Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1877-05-17

YORKVILLE, s. c.:
THURSDAY MORNING, MAY II, 1877


Our readers are aware that bill, the pur-
port of which is to change the fence law of
the State, is now before the Legislature.
Whether this bill will become law or not,
we are not able to say positively. The prob
ability is that it will. The change which is
proposed to be made by this bill, is to require
every owner of stock to keep them enclosed.
The crops may be enclosed with fence or
left without one, just as the owner may see fit.
The bill provides that before it becomes bind
ing-even should it be enacted by the Legis-
lature-it must be submitted to the people for
their approval or disapproval. Such being
the provisions of this bill, it is the duty Of
every individual in the country to give this
matter his serious attention. The subject
should be considered in all its bearings-in
all its advantages and Disadvantages. That
change must, at some time, be made in the
fence law of the State, seems to be foregone
conclusion. The only question to be decided
is whether the near future is the proper time
or not. ..a -..
That change in the fence law of the State
would be attended with no disadvantages, is
more than any practical man would say. In
every change there is some Inconvenience
some loss-some disadvantage. This, how
ever, is not the question which the proposed
change in the fence law brings before the peo.
pie cf the State. The question to be solved
is, will the advantages be greater than the
disadvantages?
In thinking over the subject, every one
should ask himself the question: cam l to
be deprived of any of my rights by the pro-
posed change?" The answer to this question
is easily given. Most positively, the rights
of no citizen will be infringed upon. All
that every citizen will be required to do, is
simply to keep his stock from destroying his
neighbors' crops. The law, indirectly, re-
quires this of him now. The proposed change
in the law contemplates doing the very iden-
tical thing that is done now, but doing it in a
different way. The law now enjoius it upon
every farmer to fence his crop with lawful
fence. The object this law has in view, is to
protect both the crops and stock of the coun-
try. The bill which is before the Legislature
contemplates doing the same thing. Now let
every reasonable man inquire whether the
stock and crops of the country can be pro-
tected better and cheaper, by so changing the
law that no stock will be suffered to run at
large, than the way it is now.
Comparatively speaking. there is very little
stock in the State, and each year the quanti-
ty decreases; and the probability is that, un-
der the present system, the decrease will con-
tinue. Hogs are fast becoming extinct. There
are scarcely any now, except few that are
kept in pens. There are but few cows. Eve
ry body knows that the people of South Car
olina buy the greater part of the bacon they
use, and many persons have long since, in a
measure, concluded to do without milk and
butter.
Clearly, it would cost infinitely less to en-
close the stock of the country than it does to
enclose the crops. The crops would be as we'll,
if not better guarded by enclosing the stock,
and the stock would be far better protected
than the way it is now. Less than one-tenth of
the rails that are required to enclose the crops
of the State, would enclose the stock of the
country and both would be safer.
The present system necessitates the fencing
of large amount of poor land, for the pur'
pose of protecting the crops growing on patch
es of good land, scattered through these bodies
of barren gades, like oases in desert. OF
the fenced land of the country, only part,
and often the least part, is cultivated. Again,
there are good patches Of land that must re-
main uncultivated-if the present law contin'
ues in force-from the fact that the owners of
these patches cannot fence them.
In variety of ways, the present law ope-
rates seriously against the interest of the poor
man. Lands that he could buy and pay for
so far as the price of these lands is concern
ed-he dare not purchase, because they are
what are known as "old fields" without fences,
and no timber to fence them. If the fence
law of the State was changed, these old fields
would be saleable and they would afford
homes for multitudes who cannot purchase
we'll timbered lands It will cost twice as
much to clear and fence field, as the land
will sell for in the market. The work of clear
ing and fencing is so much labor-hard labor,
too-for nothing. 1t adds nothing to the in
trinsic value of the land The same amount
of time and labor spent in manurng the old
fields of the country, would make them pro-
duce more remunerative crops than is realized
from what is called "fresh lands"
The labor of enclosing the crops of South
Carolina, is no small part of each years
work. The poor laborer, who owns perhaps
a COW and calf and a pig, is necessitated to
enclose several times the number of acres he
is able to cultivate, that he may protect his
crop from his own and his neighbors' stock.
Whatever advances the interest Of the poor
man, advances the interest of country. The
rails of the country are made, and will con-
tinue to be made, by the poor. There is real
ly neither bread nor meat in making rails.
It is wear and tear-it is waste-it is friction.
The fewer rails that are required to be made,
the better it is for the poor man. 1t gives
him an opportunity to devote his time and
energies to productive labor This is fact
that some will overlook. Some labor is pro-
ductive and other labor is not. Now, build
ing fences to enclose crops may be necessity,
but nothing is produced BY it. 1t is all
waste 1t follows that the less fencing that
is required to be done, the better it will be