THE GARDENERS' CHRONICLE OF AMERICA. 



473 



LORD & BURNHAM EXHIBIT, EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR VIEW. 



We believe it is the first time at any show that a 

 complete greenhouse has been shown by a greenhouse 

 concern. 



Lord & Burnham certainly deserve credit for the initi- 

 ative they have taken in the matter. Their exhibit was a 

 complete greenhouse, showing the workroom, with all 

 its equipments, boiler and even the heating pipes vmder 

 the benches of the greenhouse. 



The greenhouse was equipped with special cast iron 

 benches. The transparencies which hung around the eave 

 line of the house attracted notable attention. 



The feature of interest about Hitchings & Co.'s house 

 was the many interesting photographs, in panorama shape, 

 wiiich they hung against the rear gable of their house, on 

 the inside. 



The departure in making the entrance to the green- 

 house sort of a garden trellis effect attracted a good deal 

 of attention. 



The Pierson U-Bar Co. and Weathered & Co. also ex- 

 hibited a house of their particular style of construction 

 work. 



This seems to be one more intimate move toward link- 

 ing the greenhouse up with the garden feeling. 



The Congressional Free Seed Distribution. 

 Its History and Its Abuse 



Two years ago, in one of the many debates the 

 House has held over the Congressional free seed dis- 

 tribution, a representative illuminated the subject 

 thus : 



"A voter was asked what he thought of his Con- 

 gressman, and he replied: 'Oh, his arguments don't 

 go down and his seeds don't come up.' " 



But whether the arguments of the Congressman go 

 down or not, whether the seeds live or die, somehow 

 or other, through stress and storm, in spite of protest, 

 ridicule and argument, Congress sticks to the free seed 

 business. It has stuck to it for lo, these many years, 

 and shows no sign of loosening its grip. 



On principle, there has never been any justification 

 for the free distribution of ordinary garden seeds and 

 flower seeds. The only people vitally concerned are 

 the seedsmen of the country. They have earnestly 

 protested and at times vigorously fought against the 

 legislation authorizing the distribution. In return, 

 they have been assailed for maintaining a lobby at 

 \\'ashington, and members bursting with what re- 

 sembled indignation have belabored the seed interests 

 for trying to deprive the farmer of something to which 

 they said he was righteously entitled. 



It is not seriously argued that the free distribution 

 of seeds as practiced now by members of Congress is 

 of much good to anyone. It is sometimes said that 

 it has resulted in encouraging enough people to grow 

 gardens and raise flowers to be an actual benefit to 

 the seed growers. This is an opinion rather than a 

 fact susceptible of proof. If it could be shown, it 



would be an argument rather for a more systematic 

 distribution of seeds by the Department of Agriculture 

 than for the miscellaneous scattering about of the 

 seeds by the politicians. Apart from the expense, the 

 chief evils of the free seed distribution are: It is 

 wrong in principle. It is wasteful and extravagant. 

 It is a distribution on political lines and if made at all 

 should be absolutely impartial and nonpartisan. It 

 interferes with the legitimate business of the seeds- 

 men. The support back of it is political, not agricultural 



To prove that the support for the Congressional free 

 seed distribution is political and personal and not in- 

 spired by a sincere desire to promote the general wel- 

 fare of agriculture in this country one has only to 

 examine into the history of the annual appropriations 

 for this purpose. If the real object were to help agri- 

 culture, to get more people in this country- to raise 

 more and better vegetables and flowers, then it is per- 

 fectly clear the distribution would be so arranged that 

 it would not be wasteful, but systematic, and would 

 go to the people who want seeds and use them when 

 received. Many efforts have been made in Congress 

 to get the distribution put into the hands of the De- 

 partment of Agriculture and taken out of the hands of 

 the members of House and Senate. But invariably 

 the politicians who think they perceive ways to win 

 votes with seeds furnished free and franked by Uncle 

 .'-^am have prevented such a reform. They have in- 

 sisted on keeping the distribution in their own hands. 



The seedsmen have many times been roundly de- 

 nounced on the floor of House or Senate for bavins' 



