SHOULD THE COMMITTEE REPORT BE APPROVED? 323 



difficult to see how, in view of the generally recognized State jurisdic- 

 tion, it could be maintained that the Federal Government also has 

 jurisdiction. Mr. Woodruff's statement in the last number of the 

 Journal may well increase one's doubts. He states three possible 

 grounds on which the courts might find a basis for upholding Federal 

 control, but he discloses his own doubt in saying, "If the proposition of 

 your Committee is not workable along constitutional lines, we will 

 perhaps be obliged to ultimately try for a constitutional amendment, 

 as has been done in the case of the income tax, suffrage, and prohibi- 

 tion." His statement is nothing short of startling when he says that if 

 the Supreme Court should find no basis for this legislation its decision 

 would upset the Appalachian National Forest legislation, a contingency 

 he does not want to consider. Neither do I. Any decision which 

 would upset the Appalachian Forest legislation would probably demolish 

 our whole structure of National Forests and necessitate some entirely 

 new basis on which to build our forestry enterprise. Let us take no 

 step that might lead to such a disaster. 



My conclusion is that it would be the wisest course to reject these 

 proposals of the plan and then have a committee to revise the plan so 

 as to bring it more fully into accord with American precedents and 

 principles. 



