The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1884-01-31
he has been using outside of his own

|
Mr.. Hazlewood moved to lay thu
substitute on the table. Lost-ayes
40; nays, AZ.
The substitute House bill No 81 be
ing under consideration, Mr.. Thomp
son said he had voted no because hi
wanted the bill discussed. After the
action of the committee OF twenty, ht
was prepaped to sustain the
report. Even now he favored
| the bill as presented by the committee
of twenty. He had looked upon it as
a bill of compromises, representing as
he did a constituency composed OF
all classes of people OF the agricultural
mechanical, paSturage and other great
| interests of the state. AS to the sub
stitute proposed by his colleague (Mr.
WurZbach-It is the committed, he
was not prepared to endorse its felony
feature, and while there was, he con-
tended, no authority to adopt the
amendment which was yesterday pro-
posed by Mr.. Moursand, there is no
power lodged in the legislature to take
away private rights by the condemna-
ton of such private property for such
uses as were proposed. But he sympa-
thised with the idea that there shall
be some mode by which small property
interests could he condemned if neceS-
sary for the public use. He did not
believe this body had the right to take
from private party his private
property unless we could condemn
it for public purposes.
Mr.. Thompson said he was here to
represent the rich man as well as the
poor man, the one as well as the other;
but he regretted to see that it had
gotten to be a sentiment that big pas
lures must 90. In response to this
sentiment he had to say his duty was
to represent the rich man as well as
the COW boy and the farmer as well as
the pasture man. The bill, however,
did propose to take away private
rights and looked to such rights rather
than to the public interest. He argued
that the substitute would be exceed
ing the powers of the legislature. If
the bill passed it would afford feast
to lawyers. He hoped the bill would
pass as it came from the committee.
The substitute, he commended, would
make widows and orphans of those
who had nothing to do with enclosing
the lands.
L
servatism. He thought the bill went
a little to extremes both ways. The
penalty was out of proportion to the
offense. Still the legislature, he
thought, recognized the necessity for
penalty. He thought the bill imprac-
ticable in its operations as to corpora
lions, who cannot be sent to the peni-
Tertiary, though they could be in
dicted for misdemeanOr. Again, he
thought the latitude proposed in the
would simply give juries
the power to Cypress, in assessing
damages, in spirit Of prejudice
against certain interests. He favored
and perfecting the first bill.
Mr.. Nash said SIX months ago the
present law was considered adequate,
but was not now, under the change in
and the handwriting
was on the wall, demanding penalty
for unlawful fencing as well as fence
cutting.
Mr.. Mckinney endorsed the views
Of Mr.. Taylor.
Mr.. Browning said he was opposed
to the penalty feature in the bill as
being too great, but the bill reported
by the land committee had one fea-
ture which he suggested should be
added to the other bill-the clause
to damages.
Mr.. Durant agreed mainly with Mr..
He was unwilling to
make fence cutting a felony.
Mr.. Ethridge regarded the question
very important. He thought the sub
stitute had one redeeming trait over
The other, which, to say the least, was
He contended that if
the fence cutter should go to the pen
Tertiary, the man Illegally enclosing
should receive like punishment. He
was in favor of making the crime a
nigh misdemeanor in both cases. Mr..
remarks were appIauded.
Mr.. Ethridge in his remarks having
alluded to the Bible as setting forth
The trueameasure of damages, an eye
for an eye and u tooth for a tooth,
1T the conclusion of his remarks Mr..
Wilson suggested that the doXology
De sung.
Mr.. Ethridge moved that the gen.
,leman lead off in singing it. Laugh
;er.
The bill was further discussed by
MeSsrs. Foster, OF Limestone, and
Foster, of Grayson.
Mr.. Rosenthal offered the following:
Resolved, That the sergeant-at-arms
Je and he is hereby instructed to pur-
,haSe, at the expense of the contin-
rent fund, three air-brakes, to be ap-
olied to long Winded speaking.
House took a recess till 8 p. m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Speaker and quorum present.
Mr.. Stagner said the question under
(from adjournment) be-
ing as to the substitute to House bill
No. 81, offered by Mr.. Wurzbach, he
desired to say that this was one of the
nest important questions that ever
came before Texas legislature. The
effect had been such that in Western
Texas capital had been withdrawn
from the line of country from San
Antonio to Galveston to such extent
that it has utterly paralized business
In that section, on account CT lawlesS-
ness prevailing all over the state.
The question was one, he argued,
with which we should deal fairly but
firmly. We had considered other
questions, but the question was, what
we should do with the landlord and
as well as the fence-cutter.
The country did not demand that the
pasture men should go down, but that
Justice be done to all parties by the
body. He asked careful eXamina-
ton of House bill No. 81, offered by
Mr.. Wurzbach.
Mr.. Chenoweth argued that the
adoption Of the substitute would be
something without precedent. He
did not believe in making a trespass
felony.
Mr.. Robinson regretted the senti-
ment which seemed to prevail that
the protection of the rights of the
poor man was communiStic. He Of
fered the substitute for several rea-
sons, which he gave. If the idea of
the poor man should come to be re-
garded as communistic the term
would become popular.
Mr.. Upton argued that any man en-.
closing grass of the lands of another,
should pay for it. He thought the
substitute should not be adopted and
favored the original bill. He did not
believe in declaring trespass to be a
felony.
The substitute was lost-ayes, 20;
nays "a.
Mr.. Merriwether spoke in favor of
a substitute which he offered, entitled
IAN act to make it unlawful hereaf-
ter for any person to enclose any land
not his own, nor under his control,
and to provide ample redress in all
cases wherein such land may have
been enclosed heretofore"
1t provides that as good men have
been encouraged by several acts named
it shall be unlawful to enclose. ETC..