Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1879-11-21
Fences In Washington.

Niue, has been said Of late III " ASH
inston Territory about the pfopr'cty
Of rep,al;ng the laws requiring fences,
and much has been written and pub
lished in the journals of that Territory.
The views VI the opposers of fences
eliminated in bill introduced in the
legislature of that Territory. The
following is the result in the lower
house.:
II. B. lll--An act to repeal the
fence laws of Walla Walla, Columbia,
Whitman, Spokan and Stevens coun-
ties
Mr.. Taylor spoke long and earnest
" in favor of this bill. He declared
that in this matter he represented the
sentiments of nine-tenths Of the peo-
Die Of that whole section, and affirmed
that now the cost Of fencing is so great
as to deter immigrationj publish the
fact that no fences were required to
the farmer Of Europe and the eastern
states and the country would be set
tied up almost immediately. We
were now asking admittanoe as state,
with 10000 inhabitants. Pass this
law and we would have $780, 900 before
Congress could have time to pass upon
our petition. He drew attention to
the ease with which Usage orange
fences could be grown and the vast
benefit such fences would be. This
law, as it now stood, was law for the
rich as against the poor. 1t cost the
struggling wheat farmer more to fence
and keep out the cattle belonging to
capitalists from abroad than his wheat
netted him. He believed his colleagues
were mistaken regarding the wishes
Of their constituents upon this ques-
ton and that he desired that his rec
ord should be clear concerning it.
: Perrival noticed that all communi-
ties produced little men with great
;niads. The gentleman's desire to
stand well OH the record reminded
him Of the celebrated boy who stood
80 pobly on the burning deck, and who
made u record, but was burned up in
consequence. While he made no pre-
tense Of knowing how the people of
Walla Walla stood on this question,
he assured the house that the paople
Of his section were most bitterly OPP
posed to it. The cettlc interest was
the largest interest in his county, and
such law would virtually wipe it out
Of existence. An attempt to fasten
such a law upon them would not only
be resisted but II wronged a hardwork-
ing, thrifty constantly.
Frary declared that the argument
Of the gentleman from Walla Walla
Taylor reminded him Of the sick
mans cathartic, which resulted in
nothing but wind. The people OF
Columbia were well satisfied with the
law a. it stood, and did not desire this
change. In his county there were two
interests to protect, the stock men as
well as the wheat raisers, and he did
not propose to slaughter the one for
the benefit OF the other.
Guernsey said that should the house
see fit to pass this law he wished Co
iumbia county stricken out of the list
Of counties named.
Perkins explained to the house that
he was no orator nor had he forty
pages Of legal cap, as had his friend
from Walla Walla to read from, but
hs wished it distinctly understood that
the people Of Whitman county were
bitterly opposed to this measure.
Storms told the house that he hab
made but one speech in his life, and
that was to lady, but that he would
attempt another to defeat this bill.
Dunbar had no hesitancy in saying
that its passage would be the most
disastrous thing that could happen his
section OF country. It was the town
SPECTATORS. railroad and steamboat
men who talked mo fence" where he
lived.
Harper had laid out fourteen town.
ships in that section, and was satisfied
it was good law. While there were
but few cattle in it there were enough
to prevent settlement, because immi
grants could not afford to fence. Pass
this law and WHARF, you find bare and
urproductiye country now, You will
find miles Of waving wheat fields.
The vote stood Against, l6; for, II
Adjourned.
r-rsn