The weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1891-1894, 1891-08-29
4 VAIL From CHOTEAU.

Concerning the failure of the senate
last winter to agree to the house hill pro
vidiug for the creation of Teton county
the Montanian walls in the following
striin:
The failure of the democratic senate
to JON with the republican house in the
creation OF Teton county last winter was
one OF those things which the party OF
negation" are constantly leaving undone
much to the detriment of the people
Had the senate done as well by u PEG
pie as did the house Choteau county
would today be the scene of the most
active operations in the way of develop
ment. Our people blame the obstruct-
ionists for thus retarding The develop
ment OF this sectional section vastly
richer in all that goes to make upa great
and prosperous country than any Other
of the state.
The Montanian is not ignorant of the
facts in connection with the defeat of the
Teton county division bill. 1t knows all
about them, but it chooses to be dishon-
est with itself and with its readers rather
than tell them the truth. 1t knows that
there were three things that stood in the
way OF the passage Of the Tet n bill,
The principal obstruction was the repub-
lican senator from Choteau county, Mr..
John w. Power. MI. Power had prom
Used the people of Choteau sand
contiguous precincts hat if they would
vote for him and if he were elected he
would do all he could for the proposed
new county of Teton. He failed to
keep his promise. He did all he could
against the division bill after it left the
house. All the votes the bill received,
with one single exception, came from
democrats. Mr.. Power was its enemy
throughout and the M~ontanian, which
had supported the gentlemen in the
campaign. knows it.
There were two other very potent in
fluences which also united to defeat the
bill. One was the Northern Pacific in
tiuence cast against the organization of
any new counties on the line of the
Great Northern railway. The friends of
the proposed new county of Teton will
be compelled to meet and overcome that
influence before they will succeed in
dividing Choteau. The proposed new
county Of Valley is opposed by the same
corporation and for the same reason.
The third powerful opposition which
the friends of the proposed new ''cow"
counties will meet is found in the sena-
tors from the mining counties. That
provision of the constitution which
gives to every county in the state just
one senator, no more nor no less, has
united them, it appears, in a common
battle against the organization of new
counties in the farming and graz
ing portions of the state. The
counties held in the constitution
al convention that senatorial representa-
ton should be apportioncd upon the
basis of population. The ''cow" coun-
ties, while agreeing that the house mem
bership should be so determined, in
upon a senator from ca h county.
1t carried in the convention and is now
a fundamental law of the land. The re-
suit is that while the mining counties
the house the 'cow" counties
the senate. In order to keep
their majority down senators from min
.ng counties oppose the formation of
new counties, especially in the eastern
or northeastern portion of the state.
The ''cow" counties, however, have a
majority in the senate and could have
passed the Teton county division bill if
John W. Power and the Northern Pacific
influence had not stood in the
way. The Montanian knows this and if
t had been disposed to state a plain fact
.ruthfully it would have skipped its
'ot about the party of negation' stand
ng in the pathway of Choteau county's
prosperity.