342 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



several important details, by which an executive committee of seven 

 would control the Association and the financial reports would not be 

 published. It was determined by a few members of the Association 

 that an effort should be made to secure a referendum vote of the 

 16,000 members on these by-laws. About fifteen members attended 

 the meeting to act as spokesmen for those who protested the proposed 

 action. The account of the meeting was printed in the March issue of 

 the Journal. 



To sum up the case. 



Of the seven men, who by this action are made life directors, not 

 responsible in any way to the members for re-election or for their 

 policies. Directors W. R. Brown, E. A. Sterling, and Chester W. Lyman 

 are each of them so closely affiliated with large business interests in 

 timber and timber lands, and Mr. Pack has been so directly concerned 

 with lumbering in the past, that they cannot be expected to prefer 

 the public interests in legislation to their own interests, much as they 

 would like to do the fair thing. 



Dr. Drinker was retained on the Board by Mr. Pack after and in 

 spite of his record with respect to national forest policy and Mr, Pack's 

 public repudiation of his attitude. This was due, I think, to the Sec- 

 retary's close personal friendship for Dr. Drinker. He finally became 

 one of the life directors. 



Mr. Pack at the time when his election for President was being 

 discussed, in December, 1915, was objected to by Mr. Quincy on the 

 ground that if he ever became President he'd put the Association in his 

 pocket and walk off with it. But Mr. Quincy later became a close 

 supporter of Mr. Pack probably because of his generosity in aiding 

 in the building up of the Association's finances, and their agreement as 

 to the financial policies which should be followed in its management. 



Had the Secretary been willing to confine his efforts to his legitimate 

 field and not sought complete domination of the organization, he could 

 have secured adequate assistance which v.^ould have handled the ques- 

 tions of policy in an efficient manner. Such assistance was freely given 

 whenever requested. It was beyond his powers to handle both the 

 policy and the finances. 



Had the President not proceeded on the principle that his financial' 

 contributions entitled him to manage the Association without any 

 serious interference from the Board of Directors, the events might 



