92 ANNUAL REPORT 



ency is to increase the number of these laws, and to throw protection 

 around the general public. I think that is legislation in the right 

 direction. I know many think that every individual ought to go it 

 alone, but if our law could be amended somewhat it might be better; 

 of course it is imposssble to do that before next winter. It seems to 

 me we cannot change the law now. We don't know now how it is going 

 to work, and if all we want to do is to amend it to make it better, we 

 had better take no action at this meeting. 



Mr. Pearce. I think there are a good many improvements we can 

 make. I didn't know but we might get ourselves into (rouble. I 

 went over to St. Paul. I have a brother there that has been in the 

 law business for a good many years, and he looked this matter up 

 carefully, and told me that any nurseryman could buy and sell and 

 use, so far as the law was concerned; if anybody was a mind to con- 

 test it, which they would, it would beset aside. Now, on the strength 

 of that, I bought rose bushes. 



Mr. Latham. Let's send him up. [Laughter.] 



President Elliot. This law was not intended to prevent a man from 

 selling stock and conducting a legitimate and honest business. I 

 know the law has met with opposition; it has, certainly. So it was 

 in regard to our insurance commissioner. Men that were doing an 

 honest business were protected as well after the passage of the law. 

 It was only those that were committing fraud that needed to be sup- 

 pressed. You will find by reading this law carefully that the object 

 is simply to prevent fraud; it is right there in a nut shell. 



Mr. Gould. It seems to me there is great danger of innocent dealers 

 being prosecuted for damages; there certainly is. 



President Elliot. Not if they are honest. 



Mr. Grould. I claim to be just as honest as other persons, yet I had 

 a claim brought against me of 810,000, and if I had not defended 

 myself I would have lost it, and I was not to blame at all; it was clear 

 malice. Here is a case: Friend Pearce has admitted that he has 

 transgressed this law. Suppose I get into a quarrel with hira, and I 

 take advantage of this. It seems to me there is a weak point in the 

 bill. I wouldn't go into the nursery business with that law standing 

 there, because I know I couldn't go into it and do a decent business 

 and be restrained; and these gentlemen won't be. 



Mr Sias. I haven't a particle of doubt about the good intention 

 of this law, and never had. But it reminds me of a certain party 

 that I knew about in New England, a sort of bully, who lost some 

 property; he traced the matter up and came to the conclusion that 



