TAX LANDS AND FORESTRY. 103 



the said clipping, it is worthy of note that no lands were sold at PUB- 

 LIC AUCTION on that day, but that Mr. Chandler, Chas. Pultz, Wm. 

 C. Laird, Silas McTiver, Haak Lumber Co., Wm. S. McArthur, Kenneth 

 McLoid, Hamilton J. Butler, Malcomb D. McPhee, Michigan Pipe Co. 

 and the Estate of Louis Cornwall, did on this day buy at PRIVATE 

 SALE 168 forties. These forties were the choicest descriptions listed, 

 and as the price obtained, in practically every case, did not exceed the 

 appraised valuation, it would appear as though these people, who are 

 timber dealers or lumbermen, had agreed among themselves as to what 

 descriptions each wanted and so avoided bidding against each other 

 and thus raising the price. 



As stated in the report of the special examiners, the fact that tres- 

 pass agents or representatives of the State Land Offlce have power to 

 settle trespass cases, and receive money for timber, etc., has led to many 

 abuses in this branch of the service, particularly as there appears to be 

 no systematic control or inspection of this work. 



The case which they bring out, where Chas. Roberts collected $30 for 

 trespass from 20-36-1 W, Reuben A. Simons cutting this timber for the 

 purpose of building a house to shelter his children and the apparent 

 poverty of his surroundings, illustrates one of the objectionable work- 

 ings-out of the present system. If, instead of compelling this man to 

 pay money which he could but ill-afEord, this case had been reported to 

 the Land Oflflce, some arrangement might have been made that the State 

 Land Oflflce, like similar oflSces in the United States service, and other 

 countries, issue a free-use permit to the poor family, and certainly hu- 

 manity and common sense should prevent such blood money to be col- 

 lected. How far this system can go in the other direction is illustrated 

 by the case of Henry Williams, where 250,000 feet of timber had been 

 cut and a settlement made for which he paid the State |16.95. 



A further objection to this system is brought out by the following 

 information received under date of June 18, 1908, from the State Land 

 OfSce: On Jan. 12, 1902, Wm. F. Johnson, of Roscommon, who was at 

 that time emploved as a special agent for the county of Roscommon, 

 receipted for fSOO for trespass on section 3-4-9-10 T 22 N R 3-2 W to 

 the Maltbv Lumber Company. This money was not received by the 

 Land Office until Oct. 22, 1902. We cannot see why the Land Oflflce 

 should allow the trespass agent to retain this money for almost a year. 



On May 10, 1907, A. E. Imler collected of Dick Hunter of Spencer, 

 at Kalkaska, $7^.00, being for 304 hemlock ties cut and removed from the 

 S E 1/4 of the N W %, 22-26-6 W. June 20 the State Land Offlce reports 

 that this forty was not held and that no trespass had been reported. 

 This case shows the possibility of fraud being perpetrated by the tres- 

 pass agents. If, as the Land Offlce reports, this description is not held 

 by the State, the fact that the trespass agent has power to collect money 

 for timber, etc., makes it possible to make a collection illegally. On the 

 other hand, if this description was held, it again illustrates that money 

 due the State can remain in the hands of trespass agents for great lengths 

 of time without anybody being the wiser. 



These petty misdeeds, which naturally enough must creep into any 

 service held in this form and condition, would not require mention were 

 this matter not so serious in its eflfects on the public at large and 



