Rocky Ford enterprise., 1898-11-24

To the Editor Of the Enterprise:
The last issue of the Fowler
Tribune contains an editorial show
ing why the melon growers in that
vicinity should cut loose from the
Rocky Ford association and estab-
lish an association of their own.
The people here would undoubt-
edly feel as the Fowler people do
If they lived at Fowler.
The Manzanola and La Junta
melon men contemplate the same
course, and all of them are hear
tily in favor of cooperating with
til 70 other associations in the val
ley, SO far as practicable, SO that
really in future the parent associs-
ton will be only sub-divided, not
destroyed:
There also appeared in the Tri-
bune letter from a party from
Denver who has been raising cam
taloupes at Fowler during the past
season. Whether from ignorance
or malice. I do not know, nor care,
but l do know that he misstated,
misauoted or misinterpreted al.
most every fact of which he wrote.
An explanation to which the
board is entitled can not be made
in a few lines, therefore I ask par
don for the length of this letter.
It is unnecessary to attempt con-
tradiction of street rumors, such
as the board standing in" on a
steal, their Gisinclination to make
settlement. and dozens of other
charges which I never heard.
In the first place this man as
serts that the contract with the
Western Poultry & Game Co. was
invalid. j. R. Dixon Of Pueblo
said the Fairmount contract Ia
duplicate of this) was valid. Why
does Mr.. Faurot hide his legal
light under a bushel?
He makes the assertion that the
directors told him that the. con-
tract was backed by a bond. Can
he produce one man who was told
so? Not one. It was purely i'm
aginary on the part of Mr.. Faurot.
Does It not appear to ourselves
that no level-headed business man
would give q bond for the hand
ling, six months ahead, OF such .
quantity of such perishable az
ticle?
would give a bond, but wanted one
in return, guaranteeing delivery of
300 cars of cants. When this prop
osition was sprung, the directors
backed down. That request was
of course out Of the question, as
they could not tell how many
acres would be planted, what the
yield would be. nor how many
men would pull out before the
shipping season (This contract
was made last winter.
The next statement made in this
party's letter is that there would
be letter from the w. P. & G..
Co.'s bankers guaranteeing the
payment of the drafts. There is
no more truth in this than in the
bond business. On the face of it
the assertion is absurd. Why
would the bankers guarantee be
needed il the bond was given?
And why should a bond be asked
for if the bank guaranteed the
drafts?
He also asserts that drafts were
to be attached to the bills of lad
ing, and that this was not done.
The manager says it was. and no
person doubts his word but this
Denver party. He loses sight OF
the fact that the w. P. & G. Co.
did not receive or pay freight on
136 cars. They were dumped by
the railroad companies at the
other end. So that the attachment
of drafts to the bills of lading for
those cars cuts no figure in the
transaction, ard l grieve to say,
did not keep the cants in saleable
shape.
One paragraph about inspection
is not much clearer than mud. l
give it up. The facts are that the
terms of the contract call for "No.
1 quality to be packed in No. !
cratos, in first-class manner, and
to be inspected and approved by
the inspector of the same second
party" The association claims
that if the goods passed inspection