State Agricultural Societt. 19 



are also being adopted and pushed forward to completion, thus placing 

 the certainty of water within the control of every cultivator, and render- 

 ing a crop of any kind beyond the possibility of failure. On the whole, 

 we are well satisfied that no other State in the American Union presents 

 greater inducements or more certain prosperity to the enterprising, 

 skillful, and economical immigrant than does California. We are also 

 well satisfied that whoever persists in publishing to the world the dark- 

 est side of our condition in California is not only injuring the best- 

 interests of the people and the State, but is also doing a great injury to 

 those who would otherwise come and make their homes among us and 

 enjoy the unequaled advantages and prosperity that here awaits them. 



THE FENCE QUESTION. 



There is perhaps no subject at present undergoing more earnest dis- 

 cussion in the agricultural communities of the State than the laws regu- 

 lating the building of fences. If the general expression of the press be 

 a true indication of the wishes of the people, we must conclude that there 

 is a pretty general disposition to abandon the system of laws and cus- 

 toms that have heretofore prevailed in this country and State, and adopt 

 the European system in regard to the protection of growing crops. 

 While it is the province and desire of the Board of Agriculture to extend 

 to all the industries of the State a fostering care, and equal protection 

 and encouragement, we cannot ignore the many considerations urged in 

 favor of the change proposed. If it be found upon an unbiassed exam- 

 ination of this subject that such a change will bring greater benefits to 

 the greater interests, or the greater good to the greater number of our 

 people, without inflicting severe wrong or hardship on other interests, 

 then the sooner the change be made the better. It is a contest between 

 two classes of propert}^ — in general terms, grain and cattle. It is 

 claimed by the owners of the former that as grain or growing crops of 

 all kinds are passive and cattle are aggressive, that the natural rights of 

 property and the equities regulating the management and relations of 

 the same, as well as the moral obligations of the owners, would require 

 that the latter should be restrained from committing depredations on the 

 former, and that whatever expense is necessarily incurred in furnishing 

 the means of such restraint, such expense should be borne by the owners 

 of the latter, and consequently that all laws founded upon a different 

 principle should be repealed, and that laws recognizing this position 

 should be enacted and enforced. 



RELATIVE PROPBRTY CONSIDERATIONS. 



As we have before stated in this report the returns of the County 

 Assessors and the census reports fix the value of the agricultural pro- 

 ducts of the State for the year eighteen hundred and seventy, including 

 grain, roots, and wine, and excluding fruits, at sixty million dollars. 

 By the same returns, the whole number of grape vines and fruit trees of 

 various kinds in the State is thirty million nine hundred and ten thou- 

 sand and forty-six. Valuing these at one dollar each — and this is cer- 

 tainly below their real value — and discarding the odd thousands for con- 

 venience, we have an additional property of thirty million dollars — 

 making ninety million dollars' worth of growing crops and property 

 requiring protection from the ravages of the stock of the State. 



Now, taking the whole number of horses, cattle, sheep, and goats in 



