New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-05-06
OUR KIND GUARDIANS.

A few days since an anonymous letter
from supposititious sugar planter was
pu blished in st. Louis paper; it COM
planned of the charges on produce at the
port of New Orleans, and deemed it better
for the planter to give his business to st.
Louis. This was accompanied, of course,
wi tn statement to show that though the
| price of cotton might be little better at
New Orleans, yet the superior economy of
sales and purchase of goods afforded by
st. Louis more than equaled the differ
ence, leaving the balance in favor of that
omniverous city. And now comes
our article showing "'The approximate
damage by the food" When we state
that our estimate of actual damage CORES
ponds with sufficient accuracy with that of
a commit tee of business merchants who
made the same estimate in detail, we are
sufficiently justified in our accuracy to
disregard the comment of dry land ed
itor who writes of that he can know but
little about We did not carry our esti-
mate into the region of imagination, nor
did we care to appeal to distant sympathy
for "the average misfortune of the indi-
vidual" Had we undertaken what we ex-
pressly declined to do, we must in justice
have credited this loss by the charities
which have been poured upon our unhappy
people from the national Golfers and the
private purse. 1t was.our object to state
what the world lost by our reproduction
of certain staples. Our own personal
losses could not well be computed until
they shall have been ascertained in the
future. But the Times startles us with
this complaint:
The article from which we quote is ex-
ceedingly palliative, and evidently intended
to inspire confidence among the mercantile
creditors abroad of the business houses of
New Orleans.
And has it come to this that because
we did not desire to contribute to panic,
but desired suspension of foreign ap
prehension until the flood has passed,
that We are to be censured? Did we not
put enough lampblack upon our pallet to
suit the sombre tastes of our critics? We
may suppose that the St. Louis Times wishes
tomagnify losses, to depreciate the credit
of our merchants, that the sugar and cot
ton commerce Of New Orleans may be the
sooner transferred to st. Louis. If such
be not the object of the st. Louis Times,
why speak of ''a calamity worse than
fire" of plantations swept clearof every
thing valuable" What basis of credit is
this:
Nothing can be produced this season on
many of the plantations, because there is
nothing to work WITH and those imple-
men.s which have been spared on others
are unfit for service. The probabilities are
that four ffths of the land overlooked will
remain uncultivated for several months,
while changes may be wrought in the face
OF the country forming some of the farms
which will render them worthless.
We challenge and controvert the &C
curacy of this whole picture. 1t can have
bu. one purpose-to cripple and destroy
the credit of our merchants abroad. 1t
is to invite these ruined people to send
whatever crops they may make to st.
Louis. Of such change of trade the
New York World says:
St. Louis derives the advantages which
its rival has lost, and which, added to those
of the tobacco and flour trades, have given
wealth and influence to her mercantile
classes.
This is foul blow given by the Times.
1t is the more foul that it tends to destroy
our credit in the midst of our misfortunes.