The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1890-05-21
BUTLER TO TiLLMAN.
A REPLY TO SOME CHARGES As TO
FERTILIZERS.
An Aupc:.: t.. the Record and th" Laws =
sari. Ti:'muu Requested {" i'r"rc 80

An Appc:.: IT, the Record and tho Laws
sapi 'ii:'mau Requested 10 Prove 80
/; tract.
COLUMBIA. :. G.. :ia, -. lS;.:'.
Capt. 5. II. Tjjl!laan:- The n"',s-
2,:.::,,,. reports OF y"Sl speech 4 M,
ll,.,sali o.. H. ftiA. 50, a5@r;.!;oitvd
rs charging, substantially. t;l;,S the
,!;nuunvnt OF agriculture has PEI
m:tt.ll tie fs.lE. yas 81 South Carolina.
to be leflauded III the pUrnits. OF
co,n,uerclal fertilizers by faiI,lre to
3unis;: manufacturers whose goods
fall below tAcir guarantees. loE arc
further reported to nave s@lci that
vou could prove al tbatyo charged.
and qactcd rom theannuai report CT
tie Gienartment for the yea 1885 rs
authority upon which to sustain your
! statement.
Tue legal penalty in regard to do
G;cieut fertilizers is selzRre. ccndarl-
nation and sale. and b"caus" this
:>snalty L&s not beeu Eihlcte| SO"
;,err t!:at lyotnel penalty has been
imposed.
Iili, provision Ct tie law cannot he
enforced. Tor the sufficient reason
tll~t when the analyses are mado thc
fertilizers have been pit ii the
grouud ana are out OF reach OF an
action of the kind prescribed This
defect IN the law has been reported
to The Legislature, and could have
been amended i that body had
Thought it necessary or desirable.
Iha. tins has not been done. forces
me to the conclusion chat the repre-
sentatiyes of the people honestly be
lieyo that the existing laws were sutli-
Gent. or that the action OF the de
nartment itself had made amendments
unnecessary.
While. therefore, We hsTc not
seized and sold deficient fertilizers,
we have detected and exposed all de
ticiencies. as the very report from
which you quoted shows.
Finding that the law did not reach
tie case rs contemplated, the depart
luens resoricu TO the publication Of
the manufactured, guarantees along
side of the official ANALYSES. printing
in italics those brands falling below
the guarantee. This directed attcn-
ton Immediately to all deficient
brands. II should be understood,
however, that the department has
never undertaken to exercise the
judicial authority to declare which, If
any. of such brands were fraudulent.
This penalty, voluntarily imposed by
the department, was, after detection,
put upon every brand, no matter how
Slight the deficiency. In one case this
deficiency amounted to only one
hundredth Of one per cent. of potash,
the cheapest Ingredient used in COM
mercial fertilizers. The department
could not say that this was fraud
any more than it could officially pro
nounce other brands fraudulent
where the difference was greater.
Just what constitutes fraud is ques-
ton to be determined by the courts
alone.
There may be difference ofopinion
as to whether merely exposing the
deficiency was sufficient punishment,
Gut the Legislature has SO regarded
il, because it las for ten years failed
to provide other punishment. even
after the defects in the law ha3 been
officially reported Eut the best eyi-
denca OF the effect OF this method Of
punishment is found Ill the subse-
quenv reports of the department.
This plan (of itEhcisiss deficient
| brands) was first adopted in 1881.
Ar examination OF our reports since
that time will show that there has
been a steady improvement IL the
value OF fertilizers. It VAS not ey-
pectcd that ii would il one season
result in bringing every brand up to
the guarantee, because new brands
are being introduced every year, and
the manufacturers OF such brands,
not having re&lized the effect Of this
penalty, might take risks that those
who had been once exposed would
afterwards avoid if possible. With
the exception Of the ammoniated fer
tilizers in a single season, the i'm
provement III the grade of fertilizers
! has been marked Take, for instance,
the very report that you SO sarbled
IN making your charges. It is there
shown that the averages Of the man-
ufacturers guarantees for ammoni-
ated fertilizers for that season were:
! Available phos. acid. S.22 per cent.
Ammonia. 2.l8 per cent.
Potash. 1.49 per cent.
Commercial value, S20,79.
The averages Of the analyses by
our chemist We're:
Available phos acid. $50 per cent.
Ammonia 2.61 per cent.
| Potash. 2.17 per cent.
Commercial value, S14.47.
Now this shows that, taking the
general sales throughout the State,
these goods: for that reason exceed
the manufacturers guarantee IN:
Available phos. acid. los per cent.
Ammonia. o.53 per cent.
Potash. O.6S per cent.
Commercial value, S3.6S per ton.
| Why did you not explain this also?
Was it because you had determined
to denounce the department of agri-
culture, regardless of facts, and sim
ply made use OF such garbled e1-
tracts rs suited the purpose you had
in view! I am forced to that conclu-
sion. This is confirmed by the fur