1909 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



147 



Our Homes 



By a. I. Root 



In lecret hive 1 done nothing. — John 18; 20. 



Much of the time for years past I have felt that 

 I was protesting almost single-handed against the 

 "secret" business; but the Rural Nexv -Yorker 

 and several other agricultural papers have come 

 out strong and clear on the subject occasionally; 

 and now that persistent and pushing little Farm 

 Journal has hit the nail on the head by giving 

 the world a beautiful little poultry-book entitled 

 " Poultry Secrets." When 1 first saw their page 

 advertisement in our January issue 1 said, " May 

 the Lord be praised for putting the idea into their 

 heads of stopping this whole business, by putting 

 all the secrets into a low-priced book." The 

 book of 53 pages is now in my hands; and al- 

 though it contains many "dollars" worth of se- 

 crets, the price is only 25 cts. ; and if you send 

 $1.00 for Farm Journal ior fi-z-e years the book is 

 included. I don't see how any farmer or poul- 

 try-keeper can afford to be without the Farm 

 Journal at this insignificant price. 



Well, while I rejoice at the secrets they have 

 exposed I feel sorry they did not include many I 

 have purchased and given here in years past, not 

 because of their value, but to show how people 

 take money for things as old as the hills, and for 

 things that do not do the work when you get 

 them. There are something like fifty or sixty 

 poultry-journals now published in our land; but 

 until recently, scarcely one of these has lent a 

 helping hand; on the contrary, the greater part 

 of them have accepted, without stint, all this sort 

 of advertisements. Why didn't some of these 

 fifty or sixty take up the work the Farm Jour- 

 nal has started? 



I am pleased to see that the Poultry Record 

 (Carey, O.), isn't afraid; and to get the whole 

 matter before us I give below some extracts from 

 their January issue, written by L. E. Keyser: 



The world is full of fakirs who prey on the unsuspecting pub- 

 lic, and the poultry business is not free from them. They go on 

 the supposition that a sucker is born every minute, and taat they 

 never quit sucking. They believe that the bigger the story they 

 tell the more suckers they will catch. While there are fakirism 

 and dishonest practices among fanciers they are not so prevalent 

 ai the fellows who are lying for the beginner. These fellows 

 have some wonderful secret to sell that is sure to pave the poul- 

 in-keeper's way to wealth. One man advertises that every hen 

 U a 200-egg hen by his method, which is only 50 cents.* An- 

 other will furnish you a formula to make feed at 10 to IS cts. per 

 boshel, which will save $25,00 per year on every hundred hens. 

 This wonderful secret he calls " processed oats," which is noth- 

 ing more nor less than sprouted oats. The formula for preparing 

 oats in this manner was published in the agricultural and poultry 

 papers twenty years ago. A bushel of oats when sprouted will 

 swell and make four bushels: so if oats are worth 40 cts. a bush- 

 el, the feed will cost 10 a bushel; and at the present price of oats 

 (about 60 cts.), the feed costs 15 cents. There is one thing that 

 ii not explained, and that Is that the sprouting of oats does not 

 increase their nutritive value: it simply increases their bulk. 

 Anoilier cheap feed is advertised at 8 cts. a bushel, which is not 

 sprouted oats nor beet pulp. I do not know what this feed is, nor 

 would I give a dollar to find out. 



A method of telling the fenile from the unfertile eggs before 

 placing them in the incubator is advertised by a Missouri woman. 

 This secret is for sale at SI. 00, and is on a par with telling the 

 •ex of the chick by the shape of the egg. 



I have mentioned only a very few of the secret processes which 

 show on their very face that they are fakes, or at least very de- 

 ceptive. You will find them advertised in many of the poultry- 

 joomals, some of which claim to protect their readers against loss 

 from dishonest advenisers. The publisher does not consider 



• If evef7 hen could be made a 200-efr»; ben It wnuUl j)ay u» 

 all to Invest In this secret, for 1000 guch hens would make a 

 poor man rich In a very Bhurt time. 



these advertisers dishonest, because they send what they adver 

 tise, and the fact that it is worthless does not disturb the 

 publisher. 



All secret processes are not fakes; but most things that are new 

 and give promise of being good are tried out at the experiment 

 stations, published in bulletins, in the poultry press, or in books 

 that pass through the regular channels of trade. When a man 

 advertises to sell you plans for a brooder, hen-house, trap-nest, 

 feed-hopper, or something of that nature, you know that he will 

 send you what he advertises; but whether it will be practical for 

 your use or not can be determined only when it arrives. 



The above makes reference to a secret offered 

 by a "Missouri woman." We find her adver- 

 tisement in the Northavest Poultry Journal iSahm, 

 Oregon). Here it is: 



Save useless work, also money, by testing your eggs before set- 

 ting. Method, $1.00. Tester, prepaid, 50 cents. If you raise 

 chicks by hand, you need my 25-cent booklet containing plans 

 and information for making heatless brooders at literally no ex- 

 pense. Used with safety in zero weather. Twenty years' ex- 

 perience. Mrs. L. L. White, Montrose, Mo. 



Now will the editor of the Poultry Record (and 

 perhaps some other editors) excuse me if I offer 

 some suggestions.'' Why not send to the woman 

 and get her secret before condemning it.? If it 

 does what she says, it ought to be worth a /lun- 

 dred dollars to the editor of any wideawake poul- 

 try-journal. Even if she aoes want $1.00 for the 

 secret, and 50 cts. more for the tester, I sent her 

 the money the minute I got my eye on it. If I 

 have my usual good luck we will all have it in 

 due time. In this same Northavest journal I find 

 the following /;/ the reading-columns -. 



MORE ABOUT MITES. 



I should like to tell your readers my way of getting rid of 

 mites. On coming to my present location I found hens dying 

 from mites. The hen-houses were certainly alive with them, 

 and the whole ranch infected. 1 gave the houses and perches a 

 thorough cleaning with Avenarius catbolineum; but the hens 

 kept getting infected outside. I began giving my remedy with 

 their feed, and in a very short time could safely ofler five cents 

 each for mites. They simply can not live on a hen fed this rem- 

 edy. It is cheap and simple and perfectly harmless, and will rid 

 a place of these pests quicker than any other way I have yet dis- 

 covered — is equal to a fire. — Geo. A. Spragitk. 



[Mr. Sprague is advertising his remedy in our miscellaneous 

 advertisements. It will pay you to get his recipe. — Ed.] 



After reading the above we turn over to " mis- 

 cellaneous ad's," and find the following: 



will you give $1.00 for formula to mix with feed, guaranteed 

 to kill every mite that bites your hens.' Costs only 25 cents to 

 fill. Sent by George A. Sprague. Gaston, Oregon. 



As the above is a fair sample of what we find 

 in many poultry journals, let us stop and consid- 

 er it a moment. First, the editor gives the man 

 Sprague a place in the reading-columns; he lets 

 him say "I should like to give (.?) your readers 

 my way of getting rid of mites." No doubt — at 

 a dollar apiece; and then the editor adds, "It- 

 will pay you to get his recipe." 



If this is the way we are to do business, what 

 are poultry -journals for.? Are they not to give in- 

 formation, and tell subscribers how to do things? 



And how about our poultry-^oo^j.'' This idea 

 oi feeding something to kill the mites reminds me 

 of boring an auger-hole in a fruit-tree and put- 

 ting in some "medicine" that will kill every in- 

 sect on the tree now and forevermore. I suppose 

 fakirs are still going round getting money for 

 this absurd swindle if they can find a locality 

 where the folks don't take the farm papers. I 

 have also sent Mr. Sprague his dollar, and we 

 will all see what it is. What have our experi- 

 ment stations to say in regard to this kind of 

 work? Is it possible to banish the "mites "by 

 putting something into the feed? 



Here is one more from the Poultry Herald (St. 

 Paul, Minn.): 



