The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1905-04-12
SUMTER. S. @ WEDNESDAY APRIL l2. 1905.
NO INCREASE.
President Smith Nails the Tag
Tax Story---Farmers are
Reducing.

the Southen Cotton association. It
is from the state president, Nj E. D.
Smith;
I'm view Of the wide spread publ
cation and the impression made. on
the public that the use of fertilizer
has been increased rather than de-
creased, and as it is the object and
Office OF this association to keep the
pubic Informed as to the situation in
reference to the reduction of acreage
and fertilizers and all matters per-
tanning to the welfare of the farmers
we wish to state some facts: l. AS to
the report Of the increase use Of fer
tilizer, II am in receipt of the follow
ing from Fl. M. Stackhouse, secretary
of the fertilizer department., Glenn
son Agricultural college, sAwho has
charge of the tag department.. This
letter is in response to the inquiry
made hy me Of him in reference to
the large sale of tags.
He replies as follows:
Clemson Collegc, S. c.,
March %, 1905.
Hon. E. D. Smith,
Magnolia, S. G
Dear Sir: see interviews with you
in the papers as to the amount Of the
tag tax along the line Of your "phone
conversation in Columbia few days
ago, but the line was busy at the time
and your voice very indistinct, was
not sure I heard you correctly, and
only press of work has hindered this
writing earlier. Am getting frequent
inquiries from boards of trade, cham
bers of commerce, ETC., Of other
states as to the amount, but did not
answer as believed it for speculative
purposes. However, the news men
get reports from state treasurer and
incorrect reports sometimes get in the
newspapers.
. The amount however is not less
than stated and about the same as last
year, we think at least $l10, GOO OF
this comes from increased sales for
cotton seed meal which for stock
food pays the tax this season for the
first time. Then the salesman and
manufacturer, of fertilizers say that
anticipating orders they supply them
selves with tags knowing that if not
needed they can be redeemed with
new ones after Nov. /, and they admit
aggregate sales to date considerably
less than last year. So you correctly
say these sales are not reliable indica-
tion of the fertilizers used any given
season. In the effort to reduce cotton
crop which means so much for the
south, | should:be sorry to think the
farmers would not stand patss on it or
let narrow selfish considerations of
supposed present gain wreck their
own and best interests of entire coun-
try Cor years to come.
Yrs. very truly,
q. M. Stackhouse.
Gas he states at least $40, 600 or 40,
900 tons comes from increased sale of
cotton seed meal fo1 feed purposes.
Up to June, 1904 all meal for feed
purposes was exempt from the privi-
lege tags Hundreds of tons were
bought for fertilizer purposes shipped
as feed stuff; thereby avoiding the
tag tax. His estimate in my estima-
tion is very conservative one. Again
farmers this year have exchanged
seed for meal in larger quantities
than ever known before in the history
of the state. One reason for this is
because the price of cotton has drop
ped so low and the price of guano re-
manning the sameeas it was last year
that they have substituted meal for
the ammoniated stuff. Then again we
have made inquiries from the Pied
mont and Pee Dee s-ctions OF the
state and from the middle sections
and the replies indicate that the ac-
tual amount sof guano bought by the
farmers for this years consumption
does not exceed &C per cent. of last
year.