The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1888-07-31

my fence be only SO inches high in
any place [ am liable to indictment,
and should half starved cattle break
over and get into my crops, eat and
gorge themselves and die, I would be
compelled to pay you for your stock
and not only so, but receive no com
pensation myself for damages done
me. l know not of a law more unjust
than this or better culcated to impov-
ish the farmer or to inculcate princi-
Piles that are iishonorable. Why any
~peaceable hardworking citizen is liable
to be made a criminal because his
fence is only SO inches high; liable to
be arrested and be compelled to pay
damages though his labor be totally
destroyed, because you want stock you
cannot feed, and if you cannot, have
no right to own. Passing the moral and
social aspect, [ now invite your atten-
ton to the legal.
If the Legislature of North Caro-
lima has the constitutional right to say
I must build a 60 inch fence before |
can collect damages for injury done
crops; that is to say before l can ex-
pect to receive benefits from my labor;
then it has the same right to say that
l must build one 600 inches high. If
it can say 1 must build it tight and
strong, it can say you must build it Of
iron or we will give you nc protection
if your crops r destroyed by cattle.
Why yes; build it of iron. This
would develop our State; we have
mountains of iron. What an impetus
this would give the iron industry in
this State. Capital would come in by
the millions. Can't we get up an iron
fence trust in this way and enrich
ourselves ? But seriously, if our
Legislature has the constitutional
right to compel me to fence my own
land, and to say how high that fence
must be, there can be no limit placed
on the height, and if it treats all citi-
zens alike it can compel us to use iron
as we'll as wood or rock. 1t has
just as much right, and nc more,
to say to you and any other citizen,
"Paint your house yellow from top
to bottom; if you do not, then if your
neighbor burns yours down he is not
guilty of arson; and if from your build
ings others burn that are yellow, you
must pay them for theirs" One law
would be quite as just as the other,
and equally constitutional.
What right has A., who does not
own one foot of land, to say that [
shall fence my land, or how high it
must be? Clearly, if you that live in
town have a right to vote to compel
me to fence, then | have the same
right to vote on the color of your
house in town. If you that do not
own farm land, but live in town, have
no right to compel me to build fences,
then he who owns no land living in
the country has no right to vote on
this measure.
Every principle of the Farmers
Alliance, every principle of justice on
which it is founded, cries out against
this monstrosity in form of law. Take
down that good old book and read,
edo unto others as ye would they
should do unto you," and then say,
does that warrant legalized theft 3?
Does it warrant any one in robbing
me of my labor, or my lands of their
fertility? I took this position ten
years ago in the NeOs and Observer,
and I am proud of it, and I am glad
that the Farmers Alliance has for a
cardinal principle that might does not
make it right to rob or Cypress.
SEC'Y P. S. f. A.