The Durham recorder. [volume] (Durham, N.C.) 1879-19??, 1891-07-01
4 agricultural Department,
Dnrl.am Fertilizer Comnany.

self against the Farmers Ali.
ance goods manufactured by
the Durham Company. 1t il
well known that the Department
depends upon the receipts from
the tonnage tag tax for its very
existence and the primary OBJ,
jcct in establishing the Depart.
ment was to promote the inter
ests If the farmers who are con-
sumers of fertilizers and also
the chief customers of the Dur
ham Company. Now it so hap
pens about two-thirds of the
goods manufactured and sold
by the Durham Company are
manufactured and sold to their
customers from their factory in
Richmond in the State of Vir-
ginia. On these goods it may
very we'll be doubted, and even
confidently asserted, to the con-
trary, that even if the tax is
legal under the Constitution of
North Carolina as taxing per-
sonal property by WEIGHTS in
stead of ''vALUE IN MONEY!"
whether or not the present act
of the Legislature upon the sub
ject would reach the product of
the Durham Company sold at
their factory in Richmond, Va,
and delivered to a common car
rier there for their customers in
North Carolina. 1t is certain
that SO long as the goods remain
in Virginia they are not subject
TO the laws of North Carolina
and when these goods, in the
course Of transportation, reach
North Carolina, they have al
ready become the property of
the CONSUMERS by whom they
were ordered and bought.
The tax tag law, IN so many
words, imposes the tax only on
goods ''sold or offered for sale"
in North Carolina. These goods
have already been sold and de-
lived to the consumers in the
State of Virginia and are not
brought to North Carolina to
be "sOfd or offered for sale"
here; but are brought to North
Carolina for purposes of CON
SUMPTION only. We understand,
however, that this Durham Fer
tilizer Company, against which
so much has been said and pub
lished of recent date and against
which the charges of fraud have
been raised about a few dollars
worth Of tags, has actually paid
the Department on their Rich
mond, Va, goods without a
murmur. We are not authoriz-
ed to speak for that company
and know nothing of their busi-
ness affairs further than what
has been given out TO the pub
lie; we are not their champions
in any sense further than hav-
ing a simple desire to see justice
done to every progressive busi-
ness concern in the State and
especially friendly TO Durham
enterprises, an we are interest
ed in the Agricultural Depart
lnent, too, as a part Of the ina
chinery Of the State govern
ment. But, if the department
has not already done so, we sug-
gest that it might be well to
consider the subject in the light
above presented and count some.
what Of the cost before the fight
gets too hot and the courts have
10 b. called upon to settle much
contention that by wise counsels
and good management might
he avoided.
A recent decision Of the court
knocked the fertilizer license
tax ri $500 on each manufac.
Iturer into a cooked hat and this
new tangled tonnage tax is a
mere makeshift to preserve the
life Of the Department. But
once let the impression get fixed
in the popular mind that the
Department is hostile % the in.
terests Of the Farmers Alliance
and il will be- goodbye John to
the Agricultural Department.
IL seems 10 Us that Commission.
or Robinson's conduct towards
the Durham Fertilizer Company
of late is Indicative Of such hos.
sffssrs Faz.f., ssssssas. s.s...~... -. Il.