282 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN 
secure because it is in growing things that are always at 
the mercy of the elements. Returns on such an invest¬ 
ment should be larger than ordinary. 
Cost finding fails at a vital point: What you do not sell, 
adds to the cost of what you do sell. Or, putting it the 
other way around, whatever is sold must include the cost 
of what is not sold. Else you will never get back the in¬ 
vestment that has gone into both equally. Again: If a 
block of apple trees fails this year, the next crop or some 
other crop, must absorb and collect the loss. You can’t 
take one particular block of stock and say that it cost 
so much money to grow it, that so much added for profit 
to that cost makes a fair price and that you will ask thus 
and so-for the stock. That is a sort of reasoning that ar¬ 
rives at nothing except a balance on the wrong side of 
the Profit and Loss account. It is assuming that all of 
those trees are going to be sold; not only that, but that 
all other kinds of stock regarded in the same way, are 
going to be similarly sold. In certain circumstances we 
are assured that we could catch a lot of larks; but the 
conditions required, don’t materialize. 
Rut there is still another and equally important and 
very practical objection to any cost-plus selling price. 
Of all things, fruit trees require correctness. To be sure 
of correctness in them, requires constant care and at¬ 
tention at budding-time at digging-time and grading- 
lime, at packing-time and at every other time. The 
grower who gives all that necessary care and attention 
to his stock, is putting cost into it. The fact that most 
nurserymen do not regard the time and labor they per¬ 
sonally contribute, as a chargeable cost item, is apart 
from the question. And yet that personal contribution 
is mighty important. If it should be seriously proposed 
to find, as nearly as possible, an average cost price for 
growing different varieties of stock and then to say that 
selling prices should be based on those average costs, it 
would work serious injury. It would be seeking to es¬ 
tablish uniform prices; but uniform prices should mean 
uniform values, something wholly outside the attainable 
in the nursery industry or in any single nursery business 
from year to year. The result would be actually to put 
a premium on incompetency and inefficiency; it would 
discount the value of the extra care and skill that pro¬ 
duce quality above the average. A nurseryman growing- 
certain kinds of stock in quantity, things requiring little 
knowledge or skill, might argue that with small overhead 
expense, he could sell at prices lower than the average. 
That is done now. With alleged “average” prices ascer¬ 
tained through the agency of some trade organization 
and given its sanction, the price-cutter would be handed 
an argument that it might be hard to answer, once the 
fallacy of average prices is accepted. And the basic 
argument for cost finding, seems to be ultimately to de¬ 
termine average prices. It can’t be done. Except in the 
case of solid blocks, growing costs cannot be accurately 
known. If ascertained, costs are of no value as far as 
being a basis for price is concerned, because your cost 
account is added to up to the time of delivery; and prices 
have been fixed and the stock sold long before the 
casting up of the column. Even if cost is known, it does 
not and will not affect the selling price. Any set of 
prices accepted and sanctioned by an organization as 
based on ascertained average cost of production, would 
be invitation to the price-cutter to advertise his alleged 
ability to undersell the rest. 
A price that regards cost (as far as can be ascertained 
and applied to complete stocks of trees and for a period 
of years and including, as cost, the unsold part), plus a 
profit that covers average losses in the same way, and 
that considers value to the buyer—and gives that value— 
is a fair price. And just as those elements vary and al¬ 
ways will vary just as value varies with different grow¬ 
ers and from season to season, so will prices vary. They 
can’t be standardized and shouldn’t be. If they could 
be, they would introduce conditions sure to work injury 
to those producing trees and more injury to those buying 
them. j. w. 
GARDENERS ORGANIZE IN FLORIDA 
A local branch of the National Association of Garden¬ 
ers was organized at Jacksonville on September 17 by 
the members of the association residing in that district. 
Herbert W. Tickner, Orange Park, Florida, elected chair¬ 
man and Alfred Addor, Jacksonville, Florida, secretary 
of the branch which will be known as Jacksonville, 
Florida branch. 
P. W. Popp of New York and an ex-vice president of 
the association was present at the meeting and briefly 
reviewed the history of the association and the growth 
and prestige it has attained the past few years. The as¬ 
sociation has recently added the following names to its 
list of sustaining members: 
Arthur Y. Davis, Millneck, N. Y., Sigmund Stein, 
Hartsdale, N. Y., Charles M. Schwab, Loretto, Pa., Miss 
Mabel Cboate, Stockbridge, Mass., Charles K. King, 
Mansfield, Ohio, S. C. Pirie, Sea Cliff, L. I., Mrs. Walter 
S. Mitchell, Pittsburg, Pa., Mrs. A. D. Baldwin, Cleve¬ 
land, Ohio, Mrs. C. A. Otis, Willoughby, Ohio, Miss Belle 
Sherwin, Willoughby, Ohio; L. F. Sisler, Akron, Ohio. 
A THORNLESS ROSE STOCK 
The S. R. McKee Nurseries and Rose Gardens, Jack¬ 
sonville, Texas, claim to have a thornless rose stock 
which they think superior to all others. 
The McKee Nurseries have been growing budded roses 
exclusively and extensively for more than thirty years. 
The first stock used was the Seven Sisters, which 
proved very unsatisfactory, Baltimore Belle was next 
tried and though it was an improvement on the former it 
left much to be desired. The Manetta was then tried out 
but is not as satisfactory in the South as in the North and 
East. The Wax Rose, introduced from Europe by Mc¬ 
Kee’s, was tried out but it’s nature of carrying sap 
throughout the winter makes it uncertain. The Canina 
proved more successful than any of the above but the 
thorns were a decided objection in budding and in field 
work. The owner of the Nurseries had often wished for 
a stock, having the qualities of the Canina without its 
thorns. Some years ago three plants growing among a 
large block of Canina’s were noticed to be without thorns 
and quite distinct. They were set aside and propagated 
with the idea of seeing if they would not prove to be such 
a stock as had long been looked for. They proved to be 
all that could be desired and are now being offered as the 
McKee’s Thornless Stock Rose. 
