Weekly Trinity journal., 1872-03-30

was mistaken and if he was wrong, ther
all right, and be disagreed with the peo-
ple,. because he believed in the right o.
the majority 10 do that which is 10 theil
interest to do and there was no power ir
the land, not in the Legislature or any
where else, that should prevent it. Be
ing called to order by Mr.. Mathers fol
talking about the platforms, he said hC
was in order, because Section 3 Of the
bill which they were about to pass was
in direct conflict with the platforms o
both parties. He was in favor Of the
passage of the bill. San Francisco would
rather vote $lO,OO0,OOO notwithstanding
the platform than to lose the advantage
of the continental railroad terminus
They would kick over their platform
and candidates if they got in the way o
the interests or the progress Of the people
If there was any plank more firm in tho
Democratic platform than another it was
that indorsing the fourteenth and if
teenth amendments yet when little
resolution came up a day or two ago ii
favor of ratifying them, every Democrat
ic member on the floor, with one or two
exceptions, voted directly in opposition
to the platform. He hoped that thes'
gentlemen would not, therefore, accuse
him of inconsistency in view of their owl
record. 1t was the best they conld de-
perhaps, and he was in the same boat
Mr.. Andrews, Of Shasta, was Mr. Shan
mons opponent, as he always has beeT
on this question. He said he stood to
day as he did six months ago, cOnscien
tiously on the platform Of anti-subsidy
and he had called for the ayes and noe
for the purpose of quietly getting mem
bers on the record. The subsidy planl
was the central plank Of the platform il
the last canvass. Mr.. Burckhalter sale
if the Governor was going TO stand upoI
the Republican platform in preference t.
the Constitution of the State, and vetC
this bill, let him stand there and go tC
thunder. The Legislature might as wei
90 home. This discussion, which lasted
about three hours, was on bill to sub
sidize an irrigation company in Stanis'
laus county. The bill passed, and as {
matter of record | send you the vote
Ayes-Bacon, Baird, Brown, Burckhal
ter, Caldwell, Coleman, Connolly, Coop
er, Crane, Dannals, Egan, Ellis, Free
man, Galloway, Goodall, Gray, Hayes
Henshaw, Hopper, James, Johnston
JOst, Lotion, Mecker, Mott Of Los An
geles, Munday, Mccullough, Pardee
Rector, Reed, Rice, Schrack, Sensabaugh
Splivalo, Slaughter, Stillwagon, Tinnn
Ward, Whitney, Wilcox, Wright, MIR
Spcaker-46
Noes - Andrews, Barker, Barklage
Bayley, Berry, Center, Days, Edgar, Ev
erett, Franck, Harvey, Little, Long
Mott Of Sacramento, Russ, Sargent o
San joaquin, Spencer, Turner, Welty
Whiting, Woodward-21.
THE TREsPAss LAW.
Again has this matter been before tn,
Senate, and in satisfactory shape ha.
passed, though there was very wordy
battle over it in the Senate. As | stated
in one of my letters, the bill, which was
made directly applicable at once to eight
counties, further provided that when one
hundred citizens of any other county
should petition the Supervisors, they
should submit the question to vote a
the next general election and maj0rit,
determine the question. The bill author
izes taking up tresspassing stock, adver
tising, selling, ETC., under well defined re
strictions. 1t allows charge of twenty
cents per day per head for horses, mule
or cattle, ten cents for hogs and five cent
for sheep or goats. When the bill wa
taken up in the Senate yesterday, severa
Senators desired their counties exempted
from the immediate application of tn,
bill, and large number desired to hav,
them exempted from the bill altogether
The only counties in which the bill goe
into full force at once are San Francis
co, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Marin
Napa, Alameda, Contra Costa and SaI
joaquin. Some % counties in all, wer,
exempted from the present or future op
Grafton Of the law. The bill finally pass
ed and Is now in the Governors hands.
ACTIONS FOR LIBEL.
A most important bill to the press o
this coast, has also now passed botl
Houses of the Legislature, and was in
troduced by Splivalo, of San Francisco
1t was the bill concerning actions for Ii
bel, requiring in substance all plaintiff
in such suits TO file bonds in the sum o
$500 AS security for the costs of the salt
A summary of the bill | have already
given. The recent libel suit against th,
Alta CdiifOrnid was most opportun,
example of the necessity of such law
a Police Court lawyer was termed
" shyster" and the evidence in tn,
case proved him "shyster," and tn,
jury rendered verdict for the defend
ants without leaving their seats. TIL,
proprietors, however, were put to grea
expense and were unable to recover
cent from the plaintiff. In the Assem-
bly, the bill passed without a dissenting
voice, and with the Endorsement of tn,
able lawyers found in that assemblage
but in the Senate the Judiciary reporte(
against its passage. But the business o
the bill was too evident to a majority
and with little work on the part of tn,
representatives of the press here, its pas
sage was gained by large majority, anC
no doubt is entertained of its approva
by the Governor.
ASSESSMENT OF ANIMALS.
Mr.. Barker, of Nevada, a few day.
since introduced bill relative to the as