AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



79 



editorial reply to " What kind of a bee 

 is the Punic?" When it first states 

 that a Hallamshire bee-keeper says " the 

 Punic bee conies from North Africa," 

 then Mr. Carr goes on and states "it is 

 dark in color, and from our limited ex- 

 perience of it, is a good worker, and a 

 prolific sort." 



I admit that Mr. Cowan's oversight 

 may have been unintentional ; if it was 

 not he would not have worded his state- 

 ment as he did. His "explanation " on 

 page 811, to all who are in possession 

 of the facts, is merely an attempted 

 evasion. . 



I have before me a copy of the last 

 Journal of Horticulture, which says 

 that Mr. Cowan's statement, which ap- 

 peared in the issue of Nov. 19, "was 

 inserted under a misapprehension," and 

 that the statement was not according to 

 facts. It goes on and gives the facts, 

 and then states "it will be seen that 

 Punic bees are twice mentioned there, 

 and that a reply is given, founded on 

 'experience';" yet in the British Bee 

 Journal for Aug. 27, 1891, on page 

 381, the same editors, in reply to "In- 

 quirer," say: "We know nothing 

 about the so-called Punic bees, and can 

 give no information as to their value." 



In reference to Mr. Cowan's article on 

 "Tunisian bees," in Dec. 17 British Bee 

 Journal, I wish to state that the Mr. W. 

 F. Kirbey is the curator of the British 

 Museum, Natural History Department, 

 Division Hymenoptera. We have his 

 letters to prove that they had no bees in 

 the Museum from North Africa, except 

 Egypt, which are yellow banded, nor 

 have they any so dark as ebony. 



Mr. Cowan professes to recognize 

 them as native bees of Tunis in their 

 dead and dry state, yet when Lowmas- 

 ter asked if they came from Tunis, he 

 could not tell him, although he had 

 seen Punic bees alive at the Royal 

 Lancaster Show. He also says that he 

 is going to Tunis to clear matters up 

 relating to them. If he was acquainted 

 with the bees, why does he have to go 

 there to get acquainted. 



In the British Bee Journal for April 

 15, 1885, page 183, is where he gets 

 his information about the 40 colonies 

 belonging to a French gentleman, the 

 Kssar-Tyre Apiary. Some of the queens 

 showed yellow. The article is written 

 by Mr. Frank Benton. There are no 

 references in March 20. 



He says the bees of Tunis, Algeria, 

 Morocco, and Minorca are the same, yet 

 he says the bees of Tunis show yellow, 

 which the others do not. If they show 

 yellow, how can they be the same f 



Whether it pleases Mr. Cowan or not 

 to call these ebony-colored bees Funics, 

 they are now in America on trial. They 

 are entirely different in both color and 

 characteristics from any he ever yet 

 imported. They are proving theiiiselves 

 up to what has been claimed for them, 

 and will doubtless find their way into 

 many apiaries another season. 



What American bee-keepers are after 

 is a dollar-and-cent bee, and it makes 

 no difference in their value, whether 

 they be called Punic or Tunic. "A rose 

 by any other name would smell -as 

 sweet." 



I will now rest my case, and let ex- 

 perience with the Punic bees settle their 

 value in America. 



Beverly, Mass. 



[This controversy is very tiresome. 

 Here is a sample : Mr. Carr is said to 

 have never "had or seen a Punic stock 

 in his life," and in the second paragraph 

 of the foregoing, it is stated that "it 

 can be proven that Mr. Carr had a Punic 

 queen." Both may be literally true- 

 but why does not Mr. Carr settle it, by 

 making a statement in his paper — the 

 Record ? What good will be done by 

 discussing it in a periodical 4,000 miles 

 away from one disputant, and 1,000 

 miles distant from the other ? Messrs. 

 Carr and Hewitt are the principals in 

 this dispute — not Messrs. Cowan and 

 Pratt. Why waste pages on the latter, 

 when the principals could settle it in 

 two or three lines ? 



When in error, Mr. Cowan has always 

 shown that he gladly makes the amende 

 honorable. What possible object could 

 he have for misrepresenting or suppress- 

 ing facts ? He is not interested in the 

 queen trade (or any other trade, for the 

 matter of that), and as the editor of the 

 B7-itish Bee Journal, and for years chair- 

 man of the British Bee-Keepers' Asso- 

 ciation, he has proved himself just and 

 honorable. Had it been otherwise, it 

 would have been found out long ago by 

 his associates. It is absurd to suppose 

 that he could have any object for con- 

 cealing anything about Punic bees. 



Now, as Mr. Pratt suggests in the last 

 paragraph: "Let experience with the 

 Punic bees settle their value in America," 



