147 



we have never been able to get anything of that kind; in fact, whenever 

 we did get a law that was worth a cent, it has been declared unconstitu- 

 tional. There was one that boxes should be disinfected at the point to 

 which the goods were shipped before they were returned, and that was 

 beaten by the fruit growers; and I am happy to say that the very fruit 

 growers that beat the law carried these pests home in their boxes, and 

 have as many now as anybody; and one of those men expressed himself 

 in the ante-room of the Senate that they were isolated, and could take care 

 of their own fruit, and everybody else's fruit could be destroyed, and they 

 would get a big price for theirs. I think the time has passed when we can 

 do anything effectual in fighting fruit pests by law. We must make a law 

 unto ourselves; we must each and every one of us put a place in our 

 expense book for the means of fighting these insect pests and preventing 

 their introduction into our own orchards, and endeavor to induce our neigh- 

 bors who do not make a specialty of fruit growing, but have a few fruit 

 trees, join with us, for they are the most dangerous ones we have — those who 

 do not make a specialty of it. It has gone too far, so far as laws are con- 

 cerned; they will be ineffectual; but as to the matter of appropriating for 

 this Board, I do not know how large an appropriation might be made that 

 would not result in benefit in proportion to the amount of money put in 

 the treasury for their purposes. It can be made of immeasurable benefit 

 to the State. 



Dr. Kimball: We have now in California a State Board of Horticulture, 

 they have been for six years giving serious and continuous attention to the 

 discussion of the fruit pests as well as to the general interests of the or- 

 chard] sts of the State, and it seems to me that any committee that should 

 be appointed by this convention to frame resolutions to go to the Legislature, 

 should act under this Board. Now, I question whether we can wipe out 

 all the laws relating to insect pests, and why — because San Francisco right 

 at the threshold of the State, through its vast importations of flowers and 

 shrubs, and trees from all countries, is the point from which these pests 

 have been distributed all over the State, and it is the point from which we 

 might expect additions to those that now exist. We must have somebody 

 right there at hand who takes cognizance of every importation and watch 

 carefully that new pests are not spread all over the land. I know that good 

 has been accomplished during the past two years from the inspection of 

 goods from China and Japan, and it seems to me there must be a watchful 

 guardian right at the threshold. 



Mr. Johnston: I hope this motion will prevail, and that one half of the 

 committee appointed will be constituted of members of the State Board 

 of Horticulture, and that all of our work in this direction shall be done 

 through that body, for the reason that it is an organization recognized by 

 the State, and with which this body is expected to cooperate. In regard 

 to repealing laws, I do not believe we have too much law on the subject. 

 I think that the laws on the statute books to-day are good laws, and well 

 adapted to the wants of the people. What we do lack is education of the 

 fruit growers themselves upon the importance of this matter; what we want 

 is cooperation among the fruit growers and unanimity of action, for what- 

 ever laws you may have would be of no consequence unless the people 

 were in unison with those laws. They have laws in South Carolina by 

 which every male citizen over twenty-one years of age would be entitled to 

 a vote, and to have that vote counted; they do not do it. We have laws 

 upon the statute book by which these insect pests can be exterminated; 

 they are not exterminated, and we know they are not; but we believe that 

 if the laws were properly administered, and if the people were educated 



