Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1878-05-25
A STEP BAcKwARD.-The town

council Monday nlgnt rePeaieu the
ordinance prohibiting cows running
at large at night. This testifes that
the spirit of reform may sometimes
overdo itself. In this case it was de-
termined that not only the streets but
the gardens of the town shall become
q common to predatory cows. 1t re-
moves the onus Of protection from
the owner of the cow to the owner OF
the garden at time when the latter
acquires special rights. The former
may now go to bed in security at the
expense of the latter, knowing that II
his enterprising COW cannot make her
nightly bread outside she can inside.
The garden-owner may now sleep
with one ear open and hold one eye
out the window. He understands,
too, that if he essays to protect his lot
by shooting the interloping COW, he
furnishes an uncomfortable occ asion
for somebody to threaten to shoot him
He remembers that in broad daylight
when he and his family are up and
can be watchful, his neighbor does
him the courtesy to keep his chickens
up. But at night this neighbor may
take advantage Of the councils par.
TALLY for him and let his COW run,
with the possible result of feud that
may never be healed. The council S
action is, therefore, not in the interest
of peace and good feeling among
neighbors, the first and fundamental
object Of government. 1t will not do
to say that good fences must be kept
up as defensive of our property, for
good fences are frequently no bar to a
vicious COW. Besides, if the cows
have legal rights in the commons the
gardens have an equal right to lie in
the commons. Indeed, they have
more right there; they carry no bells,
break no enclosures, trespass upon
nobody, and destroy no property.
The fact is, the commonest principle
of the common law tolerates no dis
elimination against one species of
property to favor another, even
though it be alleged, by implication,
that people who own COWS are poor Ter
than than those who do not. We,
therefore, commend to all concerned
careful examination of the general
statute covering this matter. 1t
could be desired, however, that this
could be done before there is occasion
to seek redress. Even then, the sat
isfaction is altogether Inadequate
To the owner the value of a garden
is not assessable in dollars and cents.
The pleasure of plucking fruit from
trees of his own rearing and from vines
Of his own training, is not reimburse
Bile in damages wrung from the I'M
willing hands of those whose cattle
have destroyed that pleasure. Hau
our council looked deeper into this
subject we do not believe they woulo
have repealed that ordinance. We
do not believe there is fibre of vii
full injustice in the entire body. But
with all the force of a lop- sided press
ure, with none upon the other side,
they made haste quickly to repair &
superficial wrong.
We are informed that several er-
rors occur in the letter of "Civis to
the Alleganlan of the 23d inst. which
ought to be corrected, inasmuch as it
is believed some of our county officials
our commissioners especially-sul-
fer some injustice thereby. In the
first place "Civis" says:
In pursuance of the action of the coun-
ty commissioners of Garrett and Allegany
counties, respectively, to test the cor