232 ECONOMICS OF FORESTRY. 



sideration and action, there expediency calls for 

 prompt and vigorous assertion of state rights and 

 obligations. 



How inconsistently in actual practice the princi- 

 ples of state function may be applied can nowhere 

 be studied better than in the United States. While, 

 as a principle, we are inclined to demand restric- 

 tion of state interference and insisting upon per- 

 sonal liberty to circumscribe and minimize in many 

 directions the sphere of governmental action and 

 authority, we actually find paternalism rampant, 

 almost to the verge of despotism, in other direc- 

 tions, as in the liquor laws and oleomargarine 

 laws, offering restrictions which no European would 

 tolerate. Surely expediency has here dictated 

 almost the annihilation of principle. We canj_. 

 therefore, not expect to have the policies which 

 satisfy one country, although based on sound prin- 

 ciples, transferred and applied in the same way in 

 another country. 



It may be conceded that the truly socialistic con- 

 ceptions (much ventilated in forestry literature), 

 which consider it a duty of the state to take care 

 that the materials necessary or desirable for the 

 comfortable existence of its society be produced in 

 sufficient quantity and economically, are either anti- 

 quated and buried with the rest of physiocratic 

 teachings, or are not yet accepted as true democratic 

 doctrine. In mercantile pursuits, generally speak- 

 ing, individual effort and responsibility are certainly 



