COMMENT 



The comment in Forestry Quarterly, Number 4, of Volume 

 XIII, on the action of the people of the State of New York in 

 rejecting the proposed Constitution of 1915 is very interesting 

 to a resident of the State and especially to one who followed 

 more or less closely the development of the 1915 Constitution 

 and its rejection by the people in November of last year. The 

 comment by Dr. Fernow is upon the conservation phases of the 

 1915 Constitution only. Because this was made without develop- 

 ing the background of the formation of the Constitution and the 

 relation of the Conservation Articles to the Constitution as a 

 whole it may be a bit misleading and especially to the readers of 

 Forestry Quarterly in States outside of New York. There- 

 fore, certain features of the 1915 Constitution are pointed out 

 below with a hope that they may clear up any misunderstanding 

 as to the part the disapproval of the Conservation Articles 

 played in the rejection of the Constitution. 



At twenty-year intervals the State of New York may, and 

 usually does, hold a Constitutional Convention. Mr. C. R. 

 Pettis, Superintendent of State Forests of New York, discusses 

 in the present issue very fully and clearly the action of the New 

 York Constitutional Convention of 1893 and shows by discussion 

 of the past land policies why the present Constitution has a 

 clause forbidding the use of the Adirondacks and Catskills as 

 the forester likes to see forest land used. Through the action 

 of the Legislature and the people of the State a Constitutional 

 Convention was called for 1915. The platform of both the 

 older parties in the State favored such a Convention and came 

 out clearly for the embodiment in a new Constitution of certain 

 policies for the future development of the State. An unusually 

 strong and representative body of men were elected to the Con- 

 vention of 1915. Several of these had served in the Convention 

 of 1893. The President of the 1915 Convention was Hon. Elihu 

 Root. Anyone conversant with the New York of today must 

 agree that it is seldom that a stronger and more representative 

 body of men was brought together for action upon governmental 

 policies. 



Throughout the summer of 1915 the Constitutional Conven- 

 tion both through committees and in a body, went over all the 



180 



