598 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Aug. 1. 



ization, I do not indorse some of the methods sug'- 

 gested or hinted at, to obtain it. 



It is well known that " Organization " was my pet 

 theme for years; and wliat organization the Nation- 

 al Society did have was tli rough my efforts in that 

 direction. I have spent both lime and money in 

 trying to get up an efflcient organization— one that 

 would be a power for good, and at the same time 

 make it a permanent institution. But as soon as 

 the National Society was incorporated, a "howl" 

 went up from some selfish, narrow-minded bigots, 

 who fought it inch by inch, and apparently, at least, 

 accomplished its dissolution — for at the last meet- 

 ing at St. Joseph they ignored the past, cut down 

 the constitution, threw out the by-laws, all for 

 what? Heaven may know, but I don't. As thf> re- 

 port of that convention has never been published, 

 we may never know th^» " whys " and '" wherefores " 

 of their action. Let us look at the history of the 

 matter a little before entering into the discussion 

 of the madus upcraudl projiosed. 



At tlie 19th annual convention held at Columbus, 

 O.. Oct. 3. 1888, a new consiitution and liy-laws were 

 adopted by unanimous vote. These documents were 

 prepared by me very carefully, and presei ted at the 

 convention of the previous year. They were refer- 

 red to a committee, aud that committee referred 

 them baclc to the convention, without recommenda- 

 tion. Coming liefore that whole body, they were 

 unanimously indorsed, and tlien and there adopted. 



Article X. of that constitution reads as follows: 

 "A Defense Committee of seven shall be appointed 

 for the purpose of considering the applications of 

 members for defense from unjust lawsuits by those 

 wlio are prejudiced against the pursuit. This com- 

 mittee shall be the officers annually elected by the 

 National Beekeepers' Union, which is hereby de- 

 clared to be affiliated to the International Ameri- 

 can Bee-keepers' Association. Its President is here- 

 by made a Vice-president of the Association, and its 

 General Manager also a delegate to the Interna- 

 tional Convention." 



Could any thing be plainer? The Union was 

 offli-idUiidrrliired to affiliated to the Na'ional Society, 

 and its President and General ^' anager declared to 

 be olHcers of the Association. 



In St. .Toseph last fall, this was (if I am correctly 

 informed* all thrown out; indeed, the whole by- 

 laws were lepealed, and the Union "divorced." 

 Now. in less than a year, up comes the present 

 proposition to re-marry the two again. The Na- 

 tional Association is to marry the Union, as a 

 blushing bride, probably because of her dowry. 

 Whiit child's play and foolishness! 



The Union is prosperous and successful, and 

 needs no " affiliation." The National Society is the 

 impecunious party, and must do all the " sparking" 

 if a re-marriage is effected. 



As General ISlanager of the Union I must say, seri- 

 ously, that no anialgatnation can be made unless 

 so determined by a full aud free vote of all its 

 members, upon proper presentation of the aims 

 and objects thereof. 



I do not believe that the members of the Union 

 will ever consent to have the funds, raised for de- 

 fense, diverted to other channels, and used for del- 

 egates "to pee the boys and have a good time." I 

 know that my consent will never be given for such 

 a thing. Thos. G. Newman. 



Chicago, 111., June 24. 



Elsewhere in the same issue the editor com- 

 ments upon Mr. Newman's article as follows: 



The only change in the constitution that bore 

 fruit was that of affiliation — State and other local 

 societies paid $.5.00 per year, and were then affiliated 

 with the North American. But very few societies 

 remained iri affiliation more than two years, and 

 this feat\ire soon became a dead letter. The clause 

 making the officers of the Union a defense commit- 

 tee of the North American did not infiueiice the 

 actions of either society. It was .a soit of expres- 

 sion of good fellowship," or sytnpathy. or an indorse- 

 ment of the Union by the North American; but 

 the Union went on conducting its affairs as it saw 

 fit, and the North American did the same There 

 was nothing even api)roacliing the " married " re- 

 lation to wliich Mr. Newman so tiguratively alludes. 



The constitution and by-laws were cut down and 

 revised at St. Jnseijh because time, that sure tester 

 of all tilings, had shown that theconstitution and by- 

 laws ad(iiil''d at Columbus were not adapted to the 

 condition of tilings in this country. Change of con- 

 stitution, affiliation, incorporation, and kindred 



changes will not benefit the North American unless 

 made in conformity with existing conditions: and 

 the brightest of us can not always tell when they 

 are so made -only time and experience can demon- 

 strate that. 



It may not be the best that the North American 

 and the Union shouki join forces; but that one 

 society has more money than the other seems a 

 strange argumi nt to advance againstsuch a course. 

 To have money in the treasury is well: to have 

 spent it in a good cause might have been better. I 

 do not mean to insinuate that the Union has neglect- 

 ed to spend montywhen it could be wisely spent; 

 but neither the Union nor the North American has 

 for its object the accumulation of money. It is not 

 a question of how much money each society has in 

 its treasury, nor which has changed its constitution 

 the more limes, but whether, ail things considered, 

 is it iidrisaJiU: that the two societies join forces ? 



The Union wa-! organized for a specific purpose, 

 and has done its work well; but a close observer 

 must have noticed that the amount of work it does 

 lessens as the years go bj'. At first there was more 

 work than money witli which ti> carry it on, while 

 its manager worked for nothing; now he has a 

 salary (and most riclily does he deserve it), yet 

 moijey is accumulating in the treasury. Some ex- 

 cellent and righteous decisions have been secured, 

 and these have a most quieting effect when shoved 

 under the nose of some would be persecutor. For 

 this reason the number of expensive law-suits has 

 decreased. This is a condition that would naturally 

 be expected, and is desirable. Now the question 

 arises. Would it not be better that some of this 

 money should be iixcd for tlie good of bee-keeping 

 rather than that it should go on accumulating year 

 after year ? (Perhaps a lowering of the fees would 

 be a better plan.) Of course, those who contribut- 

 ed to making up this sum are the ones to say what 

 shall be done with it. By the way, Bro. Newman 

 says this sum was raised for the purpose of defense. 

 Tliisistrue; but it is also true that it can be used 

 to prosecute adulterators of honey, to secure legis- 

 lation—in short, for any purpose thought advisable 

 by the Advisory Board. 



As I understand the mat ter, the North American 

 was organized to advance the cause of bep culture 

 by bringing together the leaders in the profession, 

 with a view to an exchange of ideas. As has been 

 (iften mentioned, the journals have greatly lessened 

 the value of the Association in this direction. This 

 condition, coupled with poor honey seasons, has 

 made some of the late conventions rather poorly at- 

 tended. We. as bee-keepers, ought to recognize 

 these changed conditions as regards both of these 

 organizations. Many bee-keepers now belong to 

 one society wlio can not afford to belong to both, or 

 think they can not. In a union of forces there 

 would be a saving of expense, an increase in num- 

 bers, and the benefit of an annual face-to-face dis- 

 cussion of tlie problems belonging to the Bee-keep- 

 ers' Union as now carried on. 



Suppose that the North American should disband, 

 and all of its members, with what little money 

 they do possess, and thtir influence, should join the 

 Union, and the latter should then change its consti- 

 tution so that it would hold annual meetings at 

 which all questions pertaining to bee culture could 

 be discussed. We should then have the condition 

 of things at which I am ainiina:. This may not he 

 the best way to bring it about, and the suggestion 

 IS made more as an illustration than any thing else. 



Personally, I have no interest in this matter; that 

 is. 1 havt! no selfish personal ends in view. It seem- 

 ed to me that the proposed union would be advan- 

 tageous to the members of both organizations, and 

 I have brought it uv for discussion. It is quite 

 likely that the question will be brought up at the 

 coming meeting of the North American, and it 

 would be well that it be most thoroughly discussed 

 in the journals before that meeting takes place. 

 The RcinewwiR be glad to receive communications 

 on the subiect—t specially should we like to hear 

 from members of the Union. 



I must say, that, after looking over the whole 

 sittiation. and sttidying it in all its hearings. I 

 am in for supporting the amalgamation. I 

 can't see how the workings of the Union would 

 be hampered by being a part of the N. A. B. K. 

 A., and the two organizations in one could be 

 run much more economically. 



