Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1886-10-09
BROUGHT FORTH A MOUSE.

Last Wednesday morning The MINEl
asked it's esteemed evening contemporar,
few questions. It labored for nearly two
days and-the caption to this article il
the result. We are candid enough to go,
we never gave the Inter Mountain credit
for possessing an alarming amount o
roltical knowledge, or for unusul powers
OF reasoning, and we are also candid
enough to say we did not believe GU,
esteemed evening contemporary would
attempt to hide it's ignorance behind frivol
;ty or that it was wanting in manliness to
discuss matter OF it's own raising, other.
wise than in straightforward logical
manner.
As an illustration of its line of argument
God save the remark-our harmless, vet
esteemed contemporary AYERS that:
"The timber laws we're passed to close
out Carl Schurz, a dough-faced nugwump.
whose policy was almost as contemplate
as that of Sparks, and who was kicked
by the Republicans into the Democratic
party"
If the readers of the Inter Mountain are
satisfied with that kind of rot; if they &C.
cept as their political teacher one who shows
such a reckless disregard of facts and ex-
bibits such lamentable ignorance of polit-
cal history, they are indeed entitled to the
commiseration and heartfelt sympathy of
every Humanitarian.
1t is hoped, however, and expected that
the Republican readers OF that journal will
blow aside the chaff thus thrust under
hair md 10<> ,1o
formation which they fail to find in the
columnsof the Inter Mountain. Eor their
benefit and for the honor of Butte journal
ism-for it would be shame to have such
unadr ;erated nonsense go abroad uncon-
tradicted-THE MINER will give a few of
the more important facts bearing upon the
case.
In the first place the laws regulating the
cutting OF timber on the public domain
we're passed by a Republican Congress and
signed by a Republican President. Although
these laws were passed in the real interest
ofholders OF large tracts OF timber land in
Washington Territory, Oregon, Minnesota
and Wisconsin to force settlers in Dakota
and Montana and some OF the other terri
tories to purchase their lumber from them,
while it was given out that they were neces-
sary to protect the forests of the Rocky |
Mountains, they did not then DOR do they |
now prohibit anyone from cutting timber |
upon the public domain for his own use. |
This much for the laws for which the Re. |
publican party is entirely responsible.
Now for their application. CarlSchurz
was one OF the first Secretaries of the In
terror to enforce the laws. He filled the
woods from Lake Superior to Puget
Sound with timber spies and paid inform
ers. Montana was full OF them. This was
before our esteemed evening contemporary
had an existence and before it's editor saw
Montana. Seizures of wood wer, made in
every mining camp and in every hamlet,
village and town in the Territory. 1t was
seized everywhere. If man could prove
he cut the wood himself it was released
But if the wood had been cut by some one
else, hauled into town by the cutter
or by another party and bought by
the consumer it was seized, copfiscated
and seld for tho benefit 81 tde Governments.
That was the way the law was enforced
by Carl Schurz under Republican admin.
|,
And now how is it enforced? There is
not man in Silver Bow County, there is
not man in Montana. who can not only
cut what timber he wants for mining or {
domestic purposes, but can purchase OF {
others who has cut it for sale. There has
not been O timber seizure made in Mon
tana under Cleveland's administration
save such as was cut by par
ties who shipped it out OF
he Territory. And all this talk
about Sparks preventing miners and ranch
men from cutting what timber they want
s sheer nonsence. But by the way our
steemed evening contemporary failed to
tate what position it took on the timber
utting question two or three years ago.
)oes it want The MINER to repeat the re-
ord our contemporary has made on the