The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1877-1885, 1884-02-13
For the Farmer and Mechanic.
Anxious Plato, Anxious Socrates,
Sed Major veritas.

sentiment that each covets most what
he possesses not This principle may
account for the appearance OF a valiant
knight-errant in your issue OF the 9th
instant. under the pseudonym OF lerl-
tas. Of course the remark is confined
to the article in question, and no per-
sonal reflection intended to be cast
upon its author. Being a correspon-
dent of the Farmer and Mechanic, 1t
should be, and no doubt is, from some
estimable gentleman, or lady, as the
case may be.
Our correction of Saturday by substl-
tuting Thursday. was forwarded IN time
to have taken down the target on which
he has just spent his strength. But, as
it turned put. we are rather glad that
your printer did moi get it, as its alb
sence has furnished the reader with the
abusing coincidence Of seeing Major
Veritas rush headlong to the conclusion
to which we were gently leading him.
For the present branch of the propo.
sition is that NEITHER OF THEM
(thc Mecklenburg MSS WAS DATED
MAY 31ST. Whether the 2lst was a
Saturday or a Thursday, would not
change this conclusion.
Our language was as folloWS:
Now it is certain that this (the Jul
lian) was the calendar of our first set
tiers also that the people OF Mecklen,
burg and the Town Commissioners dld
not punctuate time according to ours.
Subsequent data from the records OF
their independent court disclose a varl-
ance of n day from the n. s.; but the
real Importance of this variance IS, that
it establishes the fact that a change was
then made. So that correcting a former
conclusion too hastily adopted from
,these subsequent data, and preferrlnS the
: ascertainment of truth to the malnten-
auce of a record Cor consistency, we
must discard both Sunday and Saturday
as the 21st of May, and find that the
old patriots met on a Tuesday, which
was their 10Th of May, 1775; again on
Wednesday, their Goth, when all the pa
pers so far prepared were e out n
adopted by the people amid the widest
| applause; that, if the dttested copy, or
digest, of the whole proceedings was not
| made out on the same day, it followed
! on Thursday their 21st, and the next
| Thursday being the 2Sth, Friday the
10Th. and Saturday the 30th, the prin-
ter's date was not theirs, for it fell on
| their Sunday,'-or on Sunday by their
| calendar, if the latter expression IS pre-
| ferred. The Major shows so little re-
| spect for the positive and emphatic Ian
guage of the patriarchs, that there
Should be little surprise at his supercil-
ious treatment of data quoted from the
| court records. He is consistent, that
far at least, and also in preferring some
| other court. He asserts: "Ihey kept
| the same day of the week, according to
either style. Exactly but their records
very clearly show a variance from both,
| for of every datum quoted. we can say,
as did Secretary ALEXANDER of the
Davie copy of the first MS, lit is per-
fecty correct" The reader was eX-
pected to find entertainment, if not
| amusement, in making his own calcula-
tons to test those presented for his ex-
ance, from both Styles, is found at Sep
TENDER term, 1875, of the county court.
| Thus it met on Monday, September
25;n again, Tuesday, September &c !"
"wednesday, September p - Thurs
day, September % - Friday, Septem-
Der 90" and Saturday, September
3O."-every day of that term is distinct
ly Mus written by the clerk. The Ma
jor must know that, by our calendar,
the 25th Sept, 1885, was not a Monday,
but a Sunday !; nor was it a Monday by
the o. S. On such data as these, and
not on the simple change from Caesars
to Gregory's time, was a change IN the
'~hebdomad' suggested to us. 1t was
simply following his example,-relying
too confidently upon a back sight. The
forward sight. when found, did not con-
firm the survey-and the admission Is
cheerfully made, since he is himself now
convinced that the 3lst of May, 1775 lin
Mecklenburg, fell on q Sunday. Ifsuch
| a fact would have been fatal to the 21st
as the true date Of that MS, with what
consistency can any Il now contend
for the correctness of the 31st, printed
in a distant town. and neve known in
Mecklenburg? There was little hope
of him as long as he relied upon the
| printed records of New York, Boston
and Charleston newspaper offices, to as
certain whether gentlemen of the high
est character for integrity had spoken
the truth about transactions of a local
nature in Mecklenburg but since he
has now cautiously approached the
scene of action as neaf as Salisbury, he
should relieve himself of his burden
some theories, and come the balance of
the way over to accept the stubborn
facts.
Salisbury had a Committee of Safety
as early as August, liza. 1t dated its
entries by the Julian calendar. but it
dictated nothing whatever to Mecklen-
burg. That fact has no more relevancy
than the printed dates of the newspapers
at Charleston, though an assumption to
the contrary furnishes him a very salts
factory conclusion. But it would be
worse than begging the question to as
sumo that Mecklenburg, also, had a reg
ularly organized and standing commit
tee on, and prior to, the 10Th May, 1775;
for no proof whatever, after the most
diligent search, can be found to support
the assertion. But there is positive
proof to show that an original, that is,
an independent committee was formally
organized on that day but not that it
took any other committee for its exact
model OF chronometer. The leading
spirits had often met in solemn council,
but there is no trace Of a prior meeting
OF regular delegates. but OF mis- coup
Petat, at another time.
We have acknowledged our inaccura-
cies, and even pointed them out before
discovered. Eritus acta probat. Let
us sec if the Major will do the same.
His pointed paragraphs are convenient
ly numbered.
1. 1.-The tradition was confined to one
meeting, and to one set of resolves"
Here are tuo palpablc errors in one SEN
tence. The others naturally flow from
| them. and need not here be noticed.