190 UNITED STATES FOREST POLICY 



This discussion of the Forest Lieu Act will help to explain the 

 events of 1907. Sufficient western hostility would have been aroused 

 by the fact that the act operated to destroy timber on the public 

 domain for the benefit of a few land grant railroads, some of them 

 already, by reason of various illegal and arbitrary practices, very 

 unpopular in the West. This was not, however, the only way in which 

 the act aroused western hostility, for it occasioned very unpleasant 

 relations between the Department of the Interior and certain western 

 congressmen. Even men who were in no way implicated in those or in 

 other frauds, felt a sympathy for the ones who were caught, for 

 unquestionably such frauds had been too common in some of the public 

 land states to be viewed seriously. Also, it is not probable that the 

 government convicted, or even indicted, all of the politicians who were 

 guilty of land frauds. It is doubtless significant that it was Senator 

 Fulton — the only one of the Oregon delegation not indicted in 1903 — 

 who was most active in the anti-conservation attack of 1907. 



INEFFICIENCY OF THE EARLY FOREST ADMINISTRATION 



For reasons just pointed out, there would have been sufficient hos- 

 tility toward the forest reserves, even if the forest administration had 

 been entirely above criticism in all respects, and it was not above just 

 criticism. During the first few years of forest reserve administration — 

 previous to 1905 — the force included some very poor material. The 

 superintendents and supervisors were often appointed through politi- 

 cal influence — lawyers, editors, postmasters, doctors, real estate deal- 

 ers, etc. The ranger force was worse. Ward politicians, bartenders, 

 and loafers formed a considerable share of the force. Low salaries — 

 sixty dollars a month for a man and horse — uncertainty of tenure, 

 and impossibility of promotion kept good men from entering the ser- 



cannot but feel that his stand on forestry matters in Congress was generally 

 conscientious enough. He was of course an astute politician, and it is said by 

 employees in the Land Office that while he was commissioner he used his office a 

 great deal in paying political debts, by giving information, and by advancing 

 cases out of their regular order, etc. — acts not unlawful perhaps, although often 

 unfair to the applicants who did not "stand in." {Cong. Rec, Oct. 10, 1893, 2374; 

 Oct. 12, 1893, 2431; Dec. 7, 1894, 112; Dec. 17, 1894, 366; Apr. 18, 1916, 6395. See 

 also various references to Hermann in Puter and Stevens, "Looters of the Public 

 Domain," particularly pages 59-66.) 



