’WARE SPRAYED FRUIT.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 56, 16 February 1911, Page 5

’WARE SPRAYED FRUIT.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —As secretary to the H.B. Fruit Growers’ Association, I must take exception to your leading article of yesterday’s date. If you had inserted an article on ’Ware •Unsprayed Fruit, n would have been more reasonable. Those who have lived in countries where fruit is not systematically sprayed, know what rubbish in the form of fruit is offered to the public for sale. I may say that the two instances that caused the alarmist reports about two years ago, were thoroughly investigated ; (one by my Association, and one by the Government), and both were found to be baseless. I can supply the particulars of these to you or any of your correspondents who would like to go further into the matter. I should very much like to have samples of the plums that caused the trouble you speak about in your article. Surely it would be better to have the matter thoroughly sifted and all evidence carefully taken before rushing to print With such an alarmist report. We have been trying to educate growers for years on the necessity of spraying and as you must know, it is the law of the land, and scientists have time and again proved the harmlessness of eating fruit that has been sprayed.—l am, etc., WILLIAM G. GOULD, Hon. Sec. H.B. Fruit Growers’ Association.