Idaho semi-weekly world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1875-1908, 1882-02-14
THAT


s'gied to the petition asking Delegate
Alnslie to do all in bis power to &C. !
cure the Passage Of the bedrock flume
bill with proper safeguards, giving to |
miners and persons interested in min
ing ground. their full rights 10 all
respects. The bedrock fiume company
holds that the passage Of the bill will
not interfere with the rights Of the
miners. If not. an amendment, giving
miners their full rights In all respects,
would not be asked for. Hon. Jas. n.
Hawlcy. we are informed, drew up
the bill and he circulated the petition.
BY advocating an amendment he ac-
knowledgcs that the bill. as it now
stands, asks for grant that will take
away certain rights and prove detri-
mental to the mining interest Of Boise
county. The people ask "wby was
not the bill drawn up with the proper
safeguards in the first placer" Because
1t was the intention to push it through
before its nature was known to the
people If Boise county. The compa-
uy's aim was to gobble up the best
portion of the Basin. This could not
be done with the rights Of the miners
properly guarded. When light was
thrown on tho Infamous business then
the company began to squirm. 1t
was not till then that the rights Of
the miners were considered. Ainslie
was written to more than once for a
copy OF the bill. 1t didn't come, and
for the reason that he knew that the
miners of the Basin would be red hot
and would demonstrate against whole
sale robbery Senate, John Z. Jones
was written to for copy of the bill,
and it was promptly forwarded. The
miners of the Basin then rose as one
man and began to grind the weapons
of defense. A sudden thought then
struck the members of the company
that it would be good ipIan to advo-
cate an amendment protecting the
rights of the miners, and petition
was started around. 1t received TWEEN
ty seven signers, some of them men,
bers of the company. We have said
before, and we repeat it, that there
would have been NO opposition to the
bill had it been drawn up so as not to
interfere with anybody's rights, aud
had contained a clause compelling the
company to put in fume. 1t pro-
poses 70 give the fu,ne company q
grant of nearly the entire Basin with
out compelling them to do a lick o.
work. The company did not have IL
view, as the bill plainly shows, the con
struction of f1ume. The object was
to secure an immense franchise foI
which they pay nothing, and promise
to do nothing. Summed up. it means
a franchise and no flumc. The ables
lawyers of the Territory say it is one
of the grandest schemes of robbery o
the rights of miners that was evel
/ concocted. Can the bedrock fun,
company find solitary lawyer, petit
/ logger or any kind, outside of them
selves, that will say the miners right,
will be safe in case the bill passes.
1t may look a little bit strange t,
people outside Of Boise county that tn,
petition asking for an amendment t,
the bill was not signed by every maj
in the Basin. They didn't sign i
for the reason that it was believes
to have been a dodge to appeas'
the wrath of the people, and to stoI
the fight against the bill. so that ]
could be put through-without amend
ments. We don't say that this wa