The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1886-09-22

ing for the Bulletin for several years
continuously without ever having
been favored with the sight Of one
number of it.
We are further informed that "by
conforming to this rule Of the Post
Office Department we save the State
hundreds of dollars, for we would
have to pay one cent on every copy
sent out if we did not do So Let
us see. The rule requires subscrip-
ton price to be charged and COL
lected, therefore the price, 25 cents
per year, is stereotyped on the title
page of the paper, and the money is
supposed - to have been collected in
taxes paid. Don't this look like the
thinnest kind of dodge to circum-
vent the U. S. Government, and beat
it out Of little postage? Isn't it,
too, rather discreditable position
to place the great State of North
Carolina in as a party to such a
a dodge? It may be economy, but
it is economy carried to an extreme
bordering on dishonesty, W h ich
only an ingenious stretch Of the
English language can distinguish
from swindling. No individual "en-
terprise" could play such dodge,
nor would it be permitted if it at
tempted it.
We are further informed that the
Bulletin is simply bulletin, can Off
cial document that contains no news
except official news from the De-
partment," and this in the face of
the following announcement which
we clip from the January number of
the Bulletin: 5 ..t
"The Bulletin Of the Department will
henceforth have much wider scope
than heretofore. 1t has been in great
measure directed to our staple crops !;
subjects deemed important to the gem
eral progress of the State, bm which did
not lie in the direct line Of Our agricultural
journals, haze also occupied large space.
Henceforth it will embrace the whole
field of agriculture, giving chief promi-
nence, as heretofore, to our staples, while
as much attention as circumstances will
admit of will be given to the orchard, the
garden, to stock, to poultry-indeed to
everything within the domain of rural
economy.
1t will be much enlarged, and distrib7
uted more widely throughout the State. !"
We are curious to know how the
Department will reconcile these two
statements.
To sum up our position in brief
on this question, it is this: # '-~
We hold that the Bulletin should
be bulletin, as it's name implies, and
that it should confine itself to pub
fishing the proceedings proper of
the State Board Of Agriculture, and
that it should give us correct and
regular reports Of what the Depart
ment of Agriculture is doing, and
how it is spending the $45,O0O a
year which it takes to run it. The
people don't want the opinions Of
this man nor that in it, but facts in
which they as taxpayers are inter
ested. The law requires that the
Department "shall publish a quar-
terly report Of the operations Of the
Department so that the people may
know what it is doing. This is part
of the business of the Bulletin, and
this is what it should do but does
not do. -3-.s''.'
We are opposed to the States
using the public money to enter as
competitor in the business of
journalist, or in any other business
in competition with Individual enter
prise or honest labor, which demand
and are entitled to the protection of
the State.
We are not hostile to the Agri-
cultural Department, which may be
made of great value to the farming
interests of the State when properly
conducted, and when carrying out
the objects for which it was estab-
lished, and we have no objection to
the Bulletin as the chronicler of the
the operations of that body for
which it was established, and we
want it to be a faithful chronicler of
the information for which the people
pay and which they have a right to
demand. They are both good insti-
tutions, provided they do what they
were established to do, and do it
honestly and faithfully. a'.'..
We say this not from any hostility
but because we believe in fair and