Personal interest will ever be the leading factor in progress. Public spirit induces the general movement - but what good is public spirit to me? is the prevailing thought with the masses. The Forestry Association will do well to appeal to patriotism, - it will do still better to show that direct individual interest is closely allied to the general good. In the first branch of the subject literature abounds, and efforts have been fruitful - in the last one much has yet to be done. Few farmers, or landed proprietors, have been brought to recognize a direct personal interest in setting out trees. We offer to reduce their road-tax if they will set trees along the roadside, but the practical answer is that, even with that inducement, " It will not pay." We offer trees for nothing if farmers will set them out, but the answer is still, " It will not pay." We say we will endeavor to reduce the taxes on your forest-land, but there is the same answer, " Not even that will make it pay." It is here that the Forestry Association has to select the ground for the battle.

In my opinion, the fight can be safely made, and the victory won.

Long ago, in the Penn Monthly, I showed that we could expect little from individual effort. We may show a young man of thirty that a plantation of twenty-five or thirty acres would be immensely profitable when he reached sixty. It would be a nice laying up of money for old age; or a capital life-insurance for his family, in case of an earlier death. But, few men care to deliberately lock up ground for a century or half a century. In a new country like ours, changing conditions make it probable that, before that time, land may be worth much more than the forest, long before the forest has reached market-value. The minds of few men are proof against these considerations.

The remedy is in cooperative associations. A stock company should be formed, large enough to secure tracts of sufficient size to employ a force to look after the trees properly. The stock would always be worth more than its added interest, because the trees are nearing their market-value. If one wanted money before the trees were mature, the stock would find a ready market. Of course there would be details in the carrying out of such a project that would require good judgment. The land to be secured might be in locations that would be improving, so that after the century of timber, there would be money in the ground also. This would give value to the stock as time rolled along. The trees best adapted to the location would also require good judgment, and there are many other similar matters of detail, but which an expert in forestry-management could work out for such a company.

The only objection I ever heard to such a measure is the danger of loss through forest-fires. But there are no forest-fires in new forests. Fires only become serious in old forests, where, from the mass of old and dead wood everywhere, the flames are cordially invited.

The best of lessons are given by example. No teaching has the force that comes from that which has been done. It can be easily shown that forest planting is very profitable on a fifty-year scheme. Individuals cannot work thus far ahead, but corporations may. Why cannot Forest Leaves advocate my plan? Germantown, Philadelphia.

[The above was written at the suggestion of one of the editors of an excellent little magazine in the interest of forestry, published in Philadelphia under the style of Forest Leaves. The question was, How could forestry best be advanced? - Ed. G. M].