The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-02-10
ALITTLE LEAVRN, LEAVENETH
THE WHOLE LUMP.

Nh. EDIToR:-Throw q rock in the
dark, where no good dog oughs to be,
and hear a dog howl Sequel: Some.
body's cog has been hit because he
WAS out of his place.
The Charlotte Chronicle and the
StatesviLle Landmark seem to be yelp-
ing vic;ously and cry ug with holy
horror because they fear that the
press is to be %boycotted by the Ali
slce. And what for 2
The resolutions referred to, emAnat-
ing from Polk, Macune and others,
say it is for "vicious and malicious
misrepresentation of any officer or
memoer Of the order, o. by unfair
methods against our order seeking to
impair u strength CT unity"
Now look out for the vicious and
malicious misrepresentation to begin
with: The Chronicle says shat Col.
Polk and DR.. Macune have taken
precautions to prevent their being
criticised, and to punish all papers and
persons who differ from them or OPP
pose the Alliance"
Now compare the resolutions with
this I'm Warran ted assertion. The reso-
luton does not object % any and all
fair methods, and honest, gentlemanly
criticism. The Alliance invites this.
But what kind of misre presentation
can We call the above2
And now for the Statesville Land
mark: "I5 has remained :or Col.
Polk, DR., Macune and their advocates
to say that if a voice is lifted in ;riti
cism of them or their propositions,
that voice must be stifed."
Yes, and it still remains unsaid |
Col. Polk, DR.. Macune ct ais. do not
propose or say anything of the kind,
and these no vlers know it.
They DO not 'recommend \ boycott
of all newspapers that comment un-
favorably upon the aims and purposes
of the Alliance, or indulge in hostile
critic sm of its chief off 39ts," unless it
is done by lying viciously and malic-
iously. Ii | claimed to be an honest
editor, [ nev would object to the
~boycotting of all papers that resort to
vicious and malicious misrepresenta
ton designing lies) in order to "criti.
cise," as they term it, the Alliance
and its officers.
Why did not these editors discuss
the resolutions as they are, instead of
begging off into "criticisn and IN,
favorable comment 2" Tat would
have been fair and honest. But their
weakest point is in the fast, that after
all their sophistry they had she I'm
sophisticated simplicity to put the reso-
lutions themselves on the same page
with their gar Died misrepresentation,
" slked into the very trap they say
was made to catch them. How they
squirm ? Is the leaven working 2
D)n's anybody know that "vicious
and malicious misrepresentation or un
tair methods" does not and cannot in
any way mean fair, honest criticism,
or just and ~gentlemanly "unfavorable
comment :" Now who has really
gone crazy2
"Onl consistency, thou art" &c.
Mr. Editor, [ would not fail to state
that my information is from . shees
that seems to delight in disse ninGting
these ;owardly misrepresentation of
the resolutions, mot criticised, but
misrepresented) to-wit: the Lenoir
Topic. And l see it's editor is heartily
willing to give the Alliance much
%gratuitous advice as to whom they
should follow.
How would it do to follow the in
fallible w. W. Scott, editor of the
Lenoir Topic? Don't he know it al?
Is it possibl IL that the leaven is be-
ginning 20 work, and the su os ri otion
lists of some of these papers are shrink
And is this why so many extra
are flooding the mails "free
to those who have something
else to do than reading misrepresenta
tions Of facts, measures and menP
Who is w. W. Scott, any how?
J. F B, Pamlico Co.
The above has been overlooked for
some time FDTTOR