Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-03-17

relating 10 ioul.brood among tees be 40
amended ne 70 make u operative; they
10 cot ask FOR any uoney cInsidefa.
ton but that some measure may b.
adopted 20 protect the hoekeepefs from
this dread disease. These reOple say
tuat N our legislators are not generous
enough % give ~ some simnis law
10 work 10 IN trying 10 eradicate
this Urea disease from among our
bves, especially when they ore
wiling TO pay tue cost, then
they prefer that all acts relating 10 tue
subj be repeated ~ they are and
have been taxed for yeas uu1 nre r..
ceiviug little or no benefit. VINO will
say that this IL ius or rghl2 We fnI
that the bee Industry Il VI much more
imp1ftaucs and benefit 10 the Slate
than many OF our people suppose, and
u should be encouraged. 30 also should
our ffuit industry; but u allen should
be made as near ~ possible self.sustain-
ing. A mal0tliy Of our iruit gfowers
bciieve thal " We hid some plsin sdu-
catilnnl spray law II e uli Do operated
At little cost under State board OF agfl-
culture. All necessary Information
could be- distributed through tue pross
or otherwise throughout tue entire
State for less than one.third the money
paid out by Que county 10 inspectors
under the Operations vi our late spray
law. 8 ms lafts 0f this law were Too
arbitrary, anu 10 came ~ near being n
failure that our 10 fislatos do not
seem willing 10 ngain try the
experiment. Yot we mad that there 10
stlil fow that you'd like 10 nave an.
other lng ~ this KIND nd iplei. rney
Hsneft that We need a strong oaal-itOn
law, One tnAt will force every bo1y TO
come 10 Time NJ thoy express u, ami
that nothing short OF this wOulu an.
swer the purpose. Now, while some
VI those people are h nest in their
Views u should BE- remembered that
with a lew " them the main oblec, IA
an once, or for what there " In Il.
Again, We hud great many from
neatly Rll parts OF The State who a..
sufi Just ~ positively that we need no
spray laws. ruey tell us this
mater should not be forced on the
pv0ple; they argue that Il Il unjus, And
unconstitutional 10 maze II matter n
cpmpuisi0n. SIN others tell M TINT
while they are willing 10 support the
best possible mVasute i0r tue brnen
VI the fruit Industry, ia y boliovo that
Il should be- educational Instead OF af.
bitrnTl. While some may hold eX.
tfume vioya on this A. IN oil other
quostl0ns, ana white 70 dOls not seem 10
Uu Ia the nature VI things fpf
all a. see alike, II snoulI DO plaza that
every one should exert himself Tor tue
beet general iuitfrHi for the sucutus oi
our ituit Industry; anu 70 one should
be- willing 10 iall back into the samo
Old run that We nave boel travelling w
long, Tor any que doing this eau Enrily
be cOnsldVtol n riouI 90 the ifuit III
dusty. We would like 10 impress on
oil Interested iu our fruit growing 10.
duatry this DDe fact, that success IN tbs
matter depends more on our own I'll.
,ofls Than ON the aciiDua OF our siyl-
bofe. q course " our uuighbof docs
nOihing 10 save his fruit, ID will take !
little extra N ut on obr part 90 make % |
q success; but the iuct Btiil remains |
that success 10 Obiainablr. Many o
our large ffult growers can and ate I
spnyiug their ruiz and dlHln ecti x |
their trees with success aud some OF !
them tell uA that they would prefer ~ |
have no law on tho subject 40 the /
think that ~ all Of our frult grower,
cared Tor their lrovs aud Nuit u /
W uld create 40 much competition |
that it would lower the price and make |
II loiB profitable. We zoe no neel OF /
fear on this ecofe, ~ We should Taitu |
fult TO snip % outside mhfkeis; but |
does tuis not lessen ihe necessity OF |
stringent muatufts ana dotB II not tenn |
TO rove that the Siatr should ult psv |