The weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1878-1881, 1881-03-01
A CHARGE DENIED.

The Independent, commenting on the action
of the immediate representatives from this
part of the late county Of Deer Lodge, in
for a steamboat on the upper Missouri, says
that "the Butte men were hardly out of the
woods before they turned upon us and led
the attack upon the Powers proposition"
The charge implied is that the "Butte
men, were ungra'eful for the aid rendered
them by the representatives from Lewis q
Clarke in securing the organization of a new
county. The cases are not at all parallel. The
people of the county of Silver Bow asked an Or
ganiza,ion as a matter of plain justice-as
something they were entitled to by reason of
their numbers and wealth, and above all, en-
titled to it on account of the remoteness OF
the own of Deer Lodge from the tow of
Butte. For the representatives of Lewis &
Clarke TO have opposed such a reasu.e I'M
der the circumstances, would have been to
stand in the way of the progress and develop
ment, not alone OF Silver Bow county and its
inhabitants, but of the Territory as well.
Nothing was asked that could take anything
from the territorial treasury, or in
any way deprive the citizens any where else
of any rights. Not SO with the Powers sub
sidy. That measure proposed to take $4,000
from the treasury to aid a matter of doubtful
utility, and one Which, if successful, would
ouly benefit a limited number of the people
of the territory. As we said yesterday, mas
much as the conventions of both parties, as
well as mass meetings of citizens in all sec
tions Of the territory, have repeatedly de-
clared against the granting of subsidies for
any purpose, we do not see how our repre-
sentatives could have pursued any other
course than the one they did by voting against
the Powers steamboat bill.
This bll! opened up the whole question of
subsidy. If it is just and proper to subsidize
a steamboat line in the territory, it is ally
just and proper to subsidizc a railroad line
If it is right for the territory to give a S2e,O
subsidy to "a private citizen or a corporation
for making a 1000 Investment in a steam
boat, then it is equally right for the territory
to give a s., OC0,O 0 subsidy to any railroad
corporation that will make a So, O00, 600 i'll
vcstment in a railroad to be built in the ter
ritnry. We do not think the Independent
would advocate the latter proposition. If it
did, VT are satisfied the people of Lewis &
Clarke county would not endorse its posi-
ton.
While the bill was under discussion we
were not diSr os"d to refer to the matter, lie
lieving as we did, that it had not the ghost OF
a show to pass both houses. Neither would
we have referred to it now, had not the
Independent, forgetting what was due to cur
representatives who were governed by tleir
own convictions of what was just to the pco-
pie OF the territory, and therefore voted
against the subsidy measure, charged them by
implication with ingratitude. We have no
ohiccuons to the Independent engaging in the
unenviable occupation of belittleing the rep
rcsen,atiyes Of Lewis & Clark county, though
we dissent from its conclusions, but we do
object to its misrepresenting the well-tricd
and faithful members of the legislature from
this section Of the territory. We are satisfied
that when the sting sfdefeat which the Indepen-
dcnt has so recently fe.t shall be cured bv
time, our usually amiable contemporary willie
regrett the wording oflhe ratherharsh criticisms
in which it has lately INDUCED, upon the
action of a few members of the late Iegisla-
tive assembly.