856 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Dec 1. 



committpo. and that half of Art. VIII. and all 

 of Art. IX. are devoted to the same snhjecl; 

 and Sees. 1, 2. and 3 of Art VI. are wholly de- 

 voted to the duties of the individual members 

 of that committee; and in no way, in the dis- 

 charge of their duties, singly or collectively, do 

 they, as ]\Ir. Npwnian ^ays, "interfere with the 

 dutie> of the Hoard of Directors," and no '• con- 

 flict of aiuhority would ensue." 



He asks, "If the Hoard of Directors be not 

 the Executive Committee," what is the Board 

 created for? What are its duties?" 



If he will read the last half of Sec. 4, Art.VL, 

 and Sees. 6 and 7 of the same article, all of Art. 

 VII. and the last half of Art. VIIL, he will lind 

 what the Board of Directors is for, and what its 

 duties are, quite fully set forth. 



In critici?ing Sec. 3. Art. VI., he says, " Here 

 is a big loop-hole, because it provides that the 

 Secretary of the Union shall pay to the Trea- 

 surer of the Union all moneys left in his hands 

 after paying the expense of the annual meet- 

 ing." It has been customary for the Secretary 

 to pay the usual expenses of tiie Association out 

 of the moneys he receivi d for membership fees, 

 and pay the remainder to the Treasurer; and I 

 am not aware that any one has ever before 

 thought of there beii]g even a small "loop- 

 hole. ' to say nothing of a big one. : «3 ^^ 



^ If Mr. Newman considers this "a big loop- 

 hole," how would he, if he were outside of the 

 position of Secretary, Treasurer, and G.^neral 

 Manager, (illy characterize the method of han- 

 dling the hundreds — yes, thousands— of dollars 

 of funds that have been in his hands as Trea- 

 suier (General Managei) without a single pro- 

 vii-ion in the constitution for its safety? I have 

 not the means at hand for knowing all about 

 the past condition of the treasury of the N. B. 

 K. U.; liut, if my memory serves me correctly, 

 during the years '86, '87, "iiO, '91, "03. '94 and '9.'), 

 the General Manager handled about f.5.M)0of the 

 funds of the Union, and no one said any thing 

 about a "loop hole;"' and last year there was 

 very nearly one hundr( d times as much of the 

 money of the Union in the hands of the General 

 Manager as was in the hands of the Secretary 

 of the N. A. B. K. A. "Those living in glass 

 houses shiuild not throw stones." 



In referring to the meetings of the Board of 

 Directors he asks, "How are their expenses to 

 be paid ? If mileage and per diem are to be 

 paid, it should be so stated." 



Well, for once I can agree' with his "criti- 

 cism;" and as no such provision is made, the 

 very natural inference would be that "mileage 

 and per diim" are not to bo paid them, as is 

 the case with the Advisory Board of the N. B. 

 K. U. 



He spf aksof a"cfmpnlsi1ory meeting" of the 

 Board of Directors, and " that the expense of 

 such a compulsatory meeting would bo no mean 

 item." The "compulsitory " part is the last 



sentence of Sec. 6. of Art. VI, and is tio more 

 "comuulsilory" than the provision in Art. I. of 

 the present N. B. K. U., which says that it 

 "shall meet annually," etc. Now, in the elev- 

 en years of its existence has the Union, which 

 "shall meet annually," ever met? and if it has, 

 who paid the "mileage and per diem"? Has 

 the Secretary - Treasurer- General - Manager, 

 been paying " the mileage and per diem "? 



In referring to Art. X he asks, " Why such 

 tautology ? " I believe 1 can answer that ques- 

 tion quite readily. It is probable that those 

 engaged in formulating the constitution (among 

 whom were Prof. Cook, Hon. Eugene S"Cor, 

 Rev. E. G. Abbott, Hon. E. VVhitcomb, R. F. 

 Holtermann, J. T. Calvert, L. D. StiNon, Thos. 

 G. Newman, Dr. C. C. Miller, A. I. Root, Bro. 

 Ben, Geo. VV. Brodbeck, E. R. Root, F. A. Gem- 

 mell, VV. F. Marks, G^o. W. York, Hon. (}. E. 

 Hilton. M. B. Holmes. E. S. Lovesy (Salt Lake 

 City), II. F. Moore, E. Kretchmer, with myself 

 and more than a score of others, did not repre- 

 sent all of the wisdom there is among bee- 

 keepers. Pages 737 and 738 of the Avierican 

 Bee Jonriinl for Nov. 19, 1896, might be inter- 

 esting reading for friend Newman. 



It seems to me thafhis " criticism " on Sec. 7, 

 Art. Vr., is one of; fault-finding rather than an 

 effort to aid in so revising it as to make it bet- 

 ter. I see nothing in it that would necessitate 

 a "complete revision" of it, but I think it 

 would be well to so alter it as to erase the words 

 "extra but" in the sentence where it says, 

 " and cause such extra but equal assessments to 

 be made," etc. 



In replying to the last two paragraphs of 

 friend Newman's article, I will say that the 

 constitution does not provide for "expensive 

 annual meetings," and I can't understand why 

 he so frequently refers to matters that are not 

 even hinted at in the constitution, and have 

 nothing to do with it, unless it be to prejudice 

 members of the N. B. K. U. against the mea- 

 sure. Here is an example: " If it is attempted 

 to make it representative, it will fail." etc. 

 Now, there is not the shadow of a shade of ref- 

 erence in the constitution to any such attempt. 

 It seems to me that, in the last two para- 

 graphs of his "criticism," he directly insults 

 the intelligence of the nearly threescore bee- 

 keepers who "had a hand" in preparing and 

 adopting the constitution, and shows his lack 

 of cjnsideration for the rights and opinions of 

 others (who may be just as able as he to say 

 what is the best course to pursue) in assuming 

 that he has a right to "refer back to the next 

 convention at HufTalo for revision," etc. Since 

 when has it been the prerogative of the General 

 Minager"to refer back," unasked, a matter 

 that the U. S. B. K. U. has requested the Ad- 

 visory Board of the N. B. K. U. to submit to a 

 vote of its members, quite a number of whom 

 are_m embers of both organizations? and since 



