206 TRANSACTIONS OF ROYAL SCOTTISH ARBORICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



sure that is a motto which we can keep before us, and never 

 allow our individual political opinions to interfere in the slightest 

 degree with our wish to press forward an industry which is 

 undoubtedly for the benefit of the country, whichever political 

 party may eventually bring it into force. But when we see 

 large sums of money voted for development not only in this 

 country, but for other countries, we ask why a fair share should 

 not be devoted for the development of forestry in Scotland. I 

 fear there may be in the political exigencies which affect both 

 parties quite impartially, the necessity of playing a little bit to 

 the gallery and of putting forward schemes which will bring 

 votes to the political party which puts them forward. It is our 

 duty to educate not only the legislature, but also the electorate, 

 in order that going hand-in-hand we may see a large develop- 

 ment of forestry in this country, which, when once it has come, I 

 have not the slightest doubt will entirely substantiate the argu- 

 ments we have put forward in its favour. I need not detain you 

 longer in proposing this toast. I have great pleasure in 

 associating with it the name of Lord Lovat, a more capable 

 and enthusiastic forester than whom there is none to be found 

 in the whole of Scotland. I give you 'The Houses of 

 Parliament,' coupled with the name of Lord Lovat.'' 



Lord Lovat, replying, said: — " I have addressed you at such 

 disgraceful length this afternoon, that my reply shall be very 

 brief, and, so far as I am capable, to the point. The allusion 

 which Mr Gammell has made regarding our Members to night 

 must, I think, be accepted as due to the exigencies of the moment 

 rather than to their wish, because I certainly know a great number 

 of the Members of my House wished to be here, and Members 

 of the other House equally wished to be present. To reply to 

 this toast at the present moment, without getting into the realms 

 of party politics, would be impossible. We can only hope that 

 at this great crisis Members of both Houses will be well advised 

 and will carry out their duties faithfully to the country as a 

 whole. We have probably never been, certainly not in our time, 

 at a crisis more anxious and more fraught with danger, and we 

 can only hope that both Houses will, as Mr Gammell has so suit- 

 ably expressed, put their duties before their own personal feelings, 

 and loyalty to the country before their loyalty to party. I turn 

 from this side of the question with great readiness to the question 

 of the relation of both Houses to the subject of silviculture gener- 



