Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1873-01-30
aona nav Who 6gW5hi g5Hhiaao 4 few head of cattle;

.TitstM
sons ,myX who ho ,0gW5Hhl ,0g5Hhlaao q few head Of cattle
and do no noat G,iF own "a a Sufficient quantit.
of land to, to pa&stutrte' &tttrt J. them Oh, dndytl
such landholders,' i if ths. fence law j
repealed, viii b, e, compelled IS sel
their z, cattle 1T for r what they viii bring
or let them, sstarv1e,; ~, and that this al
ternatiye must, surely occur to 2, tn h
large number who own s STOCK, GSI,s tl bu
have no land at all,eas ,,a .r...,.l. ~
I'D" Thai there are large otraets, ACTS 2 2
land, such as. our pine barrens ani
wet bottoms, that are fit. only fol
grazing, and that, if the fence Law
isrepealed, cannot rbe ut tilted as a.
present, .,d.,.
s,Sd. That many small landed PIP
prietors cannot keep. their necessary ; IlJy
stock enclosed in pastures, for We want ri
of localities supplied with: water
and that such, must ,bs greatly; inllpri- inllpplri
ed if: obliged by law to maintain Gloss !o
l.Ths answer toothe sfrst. objection
may be found,inithe followjng,legitl,
mate deduaion the prineipls ,on
chlit'seemsi to bebasedl: no;'el,,qe7'
Suppose that ten'personsjrseHle1n
a secluded portionlof,the'Sta States land
that nine of Shemn"proceed toi teVel
the forests and break upithe' sous 10
open 9farms'I and 'detesmlne to' eneDse
and feed taeirf necessary tafnlsstocR'
while the tenth locatesih theli, Vloiil,
ity, and Being the owner OF twenty
head Of cows, prefers making Hbsrtter
or raising beef cattle Filling the
soil, and as he owns but five acres
Of land, he is. opposed to repealing
the fence law, desiring his st3ck 20
range at will. The COWS COWS are are Wort worth
FIVE hundred dollars 5a,: tor ne losI gat oat
the ,eest of the fences orl;tlne,ss on the ssaPPos-
ed farms would at Least i # ffe1Ie re-. or 9.
quadrgple,t that sum, corydlng ;lyl .l19 %
the theory of. this oblsetionu uHI ths siS TIVE f'
or three thousand dollars worth g Sf
fences must be built, an and Il THAT hat amaqlt q 9 IT
of the, moleyIof the, ne, ininye Iyu1 farmers
must be locked up $50 much dead e.
capital, ,in order to, protect the. tfrr9ilts
of their,industry against destruction
by their neiphbor''s, five hundred dol,
lars worth Of cattle. ..,: ,...a ..,fiSn. I'm
= Indeed, thelsame, expense of fenc-
inc would bs,rrequired ifrthe. :neight
bo9p owue,l but one head Of. .oroving
stock. and thus nine farmers would
have to expend at least a thousand
dollars each to build a fence to keep
out from their crops one twenty-five
dollar cow. ayyiiql = ii ~. /" 1inilre
! This }air' and simple statement Of
the theorry underlying the fence law
seems see rl 70 toll he sufficient to demonstrate
its Injustice and impolity in our agri-
cultural community. ih 3''fo.7qa
That the consequences to the small
landholdert, who is obliged to enclose
b;s atocEk will not be as Injurious as as
IS 81 asserted in that iobiection,' us is eyincc-
Cd bv The fact that this y yery n class lal5sf af
cattle owners are, / have. J. been told,
notably prosperous Us on the. the sea e. coast
Islands Islands in n-oi Dur State, -
though. of great extent, and contain li \:
ing an abundance oil winter, pastur-
ace g for outlying stock, have, been for
many wears exempt from the opera
tions Of + the. fence laws, and now, CON
tain but few enclosed farms. 49, .,.;,,
The second objection can be met
by having a sufficient area Of the wet
bottoms and pine barrens enclosed for
pastures. the proprietors charging a
small fee per annum. 80
- The third oh;ection would be obvi-
ated bv driving the cattle to water,
Or taking the water to the stock; or
bv having a we'll and a trough in the
~ ~ stnro aronnd e,,i:,.,:,T 4.,..;l 10
'"1SaaI The sum s1aNs, of the, whole argument
,oainst DIR present. disastrous fence
.ystem il tbat all Eirmers are COM
cellsd to;'bnild and keep up fences
yb;cb tbev do not need because some
,ot,Ia. !" i owners, w desire to craze their
;tock ON land which thsev do not
,wo, y 17i'-i NJ ''i' = '''i'r"r
I should ada that proveehder for
,tock would Be- igreailyf aiiii::ct!rlssasea in
,roduct. and Consequently on cheapen-
d by the greater area that will sure
v " be.cultivated, should ill fencing
3e dispensed with. .''. IT, ''' - -. llnnF .,.
! / have thus dwelt. at length upon
HE reasons which should operate In |
avor ;.i;,i' Of the abolition Of opl iifshce
Observation-Disclosures l believs, that
nch abolition wonld be the, first step
AIKEN by South Carolina in the, a3op-
ion of u progressive system ofoaSri-
in which We are slgnallly be
lind the age ;rand secondM-1 because
t has heretofore been tic popular,
,ut erroneous doctrine i'm this State,
hat DIR present fence law is, ,adaaaIptedfl
o the protection Of the poor; farmer
:. ,ottlo ownar. aoaiurt. the lapdad