10 
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY 
[Vol. 17 
exhibits of different kinds. The address of welcome was delivered by Dr. J. C. 
Kielstra, the Rector Magnificus of the University, and was responded to on behalf of 
the delegates by the writer who had been made the Honorary President of the con¬ 
ference. On Monday the opening address of the conference was given by the Nether- 
land Minister for Home Affairs and Agriculture, and during the morning of Monday 
the Potato Disease Laboratory, recently constructed, was inaugurated by an address 
from the president of the board of trustees of the university. 
On Wednesday and Thursday trips were taken by the delegates through interesting 
regions in Holland, and on Friday the sessions for the reading of papers were resumed 
at Baarn, at the Laboratory for Phytopathology, under the directorship of Miss 
(Doctor) J. Westerdijk. 
A number of interesting and important papers were read by the different delegates, 
all of which will appear in the published proceedings and need no comment in this 
report. 
The final business session was held at Baarn on Saturday morning, and at this 
meeting, following resolutions introduced by Prof. Mangin of France, a permanent 
organization was formed, with Doctor Quanjer (who had been the Acting President 
during the conference) as President and a board of twelve to arrange the program 
of the next conference and to act upon matters which may come up in the interim. 
On this board there are two American members, Dr. C. L. Shear and the writer, who 
will represent not only the United States but the republics of Central and South 
America. 
An important action of the conference in perfecting its future organization was the 
decision as to the title. In his opening address the writer had complimented the 
organizers of the conference on their adoption of the title “Conference of Phyto- 
pathologists and Economic Entomologists," urged the continued use of the title in 
any permanent organization and suggested that future meetings should be divided 
into two sections which should hold independent sessions and general sessions on 
matters of mutual interest. There was much discussion and much difference of 
opinion in the conference on this point. The adoption of the term 'phytopathology 
as including agricultural entomology in European countries is so general that the title 
under which the 1923 conference was held was not pleasantly greeted by many of the 
delegates. A large number of the phytopathologists insisted upon the retention of 
the European signification of the word as including the study of injurious insects, 
many of the German-speaking delegates preferred their own term “pflanzenschutz,” 
or “crop protection,” as including the whole idea. The final adoption of a title 
was discussed vigorously and the delegates were divided as to whether they should 
be termed “international conferences for phytopathology and economic entomology 
or “international conferences for crop protection.” The final vote resulted in 33 for 
the dual name and 23 for the title “crop protection.” It was noticeable that all of 
the delegates from English-speaking countries voted unanimously for the joint title 
whether they themselves happened to be phytopathologists or economic entomologists, 
whereas the delegates from German-speaking countries were unanimously in favor 
of the single title. The delegates from France and Belgium were divided in opinion, 
as were those of Holland. 
There was much discussion, in the course of the conference, of matters of quaran¬ 
tine. Doctor Gussow of Canada read an important paper, dealing with this matter, 
which was vigorously discussed. Doctor Kielstra, himself an economist, attacked 
