The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1915-10-14
MUST NOT RUN
SHEEPONCAT-
TIE RANGE
Supreme Court Hands Down
Far Reaching Decision
Sustains Old Law.

lures the same. or permits or suffers
the same to be herded. grazed or mas
tured, on any cattle range previously
occupied by cattle, or upon any range
usually occupied by any cattle grower.
either as spring, summer or winter
range for his cattle, Is guilty of a mis-
demeanor: but the priority of possess
sorry right between cattle and sheen
owners to any range. is determined by
the priority In the usual and customary
use of such range. either as a cattle
or sheep range" Section es27. re-
vised codes.) (Twelfth territorial SEES
sion. 1883. 126. section a.
The supreme court, In two opinions
handed down on Tuesday, decided in
favor OF the state and against Secun- |
dino Omaechevviari, 8. f. Horn. John
Eiler and John Calvin, all sheen men
charged with trespass upon cattle
ranges, and affirmed the constitution |
atty Of section 6S27, revised codes
quoted above. The decision is of vital
interest to ali engaged in the cattle
and sheep industry In Idaho, defining
as 1t does the range rights of both in
terests. There were two actions. idep- |
tical In nature, one against Omaechey- /
viari. and the other against Horn. ELL |
or and Calvin The Omaechevyiari /
case was appealed by the defendant
from the decision of Judge Card A.
Davis Of the Third judicial district.
owyhee county, who gave Judgment for
the state, which the supreme court af-
firmed The case OF Horn ct al, was
appealed by the state from the Sixth
judicial district. Custer county, where
Judge ]. M. Stevens gave Judgment for
hA GAf ~
supreme court reversed. Both opinions
were written by Justice Bulge and con-
CURED In by Chief Justice Sullivan and
Justice Morgan. In both cases the de-
PENDANTS were charged with herding. H
grazing and pasturing sheep upon a
cattle range in violation of section 6S72,
revised codes
The Custer county case was tried in
a Justice court before a Jury which
found the defendants guilty. They ap-
pealed to the district court and Judge |
Stevens granted the motion of the de-
fendants to dismiss the case on the
ground that section 1872. revised codes,
was class legislation and therefore .un-
constitutional.
The Owyhee county case began In
the probate court of that county where
given. Appeal was taken to the dis
trict court where the jury found the
defendant guilty.
In its opinion In the Custer county
case the supreme court says:
1.-THE public domain is not the prop
erty of the respondents (the sheep
men, but of the United States. The
respondents have an equal right with
OH other citizens of the state to the
use Of this public domain within the
Jurisdiction of the state subject to
the right OF the state to control and
regulate such use.
at Is within the constitutional pre-
rogative of the legislature, in the ex-
ercise of the police power OF the state,
to minimize the opportunities for con-
flict between the sheep and cattle in
dustries to the extent of prohibiting
sheep from running on any cattle range
as provided In section 6S72,
revised codes.
Individuals engaged in the sheep |
industry are not entitled to claim that
the same legislative restrictions and
privileges be applied to that industry
as to rival Industries. such as the
horse or cattle industry The habits
and nature of these animals being diff
ferent. as well as the results which
follow from their use of land for graz
ing purposes, 1t Is competent for the ).
legislature to take these differences in
to consideration and to provide for
them by regulations designed to meet
existing conditions in each particular
industry When the law under consid-
Grafton treats all individuals of the
class of sheep men alike under similar
circumstances and conditions. both as
regards the privileges conferred and
the liabilities imposed. 1t is not class
or special legislation, and is not OBJ
noxious> to the provisions of seotin l,
article I, OF the state constitution
81"
The opinion in the owyhee county
case says:
"A cattle range in this state has a
well defined meaning and so has q
sheep range: and this meaning Is fully
recognized by persons engaged in the
two industries
The question of priority right is
treated In the owyhee case. After quot
ing the statute on this point. the court
says:
This statute was enacted by the
Twelfth session Of the territorial deg
islature In 1883, for the pro-
lection of stock growers In owyhee.
Boise. Oneida. Bear Lake. Lemhi and
Custer counties. The statute was con-
tinued In force by section 2 of | the
schedule and ordinance contained in ar
ticle Fl of the state constitution
at the time Idaho was admitted
as state.
ssWhfle It Is true that this section
of the statutes has never been before
this court for construction, yet It has
been for 50 years accepted to a great
er or less extent by the industries of
the state affected thereby
while 1t might be possihie for sheep
to Craze upon cattle range. 1t Is wen
known to all stockgrowers that sheep
and cattle WIN not range together, and
that cattle and horses win not RANGE
Nv. n ahnnr. ranra Thna larisia ffns, tn