252 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN 
ANOTHER OPINION 
By M. T. Bean 
August 16, 1922. 
In a recent editorial, referring to the May 15th con¬ 
ference, and the report issued by the Federal Horticul¬ 
tural Board, a trade paper said: “Strange that the . . . . 
should be the only horticultural periodical of any kind 
in the world which could see straight on this subject 
from the beginning to the end.” 
The above quotations and numerous similar proclaim¬ 
ings remind me of the story of the two darkies listening 
to a candidate for public office, orating in the usual cam¬ 
paign manner: 
“Sam, do you know who dat am talkin’?” 
“No, Mose, I dunno who he am, but he shuah recom¬ 
mends hisself most highly.” 
The official report of the hearing might well be com¬ 
mented on by our colored friends in the same terms. 
Why should our editor friend refer to the report as 
“comprehensive,” when it contains no report of protests 
made at the hearing and by many individuals during the 
past three years? 
The board has always been ready to magnify individ¬ 
ual opinions which agreed with its policy, as representa¬ 
tive of trade sentiment and action, and to belittle or ignore 
opinions contrary to its ideas. 
In complimenting itself, should that trade paper ignore 
the vital question brought up by Mr. McFarland and Mr. 
McITutchinson, namely: Has the Federal Horticultural 
Board exceeded the authority granted it by the law of 
1912, in handling these questions on an economic basis 
rather than on measures to prevent the introduction of 
insects and diseases? 
No man and no bureau is greater than the law, and 
no matter how commendable the aims of the board may 
appear to its admirers, can they properly endorse acts 
which are not authorized by the law? Are such approv¬ 
als generally based on unselfish grounds? Is it not time 
that a reckoning were taken, so that we may know defin¬ 
itely whether or not the board is the sole arbiter of the 
destinies of the nursery business of this country? 
The impression is prevalent that the conference be¬ 
tween the solicitors of the Department of Agriculture 
and the counsel of Mr. McFarland’s committee, will dis¬ 
close that the Federal Horticultural Board is not supreme 
and not greater than the law under which it is consti¬ 
tuted. Let us wait and see! 
AS I SEE IT 
By M. T. Nutt 
Seedsmen have for years waged a continual warfare 
against the free distribution of seeds by the Government 
but without avail, though for a while it did appear that 
their efforts might be crowned with success. Last year 
the appropriation passed by a very slight majority. 
It is not generally known, I believe, that not only seeds, 
but shrubs roses and vines are also included in this 
“free gift” to the constituents of the “rural congress¬ 
men.” 
In talking with a prominent nurseryman a few days 
ago he showed me a letter which he had just received, 
which was practically a duplicate of the one he had re¬ 
ceived for several years past. I give below the letter 
verbatim. 
If the Government can give away seeds and nursery 
stock, why may we not, with equal propriety, ask it to 
give the nurserymen cultivators, “fliver” tractors, hoes, 
spades and other tools and machinery which would be 
useful in cultivating the very plants which are needed 
to grow the plants required by congressmen to “draw” 
votes when election comes around. 
Why not a full list of apples, pears, cherries, peaches 
and plums to give to the orchardist? 
Or in these arid times, grapes would be particularly 
acceptable. 
(Copy of letter) 
United States Department of Agriculture 
Bureau of Plant Industry 
Office of Seed Distribution 
Washington, D. C., Aug. 25, 1922. 
Gentlemen : 
We are in the market for shrubs and plants as shown 
on the following list, same to be in accordance with speci¬ 
fications noted thereon, and delivery to be made not later 
than the first week in November, 1922. 
SHRUBS 
500 Hydrangea paniculata grandiflora 
500 Forsythia fortuneii 
500 Calycanthus Floridus 
500 Lonicera tartarica rubra 
500 Diervilla rosea 
500 Kerria Japonica (double) 
100 Forsythia intermedia 
100 Viburnum opulus sterilis 
500 Viburnum plicatum 
500 Syringa vulgaris 
500 Philadelphus coronarius 
500 Spiraea Van Houttei 
500 Althaea or Rose of Sharon 
500 Deutzia crenata (double pink) 
100 Berberis thunbergii 
ROSES 
200 Paul Neron 
200 Frau Karl Druschki 
200 Ulrich Brunner 
200 Francois Levet 
200 Marchioness of Lome 
100 Rosa Harison, yellow 
200 Margaret Dickson 
200 Magna Charta 
200 Baron Bonstetin 
200 General Jacquiminot 
200 Clio 
100 Rosa rugosa Blanche Double de Coubert 
VINES 
500 Ampelopsis Veitchii 
(All the above to be strong, two-year old, field-grown 
plants.) 
Please quote us promptly on the enclosed blank form 
your best prices on same, f. o. b. shipping point, which 
should be named; and mail your quotation to this office 
(Seed Distribution). In quoting, include the cost, if 
any, of packing the plants for shipment. 
Very truly yours, 
(Written signature not decipherable) 
Agronomist in Charge. 
