CONSTITUTIONALITY OF NATIONAL LAWS TO RESTRICT 

 FOREST DEVASTATION 



By George W. Woodruff 



The opinion of even our best lawyers on questions of constitution- 

 ality are of little importance until a decision of the Supreme Court is 

 obtained, and that is impossible except after the enactment of the dis- 

 puted law. Therefore we should not be frightened out of striving for 

 good legislation by an outcry concerning its possible unconstitutionality. 

 Hardly any of the progress in conservation would have been possible 

 if the views of our most noted lawyers had been heeded. The Supreme 

 Court ruled contrary to their clamorous advice in the following in- 

 stances, all monuments of. the progress of conservation, and more im- 

 portant than their mere recital would indicate to the uninitiated : 



1. In Light vs. the United States, the Supreme Court held it con- 

 stitutional for the United States to enforce laws and regulations con- 

 cerning the National Forests, including charges for special uses such 

 as grazing. 



2. In United States vs. Grimand, the Supreme Court held that tres- 

 pass on National Forests contrary to the regulations of the Forest 

 Service could be punished as a criminal act. 



3. In United States vs. Mid-West Oil Company, the Supreme Court 

 upheld the humble and much, condemned opinion of a small number of 

 Government law officers by declaring it constitutional for the Executive 

 to withdraw public lands from disposal. 



4. In Utah Light and Pozuer Coinpany vs. United States, the Su- 

 preme Court held the water power regulations of the Forest Service 

 valid, including the right to exact a charge and fix a limit to the life of 

 the permit. 



5. After President Roosevelt vetoed the James River and Rainy 

 River water power bills and President Taft vetoed the Coosa River 

 bill, the Supreme Court, contrary to the expressed views of Senator 

 Knox and other great lawyers, held in United States vs. Chandler- 

 Dnnbar Company that Congress had power to provide for taking, de- 

 veloping, and selling or leasing the water power of a stream. 



6. In Baker I's. Szvigart, the Supreme Court upheld the constitu- 

 tionality of the Reclamation Act, and the right to collect, from users of 



100 



