66 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
trying to make this Union one and indivisible and I hope in 
my old age 1 shall not do anything to tear it apart. If the 
nurserymen stay at home while the California fruit growers 
pass a bill detrimental to nursery interests, the nurserymen 
cannot blame the Californians. Two years ago a bill was 
drafted by the entomologists at Washington which if it had 
been allowed to pass would have paralyzed the nursery busi¬ 
ness. What would have happened if the nurserymen had not 
been roused to action. The Montana law is very detrimental. 
In Minnesota a bill that would have been very detrimental 
was killed by the active work of the nurserymen. I sugge^ 
that a committee be named, not to go to Washington unless 
you wish, but to watch what others may do.’' 
Mr. Brooke—“ I’m not opposed to a national law, and I do 
not think we could have a better committee. How much has 
the bill cost this season.” 
Mr. Rouse—“The exact amount is $1,289.78. 
Mr. Brooke—“ I am willing to spend the balance in our 
treasury in this kind of business. But I want to say that the 
State of California is not big enough to bluff the United 
States government. The eagle reached there some time ago. 
The United States is bigger than any state. We have no in¬ 
spection law in Kansas, but we have inspection of nursery 
stock. We have the best kind of an entomologist in Kansas. 
We pay the expense of inspection and the certificate goes. 
Why be scared by any bug-a-big-a-boo ? There isn’t any, there 
hasn’t been any. The scale scare is not as big as it was four 
years ago. It is growing less.” 
The motion by Mr. Van Lindley recommending that the 
committee on legislation be continued and that Robert C. 
Berckmans be added to it was adopted, Mr. Kirkpatrick 
alone voting in the negative. 
CUSTOM HOUSE MATTERS. 
There was no report from the committee on transportation 
The report of the committee on tariff was incorporated in the 
report of the special committee on the importation of stock, of 
which Thomas B. Meehan was chairman, Mr. Meehan’s re¬ 
port preceded adjournment until 9:30 a. m. on Thursday. It 
is as follows: 
May 30, 1900. 
Your committee having in charge the examination into the abuses 
and delays suffered by nurserymen at the hands of the collector and 
appraiser of the New York Customs House present the following 
report: 
During the winter of 1899 the appraiser at the port of New York 
ruled that wharf examination of nursery stock was not practicable 
and that in the future the examination should be made in the Public 
Stores, and moreover that an examination of a single case taken pro. 
miscuously from a shipment w r as not sufficient and that several cases 
should be taken for examination. 
This entailed additional work upon the examiners and the public 
draymen, and the result was a complete congestion of this department, 
resulting in most serious delays and losses to nurserymen. In several 
instances as much as four weeks were required before the goods were 
passed, by which time the contents were completely ruined. 
When your committee was appointed and took up the matter they 
found that these delays were experienced not only by nurserymen, but 
that other merchants had similar troubles, and to such an extent that 
the matter had been placed before the Secretary of the Treasury, and 
he had appointed a commission to examine into complaints and charges 
against the appraiser. This commission had completed its labors and 
made its report to the Secretary of the Treasury. 
The report of the commission was not given out by the Government, 
but Secretary Gage in a letter to the President, under date of Septem¬ 
ber 9, 1899, in which he makes a certain recommendation as based 
upon the reports of the commission, speaks specifically of the delays 
and losses of nursery stock as follows : 
“ It finds that the complaints of certain importers of nursery stock 
“ were justified in that examinations were delayed and the goods im- 
“ ported suffered more or less injury therefrom.” 
Following this Assistant Secretary Spaulding, under date of July 
27th, issued instructions to the collector and appraiser at New York 
regarding the examination and appraisement of nursery stock in which 
he directed that “ if a less number of cases of each invoice is hereafter 
“ ordered in for examination and is conceded to be practicable, and at 
“the same time properly guard the interest of the Government, it 
“ would seem that complaints from this source should be reduced to 
“ a minimum. Merchandise of the kind in question should be properly 
“ appraised at the actual market value as defined by’Sectiou 19 of the 
“ Customs Administrative Act and you are hereby directed under the 
“provisions of Section 2939 Revised Statues, to require but one 
“ package out of each invoice to be sent to Public Stores for examina- 
“ tion and appraisement, unless it shall be found necessary in any par- 
“ ticular case to call for additional packages to form the proper basis 
“ for determining the character, quantity and value of the entire im¬ 
portation. Packages containing shrubs, trees and similar nursery 
“stock which may be properly examined on the dock should not be 
“sent to Public Stores for examination.” 
In a letter received by your committee from Assistant Secretary 
Spaulding under date of July 27th he communicated the instruction 
given to the appraiser as above stated and adds that “ it is thought 
“ that the action taken by the Department on the report of the Com- 
“ mission will obviate the delays of which complaints have been made.” 
Your committee believing that these instructions would suffice to 
avoid a repetition of the vexatious delays and disastrous losses of the 
previous winter, took no further action until early in December, w r hen 
it learned that the appraisers had disregarded the instructions given 
by Assistant Secretary Spaulding with reference to wharf examination, 
and that cases were being sent to Public Stores. A letter of inquiry 
was at once sent to the appraiser, and he replied that it was not prac¬ 
ticable to make a critical and accurate examination on the dock, hence 
it was necessary to continue to send cases to the Public Stores. Im¬ 
porters of nursery stock are not all of one opinion as to the desirability 
of wharf examination. If merely a perfunctionary examination is 
made then a wharf examination is good enough, but if a critical ex¬ 
amination is made and goods removed from the cases, it would seem that 
there would be less exposure of the stock and less damage resulting 
therefrom if the cases were examined in the Public Stores. 
However, the practice of making these examinations in the Public 
Stores the past season does not appear to have caused unnecessary 
delay in the passing of the goods through the Customs House, though 
there have been a few instances when reported shipments have not 
been passed promptly, but your committee believe such cases to be 
exceptional. 
REAPPRAISING STOCK. 
The action of the appraiser in reappraising and increasing the value 
of nursery stock appeared to be a most serious matter and several nur¬ 
serymen were heavily and unjustly fined by the Government at the 
commencement of the season, and as several invoices presented early 
in December were below what the appraisers considered the market 
value to be at the time the goods were entered, they were reappraised, 
values advanced and fines imposed. 
The tariff law provides that duties shall be assessed “at the 
“ foreign market value of the merchandise at the time the goods are 
“ imported.” 
In past seasons, the appraisers have been satisfied to accept the 
invoice as representing the market value of the consignment, but this 
year apparently this was not sufficient. 
This seems to be a matter entirely governed by the provision of the 
taiiff bill and in raising invoices the appraisers seem to be carrying out 
the letter of the law which provides that “duties shall be assessed at the 
“ foreign market value of the merchandise at the time the goods are 
“ imported.” The purchase price may not represent the market value 
at the time the goods are imported. Certainly the appraisers did not 
accept this as being the case the past season when they decided that 
Mahaleb cherry and Myrobolan plum had advanced in value as much 
as one-fourth to one-half. 
