388 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



quires seven to seven-and-a-half year-hours of business training (such 

 as accounting, etc.), and three-and-a-half to six hours of electives, plus 

 science and forestry. School four requires four-and-a-half hours of 

 English, one-and-a-half hours of public speaking, six hours of eco- 

 nomics and history, and six hours of modern languages, which with 

 the science and forestry make a well-balanced course, and one which 

 should, and does, turn out extremely competent men. School five 

 requires three hours of English, and one-and-a-half hours of eco- 

 nomics, in addition to the sciences and forestry. School six demands 

 three hours of English, three of economics and history, one-and-a-half 

 hours of business training, (accounting, etc.), and four-and-a-half 

 hours of electives, with the usual science and forestry. 



Now. it is entirely possible that that school at least which required 

 no English at all, and probably some of the others, recommend Eng- 

 lish as one of their electives. But when I peruse some of the official 

 publications of our National and State forestry departments, which 

 in no wise deserve better classification than maong the proverbial dry- 

 as-dust government bulletins, /he suspicion arises that some of our 

 professional men, far from j;^lecting any Enghsh courses, must have 

 performed very indifferently indeed in such courses in their native 

 tongue as they were compelled to take. It is to me an abiding re- 

 proach to the profession that in order to secure an editor for the only 

 popular forestry journal in America we apparently were compelled to 

 go outside of the profession to secure a competent man. Not only 

 do the majority of us see no virtue in attempting to emulate such mas- 

 ters of scientific prose as Huxley and Spencer, who could make an 

 exposition of the origin of chalk, or bulky volumes on the evolution of 

 life, read like one of the six best sellers, but we are also quite indif- 

 ferent to the efforts of those who do try to make forestry topics popu- 

 lar. For example, a series of three cleverly written and well-illustrated 

 articles from a forester's pen were recently printed in the leading 

 agricultural journal of this country, if not the world ; the writer tells 

 me that outside of his colleagues, whom he meets daily, precisely two 

 professional foresters have seen fit to congratulate him upon his suc- 

 cess. The forester responsible for a recent bulletin, patently intended 

 chiefly for propaganda purposes, and to that end containing illustra- 

 tions that are a joy forever, was rewarded by the forester reviewer 

 with the comment that it is a " 'stylish' publication," and an intimation 

 that the author trifled with the facts in the case. Is it any wonder that 

 the forestry propaganda, at least of late years, has apparently limped 



