a,s we want bees for the honey they gather, 

 these dark bees are as good as if they were 

 beautiful. 



I have been raising some queens from my 

 imported Italian. Three of them have 

 been tested. One mated, I think, witii a 

 black drone ; but wliile her bees are darker 

 than those of her motlier, there are no 

 black bees among them, as sometimes 

 happens wiien my liome-bred queens, com- 

 ing from lighter stocks, mate with black 

 drones. The bees of another are larger 

 and more uniform tlian those of the import- 

 ed queen, the bands being more red than 

 yellow. The bees of the third are beauties 

 — large, uniform and bright. 



I take it for granted that the Messrs. 

 Blood are honest and careful, and that they 

 sent me an imported, and consequently a 

 pure queen ; but I have had to change Huy 

 mind somewhat in regard to tlie marks of 

 purity. I have no doubt but that I have 

 killed pure queens, thinking they were 

 impure, and have retained some as pure 

 tlifit were not. 



Logansport, Ind., Aug. 16, 1878. 



For the American Bee Journal. 



The Adulteration of Sweets. 



I sent, at the same time, the petitions on 

 the adulteration of sweets to the editors of 

 three bee-publications. Messrs. King and 

 Newman inserted it cheerfully, but Mr. 

 Root did not honor it with a place in Olean- 

 inus. On the 3d of August, I sent him a 

 postal card, asking why he had not pub- 

 lished it. This was his answer : 



"I beg pardon, but the petition against adultera- 

 tion of sweets did not seem to meof sufficient import- 

 ance to entitle it to a place in the journal." 



This petition was unanimously recom- 

 mended by a vote of more than 70 bee- 

 keepers at Burlington. It is against fraud, 

 and in the interest of all bee-keepers. 



The adulteration of honey being now 

 practiced on a large scale by unprincipled 

 aealers. the Legislature of Kentucky has 

 passed laws against it. It is under all these 

 circumstances that Mr. Root refuses the 

 petitioners the right of being heard in his 

 paper. 



A prominent bee-keeper and honey- 

 dealer, Mr. C. F. Miith, of Cincinnati, after 

 reading a copy of the petition wrote thus : 



" Glucose is the greatest stumbling block to the 

 honey trade, and consequently to the bee-keeper.— 

 If it is once known to the public that glucose is fed 

 to the bees by the bee-keeper, it will work a greater 

 damage to the honey trade than we may imagine. I 

 ■was otfered, last week, a sample of extracted honey, 

 of which the party had a few barrels. I would 

 almost swear to the fact that It was adulterated 

 with glucose. Of whom will it be safe to buy pure 

 honey after awhile ? 



Mr. Root's course in recommending glucose to bee- 

 keepers, is very reprehensible ! I certainly think 

 it very wrong in him. His course in regard to glu- 

 cose is very damaging to bee-keepers." 



In answer to my request for permission to 

 publish extracts from his letter, Mr. Muth 

 says : 



r "If Oleanings was started to represent the interests 

 of the bee-keeping public, it has certainly now 

 turned into another channel !" 



The last sentence is hard upon Mr. A. 

 I. Root ; but, in my opinion, he richly de- 



serves it ! By looking on the cover of 

 Oleanings, every one will find the reason 

 for the refusal of its editor to publish the 

 Petition. Mr. Root, by advertising and 

 extolling glusose, has created a large de- 

 mand for it. He sells it by tons, (see 

 Oleanings for May, page 161), at a large 

 profit, and does not wish to stop his trade, 

 by publishing our Petition ! 



An Honest editor, an editor devoted to the 

 interests of bee-keeping would have given 

 both sides— for or against glucose ! But in 

 Oleanings you will find praises, but not a 

 word against its use ! According to Mr. 

 Root, what was said against glucose in bee 

 papers, were mere sensational reports. 

 (Oleanings for April, page 110). Yet Mr. 

 Muth wrote to him on the subject. I, too, 

 at three different times, wrote to Mr. Root, 

 that glucose contained but 30 to 40 per 

 cent, of sugar ; that 2^4 lbs. of glucose at 5 

 cents per pound, worth 13>^ cents, given as 

 food to bees, was not more nutritious than 

 one pound of sugar, worth less than 11 cts.; 

 that 3 pounds of solid glucose, that he im- 

 properly calls " grape sugar," at 3X cents, 

 worth 10>^ cents, were equivalent to one 

 pound of sugar, worth about the same price. 

 Glucose is about 3 times less sugarecfthau 

 cane sugar. Sugar is a better food for 

 bees than glucose, on account of the quan- 

 tity of refuse matter among the constituent 

 parts of glucose ; not even taking in account 

 theunwholesonieuess of the sulphuric acid, 

 sucrate of lime, &c., always present in 

 glucose ! 



" The following will give an idea of the 

 quantity of waste matter contained in glu- 

 cose : Some American wine producers, to 

 increase the quantity of tiieir wine crop, 

 mix in some glucose, dissolved in water. — 

 The sugared particles of glucose are trans- 

 formed in alcohol by fermentation. Every- 

 body knows that alcoholic liquids are 

 lighter than water ; but wine that is 

 made with the addition of glucose, although 

 containing alcohol, is heavier than water, 

 on account of the mineral water that it con- 

 tains. For this reason, it is impossible to 

 determine with the areometer, an instru- 

 ment to find the specific weight of liquids, 

 the quantity of alcohol contained in glu- 

 cosed wine, and a small still has to be used 

 for that proof. 



1 wrote also to Mr. Root that glucose was 

 tried in the hospitals of Paris to sweeten 

 the beverages of the patients, but that it 

 was .soon abandoned on account of the in- 

 crease of deaths ; that the use of glucose 

 to make beer is forbidden in Germany ; the 

 beer thus made having proved unwhole- 

 some; that the manufacture of dry glucose 

 is forbidden in France, on account of the 

 facility of mixing it with brown sugar, »&c. 



Did Mr. Root publish my letters ? Did he 

 ever mention them ? No ! Tliey were not 

 of sufficient importance! ! ! Yes, Mr. A. 

 1. Root, they, and the Petition were of suf- 

 ficient importance to threaten to stop your 

 profits by sales of glucose, and that is the 

 reason— the true, the only reason— why you 

 di(l not publish them ! ! 



Now let bee-kee pel's understand that we 

 have not only to fight the adultei'ators, but 

 the selfishly-interested editor of Olean- 

 ings ! But, no matter ! We shall obtain 



