THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



15 



THE ONTARIO BEE-KEEPKUS' CONVENTION. 



I am just home from attending the above 

 convention. The Secretary asked me to con- 

 tribute a paper (it will be found elsewhere 

 in the Review) and Mr. .John Myers of 

 Stratford, where the meeting was held, most 

 cordially invited me to be his guest while 

 attending the convention, in fact, I was 

 treated as I always have been whenever I 

 have been in Canada, as though too much 

 could not be done to make my visit a pleas- 

 ant one. I left home about eleven o'clock at 

 night, and, as I stood on the threshold and 

 looked back at the bright, shining coal-fire, 

 and the woman standing beside it with a 

 wistful, beseeching look in her eyes that 

 seemed to say, " Don't go," and then I look- 

 ed out and saw the street and air full of 

 whirling snow, and visions of blockaded 

 trains arose in my mind, I will confess that 

 it required some courage to shut the door 

 from the outside. Once snugged away in 

 the Pullman Sleeper I soon forgot every- 

 thing until when, about five o'clock in the 

 morning, the porter poked me in the ribs 

 and said, " Most to Stratford, sir." If any- 

 thing, the storm was worse than in the night, 

 and I almost feared that the convention 

 would be a pretty slim affair, but it seems 

 that our brethren across the line, with their 

 great fur coats, and caps, laugh at such 

 storms. Dr. Duncan, who must be in the 

 neighborhood of eighty, drove in some twelve 

 or fifteen miles if I rememler aright. Some- 

 times he had to get out and tramp and break 

 a road through the drifts before he could 

 get through with a team. For genuine en- 

 thusiasm in attending conventions, the Can- 

 adians beat us. There must have been near- 

 ly 100 in attendance. Not only are their con- 

 ventions well attended, but they are never 

 dull. One thing that contributes largely to 

 the spice of their meetings is that some of 

 the members are very outspoken. Nothing 

 is ever allowed to pass unnoticed or unchal- 

 lenged. The least attempt at unfairness, or 

 irregularity, or any mistake, is prom ptly 

 challenged, and names are spoken and state- 

 ments made with a freedom that would be 

 truly refreshing were it not that some trifl- 

 ing matter is often made tlie basis for a long, 

 sharp and personal debate. It should not be 

 forgotten, however, that the Ontario Associ- 

 ation is really a more complex affair than 

 the Associations on this side of the line. 

 There is the grant of ifoOO per year that must 

 be used to the best advantage, there is the 



election of officers and directors and the ap- 

 pointing of a foul brood inspector, then 

 there are the affiliated Societies, and com- 

 mittees on this and that, and taken all in all 

 there is abundant opportunity for a conflict 

 of opinions and views, but tlie Association 

 is a power for good and its discussions of 

 practical subjects second to none. 



Of course, there is not room in the Review 

 to more than briefly touch upon some of the 

 most important topics that were discussed. 

 In regard to essays at conventions there was 

 a difference of opinion. Mr. S. T. Pettit was 

 the champion of essays, even if they were so 

 long and exhaustive that when they were 

 read one could only say of each, " That was 

 a good essay." Mr. J. B. Hall said that 

 nearly all of the information that he obtain- 

 ed at conventions came from discussion. 

 " Essays are too dry ; they don't stick." 



Heretofore there has been a lack of posi- 

 tive, scientific experiments showing that the 

 spraying of trees in bloom poisons bees. 

 Bee-keepers were well satisfied that it did 

 kill their bees : in fact, they were 'positive of 

 it, but when asking for legislation on the 

 subject they have been asked for proof that 

 it did kill the bees, and to furnish this proof 

 has been very difficult, but it will be so no 

 longer. Mr. Fletcher, Prof, of entomology 

 at the Ottawa Experiment Station, read a 

 paper, or rather a report from Prof. Web- 

 ster of Ohio, I think it was, in which was 

 given a detailed account of some experi- 

 ments in which it was proved " scientific- 

 ally " that bees working upon sprayed bloom 

 are killed and the brood that is fed upon the 

 nectar so gathered is also killed. Analysis 

 of the intestines of the dead bees and of the 

 larvas showed that poison was the cause of 

 their death. Prof. Fletcher gave it as his 

 opinion, and, mind you, he was very careful 

 to emphasize the fact that it was simply his 

 opinion, that the honey gathered from spray- 

 ed bloom would not have an injurious effect 

 upon a person who ate it. The quantity 

 necessary to kill an insect is so small that it 

 is not probable that it would have any effect 

 upon a person. There is also another point, 

 honey gathered from fruit bloom is almost 

 always used up in brood rearing. But the 

 best of it is that there is not only no neces- 

 sity for spraying when the trees are in 

 bloom, but it is actually injurious to the 

 fruit, or rather to the fertilizing organs of 

 the blossoms. Mr. Hall mentioned a neigh- 

 bor having a plum orchard that he sprayed 



