603 



has anybody got the right to do it? Has the State, by virtue of its 

 right of eminent domain, power to go and take a portion of the title of 

 any person and leave the soil vested in him. Here is an insuperable 

 objection in the way of condemnation proceedings. In the first 

 instance the State, if it is going to carry out the policy that has been 

 outlined in regard to the soft woods, must make an arrangement with 

 the owners there with reference to those soft woods by way of purchase 

 so far as it is able and then it must condemn the balance of the lands 

 when it reaches that point, because some it will be obliged ultimately 

 to condemn, but certainly during a period of two or three years that 

 work of acquisition can go on without the necessity of condemnation 

 proceedings. 



I want to call attention to the persistent manner in which 

 Van Buren Miller has been sought to be foisted upon this com- 

 mission. It is conceded upon the evidence that Van Buren Miller 

 wa» the agent of the Comptroller when these deficiencies occurred in 

 his account. There is no pretext that the evidence shows that he 

 was the agent of the commission and yet we hear from time to time 

 of the wickedness of Van Buren Miller because he had not faith- 

 fully served the State by way of returning moneys. We are not 

 here because we have any interest whatever in Van Buren Miller. 

 He was in the employ of the forest commission, as appears by the 

 record in evidence, for a period of thirty-five days, having- been' 

 recommended by the then Comptroller; at the end of that time he 

 left the employ of the commission and has never been in its etnploy 

 since. He did testify to certain matters with regard to Benton Turner. 

 He is mot the only person who has testified to those things and it is 

 unnecessary, as it would be, unwise, for us here to attempt any 

 defense of Van Buren Miller, although it does seem a little unjust he 

 should be put on trial and attacked here without any opportunity of 

 defending himself. But so far as this investigation^ concerned, what 

 difference does it make whether Van Buren Miller paid the State all 

 the money he owed it or not ? He was not the agent of the commis- 

 sion at that time or was not in. its employ. He was not a forester, but 

 he was simply the agent of the State employed by the Comptroller of 

 the' State of New York. 



At the outset the complaints against the commission were three in 

 number. In the first place, it was insisted that the commission had 

 prevented the State from acquiring lands for the park from private 

 persons because they allowed contracts for soft woods to be made. 

 What they had not purchased lands as they ought to have done, 

 but allowed these lands to go into the hands of lumbermen. It 



