194 



Journal of Agriculture. 



[ii April, 1910. 



Concerning importation, it is not intended that such will be more than 

 lightly touched upon here. The grower is, as a rule, but little concerned 

 with the procedure governing imports. Taking then these measures in 

 their order, as given above, the first is — 



Tlie Vegetation Diseases Act.-— The original Vegetation Diseases Act 

 No. 1432 was passed in 1896. It belonged to a class of legislation which 

 was then in the experimental stage. Embraced within its scope, there- 

 fore, was provision only for inspection of products imported from abroad 

 or from other States or for those grown in our own orchards. No provision 

 was made for dealing with local market inspection or Inter-State exports. 

 The measure was, moreo\1er, a temporary one (being passed for three 

 years only) in order to show whether, from results at the time of its 

 expiration, justification would exist for its continuance. At the end of 

 its term of probation, howe\Ter, the beneficial effects of its operations were 



PRELIMINARY OPERATIONS, 



so manifest that a short Act to place the measure permanently upon the 

 statutes was passed with but little opposition. In order to strengthen 

 the work of inspection of imports (in the matter of checking the spread of 

 disease) an amended Vegetation Diseases Act was passed on the 23rd De- 

 cember, 1 901. This measure provided against the sale of fruits or plants 

 infested with any insect or fungus disease, whether the same be dead or 

 in any stage of living existence. Provision was made for a maximum 

 penalty of ^10 again.st offenders in this direction. Power was given the 

 inspectors to enter any stall, market, shop or place and to examine any 

 trees, plants or vegetables exposed for sale. The effects of this legislation 

 have Ix-en shown in the immense improvement in the general quality of the 

 locally-.sold fruits. 



Objection to this measure has been made in some quarters on the ground 

 that it is harsh ; and the argument has been adduced that an inspector may, 



