July 2, 1903. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



423 



great disadvantage not only to the Exchange but to the 

 commission man. While the Exchange has suffered less 

 than other selling agents, all have suffered greatly. It is 

 stated that the commission men have lost much money, and 

 one of our most prosperous orange-growers, who sells liis 

 own fruit, and who has usually received the largest prices, 

 told me a few days since that he had hardly paid expenses 

 this year. All this led all interested parties to consider 

 seriously whether there was not a better way. 



NBW SELLING .^.GKNCY. 



A few weeks ago the managers of the Fruit Exchange 

 and several of the commission men — packers who have 

 bought and sold much of the California citrus fruit — got 

 together to consider the matter of a sort of trust — a com- 

 bined selling agency. Previous to this time the Exchange 

 knew nothing about where the commission men would sell 

 their fruit, nor yet did any commission man know where 

 the Exchange would ship its fruit, or where any other com- 

 mission man would sell his. This lack of control and dis- 

 tribution was a serious menace, and all recognized that 

 some scheme must be devised to remedy the evil. After 

 many meetings and much consideration of the entire sub- 

 ject, the following plan was agreed upon : 



All citrus fruit should be sold under one agent. This 

 agency will consist of two factors here in California. One 

 will be the old Exchange, which will carry on its business 

 just as it has before, except now it will know where all fruit 

 is being sold, and will be able to distribute its output to the 

 very best advantage. 



The other factor consists of what is called the citrus 

 union, and will be made up of all the commission men or 

 packers outside of the Exchange, as I think now nearly all 

 have joined the organization. The manager of the old Ex- 

 change is the manager of the new selling agency. 



We see, then, that this new selling agency will have 

 absolute control of the distribution of the fruit, and thus 

 there will always be an intelligent distribution. The new 

 organization will always have its finger upon the pulse of 

 the market and will know just where to sell the fruit, that 

 no car-load will compete with any other car-load. In fact, 

 all will be co-operation as far as marketing is concerned, 

 and there will be no competition. 



Of course, there will still be competition, as all the 

 fruit will sell upon its merit, and only the best fruit will 

 bring the best price. About 90 percent of the output is now 

 controlled by this new selling agent. It remains to be 

 seen what the individuals who have been selling their own 

 fruit will do. Some of them have already joined this new 

 organization. Others will probably do so ; while a few may 

 very likely remain outside. If they do, it will only be be- 

 cause of peculiar circumstances they can do better. The 

 new selling agency will have their sympathy, and they will 

 do nothing to antagonize it. 



Of course, this new selling agency is in a sense a trust. 

 It will not, however, do as many trusts do, try to lessen the 

 output of fruit that they may thereby raise the price. They 

 will, however, control distribution, and in a certain sense 

 the market. This will result in preventing all glut of the 

 markets, and will secure an even, fair distribution, and uni- 

 form prices for good fruit. It is not probable that it will 

 raise the price to any extent to the consumer. 



It is strange that the old Exchange did not get nearly 

 all the fruit-growers. All acknowledge, so far as I know, 

 that it was a good thing, and really came as the salvation 

 of the fruit interest ; while many believed, or hoped, that 

 they could get better prices outside the Exchange, and thus 

 they handicapped this latter association by preventing that 

 control of distribution of the fruit which is so very neces- 

 sary to the best success. 



I believe the bee-keepers are wide awake in this matter 

 of intelligent co-operation. It seems to me that any matter 

 of history in this great movement, like that which I have 

 given above, is of special interest and importance to them at 

 this juncture. The Exchange in the citrus industry of 

 Southern California not only saved the business, but also 

 makes possible this new combination. 



I neglected to say that in the new scheme the Exchanfje 

 is not to exploit the fruit-growers who have previously sold 

 to commission men. The outside packers have also prom- 

 ised not to take the fruit from any one who has previously 

 been in the Exchange. Those owning orchards that are 

 just coming into bearing are to be about equally divided be- 

 tween the Exchange and the Citrus Union. Our most int.l- 

 ligent fruit-men rejoice in the Exchange and its great suc- 

 cess. They rejoice now still more in the belief that tliis 

 new combination will remove the one obstacle in the way of 



success with the Exchange in the past — that of controlling 

 distribution— and a,re happy in the belief that more prosper- 

 ous days are just at hand. 



FOOL BKOOIl LAW. 



I was interested in the fact that bee-keepers in Illinois 

 had to raise money to secure legislation regarding a desir- 

 able foul brood law. California secured an excellent law 

 with no expense and very little effort. Why was this ? Be- 

 cause Southern California is very generally organized. 

 There are many farmers' clubs. Thus they have tremen- 

 dous influence. They considered as a whole the matter of 

 legislation, and decided that they needed six laws, one of 

 which was the foul brood law. They went solidly to the 

 Legislature and secured every enactment that they desired. 



Every State should have these clubs, and then our farm- 

 ers could secure their rights, which they have so signally 

 failed to get in the past. 



Los Angeles Co., Calif., May 16. 



Apiculture in the United States vs. Europe. 



BY C. P. DADANT. 



I NOTICED and read with pleasure the article on this 

 subject by J. A. Heberly, on page 104. The differences 

 existing between bee-culture in Europe and this country 

 are great indeed. The different opinions relating to hives are 

 mainly based upon the greater or less ease that those hives 

 give for manipulations. The hives in themselves, when of 

 the same size, are equally serviceable in the production of 

 honey, and the bees in a common box without frames will 

 harvest just as much honey as those in the most expen- 

 sive frame-hive. But the ease of manipulations tells on re- 

 sults, because when an apiarist can examine his bees and 

 supply their wants without difficulty he is more likely to do 

 it when manipulations are impossible or difficult. 



The Berlepsch breech-loading hive, which we compare 

 to a cupboard, has made no progress outside of Berlepsch's 

 own country, evidently because its manipulation is more 

 difficult than that of other frame hives. But Mr. Heberly 

 is correct in his statement that in house-apiaries this hive 

 has some advantages, because it opens from the rear. But 

 our American apiarist has little use for the house-apiary. 



In Europe generally, Switzerland, France, Germany, 

 the home is often surrounded with walls, often very high 

 walls which were once built to protect the inmates against 

 the depredations of brigands. Though the present condi- 

 tions of civilization have made those walls unnecessary, 

 yet the customs remain, and in my travels I often saw a 

 new house built with a 12-foot wall around it, like a fortress. 

 This seems natural to the European. To us it is abnormal. 

 One may travel through the greater portion of the United 

 States without being able to see a 10-foot wall. Such walls 

 are exceptional. Here and there a board fence will hide the 

 out-houses, but in most cases the home is left unsurrounded 

 by any obstacle except such as may be necessary to mark 

 the limits of the yard, a shallow picket fence, or, to keep 

 out cattle, a barb-wire fence. So we naturally do not think 

 of defending our bees against intruders. 



The house-apiary in Europe is most usually built 

 against a wall, two sides of this wall making two of the 

 walls of the apiary. The expense is thus much less than if 

 the entire structure had to be built purposely for the bees. 

 The temperature of Europe being much more uniform than 

 that of this country a closed house may be used in which 

 the manipulations are conducted even in hot weather with- 

 out sufi'ering. A bee-house here would have to be adapted 

 to the climate. It would have to be built more as a shed 

 than as a house ; most of the bee-handling has to be done 

 when the weather is the hottest, and a closed house would 

 be almost out of the question. 



A bee-house with several stories, with openings for bees 

 in every direction, is objectionable, both owing to the bad 

 exposure that some hives would have with flight towards 

 the north, and to the danger of stings from all sides, for it 

 is well known that bees are more prone to become ofi'ended 

 at movements of men or animals when directly in front of 

 their entrance. I have seen several house-apiaries discarded 

 owing to these faults. The manipulations are also difficult 

 unless the hives are placed on different floors and entirely 

 isolated from one another. The best house-apiary that I 

 have seen was a shed high enough for a man to stand in, 

 with the roof slanting backward, front to the south, and a 

 tight wall on the north and on each end. The north was 

 provided with two or three doors, so that one might get to 



