THE BEE-KEEPERS REVIEW. 



261 



Organization is the mechanism by which it 

 performs its operations. Without organiza- 

 tion co-operative effort would lead to failure, 

 chaos taking the plan of order, weakness 

 the plan of strength. Organization is a 

 principle of nature. We come into this 

 world organized beings. We are born mem- 

 bers of the nation and of society. By no act 

 of our own do we become members of ei- 

 ther, unless we are naturalized citizens. 



So many and so various are the kinds of 

 organizations and the purposes for which 

 they are formed, that this is distinctively an 

 age of organization. There is no interest 

 worthy of the name, except agricultural in- 

 terests, that is not fully organized. Why 

 should such interests be indifferent to so 

 important a matter? It is doubtful if any 

 pursuit needs organization more than agri- 

 catural pursuits, yet no class is as much be- 

 hind in this matter as are agriculturists. 

 The members of the bee-keeping pursuit 

 are too intelligent a class to be lagging be- 

 hind that in which, under proper managment 

 ought to bring to them important benefits. 

 Instead of asking what benefits they would 

 receive from organization, they should go to 

 work and adopt a proper system of organi- 

 zation, and by means of it, endeavor to 

 secure those benefits which should follow 

 properly directed effort, as surely as the 

 night follows the day. If adequate benefits 

 do not follow such endeavor, it will not be 

 the fault of the principle of co-operative 

 organization, but of the bee-keepers them- 

 selves. 



I do not favor an inter-national society. 

 This country and Canada should each have 

 a proper national society. About all of the 

 advantages of an inter-national society 

 could be secured by the affiliation of the two 

 societies for certain purposes. What may 

 be to the advantage of the bee-keepers of 

 one country may not be to the advantage 

 of those of the other, and what those of one 

 country may wish, those of the other may not 

 approve, and so on. Questions of national 

 concern may arise that bee-keepers of the 

 country concerned have alone the right to 

 decide. Inter-national conferences for the 

 discussion of matters of general interest are 

 well enough, and these could be secured by 

 affiliation of two national societies ; but 

 what our country especially needs is a suit- 

 able national society of its own for the 

 protection and advancement of our pursuit. 



Success in organizations among our bee- 

 keepers can only be secured by means of 

 such a society. With the exception of the 

 Bee-Keepers' Union, whose field of opera- 

 tions is limited, our bee-keeping organiza- 

 tions are little if any better than societies 

 for discussing matters relating to bee-keep- 

 ing, and are entirely inadequate to the wants 

 of the pursuit. We are greatly in need of a 

 society that can not only discuss and delib- 

 erate on subjects of interest to us, but has 

 the authority to speak and act for us when 

 necessary. The sooner we have such a so- 

 ciety the better. 



The question therefore arises what is the 

 best system of organization to adopt? For 

 my part I do not like the plan of forming 

 smaller societies and uniting them into a 

 large society. Such a system is limited in 

 scope and cannot very well secure the largest 

 membership. Besides it is a weak form of 

 organization, being based on the principle 

 of union instead unity. Union may run 

 through all degrees from mere adhesion to 

 perfect cohesion. Unity can only mean 

 oneness. 



I will describe a system of organization 

 that I think will answer the purpose better 

 than any other. It is as near a natural system 

 of organization as can be devised, and it can 

 be varied as desired to suit the circumstan- 

 ces. Although based on the principle of 

 unity and consolidation, there need not 

 necessarily be a centralization of powers ; 

 but on the other hand the different powers 

 and duties can be distributed as desired. It 

 is this: let a national bee-keepers' society be 

 formed of which each individual that joins 

 it, becomes directly a member and not in- 

 directly through a smaller society in a union 

 with other smaller societies. As good a. 

 name as any for it would be the National 

 Bee-Keepers' Association of the United 

 States. Besides a set of regular officers, I 

 think it should have a board of directors 

 composed of the officers and a certain 

 number of other members of the society. 



The members in certain districts of coun- 

 try are to be organized into parts called 

 branches and sections, and still smaller 

 parts can be formed, if advisable, called 

 sub-sections. Each part to have its own 

 officers and when necessary, its board 

 or executive committee. The branches 

 should, I think, include the members in 

 several States, and the sections could include 

 a State, or only bee-keeping sections need 



