Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-05-18
NOTES FROM DOWNUP.
Mr.. Martel's Views on the Fence CUES
tiOn

Mr.. Martel's Views on the Fence CUES
tiOn.
l took occasion at my last meeting with
Mr.. Martel to get his views at length on
the subject of the fence law. His district
succeeded in getting the Legislature at its
last meeting to pass a stock law for it and
the adjoining district, and thus out of five
districts in the county two now have the
advantage of that law. The Ordinary
levied a stax on these districts sufficient
to erect a continuous fence separating
them from the others in which the law
was not operative. Mr.. Martel. as a mat
ter of course, has no personal interest in
any further discussion of the subject. He
was a warm advocate of the stock or no
fence law at the earliest period of its dis
cussiOn, when very few persons about him
mad given the matter any Consideration at
all; and to him, more than to any one else
knew the district owed the ultimate at
tainment of the blessing. His quiet ar
guments had gradually converted his
neIghbOrs to look upon a change as thing
to b desired. Many of these converts of
his appeared upon the scene later as more
VOciierous advocates than Martel was.
and superficial observers were apt to at
tribute the final success more to them
yuan " Abo u NC Oudiu JlOls DuJ bHOSe VINO
knew the facts knew to whom the credit
really belonged. Martel never for mo-
ment indicated that he thought he had
much to do with it, but those who had
watched the progress OF the movement
knew very well that he was the Luther of
that reformation. In getting his views of
the subject recently, | asked him what he
considered the best single point of the ar
gument in favor Of no fence. After mo-
ment's reflection he replied that he con-
sidered that the greatest benefit derived
from the stock law was in taking away
the prime cause of feuds and dissensiOns
among neighbOrs; that in all the older sec
tions OF the State fencing timber was COM
paratively scarce and that it was the most
difficult thing in the world to keep up to
the legal standard every panel of the i'm
mense amount Of fencing on the majority
OF southern farms, especially, as is often
the case, where the farm is composed of
many separate fields. To-day, under the
old law, there is not one farmer in dozen
who has strictly legal fence; for Just as
cham is only as strong as its Weakest
link, so even one defective panel may rem
der the whole fence an illegal one, as a
matter OF fact in law. Stock were quick |
to see place to get over into the field,
especially if the field was green with
grain while the commons We're bare and
desolate. In went the stock, and the owner
more or less excitement, expelled them Di
Ell drnljs, perhaps, and sends over to the
owner OF the stock { a good neighbOr pro-
bably), that if he does not keep his stock
out of his field he will shoot them or have
them shot. The owner of the field NAV
not have been aware that there was a de-
fectiYe panel or two in his fence and set
1t down that the trespass was owing to
the YiclOusness of his neighbours stock. |
His neighbOr, knowing his stock not to
be vicious, and nettled by the rough mes
sage, sends back a reply that is not very
soothing in its nature, and it will be
very fortunate thing if their hasty and
incOnsiderate messages do not lead to
dlfhculty that may not be adjusted for
years.
Mr.. Martel claimed that under the old
law farmers were rather encouraged to
take the law into their own hands in such
matters, for satisfactory redress was prac-
tically unobtainable under it for either
trespass or manning. In either case,
when carried into the courts, Judgment
was obtained at an expense out of all lust
proportion to the amount involved and
with a delay that was exceedingly vexa-
tl0us. 1t made farmers 10th to appeal to
the courts for redress in such small mat
tiers, and too often the matter of trespass
was settled in a way that for a long time
afterwards proved an effectual barrier to
friendly relations or business Intercourse.
Occasionally it terminated in blOodshed.
Now, under the stock or "No Fence law.
it would be different, Mr.. Martel contin-
ued, for it would be primd tacie evidence
OF noncompliance with the law if farm
er's stock were seen out of his own prem
ises. Trespass would be easy to prove
and it would cause farmers to use the
proper diligence in keeping his pasture
fences in good order, and, as there would
be less fencing, it would naturally be bet
ter. II a farmer chooses to keep vicious.
fence-breaking stock, the burden of max
ing strong fences should be upon him.
rather than upon his neighbors who do
not keep such stock. Furthermore, it was
very UNJUST law to compel tiller of the
soil, who kept little or no stock, to keep
up miles of fencing to keep out other peo-
pies stock. In his district he did not ex-
pect to see any further difficulties among
his neighbors growing out of what here
tofore has proved very fruitful source Of
difiiculty-trespass.
At another time l shall give his views
on the other points of the argument.
Mitledqeville, Ga. SAC.
A ton of bran is said to make manure
worth $l4 so. This leaves its cost for stock
feeding very small. But it is probable the
manurial value is much less when fed to
milch COWS to increase the production of