The watchman and southron. (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, June 25, 1890, Image 1
?i..Wic **
WATCHMAN, Established April, 1850.
"Be Just and Fear net-Let all the Ends thou Aims't at, tee thy Country's, thy God's and Truth's
Conneli lakMl Aug. 2, 1881.]
StTMTER, S. C, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1890.
THE TRITE SO?*??tO?, Established J?W, #0*9
New Series?Toi. IX. ?fe. 4&
Published ovary Wednesday,
BT
N- Gr. OSTEEN,
SUMTER, S. C.
TKRMS t
Two Dollars per ami um?in advance.
v ADVERTISEMENTS.
O Square, first insertion.$1 00
Every subsequent insertion. 50
Coctracts for three mon rfis, or longer wili
be nm?te at reduced rates.
A?pomraun?catio?s which subserve private
interests will be charged for as advertisements.
Obituaries and tributes of respect will be
sharped for.
NOTHING SUCCEEDS
LIKE SUCCESS.
The reason RADAM'S
MICROBE KILLER is
the most wonderful med
icine, is because it has
never failed in any in
stance, no matter what
the disease, from LEPRO
SY to the simplest disease
known to the human
system.
The seien ti Sc men of
_ to-day claim aud prove that every disease is
| MASSED BY MICROBES,
AND
RADAM'S MICROBE KILLER
Extermin?tes the Microbes and drives them
oat of the system, and when tbat is done you
cannot have an ache or pain. No matter
what the disease, whether a simple case of
Malarial Fever or a combination of diseases,
/ we cure them all at the same time, as we treat
all diseases constitutionally.
Asthma, Consomption, Catarrh,
Bronchitis, Rheumatism, Kidney and
Liver Disease, Chills and Fever, Fe
male Troubles, in all its forms, and, io
fact, every disease known to the human
Iware ef MM IiMois!
See that our Trade-Mark (same as above)
appears on each jug.
Send for book "History of the Microbe
Killer," given away by Dr. A. J. China,
braggr?t, Sole Agent.
Jan 22 _
CATARR
Ely's Cream Bal m
- Cleanses the Kasal Passages. Al
lays inflammation. Heals the Sores.
Bestores the Senses of Taste, Smell
an d Hearing.
A particle is applied into each nostril and
is agreeable. Price 5Qc. at Pra?rist?? or by
. JELY BEOTHERS,36 Warren St-^few York.
Regulate The Bowels.
Cos*l-vene deranges tlx? whole sys
tem* "h diseases, such as
? -< .~ JBEeadaclie?
Dyspepsia, Severs, Kidney Diseases,
Bilious Colic, Malaria, etc.
tait*? Pills produce regular habit of
body and good digestion, without
which, no one etui enjoy good health.
Sold Everywhere*
THE SIMONDS MTI?ML BASK,
> OF SUMTER.
STATE, CITY AND COUNTY DEPOSI
TORY, SUMTER, S. C.
Paid up Capital.$75,000 00
Surplus Fund ...... 7,500 00
: Transacts a General Banking Business.
Careful attention given to collections.
SAVINGS DEPARTMENT.
Deposits of $1 and upwards received. In
terest allowed at the rate of 4 per cent per
annum. Payable quarterly, on first days of
January, April, July and October.
R. M. WALLACE,
Vice President.
L. S. Carson,
Aug. 7 Cashier.
TOS BM If SliTIlt,
SUMTER, S C.
CITY AND COUNTY DEPOSITORY.
Transacts a general Banking business.
Also has
A Savings Bank Department.
Deposits of $1.00 and upwards received.
Interest calculated at the rate of 4 per cent,
per annum, payable quarterly.
W. F. 3. HAYNSWORTH,
A. White, Jr., President.
Cashier.
5*000 Accident Insurance,
FOR 25 CENTS PER DAY,
5 days, $1.00; u days,$2.00; 30days, S3 00;
one year, Si0.00.
In case of death, $5,000.
For loss of both hands, $5,000.
For Joss of both feet, ?5,000.
For loss of one hand and one foot. $5,000.
For loss of one band or one foot, $2,500.
$25 weekly indemnity.
THOS. E. RICHARDSON,
Agent for the Fidelity ? Casualty Co.,
of New York.
May 28 ' Cash capital ?250,000
MONEY TO LOAN.
MONEY TO LOAN in sums over $300
on improved farming lands. Usuul
rate* of interest. Time?3 to 5 years.
By arrangement with parties we represent
costs and commissions have been greatly re
duced and loaus guaranteed within 30 days
after application.
INGRAM & MANNING,
Attorneys at Law, Sumier, S. C.
March 5
G. W. DICK, D. D. S.
Office over Bogin's New Store,
?KTRANCE ON MAIN ST8EKT,
SUMTER, S. C.
Office Hoars.?9 to 1:30 ; 2:30 to 5.
Sept 8
Capt. Tillman's Reply to Col.
Butler.
In the coarse of his speech at the
opening meeting of the canvass, at
Greenville on Tuesday the 10th inst.,
Capt. Tilltnan said :
In r^y speech at Anderson I made
allusion to the failure of the agricultural
department to punish frauds in fertil
izers, and I charged in substance as I
charge now :
.First, That the bureau has made no
honest effort to protect the farmers
against being swindled by buyingguano
below the guarantee.
Second, That it has not enforced the
law or its own regulations.
Third, That although the law is
known to be defective, and the punish
ment inadequate, no attempt has been
made by the Board or Commissioner to
have it amended, except that the matter
was mentioned in one of the depart
ment's reports several years ago.
Commissioner Butler, in an open
letter addressed to me, and which has
been widely published in the State pa
pers, says : "I challenge you to point to
one instance where farmers have been
defrauded by manufacturers of fertil
izers where such fraud was not punished
with all the power that the department
had at its command, and that you make
good your charge, or retract it." I
will cheerfully comply.
As to the first count : The Commis
sioner in his letter acknowledges that
the penalty of confiscation imposed by
law against all fertilizers that are below
the guarantee cannot be enforced, for
the sufficient reason that when the
analyses are made the fertilizers are in
the ground, and out of reach, etc. The
distribution of fertilizers to points of
consumption commences generally in
December, and they are not all "in the
ground" till May 1, or later. During
the last ten years, at a rough estimate,
one and a quarter million tons of fer
tilizers have passed the quasi "inspec
tion" of our Agricultural Department
and the amoint paid by farmers for the
farcical protection has been upwards of
$300,000.
In bis letter Col. Butler fur ther says :
"I will say that in my opinion, based
upon official experience, the manufac
turer who deliberately attempts to de
fraad the farmers is the exception, and
further I believe that va every case
where this has been attempted it has
failed of success, because of the De
partment's supervision. "
Here is an acknowledgment thaf "at
tempts to defraud" have been made
There have been "exceptions" to the
rule of honesty. Has he ever coofis
cated a single sack ? No. Then cer
tainly "the Department's supervision"
has not caused the failure of every at
tempt to defraud.
"Up to eighteen months ago" Com
missioner Butler had at. his command
a State chemist, employed by the year
at a salary of $2,000. Analyses of
fertilizers could begin as soon as sam
ples were taken?say the middle of Jan
uary In 1885 31 per cent, of the am
moniated fertilizers analyzed were below
the guarantee, and 20 per cent of acid
phosphates were the same. In 1886
20 per cent, of ammoniated and 9 per
cent, of acid were deficient, and this is
about the average of the last three
years. Is it possible to suppose that
noue of these deficient brands of fertil
izers were ever analyzed, or could not
have been auaiyzed and their fraud
found out in time, so that an efficient
and zealous officer could not have found
some of it before "all was in the
ground ?" No reasonable man in
So *.b Carolina believes ic.
Suppose, as Col. Butler claims, that
the "averages" of manufacturers' guar
antees exceeded those guarantees $3 68
per ton, what satisfaction was it to a
farmer who bought and paid for the
deficient brands to know that some one
more fortunate had got a brand above
the guarantee, and was being benefited
at his expense ? That he had paid for
what he had not received, and that
though the farmers paid $30,000 a year
for inspecting fertilizers, the inspection
was a fraud, his guano a fraud, and no
punishment meted out to the rogue ex
cept to print his brand in italics in a
report which not one farmer in fifty ever
saw or heard of.
Only 1,500 of these "italicised"-re
ports of analyses were printed in 1889,
and I doubt if more than twenty men
in Greenville other than editors ever
saw one.
By the way, this system of punishing
a rogue by printing his brand of guano
in italics'' ought to be pateoted. Of
course it is well known that the brand
may be changed next season and the
italics rubbed out.
It is notorious that manufacturers
will fill sacks, branded in a dozen dif
ferent ways, from tbe same pile, but
then the chemist can catch the thief and
"italicize" him again, and why should
we farmers complaiu ! Oh my coun
trymen ! It is this fatal laxity ; this
couuiving at crime ; this dethronement
of law ; this obtuseness of moral con
scientiousness ; this "political leprosy"
that permeates our entire governmental
fabric, and is summed up in one word,
"neglect nf duty," that is destroying
our very civilizarion itself. We punish
guano frauds with italics; we punish
lynch law, which is the result of this
laxity, with italics; we punish mur
derers, who have money, with new
trials and italics, and the people are
sick nigh unto death of such govern
ment, aod they are determined to make
a change.
The law governing the sale of ferti
lizers provides that any one selling
guano without branding the sacks giv
ing analysis and manufacturers' name
shall pay a fioe of $10 for each pack
age ; that the man who delivers or re
receivos Fuch package, railroad agent
or other persons, is similarly liable.
Any fertilizers frold not coming up to
the guarantee is liable to confiscation.
"The one branded is liable to the fine."
The ittju.-tice or weakness of the law
is that it is severe on a dealer failing
to braud 'he sack, but if a man puts
sand in a branded sack and is caught,
it can only be "confiscated." And
this has never been done ! It is only
"italicised !"
As proof of his charge that the Com
missioner or his agents had on several
occasions knowingly and willfully re
fused to cuforcc its own regulations,
?ma?B??w^"^??'
Capt. ?illman read letters, which came
from a very reputable farmer.
In reference to the charge that Com
missioner Buttler had done nothing to
have the defects in the fertilizer law
amended Capt. Tillman said :
Col. Buttler has held the office of
Commissioner of Agriculture since
December, 1879 His salary has
amounted to ?'22,000, and he has spent
in the Agricultural bureau, as I have
said, over $300,000 in that time.
He has been one of the most influential
men in the State and the "Ring,"
which we are fighting, has stood by
him and his Department through thick
and thin. He and his political asso
ciates had influence enough to defeat
the bill I prepared by order of the Far
mers association in 1886 reorganizing
the Agricultural Department, and he
was doubtless consulted by Col, You
mans in preparing the "subtitute,"
which was passed in 1887 in lieu there
of, and which is now in force. He
knew of this defect in the law, and al
though he and bis friends had things
all their own way, the provision in my
bill punishing fraud in fertilizers by
fine and imprisonment was left out of
the Youmans "substitute." He and
his friend bad influence enough to elect
the present board over tbe men nomi
nated by the Farmers' Convention, and
to re-elect them, and it stands to rea
son that if they had wanted to pass a
law to give protection to farmers it
could have been done. But the Agri
cultural Bureau was in close alliance
with the university and Citadel. Tbe
three bad pooled their streugth to de
feat everything the common farmers
wanted, and to continue in control of
the State.
The anomaly was presented of an
agricultural department which being
opposed by the country people is de
fended by the cities. The agricultural
bureau has never since this agitation
begun, save in a single instance, lacked
the solid support of Charleston and
Columbia, aud this political "trust,"
composed largely of merchants, manu
facturers and lawyers, with a few
"aristocratic agriculturists" as allies
have deemed "italics" sufficient punish
ment, just as they deemed the annex a
"sufficient" agricultural college. So
much for the fertilizer business. Now
when asked by a gentleman in tbe
audience at Anderson where the money
spent by the Agricultural Department
werjt, I answered, "I do not know,"
and I told the simple truth. I knew
where Col. Butler's report said it
went, but I have not seen it paid out,
and told him to ask Col. Butler. Col.
T J M<>ore of Spartanburg, a member
of the B>ard, has come forward and
claims that this was a charge of "cor
ruption, extravagance," etc. I fail to
see how or why. Gentlemen are not
usually so touchy about their honesty,
and this double exhibition of solicitude
about the money spent is curious to
say the least. It is on a par with the
iterated and reiterated charges, that 1
have "accused the state officers of cor
ruption, etc., and my "confession" that
there was none. AH this flurry aud
hullabaloo about "corruption" can have
but one meaning. The purpose is to
create the impression that I have made
such charges and cannot prove them.
Now all I a*k is that some one, the
News and Courier, Register, or other
"scr&pbook keeper," will put the char
ges home and show when and where I
have charged "corruption agaiust the
State officers." It is time to "show up
or shut up." I have made charges
enough and am ready to prove them
without these ''cuttle fish7' trying to
foot the people by accusing me of charg
ges I never said
Col. Moore gave the itemised expen
ditures of the Agriculture Department
for 1889 and I will give those of 1880
for nine months to show how this 'IiiDg
has grown.
Capt. Tillman then read the table
furnished by Col. Moore in a letter to
the News and Courier showing a total
expenditure by the Agricultural De
pastment of $85,129 11. He then
continued :
The demand is made that we make
this a campaign of education. So I
will play schoolmaster a little further in
this matter of expenditures in the
Agricultural Department. Here are
some questions which whoever will or
can may auswer.
Fir^t. It is seen that $12,162 have
been paid for lawyers' fees. Why did
not the Attorney Geoeral and Solicitors,
who are State officers with big salaries,
prosecute those suits and save that
money.
Second. Judgments with costs for
$76,874 was obtained against the
Pacific Guano company when the com
pany failed, (which was probably a ruse
to get some legal advantage.) Its pre
perty was then attached under the
judgment, when a compromise was
made by which the Pacific company
paid $51,249 and cost. The amouut
turned into the state treasury was $31.
?96, aod the Department kept $12,162
to repay cost, of lawyers' fees, etc.,
making $43 559. This is $7,690 less
than the amount received.
I waut to ask why was the matter
compromised at all, and where did the
$7,090 go, and did anybody get any
money for compromising ?
Third In 1SS4 the experimental
stations cost $5.049 : cost of chemist,
laboratory aud sundries, $4 347 ; mak
ing $9,986.
The State anuually receives from the
United States $15,000, kuowu as the
Hatch fund, to run an experimental
station. I can find no accouut of how
that money is spent or where it goes,
either iu Col Buttler's report or in j
that of the University trustees Are j
we spending $25,000 year on these
stations 7 Has the station a chemist j
or cheuists boih paid by the year, and ;
do they then receive additional pay for :
analyzing fertilizers ? i
IJ.-.ve we duplication of officers and :
J duplication of salary and no work in :
return thereof ? Is not somebody :
making a "?00'1 thing'' out of the
spending of these agricultural funds?;
Fourth. The uet expenditures of j
Agricultural Department as set forth
above are $30,427. This includes for
State Agricultural Society $2 500, ;
making net expenditures $27,427.
In Comptroller-General'a report for i
j the tame fiscal ye:ir, page 9, the Agri
cultural Departmeot is charged ?ith
$31,109, but this doss uut include the
$2,500 for the State Agricultural so
ciety on page 183 of same report
Tbe State Treasurer charges the Agri
cultural Department with $33,069, and
does not include this ?52,500, so we
fiud these State officers?I mention their
names with fear and trembling?mak
ing this sort of a showing about the
same matter of public expenditures in
official records.
The treasurer charges the bureau
with $5,742 more than it acknowledges
to have spent?$2,500 more than the
comptroller says it spent. The comp
troller charges it with $3,242 more
than it acknowledges to have spent,
and yet all the books of these officers tally,
and they would not do so if any charges
were made. Now have these officers
made mistakes or is there "something
rotten in Denmark ?" Has the bureau
spent more than it accounts for? If
the Agricultural Department's accounts
are correct (and Col. Moore was parti
cular to mention "vouchers." although
the bureau prior to 1887 spent over
$20,000 without ever showing a single
voucher.) how will the comptroller
and treasurer straighten their own? Is
the desperate and unscrupulous warfare
urged against me made lest a thorough
overhauling of the State government
might show something wrong some
where ?
Every good farmer cleans up his
premises once a year, and especially
bis baro. There may be no rats in our
State house, and consequently no rats'
nests ; but whether one or not, a general
overhauling and sweeping out can do no !
harm, and while you may think that I
am actuated by selfish motives, I hope
we shall have it whether I boss the job
or not.
Commissioner Butler to Capt
Tillman.
I have just read Captain B. R. Till
man's charges against the Department
of Agriculture and against myself,
made in his Greenville speech. As he
took the trouble to write them out for
the reporters, there is no possibility of
his saying hereafter that he was mis
For the past four or five years I have
beea compelled to meet and expose his
charges, and have endeavored in all
that, time to keep within the bounds of
decency. My efforts have been to treat
him courteously under strong provoca
tion to do otherwise. If I now depart
from that rule, I trust the people of
South Carolina will attribute it to the
just indignation of a man and a public
servant who feels himself persistently,
maliciously and willfully slandered.
His first and second statement, that
"the Bureau has made no honest effort
to protect the farmers against being
swindled by buying guano below the
guarantee," and that "it has not en
forced its own regulations," arc simply
false, as the reports of the Department
will show. These are general state
ments, that can only be answered in a
similar manner. When a specific state
ment is made, it will be answered as it
deserves.
His third statement, that "although
the law is known to be defective and
the punishment inadequate, no attempt
has been made by the Board or Com
missioner to have it amended, except
that the matter was meutiooed in one of
the Department reports several years
ago," he likewise knows to be untrue,
but being more specific can be met in a
more positive mauner. At my request
several bills were introduced in the
Legislature at different times. Two of
these may be cited : Ooe by Colonel
E R. Mclver at tbe session of 1885,
which passed the House and failed in the
Senate (see House Journal, session
1885, pages 126, 156, 175 335 and
340.) and another at the session of
1S87, introduced by Senator Youmans,
but failed in the Senate, I think. This
latter bill I have not had time to trace
through the Journals. These two are
sufficient to disprove the charge that
the Commissioner has not made an
effort to have the laws amended where,
in his opinion, amendments were re
quired.
So many of Ti.llman's charges arc
made iu a rambling way that it is only
possible to aoswer them generally, and
this I will do as nearly as possible in
the order in which they are made.
I have not contended that all manu
facturcrs were honest. If that were
true, analyses might be unnecessary.
Some have attempted to defraud, and
have been punished with all the penal
ties the Department could impose. So
much for that.
With an earnest desire to visit tbe
severest penalties contemplated by law
upou any manufacturer who attempted
to defraud the farmers, I requested At
torney General Miles to inform me if an
analysis of any brand of fertilizer
showed a di fieiency, from the examina
tion of a sample drawn ou of a particu
lar lot, whether the Department could
seize and condemn any other lot of the
same brand not fouud to be deficient.
He gave his official opinion that only
the particular lot inspected would ho
liable to the law. To make this per
fectly plain, suppose that, a lut of Baltic
Fertilizer, sampled at Greenville, was
shown by analysis to be deficient.
When the Commissioner undertook to
seize and condemn that lot, he found
that it had all been hauled away and
put iu the ground, hut he knew at the
time that there was another lot of the
same brand at Spartanburg that had not
been inspected or analyzed! He eouid
not seize and coudemn the Sparenburg
shipment, because in the opinion of
Attorney General Miies, it had not been
analyzed, and, indeed, an analysis of
that lot might, iis is frequently the case,
show higher results than the Greenville
sample gave, This is why the law can
out, bo enforced. Tbe particular lot
analyzed has. in every ease i have ever
known of, been hauled away before Iii.
confiscation could be attempted. All < ;
these defects have time and again been
brought to the attention of m em h rs of
the Legislature by me, a;l 1 have
urged that they be corrected, but, as 1
shall presently prove by one of Captain
riilinati?* own witnesses, the members
oi the Lrgisiature were not without rea
son in thinking that our "italicizing''
of brands was sufficient punishment.
Dut Tilliiian is much concerned about
the farmer who may have lost Sume
* 1??n. while the farmers generally re
ceived f?ll value Tub is iu reply to
quoted
my statement that the averse commer
cial value of fertilizers exceeded the
manufacturers' guarantees. To show
how few farmers lost anything as far as
commercial value is concerned, take the
report for 188(5 which he has quoted,
and it will be fouod that out of over
200 brands analyzed only three were
below the guarantees in commercial
value.
As to the general supervision of ferti
lizer sales, it may be stated that in 1882
our analysis showed that the Cuban
Bird Guano was deficient. The farmers
refused payment and the analysis cost
the manufacturers betweon $20,000 and
$30,000. Mr. R. M. Anderson, of
this city, can substantiate this.
Settlements based on the Depart
ment's analysis are constaotly being
made. Upon the analysis of a brand
found to be deficient last year, the far
mers who purchased tbe fertilizers have
recently settled with the dealer, Mr. C.
M. Coviogton, of Floreuce, at about
one-fourth of the price charged?a
settlement perfectly satisfactory to the
purchasers.
Again, he says that the farmers, or
to be more exact not one in fifty, ever
saw the reports containing the analyses,
and solemnly assures his hearers that
only 1,500 of these reports were pub
lished in 18S9. During the year 18SS
all of these analyses were published in
the daily and weekly News and Cou
rier. For tbe sake of economy this was
not done in 1889, but the analyses were
published as soon as made in the
Monthly Reports of the Department.
About 14,000 of these reports contained
analyses of official samples, and in
addition thereto 1,500 special bulletins
were issued, making a total distribution
of the analyses of 15,500 copies. These
facts are fully set forth in the Annual
Report and were known to Mr. Till
man. This is only an additional evi
dence of his intention to misrepresent
regardless of facts.
As to the letter of Mr. Connor, of
Orangeburg, tbe Department does not
want a better witness. If, as he states,
he called the attention of one of our
samplers to a lot of fertilizers that had
been inspected and found deficient, it
was certainly the duty of the Commis
sioner to have attempted to enforce the
law against it. The sampler, however
has no recollection of the matter, and it
was certainly never brought to my
attention. Mr. Connor does not say
that he called tbe sampler's attention to
the matter, and I would be glad to
know the name of his informant, and
when the information came to Mr.
Connor's knowledge. But if it was
known to Mr. Connor, he might easily
have reported the matter to this office
and thus secured action in the matter,
or have conclusively shown that I did
not enforce the law. As it stauds, it is
a question between Mr. Connor, or his
informant, and the sampler, and cannot
be satisfactorily settled. But Mr. Con
nor fully and amply justifies the De
partment and the Legislature in another
way. He says : "No notice, however,
was taken of the same by the Depart
ment, and Mr. Copes sent ike guano
aicay, as he was completely boycotted
and could not continue business."
Why was Mr. Copes boycotted ? Sim
ply, as Mr. Connor writes Cnpt. Till
man, because the Department italicised
the deficient guano. Was it no punish
ment to Mr. Copes to be boycotted and
have bis business ruined? Was it no
injury to the manufacturers to have
their goods returned to them? Capt.
Tillman says that "not one farmer in.
fifty" sees these publicatioLS. Is Mr.
Connor a farmer? If not, why was
Mr. Copes boycotted? We knew that
the operation and the result of our
method of italicising deficient brands
was as Mr Connor stored, but we had
no hope of proving it so clearly by
Capt. Tillman or his witnesses.
Mr. Connor has been a member of
the Legislature for the past two years.
Will be now, since he has entered this
fight, explain what efforts he has made
in the Legislature to cure the defects in
the law, or what he has done to protect
the farmers against swindling fertilizer
companies ? But since he has proven
himself so good a witness for the De
partment, I will not insist on his expla
nation if his constituents are satisfied.
Mr. S. W. Gardner, Jr., comes to
the front to beln his friend Tillman out
of a tight place. He bought guauo
that was short inj weight and theu his
friend remembers' that he too had done
the same thing,, and like suffering
lambs they bleat out their tale of woe
when the friend wants otnee. Did not
Mr. Gardner, like Captain Tiilmau,
buy his guano in the State of Georgia ?
Should he not lodge his cemplaiot m
that State ? In any event I will be
glad if he will show me any authority
in the Act creating the Department of
Agriculture that would justify me in
suing a manufacturer for not putting
full 200 pounds in each sack of guano
sold either in this State or in Georgia.
As well ask me to sue a grocer who
2:ive Gardner three pounds of sugar for
five pouuds. The remedy for that sort
of swindling is. as every sensible man
knows, prosecutiou under the com mou
law in every State, and every purchas
er has his remedy.
This charge is on a par with another,
made some time since in the presence of
Mr. J. K. Tindal an.) Mr W A. Au
crum. Captain Tillman then charged
similar failure to discharge my duty
because he had bought cottuu seed meai I
adulterated with rosin and his Delghbor
had purcha.-ed cotton seed meal adul
terated with hulls. At tin: time the
charge was made Captain Tillman knew
that both lota had been purchased in
j Georgia, and yet he endeavored to in
! jure t-he Department by a charge that
he knew to be utterly unjust and un
true!
Now, Mr. O F. Connor, this time
of Lancaster, says one 61 my clerks toid j
: him that "when the pb-'vphate com- ;
! panics failed in coming uj: to the anal- !
ysis required by law they would beg j
off." What the clerk probably said to
; Mr. Connor was that they tri;'d to beg j
I off. And the clerk was right, and Mr. j
Connor is right }>ut whenever the j
analyses are below the guarantee, ?he i
j results are published in spite of the j
; begging unless, it is conclusively shown
I that the analysis or the inspection has ;
i done injustice, and such cases are ex- |
j cecdingly rare. For the pa^t ten years j
j they can be named on the fingrr
So much, for the certificates. [t
should be noticed, however, that these
are dated May 31st, Jane 3d. and June
3th respectively. All since Capt. Till
man made his charges at Anderson.
Therefore his charges at Anderson were
not based on these certificates, and he
has failed beyond dispute to prove that
he had any evidence of auy kind upon
which to base his original charge af the
time he made it. This explains, also,
why my letter has not been answered
before.
I regret that ? bave not a. copy of
Till man's bill which he had introduced
and says provided fine and imprison
ment for manufacturers of fertilizers,
but I have a copy of his bill proposing
to turn over the analytical work of tbe
State to his agricultural college, and in
that bill no such provision occurs. My
friend Youmans and mvself may have
killed his little bill, we were so influen
tial, without knowing his good points.
If so, it was through ignorance, and
net through malice, as I will try to
show in regard to another matter.
Captain Tillman has beeo for years
talking about reorganising the Depart
ment of Agriculture. Finally the men
whose iuflueuce he dreads so much de
cided they would help him in this work.
Col. Youmans drafted the bill, and ail
who had anything to do with it tried to
put into it every good suggestion that
anybody, including Captain Tillman,
had made. We adopted ten members
as Captain Tillman suggested, we took
in farmers' institutes, we provided for
State farmers' conventions and we kept
everybody but farmers off the Board.
The Legislature did everything it was
asked to do, and we thought Captain
Til'mau had every change he wished.
Only one failure from his standpoint
could be pointed out?he failed of elec
tion on the Board?and that was saffi
cient to cause him to put a plank in his
March platform abolishing the Depart
ment. His silly charge that the Depart
ment is controlled by lawyers, etc., is
absolutely untrue. There is not a pro
fessional man on the Board or connect
ed with it in any way. The Legis
lature, to please Captain Tillman, pos
sibly, put all farmers on the Board,
but they refused to stultify themselves
by patting Captain Tillman on it, and
so of course he is not happy.
Let us follow Capt. Tillman to his
second attempt at specific charges and
answer them iu order.
First. vVhy did not the Attorney
General conduct the phosphate litiga
tion ? This is so old a question and
has been answered so often that it
might well have - been left aloue. Bat
it shall be answered again for fear that
some man living in a remote part of
the State may not have heard it. The
laws did not, at the time this litigation
was begun, make it the duty of the
Attorney General to do this work for
the Department of Agriculture. The
work was im portant, and the B)ard em
ployed lawyers, and subsequently made
the parties sued pay them. Was any
injustice done the State in that matter?
If so, where and how ? Bat after toe
litigation had been commenced the At
torney General was made the adviser
of the Department, except in this liti
gatiou, and that was specially exempt
ed from the amendments to the law.
This shoald be satisfactory to the most
rabid Tillmanite.
Second. "Judgment with cost for
?76 874 was obtained against the Paci
fic Gaano Company when the company
failed, fwbich was probably a rase to
get some legal advantage]. Its prop
erty was then attached under the judg
ment, when a compromise was made by
which the Pacific Company paid ?51.
219 and cost. The amoaot turned in
to the State Treasary was $31,396 and
the Department kept ?12,162 to
repay the cost of lawyers' fees, etc.,
making ?43,559. This is ?7,69 ) less
than the amoant received." Then fol
lows the insinuation that somebody got
that ?7,690 who was not entitled to it.
The statement of the settlement of
the phosphate litigation, furnished by
Hon. A. T. Smytbe, leading counsel in
the case, is as follows at:d answers
the charge and infamous insinuation
without further comment :
Amount received in settle
ment of Pacific case, ?51,249.33
Amount received for dis
bursements on account
Pacific case, 1,114 11
Amount received in Pinck
uey ca.-e, 708 66
Total, $53,072 10
Counsel fees Pacific case, ? 9,000 00
Counsel fees ia Davis ucd
Pinckuey case, 500.00
Sundry ess h expenses, 13 05
Turned over to the State
Treasury for State pur
poses, ov.-jo? i J
Turned over to State Trea
surer for Department, 12,162 26
Total as above, $53.072 10
If Captaiu Tiilman can distort these
f?gues again so as to show ?7,100 or
one cent short, he is welcome to do so.
This phosphate litigation has excited
so much interest and com met; t that I
may be pardoned for saying that when
it was begun it was exccL-djngiy doubt
ful if the State could ever Iscover any
thing. The conclusion of the ease was
the recovery of property valued at. about
SiOU 000. and cash turned into the
Treasury ?31 396 79 without the cx
p ndituie of one cent of the people's
money, for every doliar expended in
prosecuting the ease was recovered and
paid back into the Treasury, and a part of
it. is now being used to build and equip
the Clemson Agricultural College.
Third. "In 1889, the Exp?rimental j
Stations co>t ?5 ?>49, cost of the chemist
and laboratory and s;uudrics ?1.03;,
making <\) 986 r
This statement, charge, or whatever
it is, is set up without comment, t-o that
I am in the dark as to Captain Till
nans particular objection to toe ex
penditure. I cannot conceive of any
that he has, because he expects to (io
the same thing at the Clemson College.
Possibly the anticipation of similar ex
penditures there caused him to change
his mind ami forbear comment. At
any rate I will wait until he makes it
before answering ic.
The ?15.000 Hatch fund, a? Tillman
well knows, was given to the Univer
sity and I know nothing whatever of its
disbursement Perhaps Dr. J. M
McBrydc, the President of the Univer- |
sity, who La al^u the Director oi the
Stations, will explain or give any in
formation tbe public may desire in re
gard to that.
Fourth. "The net expenditures of
the Department as set forth in above
are ?30,427. This includes fur State
Agricultural Society 2 500, making a
net expenditure of $27.427,'' Captain
Tiliman then follows with a statistical
statement charging that there is a dif
ference between the amounts said to
have been disbursed according to tbo
reports of the Comptroller Genend, the
State Treasury and the Department of
Agriculture
The figures given in the first two re
ports are identical to a cent and amouut
to ?33,699 95. So far this charge is
without truth. According to the De
partment's report the amount disbursed
was ?3,272.61 less than the oth?r two
reports show. This is easily explained.
At the close of every year a large num
ber of warrants are drawn. It. is pos
sible, [I say possible because I do not
care to stop now to verify this state
ment.] that many of these warrants
1 were carried over from the previous
year and paid within the fiscal year
! under discussion. This would easily
I account for aoy differences between
j the two offices and my own, and was
I doubtless the ease. It is a matter
I easily settled, however, with time to
! check off warrants drawn and uupuid
last year, and will be done whenever
it is necessary.
Under bis fourth charge Capt. Till
man again resorts to insinuation in say
ing that prior to 1887 no v aers were
shown There has not b^.>n a year,
nor a payment, for which the Depart
ment has not vouchers, so that this
charge is malicious and base With the
exception of the first year, when the
Department was only in operation for
nine months, and the form of publish
ing financial statements was unfamiliar
te me, a comnletc summary of all dis
bursements, and itemized statements in
addition, have been published either in
our reports or those of the Comptroller
General, as Capt. Tillman weii knows
These vouchers are now on file subject,
to investigation at any time by Capt.
Tillman or any other citizen of the
Stale. So much for that base insinua
tion.
This. I believe, disposes of all Cap
tain Tillman'.; specific charges. I will
not attempt to reply to the others save
by witnesses whose honesty and integ
rity even Captaiu Tillman will not
doubt. In the first Farmer?' or Till
man Convention held, this phosphate
litigation was the subject of an investi
gation by a committee of which Cap
tain G. W- Shell was Chairman. After
the investigation had been made and
j the officials of the Department ex
! amined in the open convention, resolu
I tions completely exonerating the De
! partment from the charges and com
: mending the ofiiciu1.-. were unanimously. |
adopted. At the legislative session o."
1885 a committee appoiuted by what is
known as the Economic Caucus, with
Dr. Sampson Pope of Newberry as
Chairmam, investigated the Depart
ment aud again we were commended for
our work. At every session of the
Legislature from 1S8? to date the De
partment has made its reports and has
| been ready for official investigation. It
j is ready to-day or at any other time.
When Captain G. W. Shell and Dr.
Sampsou Pope can find nothing to con
demu in the Department of Agriculture,
we feel justified in saying that it does
not dread an investigation by others.
As '0 Captain Tillman'a statement
that Colonel Donaldson was defeated be
cause he was a Tillmanite and I was '
not, I beg to say that, unless I am very
much itiistakcn, Colonel Donaldson's
friends Were at. some pains to prove that
I he was not a Tillmanite. Bat in this
matter if Colonel Donaldson was de
feated because he was a Tillmanite, ?
may be permitted to say that I think
the L?gislature acted very wisely. At
any rate [ am personalty satisfied with
j the result.
I believe that I have .tt great iergth
j covered all Captah] Tiilman's charges.
I am not through with him, however,
aud must beg the indulgence of the
public for a while longer.
For nearly five years I have subrnit
; ted to this sort cf thing, aud whenever
? [ have had to appear in print I have
'endeavored to say nothing that would
j offend the most sensitive reader.
I i h.ivo conceived it to be my duty to
j act courteously even in dealing with a
j blackguard, buf forbearance has almost
i ceased to be a virtue, and it is a ques
j tion whether I can longer snbuiic to
i abuse without retaliation. This man
i Tinman has posed before ihe people for
j all this time as a reformer. Let us see
j if his professions arc to be trusted. It
; is generally believed that at the time he j
[ professed to be r supporter of Governor
: Sheppard's ho was endeavoring to get j
I Capt. W. C. Coker, of Darlington to j
! offer for the same place. If this \s no: J
j true, let Capt. Coker and Mr. Shrppard
I say S'>. It. bus beer, stated and Tillman
j has never denied ir that l.c wrote Cspt.
; Coker, who of course did not encourage
? such tcachcry, a letter nromising his
: support; it be wouta enier tne race,
j He was instructed by his County Con
! vent ion to support Sheppard, yet ir: the
j State Convention h^ endeavored to j
j cause a break to Culler, whirh. if it had
succeeded, would have defeated the
j man .he was pledged to support. Would
i such a man d.? to trust in official posi
[ fions 'I lie icould ht I ray Jus broth?r if
\ it YU'VJlted In al tu >lu SO.
Again, 1 a>ked Dr. Samps-m Pop**,
? of Ncwberry. one of Captain Tiilman's
j strongest supporters, if he did i;ot have
! 2ood reason to expect all the support
Captain Tillman could give him in his
; race for Speaker cf the House, and if
after that he received it ? No more
j honorable man than Dr. Pope walks
this earth. :od while we differ widely
in so.no matters, \ have no doubt of his j
! perfect integrity, end therefore 3ppeai
hit.i to say whether or not Captain
; Tillman bel rayed him.
When Tillman first began his career!
as'a public critic, I attributed many cf
his Crronereousstatements to ignorance.
But he is an intelligent mau?not a ;
fool: and I have reluctantly reached
the conclusion that he is determined te j
accomplish his purposes, if possible, by
any means wit h iu his power, and that
! he believes that "a lie well stuck to is
as good as the truth/' Iiis rectnt
[statements can be explained iu no other
way. 1
Captain Till mac, knowing that btf
cannot justify birnself, lacks the manli
ness to make a direct charge of official'
dishonesty against me, but covertl/
stabs wiih the poisoned dagger of in-"
r;unendo. I can, therefore, meet his"
insidious and unwarranted attacks upon*
my character only through the publie"
prints. A. P. Butler,
Commissioner of Agriculture".
Columbia, S. C, June 12. 1890.
COUNTY PREMIUMS AT THE1
STATS FAIS.
The subjoined letter from Col'.
Thomas W. Holloway explains itself
and should be read by all our farmer^
friends.
It is needless for us to urge upon the'
farmers of Sumter to make the display
called fer by tbe letter. They can1
see the advantages of it and should pro
fit by it. The letter reads
"On page 10 of the premium lists of
this society for the present year will be'
fourni the offer of premiums, amounting;
io the aggregate to $o00, for the coun
ties making the best display cf cou-uty
products to be shown at the fair iNovem
ber 10, 1890. The requirements are :
''To the county making the best asd*
largest display of products grown or"
produced by r-sidents of the county t
premiums will be awaded as'
follows :
First premium, ?250?
Second premium, 150*
Third nremiism, 100*"
In all ?500*
''Ail grain must be shown in quanti
ties not less than one half bushel.
The judges making the award in tnis
contest will consider : first, quality;"
second, quantity ; third, variety, and1
fourth, arrangement. Articles for the'
county display still not count in the:
individual premium.
"I beg that you call special attention*
to this feature, and urge your county to*
be a competitor ia the contest. Aside'
from the money involved, county pride'
should stimulate our farmers to enter"
heartily into the matter, and thus show*
the progress of agriculture in our State.
"I take it that the most effective plan?
would be for the several County Al
liances from the sub-alliances to can
vass the matter at an early day, and
thus become organized, so that by t&e
first of November each county will be'
able to know what wiil be shown, and
at what railroad station shipments wilt1
be made.
"Railroads require the prepayment'
of freight, but upon its return to the'
original point of shipment, with the*
certificate of the secretary that the same'
had been cn exhibition, the amount paitf
wi!l be refunded.
"I will be pleased to furnish a cop/
of the premium list to all who may apV
ply to me."
The Eichland Democracy.
The following resoicticss are the?
"platform of principles" by the Rich
land County Campaign Ciub, ex-Judge'
A. C. Haskell, Prescient, and of which*
mention was made ia last week's paper.
1. The preservation of honest Demo
cratic government won and established
by the white people of thrs State in"
1870. and never to be surrendered:
2 The election to cQ.ce of men who*
would rather serve their country thatf
themselves.
3. The refutation before the people*
of the charges made in the "manifesto"
by which the March assembly was:
called together?charges ir. themselves"
false, and iu their purpose selfish and'
unpatriotic, and iu their terms deroga
tory :o the good name of the State.
4. To speak plainly and show to the1
publie the falsity of the uttcra-nces of
B U. Tillman when he charges our"
government officers with dishonesty and
.corruption and the members of our
General Assembly with- "daninable'
perjury.'7
5. To call upon good citizens all over
the State, men who neither seek office'
nor desire self preferment?the men'
and the women who redeemed the State1
in 1870? call uson these and ail who*
love the gcod name of the State to at
tend all public meetings, suppress vile"
language and untruthful slanders and
restore the good order and decency that
are essential to the pnbiic welfare.
C). To better effect these ends io urge;
upon ail Counties and preciucts to or
ganize campaign cluos without delay.
Membership?Ail true white metf
who recognize the above duties may be'
members of the campaign club.
The Pulpit and the Stage.
Rev. F M. ?liront. pastor United Brethren'
Church. Diue Mound. Kan.. says: -I feel it tny"
luty n> tell hat wonc*srj?Df. King's New DU
cowry, has doue for me. .My lungs were bnd!yr
diseased. ::r><i my parishioners rb?-ught ? cou'd1.
live only a few v.-tks. I t.? k five K-tties <>f
King's New Discovery ami am soui.J and
well; gaining 26* !bs. in weight."
Arthur L?ve. Manager Love's Fanny Folks'
CoHibiRStier., writes : "After a thorough tiial'
and convincing evidence. I am confident Dr.
King's New Discovery f-r Consumption, heats'
"eni :;'!. :?:? < .:: (-. > when everything eise fails.
The grvates; kindness ? can dossy many thous
and frieods is to urge them to try it." Free
Trial Bottles -t Dr J. F. VT. DeLormsY
Dre;: Store. Regular sizes 50c. and $1. 3
Bucitlcn's Arnica Sttlve?
The Rest Salve in the worl I for Cut?, Rruisce*
Sores. tJicers, Salt ?heum. Fever t >res, Tetter,'
Chapped Rands Chilblains, G.rr.s rnd ail?
Sinn Eraptions. and positively car:- Hies, or"
cc pay required. It is guaranteed to :^ivc per
satislacticu, <>r isoncv refunded. Prico*
25cents per bos. For saio by J. F. V?\ De
Lorme. o
WE CAN AND DO
ran tec Acker's Rh ?d Elixir f->r i: has hccn!
fuliy demonstrated tbe people of this coun?
try th.it u is superior to ai! other preparations'
for blood disease--. It is a positive cure for'
syphilitic poisoning, ? leers. Eruptions and
Pimples. Et purities the wJ:o?e system and'
thorough^ build's up the conswiution. Sold'
l>v J- F. W. Del;?>rtue. 7
There are times when a feeling of lassitude'
v '; me the most robust, when the sys
tem craves ! r pure blood, tu famish the ele
ments of ; nu? strength. The best
remedy for pnrit? iag the blood is Dr. J. H.
McLean's Sarsaparilla. flap
Pimples, blott hi'S, scaly skin, ugly'spots,'
suits and ulcers abscesses ami tumors, un
healthy discharges, such as catarrh, c?-z<-ma,
ringworm and other forms of skin diseases,?
are symptoms of blood impurity. Take Dr.
J. H ! McLean's Sarsapariiia. vlap
The most t't-I:c:?:constitution can safely'
use !>. J. H. McLean's Tar Wine Lung IJalin.
It is a sure remedy for co?ghs, loss, of voicey
aadall throat and !ua : troubles-. "riw