»^m»m»m»* 



TMm JSMERICSN mMW JQ^RPfSI,. 4Q3 



XIIOMLAS G. MEMTJIAW, 



KnrroR. 



VoinV. June 29,1889, No, 26, 



Urotlier C. P. 



are afflicted. They 

 darling girl baby "- 

 just the right age 

 hearts of all around, 

 of the 10th inst. 

 stricken family in 

 bereavement. 



Dadant's Family 



have lost their " little 

 17 months old, and of 

 to have captured the 

 She died on the night 

 We condole with the 

 their great sorrow and 



Tlie Xiiue is Clian^etl Now.— 



Just as we are closing the forms for this 

 issue, the following comes from J. W. Clark, 

 of Clarksburg, Mo., dated Juue 20, 1889 : 

 " The biggest honey flow from white clover 

 I ever saw is here now. Also the swarming 

 fever is the largest." 



The warm, moist atmosphere which now 

 prevails in many localities promises a large 

 yield of nectar, if there are enough bees to 

 gather it. Surely, there is a " silver lining 

 to the clouds" which have prevailed so 

 long. 



Xlie L.indeiis in iflinncsota ap- 

 pear to be covered with striped worms— or 

 at least those in Douglass county are. Mr. 

 J. M. Doudna, of Alexandria, Minn., on 

 June 18, 1889, writes as follows concerning 

 them : 



The linden honey for 1889 is hopelessly 

 lost. The lindens in this county are covered 

 with striped worms, that have stripped the 

 buds, and in most cases the leaves, from the 

 trees, so that we cannot hope for any honey 

 from that source. Dry weather makes the 

 prospect very doubtful for golden-rod honey. 

 I never saw the lindens bud so profusely as 

 they did this spring. Now it would take a 

 busy man to find one bud among a thousand 

 trees. 



We hope that such is not true of other 

 parts of that State. Will our friends please 

 report on this subject at once. We want to 

 know all about it. 



The Arsrunieni of Judge Williams in 

 the appeal of the Arkadelphia lawsuit, to 

 the Supreme Court of Arkansas, which is 

 given in full in this issue, is a masterly de- 

 fense of the rights of bee-keepers, and a 

 powerful argument against the claim made 

 by many that the keeping of bees is a 

 "nuisance," to be prohibited by law. 



So many persons are frightened by the 

 fact that the bees possess a weapon of de- 

 fense, and thereuijon declare them a nui- 

 sance. They never stopped to thiuk that 

 the "sting" was provided by Nature for its 

 defense, and to insure the perpetuation of 

 its kind ! If an attack is made upon its 

 home, the sting is its only defense— but it is 

 an effective one ! When away from its 

 home it seldom volunteers an attack ! 



It was asserted by the prosecution, that 

 bees were a nuisance because they were 

 liable to sting children. Judge Williams 

 met it with this unanswerable argumett : 

 " It is not true, unless children molest them 

 at their hives, or catch them. But because 

 a domestic insect may sting or hurt under 

 some circumstances, no more makes it a 

 nuisance— po- sc— and liable to prohibition, 

 than the fact that a horse may kick, may 

 run away in the harness and kill a child ; 

 or an ox may gore persons with its horns, 

 would make these animals nuisances per se." 



Judge Williams insists that bees were no 

 more of a "nuisance" than cows and 

 horses, dogs and cats, and demands that 

 bees should have equal rights with them ! 



Cases are numerous where children have 

 been injured, and even killed, by the kick 

 of a horse, by being run over by a cow, the 

 bite of a dog, or the scratching of a cat. 

 The Judge asks, " .Shall the keeping of 

 horses and cows be forbidden by an ordi- 

 nance ?" Certainly not ! No one would 

 think of such a thing for a moment ! 

 Domesticated bees must have an equal 

 chance with all domesticated animals ! 



On the Constitutional right to keep bees. 

 Judge Williams says that because bees may 

 sting, some seek to prohibit them, and 

 adds : " It would follow that because cows 

 may gore, dogs annoy the sensitive by bark- 

 ing or biting, or running mad, we will also 

 prohibit them. Because vehieles'may annoy 

 by raising dust, or making a noise, or ani- 

 mals may run away in the harness, there- 

 fore we prohibit them. No such [autocratic 

 or despotic power is necessary to preserve 

 the citizen from real harm and annoyance ; 

 and the Legislature could not prohibit the 

 keeping of bees, and could not delegate such 

 power under the Bill of Rights. For the 

 right to acquire, possess, and protect prop- 

 erty is secured by Section 3, Article 2 of the 

 Constitution, beyond Legislative and Mu- 

 nicipal control ; and bees are the subject of 

 property. Nor can the citizen be destroyed 

 or deprived of his life, liberty or property, 

 except by the judgment of his peers, and 

 the law of the land." The blow therefore 

 aimed at Z. A. Clark, is a blow at the Con- 

 stitution of the United States ! 



Judge Williams concludes his argument 

 by stating that the authorities cited by the 



opposing Counsel all sustain his position, 

 which he sums up thus : 



1. That the power is not given to prohibit 

 bees by the statute. 



"■ That bees must at the time and place, 

 and under all circumstances, be a nuisance 

 per 8c, or the ordinance violates property 

 right, and is not sustained by law. 



l.,ater.— Since " making up '" these forms 

 we have received news by telegraph that we 

 have Mon tlii>« unit. 



This is anotliei- victory for the 



Union! The decision of the Supreme 

 Court is that bee-keeping is a legitimate 

 business— that it is not to be likened to a 

 " pig-sty or slaughter-house " (as a Judge of 

 a lower Court decided it, in another suit)— 

 that it is not a nuisance, and the City 

 Ordinance against bee-keeping in Arkadel- 

 phia is iUcfjiil and void ! 



The Constitutional rights of bee-keepers 

 are proven by the Union, and -we notv 

 Iiave a decision that is valuable ! 



Reader, how do you like it ! Is the Union 

 worthy of your support ? If so, give it, in 

 full measure. More next week. 



More Falsehoods about the manu- 

 facture of comb honey are given in the Phil- 

 adelphia Reevrd of June 18. Respectable 

 publishers ought to be above such wholesale 

 lying. It is a re-hash of the old Wiley lie a 

 year after Prof. Wiley has acknowledged 

 that there was no truth in it ! While a 

 falsehood is flashed again and again around 

 the Globe like lightning, a correction travels 

 only like a lame mule. The lie of that Pro- 

 fessor never can be atoned for. 



mr. Frank K. Sarerent sends us 

 samples of the work of his foundation 

 fastener. It presses the foundation into the 

 wood without heating, and without the use 

 of melted wax. He puts the one-piece sec- 

 tions together and fastens the foundation at 

 the same time, at the rate of from two to 

 four hundred per hour. The foundation is 

 well fastened, and if the work can be done 

 as rapidly as that, he, no doubt, has a " good 

 thing," and should put them upon the mar- 

 ket as soon as possible. 



Xiie Coneniausph Valley Flood 



drowned bees as well as men, women, chil- 

 dren and animals. Mr. L. S. Fleegal writes 

 to usjfrom Coalmont, Huntingdon Co., Pa., 

 that his Bek Jouhxals have gone astray 

 for four weeks,and that many of his colonies 

 of bees were lost in the flood, as well as 

 about .500 pounds of honey. He adds, " And 

 I came very near to losing my family, too." 

 That the latter escaped, is cause for much 

 thankfulness, even though property and 

 bees are destroyed. 



Xhe Oeneral Report now is, that 

 bees are getting in a large amount of work 

 in " honey gathering," and the prospect for 

 a good crop has greatly improved during the 

 past week. 



