W2 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Dec. 1. 



tering than we. Some of those who have been 

 the most strenuous in the advocacy of no pollen, 

 and have lived up to that advocacy, have lost 

 the heaviest. In late years the questions of 

 pollen or no pollen, poor or good stores, have 

 had very little to do with the matter of winter- 

 ing. As Mr. Hutchinson well says, we can't 

 put our linger upon any one thing, and 

 say positively that it causes dysentery. Bad 

 stores that were supposed to have caused the 

 ■disease one winter seemed to be perfectly whole- 

 some the next, even though bees were put upon 

 the same combs upon which colonies the previ- 

 ous winter died. 



FRANCIS HUBER AND HIS ACCUSER. 



Be sure to read the " Book Review " on p. 881 

 of this issue. While these reviews, as conducted 

 by VV. P. R., have contained far more interest 

 than such reviews usually do, the one in this 

 number is particularly rich. It shows that 

 great and good men like Huber are not free 

 from the lash of the tongue tiiat delights more 

 In cZcstruction than covistruction. This review 

 is interesting in another way: The light of the 

 past and present vindicates Huber rather than 

 tiis accuser. We see illustrated again how 

 opponents in controversy will often pervert the 

 statement of the criticised; for instance, Huber 

 never said that queens w ou\d tulk French, but 

 perhaps said that they would "quahk "—a word 

 resembling the French word quolque meaning 

 although. Hubers opponent has all through 

 attacked, not what Huber actually said, but 

 what he makes him say. History repeats itself. 

 While we hope mankind is better in this respect 

 nowadays, there is still room for improvement. 



By the way, our collection of ancient bee- 

 books is nearly exhausted. We should like to 

 continue these reviews further, and we should 

 be glad to get track of any old books not notic- 

 ed yet. If we can not secure the loan, pei haps 

 we can purchase them; but don't send them on 

 without first writing us, as we have a few 

 books still left on hand unnoticed. 



CAN A SALARIED " STATE OFFICER SELL THE 



RESULTS OF HIS L.ABOR TO PRIVATE 



INDIVIDUALS? 



A QUESTION has been raised by the editor of 

 the Arnerican Bee Journal as to whether R. L. 

 Taylor, a salaried officer of, and an experiment- 

 er tor, the Apicultural Station of the State of 

 Michigan, has a right to sell his reports to the 

 editor of the Bee-keepers' Revieiv. As a rather 

 nice point is here involved, and upon which 

 good men may differ, we had decided not to 

 bring it up in our columns. We may say, how- 

 ever, that this same thing has been done for 

 agricultural papers by experimenters at agri- 

 cultural stations; but the wisdom of such a 

 course has been seriously questioned. In the 

 case of Mr. Taylor and the i^euieio, it ought to 

 be stated that Mr. Hutchinson spent no little 

 time and money in getting this station started. 

 He was also largely instrumental in establish- 

 ing a valuable pi'ecedent by which other States 

 are following suit. 



The usual method of sending out reports 

 from these stations is, to issue a bulletin a long 

 time (usually a year) after the experiments 

 were performed, and when interest has died out. 

 A government bulletin, as a general rule, does 

 not and can not dish out these reports in a form 

 as popular and comprehensive as a real live 

 .iournal, to say nothing of the fact that the bul- 

 letins are out of season. A report, to be valua- 

 ble, should be given a mouthful at a time, peri- 

 odically, and fresh from the field when the flavor 

 is at its best. 



So far all of us can join hands; but when it 

 comes to the matter of giving these reports to 



some particular journal for money or other 

 considerations, there is a question. We may 

 be wrong; but we are under thn impression 

 that, when Bro. Hutchinson and his associates 

 went before the Board, asking for the estab- 

 lishment of an apicultural station, there was 

 an understanding with the Board that Mr. 

 Hutchinson, by reason of the time and pains lie 

 had taken in the matter, should have the right 

 to have periodical reports, he to pay for the 

 privilege of first publishing the same. Then, 

 too, if any journal should have the lirst reports, 

 naturally it would be the journal in the State 

 of Michigan, because this station was a State 

 affair. 



If there was not this understanding with the 

 Board, then there is a question whether Mr. 

 Taylor can sell these reports, although he 

 would have a right to give them outright, if the 

 Board do not object; but if we are correct, they 

 have not objected as it is. The whole question 

 hinges on what understanding was had with 

 the •■ powers that be." 



THE ANNUAL PRODUCT OF COMB HONEY IN THE 

 UNITED STATES. 



A FEW months ago we hinted at the possibil- 

 ity of approximating very closely the number 

 of pounds of comb honey from the number of 

 sections sold during that year. It has now 

 come to pass that three-fuurths of all the sections 

 made are turned out from not more than three 

 factories. It will be a comparatively small mat- 

 ter for these factories to report the number of 

 sections they have sold during that year. We 

 estimated that, if we knew the number of sec- 

 tions sold, we could approximate the number of 

 pounds of comb honey by deducting a certain 

 amount for sections lett over not filled, because 

 most bee-keepers order in excess of what they 

 think will be their actual needs for the season. 

 There will be shrinkages from other sources, 

 such as the fact that sections do not hold a full 

 pound, all of which could be taken into consid- 

 eration. While this might be, to a certain ex- 

 tent, guesswork, the results would be far more 

 accurate than some of the ridiculous guesses 

 founded on practically no data as to the num- 

 ber of poundsof cumb honey produced annually 

 in the United States. 

 As some of the manufacturers, especially some 

 of the smaller ones, might hesitate to place 

 their annual product of sections along.Nide of that 

 of the large factories, we have thought we could 

 obviate this difficulty by having the reports all 

 sent to an individual wlio has no interest in 

 supplies, and who would keep all such reports 

 strictly to liimself, not even letting us know, 

 and who, alter all reports had been received, 

 would give the sum total to us as publishers. 

 In looking about for the right man, our minds 

 turn toward Dr. Miller, a fair man. and who 

 knows how to keep things to himself. We 

 therefore appoint Ur. Miller as a committee of 

 one to collect reports from all section-makers 

 as to their annual product of sections for the 

 United States. After making up the sum total, 

 he is to have full latitude to estimate various 

 shrinkages, and from that compute the number 

 of pounds of comb honey. 



Now, to make this a success every manufac- 

 turer should report to Dr. C. C. Miller, Marengo, 

 111., as soon as possible after Dec. 31 next. We 

 do not expect the section-makers to do this 

 service for nothing, and would, of course, be 

 willing to pay a reasonable sum for the service. 

 But, suppose manufacturers won't report. Well, 

 then we are powerless to do any thing. We 

 assume, however, that their loyalty to the pur- 

 suit, and a general desire to know how much 

 comb honey is produced annually, will insure 

 the reports. But will they be honest about it? 



