July 25, 1901. 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL, 



469 



No. 2 Honey. 



to use poison to exterminate the bees in case they were not 

 speedily removed by their owners. This only tended to 

 aggravate matters. The bee-men retorted that, if any one 

 were foolish enough to resort to such a procedure, not only 

 killing the bees but endangering the lives of human 

 beings, they would meet them on the issue half way; that 

 they had, as backing, the National Bee-Keepers' Associ- 

 ation, which had hundreds of dollars to its credit, had 

 fought many cases in court, and had always been success- 

 ful ; that, moreover, it had decisions already on the ques- 

 tion of poisoning bees, and that the fruit-men " could drive 

 ahead " if they wished to. The latter maintained that 

 they " had looked up the law," and that they knew what 

 they were about. 



It appears that those who indulged the most freely in 

 this war of words were not those who had the largest 

 interests at stake, either in the bees or in the pears ; that 

 the large pear-growers as well as the largest bee-keepers 

 were men who indulged in no threats, but who believed 

 that a compromise might be effected between neighbors 

 who were men of fairness as well as men who are willing 

 to listen to reason, and so the sequel proved. 



The president of the National Bee-Keepers' Associ- 

 ation was asked by resident members to make a visit to the 

 scene of the impending trouble ; investigate, and take 

 such action as might, after a conference, seem most advis- 

 able. Accordingly, on the 18th of June, that officer 

 appeared at Hanford, Calif., being dropped, as it were, into 

 that " nest of hornets " by the redoubtable John H. Mar- 

 tin (Rambler), and J. C. McCubbin, who came with him 

 officially and unofficially to see that no harm was done him ; 

 but, be it said, they deemed it advisable to go home that 

 same day, although they did participate in one or two 

 little" skirmishes '' on the street. Unfortunately the Ram- 

 bler didn't have along his invincible umbrella and stove- 

 pipe hat ; for with such offensive and defensive weapons 

 he Jwould surely have come off victorious. As it was, it 

 was a •' draw " and he departed with John C. under his arm. 



It appears that the local members of the Association 

 had made a great handle of the coming of the president of 

 the National ; of the strength of our organization, how it 

 had never lost a case in court, and that it had secured valu- 

 able decisions from the high courts. But as he did not 

 come at the time expected, and days went by, and still he 

 did not come, the fruit-men began to think that this talk 

 was all " bluff ;" and when he did appear, there seemed to 

 be a feeling on their part that he had come, not to bring 

 peace, but war, and that an organization that would send a 

 " walking delegate " clear from Ohio surely meant busi- 

 ness. After a little sparring on both sides, a truce and a 

 compromise began to be talked of. On our side was a 

 special committee appointed by the Central California Bee- 

 Keepers' Association, at its last meeting, to meet the repre- 

 sentative of the National Bee-Keepers' Association ; and 

 on the other was N. W. Motheral, Horticultural Commis- 

 sioner, of Hanford, Calif., who seemed to represent the 

 fruit-men, but who some jokingly said was the mother of 

 the whole trouble. 



When both sides got together it was suggested by one 



of the fruit-men that, as a compromise, the 

 bees be moved from the vicinity of the pear- 

 trees during the time they were in bloom, and 

 that, after they were out of bloom, and when 

 the alfalfa began to yield nectar, they be re- 

 turned to take the heavy or main crop. This, 

 it was thought, would give the bee men time to 

 investigate for themselves, and if, after inves- 

 tigation, it was shown that the claims of the 

 fruit-men were well-grounded, afford in the 

 meantime the necessary relief. This was finally 

 agreed to, although it would entail a big ex- 

 pense on the bee-men. 



It may be wondered why the latter were 

 willing to listen to a compromise at all. In 

 the first place they desired to be fair ; and, in 

 the second place, the fruit-men had the testi- 

 mony of Prof. M. B. Waite, Assistant Chief of 

 the Division of Vegetable Physiology and 

 Pathology at Washington, D. C. This official 

 takes the position that bees do carry the mi- 

 crobes of pear-blight from flower to flower 

 while the trees are in bloom. In this opinion 

 he appears to be supported by Prof. N. B. 

 Pierce, Pathologist of the Pacific Coast Lab- 

 oratory, Santa Ana, Cal. 



The following letter, directed to N. W. 

 Motheral. Commissioner of Horticulture at 



Hanford, Calif., from Prof. Pierce, explains the position of 



the scientists, in a nutshell : 



Mr, X. W. Motheral^ Horticultural Cominissioufr, Hanford, Calif, — 

 Dear Hir: — In fuliillment of my former letter, and in reply to your 

 I request, I herewith give the main facts upon which are based the 



claim that bees take an active part in spreading the disease of trees 



variously known as pear-blight, twig-blight, fire-blight, etc. 



1. Pear-blight is a bacterial disease which affects pear, apple, 

 crab-apple, quince, and related trees. It is induced through the 

 action of a specific micro-organism belonging to the bacteria, and 

 known as Bacillus amylovorus (Burrill), de Toni. 



These facts have been demonstrated by many scientific workers by 

 careful inoculation, experiments conducted with pure cultures of the 

 bacillus. The cause of the disease has therefore been well known for 

 many years. 



2. The identity of the blight of pear-trees in the Clow and Taylor 

 orchards near Hanford (these particular orchards are cited only for 

 the sake of accuracy, as there are many others affected) with true 

 eastern pear-bliglit has been demonstrated at this laboratory. Bacillus 

 amylovorus was isolated in pure oultiu'e Ijy the plate process from 

 blighted branches from Mr. Clow's trees, and a young and thrifty pear- 

 tree was inoculated, and died to within a few inches of the ground of 

 true pear-blight. A control tree treated the same way as the inocu- 

 lated tree, except that the bacillus was not introduced, remained per- 

 fectly healthy. 



Mr. M. B. Waite, Assistant Chief of this Division of the Depart- 

 ment, has kindly supplied the following additional facts bearing on 

 this matter : 



3. " The occurrence of the blight on the blossoms in great quan- 

 tities, and the great rapidity with which the disease spreads from 

 flower to flower, indicates a normal and very effective method of dis- 

 tribution." 



4. "The germs were found growing freely in the nectar of the 

 blossoms." 



h. " Bees were seen repeatedly visiting the infected flowers, and 

 some were caught taking infected nectar, and, by means of plate cul- 

 tures, the pear-l)light germs were isolated from their mouth parts." 



6. " By covering parts of the trees with sacks of various kinds of 

 material, and then artificially infecting certain fiowers on the tree, the 

 blight was observed to spread very freely over the uninfected and 

 uncovered blossoms, but was entirely absent in the blossoms covered 

 by mosquito-netting." 



r. "Blossoms were infected, and at once covered with sacks, and 

 the blight, in such cases, was retained in the infected blossoms." 



8. "Pear-blight germs died very soon after being dried up, and 

 lived for only a lirlef period on exiio>ure to weather conditions out of 

 doors, hence they can not live in dust, and be blown around to any 

 great extent by the wind." 



9. " Pear-blight virus, particularly that which occurs on blossoms, 

 is a very sticky substance, and is readily carried by insects, birds, or 

 other animals, but can not be blown by the wind." 



This brief presentation will, I helieve, furnish your board with 

 the main facts needed to show the connection existing between the 

 visits of bees to pear-flowers and the siiread of pear-ltlight. 

 Sincerely yours, Newton B. Piekce. 



April 23. lilOl. rathvloyist in Cliaryi. 



Prof. Pierce happened to be in the city at the time, and 

 in an interview which we had with him he gave utterance 

 to substantially the statements as are given above. If 

 anything, his verbal statement incriminating the bees was 

 even stronger. So far as I could judge, he seemed to be a 

 competent scientist, and a fair-minded gentleman : but. 

 unconsciously, he is prejudiced, I think, in favor of the 

 pear-men, with whom he has come much in contact of late. 



