Arizona republican., 1911-05-02
GOVERNMENT
 SUSTAINED The Establishment Of Forest Reserves Constitutional MANY MATTERS SETTLED
Federal Conservation of Ma tural Resources Is Placed On 8 Solid Basis Which Cannot be Shaken by Any State Legislature.

Washington. D. C., May 1.-The legal battle against the forest re serves Of the west. in particular, and federal conservation of natural re sources in general, was lost today in the supreme court of the United States. That tribunal not only up held the constitutionality of the es- tablishment of reserves for national and public purposes. but settled. once for all, that the federal govern ment and not the states may say how the reserves shall be used.
 The immediate results of the de- cision are that Fred Light, Col orado cattleman will remain enjoined from allowing his cattle to graZe in the Holy Cross forest reservation of Colorado and Pierre Grimaud, K. r. Carajous and Antonio Inda, California sheepmen. must answer an indictment charging them with grazing sheep in the Sierra forest reserve without a permit. The subject dealt with in two opinions delivered by Justice Lamar and the entire court con cured. The basic principle upon which he proceeded was that the nation is the owner and has made congress its principal agent to dis pose of its property.
 The United States can prohibit absolutely and fix the terms on which the property shall be used" said the justice. As it can withhold or re- serve land, it can do so indefinitely
 It is true the United States does not and cannot hold property as a monarch may, for private and per sonal purposes. But that does not lead to the conclusion that it it is without rights incident to ownership for the constitution declares that con gress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regu- lations respecting the territory or property of the United States.
 All the public lands of the nation are held in trust for the people of the whole country and it is not for the courts to say how the trust shall be administered: that is for congress to determine The courts cannot compel it tO set aside lands for set tlement; nor suffer them to be used for agricultural or grazing purposes
 Even the private owner should be entitled to protection against willful trespasses. and statutes, providing that damages done by animals cannot be recovered until the land has been en- closed with a fence of a size and ma terial required, do not give permis- sion to the owner of cattle to use his neighbor's land as a pasture
 ''They are intended to condone trespasses by straying cattle: they have no application to cases where they are driven upon unfenced land in order that they may feed there
 Fence laws do not authorize wan ton and willful trespasses nor do they afford immunity to those who. in disregard Of property rights. turn loose their cattle under circumstances showing that they intended them to graze upon the land of another. This the defendant did under circum- stances equivalent to driving his cat tie upon the forest reserve"
 The cOnstitutionality of the vast forest reservations of the west and the validity of the modern conserva- ton policy. were raised early in this case in the circuit court of the United States for the district of Col orado.
 The United States government had brought suit to enjoin Fred Light. prominent Colorado cattle man from causing or permitting his cattle to trespass upon the Holy Cross forest reserve in Colorado. A stubborn con test arose and among the other de- lenses put forth by Light, was the one that the formation of the Holy Cross reserve, without the consent of the state of Colorado. was unconsti- tutional As the other vast reserves in the west had been formed by similar process of federal action in withdrawing public land from entry. the argument applied by analogy to them. The injunction was granted. and an appeal taken to the supreme court of the United States
 Throughout the contest. the federal government claimed that when Light turned his cattle onto his ranch. ad- joining the forest reserve. they fol- lowed well defined cattle trails in or der to get grass and water. directly superior grass and water supply Such 9 practice. the government contended, was tantamount in law to Light driv- ing the cattle onto the reserve.
 The defense met the government with several arguments. In the first place, it was pointed out that the re- serve had not been fenced by the government, and a Colorado law pro- vided that no person should recover