The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1888-05-15

~oASS ~ ASA
upon the Farmers Alliance or cubs,
which he knows is not true in any
sense. The Alliance has nothing
to. do as a body with the movement; as
men, as equal citizens, as lovers of
good government, they have the right
to espouse the cause of whomsoever
they choose, and they are men enough
to back those rights which a free
government grants them. L do
not advocate, as | stated in the former
article land of which the Record makes
so much capital) such radical measures
as would jeopardize the success of the
Democratic party, but | repeat that
the farmer would be justiiable in
such steps, if after all these years of
loyalty to the Democratic party they
are no better served than before; they
would then wear the yoke of bondage
by further submitting, but justifiable
or not, l stick to my prediction.
AS to my political complexion,
which the Record seems ignorant of, I
would say that my democracy has yet
to be questioned as far back as trace
able in the past generations. AS to
the stuff of which l am made, that will
develop in the future, if opportunity
presents itself, but we will add that
whether Of the "class that predomi-
mates or not among the farmers" we
are as yet considered such and closely
identified with that interest.
AS to which is the more closely
identified with the farmer, will be seen
when I state that the writer is a
farmer both by birth and profession,
while the editors of the Record r
lawyers by profession, and l presume,
sinners too. Ny fortune has never
favored me with a copy of the Record
until to-day, a copy containing the
article referred to with the article
ma1ked) came before me. In looking
ri the paper I accidently saw the
article here referred to, and in read
ing it over at once discovered that the
writer was a lawyer. | would have
vouched for that, but to be sure, l be-
gan to look over the paper closely,
and ("eureka'1 there it was in IN
OUTSIDE cOlumn:
SKULKEN & HINES,
Attorneys at Law,
-5a -~. Whiteville, N. c..
So far so good, but I must further
investigate, and what do l find =? A
bottle of neat design bearing this in
scription:
-". SKULKEN & POWELL,
DEALERS IN
Fine Cigars, Liquors, Native Wines,
Brandies, Groceries, &C., &C., White
vile, N. c..
Now as to who the Skulken referred
to on the bottle is, | cannot say, but
Judging from the evident miscarriage
Of the editors article, I should unhesi-
tatingly pronounce editor, lawyer,
bottle, and all identical. Let that be
as it may, we are not to blame, for
certainly our critic has a right to be
all of them at once if he wants to.
We can't help thinking the Record
is wrong when it records us as a apo
litical hack" for "may it please your
Honor" las he would have said it) we
are not at all a politician or an aspir-
ant for Office, but are simply an "old
farmer" We, however, do the Record
the justice to say he may have "been
off the jug" when writing that article,
consequently did not know the differ
ence between a "political hack" and
his W inordinate greed for Office.
The Record grows eloquent in the
farmers interest and elbows off his
dogs by this flourish of the trumpet:
"The farmers of Columbus county,
and of North Carolina, are too strongly
welded to the principles of good gov
eminent to subject her to a rehearsal
of such accused scenes, simply because
their political choice was not the
nominee of the convention, and such
a charge is an insult to their sense of
self-protection, their honesty and their
patriotism"
Oh, Moses [ didn't know the
farmers were insulted. Why didn't
you tell me, brother farmer? l don't
believe it nohow. Nor does the Record.
Brethren Skulken & Hines, read The
PROGRESSIVE FARMER; it will improve
your memory, and it is to be hoped
your morals. Had you scanned that
paper as closely as you should, before
speaking for the farmers, you probably
would have recorded a different view
as regards the class you misrepresent
in your REGARD. No Skulken; now
read that paper.
In concluding, brethren Skulken-
Hines would have Won watch the