84 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
NEW FEDERAL BILL. 
Prophecy of the National Nurseryman Ful¬ 
filled — Washington Convention’s Bill 
Condemned—Professor Alwood Endor¬ 
ses Nurserymen’s Measure. 
The principal topic discussed at the St. Louis convention of 
the American Association of Nurserymen was federal legisla¬ 
tion regarding the San Jose scale. The committee appointed 
by President Wilson upon this subject presented a report ; 
and a draft of a bill prepared and endorsed by the Eastern 
Nurserymen’s Association was read and discussed. The re¬ 
port of the committee, the bill proposed by the Eastern asso¬ 
ciation and all the discussion at the convention was in direct 
opposition to the action taken by the convention of horticul¬ 
turists and entomologists at Washington last March, to which 
action The National Nurseryman entered a vigorous pro¬ 
test. And just as was prophesied by this journal, a bill was 
prepared by the nurserymen at the St. Louis convention which, 
while providing for inspection of nursery stock does not con¬ 
template an injustice to nurserymen, as did the one proposed 
by the Washington convention. 
The bill drafted at the St. Louis convention bears the en¬ 
dorsement of the entomologist of Virginia who was chairman 
of the committee of the Washington convention which drafted 
the objectionable bill. 
This entomologist was present at the St. Louis convention 
at his own request. On the afternoon preceding the opening 
day of the convention he was invited to state what he wished 
to regarding the bill drafted by the Washington convention. 
He was allowed to talk at considerable length during which 
time he reviewed the history of the Washington convention, 
all of which was given in detail three months ago in The 
National Nurseryman. Finally Messrs. Rouse, Brooke, 
Hubbard and others began to question him upon the practical 
operation of the bill he was defending, and in the course of 
twenty-five minutes he was obliged to admit that he could not 
answer the most important questions asked by the leading 
nurserymen present. 
NURSERYMEN INQUIRE. 
“ Why was the entire expense of inspection proposed to be 
placed upon the nurserymen ?” asked A. L. Brooke, of Kansas. 
“ I never thought of that,” replied Professor Alwood. 
Mr. Brooke—“Why should not the general public pay for 
the inspection if it is for the general public benefit ?” 
Prof. Alwood—“ The point was not raised by the nursery¬ 
men present.” 
Mr. Brooke—“Well, we nurserymen here are rather disposed 
to dissent.” 
Prof. Alwood—“ The bill does not meet my views as to its 
wording.” 
Irving Rouse—“ Where do you get any authority for propos¬ 
ing to put nursery stock in quarantine ?” 
Prof. Alwood—“ I don’t know of any authority for it.” 
Mr. Rouse—“ It is clearly unconstitutional to do as this 
bill proposes.” 
Mr. Brooke—“ Do you believe it is practicable to do the 
fumigating at port of entry and then reship the stock ?” 
Prof. Alwood—“ I don’t know.” 
Mr. Rouse—“ Do you know in what manner imported 
nursery stock is packed ?” 
Prof. Alwood—“ I don’t know.” 
Mr. Rouse—“ Well, that is just our judgment of your bill— 
that it was drawn up by a lot of men who do not know the 
practical working of the nursery business.” 
Victor H. Lowe, entomologist of the New York Agricul¬ 
tural Experiment Station, Geneva, N. Y.—“You say you can 
inspect all the nursery stock in Virginia. Why, in New York 
state we grow millions of trees. From my office window I can 
look out upon several hundred thousand young trees. How 
am I to give any reasonably thorough inspection under such 
circumstances in the manner you prescribe ? I have tried it— 
I have inspected many blocks of nursery stock in Western 
New York, but not so that I could give a certificate.” 
Prof. Alwood—“ There is no trouble in finding the scale on 
two-year old stock if it is there. I do not inspect one-year- 
old stock.” 
WORSE THAN BEFORE. 
Mr. Rouse—“ In the light of your explanations made here 
to day, the bill you are defending is many times worse than it 
before appeared to be. We are told by good authority that 
your inspection does not amount to anything.” 
Prof. Alwood—“ Who says so ?” 
Mr. Rouse—“Some of the workers.” 
Prof. Alwood—“ I am sorry to hear it.” 
Mr. Brooke—“Now, I favor inspection of nursery stock. 
But I have not yet been able to learn why that committee at 
the Washington convention saw fit to draft a law imposing the 
whole expense upon the nurserymen. I understand that meet¬ 
ing of fruit growers at which there was a scattering of nursery¬ 
men prepared this bill and endeavored to have it passed. 
And I understand that it is the desire to get the assistance of 
this convention in passing that bill ” 
Prof. Alwood—“ There was nothing said of such a thing. 
I am not here officially.” 
Mr. Brooke—“You see the great injustice of the proposed 
bill.” 
Prof. Alwood—“Yes, I don’t believe in its wording.” 
Mr. Watrous—“Then you can’t tell who drafted the bill ?” 
Prof. Alwood—“The entomologists.” 
Mr. Watrous—“ Then they proposed the expense on the 
nurserymen.” 
Prof. Alwood—“No; I think that was done by the con¬ 
vention.” 
Mr. Brooke—“ You see the position we are in.” 
Prof. Alwood—“Certainly.” 
Mr. Brooke—“ Do I understand that you would not treat 
any nursery stock that is free from disease ?” 
Prof. Alwood—“That is my position.” 
Mr. Brooke—“But this bill does.” 
Prof. Alwood—“The Secretary of Agriculture is to decide.” 
Mr. Brooke—“ Well, we do not think the nurserymen on 
that committee at Washington convention acted wisely.” 
ANOTHER BILL PROPOSED. 
Mr. Watrous who, as chairman of the legislative committee 
of the American Association presided at the conference, read 
the proposed bill drafted by the Eastern Nurserymen’s Asso¬ 
ciation. This bill was read at a meeting of that association in 
Rochester, N. Y., just before the St. Louis convention and it 
