232 ECONOMICS OF FORESTRY. 



sideration and action, there expediency calls for 

 prompt and vigorous assertion of state rights and 

 obligations. 



How inconsistently in actual practice the princi- 

 ples of state function may be applied can nowhere 

 be studied better than in the United States. While, 

 as a principle, we are inclined to demand restric- 

 tion of state interference and insisting upon per- 

 sonal liberty to circumscribe and minimize in many 

 directions the sphere of governmental action and 

 authority, we actually find paternalism rampant, 

 almost to the verge of despotism, in other direc- 

 tions, as in the liquor laws and oleomargarine 

 laws, offering restrictions which no European would 

 tolerate. Surely expediency has here dictated 

 almost the annihilation of principle. We can, 

 therefore, not expect to have the policies which 

 satisfy one country, although based on sound prin- 

 ciples, transferred and applied in the same way in 

 another country. 



It may be conceded that the truly socialistic con- 

 ceptions (much ventilated in forestry literature), 

 which consider it a duty of the state to take care 

 that the materials necessary or desirable for the 

 comfortable existence of its society be produced in 

 sufficient quantity and economically, are either anti- 

 quated and buried with the rest of physiocratic 

 teachings, or are not yet accepted as true democratic 

 doctrine. In mercantile pursuits, generally speak- 

 ing, individual effort and responsibility are certainly 



