The Weekly Kansas chief. [volume] (Troy, Kan.) 1872-1918, 1878-04-25
Herd Law.

This is one of the questions that will always
cause bad feeling; and such feeling is being
worked up over the recent order of the County
Board. We observe that petitions are already
being presented for signatures, asking the Board
to rescind the order, and submit the question to
a vote of the people; and petitions are also be-
ing signed, in favor of enforcing the order, as
made.
The BnIlefia after stating that Mr.. Long and
Mr.. Deckard voted for the order, and that Mr..
Leland opposed it, and wanted it submitted to
the people, proceeds to comment upon what
three men took the responsibility of doing, with
ont consulting the people. The Bulletin is SO
babtuated to slashing at the three Commissi n
ers, that it condemns them all, after admitting
that one was not guilty of the offense. For our
self, we have long believed in herd law, and
have never seen the visions of dilapidated fenc-
es or bare farms, and cattle lariatted out to
Craze, that some people have depicted. The
herd law that believe in, is such as prevails
in most of the old States, where they have the
best of hedges and fences. We believe that if
the people could be induced to try it long enough
to see how it works, they would lose much Of
their prejudice against it, and that large ma
jority would be in favor of retaining it. But
notwithstanding our own feeling, should
have left the question to the decision of the peo.
pie, not on petitions, but to be voted on at the
polls. The two Commissioners who favored the
enforcement of the law, are practical farmers,
who are supposed to understand the interests of
their calling, and the wishes Of large proper
tion at the citizens of their class. They claim
that there has been great change in public
sentiment, since the question was agitated be-
fore. We think SCI. too. We know of many
prominent farmers, who were very active oppo-
nents two years ago. who are now as strongly in
favor of the herd law. But We doubt whether
the change has been sufficient to place the ma
jority on the other side.
As far as petitions are concerned, they are a
farce. We all know how signatures to petitions
are obtained. On the previous occasion, spoken
of above, there was doubtless large majority
against the herd law, but not nearly SO large as
the petitions indicated. They contained the
names of many women and children, of persons
who were not residents of the County, and of
fictitious persons that never existed. An cleo
tion of the polls would materially obviate this
evil, as no advantage could be gained from ille-
gal votes, beyond the few scattering votes of
this kind that are polled at every election.
After all, this question is one of selfinterest.
In great portion of the County, there is CON-
paratively little range, and it will not pay the
owners of stock to let it run out. In the bluffy
and timbered parts, it will be more advantageous
to let it run at large, and there the people arc
generally opposed to the herd law. But in vot-
ing, those who have the greatest interest at
stake are always at the mercy of those who have
none. The men who pay no taxes, can always
vote tax upon those who do. Men who own
cattle, but no real estate, and want their stock
to forage upon those who have land, can outvote
the latter. And men who never owned COW,
will generally be found hostile to the herd law.
The plea is also raised, that time should be Civ
en- the people to prepare for the change. But if
ten years time were given, there would be as
many unprepared at the end of that time as
there are now.
This is question, decide it whichever way
you may, one side the other will feel that
they have been imposed upon. If We were
a Board of County Commissioners, we would
want to be delivered from deciding herd law
questions, above all things else.