The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-06-20
NO NEED FOR AN APPEAL
THE ORDINARYs RULING ON THE
FENCE ELECTION FINAL.

VOte-W nat BOLn ClOoS Say ADOu
the Status of the Campaign-As Sum
mary OF the Fence Law as 1t Now
Stands.
Judge Ferrill Of the court of ordinary hal
overruled the bill of exceptions filed by G..
d. Miller, Esq. on behalf Of those who
oppose the 'sno fence" issue, and it is under
stood that the legal contest will be carried
no farther at the present by the directors
that instead of taking a certiorari to the
superior court they will await the result of
the election, and then, If they are defeated
at the polls, exhaust all their legal rights to
nullify the election.
Pursuant to the resolution passed by the
board of county commissioners, Capt.
j. R. Dillon, clerk Of the board, has had
printed and mailed to the voters of the
county copy of the preamble and resolu-
lions passed by an unanimous vote Of the
commissioners with reference TO the damage
done to the drains by cattle running at
large.
The fence people have sought to Offset
this by distributing a circular, in which the
plea is made that mo fencen is intended to
buildings" that it means withdrawing the
privileges of the poor countryman to gather
the plum or berry," and that the poor
widow.must keep her cattle up" that con-
fning cattle endangers health by diseasing
the milk, and that voting for fence insures
health and happiness.
THE ''No FENCE" SIDE OF IT.
The mo fence" people laugh at the circu-
lar, which they say is without rhyme or
reason; it is demagogic, and will have no
weight in the campaign. They argue that
If the dairy cows are kept in an Enclosure
there will be much less danger of milk be-
ing diseased than if they are permitted to
run at large, as now, to drink the filthy
sewage of the Bilbo canal and other con-
taminated waters, and that reliable dairy
men never think of permitting their dairy
COWS to run at large, and for the triple
reason that the COWS drink impure water,
they are milked by the worthless classes of
the colored people, and in many instances
are stolen, butchered, and no after trace Is
had of them.
The "no fence" people say that the "plum
and berry" argument is the sheerest dema-
goguery; that no one will object to the
"poor countrymen" gathering all the plums
and berries he wants, and if there should be
any disposition to prevent it, it would be
impossible to do so, and the fence" people
know IL, but that they hope to catch the
floating vote by this claptrap argument, as
they have no logical argument to advance.
NOT A GRAZING SECTION.
A well posted gentleman pointed out last
night that Chatham county is not adapted
for grazing purposes. There are. he said.
many reasons why grazing is not profitable
in this section. In the first place there is
not grass enough to make cattle raising
profitable industry, and in the second place
the fiat condition of the county makes the
country paradise for cattle flies and gnats
and precludes the possibility of cattle doing
well for local beef market. Beef cattle.
he argued, can be brought here from the
interior and from the west and northwest
and a. sold for less than cattle
can be raised here for beef, and the latter
are'inferior in quality at the best. It is the
general opinion that the lands of Chatham
county are peculiarly adapted to agricul-
ture and vegetable gardening, and that the
arabic lands now under cultivation, the
lands reclaimed by the county's system of
drainage. and the lands yet to be reclaimed
by drainage, if the cattle are prevented
from their damaging incursions in the
bitches. will enrich the county and city, as
the local, interior and northern markets will
handle all the products which can be grown
in the county.
AN EPIToNE OF THE LAW.
A jealous advocate of the ''no fencen law
called upon his attorney j. r. Saussy, Jr.,
ESQ.,, for an epitome of the Georgia fence
law, as the fence" men were claiming that
the ordinary had no right to order an cleo
ton, and they were also endeavoring to
complicate the issue by claiming that "no
fence" means to leave the fence law as it is.
Mr.. Saussy's opinion is in brief as follows:
louu fr.1 nera faua
altered and amended by the legislature by the
act passed and approved Aug. 20, 1872.
This act provided for an election to be held
on the first Monday in July following the filing
of a petition of fifty freeholders residing in any
county in the state
The ballots were to be "fence" and mo
fence" In the event the election returns show
majority of the ballots cast to be for mo
fence" then the provisions of the act should be
In force six months thereafter.
Undoubtedly then the meaning of mo fence''
is that the owners of cattle. ETC., should confine
them to their own land and not allow them to
stray on the lands of others-that the crops
should not be fenced
Fence means to fence the crop and allow
the stock to range at will.
The election was TO be ordered by the ordinary
If the petition of fifty freeholders was not met
with couater petition of fit freeholders
And in the event the petition was so met il the
first petitioners procured another list of twenty
i've additional freeholders, requesting tho cleo
ton, the ordinary should order it held on the
first Monday in July following. So much as TO
the petition And this law has not been changed
by any subsequent act that we can find.
This act was embodied in the Code of 1873 as
section 1449 to and including 1855
BY act OF Aug. 20, 1881, the 1455th section as
to the manner Of holding the election was
amended SO as to authorize the ordinary 10
order the election held at any time he should
appoint The balance of the section was left
the same as in the act of 1872.
By act of Sept. 8, 1888, the same section of the
Code was amended fixing the time for the hold
ing OF the election on the first Wednesday in July
after the fling of the petition provided. the ne
tition had been filed the requisite time TO give
the legal notice of its filing and the time of
holding the election. This Is the law as it now
stands.
The act of 1872 provided that the election
should be held at the place of holding elections
for members of the general assembly and under
the same rules and regulations. This was not
changed by the act of 1881, and was so embod-
led in the Code of 1873, section 1855. The same
provision appears in the act of 1888 and is en-
bodied in the Code of 1880 in section 1856.
Therefore as far as any directions appear
from the acts of the legislature, the election
should be held at the place of holding elections
for members of the general assembly, or at the
court house in Chatham county, as this is tho
place where such elections are held There Is
some confusion arising from section 1855. as to
the place of holding the election, but this is
rendered clear after careful perlsal of the
section.
The parts mentioned comprise about all there
IS as to the formality Of holding the election.
After the election is held, the managers thereof
make their return to the ordinary, and after
examining the same he declares the result.
which takes effect six months after he SO
declares it.
The decision Of the ordinary is final and not