38 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
THE MINNESOTA BILL. 
The question of legislation as to San Jose scale in Minne¬ 
sota was referred by the State Horticultural Society to a com¬ 
mittee of its members. A bill was drafted on the lines of the 
Maryland bill, but later a meeting of the entomologists of the 
adjoining states was held at Chicago and they framed a 
measure, which, with modifications necessary to meet certain 
conditions, was recommended for the consideration of the dif¬ 
ferent states and people interested in horticulture. The ori¬ 
ginal Minnesota bill was withdrawn and the one framed on 
the lines indicated submitted as a substitute bill. It is now 
pending. 
A portion of the bill is published in another column. A 
question has arisen as to the constitutionality of sections 5 and 
6 providing for a bond and license in the case of non-resident 
as well as resident nurserymen. It is held that this is a tax 
on interstate commerce and that it covers precisely the same 
ground as was covered by the Minnesota tree law which was 
declared unconstitutional by the U. S. court in the fall of 1894. 
A supporter of the Minnesota bill says: “The require¬ 
ments of this bill are identically the same as to foreign and 
home nurseries. If I am not mistaken, the previous Minnesota 
tree law was condemned as unconstitutional because it re¬ 
quired one thing of a resident and another thing of a foreign 
salesman. 
“Our ,legislature has a judiciary committee, composed 
largely of lawyers, who pass upon the constitutionality of all 
measures coming before them, and they will doubtless give 
this bill more careful attention than they would ordinary 
measures. There has been no effort in framing this law to 
impose burdens upon outside nurserymen or salesmen that are 
not shared equally by Minnesota growers. It is, however, the 
opinion of most of the horticulturists and nurserymen in this 
state that it is far easier to keep out the San Jose scale than it 
is to suppress it when once introduced. 
“ I have no doubt that the terms of this law will be such as 
to impose as little hardship as possible upon people handling 
nursery stock, or at least as little as is consistent with safety 
and the accomplishment of the purpose for which it was de¬ 
signed. The present bill is in charge of the State Horti- 
cultuial Society, and is, so far as I know, approved by the 
state entomologist and the experimental stations. 
“ I understand that legislation of a much more stringent 
character is contemplated or is now in active progress of en¬ 
actment in several of the adjoining states.” 
SCALE BILL IMPRACTICABLE. 
At a county horticultural society meeting in Michigan, dur¬ 
ing a discussion of the Michigan bill relating to insects, A. 
Hamilton said: “What I have to say will be from the stand¬ 
point of a nurseryman ; I like the title of the bill, and that is 
all I do like about it. The bill is impracticable. No state in¬ 
spector can inspect during the month of August all the nur¬ 
series in the state. I do not believe there is any scale in the 
nurseries of Michigan. Have the nurserymen done anything 
dishonorable, that they need to be put under bonds ? Small 
farmers can not sell strawberry or other plants under its pro¬ 
visions. The planters need have no fear from the nurseries. 
Nurserymen can not afford to send out diseased trees.” 
PROTECT NURSERYMEN, TOO. 
Editor of The National Nurseryman : 
I enclose you herewith a copy of a proposed law drafted by 
the recent convention of horticulturists and entomologists at 
their session at Washington. The proposed law is to be a 
federal enactment of doubtful constitutionality and it most 
vitally affects the nurserymen of the entire country. 
It seems to have been drawn entirely regardless of the 
equities of the case The nurserymen were not represented in 
committee, and in fact the only representative in the conven¬ 
tion was William C. Barry, who appeared for the Eastern 
Nurserymen’s Association, but who was an uninvited delegate 
sent by the executive committee of this association to look 
after their interests. 
The proposed law is as a matter of fact drawn by fruit 
growers and experimental station men, and was drawn without 
consideration of or proper regard for the interests most at 
stake. It is from a practical nurserymen’s point of view an 
ill-digested scheme almost impossible properly to enforce. It 
leaves to the secretary of agriculture almost unlimited power. 
Fruit is subject to all the pains and penalties that nursery 
stock is, provided it is importedj but inasmuch as San Jose scale 
is unknown in any country outside of the United States, 
except Japan, from which no fruit is imported, the reason 
would seem to be in the desire of the guileless Californian who 
wishes to do away with all competition that would affect his 
market. 
It is well known that the scale was found first in San Jose, 
California, where it obtained its name and it is equally well 
known that fruit from the Pacific coast is badly inflected. This 
fruit is exposed for sale on fruit stands and in stores from the 
Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic ocean, and the danger of in¬ 
fection from this source is a hundred times as great as from 
nursery stock, especially nursery stock grown in such sections 
as Western New York, where the pest has never been 
known. The bill affords no protection whatever against infec¬ 
tion from this source and this omission alone should discredit 
and condemn it. 
Nurserymen generally are agreed, I think, that if the pest is 
as bad as reported, something should be done to prevent its 
spreading. But certainly no nurseryman would undergo the 
tedious and expensive requirements of this law with the moral 
certainty that the first California orange or pear eaten on his 
grounds might infest his premises. 
If we have a law, let us have a just law, one that will answer 
the requirements of the case, and that will protect the nur¬ 
seryman from the fruit grower, as well as the fruit grower from 
the nurseryman. 
Rochester, N. Y. Irving Rouse. 
The bill relating to insects which was introduced in con¬ 
gress during the closing days of the last session by Congress¬ 
man Swanson, of Virginia, was largely prepared by Dr. L. O. 
Howard, entomologist of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. 
It formed a basis for the bill now under consideration. 
The prospect is good for another big peach crop in Dela¬ 
ware ; also for good crops of plums, apples, pears and small 
fruits. The planting since last spring has been heavier than 
for years. Elberta continues to be a favorite variety. 
