The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-12-25
THE oATTLEAFEN's DEFENSE.

The OALL1lElltAEs1l : IaEiE' EllSSEi.
While not mentioning his own
case or referring to. it in any way. SEN
ator Fred Dumont smith takes occa-
sion to present. in the last issue of his
paper. the KinsIey Mercury, the de-
Tense Of the cattlemen who have been
indicted in connection with the land
cases in western Kansas. He says:
''The long and strong arm of the
federal government Is just now after
some of the cattlemen in Stevens and
Morton counties. Some ten or twelve
Of them are under Indictment for
Illegally fencing government land.
Practically, they do not deny this but
they allege in defense that the neces-
sites Of the country compelled them
to use this vacant land, or leave the
country and abandon their homes.
That they could not afford to fence
and water single holdings. Dealing
with the only class of cattle that suited
the country they must hold a sufficient
number, not less than a thousand head,
to afford to employ help to look after
them. To fence a single quarter or
even a section and put a watering
plant on 1t was too expensive They
IG4A4 0AlAy GAAHL Dy IEAClLR IN large
tracts, the greater portion of which
they owned, but scattered through
which were here and there tracts of
government land. BY so doing they
were enabled to handle herds that
made them a little money, not much.
and the title of cattle barons' applied
to them is as absurd as to call a kan
sas congressman a duke. No one
wanted these lands, it. is not claimed
that any intending settler was ever ex-
cluded from them, or any just object
of the homestead law infringed upon,
it was mere technical violation of a
statute that had served its purpose
long ago. Not only that but it is
claimed and can be proven, that agent
after agent of the interior department
who visited that section and knew the
situation, promised them that they
should have ample notice before their
fences were cut. That they should
not be disturbed until settlers desired
the lands. Working under that agree
ment they continued their industry,
the only one of which the country was
capable, and now without notice or
warning they are indicted, charged
with a serious offense, and face the
chances of fine and imprisonment Not
only that but such papers as the To-
peka Capital denounce them as Grim
inals, land grabbers and perjurers.
Their claim of protection in their bust
ness is scoffed at and they are held up
as examples of the Mitchell-Herman
type of land grabbers. The whole
matter is an outrage, an attempt to
brand the best citizens Of that country
as outlaws and robbers, and the gov
eminent of the United States is in
mighty small business, when it ignores
the stupendous land frauds in Kansas
and lays its heavy hands on these
sturdy settlers who have been main
tanning their homes under the most adj
verse circumstances and by the only
course possible"
Senator Smith makes a strong de-
tense on the premises he lays down.
but there is this trouble with his
premises: The most fragrant offeaders
among the ''best citizens and sturdy
settlers" who have been indicted by
the grand jury, are rich residents Of
other sections. They do not even live
in Kansas, but hire others to do their
work for them.
Another noticeable feature about
Senator Smiths defense is that what is
"a mere technical violation" of an
obsolete statute when the sturdy set
tiers" committed it. becomes "a serious
ofense" when the grand jury charges
them with committing it. But that is
only natural, of course.