70 



Tmm M'mmmiGM.M mmM j^^mmmi^. 



Soon after this, in 1887, a character- 

 istic letter from the pen of Mr. R. 

 McKnight was published, in which we 

 tind the following : 



"There are some in the fraternity 

 whose generosity would lead them to 

 squeeze out the weak and the small. 

 They would go still further and cir- 

 cumscribe operations in rural districts 

 by a new force known as ' Priority of 

 Locations ' — root out big and little 

 from towns and villages, and put the 

 business in the hands of specialists. 



"The new doctrine of priority of 

 location is the most presumptuous of 

 all the claims the monopolists amongst 

 bee-keepers have yet hinted at. Such 

 a doctrine is begotten in selfishness, 

 and opposed to justice." 



Who in the present age is bold 

 enough to assert that Mr. McKnight is 

 not an original and profound thinker ? 

 Listen, while I repeat the strikingly 

 characteristic terms employed — " root 

 out big and little," " the most pre- 

 sumptuous," "the monopolist," "be- 

 gotten in selfishness and opposed to 

 justice." But just how leaving a man 

 to enjoy his chosen locality without tlie 

 crowding of bees other than his own, 

 will so operate as to " squeeze out the 

 weak and the small," and "root out 

 big and little from towns and villages," 

 I confess inability to comprehend, and 

 I suppose ordinary mortals will plod 

 on just the same as though that com- 

 positian had never been written. 



" Amateur Expert" writes: "And 

 having done so, proceed to walk into 

 some of the abuses he (James Heddon) 

 so loudly denounces, and then walk 

 into him if he talks of priority of loca- 

 tion, etc, and it would be all in good 

 humor." Why, to be sure, " A. E.," 

 that is the proper way to do things. 

 Then "A. E." says, "don't you know 

 that we are free traders and stout up- 

 holders of a fair field and no favors ? 

 or else how would the prioritj'-of-loca- 

 tion doctrine suit our Canadian breth- 

 ren wlien they look for a share of our 

 market ?" 



Replying I will state that I am will- 

 ing to believe that "A. E." has not 

 given the subject due thought, or else 

 he would see that our purposing to assist 

 in placing within the possible reach 

 of England's millions of hungry and 

 poor, who in all probability never in 

 their lives have enjo3'ed the pleasure 

 of eating so much as one pound of 

 honey, is a very different thing alto- 

 gether from squatting down by another 

 already in the business, to the injury 

 or disaster of both ; the dissimilarity 

 will be all the more conspicuous when 

 we reflect that we have plenty of in- 

 viting unoccupied fields, and that Eng- 

 land must look to the outside world 

 for food, or perish. Plainly enough 



CANADA. 



Report of tlie Ontario Bee- 

 Keepers' Convention. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 



BY R. P. HOLTEBMANN. 



The annual meeting of the Ontario 

 Bee-Keepers' Association was held at 

 Owen Sound, Out., in the Council 

 Chamber, commencing at 2 p.m. on 

 Jan. 8, 1889. 



The annual meeting has not had a 

 smaller attendance for at least eight 

 years, and probably never. It must, 

 however, not be considered that the 

 association is losing ground — far from 

 it — the membership for 1888 was 2B1 ; 

 nor must it be charged that bee-keep- 

 ers do not desire to attend, but the 

 reasons probably were, the poor season 

 of 1888, the localit}', and the bad roads 

 all over the country, making it difficult 

 to get to railway stations. 



President Martin Emigh, of Hol- 

 brook, occupied the chair. Among 

 those present were, Messrs. Gemraell, 

 R. E. Smith, A. Pickett, R. McKnight, 

 S. Cornell. W. F. Clarke, F. H. Mac- 

 pherson, J. Miller, Wm. Couse, R. F. 

 Holtermann, D. Anguish and G. Barber. 



After the roll call, and reading of 

 the minutes, the reports of the Secre- 

 tary, Treasurer, and others, were read 

 and approved. 



The Secretary, Wm. Couse, stated in 

 his report that about 1,000 invitations 

 had been sent out, and largely re- 

 sponded to by the bee-keepers. 



R. McKnight, the Treasurer, re- 

 ported about 1450 on hand, $200 of 

 which had been set aside to secure 

 Langstroth's revised book for the 

 members of 1887. 



The auditors, J. Miller and R. F. 

 Holtermann, reported that the books 

 were audited, and found to be correct. 



Mr. Eraigh then read the President's 

 annual address. 



An essaj' was then read from Mr. S. 

 T. Pettit, of Belmont, Ont, as follows, 

 on 



Priority of I.iOcation. 



About two years ago, when this 

 thought was presented at the annual 

 meeting of the Ontario Bee-Keepers' 

 Association, the principle seemed to be 

 something of small value, and but little 

 notice was taken of it. Not long after, 

 however, Mr. James Heddon called 

 attention to it, and wrote approvingly, 

 but Mr. Jones thought that it was a 

 case of " the survival of the fittest." 



he two cases are not parallel, and not 

 comparable. 



Mr. W. F. Clarke says : "Priority 

 of location is another matter which is 

 attracting much attention among bee- 

 keepers. It is proposed by some to 

 pass a law securing to the first comer 

 as a bee-keeper into a neighborhood, 

 the exclusive ownership of the bee- 

 forage within certain limits." Well, I 

 must say that if sucli legislation has 

 ever been proposed, or even hinted at, 

 it has entirely escaped my notice. I 

 cannot help thinking, however, that 

 Mr. Clarke was drawing upon a much 

 abused imagination when he wrote 

 that statement. But the President, 

 still believing in priority of location, 

 in his annual address of a year ago, 

 again called attention to it. Now per- 

 mit me to give a few quotations to 

 show that the principle has taken deep 

 root in the better judgments of bee- 

 keepers generally, the fruits of which 

 will be sweet and refreshing to many 

 in the business. 



Mr. Allen Pringle says : As to who 

 ought to engage in bee-keeping, and 

 who may engage in it, these are ques- 

 tions which each individual has the 

 natural right to decide for himself, so 

 long as he keeps within both the moral 

 and the civil law. When the latter e.^c- 

 clucles him from corporations, he has 

 no right to violate it, and when the 

 former excludes him from preoccujiied 

 ground, he has no moral right to 

 violate that either. 



From a dialogue between Prof. Cook 

 and Dr. C. C. Miller, at a Chicago 

 meeting of the North American Bee- 

 Keepers' Society, I gather that Prof. 

 Cook also believes in the principle. 



Mr. D. A. Jones now not only con- 

 cedes to others priority of location, but 

 advocates it as well. He says : " To 

 me it seems that the question of pri- 

 ority of location bothers some more 

 than it need. There are those who 

 make comparisons of bee-men and 

 store-keepers, etc., but such compari- 

 son is not applicable." Then again he 

 says : " With those points in view, no 

 practical man will seek entrance to a 

 section of country alreadj* comfortably 

 occupied." 



And now wo may rejoice in the fact 

 that priority of location, backed up by 

 sound public opinion, "has come to 

 stay " until the time shall come when 

 in the march of pi-ogress on all sides, 

 apiculture shall receive that attention 

 from the people, and from Legislators, 

 that its growing importance merits, 

 and it shall be placed upon a legal, and 

 therefore upon a more solid and satis- 

 factory basis ; when justice through 

 wise legislation can be done to all the 

 people ; and even then the principle of 

 " do unto others as you would that 

 they should do unto you," will be of 



