THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW, 



207 



But no discussion followed in the journals, 

 and if bee-keepers had any thoughts on the 

 subject they kept them to themselves when 

 the matter was brought up the next year at 

 Columt)Us, Ohio, as no discussion whatever 

 preceded the vote whereby the new constitu- 

 tion and by-laws were adopted I believe 

 that Mr. Newman himself was disappointed 

 that no discussion preceded the adoption. 

 Too many seem to have the habit of voting 

 for everything that is proposed, giving the 

 subject little or no thought. 



The only change in the constitution that 

 bore fruit was that of affiliation — State and 

 other local societies paid Ar).00 per year and 

 were then affiliated with the North Ameri- 

 can. But very few societies remained in af- 

 filiation more than two years, and this fea- 

 ture soon became a dead letter. The clause 

 making the officers of the Union a defense 

 committee of the North American did not 

 influence the actions of either society. It 

 was a sort of expression of good fellowship, 

 or sympathy, or an endorsement of the 

 Union by the North Amerii^an, but the Union 

 went on conducting its affairs as it saw fit, 

 and the North American did the same. 

 There was nothing even approaching the 

 " married " relation to which Mr. Newman 

 so figuratively alludes. 



The constitution and by laws were cut 

 down and revised at St. .Joseph because 

 time, that sure tester of all things, had 

 shown that the constitution and by-laws 

 adopted at Columbus were not adapted to 

 the condition of things in this country. 

 Change of constitution, affiliation, incorpo- 

 ration, and kindred changes will not benefit 

 the North American unless made in confor- 

 mity with existing conditions, and the 

 brightest of us cannot always tell when they 

 are so made— only time and experience can 

 demonstrate that. 



It may not be best that the North Ameri- 

 can and the Union should join forces, but 

 that one society has more money than the 

 other seems a strange argument to advance 

 in opposition of such a course. To have 

 money in the treasury is well ; to have spent 

 it in a good cause might have been better. 

 I do not mean to insinuate that the Union 

 has neglected to spend money when it could 

 be wisely spent, but neither the Union nor 

 the North American has for its object the ac- 

 cumulation of money. It is not a question 

 of how much money each society has in its 

 treasury, nor which has changed its consti- 



tution the more times, but whether, all 

 things considered, it is adinsahle that the 

 two societies shall join forces ? 



The Union was organized for a specific 

 purpose, and has done its work well, but a 

 close observer must have noticed that the 

 amount of work that it does lessens as the 

 years go by. At firs*- there was more work 

 than money with which to carry it on, while 

 its manager worked for nothing ; now he has 

 a salary (and most richly does he deserve it), 

 yet money is accumulating in the treasury. 

 Some excellent and righteous decisions have 

 been secured, and these have a most quiet- 

 ing effect when shoved under the nose of 

 some would-be persecutor. For this reason 

 the number of expensive law suits have de- 

 creased. This is a condition that would 

 naturally be expected, and is desirable. 

 Now the question arises, would it not be bet- 

 ter that some of this money should be ^lsed 

 for the good of bee-keeping, rather than that 

 it should go on accumulating year after 

 year ? (Perhaps a lowering of the fees 

 would be a better plan.) Of course, those 

 who contributed to the making up of this 

 sum are the ones to say what shall be done 

 with it. By the way, Bro. Newman says this 

 sum was raised for the purpose of defense. 

 This is true, but it is also true that it can be 

 used to prosecute adulterators of honey, to 

 secure legislation, in short, for any purpose 

 thought advisable by the advisory board. 



As I understand the matter, the North 

 American was organized to advance the 

 cause of bee culture by bringing together 

 the leaders in the profession with a view to 

 an exchange of ideasi As has been often 

 mentioned, the journals have greatly les- 

 sened the value of the Association in this 

 direction. This condition, coupled with 

 poor honey seasons, have made some of the 

 late conventions rather poorly attended. 

 We, as bee-keepers, ought to recognize these 

 changed conditions as regards both of these 

 organizations. Many bee keepers now be- 

 long to one Society who cannot afford to be- 

 long to both, or think that they cannot. In 

 a union of forces tiiere would be a saving of 

 expense, an increase in numbers, and the 

 benefit of an annual face to face discussion 

 of the problems belonging to the Bee-Keep- 

 ers' Union as now carried on. 



Suppose that the North American should 

 disband, and all of its members with what 

 little money they do possess, and their in- 

 fluence, should join the Union, and the lat- 



