PllOCKKDINGS OF THK SUMMKIl MKHTING 35 



amendment proposed to the yellows law, inserting the same provision 

 that we have in this, where the commissioner has to destroy trees, 

 where he had to act under the yelloAvs law. The law now provides that 

 the township shall pay the expense, and the township board by suit 

 collect it from the owner of the premises. That is very cumbersome and 

 not very satisfactory. Some one had a bill introduced to amend that, 

 to tax it up, the same as we provide in this bill, against the premises. 

 I do not think the bill passed. I don't know what became of it. An 

 attempt was also made to amend the package-marking law, and that 

 bill passed the house. Instead of marking them in pounds, the capacity 

 of the package in pounds, it was to be marked in bushels and fractions 

 of a bushel, and the bill passed the house very satisfactorily and went 

 o\er to the senate, and they included all fruit packages, specifically 

 naming them, berry boxes and all kinds, and insisted on that amend- 

 ment, which rendered the bill impractical and the amendments were 

 never concurred in by the house. I do not remember of any other horti- 

 cultural legislation in particular. I do not have any in mind at present. 



Mr. Cook: Do you understand that this bill does away with the yel- 

 lows commissioners? 



Mr. Graham: No, it works right in connection with them. 



Mr. Cook: How does the yellows commissioner examine for San Jos^ 

 scale, or is that a separate matter? 



Mr. Graham: That is in the compulsory spraying law, an amendment 

 to that. San Jos^ scale is included among other insects. 



Mr. Lawton: I understand in the compulsory spraying law there is 

 no penalty attached to a lack of obedience to the law. Isn't that true? 



Mr. Graham: It is practically a copy of the yellows law. I have the 

 law here. Here is the penal provision. Section G : "If any owner, town- 

 ship officer, or commissioner neglects or refuses to comply with the 

 provisions of this law as set forth in the preceding section, and within 

 the time therein specified, such person shall be deemed guilty of a mis- 

 demeanor and punished by fine not exceeding fifty dollars, or imprison- 

 ment in the county jail not exceeding sixty days, or both such fine and 

 imprisonment, in the discretion of the court, and any justice of the 

 peace of the township where such trees or vines shall be growing shall 

 have jurisdiction thereof." This is just that much stronger than the 

 yellows law, as to include the commissioners. Under the yellows law 

 the owner or occupant is subject to fine or imprisonment for non- 

 compliance, but the commissioner is not subject to a fine for the neglect 

 of his duty, and we put him in the same category with the owner of the 

 orchard and make him subject to a fine. 



Mr. Lawton: Is that the spraying law? 



Mr. Graham: This is the spraying law. 



Mr. Harris: Is the commissioner compelled to act, except as his 

 attention is called to it, or is he supposed to go forth and examine for 

 himself and see that these things do not exist? Would he be allowed 

 to go forth and examine? 



Mr. Graham (reading): "It shall be the duty of said commissioners 

 or any one of them (this is section four, after the appointment provision). 

 ui>on or without complaint, whenever it comes to their notice that any 

 orchard, fruit trees, or vines are infested with canker-worm or other 

 injurious insects or contagious diseases, within their township, to pro- 

 ceed without delay to examine such orchard or vineyard." It would 



