The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1881-02-11
DIVISION OF THE COUNTY.
Who Favored and Who Opposed II.

At this writing the fate of the Deer
Lodge County division bill in the Legislature
Is unknown. 1t is deemed an appropriate
time TO mention some facts connected with
its history that make it the most remarkable
IN the record of legislation in this Territory.
At the session two years ago, Judge
Knowles, now an anti-diyisionist, drew up
and endeavored to have enacted bill giving
Butte facilities for terms of court, and terms
would have been established there. 1t was
defeated by Butte men who are now, or have
recently been, divisonists. A bill passed the
same session providing that the Commission
ers of Deer Lodge County might erect or
purchase at Butte a county Jail. The Com
missioners have stood ready TO accede to an
expression of the wishes of Butte respect
ing this, but although a committee was
appointed In Butte to wait upon them and
apply for the purchase or construction of a
jail, they never applied therefor to the
Commissioners.
During the fall of 1880 certain residents
of Butte, inspired by different motives,
evolved the project of county division and
became so desperate in their resolve, antici-
pating opposition from Deer Lodge, that
they concocted scheme to betray their par
ty nominees and elect a Legislative Delega-
ton on the sole and selfish issue of their
being dvisonists. The result is known and
it is not the least interesting Of these incidents
that the trick resulted disas trously to the
fusionists.
When the issue developed in House Bill No.
@, the divisionists were somewhat astonished
that, instead of finding opposition to division
by the friends of Deer Lodge, the latter
were favorable to the establishment of Silver
Bow County, and were disposed to contest
only two claims made by the divisionists:
First, line taking out body of people,
nine-tenths of whom desire to remain in the
old County, and second, the scheme to dis
possess certain officers who had been elected
by the entire county for the entire county.
and the position Deer Lodge had taken was
affirmed by vote on final passage only opposed
by three members. 1t was right and was con-
firmed by the Representatives of every
County in Montana. The bill went to the
Council and on being considered in Com nit
tee of the Whole that body by vote of
seven to three reported in favor Of the second
proposition relative to officers.
For three months previous to this action
the two sheets published in Butte had dur
nally and weakly given voice for that city,
declaring through all the range of their abil-
tiles. from billingsgate to buster, that Butte
demanded division and would be satisfied
with nothing less. Although Deer Lodge
regarded the scheme as premature and un-
wise for Butte, was advised IL was so re-
garded by the heaviest tax payers and men
of best judgment there, and would have
preferred an act providing for separation in
1882, in the meantime aiding Silver Bow
County to prepare for the functions and du-
ties 1t would have to assume, not one of
the Butte anti-divisiunists ever put himself
ON record publicly or made remonstra nee
against the representations of the Butte
papers. This portion Of the County was,
and Is, satisfied for Butte to establish new
County. 1t will be better for all concerned.
The old County will be none the worse tina:
Ii should occur now. If the anti-divisionists
of Butte, or those desiring that action should
be deferred had made a showing, it Is not
improbable they would have had some sup
port, but the better judgment Of that which
was to remain Deer Lodge County was not
opposed so far as its own interests were con-
cerned to fair and immediate division, and
did not propose to assume that attitude as the
sentiment Of Butte was represented. And,
to demonstrate this, there was forwarded to
the Legislature this week the memorial pub
l:shed elsewhere urging the division shall be
made. We learn also a petition has this
week been sent from the heaviest tax payers
of Butte protesting against division, and
asking instead terms of court.
1t will thus be seen Deer Lodge has been
the steadfast friend of Butte, has labored
for Its interests as represented by the press
there, and that which Deer Lodge endeavored
to accord to Butte two years ago is now all
that is asked by its most substantial people,
although lis press is altogether silent about
it.
What the result will be cannot be foretold.
But 1t is evident to all that Deer Lodge has
been fair, just and generous throughout, to
the County, to Butte and the officers, and
that the selfish and venal press of Butte has
either misrepresented the best interests of that
city or that it owes to Deer Lodge debt of
gratitude. III the former, it has not denied
nor rebuked IL; If the latter, then all its
low abuse of Deer Lodge is proven to have
been malicious and false. Deer Lodge Is
for justice and division, and we believe the
Legislature will approve its wishes.