REFLECTIONS 473 



But I think I see in the report itself many features that result from 

 this origin. Aside from the general character of the solution that 

 has been presented, a matter which has been covered by others, I see 

 at many points statements which I consider overdrawn, or at least 

 unbalanced, not given in true perspective or relation, hence to the 

 reader not intimately informed, misleading. Such a treatment of an 

 important subject is sometimes justified on the ground that the end 

 sanctions the means. I do not suppose the Committee takes that view, 

 but rather that what seems to me partisanship results from their train- 

 ing and viewpoint. 



I will not specify on this head, for time lacks, and others to some 

 extent have done it already. I do wish, however, to point out two 

 points in which I think the basic figuring of the Committee is to be 

 questioned, and that is the more important because we have not yet 

 got to the end of this business; much more figuring of this kind has 

 got to be done, and it certainly seems that we ought to be sound with 

 our arithmetic. 



Let me, for one thing, refer to the first half of page 926 of the 

 report of the Committee as printed in the Journal of Forestry for 

 last December. It is stated there that 35 billion feet is the yearly 

 growth of timber in the country. The basis of that statement is not 

 given, but that point will be passed over. What I am concerned to 

 develop is that this 35 billion is stated to be growing on one-half the 

 forest area of the country, the better class of cut-over lands, a hundred 

 million acres more of the same class not being considered worth 

 figuring on, and 150 million yet in virgin timber being omitted from 

 consideration also. The point that appeals to me is that with extension 

 of fire protection and perhaps other helpful measures that seem to be 

 attainable in the early future, the hundred million acres should be 

 given some weight ; also that the productive power of the lands now 

 in virgin timber, when once they have been cut over, should not be 

 neglected. Just such figuring as this, if my memory serves, was at 

 the basis of that old 3-to-l statement that has had such wide currency. 

 I have always thought it misleading and faulty. 



For the next point I will refer you to the paragraph bridging pages 

 919 and 920 of the Journal for December, and, to compare with that, 

 to statements that Mr. Kirkland, who signs this report, has made in 

 other connections, in the Journal for March, 1917, page 294, and on 

 page 28 of the Lumber World Review for January 25 last. Each may 

 draw inferences for himself. On my part I have inferred that little 



