176 
THE NATIONAL NURSEEYMAN 
with our foolish heads stuck dec]) in the sands of eiedi- 
l)ility and kidding ourselves beautifully -hut no one else. 
Just think of res])onsible business linns contributing 
approxiinabdy l)ul a ])uny -flb.OO a])ieec for a national 
advertising j)i'ograin, and some of us tbiids: even that is 
too much! 
OTHERS ADVERTISING US 
Yet we are being advertised in spite of ourselves by 
the increasing nundier and circulation of splendid wide¬ 
awake horticiilural publications, by garden clubs spring¬ 
ing up all over the country, national tree ])lanting asso- 
•ciations, nature clubs, national tree planting days, tlower 
shows and exhibits, arboretums and botanical gardens, 
forestry associations, park and conservation movements 
—surely if we had to depend on our own efl'orts, if we 
are to judge from the past the case would be bad indeed. 
DISTINCTION SLOGAN NEEDED 
Again, we need a good association slogan or trade 
mark. We had one that was very good and that meant 
something, and just as it began to operate fairly well 
we got cold feet and threw it into the discard! The sev¬ 
eral general slogans we are using are useful, but carry 
no direct or implied guarantee of guaranteed service. 
Are we not good and thoughtful little boys, Rollo, not to 
get our feet damp, for then we might catch a bad little 
cold! 
The question is will we nurserymen ever wake up or 
will we keep right on Rip Van Winkeling? 
LEGISLATION 
This I believe is the most important subject the nur¬ 
seryman and horticulturist has to deal with at the pres¬ 
ent time. The past year is notable for the orgy of enact¬ 
ed or proposed state and federal restrictive legislation 
and departmental decrees and rulings directed against 
nurserymen and other horticultural jirofessions, tending 
to clog interstate commerce and adding enormously to 
the cost and hazard of the nurseryman’s business. Arbi¬ 
trary powers have been given or are assumed, often il¬ 
legally, by local or national authorities, and as if the 
legislative mill could not grind fast enough, department 
decrees and regulations are showered on us, in effect 
carrying all the weight and authority of enacted statute. 
When the American public wakes up to the true facts 
that the net results always are not more horticultural 
safety but more office-holders and increased costs of pro¬ 
ducts the legislative eruption may subside. 
QUARANTINES AND THEIR EFFECTS 
May I quote from a review of the nursery industry I 
recently made for the 1923 Florists’ Annual: 
“The quarantines and rulings of the Federal Horticultural 
Board have had a profound effect on the nursery industry in 
America. Instituted to prevent the introduction and spread of 
insect pests and noxious plant diseases, the Board’s almost arbi¬ 
trary power has been extended quite beyond the original intent 
of the legislative act creating it, and it now serves practically 
the purpose of a protective tariff for plant material. 
“Yet, how'ever hurtful to American horticulture as a whole this 
may eventually prove to be, it has certainly temporarily boosted 
the American nursery industry very materially; yet this aspect 
of the Board’s activities can hardly go on indefinitely without 
sharp challenge from those who (no doubt rightly) believe that 
quarantines and protective tariff are not synonymous. Protect¬ 
ive tariff means less competition for the nurseryman and higher 
prices, yet it must be remembered that the American public even¬ 
tually pays for this increase in cost. The consumer also in the 
end pays for all unnecessary or needless restrictions imposed 
on the industry, whether by the Federal Horticultural Board, or 
by the several States. 
MAN vs NATURE 
“In time. Nature always establishes an equilibrium between 
host and parasite; between subject and disease. Nature should 
be aided by science, but when a pest becomes reasonably in¬ 
nocuous, there is little justification for continuing large public 
expense for combating it or in maintaining needless restraints 
on trade.” 
don’t kick at nominal dues 
Thus oiir Legislative Committee, ninler the chairman¬ 
ship of J. Edward Moon, has had a most strenuous year. 
When you are inclined to kick at the merely nominal 
dues you pay to enjoy membershi]) in this association, 
let me tell you that you ought to be compelled to pay in 
cold easli the value Mr. Moon has been to you individ¬ 
ually, in helping to prevent drastic and unnecessary leg¬ 
islation, in securing modifications of regulations and in 
making it possible for you to eontinue business profit¬ 
ably, or even at all. 
ARE WE PIKERS? 
Are we pikers or are we not? We are; or at least it 
sometimes looks as though we are. Mr. Moon had done 
this free seiwiee for you at great personal sacrifice of 
time and labor and cost fo his firm, and has been ably 
supported by members of this committee. 
LEGAL ADVICE 
Mr. M. Q. McDonald, attorney at Washington, has 
watched national legislation affecting nurserymen, and 
has attended hearings before the hYderal Horticultural 
Board representing the Legislative Committee and also 
your president. His charges have been merely nominal, 
his services have been invaluable. We should be repre¬ 
sented in Washington at all times and I recommend that 
the Legislative Committee be given ample funds to care 
for the legislative interests of this association. 
LEGISLATIVE RECOAIMENDATIONS 
Mr. Moon, on behalf of his committee, or perhaps in 
some instances individually will no doubt have important 
recommendatons to make. Some of us may agree, and 
others disagree with such conclusions and program; but 
in any event, may I liojie that hasty criticism and the 
jiresentation of undigested alternatives will be avoided. 
May I offer a word of caution. Our legislative affairs 
as before slated are of vital importance, perhaps more 
so now than ever before. The subject is highly contro¬ 
versial and the adoption or rejection of any specific pol¬ 
icy is fraught with serious consequence for good or ill 
to the nurseryman, and to horticulture at large. Whether 
we should favor any sort of Federal universal control of 
all interstate shipments or remain as at present, with 
mixed Federal and State control, is not easily settled, 
for there are excellent arguments on both sides. 
Chairman Moon and his committee have sat on the 
job during the whole year and have been in closest con¬ 
tact with Federal and State boards and legislative activi¬ 
ties; we do not have to accept his committee’s conclu¬ 
sions, but in any event let us consider their report sym¬ 
pathetically and if possible limit our discussions on the 
floor to broad policies rather than to the details of carry¬ 
ing out those policies otherwise, may we not fail to ac¬ 
complish anything of real moment and lose ourselves in 
the bog of unessentials. It is wisely the right and duty 
