The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1. TREES.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 228, 1 February 1911, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1. TREES.

The more or less earnest attempt of the State through a Forestry Department to repair the ravages of the tree slayers of New Zealand will .be blessed by our successors who are destined to live in a country robbed of its most obvious characteristics. The layman who dares to point out that climatic changes in this country are largely due to forest destruction is ever hailed as a crank by the treeslayer, but it will be found in New Zealand as elsewhere that timber tree cultivation and adequate conservation will yet bulk largely as an important commercial consideration. In selecting an example for New Zealand in the matter of tree cultivation, State conservation and supply, there is none so notable as the methods employed in the Indian Empire. Of the vast territory teeming with hundreds of millions of people 24 per cent, is in State forests. In answer to possible queries as to whether State Forestry pays, it may be stated that the Indian State forests, which cover 250,000 square miles, have given 66,000,000 cubic feet of timber to the Empire. In a five-years period under State supervision the forest revenue increased by £OOO,OOO. All this, not by a process of utter annihilation, after the New Zealand style, but by the exercise of the greatest possible care in conservation and re-planting. The above figures, though eloquent enough, do not represent half the total value of the timber got from State forests, because innumerable people have free grants of fuel running into tens of millions of cubic feet. In studying the history of State forestry in India, one finds ample evidence of utter vandalism, the denudation of hills, the total destruction of great tracts of teak, and the consequent droughts and floods that followed as a consequence. When New Zealand was in its earliest infancy as a British country, the timber supplies of India were causing statesmen and scientists grave concern, and the famous Dr. Heifer was deputed to carefully examine the forests and report on them. His advice was that great plantations should be formed, as timber lessees were simply laying the country waste. This was in 1537, and it was in 1841 (when New Zealand was opening her infant eyes) that the old leases were cancelled and the new timber lessees were forced to plant five teak seedlings for every one felled. In 1843 the immense system of teak plantations was inaugurated, and it is therefore due to the determination of the Government that the native timber trees of India have not been annihilated, and that there is no possibility of utter loss of any valuable species. Quite apart from the immediate commercial aspect, the vast importance of forest conservancy from a national and climatic aspect was recognised at a time when New Zealand's only object seemed to be to make this country treeless. One of the world's greatest , experts in 1802 urged on the Government of India the vital importance of forest conservancy in the following words:—"Though immense tracts of country have been denuded in the past, there are still considerable areas which can be taken up and rendered serviceable for climatic ends; and the Forest Department has stepped in nons ■ too early in the endeavor to save thosfi wooded tracts that are still left. For climatic reasons alone the work of the Forest Department is of superlative importance." In New Zealand total denudation of specific areas is secured in the "interests" of agriculture. To obtain the baldness of a billiard table is to secure what is considered to be the finest result. The Indian Famine Commissioners in 1880 said: "So far as any immediate advantage is to be sought from the extension of the forests in respect to protection against drought, it will, in our opinion, be mainly in the direction of the judicious enclosure and rigid protection of tracts from which improved and more certain pastures may be secured for cattle, a supply of firewood secured which may lead to a more general utilisation of animal manure for agriculture, and an addition made to the power of the subsoil to retain its moisture. As to the protection of the higher hill slopes from denudation, it may be confidently stated that thev will be more useful if. kept clothed with wood than subjected to the wasteful and destructive proe'ess by which they are brought under temporary and partial cultivation. Whether the expectation of an improved water supply is realised or not, there is adequate reason for conserving such tracts where possible." The New Zealand sheep-farmer does not even partially cultivate the "higher hill-slopes." He denudes them, and they become absolutely worthless for any purpose whatever. Anyone who has travelled in the Manawatu district is familiar with the wretched bare hill-tops which have had every bit of useful soil washed off them, and which are the patent reason for the flooding of the flats, the erosion of the rivers and the destruction of agriculture. The delightful inconsequence of the "eat, drink and be merry, for to-morrow we die" people was shown in India, where nomadic tribes simply fired the forests and planted rice. They were able to grow one crop only, and then passed on to destroy another tract of timber and to grow another crop. These were the features that impressed statesmen and experts, and out of which grew the powerful Forest Department of the Indian Empire. The immense success of that Department, the utility of its great j work in protecting agriculture and in assisting to fight droughts, are matters that are worth considering by New Zealand statesmen. We have already noted that little importance is attached to the reports of our forestry experts, hut there certainly is a growing feeling that reafforestation is a prime essential to the success of agriculture and the wealth of the nation.

CURRENT TOPICS PREFERENCE IS DEAD ! The London Daily Mail says "preference is dead." So may it be, if only it be decently cremated so that from its ashes there arise something better: a broader preference, a wider federation. If manufacturers, producers generally, and also consumers (tlie most numerous class) only had their preference, it would be something very different from what goes under that name among the so-called statesmen of the various competing nations. The producer's preference would be for high prices, and keep out all competition; the consumer's preference would be for abundant supply and low prices; the politician's preference is trimming so as to suit both sides. He can't do it, though he sometimes deludes both producers and consumers to accept his artfully spun out scheme. It is when we see this being tried between! such close and intimate neighbors as the United States and Canada that the folly strikes one. Here are two nations, or peoples, who are side by side for 3000 miles, with only a mere survey line, a parallel of latitude, to separate them in a large part of their boundary; they speak tile same language, use the same implements, pass from side to< side of this boundary at will, and yet they—on either side —are being led to think and then act as though there is, or ought to be, some other kind of preference than that indicated above. Another thing shows up plainly in all this negotiation between Canada and her neighbor and Britain, and that is that most of the talk about Imperialism and the Flag counts for very little when dollars are in the count. It was dollars that started that cry, "Preference," and it seems that dollars will end it. Preference dead, then something better will take its place, that will have a wider outlook. May be, in the future, it will take the shape of a federation of the nations, in which each will be so dependent on tlie other that there will be a desire to remove all barriers between nations rather than to erect them.

THE PEOPLE'S CASH. If the revenue of a country increases at the enormous rate shown in the figures for both the Commonwealth and this Dominion, without any abnormal increase in the numbers of folk sharing the benefits, it seems to follow that individuals have become richer. Although, of course, it cannot be shown that because in ten years the trade of New Zealand has increased by £15,400,000 (a magnificent indication of advance), every unit of the population has benefited, it indicates with certainty the untiring industry of those who have contributed to the increase. Both New Zealand and Australia are greatly dependent on seasons, but vigorous application is necessary to obtain such splendid results even when seasons are superlative in quality. The outstanding feature in the progress of both Australia and New Zealand seems to be the splendid labor of the people. For instance, the gain of population in Australia in 1910 was not the reason for the tremendous increase of exports which added to the wealth of the Commonwealth by upwards of nine million pounds sterling. Practically the same number of people who last year produced this startling result, produced nine million pounds worth less in 1909. The reasons for the increased production of individuals lie in the increased areas of land brought under cultivation, the beneficence of Providence, and the toil of the people. If two undeveloped countries like the Commonwealth and this Dominion can show such splendid increases in business without very notable increases in population, it is interesting to speculate on the ultimate business of the two countries when they are producing to their full capacity. For politicians to infer that trade goes ahead by leaps and bounds because of politicians is a harmless conceit, for everyone recognises that at the bottom of the prosperity of all countries is the strong right arm of the worker.

" BEFORE YOU SPEAK-COUNT TEN." "In future all statutes except those of which operation was urgently needed at once, should not come into force earlier than March 1." —The Attorney-General. Dr. iFindlay himself is perhaps the finest exponent of the necessity of new legislation to be found in New Zealand. But, like each Minister in an eminent bunch, he is "approachable," and tlie result is that he has now shown that "pressure is being brought to bear on him to submit proposals to the Government" to this effect. In a country where over-legisla-tion (which is another name for political self-conceit) is a necessary corollary of over-representation of a particularly scarce number of people, it is inevitable that amateur legislators will endeavor to "flesh their maiden swords." Just because the average builder of a Bill has more zeal than intellect, there appears on the Statute Book of New Zealand measures that puzzle the wit of the finest brains of the community. In New Zealand the "intellectuals" have less influence than the mere manoeuvrers, and it thus happens that any body of persons if tlicy make sufficient noise can achieve alterations in existing legislation. Because this is recognised there is little stability in many Acts (excepting those based solely on British law) now operating to the advantage or otherwise of the people of New Zealand. The benevolent provision promised by Dr. Findlay that the "legal profession and the public" under the suggested legislation would have more time to soak in amateur legislation is particularly weird. There is no lawyer above ground in New Zealand who has the slightest hope of understanding existing statute law, and the idea that "the public" is to be permitted to understand what no K.C. in the King's dominions understands is more laughable than anything written or spoken since Chaucer died. The trouble with the bookseller or the land agent, the bookmaker or the wharf-laborer (who are the architects of our laws) is that they are too zealous. They care not about the quality of the laws, but are careful to give good measure. The suggestion that the ordinary merchant, shopkeeper, tradesman or professional man can understand the law as well as the politician is complimentary but self-de-precatory. Tf the average citizen were given one hundred and fifty years to study the legislation of last session he would at the finish understand it no better than any member of the House of Representative understands it at this moment. An examination of any member (Ministry included) would settle the point.