MISCELLANEOUS PAPERS. 
141 
No reputable inspector will, or has ever been willing to make the definite 
istatement that these organisms did not occur in any nursery, hence, all 
reliable certificates of inspection simply show that an expert has not found 
evidences of the presence of certain insect pests or plant diseases. There 
are occasionally outbursts of criticisms to the effect that certificates are un- 
reliable, and cannot be taken as indicating the condition of stock to which 
they are attached. Let me say that if the nurseryman has done his part 
faithfully, they do indicate the probable condition of such stock, and that is 
all that they propose to do. Entomologists are human, and therefore make 
an occasional mistake, and may overlook the San Jose scale in 'a nursery, on 
the first inspection of the premises, but they will be almost sure to detect its 
presence the second time they go over the ground. Besides, every annual 
inspection of a nursery makes a certificate of inspection more dependable. 
It is unfortunate, for two reasons, that the first law to be enacted, the 
Maryland law, demanded certificates of absolute freedom from San Jose 
scale. First, inspections and certificates were innovations; and there were 
two or three entomologists in the United States, who obligingly allowed 
their names to be attached to that sort of a certificate, to enable nursery- 
men to ship stock into Maryland, and, second, it unfortunately gave nursery- 
men the idea that certificates were matters of form, intended mainly to 
enable them to ship their stock into Maryland, and not as showing its con- 
dition. Thus, inspection certificates were obscured by disrepute at the very 
beginning, and some few nurserymen have not, even yet, been able to dis- 
abuse their minds of the original idea. If . the first Maryland law had been 
less rigid and not demanded impossibilities, its evasions would not have been 
so generally attempted. If the few entomologists on whose shoulders the 
brunt of the battle first fell, had held fast and refused to give a certificate of 
absolfite freedom, in order to aid in evading the law, and insisted that their 
certificates must stand for higher and better purposes; if nurserymen had 
stood by these entomologists and each other in this matter, then certificates 
of inspection would have been born into this world unshadowed by suspicion 
and disrepute. Following the letter and breaking the spirit of the law is 
sure to prove disastrous to somebody. The nurseryman who attaches a 
certificate to uninspected stock may think he is doing a sharp trick, and that, 
in case of trouble, he can shift the responsibility on to the inspector, who 
never certified to absolute freedom, and therefore, Could not say, under oath, 
that he had not overlooked certain insects and diseases, and that the stock 
infested had not passed under his inspection, as, once removed from the 
premises on which it is grown, identification is almost or quite impossible. 
This is the reason why I have always insisted that the premises of a nursery- 
man shall be included in his certificate. Nursery stock may come and go, 
and identification be rendered impossible, but the premises remain and can be 
located and identified, and will stand as proof of the faithfulness of the 
inspector. The criticism has been raised, that as an inspector cannot pos- 
sibly inspect every tree in the nursery, therefore certificates are worthless. 
Now, meats, grain, liquors, etc., are inspected by sample. Given a block of 
nursery stock, we all know that there are but two methods whereby this can 
become infested, by insects or disease. Either these must come from sur- 
rounding vegetation, or they must be introduced on buds, cions, grafts or cut- 
tings. If the surrounding premises are clear and free from certain pests, 
and the trees from which the buds, cions, etc., came are found to be also free, 
where is the use of inspecting every tree in the block? Will not these last 
