, 1888-01-28

tne action OF the senior BODY In passing
the original bill.
Mr.. Summers spoke for his substitute
on behalf OF the cattlemen. They were
certainly entitled to protection and most
assuredly needed it in this case. To his
personal knowledge the lion had killed
sixty-fve head OF horses belonging to a
%ranchman in his county. The coyote
wrought havoc in the flock of the sheep
raiser, and the burrows of the lowly
badger were dangerous to horsemen.
Mr.. Blydenburgh was opposed to pro-
lection which did not protect. During
the past ten months Carbon county had
purchased $4,000 worth of animal
scalps. Some of his constituency were
advocating the enactment of a bounty law
looking TO the determination of the jack
rabbit, but if the coyote was allowed to
multiply, his favoritc food, the herbiver-
Gus creature, would disappear. He owned
and raised both horses and cattle and did
not ask for protection. He would protect
himself. Finally, he agreed with Speaker
Pease that the entire bounty system was
wrong.
MIR. Huntington, who last week advo-
Gated the repeal of all that portion of the
law not relating to the larger animals, had
changed his mind on the subject. In his
opinion the entire act should be removed
from the statute books at once. 1t was
too'costly a luxury.
MIR. Pease renewed his declaration that
a bounty system was extremely faulty in
principle. 1t was not practical, not in
Guiding or carrying the assumption that
the greatest good was for the greatest
number.
Mr.. Currier, Albany county, is a well
known sheep raiser. So far as he was
concerned the interest he represented did
not seek or need protection. The coyote
was more of a menace to the stockman
than the wool grower.
Mr.. Summers stated that when land
was Irrigated the gopher, squirrel and
prairie dog disappeared, consequently
they did not interfere with farming, as
had been intimated.
Mr.. Blydenburgh responded that in
Carbon county he had endeavored to cul-
tivate oats, but that a prairie dog town a
mile distant had Immediately moved to
the center of his field. Notwithstanding
this fact, he desired to see the bounty law
wiped out before any counties were bank
rupted.
MIR. Lafrentz rose for information. He
desired to be enlightened as to whether
the failure of the Union Pacific to pay its
taxes or the bounty law was merging Car
bon county toward insolvency.
MIR. ~Blydenburgh was equal to the oc-
casion. 1t was the rodents, not the
sharks.
Mr.. Sampson desired to be set right.
The gentleman from Uinta held that 60
pliers Stunned irrigated lands, while the
representative from Carbon assured the
house that prairie dogs had pre-empted
his oat field, which was watered by
bitches.
Mr.. ~Blydenburgh illustrated. When
water flowed into the burrows of the pests
they excavated in another direction and
avoided the fluid.
Mr.. Sutherland remarked that the
gopher was a dead issue, but that the
lion, wolf and badger should be scalped.
MIR. Rummel, johnson county, thought
that the granger could protect himself.
The bounty law should be repealed.
Mr.. Giant, Albany county, stated that
the originator of the bill secured its pass
age in the council by setting forth that
the operative bounty law should be re-
pealed and one mentioning only the larger
animals subsequently enacted. He feared
that a bill continuing the PROVISIONS last
mentioned would be defeated and believed
that the bounty on the larger animals
should remain.
SETTLED.
There being no further remarks, the
question occurred on Mr.. Blydenburgh's
amendment recommending the passage of
the bill. 1t was carried by a vote Of 9
to 8.
After the consideration of a few other
bills on the general file, the house ad-
iourned until 2 o'clock Monday after
noon.
Read S. KelIncr's ad this morning.