Arizona republican., 1907-01-07
HOW GRAZING FEES
ARt TO Be COLLECTED
Regulations Unmodified by Recent De-
eIsion Of Federal Judge. Msappre-
hension Corrected.

HSHSlOn corrected.
To the Editor OF The Republican, Sir:
In view CT the fact that there has
been a general misunderstanding re-
garding the effect Of the recent court
decision in the case OF the L. S. VS..
Mathews, by Judge Whitson on the
grazing fees. l enclose you a statement
OF the facts which may be Of interest
TO your readers.
Very truly yours.
Il w. II. REED, Forest Supervisor.
Then follows the subioined matter
which The Republican recently printed
in another form.
A recent decision of a federal Judge
has been widely commented upon
\ throughout the west on the supposition
that it declared illegal the regulation
OF grazing on forest reserves and the
system of charging Tor grazing per-
mits. As a matter Of fact, the deci-
sion, which was handed down by Judge
/ Nhitson, Of the United States district
court for eastern Washington, in the
case of the United States VS.. Matthews
/ has no bearing whatever upon the
legality of the grazing regulations or
of grazing fees, which stand precisely
as before. The legal question involved
was simply this: Does the law author
ize the secretary OF agriculture To issue
regulations make the breach of those
4 regulations a crime?
! Judge Whitson's decision merely an
swered this question No 1t was in
substance that the objection to the in
dictmeut against Walter Matthews was
] ha Oh mo. L. L.
therein charged as a criminal offense.
/ Upon that ground the court held that
the demurrer must be sustained and the
! defendant discharged.
! Though the point was simple and
clear enough, it was entirely miscon-
strued in the press reports Of the de-
Cision and in editorial comments upon
/ it. For instance, in the wyoming
/ Tribune Of Tuesday. November 6, news
/ Of Judge Wilson's action was given
under the headlines: Grazing Fees
| Illegal Decides Federal Judge" and the
article declares that AS a result OF
/ the decision. aMtthews, who entered
/ the Mount Rainier forest reserve with
out the permit required by the secre-
/ tary, is still using the reserve and is
not paying the fee imposed by the
secretary" As a matter Of fact. Mr.
Matthews sheep were Immediately re-
moved upon notice by the forest Off
GERS and have not since entered the
| reserve.
I In the Sheridan. Wyo., Post It is said:
A decision fraught with importance to
| Wyoming stockmen IS that appearing in
I this issue, wherein II is held by the
I United States district court that the
collection of fees gor grazing live stock
| is Illegal Since its imposition
this Zee has been regarded as illegal
and arbitrary by many well-informed
| Wyoming people. and the views cx
pressed by the court i'm this decision
meet with general approval here.
The ltigant is still running his
sheep on the Rainier reserve without
paying the fees"
Decisions like Judge Whitson's had
before been made by the federal courts
in three other districts. one Of them six
years ago. but none Of these interfe-es
in the slightest with the right OF the
United States TO institute civil action
against trespassers violating the graz
ing fee. The United States circuit
court Of appeals for the ninth circuit
decided definitely. in the case Of Das-
tervignes VS.. United States, that the
provisions Of the act Of March I, 1891,
delegating to the secretary the power
to make regulations, is constitutional.
that the regulation prohibiting the
pasturing Of sheep on forest reserves
without permit is valid. and that the
federal courts will enforce the regula-
ton by injunction. The supreme court
Of Arizona three judges sitting. in the
case OF Dent VS.. United States GO Pa
cific Reporter, s55). went still further.
under circumstances which made the
decision most emphatic. Dent was
crimin9Ily prosecuted for grazing sheep
on "A forest reserve without a permit. in
violation Of the regulations. and the
court had held that his act was not a
crime; but as soon as the Dastervignes
case was decided for the government
the Arizona court granted a rehearing
Of the Dent case and held that the
Dastervignes decision was binding on
all courts in the ninth circuit i'm Grim
inal as well as civil cases. and that
Dent was therefore guilty of crime.
So far. therefore. the court decisions
as to the criminality of trespass con-
trary To the forest-reserve regulations
are conflicting. Final adjudication of
the point cannot be had until the rul-