I

|

Lig-Free® Type

gDiGet

Plan of Reforestation:

[Extract from Thirteenth Annual Report of the Forestry Commission of Minnesota.] ;

The pine forests of Minnesota have been logged sixty
years and most of the timber has been shipped out of the
State. Inafew more years the original pine will be gone.
Already thirty thousand car loads of forest products are
brought into Minnesota annually from the Pacific coast.

The population of the United States since its first
settlement has increased at the average rate of 18 per
cent every ten years, and in eighty years will reach the
amazing number of 320,000,000! Forest products will be
in much greater demand then than now. If we neglect
suitable measures of reforestation our posterity will be
ashamed of us.

Forestry is not an expenditure. It isa savings bank
investment. The great thing in forestry is that it utilizes
third and fourth rate—sandy, hilly and rocky—land that
is unfit for agriculture. The yield tables of Germany
show that an acre of such land planted as part of a forest,
with pine, on forestry principles—seedling trees two or
three years old, planted at an average distance apart of
four or five feet, it being necessary to have forest crowded
when young to promote height growth—will in eighty
years produce 18,000 feet board measure. The surviving
trees—for the greater number would have died out—
would be from 12 to 15 inches in diameter breast high.
They would continue, if left standing, to grow many years
after they had reached the age of eighty years, but not at
a rate to earn good interest.

If the State this year planted 37,500 acres of coptichc
land in the same way, and continued todo as much every
year for eighty years, it would then have a normal forest
of 3,000,000 acres—not in one body but in scattered
localities—of the value of probably $200,000, 000, yielding

E

‘ ~

\:

a net revenue of 3 percent perannum. From the 37,500
acres planted this year there could then be cut 675,000,000
feet board measure of logs and the same amount every
year thereafter perpetually. Under forestry management
a larger percentage of the cut-over area would become re-
forested by natural seeding than is the case under present
methods of logging (now only about 5 per cent of cut-over
land becomes well stocked with pine from natural seed-
ing), the blank spaces would be promptly replanted and
a sustained yield secured.

If the State had 37,500 acres of third or fourth rate
land to plant with forest we would find that on an average
5 per cent of it was already well stocked with pine or
some other valuable timber, and that another 5 per cent
of the area was rock or water, which we would call blank
spaces; deducting this ro per cent from 37,500 would
leave 33,750 acres to be actually planted. In other
words, for every 1,000 acres of third or fourth rate land
only 900 acres on an average would have to be planted.

In planting about 200 acres substantially in the way
above mentioned the State has found that two men can
plant one acre a day, the whole cost, exclusive of land,
being about $6.00 per acre. To plant 37,500 acres each
spring would require 2,500 employes thirty days. Al-
though some thousands of men will for a few years be
coming out of the logging camps every spring, some of
whom could be employed in planting, and although the
planting would be done in half a dozen or more counties,
still it is not likely the State could for a number of years
plant 37,500 acres annually. The State should not
undertake to do any more than it can do economically
and well. It should, however, engage in the work with
energy.

Prussia plants and sows 45,000 acres of state forest
annually. The other German states in the aggregate

plant more.
Ve

I believe the State will be able to purchase forestry
land at an average price of not exceeding $2.50 per acre,
but as the State has some school land that is only fit for
forestry, but which according to the constitution must be
offered for sale at not less than $5.00 per acre, authority
should be granted for paying $5.00 per acre when
necessary.

The ordinary revenue is not sufficient to permit the
legislature to appropriate money enough to carry into
effect a plan of reforestation as extensive as the above.
To accomplish this there should be an additional tax of
three-tenths of one mill on all taxable property in the
State, being only thirty cents on each thousand dollars.
This would raise about $300,000 annually and be sufficient
to carry the plan into effect. That the plan may be per-
manent it should be authorized by a constitutional amend-
ment such as herewith proposed. That it may not seem
extravagant let me mention that for forestry Pennsylvania
appropriates annually $400,000 and New York $550,000.

If the next legislature were to submit the amendment
it could not be voted on until the general election in rorz,
and if adopted no money would be available under it
sooner than 1913.

Few states have the natural resources to undertake such
a system of reforestation. Minnesota’s natural advan-
tages admit of her doing it. If she has the public spirit
to undertake it she would at once be in the front rank, if
not the leader, of all the American States in reforestation.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment.

To secure a sustained yield of timber for the use
of the people of this State the proper officers shall
annually levy and collect a tax of three=tenths of
one mill on each dollar of the taxable property
within this State, the proceeds of which shall be
used for the purchase of land for the State adapted
for forest at not over $5.00 per acre, and for the
production and maintenance thereon of forest
according to forestry principles. Unexpended
balances shall not lapse but constitute a fund for
forestry purposes. The timber produced thereon
shall be sold at a fair valuation and the revenue
therefrom be paid into the State treasury, except
that one quarter of the net revenue shall be paid
to the towns in which the land is situated, in aid
of public schools and roads. Should any tract
acquired be found better adapted for any other
purpose than the production of timber, it may be
sold or leased and the proceeds used for acquiring
or developing forestry land. Until otherwise
directed by the legislature, which may supplement
these provisions with necessary enactments, the
State Forestry Board shall draw and disburse the
money hereby provided and purchase, manage and
control the lands and forests. No money shall be
paid for any tract until the attorney general shall
certify to the validity of thetitle. It shall be com=-
petent for two successive regular legislatures, by
a two-thirds vote of each house, to alter or repeal
any of these provisions.

LETTERS FROM VARIOUS CITIZENS OF MINNESOTA APPROVING
THE FOREGOING PLAN OF REFORESTATION, IN THE
ORDER OF THEIR DATE.

(From Mr. J. M. Underwood, experienced nurseryman and
formerly President of the State Horticultural Society. )

Lake City, MINN., Jan, 22, 1908.
Gen, C. C. Andrews,
St. Paul, Minn.
Dear Sir:

I have just read over the plan you recommend for reforesta-
tion. Youcertainly have put the subject in a logical and conclu-
sive manner, and I heartily endorse the proposed constitutional
amendment. There is nothing of greater importance to our State
and country than of promoting moisture in our climate and retain-
ing it, andin no way can it be done except by reforesting our cut-
over forests and adding to them. Commending you for your
efficient service in this work, I am,

Very truly yours,
J. M. UNDERWOOD.

(From Hon. S. G. Comstock, ex-Member of Congress. )

MoorHEaD, MINN., Jan. 22, 1908.
Hon, C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul, Minn.
Dear General:
I have read with much interest your plan of reforestation.
The need for some energetic action in that line is apparent to all
familiar with the facts. I have heard no plan so feasible and
practical as the one you outline. In my judgment the State will
do well to adopt and putin early execution your recommendations,

Very sincerely yours,

S. G. COMSTOCK,

(From Mr, J. H. Beek, Secretary St. Paul Jobbers’ and Manufac-
turers’ Association. )
St. Pau, MInNn., Jan, 22, 1908.
Gen. C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,
State Capitol, City.
Dear Sir:

I have very carefully thought over your plan of reforestation
as outlined in your letter of January 14th, and I am heartily in
favor of it. Unless the State of Minnesota enters upon some
comprehensive plan of reforestation and pursues it continuously
the time is not far distant when the people will realize how costly
has been the indifference and shortsightedness of our lawmakers.

Yours truly,
J; Hey BEERS

(From General C. McC. Reeve. )
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., Jan. 22, 1908.
General C. C. Andrews,
St. Paul, Minn.
My Dear General:

I have examined carefully your plan of reforestation and I
certainly approve most heartily of it. To my mind no one ques-
tion is deserving of more prompt and intelligent action on the
part of the proper authorities than the question of providing an
adequate timber supply for future generations.

Yours very truly,
C. McC, REEVE.

(From Mr. Daniel R. Noyes.)
St. Pau, MINN., Jan, 23, 1908.
Hon. C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,

St. Paul Minn,
Dear Sir:

Your favor of Jan. 20 received. Iam heartily in favor of
the plan proposed to ‘‘secure a sustained yield of timber” in this
State. The matter of ‘‘reforestation’’ is one of great importance
to Minnesota, and some practical plan of reforestation is of the
utmost importance to our State, and cannot be entered upon too

soon. Yours truly,
DANIEL R. NOYES.

(From Ex-Lieut. Governor A. E. Rice.)

WILLMAR, MINN., Jan. 23, 1908,
Hon. C. C. Andrews,
St. Paul, Minn,
My Dear General:

The necessity of reforestation under such a plan as you
propose, or something similar, ought to be given serious consider-
ation by every thinking person who has at heart the needs of the
State and the welfare of its future generations.

Sincerely yours,
A. E. RICE.

(From Mr. Robert A. Kirk.)

St. Pau, Minn., Jan. 24, 1908.

Gen. C. C, Andrews,

St. Paul, Minn.

Dear Sir:

I have your valued favor of the 21st, enclosing statement
of your plan of reforestation.

Iam sure that most thoughtful men are disposed to regard this
subject as one of the most important subjects before our people.
Already valuable time has been lost in getting to work on it, and
it is to be hoped that our next legislature will take favorable
action on it. Ido not attempt to recommend any particular plan
for this purpose. I have not given the matter careful attention,
and am not qualified to express an opinion of the value of any
plan under consideration.

I feel deeply, however, that this work should be undertaken at
the earliest day possible, and that it should be put into operation
as soon as the large body of intelligent men who have been giving
this subject careful consideration can unitedly work together in
carrying out this object.

It is a great work and deserves the most thoughtful considera-
tion of all public spirited citizens,

Yours truly,

RK. A; KIRK:

(From Hon. W. P. Allen, former Senator from Cloquet District,
and for many years Vice Pres. C. N. Nelson Lumber Company.)
Gen. C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,

St. Paul, Minn,

Dear Sir:

I have carefully read your circular offering a plan of refor-
estation, to be submitted to the people of Minnesota through a
constitutional amendment.

With the general purpose of the proposed plan I am, as you
know, heartily in sympathy, and I do not know of any one in the
State better fitted by temperament and experience to work out
the details than yourself. The adoption of some permanent sys-
tem of scientific forestry by the State of Minnesota is, in my
opinion, the only way to avert a disastrous famine in forest
products in the near future, and, what is worse, a steady decrease
in rainfall and the consequent lessening of agricultural production.
No dependence can be put on private initiative and enterprise,
even when encouraged by tax exemption or other subsidy.

It is a work to be undertaken by the whole State, since its ulti-
mate benefits accrue to the treeless portions of the State even
more than to the regions included in the forested limits.

Very truly yours,
W. P. ALLEN.

(From Mr. James J. Hill, Great Northern Railroad Company.)

St. Paut, Minn., Jan 25, 1908.
Mr. C. C. Andrews,

Forestry Commissioner,

St. Paul, Minnesota.
Dear Sir:

Acknowledging receipt of your favor of the 24th instant, I
beg to say that I have*read your plan for reforestation of cut-over
pine lands in this State, and find it well worthy of the best efforts
of all the people in the State. Our forest, once a rich heritage, is
rapidly disappearing. Except for the areas on the Pacific coast,
the forests of the whole country will in twenty years be practically
exhausted, and then we will be compelled to begin in earnest
what you recommend now.

Yours truly,

(From Hon. Wm, B. Dean, Ex-Senator from Ramsey County. )
REDLANDS, Catir., Jan. 26, 1908.

My Dear General Andrews:

Yours of the 2oth instant, forwarded from St. Paul, is athand,

I know of nothing relating to the material interests of Minne-
sota that should command the hearty support of our people more
than the subject of reforestation.

The plan proposed in the amendment to the Constitution seems
practical and common sense, If it should ever be put into opera-
tion, future generations will bless the wise men who devised it. I
hope you will be successful in your efforts.

Yours truly,
WM. B. DEAN.

(From Mr. Thos, Owens, Gen. Sup’t, Duluth & Iron Range R. R.)

Two Harsors, MINN., Jan, 27th, 1908.
Mr. C. C. Andrews,

Forestry Commissioner,

St. Paul, Mino,
Dear Sir:

I am in receipt of your letter of the 24th inst., with your
plan of reforestation; and I assure you that I heartily concur in
same, In fact, I ama strong believer in the fact that we should

plant trees for the coming generation. Yours truly,
THOS. OWENS.

(From President Northrop, State University. )

MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., Jan. 28, 1908.
Hon, C, C, Andrews,
St. Paul, Minn.
Dear Sir:

I have read with interest the plan of reforestation recom-
mended by the Forestry Commissioner of Minnesota, and while I
cannot go into a minute examination of the plan, I may say un-
hesitatingly that the plan seems to me to be feasible and desirable.
It is of the utmost importance that the land in Minnesota that is
not adapted to agriculture should be restored to forests, if possi-
ble; and I have faith in your knowledge of the subject and your
wisdom that justifies me in approving your plan.

Very truly yours
CYRUS NORTHROP.

(From Mr. Geo. Rupley of Duluth. )
DuLuTH, MINN,, Jan. 20th, 1908.
Hon. C, C. Andrews,

St. Paul, Minn.
Dear Sir:

I have your favor of the 28th instant enclosing copy of pro-
posed constitutional amendment.
I certainly approve of the plan of State forestry outlined there-
in and trust there will be no unnecessary delay in its adoption.
Very truly yours,
GEORGE RUPLEY.

(From Mr, J. W. Cooper, of Griggs, Cooper & Co., St. Paul.)
ST. Paut, Minn., Jan. 30, 1908.
Mr. C. C, Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,
State Capitol, City.
Dear Sir:

I have read with a good deal of interest the printed com-
munication sent me in your favor of Jan, 28th. I have long
thought that the State could well afford to spend sufficient means
to eventually cover lands that are unfit for agriculture with timber
of various kinds. I believe there is no question of more import-
ance than the question of reforestation, and I regret so few people
give the matter any thought. If it was possible to place before
the people of Minnesota what reforestation means to future gene-
rations, I have no doubt a large majority of the people would
favor liberal use of public moneys for sucha scheme. I assure
you it will be my pleasure to do anything in my power to assist
you in the matter,

Yours very truly,
J. W. COOPER.
(From Mr. T. G. Walther of St. Paul.)

St. Pau, MINN., Jan. 29, 1908.
Gen. C. C. Andrews,

St. Paul, Minn.
Dear Sir:

The subject of the restoration of our pine forests is very
interesting to me.
I fully believe that the United States ought to take hold of this

10

subject and carry it out to its fullest possibility, but it would also
be a grand idea for the State of Minnesota.

In this State we have many thousands of acres of land which is
really waste and is only fit to raise pine trees,—in addition to
that, the question of what the future generations will do if there
is Do pine is a very serious one. It is right that we who live at
the present time should do all we can for the happiness and profit
of the future, and I am very much in sympathy with your efforts to
bring about the restoration of the forests.

Of course, you know much more about the detail than I do, but I
assure you that if my assistance can be of benefit to you at any time
I will be very glad indeed to give you my help to the fullest extent.

If a system of taxation is necessary, I will be very glad to put
in my share,—in fact, anything that is done to restore our forests
to the greatest possible extent will meet with my hearty approval.

Yours truly, EG. WALTHER.

(From Hon. C. D. O’Brien.)
Mr. C. C. Andrews, St. Pau, MInN., Jan. 30, 1908.
Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul, Minn.
Dear Sir:

I am in receipt to-day of your favor of the 3oth inst., enclos-
ing your plan for the reforestation of this State. The matter can-
not be commended too highly, and is one of lasting importance.
I sincerely trust that your plan will be carried out.

Sincerely yours, ¢. D, O'BRIEN.

(From President C. H. Cooper, State Normal School, Mankato.)

Mankato, MInNNn., January 30, 1908.
General C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul. Minn.
Dear Sir:

Iam greatly interested in the effort that is being made for
an amendment to our State Constitution, and the plan of reforesta-
tion contained in the amendment submitted to me meets my
approval. I believe that the State should in fairness to the com-
ing generations do what it can to restore the forests that have been

destroyed; no investment could yield greater returns.
Very truly yours, ¢: H. COOPER:

11

(From Mr. Joseph McKibbin of St. Paul.)

St. Paut, Minn., Feb. rst, 1908.
Gen. C. C. Andrews,

Forestry Commissioner,

St. Paul, Minn.

My Dear Sir:

I have read your plan of reforestation with great interest,
and while lacking the information to discuss it fully in all its de-
tails, the plan as a whole has my hearty endorsement.

Forestry is one of our greatest economic problems. It should
especially command the attention of our more thoughtful citizens
and legislators. When we are so resolved, we can extricate our-
selves in a comparatively short time from most of our economic
difficulties—but no amount of penitence and energetic reform can
grow a pine forest in much less than a hundred years.

Individuals will not engage to any extent in enterprises from
which they must wait a century for returns. Reforestation is
peculiarly the work of the State and the nation, and a vigorous
and broadspread start should at once be made in Minnesota.

Very truly yours,
JOSEPH McKIBBIN.

(From Professor Thomas Shaw, of St. Anthony Park, Minn.

Wituiston, N. D., Feb. rst, 1908.
Gen. C. C. Andrews,

St. Paul, Minn.
Dear Sir:

Your letter of the 28th ult. and the circular inclosed have
reached me here. I take the first spare moment to reply. I have
read what you say in the circular headed ‘‘Plan of Reforestation
Recommended by the Forestry Commissioner of Minnesota,” and
am in hearty accord with the same. Minnesota will not be true to
herself nor to her future citizens unless steps are taken at the
earliest possible moment looking to reforestation under govern-
ment supervision.

I am also in hearty accord with the proposition to ask for a
Constitutional amendment on the general lines suggested by the
Commissioner, but have not yet been able to give that study to
this phase of the question which its importance demands

Truly yours,
THOMAS SHAW.

12

(From Hon. Daniel W. Lawler.)

St. Paut, Minn., Feb. 3, 1908.

Gen. C. C, Andrews,

Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul, Minn,

Dear General:

I have carefully studied your plan of reforestation and your
draft of the proposed Constitutional amendment to put it into
effect.

I believe that your plan is feasible and that the commencement
of the work should be no longer delayed. During the past several
years I have carefully read in the newspapers the accounts of your
efforts for the preservation and renewal of our forests, and I
believe that the people of the State are under great obligations to
you for the intelligent and efficient work which you have done.

Respectfully,
D. W. LAWLER.

(From J. W. Strong, President Emeritus, Carlton College, of
of Northfield, Minn.

Los ANGELES, Catir., Feb. 4, 1908.
Hon. C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul, Minn.
My Dear Sir:

For many years I have been deeply interested in your
earnest efforts to preserve the forests of Minnesota from needless
waste—a waste far greater than most of our citizens appreciate.
The importance of reforestation cannot be overestimated. The
adoption of the Constitutional amendment suggested would, in
time, accomplish what President Roosevelt so wisely calls ‘‘an im-
perative business necessity.”’ I sincerely hope your plan may be
carried out at the earliest possible date.

With personal regards,
Very cordially yours

JAS. W. STRONG.

13

(From Mr. L. W. Ayer, Experienced Woodsman and Timber
Estimator.)
BELLE PRAIRIE, Minn., Feb. 3, 1908.
Gen. C,. C, Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,

St. Paul, Minnesota.
Dear Sir:

Your favor of the 1st inst., enclosing ‘‘Plan of Reforesta-
tion,” is before me. That this ‘‘Plan,” or something equivalent
thereto, is absolutely necessary to prevent the destruction of our
entire timber resources in the near future, is evident to any one
fully conversant with the facts; and I am glad to give it my un-
qualified endorsement.

Born and raised in the timber region of Minnesota and having
followed the occupation of surveyor, cruiser and timber estimator
for thirty-five years or more, my opportunities for observation
have been perhaps as great as those of any person in the State.

Truly yours,
L, W. AYER.

(From Ex-Governor Lucius F. Hubbard.)
St. Paut, Minn., Feb. 6, 1908

General C. C. Andrews,

St. Paul, Minn.

My Dear Sir:

The proposition that Minnesota should adopt a definite
policy for the protection and perpetuation of her forest products,
such as would be provided by the Constitutional amendment you
have suggested, is one of the important questions that ought to be
pressed upon the attention of the people of the State.

This is one of the vital questions of the moment, and much
farther postponement of its serious consideration and practical
action thereon, would be a neglect of duty that would be severely
judged by generations to follow us. I believe that our people are
now educated upon this subject to a point where a decided opinion
in favor of substantial State aid for the reforestation of our denuded
timber tracts would be secured if an opportunity was given for its

expression,
Very truly yours,

L, F. HUBBARD.

14

(From Mr. Frank J. Waterous.)
Gen, C. C. Andrews, St. Paut, Mrnn., Feb. 13, 1908.
Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul, Minn.

My Dear Sir:

The proposed Constitutional amendment as recommended
by you appears to me to be thoroughly practical and feasible, and
I am satisfied that if the people of our State understood the situa-
tion that the amendment would carry by an overwhelming
majority.

Is there not some way that a campaign of education can be
inaugurated calling the people’s attention to the importance of this
matter? Yours sincerely,

FRANK J. WATEROUS.

(From Hon, J. R. Morley, Chairman House Committee on
Forestry, Legislature, 1905. )
Gen. C. C. Andrews, Owatonna, Minn., March 3, 1908,

St. Paul, Minn,
Dear Sir:

I have read with much interest the Constitutional amend-
ment proposed by you for presentation to the next Legislature.
And I can assure you that I am very much pleased to see these
steps taken toward reforesting the cut-over lands not fit for agri-
culture.

And I think the State should take the necessary steps at once
to reforest these cut-over lands. It is common knowledge that
our forests are fast becoming depleted and the average citizen is
indifferent about it. But if the State does not interest itself in the
matter of reforestation it will never be done.

Such a system of reforestation as you propose would put Minne-
sota in the front rank in this particular enterprise, as she has been
in everything she undertakes. Let the people become once inter-
ested in this matter and realize the benefit that will accrue to pos-
terity, and your measure will become instantly popular, No time
should be wasted, and I hope you will use every effort to get this
matter before the people, to the end that public sentiment may
crystallize and results may be got at the hands of the next legis-
lature. Yours truly,

J. K. MORLEY.

15

(From Mr. James E. McGee, of Hibbing, St. Louis County,
Timber Cruiser and Surveyor for Thirty Years. )
Hrspinc, Minn,, April 13, 1908.
Mr. C. C. Andrews,
Forestry Commissioner,
St. Paul, Minn.
My Dear Sir:

In answer to your letter of February 1st, 1908, will say that
your plan of reforestation meets my approval; and also your pro-
posed Constitutional amendment meets my approval. I have had
thirty years’ experience as timber cruiser, surveyor and logging
superintendent in the forests of Northern Wisconsin and Minnesota.

Yours truly,
JAS. E. McGEE.

TAX EXEMPTION TO PROMOTE FORESTRY.

It is the opinion of some people that it would be good
policy to encourage the production of timber by private
parties by reducing the tax on land so used. In Minne-
sota it would require an amendment to the Constitution
to authorize a lower rate of tax for forest than for other
land. If any such measure were adopted there would
have to be conditions that on land receiving the benefit of
low tax, forest should be maintained according to forestry
principles. It would not do to leave the land ina wild
state to take its chances for natural forest growth, because
in such a condition it might be very many years before
the whole of it would become well stocked with valuable
timber. There would have to be conditions that all of
the land not well stocked naturally should be planted with
valuable trees at proper distance apart—say not more
than about five feet apart when two or three years old;
also that the assessor should in person annually visit the
land and report in detail as to the manner in which forest
was maintained. Besides, the State forestry authority

16

would have to keep informed as to the way in which forest
was maintained on private land receiving the benefit of
tax exemption or reduction.

I believe the opinion which favors any such encourage-
ment of private parties in forest production goes no further
than to recommend that the land be taxed simply for its
value as land, and that no tax be levied upon the timber
until it is cut, and that the tax shall then be collected
according to a fair value of the timber.

I do not believe that public opinion would favor treating
large tracts of private land nor land of large corporations
in this way; but only about 4o, possibly 80, acres owned
by any one individual.

If it should be found expedient, I would not object to
the submission of an additional amendment to the Con-
stitution of a clause in substance like the following, to
form a part of and follow the amendment I have recom-
mended for a tax levy of three-tenths of one mill on every
dollar of taxable property, namely:

To encourage the production of timber by private
parties, the Legislature may provide that not exceeding
80 acres of land belonging to any separate owner and
used for the production of timber in a manner which the
Legislature shall prescribe, shall be taxed only for its
value as land; the timber to be exempt from tax until cut.

il

IBRARY OF CONGRESS

UN

Il

BRARY O RE

HNN