The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1884-02-14
FACTIONS VERSUS THE PEOPLE.


relief comes, or until the end is reach
ed. There were two elements arrayed
against each other in the legislature,
one admitting that grass is property,
like timber, and that the government |
should protect property rights in grass |
as well as in timber and in crops OF |
cotton, and corn, and in live stock; |
the other, that might is right, and
that one may take grass from
another or the state and use it for
his own benefit and for the enlarge
ment of his own private fortune. The
latter clement could see well enough,
however, that live stock is not COM
munity property, and could teach that
that the person who supplies susie
nance to such live stock can have no
interest in production consequent
therefrom. The one had witnessed the
deplorable condition to which Texas is
now reduced, and had seen as a cause
of this condition the unrighteous rela-
ton between two classes of property,
in which one is made to contribute to
the other without the least return for
its use. The minority eliment in the
legislature found itself sustaining the
sound principle of government, that
under civil law there exists no right
to take from one citizen and to givet to
another; the majority sought to main
tain, and did continue in force, the
right of one person to take
the property of anoUher. There
can be no wonder, when this
monstrous proposition is considered,
that anarchy has asserted its sway in
many portions of Texas. 1t is this
very principle, not prohibited in our
laws, while the contrary is clearly set
forth in our constitution, that has led
to these great evils which disturb
Texas, aud which will afford them vi
tally until the state properly guaran-
tees to the children of the state and to
individual property holders the rights
that belong to them by every moral
law, and which the statute laws of
all other states and coun-
tries recognize. Here is a great
evll-the outgrowth of a prim-
tive and barbarous practice,
sustained under an advancing civili-
zation, that brooks no disregard Of true
rights, and is not its existence under
such circumstances reasonable, and
must they not continue until brute
force prevail against it, or until the
state government fully recognizes
such rights as veSting IN all property :?
The horse thief takes your animal at
night in stealthy style, because the
state vindicates the right of the owner
to his horse, but the stock-raisers
takes your grass in the
broad, open daylight, because
the state has failed, and
because it now refuses to protect, the
owner of the land upon which this
property grows. Time was when the
planes of Texas had roaming over
them tens of thousands of unow- [
horses, the property of ~aay one who
couldrtake them and place upon these
wild animate marks and brands of
ownership. So it was, too, with many
herds of cattle, whom no man owned.
The right of commune could then be
recognized, but since these unclaimed
herds have passed away the state
no longer recognizes such common
right, and to appropriate any horse,
or a cow not ones own, is punishable
as felony, while society has often
dealt out swift justice to the thief
who appropriates them. The state
owned no horses or cattle. but it
owned vast domain which has beer
IIt0nveyed, for value received, in fee
simple, to individual owners. In
changing hands any excuse for the
exercise of communistic privileges in
lands ceased. Individual brands, so
to speak, were thus put upon lands,
and all that grows thereon is as much
property as are horses and cattle, and
no enlightened government dare re-
fuse to maintain such property rights.
Under such rights, in truth, in all
countries, lies the basis to all other
property. Real estate carries with it
all that pertains to it, and Texas stands
alone in denying so vital PROPOSE
tion-one attaching to all property
rights. Here are the positions as
sumed, as we have said, by two ele-
ments in the legislature, where a re-
verse ratio representation mani
tested itself-a minority for what
the popular majority desire, a
majority for what only privileged
class demands. This was manifested
in the Senate in a manner which let
in flood of light upon motions at the
bottom of legislative consideration.
There the anti-free-grass element was
in the minority, while the majority
seemed to be influenced alone
by personal and class considera-
tions. All the cattle kings are
not in favor of free grass, but some
of them were for it, and their inter
ests were so represented in the Senate.
if not in the House, as to secure the
defeat of any necessary and rightful
measure concerning grazing. When
the governor first addressed the legis-
lature, concerning the all absorbing
question of the day, he was
on the popular side of this
grazing question, and THE STATES
MAN found occasion to heartily en-
dorse his views. His words then were
admirable, but three days afterwards
he spoke upon the same subject, a ndit
was evident serpent had beguiled
his mind into the advocacy of unpopu-
lar methods; he had turned his back
upon the peoples contemplate
Eden and had gone out upon the
unexplored Euphrates of class opinion
to pursue unpopular methods. From
that day forward the course of the
legislature appeared doubtful; evil
IDENTIFY the unbidden fruit had been
tasted of by senators ald representa-
tives as well as by the governor. Free
grass was from that day en-
troned. Senator Terrell's bill was
is almost perfect harmony with
the governors message, and it would
have been necessary only to modify.