The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1919-02-26
= y 90 ;
THE APPLE GRADING BILL
How the New Grading Law Would
~ Affect Small Growers

Affect Small Growers
Professor NJ. B.sChlnnlings.s secretary !
OF the Vermont Horticultural society,
has. Written an open letter to A. M. i
Naughan, of Shelburne, which follows:a
Dear Mr.. Vaughan:
THE full title of the bill is 9 Pro
posed Uniform Apple Grading Law for
the New England States. =
The general provisions of the bill arel
for a Standard barrel like our flour
barrel and standard box holding a +
bushel Of apples. These packages havet
| been in use for years and Years. The
grades. are Standard Fancy, Standard
A, Standard b, and Unclassitied. These
correspond Approximately to the pres
ent. practice of Fancy No. / and No. ?,
but with more precision as 70 quality.
Provision IS also, made for the brand
ing of the apples in saeeordanee with
the quantity, and. quality of the pack
| ages, via: f,ti
/ This BILL HES is not a. new one got
ten up IN haste, The general scheme |
1 for grades has beenannder censidera ton
/ Throughout New England for, upwards
of four years. IT has, been studied by .
the. various horticultural societies and
commissioners Of agriculture and COM
iaercial dealers. and during the four
years much pruning, staudardizing,- cts, |
has been done to get the measure 10
meet the general papproyal of those
/. concerned.
The bill Is practically a copy Of the
New York law enacted four, years ago
and essentially the same as the law tor
J Maine and, Massachusetts already II
s force for two, years. zz.
r. The points in favor of the bill brief
y stated are: these, It. provides for
staaaaTdi zation: 9f. packages aud grades
: and ..e q, the lagtitpdcae II gfades
: and packages which have been source
: Of enauGb snl5supdegst aadipg itherto,s Il
helpsaip lleadeyelleoi3lnent efeqmarkets
ald provides a. square deal and cor
: reel stFatement of qn2ntity and quality
!, of fruit 1t, win tend to stimulate
! methods of culture and avoid heavy
Y losses in the production of much infer
7 Tor fruit.
. Many growers in Vermont, apparent
t ly a majority, desire the Hill; laany
. commission men and wholesale buyers
l. are in favor of it: retailers approve it.
i The assumed objections to the bill are
}, that. it would avoid the use of private
e lly established labels or brands: that it
< would discriminate against the small
grower and that it is rather exaeting.
These points may be met in the follow
ing way;
The bin does not forbid use Of pri-
IS vate brands NOR labels but saws they
must not be more conspicuous than the
~ standard brand or label AS to wheth-
% er tile measure is unfair to the small
grower is a matter TO be determined
but the objection does not appear to
. be as well founded as some suggest
:" This point was under consideration al
the three different conferences held by
CT commissioners of agriculture or THEN
IS representatives and by the representa-
tives of the New England Horticulture
Y, societies at conferences held in Worces
he ter. Mass, in Boston and Portland, Me
d. It Is difficult to believe that til,
cd commissioners of agriculture OF tn,
ID New England states or the represen
tatives of any horticultural societies
:, would favor any measure with an el
M ement of unfairness in it, Moreover j
~ is difficult TO believe that the, law which
has worked well in the west and in Tn
ne south. in New York for four years, il
Is Maine for. two wears. in Massachusetts
n, for two wears, would have been enaete,
ngi and would still be in force if there
Is, in it.
+, 1t is greatly to be doubted if tn
av executive committees of the Vernon
ol. Horticultural society for three difieren
.ei years, with different personnel in par
nv would have approved this measure. If
ola had seemed to them to be unfair. As fo
the writer, he wishes to say that if h
10 felt that the bill would Re unfair t
az any considerable number he would OF
S9r6 pose it on just that ground,
~ As TO the sentiment of the growers o
,ad the bill it should be stated that an e.
- fort has been made to find out how pc,
10 ia pie felt about It. Weeks ago copies {
- the bill were mailed to growers in di
II. ferent parts of the state and of Il
- dozens of replies received only tw
.,s people raised objections and these a
~ met in the points hitherto presented.
! nc those who favor. the Iill there are a
parently as many small growers /;
large ones There are n considerab
number. of people in Grand Isle ar
rat. addison counties who are in favor
the bill, and some from these COUNT
have already used the New York reg
III lations.
Finally it should be noted that Il
IN bill is not 10 go into effect until 49,
and if it appears after its passage th
ting there is injustice in it, the bin can
repealed two years hence.
vas Very truly yours.
NJ b. CUMMINGS,
Secretary Vermont Horticultural Socie
ting -