109 



lias any facts to bring to us and lay before us, we are willing 

 to accept them. We want facts; we want knowledge. We have 

 heard a great deal about scientific inquiry. I understand that 

 science is the pursuit of knowledge, and that its business is to 

 get facts. Science simply describes. It has nothing to do with 

 explanations. Therefore, if science will describe to us the things 

 that we are trying to learn, we Avill be greatly indebted to science, 

 and we by no means are in a position, nor do we wish it to be so 

 understood that we attempt to turn our backs upon scientific 

 inquiry. The truth is that this Commission wants all the facts 

 it can get. It wants the help of every scientist in the land who 

 is interested enough to pursue a line of work and make deduc- 

 tions therefrom that are useful in a work of this kind. We want 

 to go hand in hand with everybody who can lend an iota of 

 strength to this work; but we do not care to join hands Avith 

 those who see simply gloom and failure, and are unwilling to 

 make any decent effort to determine whether or not a thing can 

 or cannot be done. The experiments that are being made by 

 the Commission are for the purpose of finding out. We heard a 

 great deal about the ineffeotualness of the cutting-out method 

 of combating this disease, or checking its spread. I do not know 

 upon what foundation or upon what premises these conclusions 

 are drawn. We have attempted to follow the progress of this 

 inquiry and the knoAvledge on the subject as closely as possible, 

 and yet gentlemen tell us that it is absolutely ineffectual. Now 

 I would like them to tell us why it is ineffectual, and how much 

 cutting out they have done, and what real knowledge they have 

 derived from that kind of work. If it is going to turn upon 

 someone's opinion, then I would like this meeting to believe that 

 probably one man's opinion is as good as another's. If it is not, 

 let us find out why. I would like to ask Mr. Stewart, in respect 

 to one sentence in his paper this afternoon, which you will re- 

 member was one continued negation, I would like to ask him to 

 tell us why in that paper he broke away from the negative atti- 

 tude and, in the very closing moments, took a positive stand in 

 that he recommended the restriction of the movement of nursery 

 .stock. Now if there is no use in cutting out a diseased tree, if 

 there is no real effectual value in doing any work of any kind, if 

 we are simply to sit down and let things go and take their course, 



