The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1877-06-21
THE FENCE LAW.

We publish elsewhere an article signed
"Varenncs," which opposes the adoption
Of the proposed change in our fence sys.
tom. The only ground which tho writer
assigns in opposition to the law that has
any weight, is the question of water for
stock, and there is really very little force
in this objection, for, as q general thing,
every farm has aspring branch upon it
that would afford an abundance of water
for stock, and those few farms which
have TO water On them are so situated
that it does .ot pay for stock to ramble
off to branches ON other mens' farms to
get little water. It would pay the
owner better to draw them water three
times day than TO have them scattered
about over the old fields and in the woods,
subject to being lost or stolen. It might
induce people TO keep smaller number
of cattle, hut those which they do keep
would pay them much better for being
taken care Of S On tho water question,
also, we might reply that nearly every
one of those farms where there is no wa
ter has some child on it large enough to
draw all the water necessary for stock,
and hence very few poor men, or any
other sort Of men, would have any water
to draw. Again, the writer thinks winds
might blow down the pasture fences, and
turn The cattle ;iisc: The The ce=ctr= A scea!
fence with stakes and riders would be
apt to Withstand the storms, aud even if
it did not in few instances do so, the
farmer would not be worse of than he is
now, for wind storm that would destroy
pasture fence would destroy q crop
fence, and tern every persons stock in
the neighborhood :s.prea the crop, and it
would not be as easily corrected as the
blowing down Of the pasture fence would
be.
Again, he says hogs and sheep could
not 30 ss:ss;! Il. The s=ss.s p.stt::..Es, E::s. E::s.
with e little attention and penning OFF at
one season of the year it could be done
at least as we'll as, IL not better, than
can be done by allowing them to run as
large together. What our correspondent
says about the rich and the poor, and
about selfshness, is also unfortunate, for
it appeals to the prejudice and passion
rather than tho reason. Matters like the
one under consideration should be calmly
discussed and decided without prejudice
or passion. The simple question thlst
csc:y. :.5!:c spirited s:.ss!.s s:.s!.s &.
slider is, will the change benefit the ma,
jSssy js os s.is sli ivi #avis e Nil!
it should be adopted and if 1t will not,
is should not be adopted. If It is o.
measure that viii iajlfe' the poor man, 1t
ought to be frowned down Immediately /;
but this should be proved hs argument
and not by assertion We believe the
change will beuefit the poor man az we'll
as the Landowner OF. rich nias,, as our
correspondents terms him !; and if the
election is ordered, Te propose e en-
deayor TO advance some arguments for
the ebehef Wo Rav6 expressed. We shall
do 50 ;candidly and courtnnualv. and hope
that the discussion Of the measure sgil,
be free aid ard a.!l s!s..s l:. j. Sc. .t;;l
ings, with the DESIRE to advahSs tho in
tereat Of the whole County ubpermost in
the mind and heart Of every writer or.
speaker. &, sss ogi. SfssySs sisflas