The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1877-03-22
THE REHCE Law.

Our farmers are still agitating the fence
law, or more properly the "stock law" by
which the stock Is to be fenced instead of
the crops. The matter Is discussed at Grange
meetings, and there i9 o general disposition
to make one more effort to secure this law
for Anderson County. Many of the farmers
who had been waiting for the passage of
such law, evidently allowed their fencing
to become dilapidated in the last few years.
and recently have been Obliged to undergo
great expense TO repair fences, in order to-
make crop this year. They have had an
opportunity OF judging ns to the cost OF
fencing, and are doubtless more than ever
convinced that it is an exorbitant tax upon
their resources. Others who were opposed
to the application of such o law to Anderson
County have become convinced that the
best interests of the farmers generally de-
mand that such o great outlay for fencing
every year ought to be stopped. and that It
is far cheaper and moro satisfactory to fence
the stock. We have no doubt that a ma
jority almost equal TO Hampton's majority
last fall could be secured for q "stock law
in this County. Our attention has beeA d.
rected to this subject at the present time by
the perusal Of letter from Mccklenburg
County il. O.. where stock law has been
In operation for seyeral years. Mr. Robert
Stevenson wrote o letter some time ago to
Rev. J. c. Chalmers, who Is we'll known to
many Of our citizens, asking for information
in regard to the practical effect Of the law In
North Carolina, and the following answer
was received by him.. It will be remen,-
hered that the law originally applied to one
township, and it will be aeen that It's practi-
cal benefits are to be extended to the entire
county:
CIfARIorgE, N. c., March 5th, 1877.
Dear Sir: Mr.. Chalmers having been
away from home for few days, end being
considerably worried, requested ne to reply
for him to your letter, which was received
last Saturday. A
Twill preface my reply by stating that the
benefits aocruing from the 'stock law" are
so many and 80 great that It Is very hard to
state ell.
1. From the ssarcity of rail timber, Bar. @.
thinks that it has added at least one hun
dred per cent. to the former value Of our
lands.
2. That the farms can be cultivated with
| fewer hands, and thus at less cost. for
during the winter months, instead Of fenc-
ing as formerly. we can be preparing our
land for planting.
8. That vegctation, which was before
kept eaten down by cattle ranning at large,
10 now permitted to decompose on tho land,
thus enriching It every year.
4. That the expense per capita to keep up
tho neighborhood, district or county fences,
Is not near so great as to keep UP plantation
fences, and the Laws being stringent wc are
5ot;i5T5i: as 5o:oIs with
stock.
8. That farmers generally reduce the num-
ber of their stock, and hence have bette.
quality. or course, we have to provide
food for them, but being confined In pas
tures they run less. and takes less to feed
thein. 80 we consider the expense no greater.
We are never bothered hunting strayed cat
tie or hogs, which ycu know IL very CON-
mon underline old sysleni.
The above are only few OF the benefits
ayissng Efom the system. but we think
enough 70 eonyinee any unpreludicsd mind
tltkt st is BY isr profasaSie to the old plan.
HID 20 ten acres of forest land to one In
cultivation, we would be unwilling TO re-
turn to the old system. In fact. 1 don't
think tlicre IS one who ha= tried tho new,
would ba willing under any circumstances to
| stsG Nto the old plan. Tha synten israp.