1861. 



THE illi:n^ois FAEMEE. 



365 



Met! must be made to feel that domestic animals 

 must be domirsticateil, i.e., kept at home. That 

 if he wishes to keep domestic animals, he must 

 take C"re of them, and be responsib'e for their 

 comluc;. This is a desirable corsumraation. It 

 is rhe l:iw of the land, a'jd would probably be 

 universally adopted as practical law, were it not 

 for a statute passed April 18, 1838, which denies 

 to a person liable to contribute to the mainten- 

 anc ' of a division fence, all right to damages in- 

 curred by reason of his portion of .'uch fence be- 

 ing out of repair. This act, however, i^ lim- 

 ited to division fences, and does not apply 

 to anv other. All road fences, and other than 

 divihion fences I'.ept up by adjoing owners, fall 

 under the general law, which does not im- 

 pose upon the owner the duty of protecting 

 his cultivated lar;d from stray cattle. That duty 

 belongs to tiie owner of the cattle. To make this 

 pritici;'le effectual it must be asserte'i in a stat- 

 ute. Although the law would aiford a remedy, 

 it must be obtained at the end of an expensive 

 Ltigation." 



Tlic Liw of 1838, perhaps not a very just act 

 in ev ry respect, al hough it has no reference or 

 bearing upon road fences, has done a large part 

 towarvJs erecting the*opinion which so generally 

 prevjiils, that a person must have a good fence 

 agau)^t the road, or he cannot sustain nn action 

 agaiii~t ■ho owners of cattle for- damages. The 

 substance of that act [see R.S., 3d ed., pp. 402, 

 403]. '^ bvit'tiy this : When two or more persons 

 have lamis ^idjoining, each must maintain a just 

 proportion of the division fence between, except 

 the owner of either chooses to let such land lie 

 open ; but if at any time afterwards the owner 

 incloses it, he must refund to the owner of the 

 adjoining laud a just proportion of the value of 

 the divis «n fence at that time. If any person 

 liable to c ivtiibute to the erection or reparntion 

 of a division fence, neglects, or refuses, to make 

 and ma;niiiin his proportion of such fence, or 

 permits iLe same to be out of repair he cannot 

 maintain any action for damages incurred, but 

 will be liable to pay to the party injured all such 

 damages as may occur to his lands, and to his 

 crops, fruit trees, and fixtures thereon, or con 

 nected with said land. 



Let us look a moment at the justice of this act. 

 In some portions of the State there are farmers 

 who have discovered that there is a morn profita- 

 ble way of keeping stock than pasturing them. 

 On such this law is very unjust, and should be 

 modified so as not (o compel them to build fences i 

 wholly for their neighbors' benefit. To show the 

 action of this law more clearly let us illustrate. 

 Suppose Town eighty acres of land, in a square 

 chunk, one side, half a mile in length, lying on 

 the road, and the other three sides, a mile and a 

 half in length, is bounded by cattle-pasturing 

 neighbors. I keep ray cattle up, hut this law 

 compels me to build one half the division fence, 

 which costs, at seventy-five cents a rod, §180 ; 

 the interest ou this amount is $12 60, and the 

 cost divided between ten years — about the aver- 

 age duration of ordinary fences — would be $18, 

 which added to the interest makes $30 60, which 

 I am compelled to pay yearly to help my neigh- 

 bors take care of their stock. But look a little 



further. On the road I have to build a tight, 

 strong fence, which catches all he -now ir win- 

 ter, and makes the roads, at tim'S, impassable, at 

 a cost of $120 — at seventy-fivejct nts a rod — be- 

 cause my neighbor lets his old sow and pigs, and 

 unruly old cows run in the road. The i: lerest 

 on this sura and the cost, divided between ten 

 years, makfs a yearly expense of §20 40 Now 

 were it not for turning the stock which luns in 

 the road, I could build an open, durable fpnce 

 which would be better for all practical purposes 

 as a road fence, for less than half the expense- 

 so we must add one half this sum, or $10 20 to 

 the $30 CO, found above, which makes $4080 

 besides the time spent in fixing and Jookuio- af- 

 ter the fence, is an annual tax upon my industry 

 for the benefit of my neighbors, tor whuh I do 

 not receive a single iota in return, but am com- 

 pelled to pay, for the want of a pimple law to 

 compel my neighbors to bear the expense of 

 taking care of their own stock. Who will say 

 that I am not entitled to such a law ? If they 

 wmt a fence to keep their stock, surely they 

 should be obliged, not me, to build it. 



That there ought to be some leo-i«lation to 

 amend the act of 1838, so that a person who 

 does not pasture his stock shall not be obliged to 

 pay a heavy tax for taking care of the ^tcTck of 

 his neighbors who do choose to pasture, and to 

 make persons strictly liable for the action'of their 

 stock while in the road, must be admitted by all- 

 it remains, then, only to consider how it can be 

 obtained. Speculators, railroad men, and public 

 thieves claim, and receive, so large a share of the 

 attention of our law makers, that it locks like a 

 serious undertaking to attempt to get any meas- 

 ure passed pertaining to the public good ; but I 

 think that a course might be taken to efifect t^e 

 passage of such a law, that would be successful 

 —the lobby to contrary notwithstanding The 

 farmers have the control of the ballot-boxes, and 

 have the power to dictate who shall be sent to the 

 Legislature. They have on'y to a;;t together, 

 and they can elect two-thirds of the members, 

 pledged to vote for any measure they wish to 

 caiTy. To do this, they must agitate the subject, 

 and enlist the local, agricultural aud melropoli- 

 t.in press lu their cause; and if they have any 

 le^rs that thea- members will torget their pledges 

 when they get to Albany, they had better give 

 them tL understand, distinctly, that if they em- 

 ploy the lime which they are paid for by the 

 people in giving away the people's property oy 

 millions, and filling their own pockets— as dia the 

 Legislature of I860 -and adjourn without enact- 

 ing their law, they may expect Southern treat- 

 ment—tar and teathers, ani, perhaps, he^'p— if 

 they are ever again caught in the district they 

 repiesent. •' 



Farmers of New York, choose for yourselves 

 whether you will be " troubled " with unruly cat 

 tie running in the road, and suffer from unjust 

 laws. You may choose to be still longer annoy- 

 ed and ravaged by unruly cattle, but let no Ru- 

 ral reader, at least, inquire what he eliall " do 

 with them." 



-••»- 



Geoffrey St. Hillyear, the celebrated European 

 naturalist, is dead. 



