The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1877-07-05
FENCE or NO FENCE.

Mr.. EDITOR Seeing it announced in
your paper that your columns were open
for discussion on the fence law, propose
to say few things. I am not in the
habit ofEYriting newspaper articles, and
do not now propose to do anything more
than offer few thoughts upon the pro-,
posed change. G W.
First, l am surprised to see that any
man oppose $ law requiring every man
to keep bis alock inside Of his own en-
closure. Certainly no man can con-
scientiously say that he believes it to be
just and fair for him to turn out his stock
to roam over the country at large, making
it absolutely necessary fer l.is n,e;sgAbos
to8kaep up fencing at great cost 10 keep
his and other peoples stock from destroy
ing his crop.
have been 80 situated, Mr.. Editor,
for great number of years, that I have
had good opportunities to see and know
that more little difficulties get up in
neighborhoods from the trespassing of
stock and abuse of them after trespassing
by getting over old dilapidated fences
than anything else. The way the law
now stands there is probably not one
dozen farms in Anderson County now
enclosed by lawful fence. 1 am satis-
fed now, and have been for the last
twenty-five years, that the present fence
law is all wrong, and we should at once
adopt the present proposed change.
tt is argued by somo that this change
would damage the poor man. How
stands the case? Is it not i'll the power
Of the land owner to keep any mans
stock off of his land. Could he not fence
up the whole of it, and no man dare say
no7 or, is the landowner now bound by
law to furnish those who have no land
pasturage for their stock? Certainly,
every man would say nc! Is it not just
that it should be so? But pass this pro.
posed change, and every employer is
then bound by law to furnish pasturage
for stock for his laborers, provided they
help keep up the pasture fence. Now,
does 1t not benefit the renter, for this
change, by law, furnishes him pasturage
on certain conditions. The present law
does not make any such provision.
So it does seem to me that in any view
of the case that the croper anGthose who
own no land would be the most benefit
ted. One thing is very certain, they
have no right 10 say TO the landowner,
"Sir, I will make your land my pasturage
for my stock" If the present proposed
change is adopted, the farmers could
spend all the time now lost repairing up
old rotten fences in composing and max.
ing homemade mannres, giving them an
opportunity to- spend much moro of their
time in preparing their lands, which
would every year bring their farms into
n higher state Of cultivation. Mako the
change and farmers would be fo-c ed to
diversity their crops more they would
have to SOW the grasses and small grains
on larger scale, thereby improving their
lands; and they would be forced to i'm
prove their. stock of all kinds, which
would certainly pay thsnn. Fence up
the stock and our old fields would i'm
prove much faster,. as I suppose every
man will admit that an old field nova
fenced in will improve much faster than
one when stock is permitted to forage
This of itself is sufficient reason to
change the fence law. It is said it will
not do to turn hogs and sheep in one
pasture. Why this has always been the
case; they have run together all the time.
There are certain seasons Of the year
when it is necessary to lcok after tho
LAMBS. This is now done, and will still
be done, so this objection is not we'll
founded. It is said that high winds or a
storm might blow down the pasture fence,
and turn out the stock; and such thing
might happen, but certainly if it did the
case would be no worse than row under
the old law; and besides, it would not
occur often, and then strong pasture
fence would be more likely to stand the
Storm than our old fences. We should
all build good, substantial pasture fences,
and then keep our stock in our own en-
closure. Do this and kill ali the worth
less dogs in the County, and we wcs!d
have good stock of all kinds, and plenty
oi them; end what is better, securely
kept in our own pastures, and not troub
ling our neighbors. believe it is just
as necessary for the farming and stock
raising interest. to make this change in
the fence law as it vas to change our
political situation by electipg Hampton
Governor of our State. I have seen this
accomplished and now Efwant 70 see the
fence law changed.
Make this change, and in three years
you will see the farming interest greatly
improved You will see our bread and
meat made at home by the raising Of
more grain and the diversity of crops /;
less cotton made and better prices for It;
the poor man and the rich man alike
benefttcd--aii working under the new
change together TO more prosperous
future. Farmer, study well before cast
Ing vote against This change. Pastures
can emade on any farm in the County
by preparing for sinking wells, which
will not cost much. All this about q
poor man having TO walk naif niiio