Western liberal. (Lordsburg, N.M.) 1887-1919, 1911-03-17

The S OF 7. W. Gould and the
fence, which has been told OF In the
last two issues Of the LIBERAL, is OF
interest. The LmERAL printed the
statement Of Mr.. Gould saying he
had taken down the fence that the
department objected to, and not with
standing this the government had
commenced a suit against him, which
he did not think fair. Last week
Is printed the statement OF Leroy ..
Moore. chief OF field division, who
had the matter in charge, who stated
THAI Mr.. Gould had written January
II, 1910 that 1.-THE fence Is now down."
and that q representative Of the de-
partment had made an examination
on July 4, 1910, and found most OF
the fence IA still In position. Mr..
Could was out Of town and could not
be Interviewed regarding the state
ment. lie has returned, and makes a
statehient directly contrary to the
one made by the representative to
Mr.. Moore. Mr. Gould said he had
received the notice to take the fence
down in 1909. He was too we'll &c
quainted with the department not to
obey the order, and before he sold the
place, which he did In October, 1909,
he had men 81 work on 10, taking
down the fence and rolling up the
wire, The job was not completed
when he sold out, but he gave In
structions to the men to take down
all Of the wire not only on his own
place, but to also take down the wire
owned by Perry Culbertson, who had
left the country In December, 1909,
the men came in and told him II was
all down. They went before Judge
McGFath, and made an afidavit that
the fence was down. 1t was on the
strength of this afidavlt that Mr..
Gould wrote the United States attor-
ney, saying 1.-THE fence is now down."
In the early spring he was out to the
place, In which he had no interest,
and found the fence was down. The
The representative Of the department
visited the place in the next July, and
reported the fence was not down.
Thus 1t comes to a question Of YER
acity between Mr.. Gould and this re-
preventative Of the department. The
Liberal knows Mr.. Gould and has
always considered him q reliable and
responsible person. In answer to a
question as to how the representative
Of the department could have made
such an error, Mr.. Gould said he
could not imagine how he had done 1t,
II he had visited the place and made
an examination, but II he had been a
long way off, and had looked at
the place he might have seen some Of
the posts still In place. as they had
not been removed; but If he had gone
to them he would have found there
was no wire on them and that most
OF the wire was rolled up, and stacked
alongside the road. This fence was
originally built TO keep the horses
away from a loco plantation on the
plains. V, P, Harrington lost some
Is head OF horses. and Perry Culbert-
son also lost a great many. To keep
the horses in the mountain, and away
from the loco the fence was built. 1t
was not built for the benefit Of the
cattle range. According TO the laws
OF OF the United States a horse has
got a right to eat all the loco weed he
wants to, and any man who builds a
fence to keep him away from 1t Is
violating the laws of the United States.
But for the active interest the repre-
sentatlves Of the department took in
this case the horses on that range
might to this daV be deprived Of their
constitutional right to eat the loco
weed, and die.