The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1877-11-28
The Cost Of Fences.

Mr.. ED1ToR-
If there be an especially obnoxious
feature in our agricultural system, it
is that which has sprung up in the
long practice Of years, been regula.
ted by law, and is now generally
known as the "Stock Law" l think
it would be perfectly right. to say.
that since the war, no custom sane.
toned and enforced by law has opera
ted 50 injuriously to the development
Of the PROSTATE agricultural interests
Of the Parish as this law. Before
the war, with the perfect labor sys.
tenn then existing, it was difficult to
comply strictly with it's require.
ments. Since the war, with labor
demoralized, and utterly unreliable,
in addition to the universal poverty
Of The planters, it has been found inn
possible to comply with it. With
the hope of calling public attention
to the subject and that public opin-
ion may be formed to demand that
the existing laws be modified so as to
conform to the true interests and al
tered condition of our people, / ask
that the following article be publish
ed in your journal:
A writer in the Illinois Agricultural
Report for 1864 says: "The fences of
the United States have cost more than
the houses, cities included; more than
the ships, boats and vessels of every
description, which sail tho ocean, lakes
and rivers more than our manufacto-
ries, Of all kinds, with their machine
~ more than any one class of prop
erty, aside from real estate, except it
may he, the railroads of our country"
This may seem like an exaggerated
statement, but little estimate will
show that it is not so extravaganza as
would first appear.
The first cost of the fences of New
York State was between one hundred
and one hundred and fifty million dol
lars. Robinson gives it as LA, 600, 600.
Assuming this to be Approximately
correct, aud estimating the first cost of
the fences of the other States on the
same basis, we have, as the total first
expense of the fences of the whole
country, the vastsu offs 900, 600, 600,
This requires to be renewed once 10
ten years, giving Sl26,6OO,OO0 as the
annual cost, to which should he added,
however, at least half as much more
for repairs. making the aggregate of
Sl9i, 100000, as the annual national
expense-a sum, we believe, below the
actual figures, vet quite beyond COM
prehension. Nicholas Biddle estima-
ted that the ''fence tax" of Pennsylva.
MIA was ten million dollars a year,
Gen. James T. Worthington, of Ohio.
says that there are 100000 acres of
laud in Ohio, inclosed with $4,000
miles of fences. at prime cost of
Sll5, 900, 900, and at yearly expense
for repairs, etc, of 81 100000.
If roadside and boundary fences can
be dispensed with, half the cost of fen
cling will be saved. That cost is now
an annual tax of $3.50 on every acre
Of improved land in the United States
the "fence tax" being twice or thrice
as great as the aggregate of the State
and local taxes combined.
Why cannot large portion of this
outlay be saved for some profitable in
vestment9 Every dollar rescued from
fences may be added to productive
wealth. Fences are dead capital; they
pay no interest, and are constant
drain upon the pocket. AS Mr.. Gree
ley says: "We poison our land with
fences; they are shelter for weeds, as
we'll as a vast and useless expense"
The indirect waste which they infct
is almost az great as the direct cost.
A Virginia zigzag fence occupies five
acres for every hundred inclosed, thus
imposing a five per cent tax on the
market value of the sofia tax that
would be felt to be oppressive if it was
for the payment Of the national debt
instead of to shelter q growth of weeds.
Shall we fence stock out or in?
There is no doubt that our people now
expend four times as much money to
fence stock out as would be required
to fence it in. Our present custom
which commands universal fencing, is
the worst blunder the practical Amer
lean people ever made. Enterprising
and original in many matters, they
are here following slavishly, genera
ton after generation, the habit of the
earliest English olonies-following it,
though very expensive and inconve-
nient, becauseit is "the good old way"
Europe has learned a more rational
method. There are ten times as many
fences in Illinois as there are in Ger
many, and Duchess county in New
York, has more than all France. In
France, Germany and Holland farmers
hold their lands in common, with only
narrow paths between.
The continental system of having
few or no fences is evidently the best;
and even exclusive England is slowly
adopting it. America will inevitably
follow, for economy, taste, thorough
tillage, fair play, aud good sense com
mand 1t, and the time will come, be-
fore many years, when the absence of
farm fences will be a sign of progress
sive culture.
The immense cost of sustaining fen
ces; the Inconvenience of having them
always in the way of thorough tllage,
and of easy ingress and egress to the
premises; the impossible snow-drifts
accumulated by them the shelter
they afford to weeds and briers; the
protection they afford to many of the
worst animal pests of the farm, and
their unsightly appearance generally
throughout the country, as the recep-
tacle of stone heaps, piles of brush and
dead trees, to say nothing of the
countless acres rendered worse than
useless nv their occunancy Unu1d SOON,