132 



THE AMERICAN BEE-KEEPER. 



August 



familiar with the part that this wheat 

 "racket" plaj's in lowering the price of 

 honey? 



To be very brief, Leiter, according to 

 the papers, bought wheat at 64%c, 

 which was below the cost of produc- 

 tion, and sold the same for $1.85. I 

 have taken extreme outside figures 

 both ways to' show the point I wish to 

 make. What was the result? Flour 

 went from less than a dollar to two 

 dollars a sack. So we had the farmer, 

 or producer of wealth, selling his wheat 

 at less than the cost of production, and 

 the consumer of the flour taking of his 

 hard-earned wealth to double the 

 amount that he formerly did to supply 

 his family with bread; all because Lei- 

 ter desired to put those "unearned 

 charges" down into his pocket. That 

 he made a failure on his part is for- 

 eign to the subject. This scheme in 

 which Bro. J. seems only to see some- 

 thing to "prevent the bottom from 

 dropping out" of the wheat market, not 

 only fixed the farmer, but the great 

 mass of wealth-producers also where 

 they could not buy honey, for, by it, 

 supply and demand were robbed of 

 their rightful equilibrium, and what 

 might have gone for friend Jolley's 

 honey went into the trusts' pocket, even 

 though Leiter himself was swallowed 

 in the mealstrom. And this is only a 

 sample of the others, whose name is 

 "legion." 



Wonder if Bro. Jolley thought when 

 he was using that shoe illustration of 

 his, that the readers would not remem- 

 ber that, in the earlier years when 

 shoes were made by hand, that there 

 was nothing in "unearned charges" 

 that come between a trade with the 

 honey producers and the shoemakers, 

 while now there stands a leather trust 

 and a shoemakers' combine (which 

 does not produce a particle of wealth), 

 that must have their "pound of flesh" 

 out of both Barber and Jolley every 

 time they look toward a supply and de- 

 mand transaction, I frankly admit that 



there are other things in the way of 

 our enjoying the prosperity of the sev- 

 enties, but cannot see even a shadow 

 In the massing of honey in the "great 

 ^imporiums" as casting a ray of light 

 (?) on this subject, even after friend 

 Jolley's rejoinder in the June number. 

 If I did not think this one of the most 

 serious menaces which threaten our be- 

 loved pursuit, (bee-keeping) I should 

 not take any room with it in a paper 

 which preaches practical bee-keeping. 

 But what will practical bee-keeping 

 amount to when the price of honey 

 (supply and demand) falls so low that 

 we cannot live at our pursuit? All of us 

 do not have a lucrative position inside 

 the "fold" of the Standard Oil Com- 

 pany. 



Borodino. N. Y. 



[So far from Introducing a foreign 

 subject, we regard this discussion as 

 dealing directly with fundamental prin- 

 ciples. If it is a fact that our industry 

 is tottering upon a weak, crumbling 

 foundation — an erroneous system— the 

 subject is of vital importance and de- 

 mands an investigation which will en- 

 able us to apply the remedy in such a 

 way as to effect a permanent cure. If 

 the disease is deep-seated and chronic, 

 a mere topical application can give but 

 temporary relief at best, hence we 

 think it advisable to look a little fur- 

 ther into the matter, that we may lo- 

 cate the true cause of the limited de- 

 mand, at low prices, for our product. 

 We will see to it that the practical 

 side receives due attention, by adding 

 space, if nei>essary, while the discuss- 

 ion is going on, if our readers will 

 freely express their views of this sub- 

 ject. While it is on let us fathom its 

 depths, and by friendly discussion lo- 

 cate the wrong which seems to ex- 

 ist, with a view to permanently better- 

 ing future conditions. — Ed.] 



Kindness in ourselves is the honey 

 that blunts the sting of unkindness in 

 another,— Landor, 



