334 FOREST AND STREAM. [March 2, 1007, 
r 
d 
m 
vn 
Ml. 
f } 
01 i 
m 
ni\] 
a 
»)( 
TJi 
nl 
i 
- 
s 
=Jd 
Adirondack Forest Protection. 
Lake Placid, N. Y., Feb. 8 . — Editor Forest 
and Stream: A concurrent resolution to amend 
Section 7 of Article VII. of the Constitution 
of the State of New York is now before our 
Legislature. In 1904 a concurrent resolution 
was passed by one Legislature to permit the 
removal of timber from State land, but it 
never passed another Legislature, for the rea¬ 
son that the hypocrisy of the proposition was 
disclosed by the startling revelations of tim¬ 
ber thieving made the following winter, to¬ 
gether with the honest and unflinching posi¬ 
tion taken by Governor Higgins. 
In 1905 Senator Malby and Assemblyman 
Merritt appeared before the River Improve¬ 
ment Commission, as paid attorneys and 
agents of the pulp wood and lumber interests, 
asking to have dams and reservoirs built in 
three rivers of the Adirondacks, and the Hon. 
Joseph H. Choate and the Hon. Edward B. 
Whitney opposed them. The River Improve¬ 
ment Commission refused the privilege of 
building dams, which would take State lands 
by overflowing many acres, and would also 
destroy the timber. Our State constitution 
forbids the taking of State lands for any pur¬ 
pose, and also forbids the destroying of any 
timber on State lands. 
Having been defeated here Senator Malby 
and Assemblyman Merritt took steps to have 
the State constitution amended so the lum¬ 
bermen, mill owners and water power seekers 
could carry out their designs against the Adir¬ 
ondack forests and undeveloped water powers. 
To this end they introduced in both branches 
of the Legislature, in April, 1906, a concur¬ 
rent resolution to amend the State constitu¬ 
tion, and in the few remaining days of the 
session pushed it through. Governor Hig¬ 
gins had not power to veto it; it must again 
be passed this present session of the Legisla¬ 
ture, if they are to have their way, and then 
go to the voters next November for accept¬ 
ance or rejection by the people. If accepted 
by a majority of the votes cast for or against 
it the amendment will make the constitution 
read: 
“Section 7. The lands of the State now owned 
or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest 
preserve as now fixed by law, except such lands 
as the Legislature shall provide by law shall 
necessarily he used for the storage of water for 
public purposes and the construction of dams 
therefor, shall be forever kept as wild forest 
lands, they shall not be leased, sold, or 
exchanged, or taken by corporations, pub¬ 
lic or private, nor shall the timber thereon be 
sold, removed or destroyed.” The words in 
italics are the ones put in to amend and change 
the section. 
After that it will be comparatively easy for 
the lumbermen and wood pulp interests and 
water power seekers to get an act passed at 
Albany giving them any and all things they 
may want, in the Adirondacks, for their own 
private gain and against the larger interests 
of the State and its citizens. If there be doubt 
on this point in your mind, please consider 
the record, as follows: 
In 1904 these same men had a concurrent 
resolution passed, but it was not passed the 
second time, because the startling revelation 
as to the stealing of State timber, aided by 
State officials, and the sterling honesty of Gov¬ 
ernor Higgins made it impossible. In 1905 
State Senator Malby and Assemblyman Mer¬ 
ritt, two State officials., and paid servants of 
the people, acting as paid attorneys and agents 
of the lumbermen and water power seekers 
tried to get the River Improvement Commis¬ 
sion to have the State build dams and reser¬ 
voirs at State expense for dams, lands and 
for any and all damages to private lands, so 
the lumbermen and water power seekers might 
cut more Adirondack timber and have the use 
of an immense water power for electric and 
manufacturing purposes, or in other words, 
to let these men make money at public ex¬ 
pense. The River Improvement Commission 
refused to help them do this. Then these two 
State officials introduced a concurrent resolu¬ 
tion to change the State constitution so the 
Legislature may do what the River Improve¬ 
ment Commission refused to do, and very 
much more also. They rushed this resolu¬ 
tion through the Legislature in April, 1906, 
refusing to grant a hearing on the same, 
though asked to do so by the Board of Trade 
and Transportation of New York city, and 
also by the Association for the Protection of 
the Adirondacks. 
The Board of Trade sent Mr. Hughes, be¬ 
fore his inauguration, a communication on this 
subject, setting forth at length the great harm 
that will result if the forests of the Adiron¬ 
dacks are allowed to be cut off, and the Asso¬ 
ciation for the Protection of the Adirondacks, 
under date of Dec. 8, 1906, sent a printed let¬ 
ter to each assemblyman and senator of the 
present Legislature, clearly calling their at¬ 
tention to the protection now given the forests 
by our State constitution, to the proposed 
amendment as provided for in the concurrent 
resolution, which would come before them 
for action, and showing the irreparable dam¬ 
age and harm which will come to the State 
and to all our citizens if the destruction of 
the Adirondack forests is allowed. 
Forest and Stream, in its issue of Dec. 29, 
1906, published an article in which the need of 
better protection for the Adirondack forests, 
the desirability of having the State own all 
lands and timber now within the bounds of the 
Adirondack Park, to forever keep the same 
and to give the Commissioner of Forests 
added powers to acquire for the State all 
needed lands and for the better protection of 
the North Woods was set forth. Forest and 
Stream sent a marked copy of this issue to 
each of the two hundred assemblymen and 
senators at Albany, thus again calling the at¬ 
tention of each and every one of them to this 
concurrent resolution and the evils it will al¬ 
low if the State constitution is amended, as it 
provides for. 
On Jan. 11, 1907, the Forestry, Water Stor¬ 
age and Manufacturing Association, com¬ 
posed of lumbermen, wood pulp men and 
water power seekers, who hide under this as¬ 
sociation name, only giving the name of G. 
H. P. Gould, president, as signed to the mis¬ 
leading circular letters which they are send¬ 
ing out, sent to each legislator at Albany 
a printed answer to the letter of the Associa¬ 
tion for the Protection of the Adirondacks, of 
date Dec. 8, 1906, and are now making a de¬ 
termined fight, for private gain, against the 
interests of the people ond the larger inter¬ 
ests of the State. 
Friday afternoon, Jan. 25, 1907, the Board of 
Trade of New \ ork city met in joint con¬ 
ference with the Association for the Protection 
of the Adirondacks to agree on some general 
plan to defeat the concurrent resolution. Rep¬ 
resentatives of twenty-four different associa¬ 
tions and sportsmen’s clubs attended the con¬ 
ference, unanimously and earnestly condemn¬ 
ing this attempt to legally destroy the Adir¬ 
ondack forests. Letters indorsing the pro¬ 
test against the passage of the concurrent 
resolution were received from Bishop Potter, 
former Governor Morton and many other per¬ 
sons. Chairman John G. Agar was directec 
to appoint a committee consisting of one mem 
ber of each organization represented to helf 
defeat the concurrent resolution. On the same 
day, Assemblyman Merritt again introducec 
this concurrent resolution for its second pas 
sage by the Legislature at Albany. 
On Jan. 26, Timothy L. Woodruff, whet 
asked about the Adirondack water storage 
bill, stated, “he really had very little informa 
tion on the subject, and was therefore loatl] 
to express an opinion, but he thought the at 
tacks on the sponsors of the bill were un¬ 
warranted.” It seems he did have an opin¬ 
ion, and was not loath to express it for the 
benefit of the lumbermen and against the 
State. He is a timber owner and lumberman 
That day, James S. Whipple, Forest, Fish and 
Game Commissioner, also gave out an inter¬ 
view, in which he plainly put the weight oi 
his official position on the side of the lumber¬ 
men and water power seekers, as against the 
people and the State, indorsing Assemblyman 
Merritt’s resolution to change the State con¬ 
stitution, which, if passed and become ef¬ 
fective, will let the men and money interests 
behind it destroy what is left of our forests 
in the Adirondacks. It has been for some 
time an open secret that Mr. Whipple was in! 
favor of the passage of this concurrent reso¬ 
lution, but it was not thought he would openly 
advocate it, because as Forest, Fish and Game 
Commissioner it is his sworn duty to carefully, 
guard the State lands and forests, and to sup-! 
port the State constitution. 
Jan. 29, Governor Hughes called Mr. Whip¬ 
ple to the Executive Chamber for a private 
interview on this subject, after which Mr. 
Whipple said. “I am much surprised that my 
views on the water storage problem should 
have been construed as favoring the proposed 
constitutional amendment. I had no intention 
of either defending or opposing any proposed 
legislation.” Why should a State official not 
oppose legislation which is against the peo¬ 
ple? Again, win- should a State official, paid 
by the people, defend legislation against the 
people? Also, why should Mr. Whipple be 
surprised at the view taken of his statement 
of Jan. 26, made to the press bureau at Al¬ 
bany, which press bureau is devoted to the 
interests of the lumbermen and water power 
seekers, and which sent out the plainly worded 
interview with Mr. Whipple as favoring the 
wishes of those who desire our State con¬ 
stitution amended? 
He advocated the building of dams for 
water storage in the Adirondacks in plain, un¬ 
mistakable words, indorsed the Merritt reso¬ 
lution, talked about State control of the dams, 
stated it would increase commercial and man¬ 
ufacturing prosperity, and make possible the 
profitable employment of thousands of men— 
cant expressions and poor reasons, but per¬ 
haps better than none. 
Mr. Whipple spoke of one dam as follows: 
“Around the Indian Lake reservoir, where the 
work was well done, land has increased a 
hundredfold in value, and the people there 
are much better pleased with the new than 
they were with the old conditions.” William 
G. Peckham, of Indian Lake, N. Y., at the 
conference held the day before in the Board of 
Trade rooms, said: “I represent no society; I 
merely represent my neighbors. We have 
seen how the State money has been used by 
the wood pulp paper companies, under the 
guise of looking after our best interests. We 
have seen the charm and beauty of our wood¬ 
land wiped out by the paper trust. I have seen 
my neighbors, men, women and children, who 
lost their homes through the lumber trust’s 
