THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
61 
manager will be stationed there, who will watch the mar¬ 
kets and send daily bulletins of the prices and supply and 
demand to every shipping point throughout the country. 
This manager will also control the funds of the union, 
which will be deposited in the First National Bank of 
Chicago. Annual meetings will be held at some central 
point for the election of officers and making of rules and 
regulations to govern the union. 
The officers elected for the first year are: John D. 
Cunningham, president ; Willis Brown, secretary; execu¬ 
tive committee, John D. Cunningham, Willis Brown, E. 
R. Jennette, G. H. Fay, C. W. Benson, J. F. Chamblin, 
and W. A. Gardner. A vice-president was elected for 
each state in the Union, and one for British Columbia. 
The next general meeting will be held in Chicago the 
second Tuesday in May, 1897. 
IMPROVEMENT OF CATALOGUES. 
The suggestions of James MacPherson in another 
column regarding names of varieties in catalogues are 
timely and practical. There is not a nurseryman who 
will not admit that to secure the results outlined would 
be an advantage. Mr. MacPherson has clearly pointed 
out the road to improvement by reference to a catalogue 
which is above the average in respect to attention to 
details of preparation. 
Mr. MacPherson emphasizes his desire to see catalogues 
brought as nearly up to date as possible by authorizing 
us to say that he will be pleased to revise the names (so 
far as determined) of any ornamental catalogues sent to 
him in duplicate, and accompanied by any remittance the 
sender can afford. 
The genuine interest thus manifested will, we trust, be 
rewarded by the acceptance upon the part of a large 
number of so generous an offer. 
SAME TROUBLE IN NEW ZEALAND. 
The complaint about low prices on nursery stock ex¬ 
tends to the New Zealand islands. D. Hay & Son, 
Auckland, make the following statement to their patrons: 
“We frequently receive letters, the writers stating they 
have written to other nurserymen and growers, and in¬ 
tend to place their orders where they can buy the cheap¬ 
est. Just a few words about cheap trees. The prices 
some trees are offered at practically exclude the possibil¬ 
ity of their being first-class. No experienced grower will 
recommend you to buy cheap trees simply because they 
are cheap, or buy auction stock, but ‘ Go to an established 
nurseryman, who has a reputation at stake, and will not 
in his own interests palm off a worthless tree.’ A few 
pence per tree extra at first, is pounds saved in the long 
run. If you buy an ill-formed scrubby tree, it remains a 
scrubber all its life. A good tree takes up no more room 
than a bad one; by all means plant the good! ‘ Do 
sensible men buy the cheapest horse, the cheapest clothes, 
employ the cheapest lawyer, or the cheapest doctor, be¬ 
cause they are cheap?’ ‘No!’ The same applies to 
cheap trees. It isn’t nature 1 Buy the best obtainable 
to ensure the most satisfactory results. ‘ With all your 
getting, get the best ! ’ Trees that have been properly 
worked, nurtured, and cared for, well taken up with all 
their roots, and selected by throwing out any that are 
poor roots, crooked in the stem, or stunted in growth, 
entail considerable outlay, and are well worth the price 
we ask.” 
HORTICULTURAL LAW SUIT. 
A law suit of much importance to horticulturists in 
Minnesota, and probably in the whole country, has lately 
been begun in New Ulm, Minn. It involves a question 
as to the identity of a seedling being propagated by 
C. W. H. Heideman, of New Ulm, with one owned and 
originated by H. Knudson, of Springfidd, a neighboring 
town. Mr. Knudson claims that the seedling Mr. Heide¬ 
man is propagating is in reality his (Knudson’s) seedling, 
scions from which he gave Mr. Heideman some years be¬ 
fore—which latter fact Mr. Heideman admits, but claims 
they did not live. 
The suit is for the purpose of securing a permanent 
injunction against Mr. Heideman to prevent his selling 
any trees or scions grown from this particular seedling. 
C. W. Sampson, of Eureka, is interested with Mr. 
Knudson in this suit, having become a part owner of 
stock to be grown from the original tree. 
A temporary injunction has been secured by the plain¬ 
tiffs by presenting affidavits from Prof. S. B. Green and 
Clarence Wedge showing in substance the improb¬ 
ability that two plants differing so widely as in this case 
from the original species and originated by different per¬ 
sons working independently should be so apparently 
identical. 
The trial and decision of this case will be looked for 
with much interest. The result will depend very largely 
on expert testimony as to the identity of the trees and 
the improbability referred to in the above affidavits. The 
case also involves a very important question as to the 
rights of originators of new kinds of fruit. 
The plaintiff’s attorneys state that there is no statute, 
either of the United States or of the state of Minnesota, 
protecting the propagator of a new variety of fruit, and 
while they are of the opinion that the common law can 
be invoked to protect such a person, it seems strange that 
such rights are not clearly defined and protected by 
statute. The discovery and propagation of new hardy 
varieties of fruit in Minnesota is certainly of as much 
importance as the invention of some new machine, and 
our legislature should be called upon to pass a law upon 
the subject which will give protection in such matters, 
similar to the protection given by trade marks and patent 
laws. 
The seedling referred to above is the new hybrid sand 
cherry of Mr. Knudson, a very interesting and, probably, 
valuable cross between the Miner plum and the sand 
cherry .—Minnesota Horticulturist. 
