92 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF ONTARIO. 



The Parry people were as much astounded at the revelation as were the Government 

 Entomologists, and promptly destroyed over $1,000 worth of stock, and as ptomptly 

 stopped shipping anything from their nursery, buying from localries that are even now 

 beyond the area of infection, the trees whereby to fill their orders. From this time on 

 this firm has followed this policy and bent their whole efiorts on stamping out the peat 

 on their premises, sparing no expense in the accomplishment of their purpose I cannot 

 myself find words to express my own commendation of the course of this firm, and I do 

 not believe that the American people will overlook or underestimate the public spirited 

 acts of the Messrs. Parry. Had all of those who are engaged in your vocation, and were 

 aimiliarly unfortunate, followed this course, the entomologist and the agricultural press 

 might have been spared the unenviable task of exposing their disgrace. The introduc- 

 tion of the San Jose scale from California was a sad piece of carelessness on ( he part of at 

 least four firms of nurserymen, as either one, had they applied to the Department of 

 Agriculture, miHit have learned and avoided the danger, as the Division of Entomology 

 had, at the time the introduction took place, two of its special field agents in California, 

 and would most certainly have pointed out the danger had an opportunity been presented. 

 Up to the time that the proprietors were notified of the presence of the pest, then, careless- 

 ness only can be charged against them, and they should be judged according to their acts 

 since that time. The Parry Brothers, when the pest was found established on their 

 premises, asked that the fact be withheld from publication, as it would otherwise ruin 

 their business. Considering the efiorts being made by them, it was certainly no more 

 than just to give them an opportunity to show what they could and would do, and as we 

 yet have no reason to suspect that they have betrayed the confidence placed in them by 

 the Government and State Entomologists, and, be&ides, they have willingly furnished 

 entomologists with a list of purchasers who were liable to have received the pest with trees 

 sold from their nursery, prior to this discovery of its presence among their nursery stock. 

 What more could they have done to undo the wrong, or prevent its continuation ? 



Soon after the foregoing outbreaks of this pest had been investigated, another badly 

 infested nursery was located in New Jersey, that of the Lovett Company, at Little Sil- 

 ver, and which, as we now know, was infected in precisely the same way and at trie fame 

 time as the first. This nursery was known to be infested as early as September, 1894, 

 when it was visited by the entomologist of the Experiment Station of that State, and the 

 fact pointed out to the officers of the company, who promised to destroy and disinfect 

 their trees before sending them out to their customers. The New Jersey entomologist 

 took upon himself the responsibility of stating in public print that these precautions were 

 being taken, and that everything possible was being done by the company, whose name he 

 did not give, probably supposing that he was dealing with men who would readily see that 

 their own interest would lead to such a course, and was not as active in holding them to 

 their promise as he would have been justified in doing. It was' late in December — over 

 three months later — that I received twigs of apple infested by this scale from Clermont 

 county, Ohio, and on promptly visiting the orchard found some twenty-five trees literally 

 covered with the pest, and three -time3 as many more infested to a large deg-ree, but all 

 in such a condition that sixty of them have since been dug up and b'irned. These trees 

 had been purchased from the Lovett Company and planted out in spring of 1890. 

 In a note given to the daily press on the discovery of this serious outbreak, I 

 stated the fact that the tree3 had been purchased from this firm, but did not 

 accuse them of having, at that time, the scale among their trees, though the fact 

 was not unknown to me Promptly on the appearance of my note came a letter to 

 the Director of the Ohio Experiment Station, which ran as follows : 



Little Silver, N.J., December 28, 1894. 



Director Experiment Station, Columbus, Ohio : 



Dear Sir, — One of our customers has sent us a clipping from a Columbus paper, in which is stated 

 that trees owned by one Mr Nicolis have been found infected with the San Jose scale. You will please 

 give us all the information you can in regard to this matter. We would like very much, indeed, to have 

 some branches from the trees referred to for examination ourselves. We have made a critical examination 

 of our trees here in the nursery and also fruiting trees, using the miscroscope, and ctai find no trace what- 

 ever upon any of them of the San Jose" or other tcale. Having read reports upon the San Jose" tcale, we 

 are confident chat we could detect this insect if it existed upon our trees. 



Yours truly, 

 (Signed) The Lovett Company. H. 



