The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1886-07-21
. VERY STRANGE PROCEEDING.

State Chronicle of the 10Th inst:
"MIDDLEBURG, N. c., July 9, 1886.
i am a plain, uneducated farmer,
and would like to see this question
discussed by the intelligent farmers
Of the State. [ do not profess to be
able to answer the question, even to
my satisfaction, but it does seem to
me that the question Justifies a dis
cussion at least.
Quite a number Of my neighbors
and many farmers in Vance and
Warren counties have for several
years been using a home made Ter
t~iliizer, made by formula OF Dr.
Courts, of Rockingham county, with
entire satisfaction, and we prefer 1T
to any of the manipulated brands on
the market. By clubbing together
and buying in carload lots direct
from the manufacturers, the cheml-
Gals cost us from 20 to 25 dollars per
ton. W. have been buying from
Baltimore firms. We had made our
arrangements to get u supplies
this spring, but about the time ve were
putting IN Il orders, were notified by
the agricultural Department hat the
dissalued bone, one f Mermqln fagre-
dients, saods subject to the. tau and any
goods shipped By the Baltimore firms
mould be seized by the Department.
This forced us to get supplies OF
such manipulated goods as we could
find, on the market which bad paid
tax.
Now, with all Difference, | think
we farmers should be allowed to
purchase any chemicals we want
from any whereIwe choose, the opin-
ion Of the Attorney General to the
contrary Notwithstanding. GI
We have been using these, goods
purchased of the above named firms
for years and prefer it to any brand
of fertilizer sold in the State, pound
for pound. ....n..
We uere informed by the Depart
ment that ,ue could get the chemicals we
,rdnted from another firm in Baltimore,
who had paid tar, but it was too late
for us to make new arrangements,
and besides we could not get them
on the same terms.
] have been a friend to the Agri-
cultural Department, and would
not say discontinue it, but it does
seem to me that some plan might be
arranged by which this burden Of
tax might be lifted from the farmers
shoulders. If they have it to bear
| do not think we get fifty thousand
dollars worth Of protection, and it
seems to me that we might be per-
mitted to buy from the first hands
instead of being saddled with the
commission ofthe middle men. Let
us hear from you, gentlemen farmers,
of North Carolina. fF IrfHuHIH
/3+| la VANCE Co. FARMER"
THE italics are ours.
Without any desire to place our
self in antagonism to the Depart
ment Of Agriculture, we would re-
spectfully ask if it has not proceeded
beyond the limits of it's lawful iuris-
diction if it has done as represented
in this letter, which we take to be a
true statement, as it appears in a
respectable and responsible paper,
published at Raleigh?I tUaH HTI
Where is the authority for such
arbitrary action?
Where is the law which says that
the farmer shall not buy a ton
Of ground bone, or plaster, or sand,
if he choose, anywhere outside or
inside of the State that he may elect?
The law, as we understand it, re-
quires fertilizer dealers doing bust
ness in the State to take out a license,
but it does not prohibit the farmer
going out of the State and buy
ing the ingredients. of his fertilizers
where he can buy them t the best
nor does it force him to
buy from some one endorsed by the
Agricultural Department.
There is a law requiring dealers
in horses, cattle and mules, to pay a
license tax. Does this law prohibit
farmer Of this State from going to
and buying a horse, a
cow or a mule? [7IAA Ia !
There is a law imposing a tax on
representing commercial
houses. Does this law prohibit a
of this State from going
to any Of the trade centres and buy
ing a stock Of goods from a house
which does not send out a drummer
nor take out a license in this State?
Merchant tailors + required to