14 



horticulture: 



July 6, 1907 



THE CONGRESSIONAL FREE SEED 

 DISTRIBUTION. 



(rapcT read before tlie American Seed 

 Trade Association by Alexander Forbes.) 

 {CoKtinncd froui page Si4). 



The Truckers and Market Garden- 

 ers are also opposed to the Congres- 

 sional Free Seed Distribution, as will 

 be shown by the following: 



"Tbe SoLtli Te.tas Fruit and Ti-uclt 

 Growers' Association, cousisliiis J>t affil- 

 iated local associations tUroui;luiut bouUi 

 Texas and the Gulf coast country, tlje 

 totJil membership of which is ;.vei- l,dUO, 

 passed unanimously the following i evolu- 

 tions during their regular intetmg at 

 Edna, November 13 andj 14. IWOU; , 



Whereas, The free garden seed received 

 from members of Congress at the expense 

 of the General Government are usually ot 

 varieties known to be unsuited to the sou 

 and climate of South Texas, and hence 

 are worthless to us; and 



Whereas, These seeds are sent to us bj 

 our liepresentatives in Congress under tbe 

 mistaken idea that a favor is ''enig coii- 

 ferred, which mistaken idea we hereby 

 wish to correct: and r-onoral 



Whereas. The expense to the G?neial 

 Government of obtaining seed and distrib- 

 uting them is a considerable item, and a 

 sertous economic waste wholly nnjustmed 

 by the results obtained; and 



W'hereas, The amount of money spent 

 animal y for seed distribution if appor- 

 tioned among the United States experi- 

 ment stations, would be a tb<';;«;;"i, t\f„«„« 



more beneficial to each of us than as iion 

 ^ent for it would enable more mvesti- 

 g?itors to work on horticultnial m'o >l^m« 

 the solution of which would be ot li^^tni. 

 value to every vegetable grower and to 

 iiio whole state: therefore be it 



IJesovcd, That we, the South Texas 

 Fruit and TiucU Growers' Association, 

 th-iuk our Representatives in Congress foi 

 {be post favors in the way of free seeds 

 [,ut assure them that these t^iy"''^. ,"-^': 

 mistaken kindness on their part ;''*■" 

 Condemn the practice of free distribution 

 o? ga"-den seeds as an economic was e 

 vvhoUv unjustifiable; that in the fului 

 ^e will not occept from the Go^";™"^^ / 

 free garden seeds; that we urge on Ke v 

 resent.'. fives, as n favor which we will 

 heartily appreciate to ^S^ ;^''gLj^. 

 bill appropriating funds for the ilii=tiibu 

 tig of free garden seeds, and to use thei 

 nflnence to "have the amount thus s.ved 

 approiiriated to the experimeut sta ions of 

 he country, whose v,aluable work is in- 

 dorsed bv oil right-fhinking men. 



Resolved FurthSr. That a .-opy of these 

 resolutions be sent each Congressional 

 Eep-esentative from South Texas and to 

 "he press of the State with a request for 

 its publica^ion^_ ,^^^^,^^^ 



Palacios, President. 

 S. A. McHENRY. 



Santa Maria. Vice President. 

 C. A. WALTON, 

 Victoria, Secretary-Treasurer. 

 The Agricultural Experiment Sta- 

 tions in every State are decidedly op- 

 nosed to the distribution and the De- 

 partment of Agriculture itself is now 

 arayed against it. Even as far back 

 as 1903. Secretary Wilson wrote 

 with regard to the securing and dis- 

 tributing of miscellaneous garden 



"With regard to the securing and dis- 

 ti-lbuting of miscellaneous garden and 

 fir ver seed the fact remains Ibat Ihis 

 work does not accomplish . the ends for 

 which the law was originally framed. 

 There are collected, put up. and distrib- 

 uted now, on Congressional orders, uearj 

 40,n(W,000 packets of iniscellan.'ons ve^^ 

 etable and flower seeds each year. These 

 seeds are the best that can be obtained 

 K the market, but from the fact that 

 large numbers of packets are wa..l-Ml, the 

 seeds obtained can be of standard «orls 

 onW srch as .ire to be found everywhere 

 fjr sale in the open market. .\s. there 

 Is no practical ob,1eet to be gained m dU- 

 irihi^ting this kind of seed, it scenjs vev 

 desirable that some change bo made, T" 

 this end. it would seem wise to Iim t mu 

 wok .entireiy to tl.c securiui: nnd d.s 

 tribuduff of seeds, plants, etc. .-1 new 

 and rare sf.rts." 



And later by the Secretary's letter 

 to the Hon. .T. A. Tawney, dated 



March 15, 1906, from which the fol- 

 lowing is an extract: 



"In my former letter I commented on 

 the value of this miscellaneous distribu- 

 tion of garden and flower seeds, calling 

 attention to the fact that it was difficult to 

 state what such value might be. I also 

 emphasized the fact that in my judgment 

 the money thus expended could be put to 

 better use." 



If further proof were needed that 

 the Department of Agriculture was in 

 favor of a change in the distribution, 

 it can be found in Dr. Galloway's tes- 

 timony before the House Committee 

 on Agriculture, dated December 17, 

 1906. This testimony was prefaced 

 by the remark that Dr. Galloway 

 would present the Department's view 

 and represent the Secretary in this 

 matter. His view, therefore, may be 

 considered the views of the Depart- 

 ment. 



"If Congress, in its judgment, believes 

 the time has come to make a change, thi 

 Department stands leady to indicate in 

 wh.at manner tliis change can be made and 

 in" what wav the funds now appropriated 

 might be used for the upbuilding ot plant 

 induslries. I am here lo prc'sciil Ihis 

 plan and to invite yonr siiggesfnms and 

 f-riti^-isms I'pon anv jioints regarding it. 

 The plan that we want to suggest has for 

 it.s object ^ ^, . , 



First. The abandonment of the miscei- 

 lanerus distribution of ordinary seeds. 



Second. I'he securing, through all the 

 sources at the command of the Depart 

 nieiit, of valuable new seeds, plants, bulbs, 

 etc, w!iieh are being developed at home 

 and' which are known' only locally, and the 

 distribution and testing of these new- 

 things in regions where it is believed they 

 mav have value. 



Tliii'd. The securing from abroad of new 

 seeds, plants, etc., for introduction into 

 this country, and the upl)uilding of agrl- 

 cnltural iu'dnstries as a result of this 

 work." 



He then went on to eiiumerate the 

 number of pro.iects which the Depart- 

 ment had worked out, some of which 

 were described to the Committee, 

 seventy-five in all, including such sub- 

 jects as tl|^ extension of Arabian al- 

 falfa in the southwest, extension of 

 alfalfa-growing into states where not 

 now a staple crop, distribution of new 

 varieties of cotton, the improvement 

 ot cowpeas, introduction and testing 

 of alkali-resistant crops, sugar-beet 

 seed growing, bulb growing in the 

 United States, etc., etc. 



It will therefore be seen that the 

 seedsmen are not the only body who 

 oppose the Congressional Free Seed 

 Distribution. As has been shown, we 

 have also the Farmers, the Market 

 Gardeners and Truckers, the Agricul- 

 tural Experiment Stations, the Agri- 

 cultural Press, and last, but not least, 

 the Department of Agriculture. All 

 these are opposed to the present man- 

 ner of distribution. Who. then, is in 

 favor of it? Congress, and Congress 

 alone! Why does Congress want this 

 distribution of seeds conducted on 

 these lines? The reasons, in my opin- 

 ion, are purely political. It enables 

 the Congressmen to come in touch 

 annually with their rural or suburban 

 constitiients. It enables Congress to 

 shake hands, so to speak, with their 

 farmer friends, and there is no doubt 

 some of their constituents feel 

 "tickled" that their Congressmen re- 

 member them in this way once a 

 vear, and small as it may appear, this 

 same free seed distribution is consid- 

 ered by the average Congressman, es- 

 pecially from the rural districts, a 

 valuable political asset. He is there- 

 fore anxious to remember as many of 

 his constituents as he can, by sending 

 them this petty package of common 



garden seeds. If the distribution was 

 confined to new, rare and valuable va- 

 rieties, that were worth something, 

 each Congressman would probably 

 have to be content with sending 1,000 

 packages annually, whereas, by the 

 present plan, he can send out, under 

 his own frank, 12,500 packages of five 

 packets each, or 62,500 packets in all, 

 and so hungry are some Congressmen 

 for these seeds that they exchange 

 their documents with fellow members 

 from the Cities, for their seed quotas. 

 Hon. Chas. R. Davis of Minnesota ac- 

 knowledged to the Agricultural Com- 

 mittee of the House that he bought 

 15,000 to 25,000 packages over and 

 above his quota, that he bought them 

 for cash at reduced figures, some 

 from the Department and some from 

 agents around the corridors, who 

 claim that they have gotten them 

 from certain members who did not 

 need them and who have them for 

 sale. (Proof of this can be found on 

 Page 5 of the pamphlet on the dis- 

 tribution of seeds, 'at the hearing be- 

 fore the Agricultural Committee ot 

 the House, Dec. 12, 1906.) The fol- 

 lowing table, prepared by the Depart- 

 ment on Agriculture, will also show 

 how systematically this thing is done: 



Congressional Distribution of Vege- 

 tables and Flower Seeds 1905-6. 



(1) Number of Congressmen who dis- 

 tributed more than 20,000 packages 



i>t seed 59 



(2) Number who distributed more than 

 their regular quotas (12,300 pack- 

 ages) but less than 20,000 pack- 

 ages , • lo' 



(3) Number who distributed not ex- 

 ceeding, npproximati ly, their reg- 

 ular quotas, but more than 3.000 

 packages ■ •••■,••■ 



(41 Number «ho distributed less 'hin 

 ,-i.iNiii packages but more than 1,000 

 packages Vi ' ' ' ^^ 



(5) Number who distributed less tlian 

 1,000 packages ^^ 



Total 478 



There is at the Capitol a regular 

 clearing house, so to speak, for 

 handling members' quotas. Can it be 

 wondered at. that it is a hard matter 

 to root tiut or change this Congres- 

 sional Free Seed Distribution, it is 

 so dear to the heart of some Con- 

 gressmen that it seems to them a 

 part and parcel of their very exis- 

 tence to keep this distribution intact 

 as it is now? It is my belief that it 

 this distribution was confined to new 

 and rare varieties, as it should be and 

 as the original Act provides, the ma- 

 jority of Congressmen would have no 

 intei-est in it. There is no use in de- 

 nying the fact that what Congress 

 wants is not what is new, rare and 

 valuable in connection with the free 

 seed distribution, but the greatest 

 quantity of the most ordinary kinds, 

 that can be bought for the least 

 amount of money. 



PUBLICATIONS RECEIVED. 



The " National Chrysanthemum So- 

 ciety of England has just issued its 

 schedule of prizes for the year 19it7. 

 Til ere will be three regular exhibi- 

 tions at the Crystal Palace, the first 

 on October 2 and :3. the second on 

 Nn\ember ,6, 7 and 8 and the third on 

 December 4 and 5. There will be a 

 nuirket show at Covent Garden on 

 December 11. Full schedules of prizes 

 are given in this publication, also lists 

 or iiiembeis, rules and regulations and 

 a lot of other pertinent information. 



