The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1889-09-28
could run at large and cattle occasion
ally Craze.

| ed WIRE fences ana thought them yer,
dangerous to stock particularly to horses
lnstanclng a number of cases in his vicin
ity in which horses and cattle had beef
seriously injured by them. He argued
that while you might educate horse o.
steer to AVOID a barbed fence, thu
animal does not transmit this education
as the human family does, and since thu
lower animals act only on experience you
are compelled to educate each individual
generation of them. AS to kinds o
fences, he expressed his preference fol-
good post and rail fences as being in the
end the most economical He did moi
entertain the idea that farmers coulc
abolish fences as in England and foreign
countries. There, land was high and la
Dor cheap. Here labor was high ano
land cheap. Hence the abolition of fences
would involve the herding of stock by
hired attendants and possibly dogs, the
cost of such service, to say nothing of the
! injuries inflicted on sheep in this country
by worthless dogs, putting it beyond
most farmers. AS to tho ''soiling" sys
tenn commended by Mr.. Kitchener, he had
not thought favorably of it. He believed
that horses and stock profited more by
hunting their food upon the pasturage
than by having it brought to them. You
can lead horse to water, but you can't
,aly hi l,.,,, tor \
| been that horses and stock would not as
readily eat green grass or green fodder
cut for them and fed to them, as they
would the growing grass. or course they
could be starved into eating it, but this
was bad method, because the animal
would lose in flesh and which could not
be regained by stall feeding. Besides he
thought the soiling system too expensive
in the cutting and handling of green
food. He did not think boundary fences
could be profitably abolished particularly
those binding upon public roads, simply
because it would become almost practic
ally impossible to drive cattle upon the
public highways if they were not fenced
in some way. The facility of driving
stock to market was necessary condi-
ton of the stock growing business with
the farmer, since if he cannot get it to
market be cannot profitably raise it.
Mr.. Magraw said that he was consider
ing the expediency of a5olishing all inter-
ior 20 i1oa hoinp IN
surround it by hedge fence. He thought
very favorably of movable iron hurdles
as cheap and convenient interior fence
for enclosing pasturage or other fields.
He referred to the absence of fences in
other countries, and while he did not ar
que that it would be desirable to abolish
expensive use of wooden fences was a
system inherited from our ancestors that
might we'll be modified at least. In the
early settlement of the country timber
was cheap, and fence Of wood was the
cheapest to be had. The farmer of those
days fenced to protect his growing crops
we'll as to keep his own stock from stray
ing away or trespassing upon his neigh
bors. He remembers once being in Vir-
ginia when his attention was attracted by
very high fence, which on inquiry he
learned had been erected by farmer to
protect his grain against deer. 1t would
require no such fencing now, and yet he
believed that wooden fences were main
tanned to-day largely because we were
following in old ruts and pursuing the
methods of our forefathers, He thought
on farms, but as stated his preference was
for permanent hedges.
Mr.. Carhart expressed the opinion that
verything considered, good post and
rail fence would generally prove the best
investment for a farmer, his opinion also
being shared by the Rev. Mr.. Milligan,
who held also favorable opinion of wire
fences for certain uses, his belief being
that their comparative cheapness was a
recommendation as stated by Mr.. Wilson.
MIR. Duyckinok gave his experience in
the matter of fences stating the fact that
he had set good post and rail fence on
his farm in 1859. That on the average it
would last from twenty to twenty, five
years, and that while he had found the
item of fences a very expensive one, still
of wooden fences he regarded the post
and rail as the best. He however in
stanced one case in which a we'll built
worm fence had outlasted any other in
its neighborhood, explaining its superior
durability by the fact that having no
pointed rails or mortices, the rails did
not rot so fast Mr.. Wilson he said had
spoken of locust posts and cedar rails.
While matured locust posts were I'm
doubtedly the most lasting, yet they
were difficult to get, his experience hav
ing been that young locust was not desir-
able, instancing case where he had set
locust hitching post of a young growth
which had rotted out in very few years.
Oak posts aud chestnut rails were
| the best the farmer could secure and he
had from time to time renewed his fences
with these as occasion required. He
held a high opinion of the method
of hedge growing adopted by the
Cecil Hedge and Wire Fence Company.
The general objection that hedges ex.
hausted the soil, for so wide a space on
either side of them, had been met in this
case by system of close cutting of the
roots, and he had seen in Frederick
County crops growing vigorously quite
as close up to the hedge as in the case Of
any other fences. He had used wire fol
fences, and while he in measure shared
the opinion that they we're dangerous to
stock, yet as division fence, he hao
partially overcome this difficulty by using
top Iail of wood with wire under it
this being sufficient generally as against
horses or stock. As to the "soiling" sys
tenn referred to so favorably by MIR. Mich
ener, his experience had been the reverse
In the case of pair of steers, one o
which had run at large and hunted hi
food, and the other bad been kept en-
closed and fed on grass and green fodder
the former had thrived far more than tn,
latter. He agreed with Mr.. Coudon, tina
the trouble was to have the cut gras
when brought to the horses and stool
eaten by them. They did not seem t,
relish it, while in grazing on good pas
turage, the condition seemed general,
more favorable than when kept in en-