THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
forms of vegetable diseases, and for an investigation into the 
habits, life, and best methods of eradicating insect pests; but in 
all these cases congress has never gone beyond the line of general 
investigation, experiment, and publication of the results for gen¬ 
eral information. The state of Michigan passed a law authoriz¬ 
ing, under certain rules and regulations, the destruction of all 
trees affected by the peach yellows, and the operation of this law 
was highly successful. But congress has never given the power 
to any federal agency to enter upon a man’s field and destroy his 
products in order to abate either contagious vegetable diseases or 
insect pests, and I do not believe that congress will ever confer 
any such power under this clause of the constitution or any other, 
and I submit that it is idle for us to look for legislation in that 
direction. 
THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAUSE. 
The interstate commerce clause presents some hope, though 
it also encounters many difficulties. Congress has unquestioned 
power to regulate commerce among the states, and the source of 
most of our difficulties lies in the fact that these diseases and pests 
are generally transmitted by commerce. If the disease or insect 
should be quarantined in its habitat, ninety-nine-hundredths of 
the harm from disease and insect would he avoided. In the regu¬ 
lation of this commerce I believe it has a right to say that there 
shall be no commodity transported from one state to another 
afflicted with a contagious disease or a pestiferous insect; and to 
prevent this it has the power to appoint agents to execute these 
laws and to provide penalties for their violation. But you will 
understand that this power only relates to commodities to be 
transported from state to state. Under this brief statement of the 
facts it is manifest that a large proportion of the remedial efforts 
must be assumed and carried out by the state, the United States 
government being asked to co-operate only in the effort to prevent 
the spread from state to state. The whole legislation on the sub¬ 
ject should be carried on pari passn by the states and congress, 
the states assuming the right and power of extermination and the 
United States, through congress, assuming the right and power of 
pi’eventing transmission from state to statg, with public sentiment 
back of all to (mforce the laws enacted by both jurisdictions ; at 
the same time a liberal line of appropriations by both jurisdictions 
should be made to investigate, experiment and inform the people 
as to tbe character and destructiveness of the disease or insect 
and as to the best method of their eradication. 
One question intervenes in this discussion that is not without 
its difficulties. Who shall decide that the young nursery stock is 
or is not stricken with the disease or has or has not within it the 
incipient germ which, under pi’oper conditions, will develop the 
disease ? A state, for instance, passes laws absolutely prohibiting 
the importation within its borders of any such afflicted nursery 
stock. I think it has the power to prohibit such importation. 
Assume that the nurseryman makes a sale in another state of 
stock which he claims is absolutely free from infection. The 
state authorities insist that the stock came from an infected dis¬ 
trict and that the chances are that the young trees are likely to be 
also infected, and prohibit their importation on the same principle 
that the states have established quarantine lines, across which 
no animal during certain periods shall be brought from an 
infected district. Who shall, as I say again, decide whether this 
stock is truly a subject for the adverse operation of the state law ? 
This was a practical question raised in the department within the 
last year. An owner of large peach nurseries in a certain state 
made large contracts in California for the delivery of his stock, 
and simply because the peach trees came from an infected district 
he was forbidden by the California authorities to deliver the stock 
in said state. He appealed to the Department of Agriculture to 
examine and report upon the fact whether his trees were infected, 
and then demanded, in case we should report they were not, that 
our certificate of the healthfulness of the trees should overrule the 
state prohibition. I had hard work to convince him—in fact, I 
do not believe I did convince him—that the Department of Agri- 
cnlture had no such power. I was willing in his specific case to 
examine and report, providing he would secure from the state 
131 
authorities their consent to accept our certificate as final. I do 
not know whether anything further came of the matter as at this 
point our correspondence ceased. Another element entered into 
my reasons for declining to examine his nursery, and that was the 
fact that on the principle sought to be established we were likely 
to be called upon from first to last to make an examination of all 
the nurseries in the land, for which expense we had neither funds 
nor force. The inspection and examination on this basis would 
soon become so huge as to break down of its own weight. 
LEGISLATION WHICH HAS BEEN PROPOSED. 
Before concluding this paper it may be proper to put on record 
and attach thereto, as an exhibit for consideration and discussion, 
a bill presented in the last congress by Mr. Gaminetti, representa¬ 
tive in congress from the state of California. It is entitled 52d 
congress, 1st session, H. R. .3876: “A bill to prohibit the inter¬ 
state transportation of trees, plants, vines or other nursery stock 
infected with scale insects, or codling moths, or other pests, or with 
their eggs, or larvse, or infected with any diseases injurious to 
trees, plants, and vines, and the importation into the United 
States from any foreign country, of any thereof so affected ; to 
provide for jienalties for violation thereof, and defining the duties 
of certain departments of the United States with relation 
thereto.” 
This bill was presented, read twice, and referred to the com¬ 
mittee on agriculture in the House of Representatives and or¬ 
dered to be printed, and was then referred by said committee to 
the Department of Agriculture for consideration. No further 
action was taken and no report was ever made either from the 
Department of Agriculture to the committee or from the committee 
to the House. It was a matter of considerable discussion between 
myself and the promoter of the bill and various parties who met 
in my office. A mere casual examination of the bill will convince 
anyone that in its present form it is improbable that it can secure 
a majority of adherents. It is very drastic and its principal objec¬ 
tion is that if carried out its full extent would be an embargo on 
commerce or would, if enforced, drive railroads into bankruptcy 
and a large number of people into the penitentiary. Mr. Cami- 
netti does not claim that his bill was perfect, and admits that in 
some respects it was crude. He only desired that all parties in¬ 
terested in the eradication of disease and pests 'which affect 
fruit should unite on some common ground and present such modi¬ 
fications and amendments as would make the law effective with the 
least injury to individuals, corporations and communities. No 
common ground has yet been found, and I suggest that inasmuch 
as this bill or one of like character may be presented in the com¬ 
ing congress, the matter should be carefully considered by the 
representatives of all interests and localities. 
This bill is simply the precursor of many efforts to legislate 
on the subject and may well afford to wait for final consummation 
until the subject has had full discussion. It is in the line of an 
honest effort to stay the ravages that place in peril our whole fruit 
industry. The effort has my most hearty sympathy ; but as I have 
intimated before, it should not go alone. Legislation should cover 
four points : First, legislation by the general government affect¬ 
ing interstate commerce in fruits and fruit trees among the states; 
second, legislation by the states vigorously directed and executed 
for the extirpation within the state ; third, legislation on the part 
of the general government preventing or controling the importa¬ 
tion of infected fruits and plants; fourth, liberal appropriations 
by both the state and general government for the investigation of 
all contagious diseases and pestiferous insects and experimenta¬ 
tion as to the best methods of eradication. I might add that a 
fifth point is perhaps more essential than either of the preceding 
four, to wit: That wholesome public sentiment should back up 
this legislation and that moral courage on the part of the individ¬ 
ual shall reconcile him to the absolute destruction, if necessary, of 
his own property affected. 
Chrysanthemum shows are being held in all the princi¬ 
pal cities of this country and England. 
