78 UNITED STATES FOREST POLICY 



at appraised value, but without success.*® Representatives Browne 

 and Holman of Indiana and Payson of Illinois tried to secure the 

 repeal of the act, but Browne's measure was never reported, one of 

 Payson's was reported adversely by the Committee on Public Lands, 

 and Holman's proposition, although debated at considerable length, 

 did not pass even the House. *^ More courteous treatment was accorded 

 a bill introduced by Senator Dolph of Oregon, to extend the act to all 

 timber lands regardless of their fitness for agriculture. This bill was 

 favorably reported by the Senate Committee on Public Lands, but 

 fortunately made no further progress.*^ 



In the General Revision Act of 1891,*^ the Timber and Stone Act 

 was not touched; and in the following year its provisions were ex- 

 tended to all public land states.^" 



EXTENSIVE TIMBER STEALING 



The two acts of 1878 have now been traced through, and somewhat 

 beyond, the period of the eighties. It has been pointed out how, in 

 spite of repeated protests regarding the evil effects of these two laws. 

 Congress, instead of repealing them, only extended their provisions. 

 However, while the action of Congress seems, in the light of later 

 developments, exceedingly unwise, yet any criticism of that action 

 should be tempered by a careful consideration of the laws applying 

 to timber during this period. A strict interpretation of the Free 

 Timber Act, as already pointed out, would have limited its appli- 



46 H. R. 1164; 46 Cong. 1 sess.: H. R. 6997; 47 Cong. 2 sess.: H. R. 832; 48 Cong. 

 1 sess. 



4T H. R. 1909, Cong. Rec, Jan. 7, 1884, 244: H. R. 7901; 50 Cong. 1 sess.: Cong, 

 Rec, Mar. 17, 1888, 2195: H. R. 379, Cong. Rec, Dec. 21, 1885, 378: H. R. 1300, 

 Cong. Rec, Feb. 29, 1888, 1594. 



48 S. 2482, Cong. Rec, Jan. 12, 1885, 622. Later in the same session the House 

 voted favorably on Holman's proposal to suspend all the public land laws except 

 the Homestead Law, pending legislation affecting lands, but in the Senate this 

 proposal was not considered. {Cong. Rec, Sept. 21, 1888, 8828.) 



49 Stat. 26, 1095. 



50 Stat. 27, 348. The act of 1889 (Stat. 25, 644), providing for the sale of Chip- 

 pewa pine lands, cannot be regarded as an extension of the Timber and Stone Act, 

 nor even of the general idea of sale, for in the case of the Indian lands the sale 

 was at an appraised value, and other legislation of the same period regarding 

 Indian lands indicates that the idea of sale was giving way to the idea of reserva- 

 tion. (Stat. 25, 673; 26, 146.) 



