136 GENERAL HISTORY. 



gists, whose duty it shall be to supervise the nomenclature of the fruits on exhibition, 

 and in case of error to correct the same. 



Rule 2. In making the necessary corrections they shall, for the convenience of 

 examining and awarding committees, do the same at as early a period as practicable ; 

 and, in making such corrections, they shall use cards readily distinguishable from those 

 used as labels by exhibitors, appending a mark of doubtfulness in case of uncer- 

 tainty. 



Section IV. 



Rule 1. In estimating the comparative values of collections of fruits committees 

 are instructed to base such estimates strictly upon the varieties in such collections 

 which shall have been correctly named by the exhibitor prior to action thereon by the 

 committee on nomenclature. 



Rule 2. In instituting such comparison of values committees are instructed to 

 consider: 1st. The values of the varieties for the purpose to wliich they may be 

 adapted ; 2d. The color, size and evenness of the specimens ; 3d. Their freedom 

 from the marks of insects and" other blemishes; 4th. The apparent carefulness in 

 handling and the taste displayed in the arrangement of the exhibit. 



Advance copies of these rules had been sent to P. Barry, R. Manning, and 

 also to President Wilder, inviting criticism with the purpose to render the 

 rules as perfect and as generally satisfactory as possible. President Wilder, 

 in his annual address, says: "This I have examined carefully, and I desire 

 to say that it meets my entire approval, and I tender my sincere thanks to 

 the Hon. Mr. Lyon, its chairman, and his associates, for the able and judi- 

 cious manner in which they have discharged their duty." 



Pending the adoption of the report of the committee W. C. Barry read a 

 code of rules adopted by the society at an early date in its history but which had 

 fallen into disuse. These, together with the rejDort, were referred to a special 

 committee, who, upon examination, finding that the rules now proposed 

 covered all embraced in the former, and something in addition, they recom- 

 mended the substitution of those now reported, which was accordingly done. 



A committee consisting of W. C. Barry, of New York, C. W. Garfield, of 

 Michigan, and W. U. Spooner, of Massachusetts, appointed to designate the 

 place for the next meeting of the society. The committee reported in favor 

 of accepting the invitation of the Indiana Horticultural Society, The ques- 

 tion of adopting the report of the committee being under consideration, it 

 was proposed to accept the standing invitation of tiie Michigan Horticultural 

 Society instead, and in the course of the discussion the Michigan delegates 

 were invited to express their wishes, which they did, disclaiming any desire 

 to discourage the acceptance of the invitation of Indiana; but giving assur- 

 ance that if Michigan were chosen its people could be relied on to fully meet 

 the requirements and expectations of the society. After some discussion 

 Michigan was fixed upon as the next place of meeting. 



Detroit being the commercial metropolis, was naturally first thought of as 

 the place of meeting, but, at the request of the Michigan delegation, this was 

 left to be determined by the State Society. 



C. W. Garfield having been appointed member of the general fruit com- 

 mittee for Michigan, made a full and valuable report for this State which 

 was highly complimented by P. Barry, the chairman of the committee. 



