The Marietta journal. [volume] (Marietta, Ga.) 1866-1909, 1890-04-03
tcoAMUSIcATED.l
THE CONTEST FOR COMMISSIONER.
An Open Letter to the Commissioner
Of Agriculture, From Mr.. Nesbitt.

MARIETTA, Ca, March 25.--Hon. ]. T. Hender.
scn.---Dear Sir AS you occupy position of trust,
created for the benefit Of the people, the farmer
more especially, and supposed to DO operated in
their interest, and as am candidate for the
same position, submit for your consideration the
following questions in reference to your admins
tration OF the office, and ask that you give an ex-
plicit answer to each. feel that the people have
right to full information on the subject, but I
would not willingly do you an injustice, even in
the smallest particular therefore, offer you the
opportunity of correcting any inaccuracies SIT
there are any---to which my present informat ion
may have led me:
1. Have you not occupied the position OF COM
missioner of agriculture by appointment eleven
years, at a cost to the state Of $4,000?
2. Have you not had son in the department for
about the same period, at cost of about Sl5 600?
8. Did YOU not have another son in the depart
ment for some time, at good salary?
4. Did you not appoint your brother-in-law in
spector OF fertilizers and was he not also ex-ofcio
inspector of oil Did he not occupy this position
for several years at cost of at least $50 900 ?
Does he not still hold position inspector of oil?
g. Is not the amount which has been ths:s sh-
sorbed by your family about e1000 600?
6. Do not these figures demonstrate nepotism
at variance with the principles of our democratic
form OF government
Z. If elected, will you continue appointments on
the principle demonstrated in the foregoing ques-
tionsf
8. Have you not created extra clerkships not
contemplated by the law, and does not your son
occupy one of these positions?
g. Did you not oppose the reduction to ten cents
of the inspection fees fertilizers when the leqs-
lature was seeking to relieve the farmers of this
unnecessary burden?
10. think it was in 1887 that bill was intro
duced and passed the lower house of the legislature
seeking to regulate the inspection of OIL In some
instances these inspectors of fertilizers were ex-
ofcio inspectors of OH and it was alleged that the
oil money flowing into their hands made their
salaries too large, as they were already receiving
800 per month inspectors of fertilizers and that
this oil money ought 20 go into the treasury
Knowing this, did you not, after the legislature
adjourned, increase the salaries of inspectors of
fertilizers from 81 200 to 81 500 per annum, thus
taking out 81 800 more from the state and putting
not one dollar of oil money in?
IL. Did you not oppose with all the resources at
your command, and notably, with the tremendous
patronage of your office, representing nearly
SS5 000 tine bill making epositon of mission
er of agriculture elective by the people2 Have
you not by going into the general assembly and
seeking to defeat this BILL which makes you re-
sponsible to the people, put them on notice that
you feared to trust them? Is it not contradic-
ton, that having dstrusted Them you now ask for
their confidence and support? Respectfully,
R. T. NEsBITT.