DR. COMPTOn'S fourteen POINTS 961 



13. "The legal obligation upon the owner of property — an obliga- 

 tion that is universal and should be enforced — so to use it as to do no 

 damage to another's property and to do no public injury does not 

 include an additional obligation to make a specific positive use of it 

 which, although intended to benefit the public at large, involves a loss 

 to the individual himself." 



]t all evidently depends on what we are to understand by the ex- 

 pression "public injury." To cut over lands which are chiefly valuable 

 for timber production, or which for reasons of public interest 

 should be covered with forest growth, in such a way that they will 

 not quickly restock by natural means, and failure to reforest them 

 by planting or otherwise, is to do a public injury. The decision of 

 the Supreme Court (of the State of Maine) is very explicit on this 

 matter : 



"It is recognized that the State as a quasi-sovereign and representative 

 of the interests of the public has a standing in court to protect the atmos- 

 phere, the water, and the forests within its territory, irrespective of the 

 assent or dissent of the private owners of the land most intimately con- 

 cerned We are of the opinion further that the constitutional power 



of the State to insist that its natural advanages shall remain unimpaired 

 by its citizens is not dependent upon any nice estimate of the extent or 

 present use or speculation as to future needs." 



Dr. Compton is still harking back to the times of Adam Smith, 

 when unrestrained growth of industry and total wealth of a nation 

 was considered tantamount to public welfare. After a century of un- 

 restrained industrialism very few economists will now subscribe to 

 this view. Public welfare, increase in human progress and happiness, 

 can be secured only by subordinating the self-interest of a few to 

 the common good of the many. If the self-interest of the timber 

 owners of this country, although spelling greater immediate prosperity 

 to the individuals means devastation of land, decreased opportunities 

 for employment and decrease in the production of essential raw ma- 

 terial, then in the interest of public welfare, such practice must be 

 stopped, whether it involves a loss to the private owner or not. 



13. "// the public is interested in any use of timber lands or of 

 cut-over lands different from that which the enlightened self-interest 

 of the ozvner may dictate, the public which is the beneficiary should 

 pay the additional cost." 



We seriously doubt whether the self-interest of the timber owners 

 may generally be described as "enlightened." If it were, the lumber 



