11>03. 



THE AMERICAN BEE-KEEPER 



249 



beinj;' catching, as there is nothing to 

 catch; that the boes only have their 

 stomaclis too full of chyle, ami claim- 

 ing that none but worker bees ever 

 have it. Perhaps he has never seen 

 any but workers have paralysis, but 

 I have seen more than one queen af- 

 fected with it; and the fact of having 

 seen queens affected knocks out all his 

 lengthy article, with me. But if he has 

 found the cause and Mr. Poppleton the 

 cure, sure we need not lose many more 

 bees from this cause. I am not going 

 to kick very hard because a man writes 

 what he thinks he has found out; but I 

 do say, this is a stunner on the begin- 

 ner. That statement made by J. B. 

 Johnson, of Illinois, and called into 

 question by Z. Cornell, of Pennsylva- 

 nia, did look rather "fishy." 

 Yours truly, 



John W. Pharr. 



"HONOR TO WHOM HONOR." 

 Marengo, 111., Oct. 16, 1903. 



Mr. Editor: On page 234, speaking 

 of the officiary of the National Asso- 

 ciation, you say: "It Is gratifying to 

 note that the management of the Na- 

 tional's affairs is passing exclusively 

 into the hands of active producers of 

 honey.'' I'm sorry you said that, for 

 whatever you may have meant, it 

 will be understood as saying that in 

 the past the Association has suffered 

 because among its officers have been 

 men who were not active producers of 

 honey; thus doing injustice to men to 

 whom the Association owes much. 



You say, "Bee-keepers themselves, 

 perhaps, know better than any one else 

 what they want." Suppose it is said. 

 "Bee-keepers, perhaps, know better 

 than any one else what they want in 

 a bee-.iournal." And then .suppose some 

 bee-keeper proposes to dictate to you 

 just what shall and shall not go into 

 the columns of your journal, saying. 

 "I am a bee-keeper, therefore I know 

 what bee-keepers want." Would you, 

 my good friend, be likely to put the 

 reins in his hands? Hardly. You would 

 be likely to say to him something like 

 this: "Now, see here, my friend. I 

 grant you that you know pretty well 

 what you want, but there are others, 

 and I believe I can tell better than you 

 what the majority of my constituency 

 want, not because I am a better' bee- 

 keeper than you, but because I am an 

 editor, and have made It my study to 



know not only what one bee-keeper 

 wants, but what bee-keepers in gen- 

 eral want." 



The very fact of a man's being an 

 editor, if he is fit to be an editor, be- 

 speaks a knowledge of the wants of 

 bee-keepers beyond the knowledge of 

 their wants he would have as a bee- 

 keeper. Now, so far as I recall, the 

 only men heretofore upon the manage- 

 ment of the National that were not 

 conspicuous as active producers of 

 honey were editors, some four or more 

 of them, and the very qualifications 

 that fitted them for knowing what bee- 

 keepers wanted for reading matter, fit- 

 ted them to know what bee-keepers 

 wanted as members of the Association. 



I think Thomas G. Newman had 

 less to do with the production of honey 

 than any of the others, and look at the 

 grand work he did as general manager. 

 Geo. W. York has never been very ac- 

 tive in the production of honey, and 

 yet I do not believe any one man has 

 done as much as he since the organi- 

 zation of the present association to 

 increase its membership, and to ad- 

 vance its interests. 



I've no objection to having the af- 

 fairs of the National exclusively in the 

 hands of active honey producers, so 

 long as they are competent men, but 

 please. Mr. Editor, don't hint that in 

 the past some of the men on the man- 

 agement were not among its best be- 

 cause they were not active producers 

 o." honey. C. C. Miller, 



Doctor Miller's criticism is interest- 

 ing and very welcome, indeed. The 

 spirit manifested is characteristic of 

 his inherent good will to fellow man, 

 while the actuating motive is, obvious- 

 ly, a fear that unjust reflections have 

 been cast. The doctor says he is sorry 

 we said a certain thing. If any in- 

 justice has thus been done to any one, 

 we're sorry too. We said it because we 

 felt it; and we have yet had no occa- 

 sion to regret either the thought or the 

 expression thereof. The fact that the 

 editor of The Bee-Keeper finds person- 

 al gratification in contemplating the 

 preceding fact that "the management 

 of the National's affairs is passing ex- 

 clusively into the hands of active honey 

 producers." need not. and should not, 

 be construed as reflecting depreciat- 

 ingly upon the good work bestowed in 

 years past by any of the many faith- 

 ful officers, which list we well know, 



