The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1891-11-27
gous off H.is ce..e1.

Our correspond mt Kclton wbe,l, cer-
J. Rice Rodgers, ns.d TO Soy Of US, wbon
We said snyth'ng that did not please him.
In order that We msy be fully understood
In the matter we publish Whist our friend
said last week which we thought demanded
. notice from us:
There Is great deal being said about the
mercantile fraternity not Selling anything on
time in uinety.two. No. .iiinx the mer-
uDspt, had better 60 slow on that linz, for
fear they viii loose more than they will
gain by the operation. 1t might do very
well we'll for them to close down on cred
i,ing for.dry goods but 10 refuse the farm
ers credit for provisions, under the condi-
lions and circumstances now In the country
would bring ruin and disaster upon the til
lers Of the soil and those in other avocaticns.
and would cerfninly cause less debts 10 be
paid than would be under other circums ace,
As an illustration, we will take q Uan that
owes oil he will make this year, and all the
merchants say we will not credit out n single
dollars worth OF dry goods or provisions in
w. That man would sell his crop and put
the money in his pocket, knowing that HI
could not get credit any more, and ,oho coutd
blame ham for being guilty gf such an act, know
ing that without money he would have TO go
hungry and cold. This is only n hint 10
show what thing Of that kind would lead
to. expect 10 be shot at by rome fellow
for writing what have. 1t may be that
am wrong, but it is my honest opinion and
am bound to speak what 1 think, If il he
expcd,ent.
In the first place, we never said that the
Merchants Of Union had threatened not to
give credit for supplies next year.
In the mex, luce it is merely n matter OF
tasfe between saying I am not tciliing and I
am not a6ke 10 give credit II is the same
thing in Dutch.
In the next place We can't point our freud
to any pdrticuiar Bank, corporation or in
diuidual whose failure was causel directly
by the Farmers, nor did we say 50 but
We dill say and say, yet, thcir failures were
from not being able to make collections, aud
the Wholesale merchants bcingmainly the suf-
fcrers we've pushing tho country merchants,
etc. And here, respected friend, is where
Tho Willingness or ability of the country
merchants to give credit lies: If the whole
sale merchants refuse credit to the retail
get supplies to sell to Farmers on credit?
But yoIr great mist,kc is in accusing
US of charging you with dishonesty. We
did no such thing. You certainly will not
deny that In the above extract you suggested
that if the merchants threaten to refuse credi,
FOR supplies in 1892, "the farmer who owes
ali he makes this year would sell his crop
and put The money in his pocket" In that
ycu may not suggest to The Farmer to do such
II dishonest act, but as We understood you
it was suggestion that such mdy be the
result of such threat But, when you
fur her say, land who can blame him
(thc farmcr,) for beirg gniity of such an
net" You no. only acknowledge it to be
dishonesty ac', but. you t,citly endorse aud
commend il,
No doubt, you arc quite as honest as we
'rc. and perhaps you would not inten.
ional|y encourage farmers or any one else |
o do dish oncst net, and on the contrary We
aid We did not believe the Farmcrf of Union
would commit such an indiscrect and dis, |
loncst act as you suggested in your illustra-
ion, they might do which You call "a hint |
o show what thing Of that kind wanlll
You also said, IL expect~ be shot at by
ONO .ftiiow fu" writing what have" Well, rs
'ou said they were your honest opinions"
his fellow shot ut Mtm. and you, according |
o cx} cctaticn. You arc not tho first honest |
nan who honestly held opinions which were
dishonest in their tendencies.
Insult or no insult we now say the ten |
Tor of the above ext act from your letter is |
dishonest in its teachings, and your scnsi- |
ivcncss in tking what we said rs an
INSULT only shows that You either did not |
understand the full meaning cf what you |
sail or are trying to evadc the responsibility
,f the true import of your words. Why, in
The three las. lin os of your letter this week,
you are c3unsclling dishonesty.