As a member of the National Nut Growers Association I was this year chairman of the committee on orchard records. I sent out blanks, with lists of questions, to many prominent nut growers to see if I could secure data upon which to base a report to the association. The replies I received showed the existence of some very promising young orchards of small size, well cared for, but they also showed that there was no such thing as an intelligent report upon which reliable data as to the bearing records of orchards could be based for any future calculations. There are two reasons for this. First, most of the figures we have are based upon the records of a few pet trees around the dooryard or garden, grown under favorable conditions. Second, the young groves are not yet old enough for anyone to say, with any degree of accuracy, what the results will be. Therefore, the alluring figures printed in these pamphlets are only guesses. Furthermore, what of the contract of these concerns? What does it specify? You would be surprised to know the legal construction of one of these contracts, together with their guaranty bond. In most cases they advertise to plant, and properly cultivate for a period of five to seven years, orchards of the finest varieties of budded or grafted pecan trees, with Satsuma oranges or figs set between. But the guaranty company is usually wise enough to have lawyers who are able to advise them of their liabilities, and about all they actually guarantee is that, after a period of five years, provided all payments have been promptly met, there will be turned over to the purchaser five acres of ground with trees upon it. Five years old? No, they may not be one year old. Budded or grafted? No, they may be mere seedlings. Oranges set between them? No, the orange has passed out of the proposition before the bond stage. The companies generally print a copy of the bond, but usually in such small type that the victim does not read it, though the heading is always prominent. It thunders in the index and fizzles in the context. Moreover, suppose suit is brought on one of these contracts and bonds? What is the measure of damages? What basis has any court or jury for fixing damages? And be it remembered that courts do not exist for the protection of fools against their folly. The principle "caveat emptor" is as old as the common law itself, and it means that the buyer must beware, or in other words, that he should inform himself, and that he cannot expect the courts to protect him where he has failed to exercise due caution and diligence. Therefore, as a lawyer, I should very much hesitate to take on a contingent fee the suit of one of these various victims against a promoting orchard corporation.