The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-06-15


We think it necessary for us to reply to the pro-
ceedings and resolutions Of meeting of farmers
held on board the steamer Champion on the 7th
June, and published in the Baltimore American of
the 18th.
On the 10Th May we bought from Messrs. Cox &
Brown, Commission Merchants, about 1900 bush
els of white corn, cargo ofschoOner William Emory,
represented by two samples of some $50 and 900
bushels.
The sellers described the cargo as sound, fresh
shelled corn, and composed of only two lots. Very
shortly the vessel hauled to deliver to us. On ex-
animation of the cargo we found the corn, as far
as we could get access to it in the vessel, inferior
to the samples, being dirty and damp. We there
fore rejected it. Messrs. Cox & Brown required us
to receive it, saying they had no discretion in the
matter, and If there any difference of opinion
between us, as the corn subject to inspection,
that the matter must be settled by the inspector;
accordingly they appealed to Mr. Goodwin who de-
cided that the cargo was equal to the samples and
that we should receive it, or become liable to the
requirements of the inspection law, which would
have imposed on us penalty Of double the differ
ence between the first sale and a resale.
Being satisfied of the inferiorty of the to
the samples, we were determined to resist as far
as possible, such injustice. At request, three
highly respectable dealers in grain, two sellers ant
one buyer examined the cargo of corn and decided
that it was inferior to the samples by which it
sold, by from three to FIVE cents per bushel Here
with we send a copy of their certificate.
We received the corn under protest and compul-
sion. On Saturday, the 2lst of May, we took out
about onehalf of the cargo, the portion on top
We left directions with the men in our employ to
commence early on Monday morning and take out
the remainder. When we arrived at our store be-
tween eight and nine o'clock Monday morning,
all except about three hundred bushels had been
received. We found this, and also 600 to 700
bushels which had been received that morning rep
resenting about 900 bushels at the bottom Of the
cargo, to be unsound, damp and with a strong
smell. AS apparently had no alternative,
we permitted our men to proceed to take out
hn oG thn IL, i
some of it to experienced dealers on Change
who unhesitatingly pronounced it damp and
unsound. With little expectation of obtaining
any redress, we sent for the Inspector; he did
arrive until all OF the cargo, except about 40 bush
els, had been received. This he pronounced I'M
sound and inferior to the sample. In relieving us
from the obligation to receive this As bushels and
pronouncng it unsOund as it manifeStly was, the
inspector reviewed and reversed his own decision;
and as there were only two lots of in the
sci, one of them about 1900 bushels and the other
about 1000 bushels, there must necessarily have
been at least $50 bushels of corn similar to
the 40 bushels which the inspector admitted
were inferior to the sample, and which he de-
cided we were not bound to take.
The assertion that we rejected the corn in con-
sequence OF decline in price, is unjust and untrue.
Ii there were any telegraphc reports calculated to
influence prices received between the time of pur-
chase and rejection of the corn we were not aware
of their existence. We bought other corn from
Cox Brown, and from other parties, on the same
bought corn subsequently from James B. Streets,
Duvall lglehart and Freeand Hall, at 80 cts,
to replace this very corn which we had bought at
So cts. and rejected.
We had entered into a freight engagement to the
South which we had to fill. The cargo of the
William Emory was unfit to ship. We could not
use it to fill our freight engagement-still were
forced to receive it. We took it unwingly, and
had to go to the expense of putting into store not
knowing what else to do with it.
We have never heSitated to meet any lust demand
and whenever the sellers of this corn will make a
proper abatement for its interority to the samples
we will pay them promptly.
john S. WILLIAMS & Bro.
Baltimore, June l4th, 1859.
(Copy)
On the list OF May at the request of Messrs. John
>. Williams Bro. we examined cargo of corn
on board the schooner VIM. Emory Can't Pen
nington, sold to them by Messrs. Cox Brown, con-
slstlng OF two parcels, say of 0l0 bushels, and
one OF $50 bushels. We found the cargo differing
In quality from the samples exhibited to us and in
our opinion with a Just and decided cause of re-
lection by the purchasers. The corn on board was
very filthy with sand and dirt, badly cleaned and
some blue-eyed, which the sample did not correctly
represent We think the actual money difference
IN value between the samples exhibited to US and
the corn on board the vessel to have been from
three to four cents per bushel.
(Signed.) ISRAEL NJ. PARR,
ROBERT TYSON
SAMUEL S. lowering.
Baltimore, June l4th, 1859.
BALTIMORE, June IA, 1859.
regret to say that the paper which | intended
to issue some weeks since, giving the proceedings
OF the Courts and Record transactions, comprising
the Deeds mortgages bills of sale, Judgments suits
commenced, &c, &C., has been unavoidably DELAYED
by the refusal of the Clerk of the Superior Court
of Baltimore city to allow me to examine the pub
lie records.
This refusal can only be accounted for on one
theory, viz: that Mr. Sangston himself furnishes to
portion of the community the most valuable part
OF the Information which my paper was designed
to communicate.
How far this refusal is in accordance with law.
and how far the Clerk may be held to have either
the prior exclusive right the information con-
tanned in the records of his Court, remains to be
SEEN
Mr.. Sangston has intimated that he is prepared
to test my right to examine the public records for
the above purpose. propose to meet him not
only upon this question, but also to investigate his
exclusive right to furnish by contract to the select
merchants and bankers of Baltimore such informa-
ton as he may think proper upon private specu-
latiOn.
1t is, indeed, strange doctrine that the commu-
NIFTY are bound, at their peril take notice of all
matters disclosed by the records of our Courts and
yet that the Clerk is to dictate the extent and
amount OF information to which any individual is
entitled.
JOHN H. HANDY.