Middletown transcript., 1870-03-19
Correspondence Of the Mdalslo,en Ttan,ript.

EDITOR OF MIDDLETowN TRANSCRIPT. -
In recent number of your paper l no..
ticed an article from the pen of that dis
tinguished peach grower, S. Townsend.
Some Of his ideas are very good, but there
are one or two points he mentions that !
think he knows but little about, and has
mixed them up considerably. One point
l object to is, the bad taste exhibited by
him in calling names. In speaking Of the
amount paid for carriage, he says, that
ave are robbed of that amount" Now
the fact in the case is just this, if the
growers are robbed it must have been
done by thieves. and those thieves must
have been the n Y Commission Mers
chants, and these were the men that he
aimed his epithet at. A stranger to tho
business, on looking over his article,
would at once conclude that stupendous
fraud had been pcrpetrated on the peach
growers. There is not the least intima-
ton given on his part that there was
mutual understanding between any of the
growers and the dealers on this subject,
but one broad sweeping assertion that all
these dealers are thieves, Now let as
look at this item OF! carriage about which
there has been so much hard talk. 1t is on
ly difference of opinion existing between
the growers and Commission Merchants,
and the larger part of the growers possess
enough good sense to know that the deal
ers are placed in a position which enables
them to become better judges than the
farmers, and accept the advice of those
dealers about charging the carriage to
them, believing they secure more money
by SO doing, yet some men are always
harping about the dealers just as if their
only object was TO rob a farmer, and put
the money in the hands of the purchasing
customer. There is not the least intima-
ton given by him. that these men are sim
cere in their opinions, or have the least
desire to work in the favour of those that
employ them. Is this just or fair in
man who knows all about the business?
This whole thing can be easily man
aged without so much fuss or hard talk
Let the farmers at one station send to one
dealer, instruct him to sell their fruit in
Jersey City, let it bring what it will, and
that they will accept the result, and it ia
done. 1t is Of no interest or profit, save
the slight difference on the commission to
the dealers, and there is not one but would
do it, if he was told to Now l think
there are at least two or three men in Del
aware who know as much about this bu-
siness as friend Townsend, and are as ca
pable of judging what is for their interest
as he is, and if they are willing that their
fruit should be sold and delivered in New
York cannot see that it is his business,
But the worst feature that | see in his de-
nunciation is this. 1t may not generally
be known in Delaware that he sends his
son to New York every peach season in
order to get good location, and get back
part of the commission by going in part
nership with some dealer who has but few
or no other peaches to sell, SO that his
fruit can secure the full benefit of the
trade of the firm. In regard to how the
business of this firm was conducted l can
not say, but if he was robbed, it would
have looked better for him to have said
nothing about it, as long as his son was so
closely connected with the operation; or
does it justify him to judge all others by
him.
The question now arises, why did he
let these persons rob him? If he gave
them orders to sell his fruit in Jersey City
and that they did not obey, why did he
submit to it? He had the privilege of
sending his fruit elsewhere, why did he
not do it? The remedy was very simple
Even admitting that he was robbed. does
that justify him iu calling all other deal
ers thieves They did not rob him. and
he does not know that they robbed any,
one. 1t is very easy thing to call man
a thief, but at the same time it is not a
very polite or geutlcmanly mode of ex-
preston, and sometimes it hurts the feel
ings of those that have the epithet applied
to them, because it is not the truth, and |
think that the less bad feeling that is ere.
ated between both parties by calling names
that the better it will be. | think friend
L. would feel hurt to be called thief by
anyone, In regard to the firm alluded to.
l am pleased to state that their name ia
above reproach, and that his sons charac-
ter stood high among his associates, and
knowing both parties SO well, must con-
clude that he was mistaken about his be-
ing robbed, and would advise him to. bo
more choice in his language for the future,
A N. Y. CoaMIssInN DEALER,