CANADIAN Jf ORE STEY ASSOCIATION. 59 



we have arrived at a time when those who are at all acquainted with the 

 subject do not believe such speeches. We have, however, a great many 

 who believe that it is only a question of going a little farther north, and that 

 there our forests are still inexhaustible. I regret exceedingly the destruc- 

 tion of our forests through burning and improper cutting, but 1 am one of 

 those who believe that if Canadians will be true to themselves our forests 

 can be preserved in perpetuity. (Hear, hear.) 



It is sometimes claimed that the lumbermen are the great destroyers of 

 the forest. If there is one class more than another that desires to preserve 

 the forests it is the lumbermen. But in the Province of Quebec, of which I 

 know most, I regret to say we have two classes of lumbermen. We have 

 the lumberman who buys his limits, builds a mill, places booms, and does 

 in every way a legitimate business. But, unfortunately, we have another 

 class of lumberman there, who ostensibly for settlement, gets an area of 

 land from the Crown for practically nothing, cuts the timber and, in many 

 instances, makes a good deal of money very improperly. This class of lum- 

 berman exists also to a very great extent in the Province of Ontario. I 

 hope that it is not the case in your, own Province. As to legitimate lumber- 

 men, I ask is it possible that a body of men having millions of dollars in- 

 vested in timber should take any other position than to endeavor to protect 

 the forests? In my humble opinion, fire has caused twenty times as much 

 destruction as the lumberman's axe. The Ottawa Valley, that great re- 

 gion of country, would to-day be a green and unbroken forest if no other 

 instrumentality than the lumberman's axe had been at work. 



Mr. Sifton has given us to-day a vivid exposition of conditions in the 

 United States and Canada, and of what the conditions will be a few years 

 hence. I agree most thoroughly with him. In twenty or thirty years that 

 country's timber resources will be exhausted and if we in Canada do not 

 cut a stick at all during that time, we cannot expect to supply them for more 

 than eight years. It is, therefore, of vital importance for this country to 

 consider the best means to preserve its forests for future use, and the great 

 question is, Can it be done? There is one thing a great many hold in 

 Ontario and to some extent in Quebec: That it is right to sell a piece of 

 timber, and when that is cut over to sell another piece. With that practice. 

 I personally disagree in toto. All over the forests a large amount of tim- 

 ber is dying from old age. The whole area of the forests should be cut 

 over, taking the old timber and allowing the young trees to grow for future 

 use. With this idea that a territory can be cut over every ten years with the 

 same results I entirely disagree. Thirty years is more approximate to the 

 correct thing. In order to perpetuate our forest everything possible should 

 be done to prevent forest fires. That is the most important matter, and 

 the next is to so dispose of the timber areas as to place a premium upon 

 their being so worked that they will be maintained in perpetuity. In your 

 Province of New Brunswick Mr. Sifton referred to it I think a very 

 great mistake has been made as to your tenure. If you desire perpetuity, 

 your tenure should be a continuous one. Ontario, 1 think, is making a vital 

 mistake in this matter. Territory is being sold under short tenure and only 

 a short time allowed for taking off the timber. The consequence is that 

 there is a premium upon the rapid cutting of it. I do not blame the political 



