The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1904-02-20
THACKER'S RECORD
ON HOUSE BILL SO2
FOR ANNEXING CERTAIN
COUNT TERRITORY
Voted for Indefinite Postponement But
Did Not Vote When Bill Game UP for
Final Passage = Act Ignores Funda-

Final Passage = Act ignores Funda-
mental Principle of Law of Contracts
The ISLANDER has ascertained from
Olympia that House Bill No. 3O2,
amending the act of 1891 entitled
can act to provide for annexing
certain county territory to a neigh
boring county to which it is contigu-
Gus, under which amended act it is
proposed to annex to. this county
Fidalgo, CYPRESS ,Guemes and Sin
clair islands, was introduced by Rep
resentative Peasely, of Asotin coun-
ty, the extreme southeastern county
of the state. The real originators
and advocates of the measure evil
IDENTIFY realized that it would be
'moer likely to escape attention and
less iikely to arouse opposition in the
counties most Interested if introduced
by statesman from remote part
Of the state, the remoter the better.
A majority of the members OF the
of the committee to which it
was referred were evidently en-
dowed with fair measure of COM
mon sense, for they recommended
the indefinite postponement of the
bill A minority report favored its
passage Upon the motion to indef-
initely postpone, Representative
Thacker, of this county, voted
"aye,n but the House journal does
not show that he made any argument
against the bill, while it does show
that when the measure came up for
final passage he was either absent or
failed to vote. At can hardly be said
to be record to which either he or
his friends can 'point with pride. "
He might not have been able to. pre-
vent the passage of the bill, but he
might, at least, have made such
fight against it as would have dem
onstrated to his constituents his zeal
in their behalf. Two weeks elapsed
after the bill was reported from the
committee before it passed the
House. Much might have been done
in that time. Earnest protests might
have been obtained from all over this
county against the bill and strong
influence brought to bear from other
localities against it's passage. No
just purpose would have been inter
fered with by the addition of a Sec
tion providing that no territorial ad
dition should be made to any county
under the provisions of the act with
out the consent of three-fifths of the
voters resident within the original
limits.
The act violates the fundament |
al principle of the common law
of eontracts-that of consent of the |
parties in interest. 1t opens the way
for the imposition of heavy burden
of debt upon community'in no way
responsible for the creation of such |
debt and in no manner benefited by |
it, for the law provides that coun
ty to which new territory is annexed |
must assume a portion of the debt of
the county from which such territory |
was detached 1t puts county seats
upon wheels, disturbs property val
ues, menaces business interests, and |
in such case as the one which now
threatens us leaves the people of
more than nine tenths of the county's |
area, engaged mostly in agricultural
pursuits, at the absolute mercy, in |
matters of taxation and administra-
ton of public affairs, of the residents
of town as populous as all the re-
mainder of the county. In its pres
ent form, ignoring entirely the rights
of the people of the county which it
seeks to force to become a party to
an unwelcome contract of union, the
act is thoroughly pernicious. In
view OF its character, or lack OF