Year: 1872

The question of fence or DO fence, which


for some time past has been attracting .


large share of public attention, may be
considered as finally settled in the afirma.
tive On Friday Of last week the subject
came up in the State Senate, it having


been made the special order for that day,
and the bill providing for general no
fence law was defeated by large majority.


The advocates OF the bill pressed it to =
Vote themselves, and the overwhelming
reverse they sustained shows that they had
either grievously miscalculated the temper
of the Senate in reference to the subject,
or placed too high an estimation upon their
ability to force through an obnoxious mea-
sure. AS the whole matter had been very
thoroughly discussed before a vote was
reached, we can see no reason for suppos-
ing that the Senate will rescind its action.
Possibly the minority on this question
some of whom belong to that class who
never accept an adverse result as decisive
fact-may attempt to bring the subject up
again for the purpose Of gaining little
rotorety; but there is not even probabili-
ty that no fence law can or will be passed
this session. While the effort to extend
the provisions of q Trespass Act to the
entire State has failed, as it should have
done, it does not follow that those counties
which desire such law cannot obtain it.
We do uot believe there is one among the
opponents of the bill just defeated in the
Senate who would not vote to give tho
people OF any county no-fence law If they
asked tor it But the advocates of the
measure we're not satisfied with urging the
passage of the measure With reference
supply to their own districts. They desir-
ed and endeavored to force its acceptance
upon counties in which its operation would
have been detrimental, contrary to the
wishes of their Representatis es and in the
face of petitions from the people. The
action of the friends to no fence, in the
Senate, has been overbearing, arbitrary
and aggravating from the inception of the
mea> ure. They were not willing that the
people should be heard in the matter, and
those Representatives who favored the
retention of the fence law were scarcely
accorded decent respect upon the floor Of
the Senate by the arrogant puppets of the
valley lords. The defeat that followed the
high handed manner in which the minor.
ity endeavored to force an obnoxious mea.
sure upon the State at large, was no more
than just rebuke for the naughty pre-
sumption that ignored alike the wishes Of
the people and the welfare Of at least one
half the community. During the discus
sion of the question several papers in the
no-fence interest have lost no opportunity
Of misstating facts and dstorting the truth.
They have asserted, over and over again,
that "the entire press OF the State is favor
able to tie passage of general Trespass
law. There never was more unmitlgated
falsehood told, nor lie better stuck to.
The truth of the matter is that not one
paper in the whole length and breadth of
the mineral portion of the State ever
printed line favoring no fence. On the
contrary, almost without an exception they
have opposed the measure, and in doing SO
reflected public sentiment in the localities
in which they are published. Further
than this, petitions numerously signed
have been presented in the Assembly, if
not in the Senate, from every mining
county ir the State, praying to be exempt
ed from the opers tions of the no fence law
in the event of its PASSAGE Will some
one OF those papers which have spoken SO
frequently and feelinsly about the "unani-
nifty of the press" upon this question,
kindly give us the name of a mountain
journal that has advocated no fence, or the
mining county that has petitoued the Leg
islature for its enactment P [Calaveras
Chronicle.