The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1897-06-22
THE 81 D

THE OTHER SIDE.
Somebody once used this very trite
saying that ''every question has three
sides yObsr side, my side, and the right
SIDE" If any brother has a real, or
imaginary, aide adverse to the Agency
it is we'll for the light to shine upon 1t.
Below we give an interesting letter
from q party supposed to be an ALI
anceman, although the letter comes
from a county which, since 1895, has
reported only one Sub Alliance and has
been represented in the State Alliance
only ono since '93:
ct. IvEY, ESQ
"Hillsboro, N. Q.
DEAR SR:-Inotice an article in The
PROGRESSIVE FARMER occasionally by
you, and it seems you think we do not
do our duty towards the Agency. No
doubt you are correct; yet we, too,
have some grounds for complaint-for
instance, fertilizer. We used a large
quantity of Alliance fertilizer in this
section two or three years, but the last
three years there has not been a
bag sold. Why's Not because it
was. too high, but owing to the
quality. OF course it was usually
up to the guarantee. One year, /
remember, when made at Durham, it
fell low, but the ingredients used were
not the best for tobacco, for instance,
the potash was composed largely of
tobacco stems. Now, stems r all
right If put on the land several
months previous to planting so they
can have time to decay, but when put
on just before planting, as we use
complete fertilizer, they are not in con,
dition to be used by Elephant the result
is an interior crop of tobacco. II you
have ever had any experience with to
baCco you know that the fertilizer has
a great deal to do with the profit or
loss on a tobacco crop. A good aver
age crop will pay about SIS 90 acre,
although, I have more than doubled
that. On the other hand there is q
great deal made in this section that
doesn't pay $1,000 acre. I mention
this to show you what q wide range Is
has and I know the fertilizer has a
great deal to do with that range. Now,
we tried the Alliance fertilizer three
years with other brands and found,
while it was better than some, it was
not as good as others Of a lower guar
antee. We are not able to explain
why, unless it was, ss I said, not com
posed Of the proper ingredients for to,
bacco. No, brother, we did not com
plain at the price. If we could get a
fertilizer a little better than anything
we have used we would willingly pay
$25 90 per ton for it. 1t is not so much
the price but the quality that concerns
US most. I am experimenting with
different fertilizers, trying to get the
best fer this section, but think a fertil
izer of Phos. Acid 8, Ammonia 81, Pot
ash 8 or 10 is near the right proportion
to make good rich, sweet tobacco.
Such q fertilizer could be made of the
best ingredients and sold for $500 or
perhaps a little less per ton. One thing
more 1 do not think it is consistent
for Us to say so much about trusts
while our fertilizer is made by a trust
company. 1 tried to get up a car of
our goods this spring, but could not.
II we would get out a new and high
grade, especially for tobacco, 1 am
eure that in five years it would have a
wonderful sale. But we should be sure
that it is made by a company who
will use nothing but the best material.
thrust you will not take any excep-
tions to this. for I've worked as hard
and made as great sacrifices as any one
in my county for the Alliance and am
ever ready to do what I can in the
future to sustain it.
"Fraternally"
= =
Let the brother be assured that the
Agency takes no exceptions to any,