized. He jjelieved 

 that this was a sufficient check upon 

 the expenchture for the ])ur])ose of the 

 l)ill. fie offered a liomi-K- illustration 

 from his experience as a bov on the 

 farm in northern Xew ilam])shire as 

 a further contribution to the discussion 

 of .Mr. Aloore's report. He said that 

 on the hillside ])asturc the snow would 

 be iL^'one in the sprint^' so that one could 

 walk in thin shoes, when the snow was 

 lying" a foot and a half dee]) in the 

 woods just above the pasture. It is a 

 matter of common observation which 

 needs no scientific knowledge, he 

 pointed out, that if the trees were cut 

 off from this land it would be in the 

 same condition a^ the ])aslure adjoin- 

 ing'. 



Finall}-, Mr. Weeks lU'ged upon the 

 committee that it is not new L'gislation, 

 and that it would be gross injustice not 

 to report back to the House a bill which 

 has in susbtance ])assed the Senate 

 twice and the House once. To prevent 

 action on this bill wmild l)e resented 

 by Massachusetts and by all Xew Eng- 

 land. The bill is moderate in character 

 and, in m\- mind, he sai 1. will start a 

 policy that will be of great benefit to 

 the whole countrw He urged ])rom])t 

 action, and said that hundreds of thou- 

 sands of people all over the countrv 

 were behind this measure, that it had 

 been advocated by President Roosevelt, 

 by President Taft. and is the one prac- 

 tical measure that has been offered in 

 the direction of carrying out the con- 

 servation policy. 



Mr. Currier made no formal speech, 

 but supported his colleagiu' effectively 

 with pertinerit suggestions and facts. 



This report necessarily gives a very 

 inadequate impression of the able jires- 

 entation of the case to the committee. 



The interchange of (piestion and an- 

 swer, the keen and unassailable scien- 

 tific arguments advanced by Professors 

 Swain, (ilenn, and Roth made the hear- 

 ing a notable one in the history of the 

 cam]iaign in behalf of the Aj^palachian 

 forests. Chairman Scott, at the out- 

 set of the hearing, requested the mem- 

 bers of the committee to refrain from 

 interru])ting the speakers with (|ues- 

 tions until the\- had concludetl their 

 statements. Within a few mintttes after 

 this he liimself interrupted the first 

 speaker and he continue:l this practise 

 of interruption with cpiestions and in- 

 ter])olation of his own views, especially 

 in the afternoon, when Professor Roth 

 was s])eaking. This interfered with 

 ihe orderl\- presentation of the argu- 

 n:enl which Professor Roth had 

 ])rep^ared, but ])erhaps it did not 

 interfere witli the effectiveness of the 

 discussion, as .Mr. Scott's questions 

 were adequatel}- answered. Mr. Scott's 

 well-known op])osition to this measure 

 h.as not in the least abated and is i)lainly 

 shown in his conduct of the hearings. 

 Indeed, he ai)])ears at times more anx- 

 ious to bring out his own theories, some 

 of which are well defined, than to hear 

 the uninterrupted statement of the ex- 

 pert witness. 



The general interest of the commit- 

 tee was shown 1)\- the good attendance 

 and keen attention to all ]:)oints brought 

 out in the discussion. 



.\lr. .Moore's position previously 

 taken l)efore the same committee was 

 so badly riddled by the discussion that 

 the committee considered it necessary 

 to give him an ()])i)ortunity to take the 

 stand in his own defense, and a special 

 hearing was assigned for that purpose 

 for the 1st day of March. 







k.AS» 





