STATE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. 14) 



for breeding purposes. Thus, while the Spanish herds were driven far- 

 ther off, those near market were nominally withdrawn. This accounts 

 for the long time at which beef cattle remained at a high price. It was 

 some years before American beef cattle could be had at any price, and 

 the effect was their rapid multiplication, with constantly diminishing 

 ranges. Two causes at length operated to bring American beef cattle 

 into the market in great abundance. These were a desire to realize 

 after a long period of investment in multiplication, and the increasing 

 difficulty of procuring pasturage. Although long deferred, the eventual 

 decline in stock was as sudden as it was extraordinary. This unex- 

 pected prostration of an interest in which large communities had in- 

 vested their means for years, with the expectation of acquiring a com- 

 petence from the enterprise, has had the effect of producing a wide- 

 spread discouragement and an abandonment of the business, attended with 

 ruinous losses by a great many persons. While sanguine of a favorable 

 result from their investments in stock growing, greater attention was 

 being paid to the improvement of breeds, and it should be a source of 

 pride to our farmers to reflect that they have been enabled in so short a 

 time to expel from the ranges the nondescript Spanish breeds, and sub- 

 stitute in their places the majestic Durham and kindred blood. Having 

 attained this, which is but the first step toward final success, it becomes 

 a matter of the greatest importance for the herdsman to provide such 

 subsistence as shall not only keep his improved breeds of cattle from 

 deterioration, but render the business of pecuniary profit. This cer- 

 tainly cannot be expected under the " feast and famine " process. The 

 only available means to render stock raising certain and profitable is to 

 cultivate and store forage crops, to be fed out iu the famine season. This 

 recourse involves the consideration of one of the gravest questions 

 affecting the relations of landed rights. It is the question of fences. 

 This question may be examined in two aspects : 



First — As to which is the best policy, as a mere matter of economy, 

 either to fence stock or grain. 



Second — What are the equities and natural rights existing in the case. 



In the first proposition, it will be necessary to illustrate the subject 

 by a comparison of the economies and profits of stock farming as com- 

 pared with produce farming. In the second proposition, it will be de- 

 sirable that an analog}^ be drawn, so as to show that human society may 

 have acted inconsistently when it established rules of restraint which 

 should operate to protect persons' from aggression, but were subject to 

 reversal when applied to outrages committed on property. 



COST OF FENCING GRAIN AGAINST STOCK. 



Statistics showing the cost of fences in any country, when arraj'ed in 

 columns, will appear of startling dimensions, and in none more so than 

 in California. In the first place, our fencing material has to be brought 

 from a long distance, incurring heavy charges for both water and laud 

 carriage. Then, again, where it is other than of redwood, it soon decays, 

 and must be renewed after a few years of exposure to our dry and w T et 

 seasons, which operate to produce rapid decomposition. It is intended 

 in this article to lay before the public a few facts gathered from reliable 

 sources in illustration of the comparative relations existing between 

 stock growing and produce farming in thirteen counties of the State, 

 where the area of land is occupied in nearly equal proportions by each 

 interest. The counties taken for purposes of illustration are Alameda, 



