Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1889-10-02
FARM NOTES.

THE FARM FENCE QUEsTIoN.-Ai
most significant mark of defective civ
ilizatlon, says the New York Weekly
Times, is the present system of permit
ting live stock to wander abroad on the
roads. This it justly characterizes as
a most costly and exasperatlng wrong
and injury to the public, and goes on to
say:
1t causes an enormous waste of mon
ey and labor in the building and main
tanning of fences, which on many SIN
gle farm cost more than the whole value
of the stock kept out of the fields 1t
also engenders disputes, complaints,
quarrels, and ill-feeling, which tend to
destroy that harmony among neighbors
that is requisite for comfort and pros
perlty. To give the roads up to roam
ing hogs and cattle is one of those en-
rors and wastes of resources which go
far to make farmers poor and keep
agriculture in a backward and i'm
poverished condition. Some years ago
the State OF South Carolina enacted a
fence law, compelling owners OF stock
to inclOse and restrain them so that cul-
tivated fields need not be fenced At
the time, many complaints were made
that this was an injustice to the poor
people who kept COW or few hogs
and would be disastrous generally. But,
on the contrary, under the action OF
this beneficent and eminently just regu-
latlon the agriculture of South Carolina
has made great advance and has be-
come more prosperous in proportion
/ TO its resources than that of any other
State.
The owner of land has rights which
should be respected as much as the own
ers of houses or other property. What
a man purchases and pays for with the
/ proceeds of his own labor should be held
/ inviolable, in whatever form II may he,
] y mans field or garden should be as In
/ viOlable as the house of another man.
and should not need costly protection TO
preserve il from trespaSs and damage by
other persons. Hence a garden or a
4 field of corn should no more be required
/ to be fenced for protection against wan
/ dering stock than any house should be
I fortified with stone walls and barred
| windows to keep out tramps and thieves
/ And inaSmuch as this was at one time
an incident of lawleSsneSs and semi
barbarity, when every mans hand was
lifted against his fellow who owned any
thing desirable TO the lawleSs robber, 50
now il Is an incident Of equal lawleSs-
hess and barbarity that a mans crops
should be oyerrun and destroyed by the
cattle of his neighbOrs unless more than
the value of these cattle Is spent IN fenc-
ing them out.
Pastures only need TO be fenced for
the purpose of taking care of the farm
stock. All road fences and arabic heid
fences should be unnecessary. In many
cases the relief from the cost of making
and keeping up fences would be the
difference between poverty and pecunl-
ary ease. No doubt the other benefits
resulting from such just and proper
system as economy of land, less difficult
destruction of weeds, etc, would still
further better the farmers condition
and make his life more pleasant As it
now is, where the absurd and unjust
practice of permitting cattle TO roam at
large prevails, the farmer is obliged to
guard himself against every other man
and to watch and ward his property in
the fashion of the Middle Ages, while
every other man is permitted to harass
and iniure the farmer with impunity.