EVOLUTION OF TOWNS AND VILLAGES.
HERDS AND FENCES.
At a first glance such things as herds, fences, trails and such like may
not look like subjects for historical matter, but they affected and largely
governed the life of the early settler. Few things caused more bad feeling
between neighbors than injury to crops by a neighbor's cattle. To legis-
late for the tariff today is a childishly easy thing compared to the task the
old N. W. T. legislators had in dealing with such matters as herd law
and fencing. For one thing Alberta was mostly a stock country and here
stock districts were formed, but they were not all cattlemen, and the in-
terests of farmers and ranchers conflicted. In Assiniboia and Saskatche-
wan there were two classes of farmers, wheat farmers and mixed farmers.
The wheat farmer did not want to fence a big acreage in order to keep
out cattle; while the mixed farmer preferred to fence his small arable
acreage and let his cattle have free range. Herd districts were formed
under which cattle were allowed to run from seeding to harvest. Then
there would be difference of opinion as to the date of the restriction.
Where a herd district was formed a man might live just out of it, and
suffer all its inconveniences without getting any benefit. And there was
also the vexed question of whether bulls might run at large. The Council
and the Assembly were repeatedly amending the herd and fence ordinances
sometimes with exasperating results as one never knew what the law really
was. At the second Session of Laird's little Council in 1878, we get the
first evidence of stock legislation in an Ordinance for "the marking of
stock." The word "brand" is not used, only "mark". This provided for
the governor proclaiming a district a stock district, for the sole purpose
apparently of recording these "marks". The stipendiary's office was the
"mark" office and his clerk was ex-officio the Recorder of Marks. The
following were the fees. To Recorder for recording each mark, copy of
same and mailing to stipendiary magistrate at Battleford, two dollars;
fee for the clerk of the stipendiary at Battleford for filing and recording
or returning such copy, two dollars; each certified copy, fifty cents; every
search for mark, twenty-five cents. There was also an ordinance against
any stallion running at large within ten miles of any settlement; also an
ordinance (the first) for the protection of sheep and the killing of dogs
which had worried sheep, and for the liability of the owner to fine and
damages. It was expressly provided that the knowledge of the owner of
the dog's propensity was not necessary to a conviction. There was an
ordinance also imposing a fine of $100 or three months in gaol for any
man who drove off stock found grazing with his own, or who drove ani-
mals more than five miles away from their usual grazing places. Also a
bull ordinance which made it unlawful for any bull to run at large between
the first of February and the first of June.
As an instance of trouble arising from the continual amending of
ordinances I may mention a case in which I was the somewhat inglorious
hero. A neighbor of mine had a cross old bull which had a habit of coming
pawing and snorting around my house to the discomposure of my young
and interesting family. As last I ran the bull into my stable and de-
manded five dollars, before I would release him. My neighbor insisted
that the old bull had the right to run, an idea which I flouted. But I went
back, hitched up and drove nine miles to have a look at the latest ordin-
ance. My neighbor was right and I was liable to be arrested for the un-
lawful retention, if not the actual theft of the bull. I was soon back. In
about four hours from my first visit I was again at my neighbor's place,
this time in a mood of lofty conciliation. "Look here" I said, "1 don't
want any trouble; just say you'll keep old George away from my place
and you can take him away and we won't say anything about the five dol-
lars". "Alright" he said; and I never knew whether he found out that I
was wrong and he was right. But there was no more trouble with oldGeorge.
The first fence ordinance was passed at the second session of Laird's
Council held in 1878.
No.10 of 1878 defined a lawful fence as follows: "Any fence four
feet and six inches high, and the lower rail not more than one foot from
the ground, and no other rails more than eight inches apart, except the
top rail of wire fences, and any river bank of boundary reasonably suf-
ficient to protect growing crops from domestic animals, shall be a lawful
fence". This was the law till 1881 when the first ordinance was repealed,
and provision made not only for rail fences, but for those of board, com-
mon wire, or barbed wire. The rail fence was tightened up. Three inches
were added to the height of it which now had to be four feet nine in height,
the rails were to be only six inches apart except the top one which might
be eight. The board fence had to be "of upright posts or boards not
more than six inches apart." A "common" wire fence had to have a sub-
stantial top rail, and no less than four wires not more than a foot apart.
The river bank or natural boundary clause still remained, but with the
elimination of the word "reasonably", it had to be "sufficient" to keep
domestic animals out of any enclosed land". As the years went on there
was quite a battle about the top rail on the barbed wire fence. Once it
was taken off; then an effort was made to restore it, and a division took
place in the House. The top rail men were defeated. They came back
to it again and carried their point.
Bibliography follows:
Next Page
