Newspapers / The News & Observer … / March 6, 1904, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The News & Observer (Raleigh, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
The News and Observer. VOL. LIV. NO. 153 o=®aiip® 53®EP{bDn ©snroUODns) QDaißOy (Psopstp® Bon EtoftOD R3®ws sqddgD ©Orenollsnftß®!® IHE SOUTH GIVES NEGRO JUSTICE Governor Aycock States True Sentiment. CAUSE OF BITTERNESS If there is More Bitterness in the South it Grows Out of Recon struction and Not the War Be tween the North and South. Tr the Editor: One great benefit ac cruing to the people of both seniona frt in the yearly migrations of Northern people Southward, is the better under standing which each obtains of the other. Will you permit a New England Yankee, who thinks enough of “the Old North State’’ to educate his son at your Sirte University, to offer some kindly observations? Cne thing that I have noticed is that whatever of bitterness remains as a result of the Civil War, is on the part of the Southern people. I have never met a Northern veteran or Northern person of gny -condition, who spoke unkindly or unfriendly of the Southern people. When all the Southern “people come to realize the honest desire which exists on the part of the Northerners to “make friends,” I think that the last friction between the sections will have been eliminated. It goes without sayiag that the chief bane of contention between Yankee and Southron is the negro, and the treat ment he is supposed to receive South and North. On this important question, I think that there is a mutual misunder standing. The Northern man living where the negro is negligible qiiintity, and by reason of education and environ mint, a law-abiding and useful person, can have little just appreciation of the toitlitions obtaining in the “Black Belt” of the South, nor of the imminence of the black peril. On the other hand the Southron, whose travels have been limited, and whose prejudices have been hardened by the harsh fortunes of war, has I believe en tirely misjudged the Northern attitude towards the negro. My observations have taught me that the Northern man has a far greater aversion to the negro than you have in the South. We do not care for him as a servant: we would not think of walking with him on the street; we are uneasy if he chances to sit next us in a street car. The idea that the Northern people believe in the social equality of the negro is entirely a bugaboo, fostered by politicians for political purposes. They believe in no such thing. I have lived all my life in the North and by reason of my profession have had ample opportunity to observe the customs of al grades of society, and I never knew or heard of a negro being received as an equal in any house, no matter how humble. Where the Northerner Hitters widely from his Southern brother in his atti tude towards the black man is in the fact, no matter how much he feels him self the superior of the negro socially, he is willing to accord him his rights under the law. So it happens in the North that the negro, who generally vet os the Republican ticket, is treated ex actly the same as to the franchise as the naturalized Irishman or Italian, who generally votes the Democratic ticket While I never saw a black man on a jury, no white jury in the North would ever think of deciding against a black man on account of his color. I am led to these remarks by the following editorial in the Charlotte Observer, which I sup pose is a respectable and typical ex ponent of Southern opinion: “We mentioned. Tuesday, a case in Rowan Superior Court, in which a nigger . was the plaintiff and the Southern Railway Company defend ant, in which the nigger won. A Salisbury attorney writes that this is a mistake—that it was a case of a hung jury. This statement is much easier of belief than the other, and sustains our notion that in a suit between the Southern and a black man, the average jury’ is at its wits’ end as to which to decide against, ing able to decide against both, sur nndered to its perplexity and just laid down.” V.’Lile there may be some excuse for trying to eliminate the negro from poli tics, there certainly can be r.one for treating him unjustly in the courts, for the sake of justice I hope that the. Char lotte Observer does not properiv repre sent the opinion of the educated and thinking people of the South. Yours very truly, WALTER B. FROST. Southern Pines, N. C., March 4, 1904. The suggestion that the Charlotte Ob server is "a typical exponent of Southern opinion” in itself shows that Mr. Frost does not understand North Carolina condi tions. It is unfortunately true that a jury in Boston and in Baltimore may be influenced against a negro because of his color, but we believe it happens oftener in propor tion to the number of negro inhabitants in the New England than in the Southern city. To show the true position of the negro in the courts of justice of North Carolina, we print below an extract from a well considered article by Governor Aycock, written for a leading Northern magazine. There is no man in the State so well qualified to speak of how negroes fare in courts of iustice as the Governor. Nobody will suggest that he would mis represent the true situation. He is “a typical exponent of Southern opinion’’ and here is what he says: “Indeed we are more than fair to him. We have provided for the insane of the negro race a hospital capable of caring for every ipsane negro in the State, while there are a few hundred insane of the white race for whom provision has not been made. In our courts of justice a practice of more than twenty years at the bai enables me to de6lare with em phasis that the negro can and does se cure a fair trial. I have appeared for hundreds of them in criminal indictments and in civil suits and I have yet to find a ground for complaint against our courts for failure to act fairly toward the negro. Indeed, in civil suits between whites and negroes the juries incline to favor the negro. If the case presents the slightest element of oppression on the part of the white man toward the negro, the verdict is almost certain to be in favor of the negro- There is a sense among our white people which causes them to look with contempt upon the white man who seeks to overreach the negro in a business mat ter. - We think Mr. Frost errs in supposing that there is more bitterness in the South than in the North growing out of the war. We do not believe there is as much hi either section as Mr. FrosL tt inks ex ists in the South. The mistake of Mr. Frost is very natural, for you will hear more talk about the war in the South in a week than you will hear in the North in a month The reason is that in the South the war was brought nearer to every man, it touched every neighborhood, it brought want and suffering into nearly every home, and disaster and poverty followed, in its wake. In the North, the war made larger markets and geatral prosperity, there were no battles in Northern States, the horrors of war were not brought direct to the people in their homes, the results of war brought no loss, no disaster, and little changed con ditions. Prosperity smiled on the North from 1865 to 1870, while Reconstruction blighted the South. The wounded North ern soldier’s pension provided' all neces sary domforts and medical attendance. The wounded Southern soldiers had to work l.ara to get bread and meat. Perhaps tb.?*c would be more excuse for bitterness in the South than in the North, if it exist*d, not because of war or battle, but because of Reconstruction that fol lowed the mighty struggle when brave man met brave man in honorable warfare. If Mr. Frost will look a little deeper he will find that whatever of bitterness he sees in the South is due to the hell of Reconstruction, conceived in the malevo lence of base partisans, an<j never under stood or approved by the men who fought in the Northern army. The ’‘bitterness” that lingers—and there isn't much of it now—is due altogether to the feeling of resentment to the Reconstruction acts which the Southern people believe were passed and put into execution to humiliate them in the hour of their defeat and pov erty. Mr. Frost has evidently net gone deep enough to see this, but after he has lived in the South longer he will dif ferentiate between the War Between the States, participated in on both sides by patriotic men, which left no bitterness, and the War of Reconstruction precipi tated by men who for political success visited the deepest humiliation upon the Southern people, after they had returned to their homes and in good faith looked to the protection of the old flag. Mr. Frost is mistaken in a political mat ter. He says that the naturalized foreign er in the North “generally votes the Democratic ticket.” If he will read an article by President Roosevelt in the Cos mopolitan Magazine, written shortly .after the election of 1896, he will see that Mr. K.o?evelt gave statists proving that Mr. Bryan received a large majority of the native American vote and the Repub licans were dependent for their victory uptn the foreign vote.” M - . Fiost says he never saw a negro on the jury in the North. At a late term of Wake court a negro was on the jury In one of the most important trials ever held in the history of the State. Juries in North Carolina do not “decide against* a black man on account of the color or hi- sk;n,” and we feel suri that Mr. Frost cj.o.i this subject will accept the stale ment of the Governor, who speaks always truthfully and whose fairness to the ne gro i-. known of all men, rather than the flippant remark of a mugwump journal. TU-* spirit that actuate Mr Frost is one that is characteristic of broad minded and honorable men of both sections. It is pleasant to all North Carolinians to wel come as citizens men of his breadth, hon esty and frankness. Sucii men have help ed the South to develop its resources and there is welcome, cordial and sincere, for all who come among us. We have touched upon the above points suggested by Mr. Frost in no spirit of controversy, bat to give the true Southern sentiment as we believe it exists. KAIMGH. NCKTH CAROLINA. SUNDAY MORNINO JIARUH. 6. 19U4 STRIDE TOWARD IMPERIALISM South Dakota Bond Suit Reviewed by B.F. Grady THE 1868 LAWS HURT The Carpet Bag Government Was Re sponsible for the Small Price Which Was Received by the State for the Bonds Sued Upon. (Clinton Democrat.) To the Editor: That was a remarkable decision of the Federal Supreme Court which was delivered in the suit of South Dakota against North Carolina: and, as I suppose some of your readers would like to know’ the reason why anybody thinks it remarkable, I ask space to present a brief statement of some of the fundamental principles on which the thir teen States entered into a Union and of the historical evidence that the judg ment of the court is in conflict with the compact embodied in the Constitution. 1. In the first Constitution —the Ar ticles of Confederation—it was pro vided that "the United States in Con gress assembled shall be the last resort on appeal in all disputes and differences now subsisting or that hereafter may arise between two or more States.’’ Here is a delegation of as ample power as Justice Brewer and his four associates now claim in suits between States; but the judge or the layman who affirms that this was a delegation of power to compel a State to pay its debts, acknowl edges his ignorance of the spirit of the times when the Union was formed, as well as of the purposes of the States when they entered into it. One of their purposes may bo inferred from the d-ec la rat ion: “Each State retains its sover eignty, freedom and independence." 2. Constitution of “the more perfect Union’’ was framed, the power to decide “controversies between tw r o or more States" was transferred from the Congress to “the judicial powef,” with no intimation anywhere that the “power” was enlarged so as to cover state debts. If any reader thinks otherwise, let him imagine President Washington sending a military force into Massachusetts to com pel her to settle a claim adjudged by a Federal court to be due to another State. 3. But there was inserted in the new Constitution a provision that the judicial power should extend to controversies “between a State and citizen of another State,” the full significance of which seems not to have been realized, as events proved. A few years after the adoption of this Constitution, Massachusetts was sued by a citizen of another state, as avc are informed in the biographical sketch of John Hancock in “The Lives of the signers of the Declaration of Indepen deuce.” Hancock was Governor at the time, and here is what is said about his respect for “the judicial power:” “He did not. however, in favoring a Con federate Republic, vindicate with less scrupulous vigilance the dignity of the individual States. In a suit commenced against Massachusetts, by the court of the United States, in which he was sum moned upon a writ, as Governor, to an swer the prosecution, he resisted the pro cess and maintained inviolate the sov ereignty of the commonwealth” —a com monwealth from which President Roose velt appointed Justice Holmes, who sided with the majority in the South Dakota suit. This resistance was submitted to by President Washington, the Federal ju diciary, and the Congress; and to avoid a similar collision of authority, the eleventh amendment was promptly placed in the Constitution, denying to the judi cial pow’er the right to entertain “any suit in law or equity, commenced or pros ecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citi btns or subjects of any foreign state.” Such is the history of this “judicial power,” and its* significance is clear to any intellectual, fair-minded man, al though he may not be learned in the law. But Justice Brewer undertakes to justify the decision, making elaborate argument to prove that the. bonds represent a valid debt of North Carolina, as if the eleventh amendment was intended to cover none but unjust claims against States! But the unwarranted stretch of the “judicial power’’ in this case does not stop at the decision asked for by South Dakota; it gives notice to the benevo lent donors of these bonds ($10,000) that they can sell to some State the remain ing $250,000 in their hands, and that that State can collect the money. It says: “It will seem strangely inconsist ent * * * to refuse jurisdiction of an action, *on a like promise made bv th latter”—North Carolina—“to an individ ual and by him sold or donated to the former"—South Dakota. This is the solu t'on of the problem which for many years las been puzzling the holders of th “special-tax bonds” which the carpet-bag gers. with “the government” standing at their backs, attempted to saddle on the people of Nort% Carolina; vqd hence ve may soon find ourselves in the bauds e; a receiver appointed by the Supreme North Carolina thirty or forty millions Court at Washington to collect out of of principal and interest for thirty-six oi seven years. Thus we find the Supreme Court of .the United States, a body which ought to deserve the profoundest respect of tie people, lending itself as a partner t* a scheme to play a “cute” trick on t ie foundations of our government and to nullify the constitutional rights of the uembers of the Union. But the pecuniary damage to North Carolina and the infraction of the moral law may be simply the beginning cf evils. About 1840 the twenty-six States then in the Union had borrowed, princi [ally from foreigners, about $212,000,000, »nd their annual interest on their in debtedness was about $12,000. For rea sons which have been ma away in ob scure corners of libraries, except that .insolvency overtook the States and that Mississippi formally repudiated her debt, very few of the bonds were ever paid. It will now, therefore, be in order for the holders of these old bonds to sell them to South Dakota, and have the money, with sixty years of interest, col lected by a United States marshal. Then some people will grieve over their folly in assisting to place the Republican party in power in these States- * * * L ask space- to remind your readers that ruy objection to the decision of the Su prime Court is founded solely on the constitutional rights of the State; and to go farther now-, and inquire into the validity of the bonds. The apologist of the Supreme Court, to W’hose presentation of the subject, my attention was first invited, tolls us that these bonds were issued by the representatives of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY in 1867, and that, therefore, I suppose we must infer, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY today must regard the payment of them as a “dictate of honor.” Pos sibly this is true, but, like most other questions as to the rights and duties of men, this has two sides to it. Two years after the close of the War between the States, when everybody sup posed that North Carolina was a State, the people whereof could regulate their own affairs, as they had done ever since 1776, these bonds were issued and placed on the market. About the same time, the political party which now controls all the departments of the Federal gorei’n ment, being then in control, passed, over the veto of President Johnson, the “re construction measures,” destroying North Carolina as a State/ subjecting her, wih South Carolina, to an odious military despotism with the headquarters of General Canby, the satrap, at Charles ton, and subjecting our people, so far as there was any semblance of civil govern ment, to the rule of the “carpet-bag” mendicants, who came down from the North to participate in plundering the State, and of the ex-slaves, who had not yet l en made “citizens” by the Four cci’.*th A.iiemh tent. This subjection was accomplished by disfranchising thirty or forty thousand of the hereditary citi zens of the State, who were compelled to look on in silence while these pets of the Republican party held a so-called constitutional convention in Raleigh, and sessions of their disgraceful legislature in 1863-'69-’7O, the expenses of which General Canby collected out of our peo ple's pockets. This “carpet-bag” government, support ed by post-commanders in every import ant town, had colored troops to do their bidding—some of your readers remember that a squad of them was sent from Fayetteville to Clinton to supervise the election in 1868, but for prudential rea sons, got no nearer than Dollar Branch— destroyed or stole the literary fund of the state, the money she had received for establishing the A. and M. College, the money these interlopers collected from the people to support the free schools, and, in iact, about all the public funds they cculd lay their hands on; and, when other sources of supply were exhausted, they issued the noted “special-tax bonds,” which the state repudiated several years ago. Hence the credit of the State was so ’’impaired that the bonds issued by the Democrats sold for not more than half of their face value, and the money the State received was "green backs,” worth pel haps, about half of their face value. So that her bonds went for little, if any, more than twenty-five cents on the dollar of face value, the Republican party be ing wholly responsible for the loss. By what right, then, does the author of this wrong, acting through five* of the justices of the Supreme Court, come ii.lt) North Carolina and compel her to pay the face value of these bonds, to gether with thirty-seven years of inter est on the face value? I deny the right. The State ought to tender to the bond holders the specie value of the amount she received for the bonds; but to force her to go beyond this is a violation oi the moral law, as well as the Constitu tion of the Union. B- F. GItADI. Clinton, N. C., Feb. 22. 1904. Rockefeller’s Health Rules. (New York World.) I have discovered the best prescrip tion lor good health is outdoor exercise and eating slowly. Be regular in every thing, but above all things, eat slow’ly. “Il' I have only fifteen minutes to eat a luncheon I will cat. four or five mouth fuls in that time and carry away a mouth ful with me. Four mouthfuls slowly eaten is far better than a hearty meal consumed in haste. It. takes a person a long time to appreciate this fully, but the sooner they do it the better it will he for their health- I find that when 1 play golf a lot. and keep out of doors I both eat and sleep hi tter. “Do vou know that I recently read an article by a well-known scientific man to the effect that cheese is an excellent ar ticle of diet? I wish that I had read that article a long time ago. I had been afraid that cheese bad a tendency to pro duce indigestion, and for that reason never touched it- No*’ I find that its ef fects are directly contrary, and I eat a great deal of it a nd find il agrees with 10 “ Take tnv advice, eat cheese, eat slowly and have outdoor exercise and you will enjoy good health- It’s a case of minority rule in a house where there's a baby. EDITORIAL SECTION—Pages 1 to 8. A HERD OF PISTOL ' BATTLES Upheld Law in Many Des perate Encounters. George Pritchard, the New Marshal in the Central District of Indian Territory, Goes There as No Tenderfoot. (Washington Post.) Asheville, N. C., March 5. —On Febru ary 18th, George K. Pritchard, of Mitch ell county, N. C., was confirmed by the Senate for the position of United States marshal for the central district of Indian Territory. The nomination was held up for several weeks, and some opposition developed because Pritchard was not a resident of the Territory. This, however, soon disappeared. Mr. Pritchard is a brother of former Senator Jeter C. Pritchard, of North Carolina, now asso ciate justice of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, who presided over the court which tried Maehen, the Groffs, and Lorenz for frauds on the Post Office Department. It is the general supposition that in the discharge of the duties of his new position “Sheriff" Pritchard, as he is usu ally called in Western North Carolina, is likely to meet a good many crises re quiring resource—that quality known as “nerve” and a brave man’s contempt for death. If this be true, the President chose well when the chose Sheriff Pritch ard for marshal. In 1888 Mr. Pritchard was elected sheriff of Mitchell county, N. C. Mitchell Is one of the far western counties, where blood runs fast and hot; w’here hip pockets are made for pistols, and the inhabitants know how to use them. Pritchard was the regular Republican candidate, and his opponent who then held the office of sheriff was an independent Republican- Pritchard had not a single blood relative in the county, while his opponent was a man of large family connection. The campaign was a very exciting one. Pritchard's opponent lived in a strong Republican township, a considerable pro portion of the citizens of which were lira relatives. When the candidates met there in joint debate, political sentiment was at fever heat. Pritchard in his speech attacked the record of the sheriff, and the friends of the latter, to the number of about forty, drew their pistols on the speaker and cocked them, as a sort of intimation that his language ought to be’milder. ONE CHAMPION OF HIS CAUSE. Pritchard was speaking from the van tage point of a pile of lumber. He paus ed a moment, and then said, addressing his opponent: "John, we are in your home township. You are the sheriff, and it is your duty to protect me from vio lence. But if you will not, I’ll protect myself.” At the same time he drew his pistol, and a young man—a Democrat, by the way—stepped up to his side and said: “George, if you die here, I'll die with yoH-” The crowd immediately became quiet, and the guns disappeared. This incident w T as described by an eye-w’itness, who said: “It Avas the most dramatic situa tion that I have ever seen, and I lived for a long time in Mitchell county.” During his first term as sheriff of Mitch ell, Pritchard killed Avery Parker, his personal and political friend. Parker war. a merchant of Bakersville, the county seat: a good fellow’ when sober and a demon when drunk. One Sunday after noon, as people were passing by the door of his store, on their way from church, Parker, who had been drinking, suddenly came out and began shooting into the crowd. The town marshal heard the firing and hurried to the scene, along with the sheriff, the tAvo happening to be together. Pritchard sprang into the store, ordered Parker to surrender, and by Avay of reply received a bullet through his hand. He then shot Parker twice, and the latter fell. Parker’s son in-law, a man named Young, was one o! the crowd Avhich had gathered rapidly, and he opened tire upon the sheriff, his first* shot making tAvo holes in Pritchard's coat. TRIED AND EXONERATED. A pistol duel ensued, in which the wounded officer shot Young in the arm, breaking it. Pritchard ceased firing only when the chambers of his revolver were emptied. The sheriff was tried lor kill ing Parker. When the evidence avhs all in. Judge James 11. Merrimon, of Ashe ville, the judge presiding, ordered that the court room be cleared of all persons except officers of the court. He instruct ed the jury that the State had not made out a case. The. jury returned a verdict exonerating Pritchard. Young Avaa con victed of or pleaded guilty to an assault Avith a deadly weapon. During his same term in office the pro hibition forces eairied Mitchell county. The sheriff Avent around among the dis lillers and whisky dealers —many of whom Avere his friends—and told them that the >law was going to be enforced. They did rot at first take him seriously, but he filled the courts with cases against them, and stamped out the traffic. lie was again elected, and his second term was a tranquil one. In 1896 Mr. Pritchard’s third term began, and it Avas in June of the following year that the memorable fight occurred around which the inci dents of a novel have been grouped. The story is told by one of Pritchard’s most 71VE CENT 8. intimate friends. He aaxls a near neigh bor of Pritchard's, one of the first to roach him after the fight. ( ourt Avas in session at Bakersville, and it was reported to the presiding judge that one Monroe Garland Avas an outlaw, that he had shot five persons from ambush, two of them AA’omen. Thereupon Judge L. L. Green issued 1 a bench Avarrant for Garland and placed it in the hands of the sheriff, and the lat ter AA-ent in search of Garland, accompa nied by Columbus F. Blalock as a special deputy. They located Garland at the house of a man named Mosely, eleven miles from Bakersville, in a wild section of county, accessible only by a trail through the mountains. They reached the place and posted themselves in a patch of corn near the house. DEADLY CONFLICT WITH AN OUT LAW. Day was just breaking over the moun tains when the outlaw issued forth from Mosely's house. He passed near where the sheriff stood in Avait. The latter stepped out, laid a hand upon Garland’s shoulder, and said: “Hold on, Monroe.” Garland’s hand was in the breast pock et of his coat- He did not start Avhen the sheriff addressed him. He did not look around to see Avho it was. He asked no questions. He simply whirled around and shot Pritchard through the breast. The sheriff’s gun was out in an instant. Its sharp tones broke upon the sweet pehce of a mountainside morning. Bla lock, who was looking on, remembered afterward that from time to time little clouds of dust flew from Garland’s cloth ing. He was being riddled with bullet®. He retreated, and Pritchard followed. He climbed a fence, went a few yards , farther, and fell. Pritchard had not strength enough to climb the fence- On reaching it he knelt down, poised his pis tol upon a rail, and fired the last shot. Again a little cloud of dust flew from Garland’s prostrate body. Then Blalock supported Pritchard to the porch of Mose ly’s house. Blalock crossed over the , fence, where Garland lay, and returned, “Lum,” said the sheriff, “he’s killed ITI'O * “Well, George,” said Blalock, “you - have killed him.” , ‘‘That is some comfort,” said the sheriff. I He then gasped, and his limbs stretched | out in -what ever one thought was his ( death agony. Water was thrown in his . face and restoratives applied. He rather , remarkably revived, and Blalock rode ■ eleven miles over a rough mountain trail !to Bakersville in less than an hour to , bring medical aid. On the following day Pritchard was carried upon a letter to his home in Bakersville. On his recovery from his wound. Judge (then Senator) . Pritchard and others of his friends ob tained a position for him at the Capitol in Washington. They felt that his life in Mitchell county was altogether too stren uous for safety. George K. Pritchard goes to South Mc- Allister as a stranger, it is true, but not . by any means as a tenderfoot. FORTY ACRES AND A MULE. Dr. Whitaker is Illuminating Some Pretty Black Places in Recent History. To tho Editor: To those of us wl.o remember the days of reconstruction Fieedraan's Bureau, and “The 40 acres and a mule,” Dr. R. 11. Whitaker’s com munication in the News and Observer of the 28th of Feb. is but a refreshing of our memory, but to our younger peo ple who came on the stage of action since j 1865-70 who have not read that bit of his tory I suggest that they be sure and get the paper and read it. What Dr. W. says is true, but he could onlv give a few of the outlines, read what he says, then ask those who were living in those days, as to what our people in North Car olina and the South had to endure. It *s surprising that a man of Dr. Myers’ in- UJligence, should eiing to that old and long since exploded idea, that “Old John Brown.” was a saint, and “that while » his body lies mouldering in the clay, his soul goes marching on.” The true history puts him down as a fanatic, mur derer and robber. He with his band of robbers, not only robbed and killed white people but actually killed some negroes also' Thanks to Dr. Whitaker for his efforts to keep the history correct. As these things arc called up, some one os Dr> W. has done should set them straight. If we let such false statements go un challenged, *our younger people may be led to think they are true. I agree with Dr. W. it is strange how some people try to pervert the truth. M. O. SHERRILL. Raleigh, Feb. 20, 1004. WILL SOLVE LABOR PROBLEM. Mr. Cardie's Cotton. Corn and Peanut Planter Tested and Found Successful. (Special to News and Observer.), Dittleton, N. C.. March s.—Mr. H. J. Cardie had on exhibition and trial today h s new patent “cotton corn and peanut planter.” The same proved a '•omplcto success. It opens the row, distributes the fertilizer, beds the land opens the bed and sows the seed, and covers them all at one time, doing the work with one man aed two horses of six men and six horses. Tre machine promises to revolutionize the cotton industry in this country, it is a solution to a great extent of the present troublesome labor problem in the South. Ex-Sheriff J. T. Dawson, of Halifax coui ty, h resident oi Littleton, has lost three good horses by death supposed to be brought on by poisoning by an enemy Avithin i month. He was notified Tues day morning by telephone of the death of the third horse, one valued at $165. and went immediately to his farm, which is about- five miles from Halifax to in vestigate.—Littleton News Reporter.
The News & Observer (Raleigh, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
March 6, 1904, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75