in view of the fact that only a comparatively few years have elapsed
since I began my work on plants. Still, after having used vaccines on
human beings and animals for twenty-one years, and observing that plant
life reacts to an antigen in a similar manner, I am at least entitled to
the same conclusions. This gives me an opportunity of knowing years in
advance just what to expect.
While my work is still going on as an experiment I have no hesitancy in
saying that I can and have put as much active immunity to the blight
into the chestnut in five years as nature has been able to place in
perhaps four or five thousand years by her usual method. However it is
only fair to state that such results cannot be accomplished by mere
oratory. Injections must be made and the antigen must go into the
plants, not in single doses, if you please, but by the thousands.
In recent years there has been considerable discussion relative to the
chestnut coming back. This simply means further delay. The chestnut will
come back but not before from 25 to 150 years yet. There are few roots
that will stand mutilation for that period, and the few plants that do
survive will have taken the shrub form like the chinquapin, and the nuts
will likely be as insignificant. I have plants from a tree that holds as
much immunity in the natural way as any I know, being rated at 2X, and
these plants have inherited an immunity equal to the parent, no more and
no less. I have, however, a lot of seedlings from Paragon and Champion
trees rated at from 6X to 7X. These seedlings may confidently be
expected to perform as their parents and produce many plants of equal
resistance.
I shall not discuss the antigen or its method of administration. That
has been covered rather carefully in former papers. I do want to say a
word, however, about root stock. In a blight region it is preferable to
have chestnuts on their own roots. The nearest to own-rooted plants is a
graft on their own seedlings. The Chinese and Japanese chestnut in my
hands has made a very poor root stock for the American chestnut or its
hybrids. The European chestnut is only fair, with the chinquapin
somewhat better, but having the disadvantage of being troublesome to get
from the seed. The American chestnut, or its American hybrids, is by far
the best, providing we can get one with immunity. I think the Rochester
will shortly fill this need.
The chestnut oak has made a rather interesting stock for a few
varieties, notably a Chinese and 20 No. 3, a native American chestnut
sent to me from Bloomsburg, Pa. I now have a few of these double grafted
with other varieties.
I might say that I am no longer interested in any chestnut, no matter
how resistant it may be, unless the nut is of large size and fine
quality, because I can immunize a plant bearing a good size, fine
quality chestnut much easier and in a shorter time than one can be
developed through hybridization from an inferior nut. I am usually, like
most folks, looking for the path of least resistance.
My work has been a good deal divided during the past few years because,
while I started out with the chestnut alone, now I am carrying a dozen
other fruits, nuts and berries.
In closing let me state that my principle of induced immunity is sound
and the procedure feasible and practical.
* * * * *
THE PRESIDENT: About the result of grafting the chestnut on a
species of oak. How long have these scions been growing?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: About three years.
MR. HERSHEY: How long?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: This is not the oak that I had reference to
when you were up there. These are about three years old. I think they
grow a little better than on the chestnut. Many of them died. I have
another scheme now; that is grafting the scions as high as I can. Get
them united and then bend them over and get them to root. Some are doing
nicely, others have died.
DR. SMITH. I think you complimented us by thinking we could
follow you. Do you intend to vaccinate the chestnut and make it immune
and then expect it to transmit that immunity in its seed? Have you
checked up in the second generation?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I haven't had time yet.
DR. SMITH: Thus far you have established immunity in the living
tree?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, and I have a bunch of seedlings now from
nuts from immunized trees that I planted last spring. I have 200 of
those. I expect them to inherit immunization from their parents.
DR. SMITH: We vaccinate each generation of youngsters.
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I was speaking of the experiments with guinea
pigs.
DR. SMITH: Isn't smallpox vaccination against your theory?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I don't think so. They are doing it with other
things. I found a human being giving the reaction for typhoid for
seventeen years after he had been immunized.
DR. SMITH: Have you any evidence for or against the decline of
immunity in the tree?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I think it will decline.
DR. SMITH: Then we have got to keep on immunizing like
spraying. I didn't mean necessarily annually. I mean perhaps it is not a
permanent achievement.
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I imagine that the tree will be sufficiently
attacked by blight to keep the immunity up. It is wise to have it
attacked once in a while.
MR. HERSHEY: Isn't this only carried on until you get natural
resistance?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I know that it will be a long time before I can
have chestnut trees to produce like Mr. Harrington's. But I am going
ahead. I can't wait 17 years. All I need is some time and I will produce
chestnuts of the finest varieties, as Mr. Harrington has.
DR. SMITH: How long will it take?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: They will hold their immunity as well as the
Chinese. The ones I have are worth planting right now. I have trees that
are standing up better than any Chinese chestnuts are. It takes a long
time before the immunizing principle is so disseminated that every part
of the tree will have an equal resistance. I can easily see that by
cutting off a scion and grafting it I may get hold of one that has not
had its immunization distributed as it should be.
DR. SMITH: A fairly ignorant man can take machinery and spray
an orchard. Can he do the same with immunizing?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: No sir, he can not.
DR. SMITH: Perhaps I should not have used the word ignorant. A
farm hand can spray and make a pretty good crop of apples.
DR. ZIMMERMAN: No, he can't do it. It hasn't been easy. I have
run into all kinds of obstacles. As soon as I injure the stock a little
bit the blight takes it. As soon as I can raise them on their own roots
it will be all right. That will come.
DR. SMITH: Have you seen chestnut grafts root as the apple
does?
DR. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, right below the surface. A couple of them
were that long. They will send out roots. Then I have noticed on some,
that at the place where I grafted the callus got quite large. It got too
dry and died off. I have never rooted American chestnut cuttings. I have
rooted some Chinese chestnuts.
THE PRESIDENT: Some of the Chinese chestnuts root quite readily
from those small shoots that come up from the ground. I conducted a
little experiment in trying to propagate the Chinese chestnuts by
cuttings. I made 144 cuttings. They all dutifully and beautifully died.
I don't mean to say that the Chinese chestnut cannot be rooted by
cuttings.
DR. ZIMMERMAN: I noticed one chestnut that was toppling over
and the leaves were withering. The rats had taken it off just below the
ground. I couldn't find a root anywhere, but it was callused. I cut it
back and planted it again. It must have roots now for it is still green.
Otherwise it wouldn't live this long.
THE PRESIDENT: Your experiments are of very great interest. If
you are successful you will deserve the gratitude of this and future
generations.
MR. HARRINGTON: Do you remember when we were down at the Riehl
nursery that we ran into a chestnut that produces 7 to 9 in a burr?
THE PRESIDENT: I remember one tree that had a great many nuts.
MR. HARRINGTON: I had one with 7 nuts and they said there were
some with 9. Was that the one named Gibbons?
DR. COLBY: That has three nuts to the burr.
DR. DEMING: Dr. Colby, there have been two instances of blight
infection in Illinois. Could you tell us how the eradication was done?
DR. COLBY: In each case the tree was burned and the disease
entirely eradicated by fire on the spot.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Colby has a paper from Mr. Littlepage on the
plant patent law.
"PLANT PATENT ACT"
_By Thomas P. Littlepage, District of Columbia Bar, Washington, D. C._
The plant patent act is an effort by Congress, as stated in the
Committee reports on this bill, "to afford agriculture, so far as
practicable, the same opportunity to participate in the benefits of the
patent system as has been given industry, and thus assist in placing
agriculture on a basis of economic equality with industry." The act is
rather short and is set forth below:
[PUBLIC--NO. 245--71ST CONGRESS]
[S. 4015]
An Act To provide for plant patents.
_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled._ That sections 4884 and 4886 of
the Revised Statutes, as amended. (U. S. C., title 35, secs. 40 and 31),
are amended to read as follows:
"SEC. 4884. Every patent shall contain a short title or
description of the invention or discovery, correctly indicating its
nature and design, and a grant to the patentee, his heirs or assigns,
for the term of seventeen years, of the exclusive right to make, use,
and vend the invention or discovery (including in the case of a plant
patent the exclusive right to asexually reproduce the plant) throughout
the United States and the Territories thereof, referring to the
specification for the particulars thereof. A copy of the specification
and drawings shall be annexed to the patent and be a part thereof.
"SEC. 4886. Any person who has invented or discovered any new
and useful art, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any
new and useful improvements thereof, or who has invented or discovered
and asexually reproduced any distinct and new variety of plant, other
than a tuber-propagated plant, not known or used by others in this
country, before his invention or discovery thereof, and not patented or
described in any printed publication in this or any foreign country,
before his invention or discovery thereof, or more than two years prior
to his application, and not in public use or on sale in this country for
more than two years prior to his application, unless the same is proved
to have been abandoned, may, upon payment of the fees required by law,
and other due proceeding had, obtain a patent therefor."
SEC. 2, Section 4888 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (U. S.
C., title 35, sec. 33), is amended by adding at the end thereof the
following sentence: "No plant patent shall be declared invalid on the
ground of noncompliance with this section if the description is made as
complete as is reasonably possible."
SEC. 3. The first sentence of section 4892 of the Revised
Statutes, as amended (U. S. C., title 35, sec. 35), is amended to read
as follows:
"SEC. 4892. The applicant shall make oath that he does verily
believe himself to be the original and first inventor or discoverer of
the art, machine, manufacture, composition, or improvement, or of the
variety of plant, for which he solicits a patent; that he does not know
and does not believe that the same was ever before known or used; and
shall state of what country he is a citizen."
SEC. 4. The President may by Executive order direct the
Secretary of Agriculture (1) to furnish the Commissioner of Patents such
available information of the Department of Agriculture, or (2) to
conduct through the appropriate bureau or division of the department
such research upon special problems, or (3) to detail to the
Commissioner of Patents such officers and employees of the department,
as the commissioner may request for the purposes of carrying this Act
into effect.
SEC. 5. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Act,
no variety of plant which has been introduced to the public prior to the
approval of this Act shall be subject to patent.
SEC. 6. If any provision of this Act is declared
unconstitutional or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the Act
and the application thereof to other persons or circumstances shall not
be affected thereby.
Approved, May 23, 1930.
* * * * *
It is admitted by all who understand anything about horticulture that
this act is intended to meet a long-felt want. The world owes much to
many hard working scientists who have developed many valuable plants,
both ornamental and edible, and up to the date of this act such producer
had no way of reaping any very material financial benefit from his
labors. The man who might invent some new and useful gadget for an
automobile or other machinery was protected under the patent law, if he
availed himself of it, but the man who developed a beautiful flower, a
fine apple or a fine nut was wholly without protection.
The term "asexually" as used in the act, is generally understood by
horticulturists to mean any method of producing a plant except from
seed. It will be observed, in referring again to the act, that the man
who discovers some new plant and propagates it by any of the methods
covered by the term "asexually" can have such plant patented under the
terms of this law, but the patent law is one that is always construed
strictly and obviously the application for patent would have to be made
in the name of the man who actually discovered the plant. Of course,
after securing such patent, he could assign it the same as any other
patent is assigned, but the question would constantly arise in this
connection as to who actually was the first discoverer. Most of the
sporadic fine plants, especially fruit and nut bearing trees, were
matters of neighborhood knowledge many years before they actually
attracted the attention of some one who recognized their full value and
knew how to propagate them, and the question would arise immediately as
to who was the real discoverer. Undoubtedly the man who tramped
constantly around in the neighborhood of a fine nut or fruit tree and
actually saw the tree but did not recognize its value, is like the man
the poet describes when he said:
"A primrose by the river's brim,
A primrose only was to him,
And nothing more."
This man could not be said to be a discoverer under the terms of this
law; but on the other hand the plowman who might be plodding his weary
way homeward and see a fruit or nut tree bearing something unusual and
who would recognize its unusual and distinct differences would be the
real discoverer, but unless he could prove the fact that he had called
it to the attention of others in some manner he would have difficulty in
complying with the patent law and making a proper showing of originality
as required by that law. But he would also, in addition to being the
discoverer, have to asexually reproduce it and this he might not be able
to do on account of his lack of knowledge of propagating methods.
The language of the law presents some very interesting problems to those
of us who have tramped the fields and valleys in search of nut trees
producing better nuts than those already propagated, and it incidently
brings into the patent practice a brand new requirement. The ablest
patent lawyer in America might not know the difference between a bud and
a graft, a layer or cross-pollination. I have frequently had some very
able lawyers who visited my farm and had their attention called to a
pecan tree grafted onto a hickory, ask what kind of nuts it would bear.
Of course when they ask such questions as that I promptly change the
subject and begin to talk about the weather or something else; I
certainly do not try to educate them in the fundamentals of tree
propagation. It will also require specialists in the patent office who
likewise know something of horticulture and reproduction methods of
plants.
It will also be noted that the law excludes tuber-propagated plants. The
Committee report states that:
"The bill excepts from the right to a patent the invention or
discovery of a distinct and new variety of a tuber-propagated
plant. The term "tuber" is used in its narrow horticultural sense
as meaning a short, thickened portion of an underground branch. It
does not cover, for instance, bulbs, corms, stolons, and rhizomes.
Substantially, the only plants covered by the term
"tuber-propagated" would be the Irish potato and the Jerusalem
artichoke. This exception is made because this group alone, among
asexually reproduced plants, is propagated by the same part of the
plant that is sold as food."
It will be noted that there is quite a spread, however, between the
exact language of the law and the Committee report, for example: under
the law it would appear that a dahlia might be excluded, and it also
raises the question, under the language of the law, as to many of the
root plants, such as peonies and others. Obviously, Congress did not
intend to exclude plants such as the dahlia, peony and others, as
evidenced from the excerpt in the Committee report above quoted, and
whether the matter of the production of a new dahlia by
cross-pollination and tested out through the growth of the bulbs, can be
made to harmonize with the language of the law is the question. The
Committee report says that tubers mean only "Irish potatoes and
Jerusalem artichokes." It always occurred to me that the sweet-potato
is also a tuber, but the Committee report apparently attempts to exclude
it.
There are any number of interesting questions that occur to those of us
who are fortunate enough to have some knowledge of the law as well as a
few fundamental principles of horticulture, but in spite of whatever
weakness the law may or may not have, it is undoubtedly a step in the
right direction, and meets a long-felt want.
The Secretary of Agriculture said in his letter to the Committee:
"The proposed legislation would appear to be desirable and to lend
far-reaching encouragement to agriculture and benefit to the
general public."
Thomas A. Edison, who is also quoted in the Committee report, said:
"Nothing that Congress could do to help farming would be of greater
value and permanence than to give to the plant breeder the same
status as the mechanical and chemical inventors now have through
the patent law. There are but few plant breeders. This (the bill)
will, I feel sure, give us many Burbanks."
It is certainly to be hoped that many of those interested in northern
nut culture, as well as in fruits and ornamentals, will avail themselves
of the privileges of this bill to give us something better. We are not
satisfied with our varieties today and should not be. The greatest
problem in nut culture, as well as fruit and ornamentals, is the
question of variety. It will also be the most important question a
hundred years from now, but the man who produces these better varieties
should do so with the knowledge that under this law the fruits of his
labor will be protected and he will at least have the same opportunity
to receive remuneration therefrom as the inventor of a gadget.
* * * * *
DR. COLBY: I have talked with a number of men interested in the
law. While they agree that it is a step in the right direction they feel
that it will be a rather difficult thing to administer it. Plants differ
from other objects or things or "gadgets" and considerable experience
will be necessary on the part of the administration before the law will
be made workable.
* * * * *
A banquet was held at the Hotel Montrose on the evening of September 17
at which about forty members and guests were present. The menu follows,
and it will be noted that nuts were featured:
Canape, Montrose
(Dates stuffed with Nuts)
Iced Celery
Mixed Nuts
Queen Olives
Soup, Rothschild
(Garnished with Chestnuts)
Roast Young Capon Stuffed, Hickory Nut Dressing, Jelly
Au Gratin Potatoes
Puree of Chestnuts, Baked
Frozen Fruit & Nut Salad, Cream Nut Dressing
Wafers
Hot Parkerhouse Rolls
Black Walnut Ice Cream
Nut Layer Cake
Coffee
After the banquet the President spoke as follows:
Once upon a time I read a poem, which unfortunately I do not have here
but in effect it was this: In our progress through life a great deal of
injury is wrought by not showing our appreciation of people while they
are with us. Let us give them our flowers now. We do want now to say a
few things about the founder of our organization. In my history of this
association Dr. Deming was the person who first proposed an association
of this kind. I believe this was about 21 or 22 years ago, perhaps
longer than that. At any rate the association has been going for some
time and it was brought into existence through the thought of Dr.
Deming. We should be very glad to hear from Dr. Deming.
DR. DEMING: Thank you. It is very gratifying indeed but I wish
you hadn't. It is very difficult to express gratitude properly. I cannot
make a speech like our friend Dr. Smith here, who I hope will make one.
I can't tell a good story like our President. In fact, I feel like that
man who said, "How happy is the moron, he does not give a damn. I wish I
were a moron. My God! perhaps I am."
David Fairchild says that it takes the energies, the fortunes and the
lives of pioneers, the best people of our country, to build up a new
plant industry. I congratulate you all in being included in that class
of pioneers, the best people of this country. But we haven't yet built
up the great nut industry that we would like to build.
I might tell you how the idea of the nut growers association arose. In
1907 I got a little farm of forty acres in Connecticut. In 1908 I read
an article by Dr. Morris, "Nut Culture as a Side Line for Physicians." I
immediately wrote the doctor and he said in fifteen years I could have
an income of $100.00 an acre from nuts alone. That seemed to me exactly
what I wanted, $4,000 a year and live very comfortably. So I bought all
the nut trees I could find. I bought nut trees from every nursery in
this country that offered them in the North. I got pecans from the
South. I sent to California and got filberts and English walnuts. I sent
to Europe for English walnut seeds. I bought twenty acres of chestnut
sprout land and grafted the sprouts. Just as the chestnuts were
beginning to bear the blight came along. That ended them. The English
walnuts I set around in fence corners and they grew a little smaller
every year and, finally disappeared. That was the end of the English
walnuts. At that time I couldn't graft hickories. With great labor I
collected hickory scions and sent them to nurseries in the South and had
them grafted. They arrived in the North after the ground had frozen. I
told the hired man to heel them in. He heeled them in but left the top
of the roots out. In the spring they were all dead. By that time my
dander was up a little. I thought there must be other men who were
having the same trouble. If we could have a little organization we could
tell each other our troubles and perhaps work them out together. I wrote
Dr. Morris, John Craig, Professor Close, Mr. Hales, and one or two
others, and we met together in the Botanical Museum in Bronx Park and
organized the Northern Nut Growers Association. That is all I had to do
with it. Whether we will ever come to the place where they will have
bands out and ticker tape flying, when we come to town--that is the
thing I used to dream about a little when we first started. But I don't
think we are destined to burst wide the gates of fame yet. We may after
we have achieved our objects. As Dr. Fairchild has said, all our money,
lives and energies must be devoted to them. We then may achieve
post-mortem fame.
I want to say one thing, however, before I stop. We can't advocate the
planting of nut trees if there are no nut trees to be had. Therefore, I
think the Northern Nut Growers Association should do all that is
possible to encourage the nursery men who are propagating nut trees. We
should consider the propagating nursery men as a vital and essential
part of the work we are trying to do.