, 1880-03-20
Dry Greek on the Fence Question.

The negative said tha; the assertion a
the affirmative that the no fence law
woald sive Us more rapid increase Of puf.
a.aton remained 70 be proved Peopl,
who axe about u come here j1 No; inJui-,
Is 70 whether We have : '.no fence law.
They ask II We haze good land. climate
and transportation facilities. and when
they are satisfied On these points they
come The speaker on the affirmative
who had complained Of the cost II ienc-
ing, haG pnt II ar too high a figure The
first speaker on the negative had neigh
Dor whose ditch fence had lasted fifteen
years, and had served al the purposes for
which fences are made. Such a fence
would Cos: only 50 Per mile S1"2 sor
fencing quarter section, which would
take the value OF SiXiy-four days ui the
labor Of the poverty stricken first speaker
u the affirmative. In giving the gross
receipts from a township put IL wheat.
the speaker neglected 10 give the cost of
cUluvatInI It. II ever township in
Eastern Washington were put III gram
the stock interest would be eiTectuailv ex-
terminated. Nothing IS truer than that
mixed hushaGdry Is Necessary tu PROSPER
i,y- Years Will come when Ne Will have
partial failures ui q IS. ly unusual s.
verify Of weather. ,r hy such artificial
causes IS graSshoPpcr invasion i MN
geucy By no mCGnS remote or improbable.
There will he Years when good gram crops
IL other portions II the world viii re-
iuce the demand ;or and profit upon our
gram II such minimum Is hardly 10
repay the cost ci cultivation. \ c, untry
To- be prosperous must lie Self-sustainius
The mo fence law would he . death
blow to our sheep and wool interests
Every year thousands Of head + cattle
are driven from ,uy Territory T. the east
ern market, and they briug IL cash to
the country. nder the no fence law.
hardly enough would he raised fr, home
consumption. We would have 10 such
things as wopllcn mills. :aualr;,S. boot
and shoe faBtpricS, etc
It Is claimed by the affirmative that
- .tioGs ( Eastern Washington, ami, for
farming, Wouli T.. rc.e.4te3 d stock.
But men vii not keep stock IL a country
"hsre .yley are compelled To- herd. when
they can avoid this by removal In the
midd!e " a scope II country tt caly f,r
grazing, man can p!oW up a iuw acres
Of ground and compel stock men agouad
him To- hire hcr,lers. Al stock men are
not trespassegs Nos, oi the men in this
country who own syoch. axe farmers also.
Their cattle feed upon government land.
which should be free II he Use - al "f
Uneie Sans children. and IS. under the
present law. No one m"n"poliscs the
ranges. Under the mo fence law the
railroad companies could force stock men
To pay them whatever they asked for pas
tTrage upon their open lands, ar maze
them pay damages. The n, fence las
would dcPreclate present improved farsas,
and the incoming poor men wu1!d have
to bear heavier share al the tax than
now. Farmers VINO are now paying taxes
on fencing would refuse t. consider thela
under the head Of improvements, and
stock men would he, of necessity, forced
10 drive their stock away no tax from
that quarter. An acre Of Unfcnced land
would be a. valuable as one fenced. and
the owner would have 10 pay the sam.
taxes. Spectators and business men IN
town would take up land and hold i On
speculation only: since the Improvements
necessary for securing 1t would be very
little Under the present las, this land
viii be taken mp by more hona-tile farIn-
.rs Tho uqSSas,. and enforcement .f I
mo fence Law would involve a continu-
Gus litigation, the taxes 10 pay for which
would soon pay COX fencing all the land
in Eastern Washington. Bat have al
ready taken UP too Huch Of yoTr space
in my rambling arrangement of the arya-
menJs, pro and Con, and have not now
given hall The Judges decided mani
mgusiy IN favor u Il. NEGATIVE.
SUE GIa;E.