The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1880-08-06
THE STOCK LAW QUESTION.
ANDERSON. S. c.. j

.--xssswvo~s-ss.sx-~.s,s..,
wer your inquiries. 1 wrote Mr.. Holltns.
head, Lincolnton, yesterday and gave him,
IN substance, about the same l now give
you. Being farmer, feel deep inter.
est in what pertains to or promotes that in
tcrcst.
know Of no reform moro needed il that
direction than the cha &C ia the fence las,
which was adopted when the country was n
forest, and adapted to grazing and stock.
raising. Then it was economy to fence tho
crops and suffer tn, stock to run at large
but time, in this as all other things, has
worked changes. On what other subjects
have the laws not been changed? l know
of none. The lands, stripped of vegetation,
become poorer every year, while, If not
grazed, they become richer. We sec al
ready great change in our lands in the
three years VIC have had the fence law in
force here, and also in the improved con-
dition of our arabic lands, since the removal
Our clay lands were more injured by tho
pasturing and grazing than we received in
benefit to the stock.
There is an erroneous idea in reference
to tn, amount Of pasturage necessary to
keep up cattle. We have found that they
DO best on small enclosures and shifted of.
ten, as it is the nature Of n COW to look into
every fence corner during the day; and, un-
der our old system of going where they
pleased, they consumed in the extra travel
what they gathered, and, as a consequence,
were as poor in the fall rs they were in tho
spring.
1t was pr"phcsi,d by opponents Of tho
change that it would lead to constant truvble
By stock breaking out, and by persons tres
passing upon the open fields. Such is not
the case. There has been much less bad
feeling on account Of stock than formerly.
| have not heard a hog squcal from being
ooggco ln tnrec yeavs, and nuvc not hcnrA-
Of II single case Of trespassinS or travelling
through fields. 1t shortcns travel in tho
neighborhood by the introduction of paths
1t has brought great many waste places
into cultivation, and made valuable strips of
| the best land that were too small to be worth
fencing.
have no doubt that this county saved by
the change this past season from S75,00O
to $4,000 in the yellow cotton, which
would have been destroyed by the cattle had
they been allowed to run on the fields az
formerly, which | regard as Il clear gain.
Our newspapers all over the State endorse
and extol it wherever it has been tried.
think it is the only question | ever
heard that lad only one side to it, The
change is demanded if for no other reason
than to save the expense ofbulding and re-
pairing the fences. have seen the state
mcnt that the fences Of a county cost moro
than the buildings, which l am prepared to
believe. 1t certainly costs more to repair
them.
The opponcts before its passage, said We
would have no milk and butter, but they
were false prophets, as it has greatly in
creased a remarkable case occurred ct
| Piedmont Factory, on the line of this and
Greenvillc counties There was brought
there in ono day 90 pounds Of buttcr-S5
pounds from this and 5 pounds from
Greenyille where the change was not in
force
What per cent. Of the people: after
fair trial, oppose tho law
Ans-From 3 to $ per cent.
2-What pei ceht. opposed it before its
passage?
Ans-At the first election by the whole
| county not one fifth voted for it, At the
sccohu, ny to""H''PS, cic'cp ioi ""u h'o
against it but before it went into operation,
the Legislature extended it over the whole
county, by petition.
3-The lands and stock are improving
4 Tho coored people have fallen into
it much sooner than it was supposed they
would, and we think large majority now
favor it. We think, after trial, it benefits
the renter most as he saves the labor of re.
pairing fences. The stock is greatly i'm.
proved, particularly cattle. 1t has reduced
the number but greatly improved the quail
ty. Hogs are kept in small enclosurcs.
1t has greatly benefited the material in.
tcscsts of our people, aud il submitted to n
vote t. return to the former law, | have no
idea that 5 per cent. would vote for it.
| Is. f. GRAFTON.
-----.. . -----------