The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1872-11-21

transferred to our columns. Although our
friend alleges that the editorial remarks, equal
ly with the communication, did every great in
justice to the Abbeville Market" we cannot
perceive the application Of this charge, since
there,is not single word or sentence in the
editorial that might be tortured into an allasion
to the merchants or market of Abbeville. The
'tiniustice" has been done by the Press end
Banner, in this instance, snd we shall expect
a recantation of this charge, as far as we are
concerned. So much by way Of introduction
again, and now we invite attention to the COM
ments Of the Press and Banner relative to the
points made by "Long Cane" in contrasting
the Anderson and Abbeville markets, which we
propose to follow with fair and unprejudced
statements, without seeking to cast odium upon
the Abbeville merchants, or to traduce their
good names and established reputation. Here
are the comments of our cotemporary:
Now we are not disposed to do injustice to
Anderson, or to abate one jot or title of her
lust claims to favor and patronage, but when
these claims are pressed to the prejudice of All
beville, and upon what We conceive to be
misconeeption of the true state of the facts we
cannot in Justice to ourselves be any longer 81
gives mere for cotton, and sells goods cheaper
than Aboeville, being forty miles further from
market?
In the first place we may say this for Able
Vile, that the prices she has paid during the
present season for cotton have been fully up to
the prices paid in Columbia, Augusta, Charles
ton and New York, less the cost of transporta-
ton, and in many instances have exceeded
these prices. An agent of a New York house
was here during the season. and finding himself
unable to compete with the prices paid by the
Abbeville buyers, was forced to leave. When
such is the comparative state of the Abbeville
and seaboard markets, is it reasonable to sup
pose thai Anderson can really pay more for cot
ton, and sell goods at the same time cheaper?
That Anderson nominally pays more for cot
ton, is true; but an Abbeville planter who re-
sides in the upper portion of the county, gives
this solution founded on mis- own experience.
He inEosns that what is gained by the planter
in the price is lost in the weight of his cotton.
The increase of one cent per pound on 400
whilst loss of 80 lbs per bale in weight at Is
cents per pound would amount to loss of
$3.50; at 20 cents per pound to loss of Sc per
bale. Here is an explanation, simple and sat-
isiactory, if not very creditable to the Anderson
buyer. 1t is the experience of one planter ; we
do not vouch for its general application.
Again, does Anderson sell goods as cheap
as Abbeville? If what is paid in the higher
price of cotton is taken back in the increased
cost of goods, how is the planter benefited?
bill of goods sold by an Anderson merchant to
an Abbeyille farmer may throw some light on
this question. One of the items of the bill,
which is dated the 10Th of September, is l2O
pounds bscon at 16S cents per pound, whilst at
the same date bacon was selling in Abbeville
at 13l cents per pound. Other articles of the
bill seem equally high. 1t will not require
much figuring to show how, with this difference
in the prices of goods, an increased price may
be safely paid for cotton.
In conclusion, we may remark that as human
nature is the same everywhere, it is not reason
able to suppose that our Anderson neighbors
enjoy monopoly Of all the enterprise and
public spirit which make up the successful
merchant, Any extravagant pretensions in
this direction is very apt 10 provoke doubt and
msgiving. One who sets up to be better than
his neighbor is most likely to be worse; true
worth is always modest and retiring. We are
willing to concede that our Anderson friends
have their full share of honesty, enterprise and
public spirit, but not that they enjoy monop-
oily of these articles.
Answering the interrogatory as to whether
Anderson gives more for cotton, and sells goods
cheaper than Abbeville, we will assert that
comparison of prices paid for cotton in both
markets demonstrates fully the fact that, as a
general rule, Anderson is always one-half cent
higher than Abbeville, and we are willing to
make the proof by an exhibit from the mer-
chants books for any given period. We know
nothing of the prices of goods in Abbeville,
and do net intend to make any reckless state
ments But this much we can sustain, and is
easily demonstrated almost every day, if one
will take the trouble. There are Abbeville
farmers constantly upon our streets selling cot
ton and buying goods from our merchants, and
this trade has largely increased the present
season. Facts are stubborn things, and it is
not reasonable to suppose that so many farmers
in Abbeville are blinded to their true interests
to the extent of trading here from time to
time, unless there was some advantage to be
gained thereby. They are certainly as familiar
with the prices of goods in both places as the
editor of the Press and Banner, and doubtless
are sufficiently versed in arithmetic to count
the probable gain or loss in the sales of cotton
and purchase of goods. When Abbeville farm
ers quit trading at this place, we will come to
the conclusion that they can do better else
where, which is more complimentary to their
Judgment and common sense than to attribute
their actions to any lack of information.
But our friend admits that Anderson nomi-
nally pays higher prices for cotton, and renders
solution of this knotty problem by relating
the experience of single planter, who claims
that his cotton loses IN weight. Inferentialy,
this planter is made to allegc that he lost thirty