The weekly chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Craig County, Okla.) 1905-1913, 1911-05-05
SETTLES WESTERN
RESERVE QUESTION
Supreme Court sustains Right Of Fed
eral Government to Set Aside
Forest Reserves.
By Associated PICS.

By Associated Press.
Washington, ID. c.. May by hold
ing that the federal government, with
out consent of the state affected, may
set aside vast areas of lands as for
est reserve and such reserve is not
subject to the state fencing laws, the
supreme court today settled two burn
ing western issues.
The constitutionality of the vast for
est reservations of the west and the
validity of the modern conservation
policy, were raised early in this case
in the circuit court of the United
States for the district of Colorado.
The United States government had
brought suit to enjoin Fred Light,
prominent Colorado cattle man, from
causing or permitting his cattle to tres
pass upon the Holy Cross forest re-
serve in Colorado. A stubborn con
test arose and among the other de-
fenses put forth by Light, was the one
that the formation of the Holy Cross
reserve, without the consent of the
state of Colorado, was unconstitution-
al. As the other vast reserves in the
west had been formed by a similar
process of federal action in withdraw
ing public land from entry, the argu-
ment applied by analogy to them. The
injunction was granted. and an APP
peal 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 to
to the reserve where there existed su-
perior grass and water supply. Such
a 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 gov
ernment, and a Colorado law provid-
ed that no person should recover dam
ages for trespass unless the land in
question was fenced
Therefore, Light pointed to this law
as barring the government from re-
lief. The government retorted that
the fence law applied only to individ-
uals, and not to the state of Colorado
or to the United States If it was
meant to apply to the United States,
it was argued by the government that
the law was unconstitutional One of
the sharp issues of the case was cen
tered on this point.
So widespread was the interest in
the case and so vital the questions in
volved that the stave or Colorado it.
self threw itself into the contest. At
torney General Barnett was authorized
to assist Light in fighting the federal
government. He did so.
The attorney general emphasized
the argument before the supreme court
that no provision of the constitution
empowered the federal government to
conserve the national resources" by
providing for continuing timber sup
ply, regulating the flow of streams
and preserving power sites from being
monopolized. He urged that the with
drawal of such large tracts of land,
said to be one-fifth of the entire area
of Colorado, was the denial of equality
with the older states which had been
allowed to exercise dominion over all
the territory within their boundaries.