66 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Jan. 28, 19C4. 



was a law back of liim we could go in there, at least Mr. 

 Smith could, and I suppose I could go with him if he ap- 

 pointed me to assist him, and we could do what can be done 

 toward eradicating that disease there. Now I am helpless. 

 Anyone who has foul brood can come and set it down within 

 half a mile of my place and I can't help myself, and it isn't 

 germane to the question whether I can tell a man who was 

 helped this much and that much, and it is germane to use 

 something analogous. The fact is that smallpox has never 

 been wiped out. It is in existence now in the same form 

 that it was when I was a boy, and in spite of all the laws and 

 endeavors it continues, but you don't see people marked with 

 smallpox to-day as when I was a boy, because it is sup- 

 pressed. Smallpox isn't foul brood. Foul brood can be sup- 

 pressed to an extent. Suppose now it is entirely wiped out. 

 Even then I am safer if I can have done what can be done 

 with a diseased apiary close to me. There is no sort of a 

 question but what a great deal can be done to overcome it. 

 Some of the New England States have foul brood laws; also 

 in Colorado, Michigan, etc. They have them in Canada. 

 They have had them for years. They are tried there. In 

 Canada, Mr. McEvoy did a grand work. If there had been 

 no foul brood inspector, wouldn't it have gone on and wiped 

 out all the bees? They have their bees there is spite of the 

 disease. Now if there is a law that obliges a man to do what 

 he can to crush out the disease, that will be a help to me, no 

 matter if he is clear over on the Wisconsin line. Mr. France 

 is helping me because I am only 15 miles from Wisconsin, 

 and any day it may come — within two years at least — to my 

 place. There is no question but what we need the foul 

 brood law, and the States that do have it don't go back on it. 

 They have it, and don't say it isn't of any use, and we won't 

 have it. We need the law. and we need to do what we can. 

 I venture tp say that there is more foul brood in Wisconsin 

 than is desirable, notwithstanding the good work Mr. France 

 is doing, and he will be old and gray-headed, but it would be 

 a great deal worse if they didn't have a foul brood inspector 

 there. We simply have that appropriation, and Mr. Smith 

 has done — I don't say how much, but he cannot do what he 

 ought to do until we get the law. I want it for my own per- 

 sonal security. 



Mr. Moore — It seems to me that perhaps this discussion 

 has gone on about long enough, but if you will pardon me, 

 I will give an illustration. How many times, Mr. Smith, have 

 you tried to get a law since 1894? 



Mr. Smith — Every legislature. 



Mr. Moore — Last fall there was ground broken to get 

 a law for bee-keepers. Mr. Smith and the State Association 

 had been doing what they could, and we didn't get awakened 

 up until several months later. I think it was in Januarv 

 that we got to talking about it. We decided that the Chi- 

 cago-Northwestern Association would join hands with the 

 Illinois State Association and see if we couldn't get a foul 

 brood law. so through the American Bee Journal's help and 

 other personal help we went for the bee-keepers. We said. 

 "Subscribe your money, and we will do some work." and 

 with the Illinois State Association we went and got a law. 

 We did everything we could think of. Dr. Miller gave us 

 valuable suggestions which we carried into effect, and we 

 carried into effect every suggestion that our friends gave us. 

 We told them, "This won't do, but it is one of the things we 

 must do to get a law." A day was appointed, and our Secre- 

 tary had the honor of .going to Springfield on the day the 

 bill went in. and the committee on annropriations for the 

 House and for the Senate both had their hearings the same 

 day, and very kindly listened to the committees addressing 

 them. Our Secretary went to the State House and got a 

 copy of the bill as introduced. It was our intention to fol- 

 low the Wisconsin law as we supposed should be done. The 

 members of the Illinois State Association said they con- 

 sulted with their friends close to the legislature, and that 

 they failed everv time so far since 1894, and were told that 

 if they put a bill in with that clause in it they would fail, 

 and consequently introduced a law that would pass. When 

 iur committee got there we found it had already been intro- 

 duced by a member in the House and a member in the 

 Senate. I personally consulted with Mr. Austin, a friend of 

 Mr. Kanenhurg's. I told him it was a personal matter in 

 which I was interested, and then asked him as a friend to 

 push it. I talked to him at great length. He talked to me 

 about this drastic clause. I said, "Mr. .Austin, we are going 

 to have that in the law." 



When I eot to Snringfield I found the bill was already 

 introduced. We could go en and introduce another bill if 



we chose, or Mr. Austin would introduce it for us, but our 

 friends said if you introduce another law the chances are we 

 would kill both of them, so we decided it was best to get 

 what we could this time and hope for better things in the 

 future. Mr. Austin said, "What is the matter with it? There 

 is no clause in there for compulsory inspection." I explained 

 to him that they had already started their bill through the 

 grind, but I said, "Mr. Austin, I tell you, if it comes to me 

 to enforce the law, I will put in motion the machinery we 

 have aside from the Wisconsin law to compel any given 

 party to submit to proper things. I said there is a general 

 nuisance law under which any person can be prosecuted." I 

 would first write to such a party, "We have information that 

 you have foul brood in your apiary, and we recommend you 

 to submit to the treatment." If he doesn't answer, I would 

 say, "Now, sir, a certain day we shall prosecute you before 

 this court for maintaining a nuisance." I tell you, ladies 

 and gentlemen, I believe in a majority of cases moral suasion 

 will work, but this authority of prosecution, that is my 

 thought, and as I explained it to Mr. Austin, and if any case 

 of that sort comes up to me I will make these people, and if 

 I am backed by the Association. I will carry it into court 

 and do something under the nuisance act. There is a 

 nuisance act. and it will cover every possible case of a 

 nuisance. 



. We have been blamed for not getting what people 

 thought we ought to have gotten, and I spent weeks on this 

 question, and felt sensitive that we were blamed for getting 

 half a loaf when we ought to have gotten a whole loaf. We 

 would have gotten nothing. That is the situation, and Mr. 

 France has said if we make a showing before the next legis- 

 lature that we have done well, as good and faithful servants, 

 they will give us any law we ask them. They fired questions 

 at us. Why didn't you get your law last year? It is a point 

 in our favor with the next legislature that we got some kind 

 of a law at the hands of the last legislature. 



Mr. Wheeler — You may think I am overbearing. I am 

 interested in this question, and I would like to hear from the 

 people who have been helped by the state inspector. I don't 

 care to hear from the people who have wax or foundation to 

 sell, and people who are inspectors, but from the men them- 

 selves who are interested and have bees. 



Mr. Smith — I will just state that the men who are here 

 are practical bee-keepers, and they are their own foul brood 

 inspectors. A man that will allow foul brood to come and 

 stay in his apiary is no practical bee-keeper, and I don't be- 

 lieve a man of that kind would belong to an organization. 

 Outside is where the trouble comes. I was within 17 miles 

 of Dr. Miller's, I was near Crystal Lake, as far as Mattoon, 

 and south to East St. Louis, and Danville, and when I was 

 out 20 days I had visited 42 apiaries, and there were over 

 .?oo colonies that I treated. You see, I only had 20 days to 

 do it in. I would have been out longer only sickness at home 

 brought me back. I was due up at Kankakee, but the season 

 got so late we couldn't do much. We all have to work to- 

 gether, and if there is any bee-keeper who knows of a case of 

 foul brood it is his duty to correspond with the inspector and 

 have it treated. We have men in this State that are selling 

 bees and queens that have foul brood. I want to get after 

 those fellows. They are the ones that are scattering it 

 broadcast. I lost 83 colonies of bees by buying queens. "Two 

 of my neighbors near by lost 102, and another lost 42. It 

 wiped their apiaries clear out. They didn't know what was 

 the matter until they were all gone. They brought their 

 queens from the same party. I understand this party has 

 been buying bees promiscuously and shipping them all over 

 the State. He doesn't care anything about it. I understood 

 parties in Cook county bought bees of him, and they were all 

 diseased, and their apiaries had never had it before. If we 

 can't work as a unit as bee-keepers, we can't do any good. 

 We want to all stand together. If you know a case in your 

 county, it is your duty to report it. 



Dr. Miller — I didn't know there was one. 



Mr. Smith — I don't believe all foul brood will ever be 

 exterminated any more than smallpox. 



Dr. Miller — 1 would like to have a minute and a half of 

 private conversation with Mr. Wheeler. If you had no foul 

 brood in your own apiary, and there was a case that you 

 knew of within a half-mile of you, a man who had one 

 colony, and that colony was rotten with foul brood and you 

 knew it, would you. or wouldn't you, want to oblige that man 

 to burn up that colony or treat it in some way? Wouldn't 

 you want the chance to say that he 7iiust do that? You know 

 you would. I want to tejl you that if it comes to that, you 



