The Glenwood post., 1908-02-22

Q for the loss of grasses which 9
o may be eaten by animals so 9
Q ranging; and, furthermore, g
Q that generally an owner Of 9
Q lands in Montana must fence G
Q out cattle if he would prevent :
Q their going upon lands which :
Q are his. I:
o "But, Notwithstanding these 9
Q things, the question is, Was 9
9it intended, and can it be, 9
9 that this state policy obtains g
Q with sufficient force to cur 9
o tail the power of the United 9
Q States to forbid entry upon Q
Otis forest reserves by cattle Q
9owned by stock grower of Q
Q the state? g
Q "The question is thus broad e
Oily put, because the facts justi- 9
Q fly consideration of the case 9
Q from the standpoint outlined, Q
10 and because it is desirable 9
Q that ruling should be had Q
Q defining the legal position of G,
Q the general government and Q
o the stock owner whose cattle Q
@ 9may drift inside forest res Q
o ervation. Q
Q "The substance of the ar @
o gument of the learned coun- Q
S-sel for the defendant is that Q
o congress must have recogniz- Q
Q ed the policy of the law Of Q
Q the state already referred to. Q
Q and that therefore it should o
o be deemed to have acted, in Q
9all that it has done in the o
o matter of forest reserves, with =
o the public policy of the state Q
o in view; hence, that no con- Q
o struction of the acts Of coll Q
Q gress empowering the secre- ;
Q tary of the interior to make Q
Q rules and regulations insur- .
o ing the objects for which for Q
Q est reservations are created, Q
Q can be accurate if the effect g
o is to require an owner of cat Q
Q tie to keep his animals off the 9
o reserve. o
Government Not Bound
BY Laws Of the State.
"Long before the state was adj
mitted, the policy Of the United
States was to preserve and eXer-
else exclusive right Of full domin-
ion over the public lands belohg-
ing to it. True, in many cases
the United States never interfe a.
ed at all with use and occupancy
of its unoccupied lands by inli-
viduals within the several states;
for example, it did not seek to
prevent animals running at
large upon the public domain
within Montana and other west
ern states where stock growing IS
principal industry. Unit! the
last few years Of its existence as
territory, Montana was very
sparsely settled. Agriculture
was limited; there was but slight
demand for public lands, and
comparatively none for the foot
hills of the mountains and for the
grazing lands upon the great
benches above the valleys. Stock
growers could put their cattle or
horses or sheep wheresoeyer they
pleased upon such lands without
apprehension that their ranges
would ever be sought by home
stead settlers desiring to enter the
lands, cultivate them, and turn
them into profitable farms, or
that in time to come forest pres
ervation would become fixed na-
tional policy. Accordingly, un-
der such conditions, the general
government not only took no ac.
ton to exclude stock growers
from using its lands, but rather
lent such encouragement to the
industry as naturally followed
the privilege Of unlimited open
range. Nevertheless, the general
government has been consistent
in its attitude Of q proprietorship
which has enabled 1t not only to
maintain its possession, but to
maintain its possession exclusive
ly il it pleased to do 70, and to
prosecute those who have trespaa.
sed upon the pubIie lando Il ft-haa
seea +. That Il hAs nj alva5a
| exaeetsed ~ ri6ht of ax1an6fvt