50 



FARMERS' REGISTER. 



[No. 1. 



requires, for its perfection, numerous and good enclo- 

 sures. This is one of ihe last steps in agricultural 

 improvement — agreeing, in results, (from our then pe- 

 culiar circumstances,) with the earliest and rudest 

 state of tdlage in Virginia. But to arrive at this per- 

 fect condition, embracing enclosures of every field, it 

 is necessary that the durable materials for fencing 

 should be sufficiently cheap — that the landmarks on 

 which to build walls, or plant live hedges, should not 

 be changed in every generation, or oftener — and above 

 all, that the profits derived from grazing should be suf- 

 ficient to compensate amply the additional expense of 

 enclosures. None of these circumstances exist in our 

 naked and poor country — and the whole rent of the 

 country, taking rich and poor land together, would not 

 pay for keeping it enclosed in 20 acre lots, as may be 

 good policy in England, and even in some parts of the 

 northern states. But as to the latter, (at least so far as 

 we are informed,) it should be remembered that hogs 

 are not permitted to range at large — and the fences 

 may therefore be made at half the cost. A fence of 

 three rails at most, in mortised posts, is ample protec 

 tion against cattle — and fewer will serve with a ditch 

 and bank. If hogs were thus confined in Virginia, 

 half the oppression of the present law would be at 

 once removed — and besides gaining that benefit, there 

 would be more hogs raised in consequence of this re- 

 straint. We even suspect that our correspondent and 

 his neighbors, abundantly as they are supplied with 

 woods' range, would make more pork, and have less 

 need to rely on the supplies of meat from western dro- 

 vers, which he seems to admit to be now required. 



But between the foreststate of a young country, and 

 the highest state of improvement of an old one, there 

 is an immense middle ground, in which enclosures of 

 every field, and even of every distinct property, can- 

 not be profitably kept up — and therefore, in most coun- 

 tries, are wisely dispensed with. That is, the owners 

 are secured against trespasses, and therefore are free to 

 enclose, or not, as they please. Most of the arable 

 land on the continent of Europe is still in this unen- 

 closed state — and almost all of that which is not more 

 productive than the average of eastern Virginia. Even 

 much of the richest and best cultivated land is un- 

 enclosed, because divided into such small shares that 

 a fence around each would be too heavy an expense to 

 be borne. And though we will not here argue the 

 question as to the superior share of benefit which the 

 small or the large landholders enjoy in the law of en- 

 closures, we will observe, that so long as that law may 

 exist, it will be impossible for land to be held in Virgi- 

 nia in very small shares. The law is perpetually op- 

 erating to starve out, deprive of their little freeholds, 

 and to banish from Virginia, the valuable class of small 

 farmers whom it is averred the system protects. It is 

 as much the operation of the fence law to accumulate 

 many small tracts in few hands, as it is of the law of 

 descents (however beneficial this may be in general,) 

 to divide these accumulations: and from the frequent 

 changes caused by the two opposite operations, divi- 

 ding landmarks, (whether between large or small 

 farms,) cannot be expected to remain long enough to 



mature a live fence on, or to permit a clear profit from 

 its being raised to be derived. 



As applicable to this branch of the subject, we will 

 take the liberty of copying some sentences of a pri- 

 vate letter written last winter by a very intelligent 

 gentleman, than whom, no individual would be deemed 

 better authority — and who, in addition, is a resident 

 cultivator of the tobacco region of Virginia, and where, 

 it is believed, that the mode of tillage, habits, and 

 other circumstances, either are, or were but recently, 

 precisely similar to those in the neighborhood of our 

 opponent. "You are right," says this gentleman, "in 

 saying but little can be done in the way of improvement, 

 till there is a change in our law of enclosures. The 

 present law is dissected in a masterly manner in the 

 Register, [No. (»,] and its absurdity completely ex- 

 posed." "You never said a truer thing, than that 



the poorer class was more interested in a change, than 

 the more wealthy. There are hardly as many free- 

 holds now as there were thirty years ago, and I verily 

 believe that it is attributable to the present law. Small 

 freeholds are amalgamated, brought under one fence 



and one owner." "In my neighborhood there is 



thirty miles of fencing, and all to give to stock the 

 benefit of promenading up and down a six-mile lane, 

 where there is scarcely a blade of grass." 



Having admitted fully the good design and policy of 

 our law of enclosures, for the condition of the country 

 when it was enacted, it will be unnecessary to disavow 

 the intention of charging the present oppression to de- 

 signedly partial, or worse than partial legislation. We 

 spoke of the operation of the law, and not of the in- 

 tentions of the legislators who enacted it. We never 

 supposed that there was a deliberate design to sacrifice, 

 or even to impair, the interests of tillage for the bene- 

 fit of the interests of grazing, as a matter of general 

 policy. But this effect is not the less produced be- 

 cause of its not having been intended — though (as 

 formerly stated) without even the poor gain of bene- 

 fiting the favored interest. 



But however much we may differ from our esteem- 

 ed correspondent on this question, we are pleased that 

 he has come forward to maintain his opinions. It is 

 proper that every question affecting the interests of 

 agriculture should be fairly discussed in this journal — 

 and none of its readers ought to object to a full ex- 

 pression of any honest opinion, however opposed to 

 their own conviction. 



From the Petersburg Intelligencer. 



COTTON SEED OIL. 



The Mayor and City Council of New Orleans 

 have resolved to light the city with cotton seed oil. 

 The Baltimore Patriot remarks "that the extensive 

 experiment that is about to be made of the utility 

 of this oil in New Orleans, will test its value, and 

 il it should be found to possess the advantages as- 

 cribed to it, over the oil now in common use, it 

 will, no doubt, enter largely into the consumption 

 of every family, an prove an immense source 

 of profit to the cotton growing portion of our coun- 

 try. It -will in fact, be an addition, fo the full 

 amount of the oil, to their wealth, the cotton seed 

 being now almost a useless article." 



