Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-02-03
worthless Fertilizers.

Worthless Fertilizers.
We publish elsewhere this morning
communication on the above suoJect
from a farmer subscriber, who claims
that he has been defrsuded by having
palmed of upon him spurious article
under the brand of fertilizer which
has had quite an extensive sale in this
State. To avoid any risk of injustice,
we omit the name Of this fertilizer,
though, as will be seen, if what our cor
respondent alleges can be substantiated,
he has good cause fol complaint.
The press, however, is not, IN our
opinion, the proper medium through
which to make complaints of this char
acter, or through which to throw dis
credit upon any article of commerce,
such as fertilizers. The law of Georgia
regarding the sale and inspection of fer
tilizers is explicit and stringent 1t ex-
pressly declares that "a fair sample OF
all fertilizers sold in the State shall be
first submitted to the Commissioner OF
Agriculture. and the same shall be thor
oughly tested by him, and if any brands
of fertilizers so tested by said Com
missioner is pronounced of no practical
value. the sale Of the same shall
be prohibited in this State, and any per
son violating this law shall be guilty OF
a misdemeanor and punished. 1t is also
further provided on this subject that it
shall not be lawful to sell, or offer for
sale, any fertilizer manufactured beyond
the limits of this State. unless the same
shall have been first inspected and It's
value certified to as above directed, and
that all fertilizers offered for sale in the
State shall be branded with full and
true analysis of the ingredients, and any
one failing to comply with this law shall
be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and
punished accordingly.
It will be seen, then, that the farmers
of Georgia are amply protected against
frauds in fertilizers, and if any such are
committed the courts stand ready to
punish them. If, therefore, our core
spondent has been swindled, as he al
leges, all he has to do is to 60 before the
courts with the proofs Of what he charges
in one hand, and the Code of Georgia in
the other, and he will surely obtain am
pie redress. If the fertilizer he pur-
chased was not what it was represented
to be, then the tribunals of justice will
uphold him in not making payment
therefor, since the selling party has not
fulfilled his part of the contract, and
if the requirements Of the law have
not been complied with, the seller has
committed a misdemeanor and is liable
to punishment. 1t is manifestly not
proper for parties considering themselves
aggrieved in matters of this kind to rush
to the papers to expose their grievances,
since, as there are two sides to all ques-
tons, such a course makes the paper
liable to work injustice by bringing
discredit upon an established article
Of commerce, and causing heavy pc
cuniary losses upon its owners and
manufacturers before it is judicially con
demned. A farmer who has been i'm
posed upon has a right to be indignant,
and it is his duty to expose the swindle;
but he should first prove it in court to be
a swindle, and then he will be fully JUS
titled in making his charges public.
Our correspondent certainly advocates
an unwise measure when he tavors the
passage of law prohibiting the intro
duction and sale of guano in this State.
Fertilizers are conceded by all our farm
ers 10 be exceedingly useful and, although
doubtless with proper efforts much ex
pense could be saved by making fer
tilizers at home, our farmers, almost
without exception, agree that it is neces-
sary to 90 to considerable outlay for their
purchase. and in making such
purchases they have, as we have
seen, thorough protection thrown around
them by the law. The importation Of
guano, therefore, is necessary, and
fraught with no evil to the planters, be-
cause in the first place they need not
purchase unless they wish to do so, and
in the next place the courts will never
require them to pay guano debts, if they
can show that the patty from whom shey
purchased had not complied with the
law, and had not fulfilled his contract.
We are sure that, upon due reflection,
our correspondent will agree that the
position we have herein taken in regard
to his communication is correct and just.