Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1886-12-30


silene- many others think that Mr.. stu
ar. letter merits some NOTICE: not on
account; Of 'h- unsavory epthe;sso thickly
-tr,wu through it. tthtrc are few Who envy
him his proficiency in that line) int that
some should mistake his venomou- attack
for a vigorous argument we should like to
show how very thin are the claims, that
"cattlemcaarr public bencfactor-, enriching
Themselves the colnnunitie. in which they
live ana the general government. and this
I withou, injury Ia any one" That they
enrich themselves | will not for moment
question. aud right here let me say that
do not blame them for doing 50. would
willingly enrich myself in the same way
had the money and brains" especially
the brains the money could l@ dispensed
with on entering the business perhaps. bat
il IL indiSpcn-ably necessary to have
Webstorian intellect before ONE Is able to
brand calf propcrly.) but | should not
have the gall TO pose II public benef',c-
tor. while thus enrching myself
ii he who causes two blades of grass to
grow where but one grew before, is public
beneiactor, can he who makes but one to
grow where hundred grew before. be con
siderei such? And yet the latter is what
the great cattle companies accomplish in
very few years, AS experience has shown On
the worn out ranges. where a few years
ago the grass was abundant. and where
now, there is not enough of this ''wastc
product of nature" left tn noirsh
goose. We concede the fact that Large
number, Of cattlemen do not own an acre
of land" nor do We place it to their
, credit, for they own immense herds that
they drive ON the range, where the poor
settlers little band could have subsisted in
plenty summer and winter. and not have
Impoverished the land but these migra-
tory bands Craze the range Us bare as "a
pike road and then are driven to pastures
new aud to Zurich (?) some other country.
Bat pastures new are getting scarce and
the thrifty cattleman turns his longing
eyes on poor LOS" domains. And right
here | differ with Mont. The cattlemen
have no interest in keeping the settler out
of the reservations, provided said cattle
men have first secured good locations there.
The Indians, who are the attlcmcn's worst
foe, can only he driven out by the advent
OF the settler. and this they well know, So
/ they zealously advocate the settlers cause,
by memorials to congress and in other
, ways. The settler does not replcnish his
harder by a raid on the range stock us the
Indian does, but proceed to raise a few
head of his own, takes care 81 them la Il
humane manner, feeding hay during severe
| weather, but as the cattle interests have
managed to get laws passed to hamper
his action in the matter of branding, some
of his calves are liable to stray away
among the range stock to recruit che MAYER
lex crop of the round up association, or to
he branded by them for the owner at the
very moderate price of three dollars per
head. What sane cattleinan would object
to settlers on such terms? Mr.. Tavenncrs
very pertinent letter in the last ARGrs
shows, that although, as claimed by Mr..
stuart, hecattle interest pays vast taxes
it does not pay its share when compared
with other industries. Does anyone for
moment suppose that it is the small band
of the settlfr that escapes the vigilance of
the assessoa? Mont's statement that the
caitle,men tdrain our life blood and give no
compensating return" being but IA hsura
tive term il true, for the taxes they pay
does not compensate in the onc-t housandth
part for the denuding Of the ranges. The
whole question may he summed up as fol-
lows. it seems to me: The cattlemen hav-
al, ~ .,f t.i ST nd
seeing that it is IA short cut to much
greater wealth, they crowd the ranges with
/ their property, and realizing that their in
dustry mast be short lived, they endea vor
to get as much out of il in that short time
as possible, regardless Of the injury in
ilicted upon the permanent settlers of the
country. These settlers being without the
means to take the same advantage of cir
cuinst ance- rs their more fortunate neigh
bors, one Of them raises "a faint protest in
the Argus against these fortunate ones
being granted any further undue advanta-
ges in other sections, when an irate cattle
man tnrns his gattling on him, loaded to
the muzzle with epithets and sophisms,
driving the poor fellow out of sight and
hearing.
Now Mr.. Editors, il may be fair to allow
Mont to make his protest in the ARGUS
under a nom lie plume and then deny him
/ the privilege Of answering an attack unless
accompanied by his real name, but think
+ you will admit that an anonymous article
always stands the best chance Of being
judged upon it's merits alone. The public
/ tanned ia a communicat ton than about the
motives that prompt it.
/ Respectfully, LEV ROBERTS.