The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1877-07-20
Tho Fenoe Law.

But before we lock horns with him on that
important question, we will try to disabuse his
mind Of the nonsensical idea that, because we
to publish articles offensive in style,
injudicous in language and intended to pander
u the whims and wishes of men who are never
T. .dts.ssJwith anything the party they pretend
W6sIong to may do, so long Us they find they
have no chance for official position, and who ON
brace every opportunity to open gap in the party
through which they may be able to crawl; we
say, because we refuse to publish such articles
having such Tenderness, there is no reason in
any ones charging US wit an intention to
suppress discussion on any public measure, or
to close our columns to discreet and gentleman
ly criticism Of the acts and doings Of our public
officials. Our columns have always been held
open to correspondents for the discussion OF
every subject in which the public or the demo-
cratic party may be interested and benefited;
but when we receive articles that we are salts
fed will cohti ibue nothing to the good Of the
public or party, but rather do harm by creating
discussions and much i'll feeling, We take the
responsibility of suppressing them, so far as the
Times is concerned.
, lne renee LAW lS u VI o'"0
cussion, and we invite correspondents on both
sides to make use of our columns, through
which they can, moro extensively than in any
other way, ventiatc their opinions of it; and we
hope it will be freely and fairly discussed before
the election is held.
"Pca RIDGE" no doubt, thinks he has
knocked the black out, the first shot," by i'm
plying that the law does not compel the land
owner to provide pasturnge, and then appeals to
the prejudiccs of what he calls the "illiterate
non andholders' by calling it brilliant hum
bug" &c.
Webster defines the word duty us "that which
person is bound, by any natural, moral or lc-
gal obligation to pay, to do, or perform SO,
Us the law says lit shall be the duty of each
and every employer, in any county or township
which shall adopt the provisions of this Act, to
furnish pasture" &c. tocvsry employee, the en-
ployee can demand that that duty shall be per-
formed by the employer. But PEA RIDGE says,
''thc employer is not bound to furnish pasturage
for an employee, if he docs not choose to agree
to do So" That's true; nor is On employer
bound to employ man who owns cow or a
hog if he does not choose to agree to do so and
no man is compelled to work for man who will
not choose to agree to find pasturage. There
will be plenty of good men ready TO agree to do
so, if one is found who refuses. 1t is generally
the case that the best laborers are those who
own cows, chickens, hogs, &c., and we oil know
the best laborers will never be long out Of EN-
ployment, almost upon their own terms.
Many persons appear to forget that the law
does not prevent any one from fencing in the
whole of his farm, if he chooses i9 DO 30. You
can put up much fencing as you please; but
the law says 10 the employer you shall provide
pssturage for as many of your employees stock
Us you both may agree upon. And then it will
be the mutual interest of employer and employ
&C to make that pasturage as good as possible
for the stock, and as safe as possible from
thieves.
There may be defects in the law-no doubt
there are. 1t is new departure from the old
system of farming, and we should not expect the
first law governing it to be perfect in all its
parts Experience will rectify all the defects.
What is wanted now, is the intelligence to pro-
fit from the experience Of others.
A few days ago one of the most reliable men
in this county-and he is poor man, too-told
us that he had just visited Mecklenburg and the
adjoining county, in North Carolina, where the
nO-fence law had been in operation for over q
year, and had taken pains to enquire Of a! he met
land owners, tenants, day and yearly aborer:
how the stock law worked, and every one,
not single exception, told him it was the best
law that was passed, for all classes en-
ployed in Agriculture. Under it they had bet
ter stock, better cared for and more of it, than
before. Under it many poor men were able to
buy small farms and cultivate them the first year
with the money it would have cost t" build the
fences. Under it, number Of poor men who
owned small farms made arrangements with land
owners to assis. in making pastures and keeping
them up, and for very triHing amount--to be
paid in labor-they secured the best kind Of
pasture for their stock their stock was never
stolen and never strayed. Underit a man could
buy forty acres of land, put ur q cabin and q
night shelter for his COW and hogs, without any
other expense before going to work on his crop;
and he had no fear that his neighbours unruly
COW, OK, or hog would destroy the crop while
he slept at night. 1t did more for the peace and
good feeling among neighbors than oil the Grim
inas laws combined.
Now this undeniable evidence comes to us
from poor and pure man, who got it from those
who had tried the law, and among them many