1896. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



787 



securing much-needed legislation for protection against foul 

 brood. From oO to 40 bee-keepers from different parts of the 

 State were present, all taking an active part in the discussions. 



After hearing the Secretary's report, and the reports of 

 the committees, Pres. Lovesy opened the discussion by point- 

 ing out that honey was being sold too cheap. Some counties 

 were shipping honey to Salt Lal<e City and selling it for less 

 than wholesale prices. Continuing, he said that a closer 

 union of interests upon all matters pertaining to the bee-in- 

 dustry was one of the main things needed among our bee- 

 keepers. 



Relative to marketing our products, he said that after 

 much agitation the railroads were more liberal than they had 

 been, and if this policy is continued we may be able to ship 

 our honey and compete with all parts of the country. But in 

 spite of all other advantages, he found that some of the bee- 

 keepers take a course that injures themselves and the bee- 

 industry at large, by rushing their honey and wax on the mar- 

 ket at any price, actually peddling it for less money than they 

 could sell it for at their homes to wholesalers. There can't be 

 any wisdom in a course of this kind. 



A FOUL BROOD LAW NEEDED. 



The bee-industry io Utah is sadly in need of a good foul 

 brood law for the protection of our bee-industry, which is a 

 growing one, and it is bringing considerable money into the 

 State ; it is all the time on the increase, and for this and 

 other reasons it should be encouraged by our legislature, to 

 the e.xtent at least of protecting the bees against contagious 

 diseases. We believe that the bee-keepers present should 

 frame or pass upon some good measure that can be made 

 effective, and have it presented in proper form to our next 

 legislature. 



THE FOUL BROOD LAW. 



At the conclusion of the President's address, the discus- 

 sion of a Bill to be introduced at the next session of the legis- 

 lature was taken up. The Bill is the result of the efforts of 

 the committee appointed on a foul brood law, and who were 

 ably assisted by County Attorney Whittemore, of Salt Lake 

 county. The proposed Act reads as follows: 



Sec. 1. — It shall be the duty of the county commissioners 

 of each county to appoint, from among the bee-keepers in the 

 county, one or more suitable persons as Inspector of bees, and 

 they shall report annually every item of interest to their re- 

 spective county commissoners. 



Sec. 2. — The inspector shall annually report to the Presi- 

 dent or Secretary of the Uiah State Bee-Keepers' Association 

 the names of all bee-keepers and number of colonies of bees 

 owned by each in their respective districts at the time of their 

 inspection. 



Sec. 3. — These inspectors shall be appointed biennially, 

 viz.: 'On the first Monday in March of each alternate year, or 

 at the first regular sitting of the court thereafter, and shall 

 perform the duties of bee inspector for two years, and until 

 their successors are appointed and qualified. Said inspectors 

 shall qualify by taking and subscribing to an official oath, and 

 giving bonds with sureties to be approved by their respective 

 county courts. 



Sec. 4. — In determining the fitness of a person to fill the 

 position of inspector, the court shall consider the wishes of 

 the County Bee-Keepers' Association, or, providing there is no 

 association in the county, the petition of ten or more bee-keep- 

 ers of said county endorsed by the State Bee-Keepers' Associa- 

 tion shall be considered for such appointments. 



Sec. 5. — It shall be the duty of the inspector to visit all 

 the hives of bees in his county or district at least once a year, 

 and at any time, upon the complaint of any bee-owner, that 

 the disease known as "foul brood" exists among the bees of 

 any person, whether owner or custodian ; it shall be the duty 

 of the inspector to whom the complaint is made, to imme- 

 diately inspect the bees said to be thus iufected ; and if such 

 inspector finds that '• foul brood " does exist among such bees, 

 said inspector shall immediately take charge and control of 

 them and give them proper treatment for the cure of the dis- 

 ease, or he may destroy such portions of the bees and brood 

 and of the hives as may be necessary. 



Provided, in case the owner has any doubt about his bees 

 being affected and objects to their being destroyed, as in this 

 Act provided, then such fact shall be determined by arbitra- 

 tion, the said inspector choosing one abitrator, the owner of 

 the bees another, and they two a third, who shall immediately 

 inspect such bees and determine whether or not the bees so 

 inspected are diseased. Any bee-keeper may require the in- 

 spector to thoroughly clean his tools, or he may furnish the 

 tools necessary, and assist the inspector in the inspection of 

 his bees. 



Sec. 6. — If any person shall, in any way, obstruct by 

 threats of violence or in any other manner, or prohibit or pre- 

 vent a duly appointed bee-inspector from inspecting, taking 

 charge of, treating or destroying bees, as provided in this Act, 

 the person so doing shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 



Sec. 7. — To provide for the prosecution of the duties of 

 bee inspector under this Act, the county courts are hereby 

 authorized to and shall appropriate out of the funds of the 

 county the sum of three dollars (IjJo.UO) per day for the time 

 the inspector is actually employed in the performance of his 

 duties ; provided, that in no case shall the compensation of 

 the inspector exceed in any year the sum of one hundred and 

 fifty dollars (§ I 50), and no extra charge shall be allowed for 

 traveling or other expenses. 



Sec. S. — A tax of not to exceed five cents (5 cents) per 

 colony is hereby levied each year upon every colony of bees in 

 each of the counties of this State, and the assessor of each 

 county IS hereby required to assess to the owner thereof every 

 colony of bees in his county in the same manner as other as- 

 sessments are made. Said tax shall be collected in the same 

 manner as is now provided by law for the collection and pay- 

 ment of other county taxes, and when so collected shall be- 

 come a part of the funds of the county. 



Sec. 9. — This Act shall take effect upon approval. 



Thos. .Tohnson thought, as a whole, it was a good law, 

 and should be passed. 



Levi S. Heywood said a measure of this kind was ex- 

 tremely necessary for the benefit of the bee-industry. 



Sec. Fagg said if all our bee-keepers were educated in the 

 matter we might possibly get along, but unfortunately they 

 are not, hence the necessity of the law. 



F. Schach said the Bill was all right ; it would help to 

 unite the bee-keepers, and assist in building up the industry. 



Mr. Brown wanted to know if such a law would not be 

 class legislation ; he believed bees should be assessed the same 

 as other property. 



T. B. Clark said our bees were already taxed in some 

 counties ; there was both a general and special, and yet there 

 was little or no protection against foul brood. 



S, Peterson thought it should be apparent to all that a 

 measure of this kind is absolutely necessary, hence we should 

 pass on the law as it is, or amend it if necessary. 



Vice-Pres. Howe said as far as he was personally con- 

 cerned he would prefer no inspector and no law. No inspec- 

 tor had been to see his bees for sometime. He had 300 colo- 

 nies in good condition, and would prefer to attend to them 

 himself. 



Henry Bullock thought differently ; he said a bee-inspec- 

 tor and a good foul brood law are needed. He said if all were 

 practical bee-keepers it might be all right, but the trouble was 

 with the many that kept one or more colonies for their own 

 use, and they never look at them except when they wanted 

 honey. He said if the disease got in them with no inspector, 

 they would injure the industry a great deal. 



Pres. Lovesy defended the proposed Act. He said if he 

 consulted his personal feelings he would not desire a law, but 

 while it is a burden on our prominent bee-keepers, it will pro- 

 tect them from loss by the many that know nothing about 

 the disease. He said that he had fouud bee-keepers, the pres- 

 ent season, actually dividing foul-broody colonies, thus spread- 

 ing the disease. He asked if this law, with effective protec- 

 tion, would not be preferable to the present tax which gave 

 little or no protection. 



After a talk by William Cornwall on the curing of foul 

 brood, the Bill as proposed, with a few slight ameudments 

 which are embodied in the above copy, was adopted, and the 

 meeting adjourned until 5 a.m. 



At the evening session there was a long and interesting 

 debate on the necessity of organizing a bee-keepers' exchange. 

 Every bee-keeper present recognized the necessity and desir- 

 ability of something of this kind. It was finally referred to 

 the executive committee, to report at the spring meeting. 

 John B. Fagg, Assistant Secretary. 



Iloiiey as Foo*! sintl Me«licine. — A new and revised 

 edition of this 32-page pamphlet is now issued. It has 5 blank 

 pages on which to write or paste recipes taken from other sources. 

 It is just what its name indicates, and should be liberally dis- 

 tributed among the people everywhere to create a demand for 

 honey. It contains a number of recipes on the use of hor°v as 

 food and as medicine, besides much other interesting and Vhiiiable 

 information. Prices, postpaid, are ; Single copy, 5 cts. ; 35 copies 

 7.=Jcts. ; .50for$1.10; 100fori;l..50. Better give them a trial. Send 

 all orders to the Bee Journal office. 



