November ii 



1896. 



Garden and Forest. 



45* 



GARDEN AND FOREST. 



PUHLIS1IKD WEEKLY BY 



THE GARDEN AND FOREST PUBLISHING CO. 



Office: Tribune Building, New York. 



Conducted by Professor C. S. Sargent. 



ENTERED AS SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POST-OFFICE AT NEW YORK, N. Y. 



NEW YORK, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 1896. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



PAGE. 



Editorial Articles : — Forestry and the New York Constitution 451 



The Defacement of Niagara 451 



Autumn Birds in the Pines Mrs. Mary Treat. 452 



Conifers on the Grounds of the Kansas Agricultural College. — I. 



F. C. Sears. 453 

 Plant Notes : — Have we Two Native Species of Trumpet-flower ? 



Robert Ridgway. 453 

 New or Little-known Plants: — Vitis Doaniana. (With figure.).../". C. Sears. 454 



Cultural Department: — Notes on Gooseberries S. A. Beach. 454 



The Cultivation of Mushrooms E. O. Orpet. 456 



Hardy Ornamental Grasses G. IV. Oliver. 457 



Notes on Chrysanthemums T. D. Hatfield. 457 



Begonia manicata. Anthericum vittatum William Scott. 457 



Cannas, Wintering Bananas T. D. Hatfield. 458 



Correspondence : — Notes Irom West Virginia ... .Dai: she Dandridge. 458 



The Preservation of Fruits by Vapor of Alcohol... Professor F. A. Waugk. 45S 



The Rose, Bridesmaid John N. May. 459 



Recent Publications 459 



Notes 459 



Iliustration :— Vitis Doaniana, Fig. 59 455 



Forestry and the New York Constitution. 



IT is a matter for congratulation that in the midst of the 

 unparalleled excitement of the late Presidential cam- 

 paign the people of this state did not forget to kill the pro- 

 posed amendment to its constitution which authorized the 

 leasing of five-acre tracts in the State Forest Preserve, the 

 selling of certain state forest-lands, and the exchange of 

 lands without the Adirondack Park for lands within the 

 Park. It is true that the amendment was so carelessly or 

 ignorantly drawn that no distinction was made between 

 the Adirondack Park and the Forest Preserve, which are 

 quite distinct, but the intention was plain. No doubt, it 

 meant to authorize the Legislature to exchange portions of 

 the State Forest Preserve outside of the Park for private 

 lands within the Park boundary, and although such ex- 

 change, if conducted with perfect honesty and intelligence, 

 might in certain cases be advantageous, there has been so 

 much crookedness and jobber}'' in dealing with the wild 

 lands of the state that it is dangerous to remove any of the 

 constitutional safeguards which have been erected to pre- 

 vent further spoliation of our forest property. 



We did not approve of the action of the Constitutional 

 Convention of 1894 which made it impossible to cut or sell 

 any timber on the state lands. We have never ceased to 

 plead for the preservation of the North Woods, but we have 

 urged that they should be made to yield revenue and grow 

 more productive every year. This constitutional provision, 

 it is true, put a stop to the selling of standing Spruce above 

 a certain size, which was practiced under the form of law 

 and which might easily have ruined large areas of forest ; 

 but it seemed to us, and still seems, a short-sighted policy 

 to provide for a thriftless protection of the forest by sacri- 

 ficing its usefulness. Absolute prohibition of the removal 

 of wood, including even wood that is dead and down, from 

 the state preserve simply means waste ; but the convention, 

 impressed with the shameful abuses which have been prac- 

 ticed under the name of forest management, felt justified 

 in withholding from the people of the state the right to use 

 what is their own, because they feared that through igno- 



rance or greed they would not use it to the best purpose. 

 So apprehensive were they of the dangers of mismanage- 

 ment that they voted unanimously to prohibit any manage- 

 ment whatever, and under the constitution as it stands 

 trees must grow to maturity and die, and fall and rot, 

 instead of being encouraged to develop into marketable 

 timber and bring an income to the state. This means 

 either that the convention did notknow that there is such 

 a thing as a rational forest management or that they were 

 convinced that the people were so ignorant or vicious that 

 thev could not be expected to adopt any such system. 



We believe that fundamentally the interest of the people 

 in the forest and the interest of the lumbermen are one, and 

 that no advantage will accrue to either by leaving the 

 products of the forest go to waste. It is our opinion 

 that the cause of forestry was not helped by the dissemina- 

 tion of such ideas by the constitution makers, and that the 

 revised constitution was based on a serious misconception 

 of the true relation of the forest to civilized society. It may 

 be that our legislators are not yet to be trusted in so deli- 

 cate a matter. But when we read Sir Dietrich Brandis' 

 account of what has been accomplished in Burma in ad- 

 ministering forest-lands in which half-wild and wandering 

 tribes hold prescriptive rights, it is not creditable to our 

 enlightenment that such an admission must be made. 

 Nevertheless, the amendment which was killed on Tues- 

 day was not a step toward rational forest practice. It did 

 not provide for any intelligent or scientific administration 

 of the state timber-lands ; it only opened the door for greater 

 spoliation. It certainly will not hasten the era of produc- 

 tive forestry to open state forest-lands to invasion by rail- 

 roads or to lease them out in five-acre patches to campers. 

 What should be provided for is the beginning of systematic 

 forest policy. This would be an object-lesson of inestima- 

 ble value. It would correct false views and encourage the 

 establishment of skilled forest economy not only in the 

 public, but in the private, timber-lands of the state. This 

 is prevented by the constitution as it is, but matters would 

 be much worse if there were coupled with this prohibition 

 the chance of trading and leasing, and the general de- 

 moralization and destruction which might follow. 



After all, there is something gained when the people 

 have made up their minds to protect the woods even if 

 they do it unwisely. Let us hope the time will soon come 

 when popular sentiment will be so enlightened that it will 

 be safe to trust the officers of the state to organize and 

 develop a system of rational forest practice, when there 

 will be no fear that our people are too ignorant to do 

 this in a scientific way, and no fear that their moral 

 sense is so dull that they cannot administer a trust like this 

 without official corruption. 



A correspondent who has recently visited Niagara Falls 

 writes in a disheartened way about the work on both 

 sides of the river. Great care has been taken on the Cana- 

 dian side to give the reservation a dressy look with smooth 

 lawns and parterres, and beds of plants with bright foliage 

 such as we sometimes see around pretentious villas. The 

 woods have been cut away or thinned out, so as to give 

 an open and park-like effect, and everything that is rugged 

 has been toned down and civilized. The power-house 

 connected with the electric plant has a sluiceway which 

 discharges through a square hole in the wall of rock, and a 

 little stream of waste water squirts out into the abyss in 

 ludicrous competition with the Horseshoe Falls, justabove 

 it. On the American side the reservation proper is fairly 

 well cared for, and an attempt is made to save the fringe of 

 native trees and shrubs on the banks of the rapids ami 

 Goat Island. But from the last of the Three Sisters, the 

 view up the steep slope, down which the tumbling waters 

 rush, has been hopelessly vulgarized. Instead of the sky- 

 line of forest and rapids there are rods of brick walls and 

 smoke-belching chimneys ; and yet the companies want 

 more. Of course, the river still thunders over the preci- 



