260 



THE FORESTER. 



November, 



on the last day of the session for reasons 

 quite unconnected with its merits. 



The vicissitudes which this measure 

 underwent before the Legislature may be 

 interesting as an illustration of the compli- 

 cations which in the nature of things must 

 arise when an attempt to enact a law of 

 this nature is made. Friends of forestry 

 reform, unacquainted with the methods of 

 legislative business, are apt to imagine 

 that when a good bill has been introduced 

 and the reasons for its enactment have 

 been effectively laid before the committee 

 to which it is referred the work is done. 

 As a matter of fact, this is but the begin- 

 ning, and that this is so does by no means 

 reflect discredit either on the understand- 

 ing or the integrity of members of the 

 Legislature. To understand the history of 

 the forestry bill of 1899, a few words on 

 certain conditions prevailing in Wisconsin 

 must first be submitted. 



Wisconsin still possesses some 400,000 

 acres of land which was granted to the 

 State by the general Government under 

 various laws. In addition there are within 

 the limits of the State, outside of Indian 

 reservations, about an equal number of 

 acres of government land. The State lands 

 are but a small remnant of what the State 

 once owned. It has been the policy up to 

 this date, to dispose of these lands as rap- 

 idly as purchasers could be found, and at 

 prices considerably below their real value. 

 For a number of years, the transactions of 

 the land department were of considerable 

 magnitude and required a considerable 

 number of clerks and other employees. 

 For some time however, these transactions 

 had shown a steady decrease, and the feel- 

 ing was wide-spread that an employment 

 in the land office was a sinecure, given by 

 lending politicians as reward for political 

 services. When the Legislature of 1899 

 met, it was universally expected that an 

 attempt would be made to practically abol- 

 ish the land department, and naturally the 

 lii-iaries of the old system were ready 

 to fight for self-protection. 



The forestry bill was proposed to still ' 

 further reduce the work to be done in the 

 Land Office, by suspending the sale of State 

 lands, pending an investigation as to what 



parts of it were to be included in a perma- 

 nent State forest reserve. It was antici- 

 pated, therefore, that on the whole those 

 legislators, who were disposed to cut down 

 the establishment of the land office, would 

 look favorably on the forestry bill, while 

 the friends of the Land Office employees 

 could not be reckoned on. 



The promoters of the bill succeeded in 

 having the measure referred not to one of 

 the'regular standing committees, but to a 

 special joint committee of both Houses, 

 composed of its known friends. The 

 chairman of this committee was a promi- 

 nent lumberman, one of the most influen- 

 tial men in the Senate, and an energetic 

 and well-informed friend of forestry. Al- 

 though, in the light of after-events, this 

 reference to a special committee proved a 

 tactical mistake the reasons for doing so 

 were undoubtedly valid ones. It was un- 

 known what the attitude of the members 

 on this question would be, and to let it go 

 to a standing committee would have meant 

 incurring the risk of having it pigeon- 

 holed by a hostile committee, even though 

 a majority of the members of the Legisla- 

 ture might be in its favor. 



Under the rules every measure carrying 

 an appropriation must, after it has been 

 favorably reported by the committee in 

 charge, go to the joint committee on claims. 

 It being the business of this committee to 

 keep a check on expenditure, many a 

 meritorious measure suffers death at its 

 hands, because the funds in the State 

 treasury are not limitless. For reasons 

 which need not be discussed here the 

 Claims Committee of 1899 was unusually 

 liberal in passing appropriations. This 

 was true especially during the early part 

 of the session, and if the forestry bill had 

 gone to this committee earlv it would 

 have passed without difficulty and this 

 would have made its becoming a law prac- 

 tically certain. 



But here became apparent the draw- 

 backs to the policy of having a special 

 committee. The members of it were kept 

 very busy by the work of the various 

 standing committees to which they be- 

 longed. The chairman had difficulty in 

 getting his special committee together. 



