494 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



D. Crumpacker of Indiana, in his speech 

 against the bill. He suggested the em- 

 ployment of two old-fashioned wind- 

 mills with pumps at the head of the 

 Connecticut River as a means of sup- 

 plying more water in the river and do- 

 ing "more for navigation than will be 

 done under this scheme in a quarter 

 of a century." The Indiana statesman 

 also said : 



Fifty years ago and more the great prairie 

 states in the Mississippi Valley were covered 

 with swamps and sloughs that were saturated 

 with water the year round. They contributed 

 much toward the rainfall in the valley dur- 

 ing the hot days of July and the dog-day 

 season. They gave to the atmosphere vapor 

 that went up into the clouds and made rain. 

 Those swamps have all been drained. They 

 are dry. They arc farms and gardens now. 

 The government might as well enter upon 

 an undertaking for the common good to re- 

 establish those swamps and sloughs on those 

 fertile lands in the prairie states, with a view 

 to promoting rainfall in the Mississippi 

 Valley. 



The A T cu f York Sun was so impressed 

 with this powerful argument that it re- 

 marked, after reviewing the speech at 

 some length : "There were other foolish 

 speeches made in opposition to the Ap- 

 palachian forest reserve bill, but the 

 palm must be awarded to the Hon. 

 Edgar D. Crumpacker." 



If this bill needed more support than 

 the powerful scientific, economic, and 

 legal arguments that have been massed 

 in its behalf during the ten years of 

 discussion, this would be found in the 

 fact that the best its opponents can do 

 against it is typified by the filibuster 

 in the Senate and such arguments as 

 Mr. Crumpacker's in the House. 



The Rocks Ahead 



ON OTHER pages of this maga- 

 zine the record in the first ses- 

 sion of the present Congress of 

 the Weeks bill for the acquisition of 

 national forests is given at some length. 

 The failure to pass the bill at this ses- 

 sion is a bitter disappointment, and the 

 present situation has an element of dan- 

 ger in it which calls for a word of 

 warning. 



The fight in the House was successful 

 because, although the Speaker and the 

 House leaders on both sides have stead- 

 ily opposed the bill, it was in the hands 

 of some of the shrewdest and most re- 

 sourceful parliamentary fighters in that 

 body, and they put the measure through 

 by sheer hard work. 



In the Senate the opposition was far 

 less so much so, indeed, that we were 

 constantly assured of the passage of 

 the bill by those who had it in charge. 

 \Yliy, then, did it fail in a body where 

 it has always had a comfortable ma- 

 jority in its favor? Simply because it 

 was brought up too late in the session. 

 By holding the bill back to await the 

 action of the House, when an ele- 

 mentary knowledge of the situation 

 would have made it clear that the House 

 would not get at this bill until near the 

 close of the session, an opportunity was 

 fitted to the hand of those senators who, 

 to show their own power or accomplish a 

 personal end, were prepared to filibuster 

 against it. 



The President was partly responsible 

 for this delay. Naturally anxious for 

 the success of his especial measures, he 

 did not wish to have anything inter- 

 vene to block them, and while he desired 

 and recommended its passage, he asked 

 that it be not brought forward until the 

 so-called "Administration bills" were 

 disposed of. The bill might have been 

 reported at any time from the Senate 

 committee on forest reservations, which 

 was unanimously in favor of it, and 

 pushed in the Senate without reference 

 to the House. Then it would have been 

 safe. The game of the filibuster is time, 

 and it is impossible to hold either house 

 in session in the heated Washington 

 weather when a time of adjournment 

 has been fixed upon. The senators did 

 the best they could under the circum- 

 stances, but the circumstances should 

 not have arisen. 



As it now stands, the danger that 

 must be guarded against is the attach- 

 ment of amendments, making necessary 

 a conference. The bill has passed the 

 House ; it will be voted on'in the Senate 

 on the 1 5th of February next; but so 

 will any proposed amendments. It is 



