EDITORIAL 



THE STATUS OF THE WEEKS BILL 



CHE Weeks bill as it passed the House at the last session is unfinished busi- 

 ness in the Senate and by unanimous consent is to be voted on, with any 

 amendments that may be offered, on the fifteenth of February. The title 

 of this bill describes it as a bill "to enable any state to co-operate with any other 

 state or states, or with the United States, for the protection of the watersheds 

 of navigable streams, and to appoint a commission for the acquisition of lands 

 for the purpose of conserving the navigability of navigable rivers." 



The text of the bill is familiar to readers of American Forestry. It 

 passed the House on the 24th of June by a vote of 130 to 111. In the Senate 

 its passage was prevented by a filibuster conducted by Senators Burton ot 

 Ohio, and Newlands of Nevada, the fact that Congress had determined upon 

 adjournment, owing to the lateness of the season, the heat, and the pending 

 political campaign, making the success of the filibuster possible, notwithstand- 

 ing a large majority of the Senate would have voted for the passage of the bill. 



The question of success or failure of this long-sought legislation, therefore, 

 now lies in the upper house, and the fact that a rosy view of the prospect is 

 held by many members of both houses, and that heretofore there has been a 

 safe working majority in the Senate for bills designed to establish national 

 forests in the Southern Appalachian and White Mountains, should not give 

 us undue confidence, or lead us to relax our efforts in the least. 



The situation is a critical one. We have been on the threshold of victory 

 before, only to meet defeat in one way or another. The charge has been fre- 

 quently made that neither house would pass the bill if some members did not 

 have assurance that it would fail in the other house. We do not believe this. 

 The fight in the last two Houses of Representatives has been a genuine battle 

 and if the enemies of the bill in the House could have defeated it they would 

 have done so. Nevertheless, the experience of weary years of hope deferred 

 has taught us that nothing is certain at the Capitol until the votes are 

 counted. 



There has been but one test vote in the Senate for three years, the defeat 

 of the bill having been twice due to hold-ups in the last days of the session. 

 Last year on the question of making the bill unfinished business, the vote was 

 48 to 16. This vote roughly indicated the friends and opponents of the bill, 

 although it was not a final division by any means. 



The sixteen voting nay on that question are probably to be counted 

 against the bill: Bailey of Texas, Bankhead of Alabama, Bourne of Oregon, 

 Bristow of Kansas, Brown of Nebraska, Burton of Ohio, Crawford of South 

 Dakota, Dick of Ohio, Gore of Oklahoma, Heyburn of Idaho, Hughes of Colo- 

 rado, Jones of Washington, Newlands of Nevada, Paynter of Kentucky, Percy 

 of Mississippi, Shively of Indiana. 



It is probably correct to assume that on a straight vote the bill would pass 

 the Senate, but it must be remembered that there are many shifts by which 



5{ 



