The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1890-06-18
following statement.

Mr., Robert COpps uf ih ;l!C had lot Of gIlaDo-
say is or II s-tha was in irr ;tlc3 list Isl
When Mr.. Buffers agent rIImr here ] lSsf In ciI
2j) he called NJ Mr.. Cnira'S place "f iusi he
had done The srns"m i"fr'. IETnrin= for brairs oi
frrtil!Z Is he might have fnr safe. Ia get samples
for anal yS,'s. Now the that was carried over
part %! l'.I from which Samples hal rri drawn
the season !rlnrc 10y Mr. Buffers clerk, and it
shown to him, nn,I the holes IN the sacks point
ed "ui t" him M evidence that they the self
same lot that had hcrn sampled hfnr0. md was asked
Why the department did not make IN etti,rt TO carry
out the law.
No notice, however. was taken Of the same by the
department, and Mr.. Coprs afterwards s"nt the guam"
away, q. he "mrlotey hoy cot'ed and could not
continue the business.
You will clearly see TINT this was an opportunity
for Mr. Butler /" carry nut the law.
Mr. Cnpcs is Il perfectly reliable gentleman. and
one Of the best men in this county, and he will be
ready to sbstanlate this statement If called upon.
Yours respectfully,
Then here Is n letter from one of nv neigh.
bors. in which it Is charged that hiS guanO
lost twenty pounds per SICK or 10 per cent.
showing that in addition to being swindlrd In
quality we are also swindled by short weight.
Alr. Gardner Is perfectly reliable:
MIR. GARDENERS LETTER.
RorERs, s. G June 8, 1890.
DEAR BEN bought seventy-seven sacks last year,
only weighed five sacks They lost twenty pounds
each. I can prove 1t by b. L. Gambo.
8. ". GARDNER, JR.
O. F. CoNNER's CERTIFICATE.
This is to certify that I. O. +. Conner, did hear
prominent and reliable clerk In Ne Agricultural De-
artment at Columbia, S. e., say that when the phos.
phate companies failed In cnmpg mp to the analysis
required by law they would bog off. .. F. CONNER
Lancaster, ). C., May 81, 1890
Next give statement from gentleman
in Lancaster, MIR. o. +. Conner, rs to what he
heard one OF Col. Buffers clerks say, and DIR.
+. J. Stuart, who sends me the certificate,
says Mr.. Conner stands ready TO give names,
etc.
hardly think 1t will be necessary now for
the third charge that the board and commits
sioner have done nothing 10 have the defects
held the office OF commissioner OF agriculture
since December 1879. His salary has amount
ed TO Sd 800, and he has spent In the AgricuI-
tural bureau, as have said, over $306,GO In
fiuen tial men in the State and the Ring"
which we are lighting, has stood by him and
nils department. through thick and thin. He
and his political associates had influence
enough to defeat the bill prepared by order
of the Farmers association In 1886 reorganiz-
ing the agricultural department. and he was
doubtless consulted by Col. Youmans in pre-
iSS7 in lieu thereof, and which is now in force.
He knew of this defect In the law, and al.
though lie and his friend had things all their
own way, the provision in my bill furnishing
fraud in fertilizers by fine and imprisonment
was left out ofthe Youmans' Substitute"
He and his friend had Influence enough to
elect the prese at board over the men nomi-
elect them, and 1t stands to-reason that II
they had wanted to pass law TO give protec.
tion TO farmers 1t could have been done. But
the agricultural bureau was In close a,sapce
with the University and Citadel. IT,, Free
had pooled their strength to detcat<erery-
thing the common farmers wanted, and to
continue in control OF the State.
The anomaly was presented OF an agricul-
tural department which being appointed by
the country people is defended by the cities.
The agricultural bureau has never since this
agitation begun: save In single instance.
lacked the solid support of Charleston and
posed largely OF merchants. manufacturers
and lawyers, with few "aristocratic agrcnl.
turists" as allies have deemed "italics" sniff
clent punishment, just. as they deemed the
much for the fertilizer business. Now when
asked by gentleman In the audience at An
derson where the money spent by the agri-
cultural department went, answered, ~ do
not know" and told the simple truth.
knew where Col. Buffers report said 1t went.
but have not seen II paid out. and told him
tanburg, member of the board, has come
forward and claims that this was a charge OF
corruption, extravaganza" etc. / fail to see
how or why. Gentlemen are not usually so
tOucny, ABOUT tnelr honesty anu tnlS GOuOie
exhibition Of solicitude about the money
spent is curious to say the least; It is on par
with the iterated and reiterated charges, that
have "accused the State officers Of corrup.
tion," ETC., and my "contression" that there
was none. All this furry and hulldbaloo
about corruption" can have but one mean
ing. The purpose Is to create the impression,
that have made such charges and cannot
prove them. Now all 1 ask Is that some one
the Nr,cs and Courier, Register or other
home and show when and where 1 have
charged corruption against the Officers II
| is time 10 "show up or shut up" 1 have
made charges enough and am ready TO prove
them without these "cuttle fish trying to
fool the people by accusing me of charges
never said.
Col Moore gave the itemized expenditures
of the agricultural department for 1880 and
will give those of 1850 for nine months tc
show how this thing has grown.
The "new broom" did It's work better and
for less money. Here Is the statement Of ex'
pendtures In 1850.
Collections and disbursements. agriculture
department for nine months, January y, 1880
| TO November ], 1880.