30 STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY 



into that complaint much myself. There is some justice in it though, I 

 am quite sure, because I have iuvestijiated euouoh myself to know that 

 there is sometimes a foundation for the comi)lainls that are made that 

 producers do not receive all that belongs to them and they are not 

 treated with the degree of fairness that they should have on the part 

 of the commission man. 



Mr. Barnett: 1 think the gentleman did not quite understand my 

 remark. It was not as to the practices alluded to there, and the rates 

 of transportation have been reduced to ten cents per 100 pounds. Xow', 

 then, what would be a fair estimate in the mind of the speaker, for the 

 Avork which he has outlined very fairly and justly, that the commission 

 merchant should receive for the performance of that work? In other 

 words, is the rate per cent, of commission too high, in his judgment? 



]\[r. Lawton: The usual rate of commission is ten per cent. The 

 baskets are rated at (Mght pounds. They take oft" tians]»ortation and 

 take off ten per cent., and send the producer the balance. I do not know 

 that ten per cent, is too much; I don't know W'hether it is or not. I 

 think ])erhaps if a commission man received a large quantity of fruit 

 he could aftord to handle it for less. Of course, in a smaller quantity, I 

 don't know about it. I am not complaining about the rate of commission, 

 the percentage charged for selling, whether it is ten per cent, or five or 

 (4ght. so much as I am that whatever the percentage is he should confine 

 himself to that and give the producer all that belongs to him. 



Mr. Barnett: I thought the speaker believed the rate of commission 

 ought to be reduced. The other matter, I believe, comes up this after- 

 noon. 



HORTICULTURAL LEGISLATION. 

 BY HON. R. D. GRAHAM OF GRAND RAPIDS. 



I have not taken time to prepare any paper on this topic, but have 

 brought with me a list of bills that recently became laws, and also the 

 laws of 1895 with which I presume you are all familiar. I think the 

 only new law of 1895 is what is knoAvn as the "coni])ulsory s])raying 

 law," and I presume you are all familiar with that; if not. I will try to 

 answer any questions in regard to it. It is simply a question of compul- 

 sory spraying for diseases and insect pests. That law was amended at the 

 beginning of the last session, at the request of the State Horticultural 

 department so as to include the San Jos(S scale. It is a very slight 

 amendment. The only change in that law is this: ''Provided, that if 

 such trees and vines are infested with San Jose'' or other scale insect, 

 such trees or vines shall be either effectually sprayed or destroyed." 

 This is the only amendnu^nt to that. Two years ago it was not known 

 that w^e had San Jos($ scale in Michigan, and indeed it was not until 

 very recently, and about as soon as it was discovered this law was amend- 

 ed "so as to give the department the opp<»i-t unity of which they have 

 availed themselves. I understand, and are doing their best to exterminate 

 this pest in the state. 



