The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-13
THE CROP PEST LAW
Prof Atwood Makes Reply to Criticisms
that Have Been Made,

Sro1. ATWOOD Makes hepy 10 CritiCiSrnS
that Have Been Made.
Editor of The Times-Dlspatch:
Sir,-l have for some days, had It in
mind to address Il few words to your
readers concerning the criticisms which
occur. in your issues of September 9th
and September 0lh. upon tho crop p=st
law or nursery inspection law ,r
Your correspondent from Mor!isville,
Va, very fairly states the case against
this law. and ! coincide in his opinion III.
the main. It has always been my opin.
injustice to the small nurserymen. and
l expressed myself in opposition to this
amount OF tax when the subject WAS
at Lynchburg in December last All PAL
ties Interested In his matter ought to Sc
cure the report of the Lynchblrg meet
ing. OF the State Horticultural SOCIETY
page AZ. BY doing SO they, will learn
the facts about the proposal and fl st
Inception Of this feature OF the law. New
or at any time while this bin was under
people or the Legislature. did change
my views In regard to this tax feature.
but 1t didn't seem to me that ought
to express myself more strongly in OPP
position to the proposed law than to
point out the injustice which 1t would
work. From the fact that have c,n-
the enforcement Of the crop pest laws
in Virginia, 1t has never seemed to me
that l ought to actively oppose meas
ures which the fruit growers or nur-s
serymen wishstos have passed. havo
not. however,, hesitated to give my opin-
ion as to the advisability of the meas
ures proposed to be enacted.
this police tax feature reduced, say to
a minimum charge of So and in my opin-
ion such a fee would not be unjust, as
the enforcement OF the crop pest law
1t would probably be just to- charge u
minimum fee of IS for all nu:seIym n.
and then charge those Who sell lab above
Of this nunibef''To state. however. that
there is not such an unjust or unfair law
on the statute books of any other S nte
In the Union IS Erather orerreachng the
mark.
Your correspondent Of September Soth,
seryman. from the. fact that he is vice,
president for Virginia Of the American
Association of Nursetymen. does not seem
to deal with this subject in, the same
the first place, he assumes that pill
was proposed and discussed by the Vir-
GINA Horticultural Society at its last an
nual meeting. In fact no such bill was
discussed, but only the tax featu e OF q
proposed BILL and the Horticultural So
ciety endorsed. think, by unanimou;
vote, the proposition to include q p.o-
vision for taxing nurserymen in the pro
posed revision Of the crop pest laws. BY
a reference to the report have cited
above. 1t will be seen that at least one
yocate of this tax. and wanted it placed
higher than it Is. while another piomi-
nent nurseryman advocated aflower tax
han wars put in hs f My Gw tsR
by the Committee OF the Hort cultural
Society,", and offered before the General
who cared to look into the matter had q
chance to know what this bill was. and
from having been present at the commit
invitation, present at the hearings be-
fore the legislative committee. | am in
position to say that no one tried to con-
ceal the provisions of this bill or to de-
ers because in all the discussions heard
by me its provisions were plainly stated.
and am aware that other people Q
We're not members Of the committee were
invited. like myself. to be present at the
meetings E
1t is true that the. bill prepared by
modified considerably by the committee,
of the Legislature before It's passage, and
these notifications changed to some eX-
tent the tax s feature me orgha ever X
nurseryman, and S. per diem for all time
REQUIRED to inspect nursery. , IN e eSo
cess, Of ono day: In my opinion opinion the tn
ship to a few Of the small nurE erymen
because to many OF our nurscrymen, the
other provision would have caused tIcln
to pay more tax than they. do now. pos
slbly this would be best, It Is not my pgr-
pose to offer an opinion on this point.
further than to repeat that feel; sure ne
small nurseIymen. who Groi% W. only y aou Tow
fee Of 800 The small nuiseryman ought
to be encouraged, as In my opinion It Is
a, good thing to- have trees ,prop pin,'t
close to where they are 70 pc plant q.
As TO this CORRESPONDENTS assertions
that no nurseryman would let his stock
become Infested with San Jose. scale
that unfortunately a large number Of n>r-
serymenS have permitted their stock to
become infested with the San Jose scale
and some other nests. A hnet 1ns Wn
! in America, and the records or my offlse
vii! show. that the yeiy best nurse u tal
In virginia and in all the eastern ~ states.
| prety Of the inspection of nurser es ana
! the condemnation and destruction OF In
tested stock NotwithstandIng THIS his c Or
sery ;n M in Virginia and the ma tern
| States have repeatedly written to TINS o.
| flee for advice and assistance mHet rres
from pests As proof Of the Haiu I,,, OF owl :,
advice, | may say that praGtlcaliy sye,y
nurseryman in the Eastern uhdt tan SUES sh IS
| is now fumgating his stock betore SNIP
ment, which | first introduced INTO the
| system of nursery work, by enforcing
! fumlgation in tho Virginia nurseries q N
! Jose scale and the Woolly Aphis, THIS
| correspondents experience, ought not II, 70
| be so limited that he should not know ms
be fair enough te to State it correctly, 9th
er measures proposed by VS. have also
! come TO be a part Of the regular prac.
large, and are distinctly valuable or the
nurserymen would mt follow them
For my part, | give the nurserymeeIn
! cal and evel-headed set of men which
we have In the whole list Of our agricul-
! tural pursuits, But while this corre-