FISHERIES, GAME AND FORESTS. 337 



to any person. .\n revenues from surh leases shall be paid into the State treasury and sliall be 

 placed to the credit of the special fund established for the purchase of lands within the .Adiron- 

 dack Park." 



Ill view of the widely spread and too often malicious misrepresentation of the 

 nature of these leases, it may be interesting to notice the provisions and restrictions 

 contained in them as shown in the foregoing paragraph. 



Included in the 98 occupancies previously mentioned, there are several log cabins 

 or shanties which were put up b\' hunters, surveyors or travelers in the more remote 

 and unfrequented portions of the forest, their erection being absolutely necessary for 

 shelter. These cabins, when not occupied by their owners, are always open to any 

 traveler who may need them, and have proved a great convenience to those who are 

 journeying through these wilder parts of the wilderness, the State officials often avail- 

 ing themselves gladl)- of the rude comfort which they afford. As the rules of the 

 Commission forbid the peeling of trees for bark and, consequently, the erection of 

 bark shanties which hitherto afforded temporary shelter over night, the travelers in 

 certain parts of the Great Forest find these "occupancies" a very convenient refuge 

 at times. 



In some instances, however, parties have taken possession of camp sites and 

 erected cottages under circumstances of a flagrant and aggravating character that 

 called for summary action on the part of the Commission. In two instances on 

 Raquette Lake cottages were built by persons who not only neglected the formality 

 of asking permission from the State authorities — which would not have been granted — 

 but they claimed title to the property. Not content with this violation, they built 

 their cottages with timber cut on the Preserve. In these cases the persons who cut 

 the timber were prosecuted for trespass, and ejectment suits were proinptly brought 

 against the occupants. 



In regard to many of these occupants, the Commission finds itself confronted with 

 a perplexing situation. As the new Constitution expressly forbids the leasing of any 

 land in the Preserve, the question arises whether the Commission can properly allow 

 them to remain. Though they pay no rent and no rent can lawfully be collected, and 

 though their further occupancy under tacit consent may not constitute a constructive 

 lease, still they are tenants at will. How far does such a tenure conflict with the 

 constitutional provision which expressly forbids any lease ? 



On the other hand, if the Commission drives these tenants off the premises, what 

 shall be done with their cottages and buildings? Shall these houses be destroyed ? 

 Shall they be locked, kept unoccupied, and allowed to tumble down in decay ? Or, 

 having ejected the occupants, shall the houses be left open for other persons to move 

 in, whoever may come first ? If they are to be occupied, what difference to the State 



