STATE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. 305 



shall, labor must be supplied to them at cheaper rates than are now 

 ruling. The one hinges upon the other. 



Another question that is now agitating the minds of many, is that of 

 doing away with fences — tin item of enormous expense to farmers. 

 When a man invests one thousand dollars here for land, he is required to 

 invest two thousand dollars to fence it. Almost every man who desires 

 to farm, has the means and ability to acquire a small farm in this coun- 

 try; but there are those who cannot acquire even a small farm and fence 

 it as required by law. In other words, one man with six or eight cows, 

 perhaps, will come into a neighborhood, and prevent ten men from pro- 

 ducing a thousand bushels of wheat each. In my opinion it is most 

 absurd. There is no reason why one individual should pursue an occu- 

 pation to the great injury of hundreds of others ; no reason why A should 

 be compelled to build two miles of fence that he may raise three hundred 

 bushels of grain to accommodate B who milks three cows. Let B take 

 care of his own cows ; let him fence ten acres, or in other words, let him 

 keep his property from trespassing on mine. 



This question is just commencing to be agitated, because perhaps 

 stock keepers have heretofore predominated, and it would have cost more 

 to fence the stock than the grain ; now the thing is reversed and it costs 

 ten, yes twenty times the amount to fence the grain that it does the 

 stock. Should we not then welcome any measure of relief from this 

 burdensome tax of making and keeping in repair so much superfluous 

 fence. 



There has been manifest in California a spirit of opposition to the 

 combination of capital. I think wrongly so I believe there is nothing 

 better for our State than that the land should become the property of 

 individuals. It is true it would be better if we had an owner for every 

 one hundred and sixty acres within our State; but we have not the 

 inhabitants. And when they come here and demand the one hundred 

 and sixty acres they will be sure to get them. But in my opinion, 

 the sooner the land of California becomes private property the better 

 for the State; because where there is one man who will invest in land, 

 let it pay large or small, and that will let it lie idle, there are ten men 

 who will cultivate it to some extent. Therefore I say it is an induce- 

 ment to men to cultivate a large number of acres now, hoping at some 

 time to realize a large fortune therefrom. It is yet a problem whether 

 such hopes may ever be realized. 



As I said at the outset, I do not intend to discourse these various ques- 

 tions, but merely to suggest to the society the questions now before 

 them, which are of great importance. It is a question as to whether 

 the State shall maintain its present position as a producing State; and 

 the answer hinges upon the manner in which these matters are settled. 

 I say that under existing circumstances it is impossible for this State to 

 produce grain and compete with other countries more favorably situated. 

 We cannot afford to export. 



When the foreign demand is less than now our granaries will overflow 

 in less than six months, and there will be no market for us. Then, I 

 say, we must first have cheap freights, increased commerce, do awa}* 

 with fencing and with every expense that is not actually and absolutely 

 necessary, and produce at a much less cost than we do now. Will this 

 society decide upon these questions? You may say that the President 

 accords too much power to this society. I admit it, under the present 

 mode of management. 

 39 



