316 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



marketing whenever, in the judgment of the Commission, such co- 

 operative combination will promote the public interest." The recent 

 railroad legislation and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case 

 of the United States Steel Corporation indicate the futility of trying to 

 force competition when whatever doubtful competition might result 

 brings only losses to industry and the public. If combination, under 

 efficient control, results in the best use of an important natural resource, 

 and at the same time brings stability to an industry vital to the country's 

 welfare, why not allow it and control it? ^ 



The proposal to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to carry on 

 such operations on the National Forests as may be necessary to harvest 

 forest products, has two ends in view. First, to afford the Forest 

 Service a much-needed opportunity to apply the principles of forestry 

 in operations entirely under its own control, transacting the business 

 ventures from stump to market. Government operations of this char- 

 acter, extending over a period of years, should furnish excellent ex- 

 amples of what it is possible to accomplish in silviculture, protection, 

 and industrial conditions. Second, to place the public in readiness to 

 meet any possible emergency which might justify it in producing and 

 marketing its own timber for the protection of its own interests. 



These provisions, from the Committee's viewpoint, appeared to have 

 a direct and important bearing upon the success of the plan as a whole, 

 and were considered to be measures of great usefulness in keeping 

 forest lands productive. 



