Oxford eagle. (Oxford, Lafayette Co., Miss.) 1876-current, 1921-03-17

fact we think you have not yet taken
direct issue. If there is anything in
correct about any statement ore estate
ments given out by US, we want to
know it. Every figure issued from
this office has been so definite and
without equivocation, that any one
who understands cotton statistics
should be able to point out definite
| ly the error, should any be contained
therein. We challenge you to do it.
1t is unfair to US, and unfair to the
readers of your paper, and unfair to
the South as a whole, to merely mud
dy the water If you take issue with
Nus, you should do so openly, and IN
terms that leave no doubt that you
do take issue. You must assume,
however, that our purposes are quite
as sincere for the welfare of the
South as your own-that we are cap
able of understanding the truth, and
that we are willing to express it.
"The South stands at the parting of
the ways. TIE matter of the supply
of cotton is of vital importance in
determining how much acreage
should be planted this year. 1t is
important enough to deserve the
painstaking investigation of all con-
cerned, especially of those who UNI
dertake to give out information.
Jumped-at conclusions, loosely and
hastily compiled statistics, and half
baked opinions will not do. If the sup
ply of cotton is no greater than the
Figures published by YOU indicate,
there is no need for reduction in the
cotton acreage. Any effort to reduce
cotton acreage to bring about short
age in the supply of cotton, a famine
perhaps, thereby to eXtort dishonest
profits would be nothing short OF
Ecrime, and any man who engages IN
lit, should be put in jail.
"There are no mysteries about cot
ton statistics; no excuse for any dlf-
Iferences of opinion as to what the
supply really is If we are willing to
accept such authorities as the U. 5.
Bureau of ensus and Col. Hester as
being worthy of confidence; no ex-
1cuse for ignorance where there IS a
desire to know.
.sSuch a paper as yours ought to be
able to say without any Ifs or ands
about it, whether figures relating to
the carry-over are right or wrong. IL
ought to be abe to express a definite
opinion of its own, not mere general
lities. Should you question any state
ment relative to the supply you ought
to be able to check it up and analyze
the figures, and it is inconcelvable
that YOU have not man on your
staff who is capable of doing this. 10
fail to do this, to confess confusion
or uncertainty in your own mind and
then to set yourself up as questlonIn2
Col. Hester and other statistical au-
thority seems to us to be flddllng
while Rome burns
"Ypur intimation that figures lndI-
eating the carry-over of 9,000,OeO
bales or more at July 81. 1920, were
put out for the. mere purpose of scar
ing the farmers might better have re-
manned unsaid The inference is that
those responsible for the figures do
mot hesitate to lie to accomplish a
purpose. A lie is lie. no matter what
the purpose. The South is in des-
Eperate situation but it ras no use for
liars. What it wants is the truth, and
mot those who obstruct the truth. If
You will devote little earnest study
to the cotton situation, you may be
better prepared to disseminate the
truth. We enclose some statistics
(which may prove useful.
"There, will be carry-over of more
than 100000 bales at July 81, 1921.
ANY farmer who plants cotton with
the idea that it will be less, is going
to be mighty sorry"
4 "Yours very truly,
COTTON ACREAGE CONT