The Durham recorder. [volume] (Durham, N.C.) 1879-19??, 1891-07-15

goods had been consumed Then
why didn't you treat the other com
panies as you did the Durham conf
pany and detain their goods TO await
the analysis as you did in Oxford !
You say in reference to these Oxfora
goods that acting under Instructions
from the Department the Inspector
withdrew from sale this lot Of goods,
PENDING AN ANALYSIS, for which he
drew sample from the DETAINED
goods. And yet you undertake to
excuse yourself for non-perfprmance
Of duty in this regard by adding a
foot note to theseanalyses and say ~
"Note.-Several analyses tyes p,
or nearly one half of them show val
uation materially lower than the
guarantee. The Inspectors were in
structed to search for other lots for
analysis and detention but have not
been able to find the goods Why
didn'tyou detain the lots from which
you took the samples 'pefding the
analysis n What became Of those
goods anyhow, while your Chemist
was making the analyses Did you
let the bird 90 while you held only q
tail feather in your hand You made
sure of the sample however, and
now add to your mote The analy-
ses are placed in the list above as the
ONLY MEANS available for s1aching
the case And why the 'only means
available " There is but one answer
TO that question--because the Depart
ment did not do its duty and detain
the goods of the other manufacturers
as it did the oxford shipmer. Of the
Durham Fertilizer Company, 'pend-
ing the analysis And yet the De-
partment has the assurance to say it
is always impartial in its actiau, and
endeavors to treat all alike
II you detained for analysis one
goods why did you
not detain for analysis the goods of
Others alsol A beautiful object less.
on to show the MPARTiALITY Of the
Department And a fine illustration
Of Department methods. adopted to
protect the purchaser. Publish the
deficiency in the Bulletin, in.leed
and then call il sqaare between the
manufacturer and the purchasers,
but in order to be entirely fair and
impartial towards that particular
Durham Fertilizer Company seize
their goods At Oxford, and order
them to refund seas per ton at Ne
bmesyiIlc, and don't forget to pub.
lish any deficiency Of theirs in the
Bulletin, likewise, also, in the bar.
gain. Truly nice way to admins
ter the law '.impartially and treat al
alike
The reader Of the Bulletin article
referred TO, will observe that Mr.. II,
b. Battle, State Chemist, has put in
his oar and written a piece following
Commissioner Robinson's, tohelp out
Mr. Robinson and the Department
and in his article he has undertaken
10 prove that the President and Secre.
tary Of the Durham Fertilizer Com
pany lied in their published state
mcnt when they said with reference
TO their Mebanesyille goods the words
quoted by DR. Battle, to.wit: "our
explanation Of this matter is that
this particular lot Of goods had $50
pounds Of animal bone testing over
thirty per cent bone phosphatel in It,
which, while il il much more valua-
bic AZ fertilizer and cost us consid.
cradle more money. does not show
available phosphoric acid az acid
phosphate would do
Doctor Battle then criticising and
commenting IA The above quoted
statement u the President and Sc.
retary and IN order 70 prove II % II
false says: "The sworn statement
of the superintendent q the Com
pany gives the following AZ the ron
auLA by which the Mcbanc shipment
Of the Farmers Alliance guano wa,
made:
400 pounds -
-