88 MASSACHUSETTS HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY 



both in this State and in the States that have been protected by the 

 work you have done, indorse your work and will see that it is con- 

 tinued. When have we ever undertaken to control an epidemic 

 of any sort with any previous assurance of success? The boll- 

 weevil is still doing business at the old stand, and extending his 

 range year by year; but does anyone question the wisdom of trying 

 to control the boll-weevil? Out of this work has come untold 

 good to Southern agriculture. 



Next week, in Harrisburg, Pa., will be held an interstate conven- 

 tion to consider what shall be done about the chestnut bark disease. 

 We may hope that the convention will be adequately attended by 

 both practical and scientific men, and that the difficulties and 

 dangers, as well as the urgency and necessity of an aggressive 

 campaign will be adequately presented. We can afford to abide 

 by the decision of this convention. 



Bibliography. 



(1) Humphrey, C. J. Fungi which live on structural timber. 

 Appendix H (pages 383-389), in Bull. 120, American Railway 

 Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association. 1910. 



(2) A contribution to our knowledge of mine fungi. 



Phytopathology, vol. 1, p. 108. 1911. 



(3) O'Gara, P. J. Pear blight and its control upon the Pacific 



Coast. Medford Printing Co., Medford, Ore. 1910. 



(4) Waite, M. B. The cause and prevention of pear blight. 



Year-book for 1895, pages 295-300, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 

 1896. 



(5) Hedgcock, G. G. Some little known diseases of conifers found 



in connection with a disease survey of our National Forests. 

 Science, N. S. 29: 913-914. 1909. 



(6) Notes on some diseases of trees in our National 



Forests. Science, N. S. 31: 751. 1910. 



(7) A new polypore on the incense cedar. Mycologia, 2: 



155-156. 1910. 



(8) Spaulding, Perley. The treatment of damping-off in conif- 

 erous seedlings. Circ. No. 4, Bureau of Plant Industry. 

 1908. 



