The Placer herald., 1872-02-10
FENCE AND ANTI.FENCE.

Elsewhere in to-day's HERALD will be
found communication favoring no fence,
from well-to-do farmer in Western Placer,
signed j. G.. No one is more willing to ad
NIT that the question of fence or no-fencc
has two sides to it than we are, but to un-
derstand where the fence or no-fencc law
should he enforced, the demands of the soil
and the people of the specified territory must
he understood. Our correspondent errs in
bis estimate of the cost of fences. We fenced
the first 100 acres of land ever fenced in the
county, in 1850 and 81, and continued in
the business till 1865. Our estimate is,
26, 400 feet of Ike inch boards, at 500 per
thousand, 1928; 1880 posts, $14O; 500
pounds of nails at Sc per hundred, $50; 2G
days work in putting up-a little over "a
rods per day to the man-at 81 per day,
S52. Add $40 for distributing Iosts and
boards and we have about $500 for fencing
1GO acres of land. To the farmer who
hauls his grain and hay to the mountains for
market and back loads with lumber, it
will come to less. We have in Placer coun-
ty, according to the Assessors returns for
1868, 81 ,4S5 acres of enclosed, cultivated
land. The fencing Of this land, in 160 acre
tracts, would have cost, in round numbers,
sos, 900. BY the same report, for the
same year, we find 35 ,524 head of stock in
the county, which, at the lowest possible es-
innate, are worth, in coin, S306, ,629, thus
showing nearly three times the value in stock
as compared with the cost of fences. This
much to settle in the minds of our no-fence
correspondents the value of fences and stock
in the county. There was at the date of
this report 81 900 head of sheep in the
county, worth, at SO per head, sG3, 900.
Doubtless the impression prevails by the
owners of that class of stock, as they have
to herd their Aocks anyhow, that they would
be benefited by no-tence law If such is
the case, we are sure they err. Once per-
NIT the no-tence law to apply to this county
and every man that wishes to keep sheep
away from his claim will dot it over with
patches of grain, vegetables, vines or trees,
and sue the sheep owner for trespass every
time one of these are touched, while his own
stock will be permitted to forage on them at
pleasure. Certainly, while lands are vacant
Government property all men have and will
have right to Craze their stock thereon,
but such lands, either mineral or agricultural,
cease to be vacant, under the Acts of Con-
gress of 1858 and 1866, the moment they
are settled upon. The prc-cmptor's or set
tiers rights date from settlement, and are
absolute until he forfets them by nom
compliance with these laws. The great land
monopolists Of the State desire trespass
law, as it will enable them to crush out the
poor man. They can then work their vast
acres with cheap labor, and starve the small
farmer by under selling him in the market,
or compel him to rent from them. If our
correspondent estimate is true, that it costs
Sc per acre to fence. then the railroad COM
pany and other land monopolists will immc-
diately add this sum to the price of the land,
and make the purchaser pay the additional
cost Of fencing though no fencing is required,
or make him tenant We like to have
the views of our farmers on this question, as
discussion tends to elicit the truth. The
general no-fence bill is killed in the Legisla-
ture by four to one. and yet we would not
object to such a law when ratified by ma
jority of the voters of Placer, or any town
ship in it, as we are always willing to yield
our ideas to the will of the majority, after a
full, free and fair discussion.