The Bad River news. [volume] (Philip, Stanley County, S.D.) 19??-1912, 1909-02-25
A New Free Range Law

has just introduced in the Senate.
This came Immediately upon the
Lccls of his successful onslaught
upon the Hare statewide herd
law. After this bill Of the settlers
was defeated. the stock interests
were quick to see their opportun-
ity. and AS Il result the Rowe bill
will possibly be passed
We have printed the bill in full.
not tom a newspaper report. but
fr0m the printed copy sent us from
the Senate chamber at Pierre. We
have been thus careful TO give our
readers the exact language Of the
proposed law, III order that there
may be no question this time ID
regard TO Mr.. Rowc's exact posi-
ton.
The language of the bill is so
plain as TO need little comment or
explanation. The words 'Of any
county in which the law shall have
become operative" mean merely
counties in which the herd law has
been adopted by vote Of the pco-
pie. and. under the circumstances
of the case. refer, at the present
time, to Lyman and Stanley coun-
ties. 70 be more definite still the
bin proposes to make it possible to
resubmit modified free range
law in those counties where the
settlers have after such long
struggle voted the herd law into
effect.
The provision that the modified
free range law be submitted upon
a petition signed by thirty per
cent Of the voters is ingenious,
and sayors little Of the square
deal. The settlers will remember
chat when they were endcavoring
to get vote on the herd law they
were not allowed vote ON a peti-
tion signed by thirty per cent of
the voters. Well hardly. The,
free range law enacted by the
cattlemcn at the last legislature
provided that the petition for a
vote must contain a ma ajority, or
fifty per cent, of the voters.
Never before in the history of
referendum legislation as the
writer has frequently pointed out,
was law passed of this kind that
required a majority Of the voters
to petition and majority to give
their support at the election before
relief could be obtained. The law
of 1907 made it practically neces-
>ary for the settlers to carry two
elections before they obtained the
law they desired. Now the situa-
tlon has changed. 1t is the cattle
men who must have vote if their
struggle is to be prolonged. Does
their champion introduce law re-
quiriny a majority petition! Oh
no, it IS thought that thirty per
cent Of the voters are sufficient
now The stockmen. perhaps un-
willingly, have admitted the un-
fairness of the old law.
The modified free range law,
put forward by Mr.. Rowe in the
general proposition it advances is
certainly remarkable. And we
might as we'll say now. irrespec-
tive Of what Mr.. Rowe's constitu-
ents may think of it, we are op-
posed to the proposed law and we
mean to use all the arguments we
have to discredit it and denounce
it as unjust and vicious legislation.
The plan to have five winter
months Of free range, whatever
superficial arguments may be ad-
duced in support of it, is nothing
more than a proposal to re-
turn to the old free range condi-
tions. If based upon any theory
at all, it is based upon the theory
that the farm interests need no
protection during the winter
months.
In no ordinary year in this
latitude can corn be husked before
November first. Certainly the
settler has no hope if stock may be
Il L