For the American Bee Journal. 



Patents and Smokers. 



Dear Editob:— Althougli exceedingly- 

 busy, I feel that I must send a word to the 

 JouiiNAL, on the subject of patents and 

 smokers, as the welfare of our fraternity is 

 in jeopardy; as also the rights of some of 

 our most enterprising brothers. 



1 think that many people— and from the 

 last Journal I think this includes you, 

 Mr. Editor— are in error on the patent ques- 

 tion. Suppose a man has inventive genius, 

 and then works day after day— yes, and 

 niglit after night, to give us some valuable 

 implenuMit or machine, and thus aids us all, 

 is lie to be robbed of his hard earnings'^— 

 I think common morality, certainly a genu- 

 ine, enlightened Christianity will pronounce 

 an emphatic— iVo. " Render to every man 

 according to his due." Were I the inventor 

 of, sajj, so unique, so neat, so perfect and 

 so desirable an instrument as the Bingham 

 smoker, I should feel that it was as much 

 mine as my colonies of bees, and that he 

 who should make it without my permit, as 

 much a thief as though he took my bees or 

 honey. If my property and generosity 

 would permit me to give it to beo-keepers, 

 then, surely, I should be worthy of much 

 praise. But, if I was unable to do this, if I 

 was poor and had a family, in which case I 

 should be in duty bound to retain tiie right 

 to a reasonable profit; and, it 1 ttid not 

 think tills would be granted by bee-keepers, 

 I should certainly be excusable— nay, in 

 honor bound to procure a patent, to protect 

 me. 



Again, pride and generosity might also 

 tempt me to secure a patent. 1 should feel 

 proud of my invention, and should want 

 its style, finish and durability to honor the 

 liard thought and long exijeriments, which 

 it had received from me. 1 should also 

 desire to save my brothers the evil of cheap 

 imitations, and thus should wish to monop- 

 olize or control the manufacture, from 

 motives of pure charity. 



Again, Mr. Editor, if such rights are not 

 to be secured or respected, what motive 

 have men to strive to create these improve- 

 ments, or, if each patentee is to be put to 

 the expense of litigation, then we shall 

 have to pay just so much more, and ought to. 



1 believe that had Mr. Langstroth's 

 undoubted right to the movable frames 

 been respected, bue-keepers would have 

 been nuicli better off, the money spent on 

 worthless hives much less, while humbug- 

 ging patent vendors would have plied a 

 much less lucrative vocation. 



Let us urge our people to caution, to look 

 before they leap; never to purchase a patent 

 till they know that it is valuable and 

 needed. And let us stay this unkind, and 

 unwise railing at patents or patentees. — 

 The honest man, to be consistent, nuist do 

 this, or else give up the use of all improve- 

 ments. 



WHAT, THKN, IS OUR DUTY TO SMOKERS? 



Mr. Quinby brought to our attention the 

 bellows combined with the tube, which had 

 been previously in use, though I dare say 

 he did not know it. He got no patent, and 



so said. " all use it." Let us honor him for 

 the gift. His generosity was respected.— 

 His smokers were not made by others, 

 hence the price was kept up, and we are 

 benefited by having well made smokers. 



Mr. Bingham invents an improvement— 

 not, as I once ignorantly stated, " essen- 

 tially the same as the Quinby." The bel- 

 lows, (I have taken them all apart), the 

 tube, the valves, and the form are all much 

 superior. It fact, in finish it is certainly 

 admirable. 



He did not patent for a time; and see, we 

 have already a cheap, poorly-made imita- 

 tion, not to be compared with the original, 

 and yet, costing half as much. Now I am 

 sure that bee-keepers will agree with me in 

 the desire to have the best smokers with 

 the best material, just as Mr. Bingham 

 uses. 



I believe the good of bee-keepers demands 

 that Mr. Bingham's patent be respected; 

 and I believe, too, that he should not be 

 forced to contest the case in law. Such 

 litigation will trouble all invention and 

 raise prices. 



For the good of bee-keepers, for justice, 

 and morality. I hope no one will be disposed 

 to contest the matter. Should I be mis- 

 taken, I hope bee-keepers will make com- 

 mon cause, and come to Mr. Bingham's aid. 

 I write this solely on the ground of right.— 

 I have no interest, only that right and 

 justice prevail. A. J. Cook. 



[Bro. Cook very frankly says he thinks 

 us in error about patents. Perhaps so; we 

 remarked that " we should have preferred 

 that this invention (Bingham's smoker) 

 might not have been covered by a patent." 

 These are our sentiments still— it entails 

 considerable expense, which finally comes 

 out of those who use them. We do not 

 dispute the right— only the desirability.— 

 We do not say but that there is a good 

 argument on the other side; that if the 

 Langstroth hive patent had been respected, 

 it might have been much better for bee- 

 keepers in general,— but it certainly would 

 have been much pleasanter in this case. 

 We do not believe in stealing a man's 

 pocket-book, reputation nor invention, — for 

 "honesty is the best policy," atalltim.es. 

 —Ed.] 



For the American Bee Journal. 



Hard Times. 



Mr. Editor.— I have noticed a peculiar 

 feature in the reduction of the price of honey 

 hoping to increase the demand. 



Times are hard for one class because they 

 are easy for another class. In my home 

 market these two classes embrace nearly all 

 of our population. 



The poor are ton poor to afford honey at 

 even $1.00 per gallon. The other class will 

 buy just as much at 15c. per lb. as they 

 would at half that price. Hadn't we better 

 consider these points carefully before were- 



