332 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



great is the prejudice against it from 

 this cause that it is a difficult matter 

 to sell it, even when the producer is 

 known to be honest, unless it is sold at 

 a low price. 



THERE IS PREJUDICE EVEN AGAINST 

 COMB HONEY. 



There is considerable prejudice 

 against comb hone}'. There are quite 

 a number of people who believe that it 

 is manufactured and it is impossible 

 to make them believe otherwise. I be- 

 lieve that idea would have existed even 

 if the "W3lie scientific pleasantry" 

 had not been uttered or written. In 

 the public mind, honey is universally 

 associated with flowers, and any de- 

 parture from securing it — purely a na- 

 tural product — makes it artificial to 

 the extent of such departure, and the 

 consequence has been a suspicion 

 against it. 



MOST COMB HONEY IS NOT STRICTLY A 

 NATURAL PRODUCT. 



Judging by experience and observa- 

 tion, I fear that we have made a mis- 

 take in making hone}', of any kind, in 

 any sense artificial, as we have by de- 

 parture from Nature's ways. Throw- 

 ing honey from the combs and refining 

 it artificially makes it, in part at least, 

 artificial and unquestionably inferior 

 in character; and what is almost as 

 bad, or even worse, is securing extract- 

 ed honey in combs that brood has been 

 reared in, whereby the flavor of the 

 honey is injured. Honey gets its dis- 

 tinctive character and each kind its 

 distinctive flavor from the essential oils 

 that give them flavor, and when the 

 flavor is injured its quality is also in- 

 jured and the product is inferior. 



I think that feeding back extracted 

 honey to get unfinished sections com- 

 pleted is a mistake. These sections, 

 under proper management, are just 

 what are needed to secure the next 

 honey crop. It is more profitable, in 

 my opinion, to extract the honey from 

 them and use them in the supers at the 



beginning of each harvest. The fact 

 that extracted honey when fed back to 

 bees will granulate in the combs, is 

 proof that it should not be done; and 

 producing honey in this way may have 

 created more or less prejudice against 

 comb honey. 



THE DAMAGE DONE BY TfiE SUGAR 

 HONEY DISCUSSIONS. 



I fear that "the sugar honey" theory 

 has been a fruitful cause of the sus- 

 picion against comb honey. "Sugar 

 honey," being wanting in the princi- 

 ples that give to honey its distinctive 

 character, is not honey at all; no more 

 than mixing water and alcohol in pro- 

 per proportions and giving the mixture 

 a flavor like its kind, would make wine 

 whiskey, or brand\'. This way of 

 making liquor was heralded Mrth, 

 years a^o, with a great blare of trump- 

 ets, as a wonderful scientific discovery. 

 Such liquor was, of course, just as 

 healthful as the natural article, if 

 liquor can be said to be healtliful at all, 

 but soon there came a dead stillness 

 in regard to the matter, and no more 

 was heard of it. There is no question 

 but that there is plenty of imitation li- 

 quor made and much that is injurious 

 to health, but they are made and sold 

 under cover. We no longer hear any- 

 thing about the "sugar honey" theory, 

 still. I believe there is more or less of 

 this article madeand soldas real honey; 

 in fact it could not be sold otherwise. 

 Its sale in this way is fraud. What 

 different from fraud is ittoprtJduce an 

 article that cannot be sold for itself ? 

 The fact of making a thing an imita- 

 tion of something else is suspicious in 

 itself. 



COMB FOUNDATION A DKRTIMENT TO 

 COMB HONEY. 



To be candid and fair, it must be ad- 

 mitted that the use of comb foundation 

 in sections has been a prolific source, 

 if not the most prolific source, of the 

 shadow cast on one of the most beauti- 

 ful and delicious of Nature's products 



