56 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Jan. 15. 



such bees were getting rid of them as fast as 

 possible. It was also urged, that it was very 

 difficult to get Cyprian blood out of other races, 

 as very little of that blood would show quite 

 decidedly the bad characteristics of the Cyp- 

 rians, with few or" none of the good ones, for 

 generations. Mr. Benton explained that his 

 remarks had reference to the pure races only. 

 With regard to the Apis dorsata, discussion 

 arose as to whether they might not be crossed 

 with other races. Dr. Riley, the entomologist, 

 thought that it would be impossible. 



AFTERNOON SESSION, SECOND DAY. 



We had the pleasure of listening to a short 

 address from Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, 

 the Hon. Edwin S. Willits. He came to present 

 the compliments of the .Secretary of Agricul- 

 ture, and was authorized to say that the Secre- 

 tary bid the convention Godspeed, and that it 

 had his full sympathy. As for himself, he was 

 very desirous of doing something for apiculture; 

 but just what to do, he could not fully decide. 

 So far as the Department which he represented 

 was concerned in helping on the cause of api- 

 culture, it met with many difficulties. The 

 appropriations had been cut off during the past 

 season, and they were obliged to suspend the 

 special work at Lansing Apicultural Station. 

 It was difficult to get the money, and also diffi- 

 cult to get the ear of Congress; and Congress- 

 men themselves were ignorant of the thing 

 they desired to foster. The Department had no 

 thought of abandoning the effort of doing some- 

 thing for apiculture. The most it could do 

 the past season was in the way of a compromise. 

 The Department desired to contribute, in a 

 small measure, to the support of apiculture, 

 and it was for the convention to say what 

 should be done. 



DETECTING THE ADULTERATION OF HONEY. 



We next listened to a paper by Prof. A. J. 

 Cook, that set forth fully the difficulties, as well 

 as what had been accomplished so far, regard- 

 ing the methods for detecting adulteration. As 

 the substance of this paper appeared in Glean- 

 ings, page 688. 1892, and again in Prof. Cook's 

 article in our issue for Jan. 1, it will hardly be 

 necessary to reproduce it here. Following 

 Prof. Cook's paper was an address, or, rather, a 

 sort of lecture, by Prof. H. W. Wiley, Chief 

 Chemist. The professor explained very fully, 

 with apparatus, just how lioney was analyzed. 

 As a brief digest would give no adequate com- 

 prehension of the subject, we asked the profess- 

 or to let us have a written copy, which he has 

 kindly done. The address is as follows: 



address before THE NATIONAL BEE-KEEP- 

 ERS" ASSOCIATION HELD AT WASHINGTON, 

 I). C, DEC. 28, 1892, BY H. W. WILEY, 

 CHEMIST U. S. DEPT. OF AGRI- 

 CULTURE. 



Mr. Preside7it, Ladies, and Oentlemen: — 



I have been much interested in Prof. Cook's 

 paper on the subject of adulteration of honey, 

 and am glad to have this privilege of comply- 

 ing with your request to add something more 

 in the same direction. 



After the publication of the results on the 

 analysis of honey, contained in Part Six of 

 Bulletin No. 13, the question was raised in some 

 quarters, whether or not chemists were able to 

 distinguish between a pure and an adulterated 

 honey. Some of the samples which we exam- 

 ined, and which were purchased in open mar- 

 ket in different cities of the country, were found 

 to be adulterated with glucose: and it was 

 claimed that such an adulteration was unlikely, 

 and that the chemists had been mistaken. 

 Prof. Cook took a great deal of interest in this 

 matter, and asked permission to send a number 



of samples of honey and honey substitutes, des- 

 ignated only by number, to the laboratory of 

 the Department of Agriculture, for examina- 

 tion. He also sent similar samples to the lab- 

 oratory of Prof. Kedzie, of the Michigan Agri- 

 cultural Experiment Station, and to Prof. 

 Scovill. of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment 

 Station. In all, 53 samples of honey were re- 

 ceived at our laboratory from Prof. Cook, and 

 these have been analyzed and the data trans- 

 mitted to him. We have not yet been informed 

 by Prof. Cook of the nature and origin of the 

 samples, and therefore can not tell, as far as 

 that is concerned, what success we have met 

 with in distinguishing between the good and 

 the bad: yet Prof. Cook has already published 

 the fact that all three of the chemists engaged 

 in this work have detected every spurious or 

 adulterated honey which was contained in the 

 lot. On the other hand, a few samples which 

 were of known purity have been classed as sus- 

 picious, but not condemned as adulterated. 

 The general result is, that the chemist, working 

 with ordinary care, and with well-known pro- 

 cessess, is able to detect all ordinary a/lilltera- 

 tions of honey, but at the same time he may 

 include among the suspicious articles some 

 samples which are genuine. 



The special form of adulteration which we 

 were expected to deternune were glucose and 

 cane sugar. Both of these adulterations are 

 very easily determin(>d. 



Some samples of the honey received were ob- 

 tianed by feeding directly to "the bees cane-sugar 

 syrup, which was stored rapidly, and at once 

 extracted. Other samples were obtained from 

 bees which were storing honey very rapidly 

 from a known soui'ce, and this honey was taken 

 as soon as deposited. These general items of in- 

 formation I have gleaned from the article I'rof. 

 Cook has already published in regard to that 

 examination. 



I am sorry not to be able to entirely agree 

 with Prof. Cook in his definition of honey. A 

 few years ago I defined honey as the saccharine 

 exudation of flowers, gathered and stored by 

 bees. This definition may properly be applied 

 to any saccharine exudation of flowers or plants 

 gathered and stored by bees, pi-ovided they are 

 not aided in this matter by any artificial means. 

 In other words, cane sugar which a bee would 

 of itself extract from a plant would very prop- 

 erly be classed as pure honey when stored by 

 the bees in the hive; but cane sugar /ecZ to the 

 bees in the form of syrup, and simply stored by 

 the bees in the hive, could hardly be deemed a 

 pure honey. This is a matter, however, which 

 it is not within my power to determine, and I 

 shall be much Interested in knowing the result 

 of the discussion now going on among your own 

 members on what constitutes pure honey. 



The problem of the adulteration of honey has 

 been somewhat complicated within a few years 

 liy the discovery that certain honeys or sac- 

 charine exudations gathered by bees show at 

 ordinary temperatures a right-handed rotation. 

 Such honey was formerly supposed to be of 

 coniferous origin, that is. gatliered exclusively 

 from pine-trees. Later it has been shown that 

 such honeys are probably derived from exuda- 

 tions produced by the aphis, or plant-louse, 

 either directly from the trees, through the in- 

 fluence of the louse, or through the organism of 

 the louse itself. This exudation is commonly 

 known as " honey-dew," and entomologists are 

 undecided whether or not the honey-dew passes 

 through the organism of the louse, or is the 

 result of the attack of the louse upon the plant. 

 At any rate, such exudations show peculiar 

 properties: and it is doubtful whether, under 

 the definition given above, they could be classed 

 as genuine honeys. It is said by Prof. Cook. 



