- September 30. 1031 – Dr. R. C. Hill (Schenectady) to Ward B. Edwards (Department of Public Welfare – Utica)
My dear Mr. Edwards:
I am glad to learn from your letter of the 24th that you are giving some serious consideration to the proposed amendment No. 3. Brief and simplified data in complete form has been difficult to prepare on this subject. The measure has been made very complicated by many extraneous and often times irrelevant references.
Probably the most comprehensive and accurate presentation is the brief prepared by Mr. Ellwood M. Rabenold, Vice President of the New York State Fish, Game and Forest League, and sent out by their President, Mr. W. O. Dapping. I am sending you under separate cover a copy of this brief and some other information that will enable you to study the subject in an unbiased manner.
It seems to me that we are justified in expecting any fundamental aw to be simple. At least the voters should be able to tell what they are voting for with a reasonable amount of intelligence and effort. This is not possible on amendment No. 3. Section 7 of Article VII is not even mentioned on the voting machine, yet people voting will be amending that section on which has for so long protected the Adirondacks and Catskills. Briefly, there is enough good in the amendment to make it look respectable, and enough bad to make it rotten. This is the opinion of many who have studied the various benefits and injuries that might accrue from such a measure.
I am indeed glad to know that you are trying to help the pubic get a true picture of this proposed amendment.
Very Truly yours,
Dr. R. C. Hill