The commonwealth. (Scotland Neck, N.C.) 1882-1884, 1883-07-05
THE COST OF FENCES.

1nE OUOl UT TENOGO.
A writer in the Illinois Agricultu
raj Report for 1864 says Tine fences
in the United States have cost more
than the houses. cities included:
more than ships, boats, and vessels
of every description which sail the
ocean, lakes and rivers; more than
our manufacturers of all kinds, with
machinery; more than any one class
of property aside from real estate. ex-
cept it may be, the railroads of our
country" This may seem like an ex'
aggerated statement, but little es'
innate will show that it is not so ex-
travagant as it would at first appear.
The first cost of the fences of New
York State was between one hundred
and one hundred and fifty million
dollars. Robinson gives it at $l44.
100000. Assuming this to be approx.
imately correct, and estimating the
first cost of the fences of other States
on the same basis, we have as the
whole country, the vast sum 81, 1885,.
100000.
This requires to be renewed once
in ten years, giving $135,60O,OO0 as
the annual cost, to which should be
added, however, at least half as much
more for repairs, making the aggre-
gate of $184.4OO,OOO as the annual
national expense-a sum, we believe
below the actual figures, yet quite
beyond comprehension.-Nicholas
Biddle estimated that the ''fence tax"
of Pennsylvania was $l0,OOO,O00 a
year. General Jas. T. Worthington,
of Ohio, says there are 18,OOO,OOO
acres of land in Ohio inclosed with
$4,000 miles of fences, at a prime
cost Of $115 100000 and at a yearly
expense for repairs, etc. .of 81 $3.50, 900.
If roadside and boundary fences
can be dispensed with, half the cost
of fencing will be saved. The cost
is now an annual tax of $3.50 on
every acre of improved land in the
United States-the '.fence tax heing
twice or thrice as great as the aggre
gate of tue State and loo al taxes CON.
bined.
Why can not large portion of this
outlay be saved by some profitable
investment ? Every dollar rescued
from fences may be added to produc
tive wealth. Fences are dead capital
they pay no interest, and are con-
slant drain upon the pocket. As Mr.
Greedy says: 1--WE poison our land
with fences; they are a shelter fol-
weeds, as we'll as a vast and useless
expense" The indirect waste which
they inflict is almost as great as thei1
direct cost. A Virginirn zigzag fen &C
occupies five acres for every hundred
lnclosed, thus imposing a five pei
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 te
shelter growth of weeds.
Shall we fence st ock ont or in Z;
There is no doubt that our people
now expend four times as much mon
ey to "tence stock OUT as would be
required to Silence it in" Our preseu,
custom, which commands universal
fencing, is the worse blunder the
American people ever made. Enter
prlslns and original in money matters
tney are here following slavishly
generation after generation, the habi
of the earliest English colonies-fol
lowing it though very expensive ant
lnc"nvenient, because it is the gooe
Ola way Europe has learned NOR,
rational method. There are ten time
as many fences in Illinois as in Ger
many, and Duchess county, Ne,
York, has more than all France, Il
France, Germany, and Holland
farmers hold their lands in common
with only marrow paths between.
1he continental svstem IF ho;
few or no fences is evidently the best
ana even exclusive England is slowl
adopting it. America will inev;t.h,