Custer weekly chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, S.D.) 1890-1931, 1915-05-01
THE GATES OF THE

1 a
Section 5 of Chapter 224 Of the Laws
of 1913, etc.
Be it enacted by the Legislature OF the
State of South Dakota:
SEC. /. That Section 5 of Chapter 224
of the laws of 1918, is hereby amended
to read as follows:
SECTION 3. =. 1t shall be
unlawful for any person to cut remove
or in any way to tamper with the fonce
surrounding said Game Preserve, or with
the gates leading into the same, or to
leave open, or fail to close when open,
the said gates.
Down the public highway between
Custer and Buffalo Gap, John Doe went
cantering one fine day, arriving at the
gate of the State Game Preserve he dis.
mounted from his horse, opened the
gate and led his horse through, dropping
the bride reins while he vent back TO
close the gates as directed by law. He
swung one half gate into position and
then went after the other one; Just as
be was swinging this back to place the
other half swung open again and at the
same time he noticed that his foxy old
saddle horse with his head well to one
side was strolling off down the road.
Then John Doe said something that
sounded like ''Oh well" but was not
spelt that way and let the gate go and
took after his horse. When he caught
him, instead of leading him up to tree
and tying him while he wrestled with
the gates, he jumped into the saddle and
went on his way, thus violating part
of Section 8 as quoted at the head of this
narrative. John Doe was descendant
of long line of Does, who had from
time immemorial been getting them
selves mixed up in the meshes of the
law, and perhaps heredity was to blame
for his action, in this instance.
Now, if John Doe had got what was
coming to him, he had brought it on
himself and deserves no sympathy, but
it so happened that be continued his
journey, and unless his conscience re.
buked him for his unlawful act, which
may reasonably be doubted, he escaped
unpunished.
When Adam ate that apple in the
garden of Eden, all of his posterity
shared in his sin, and since that day
have had to share in his punishment,
and as in Adam all fell, so, when John
Doe left that gate open, he created a
condition provided for by the Legislature
in their last session, as quoted above,
and ANY PERSON within the iuris-
diction of the State of South Dakota,
who failed to close that gate became
liable to penalty of not less than $1,000
or more than $4,000. That is the read
ing of the law, and it does not even
require that it shall be shown that one
had knowledge of the fact that the
gate was open, or had passed through
the open gate without closing it.
Under the terms of the law as it is
written, only two things are required to
be proven. First, that the gate was
open. Second, that the party accused
failed to close it when open.
Obviously the Courts must inject some
rule of reason into that law, but since
the law itself gives no indications to
show what limitations are to be placed
upon it, it is left entirely open to the
Courts to determine under what con-
ditions failing to close the gates becomes
a punishable offense. The Court could
not hold that it meant that any person
who failed to close the gate was liable,
for he himself would be liable inasmuch
as he had also failed to close it. So as
an entirely unbiased Judge it would be
necessary to rule IN order to clear him
self, that it must be shown that the party
had knowledge of the fact that the gate
was open. 1t is unfortunate that the
law must be administered and construed
by Judges who under its provisions as
written are themselves liable to its
penalties.
On several occasions l have myself
been informed by reliable parties that
me Of the gates was open, was my |
knowledge then such that it became
necessary for me to go out into the coun-
ry and close that gate2 A person might |
zee gate open from a distance, how |
ar would he be expected to travel to |
lose that gate if he had no business
aking him there2 Any unfortunate |
ancher living within sight of gate
would be constituted perpetual gate
closer for the State without salary, in |
hat he is under this law compelled to |
70 and close it whenever it may be open.
The law is very Solomon of law as it |
tands and it will be interesting to see
What construction will be placed upon it
,y the Courts.
The purpose Of the law is obviously to |
urnish a cheap way for the State to |
system of gates across the
public highways, some of which have
,een constantly travelled since Terri
orial days, and if the State could not
.fford to put in gate keepers, it might at
east have installed facilities for opening
md closing them. Under the present
arrangement, one driving team has to
.et ont and open the gate, lead the team
through and leave it standing while GO
ng back and closing them. In the case
# farmers wives driving to town, this
s by no means safe arrangement and
should be remembered that number
# farmers and their families are fenced
lp in this Game Preserve along with