McCormick messenger. (McCormick, S.C.) 1902-current, July 10, 1930, Image 2
I
i
Thursday, July 10, 1930
McCORMICK MESSENGER, McCORMICK, South Carotin*.
Page Number Two
McCORMICK MESSENGER
Published Every Thursday
Established June 5, 1902
EDMOND J. McCRACKEN,
Editor and Owner
Entered at the Post Office at Mc
Cormick, S. C., as mail matter of
the second class.
DISPLAY ADVERTISING-
25 cents per inch for each inser
tion; nothing less than 4 inches
accepted for double column dis
play, nor less than 2 inches for i
single column display.
Positions given at ONE-THIRD
extra charge.
BUSINESS READING NOTICES:
6 per cent per line for each inser
tion, average, of 6 words to line.
WANT AD VS., 6 cents per line
for each insertion, average of 6
words to line.
TRIBUTES OF RESPECT, 6 cents
per line, 6 words to line.
All advs, set# in body type, 6
cents per single column line; extra
charges for big type on all single
column advs., except head and
signature.
L\
miirjgjmi
5 C^T'
SUBSCRIPTION RATES:
— Strictly Cash In Advance —
One Year $1.00
Six Months -J75
Three Months 1.50
RECOGNIZING A PESSIMIST
There is no mistaking a pessim
ist—you can recognize ohe as soon
as you see him.!
His countenance is shrouded in
gloom so thick that a smile has ho
chance of escaping. If he has a
slight toothache, he is as solicit-
/- ous of his jaw as a man is of his
first automobile.
* If he has a slight touch of lum
bago, he walks as if he had one
foot in the grave. If he is afflict
ed with indigestion, as most of his
/ kind are, he never loses an oppor
tunity to tell his friends about it.
If there is N nothing wrong physi
cally, which is rare, he fancies in
the dark recesses of his imagina
tion that the world is going to the
eternal bowows.
All models of pessimists are the
same. That's the reason you will
have no difficulty in recognizing
one.
Curing them is questionable.
Those in the last stages are be
yond hope, but a little persuasion
used on those who are not too far
gone may lead to a conversion and
add another good citizen to the
' community.
: X
OSCAR DePRIEST IN ALABAMA
TO TH£S£
TIRE SAVINGS!
rn
This Tire keeps going in Spite of Punishment!
Oscar DePrieSt, Negro congress
man from Illinois, is scheduled to
speak in Birmingham during th£
month of July, but there are indi-
j cations that his plans may be
changed. The city authorities re
fused him the use oi the city aud
itorium, and other citizens ex
pressed their feelings by burning
the coldred congressman in effigy.
When the weather is hot, and folks
are restless and idle, it is a dan
gerous time for agitators of social
equality and communism to fool
around in the south.—Greer Citi
zen.
tx*
’ THE SMALL TOWN COMING
BACK
(The Dillon Herald)
Paved roads and automobiles
have dealt a severe blow to the
smaller towns and cities, but it ap
pears that the novelty of spending
ten cents a mile on a fifty or hun
dred mile automobile journey to
buy $15 or $25 worth of merchan
dise is wearing itself out.
According to a recent statement
issued by the Bureau of Agricul
tural Economics, business is on the
increase in towns of 1,000 to 10,000
population. It is claimed that the
bulk of the farmer’s income, which
approximates ten billion dollars
a year, is now spent in the smaller
towns, and the prediction is nicte
that this will continue for a gen
eration.
The trend in this direction is in
dicated by the establishment;
department stores in the smalle*'
towns and the increasing demand
for space in weekly newspapers by
foreign advertisers. There has al
so been an awakening on the >art
of many local merchants who hav~
reached the conclusion that at
tractive, well-prepared advertise
ments are necessary to compete
with national advertisers.
The United States is gradual!*'
adjusting itself to the changed
economic conditions brought about
by the automobile and paved high
ways. There were times when the
small-town merchant looked into
the future with feelings of appre-
Jhension, but these days are over
29x4.40 $5.55
29x4.50 6.30
30x4.50 6.35
28x4.75 7.55
30x5.00 8.45
31x5.25 9.95
33x6.00 6 Ply 13.75
30x3 1-2 Cl. 4.89
30x3 1-2 Cl. Gt. 4.98
31x4 8.65
32x4 9.35
32x4 1-2 .13.19
33x4 9.95
33x4 1-2 13.55
N ICE day. Country road. Motor
humming. Then ... BANG! You
knew it! That bargain-counter casing
on the right front wheel!
Another good day gone wrong... and
not helped by the fact that you’d been
wondering how long that tire was going
to last.
You knowhow it is! So do we! That’s
why we have Cavaliers on our racks.
Goodrich built the Cavalier for people
who want to keep their tire investment
at the minimum. Built it to suit them
in price . • • and surprise them in per
formance. Built it to live up to Good
rich standards . . . and still cost less
than just ordinary tires.
So you’ll find the Cavalier big and
husky in every particular. Oversize in
air cushion. Stout in carcass and side-
wall. Tough and slow-wearing in the
tread. And good to look at, too!
If you want to take tires off your mind
. . . see us. Our stock of Cavaliers in
cludes your size . . . and two sizes for
trucks. Specially priced now... not apt
to be much longer. Come in while the
savings are even bigger than usual.
Goodrich ^
’ Service Station
Main Street, McCormick, S. C.
and now he is devoting his time
to the task of expandfig his busi
ness by getting his share of the
trade in his legitimate field.
X r-
WHO STARTED THIS STORY?
(The Dillon Herald.)
For years it has been currently
reported that production costs west
of the Mississippi, and especially
in Texas and Oklahoma, were so
low that cotton could be produced
in that region for five and six
cents a pound. Men who spoke
with authority said that low pro
duction costs in the west would
ultimately drive the farmers east
of the Mississippi out of the cot
ton business.
Everyone is familiar with the old
story that Texas and Oklahoma
lands were so naturally fertile that
the use of commercial fertilizers
was unnecessary, and cheap Mexi
can labor in these states was so
abundant that farmers east of the
Mississippi could not hope to com
pete with the western farmer in
growing cotton. No doubt many
men who have heard these state
ments repeated time and again
have lain awake at nights and
wondered what they would do with
their lands when they would have
to abandon altogether the growing
of cotton.
How these reports gained such
wide circulation is not known. Nine
men out of ten have heard them
and nine men out of ten believe
them. But it appears that the re
ports are without foundation. It is
probable that they originated * in
the fertile brain of some writer
who allowed his imagination to run
away with him. Texas is not far j
from South Carolina in these days,
of quick transportation, and it is
strange that these misleading
statements have gone unchallenged
for so many years. They have
done considerable harm.
The attention of the Morning
News of Dallas, Texas, one of the,
Lone Star state’s most reliable:
newspapers, was drawn to these j
erroneous statements by an article
which appeared in a reeferit isshe v
of the New York Herald Tribune,!
and in a leading editorial the!
Morning News not only denies ohe
statements but says that the cost
of producing cotton in Texas and
Oklahoma is as high as it is in the
eastern cotton states. The Morn
ing News also riducles the state- |
ment that Texas and Oklahoma
cotton lands are so rich they d:<
not need fertilizers.
The Herald is publishing belov:
the Morning News’ editorial in fu
for the benefit of its cotton-far-
i
mer readers:
A recent interesting phenomen
on in the metropolitan press of th*
east is the frequent appearance of !
special articles designed to show
the expansion of cotton raising in ;
Texas and the southwest. Broad
statements are made in some of
these, based upon random infor
mation not always in line with the
facts. The New York Herald Tri
bune said a few days ago, for in
stance, that Texas and Oklahoma
can grow 25,000,000 bales and that
farmers can produce cotton at 3c
to 5c a pound. Great significance
is given to the “sled” that home
made device which enabled South
Plains farmers In 1926 to salvage
their cotton when prices dropped
to less than 10c a pound, and
when they ceuld not obtain money
to pay nickers. Such statements
are misleading and should not go
unchallenged. The truth of it is
that the average cost of raising
cotton in Texas is somewhere
arotind 20c to 25c a pound, except
in Northwest Texas, where lower
costs generally obtain. As for the
cotton sled, it has not been used
since 1926 simply because no far
mer can afford to sled cotton as
long as the price is above 10c a
pound.
Referring to The Dallas News’
“More Cotton on Fewer Acres” con
test which continued for four years
and attracted wide attention, the
Herald Tribune article declares
that “Texas cotton growers have
demonstrated that they can raise
a crop at a cost of 3c to 5c a pound.
No grower in Dixie can meet a
price like that. In the production
of poor cotton Texas must win.”
That is a doubtful compliment.
Texas has no aspirations to become
famous as a producer of poor cot
ton. Furthermore, it should be
heralded far and wide that the ex
ceptionally low costs among the
winners in The News optton con
tests have no relationship to the
vast army of producers whose cost
ranges between 20c and 25c a
pound every year. Nor were the
low costs confined to Texas. In
the Georgia and other state cotton
contests low costs of below 5c a
pound were obtained where the
yields were eorrespondingly high.
Other unsupported views ex
pressed were to the effect that
Texas and Oklahoma seem destined
to become one vast cotton field
with growers, through machinery
and tractor equipment, tilling 500
acres per man, “instead of lone
Utegfoes driving single mules and
family groups at common toil with
hoes.” The latter picture probably
relates to the southeastern cotton
states and is intended to show how
futile it is for that region to com
pete with Texas and the south
west.
A more nearly correct view
would be that all of East Texas
raises cotton much like Georgia,
iUabama, and the Carolinas, due
to similarity of topography, smal’
fields and the boll weevil, while in
the Texas Gulf Coast region and
the South Plains tractorized meth
ods have developed labor-saving,
large-scale farming practice
which always make for lowere r
production cost. But the lesson c r
oil the state cotton contests, pat
terned after those launched b ,v
The News, is that the higher the
yield per acre the lower the cost of
production, varying with climatic
advantages or deficiencies and
methods of fertilization and culti
vation. Intensive culture of small
tracts still offers large profits. In.
fact, it seems to be the pnly meth
od under which cotton growers in
boll weevil areas can make any
money whatever. Much of Texas
still faces the same problem as
does the old south, inasmuch as
most cf the original rolling tim
ber lands that have come into cul
tivation in the last century have
been sadly depleted. Large-scale
superfarming methods will always
be confined to specifically adapted
areas. The statement that T^xas
and Oklahoma are “flat as a pan
cake and the ground needs no fer
tilizer” would be interesting if
true.
txx
Mr. Herbert’s Parable
(Greenville Piedmont.)
A parable upon the need for tax
reform in South Carolina is being
told in the state campaign by R.
Beverley Herbert of Columbia, one
of the eight candidates for the of
fice of governor.
In his law practice Mr. Herbert
has among his clients two widows.
Widow No. 1 had $18,900 which
i;he attorney invested for her In
stocks, bonds and other securities
from which she receives an income
of aboul $1,200 a year. She pays
no taxes whatever.
Widow No. 2 had nothing but
borrowed through the attorney
$4,000 upon a tract of land. She
pays $195 in taxes annually!
When. such contrasts exist, Mr.
Herbert tells his audiences, it is
little wonder “that a political
storm has broken over South Caro
lina.”
He goes on to say that he looked
up the tax records of the wealth
iest citizen he could find in the
state and discovered that his an
nual property tax payment was
less than $7. '
Mr. Herbert is another candidate
whose campaign is proving to be a
public service to the state.
He lays too much store by the
worth of the proposed removal of
the state five-mill property tax but
he is presenting tax facts interest
ingly, attractively, and in a man
ner calculated to promote general
study of the state’s taxation “sys
tem.” V
His story of the two widows will
help him to enlist the public’s in
terest—an enlistment which he de
serves.
tXt ‘
THE DEMAGOGUES
Although this is an “off year” in
politics, so-called because there is
no national campaign for presi
dent and vice-presdient, there will
be plenty of interest in contests for
state offices and for membership
in both houses of Congress. All
members of the House and one-
third of the Senate will be chosen
in elections this year.
Politicians of every sort will
make their appeal to the “dear
people” for support on one pre
text or another. And, as always,
the demagogues will be out in full
force.
Webster defines a demagogue
as “one who plays an insincere role
in public life for the sake of gain
ing influence or office; a poser in
politics, especially one who pand
ers to popular prejudice or seeks
to inflame reasonless passions in
the advancement of his personal
interests.”
It is a reflection upon the in
telligence and judgment of a great
per centage of voters that they
are apparently unable to size up
the demagogue for what he is.
They listen to his ravings and
swallow his insincere promises with
avidity. His wildest statements
and most irresponsible representa
tions are often accepted at face
value—and he gets the votes.—Ab
beville Press and Banner.
X
QUIT TALKING AND ACT
Those hundreds of thousands of
Americans who denounced the
growing weight of taxes should
realize that the solution to the
ornblem is in their hands.
When we insist that public offi
cials run the government as pri
vate official run our great indus
tries; that duplication of effort,
out-moded methods and waste be
outlawed; that extravagant gov
ernment ventures into the field of
private business be discontinued;
and when economy and efficiency,
rather than political expediency,
become the ruling forces, taxes will
go down. Until then we cannot
look for relief. — Seneca Farm
Journal. - -