The patron of husbandry., 1881-06-25

late through the kindnes, pas "a
Mississippi friend who 90 o. q
me. Hus
ONCE A GRANGE
/ once belonged to ON
most flourishing Oranges s Ct
bama, but it died dsoS 10
Since then | have read or ae
little about the Order tin 'TD
a reader of THE PArRol O.S
can be no kind of doubt st y
benefits of an organization
kind to the farmer. I bavasU y
benefits myself, and have oI 'S
them in others. / have o,I oDs'
objection to the Order. ana
pose that will never be rem.
refer to the Grange Ritual .n5,
Tape. 1t is my opinion th,,
tenths of the plain, common
country people are with me-
objection. 1t is so distasteCr,
| will not trust myself TO oiy-
opinion of it. This remove
am Granger in practice .,
now in prime pie. The mutr
and cooperative idea is II.
one, it is brotherly, it is Chr,
NOT. MUCH ON COOPER,
l STORES.
| am by no means certain d,
cooperative stores, etc. q,
wears so many strong" bank,
burst, and so many 'thorrr
trustworthy" men have proven
Gals, | am rather afraid of
movement which leads to tbs
mer investing in any busins,.
knows nothing about. We
farmers, not merchants: and =.
can not become successful NJ
chants at will. If a farmer y.
to he can unite with his brotber
mers in patronizing some reIr'
merchant, who runs his owr r
chine, making a special agreere
In this way the merchant risk,
own money in his own business
the farmer gets what he wants ".
OUT risk. If he has a surplu,
cash, let him put it in lands. J
knows what to do with them.
THE FERTILIZER BILL AND II
GOVERNORS VETO.
| have noticed a time or two A
mention has been made in :.
paper of the action oe the Cover
OF Alabama in vetoing the bill
the last Legislature, entitled
the Fertilizer bill. The Gown
for that act has been called
friend to the farmers, and the 4
nation, if not suggestion, made d
farmers should see to it that nos
men get their votes. This Bab
the impression | received vi
reading the paper.
| do not remember exactly b
the fertilizer bill was put up
my recollection is that it propose
tax on fertilizers to be paid
the benefit of the Agricultural
lege, an institution already
provided for. Did that bill pro
the farmer? Yes, "over the /
1t was just the same as putin
tax on the farmer for every to
fertilizer used, for he would ha'
pay the tax of course. If that
the bill, or any part of it, the
error showed his friendship fOl
farmer by vetoing it. There
have been other bills, or other
visions of the same bill, which
wiser, but that provision was II:
vetoed | think. This leads n
speak of another matter,
THE AGRICULTURAL BUREAU
wASHIGTON.
Are you sure you are doing
the right thing in spotting the
bers of Congress and calling
them no friends to agriculture
cause they voted against the
ton of the Commissioners Of
Department to Cabinet posi-
May you not be doing an inju
our best friends? This is abou
way it seems to me. Commiss
lie Due has had charge of thl:
partment for several years.
not know what he has accom-
ed; may be a great deal; ma
not so much. Now Dr.. Lorln
Massachusetts has been put II
place. / believe there is no q
about his being a good, pra'
farmer, and he is also much
politician, ,-once being a memf
Congress, 1t is almost certain
he was given the appolntmeIn
cause of services rendered d'
last Presidential campaign.
first thug reported of him ate
confirmation was the beginnln
an intrigue to bring about Just
you are advocating, namely:
elevation to a position in the
net. Will this be any advanta
Agriculture? l think net. l.
should succeed his salary WI
increased from $I,5o or $40
$4,000.
OF course then the Depart
will have to put on airs; II
have to have more spacious q
ments, more employees, etc |
try to run a bigger thing than u
ever dreamed of; and worst Q
every four years, the head 0
Department, being a Cabinet o.
will have to give place, no u
how incompetent, to another
has most helped the party !