Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-10-22
STEPHENS COUNTY RELIEF.
Tho Relief Distributing COMMITTEES vindi
cato Themselves.


BREcKTsMpoE, TEX, Oct. IS, 1885.
To the Editor of the Gazette.
In your Issue OF the 18th inst, find
the following clipping and comment, to
which desire briefly to reply, In justice
70 the relief distributing committe OF
Stephens county:
Mr. Scroggins, who lives on Bee
branch Informs us that the committee Is
suing supplies to the drought sufferers Of
Stephens county, positively refuse to
give anything to members OF the Farmers
alliance, and that they do not give any
reason for the refusal. Mr.. s. says that
one of his neighbors who had been thus
denied asked the committee for reasons,
and their answer was "lf you are a
member of the Farmers alliance we have
nothing for YOU
If the above (taken from an exchange
which THE GAZETTE cannot now recalD
is true,it evinces q spirit most detestable
THE GAZETTE hopes it is not true, for 1t
would regret TO know that prejudice could
20 so far. The alliance, in sending con-
tributions from Waco, made no distinc-
tons, and this would be poor return to
the order.
The Stephens County alliance and the
commissioners court Of Stephens county
each sent out agents to solicit aid for the
drought sufferers. The connty's agents
were successful In procuring supplies in
st. Louis, Kansas City, Dallas and Fort
Worth, which amounts arrived before any
ching of consequence had been received
from alliance sources. The alliance then
agreed to pool its receipts with that sent
for general distribution, and did so, and
everything went on lovely until 1t APP
peared that the alliance had shared with
the general public about all the provis-
Ions that would come from that source.
In the meantime, the supplies obtained
by the alliance agents began TO come in,
but instead of turning them over for gem
eral distribution, as agreed upon, the alli-
ance receiver stored them at Ranger, and
u meeting ofithe countYalliance was called,
at which that august body decided to issue
the supplies received to It's own members,
and did so, apportioning the same among
the sub-alliances according to the number
OF members on the rolls oil each. On the
day these sub-alliances were issuing the
amounts to their members, some
alliance men made application also
to the general relief distribu-
ting committee at Breckenridge
for n share of that fund, but were refused
for the simple reason that there was no
justice in allowing them TO drawfrom both
sources. After the action Of the county
alliance above referred to, few alliance
men had the face to apply to the general
committee, but those who did we're re-
fused, and Mr.. Scoggins was probably
one Of the number. As matter Of fact
fully one-half of all supplies received here
have been issued to alliance men, and
none were ever refused anything except
on the day referred to, when they were
drawing provisions from the alliance
committee. The general relief dstribu-
ting committee was composed of three
members, one of whom was member
of the alliance, but whose sense of JUS
tice prompted him TO insist on the com
mittee taking the action that it did.
With regard to the Waco contrlbu-
tons to which THE GAZETTE refers,
| have to say that If the alliance
sent anything from there to this county ii
went into the hands OF the allisnce dis
tributing committee, and was distributed
exclusively among the members of that
organization. The general committee
has certainly never received anything
from that point. These are the plain, un.
vanished facts with regard to the buga-
boo Mr.. Scoggins has raised, and saw
that no fair-miDded man inside the alli-
ance or out OF 1t can question: the just.
ice of the action OF the Stephens county
relief distributing committee.
| Il. w. DAVENPORT.