About that Honey Confiscation. 



New York, Jan. 23, 1879. 



Editor American Bee Journal :— 

 The January number of your Journal con- 

 tained an editorial, saying: "The Board 

 of Trade Gazette informs us, that the large 

 lot of honev, sent to Liverpool by Thurber 

 & Co., of New York, last November, has 

 been condemned by the British authorities 

 on account of adulteration." 



Considering that nothing of the kind ever 

 happened, we think that you owe us an 

 apology for the announcement; the more so, 

 because the "Board of Trade Gazette," 

 while giving currency to a malicious rumor, 

 started by a jealous enemy, did not mention 

 the name of Thurber in conjunction there- 

 with. 



The only possible foundation that there 

 could be for such a report, was the summon- 

 ing some months since of an English grocer, 

 under the British adulteration act, for sell- 

 ing honey in glass jars— the liquid portion 

 of which had been mixed with glucose, of 

 which there was no notice upon the label. 

 A small line was imposed ; but no seizure 

 made ; and this occurrence happened about 

 one year ago ; so it could have no legitimate 

 connection with our shipment of honey in 

 November, which, as stated in your article, 

 was in the comb. 



We have spent a great deal of money in 

 the development of this industry ; have 

 taken mi ch pains to forward its interests : 

 and we think it a poor return, that the 

 American Bee Journal should lend its 

 columns to spread false reports, or magnify 

 true ones. 



We have no desire to discuss the question, 

 which bee-keepers are a great deal better 

 able to decide than we are, as to whether 

 glucose ought to be utilized for feeding bees. 

 We ourselves, as well as other dealers in 

 honey, have put up broken combs in glass 

 jars, tilling the spaces around the comb with 

 a mixture of honey and glucose, which will 

 not candy or congeal, as will pure honey— 

 this result being demanded both by the 

 retail dealer and the consumer. We have 

 never, for a moment, concealed this practice; 

 and are now putting a notice to this effect 

 upon every jar packed by us, whether for 

 export or home trade, as we believe that th,e 

 consumer has a right to know just what he 

 is yetting. 



Pure glucose, which is nothing more nor 

 less than a syrup made from corn, is as 

 wholesome as honey, and, we believe, is as 

 legitimate a commercial product. 



We do not however, believe that glucose 

 ought to be sold as honey ; but, if the public 

 like, and will )>vy, a mixture, it is all right 

 for them to do so ; and we do not think that 

 bee-keepers will gain anything by trying to 

 excite public prejudice through talse reports, 

 as regards its wholesomeness. 



It does not matter much to us, however, 

 as nine-tenths of the honey which we 

 handle, is in the comb ; and we prefer to 

 handle it in this shape, whenever we can 

 do so. . 



Of late, however, certain veracious (?) 

 individuals in New York have sought to 



rejudice the public, against comb honey, 



y asserting, that so ingenious have the 



I 



adulterators become, that they extract the 

 honey from the cells, fill them up with glu- 

 cose, and palm them off upon an unsuspect- 

 ing public as pure honey. 



Of course, this will make apiarists smile ; 

 but just at a time when there is an epidemic 

 of adulteration hue-and-cries, even such 

 reports as these will be believed by some 

 people ; and, if it has the effect of injuring 

 the consumption of honey, we believe that 

 the people who spread such reports, will be 

 more to blame for the injury done the bee 

 industry, than those dealers, who mix glu- 

 cose with the liquid portion of the honey, 

 which, at the demand of the consumer, and 

 retailer, is put up with the comb in glass 

 jars. Respectfully yours, 



H. K. & F. B. Thurber & Co. 



The article on which our remarks 

 upon this subject was based in the last 

 Bee Journal, is copied from the Board 

 of Trade Gazette, of Dec. 7th, 1878, 

 and reads as follows : 



"American Honey.— Those who knew 

 about the consumption of honey in Europe, 

 very gladly received the information that 

 American honey in large quantities would 

 be imported by England. When it was 

 stated that a well-known and very progres- 

 sive firm in New York had forwarded a 

 whole cargo of this nutriment to Liverpool, 

 many congratulations were interchanged. 

 Now the news arrives that accusations of 

 adulteration have been made and that the 

 British government had ordered the confis- 

 cation of the mixture consigned as United 

 States Honey. This is too bad." 



We certainly had no desire to mis- 

 represent any one or anything, and do 

 not even now see how we could have 

 obtained any other idea from the Board 

 of Trade Gazette, than that expressed 

 in our last issue. 



We never heard that any one but 

 Messrs. Thurber & Co., ever sent a 

 "whole cargo" of honey to Liverpool, 

 and as they did send such a cargo in 

 November, we innocently concluded that 

 was the exportation alluded to. The 

 Board of Trade Gazette, adds : "Now," 

 (not a year ago) "the news arrives" 

 about "adulteration" and "confiscation" 

 by "the British authorities," of this- 

 cargo of " United States Honey " !! 



If the Board of Trade Gazette gave 

 "currency to a malicious rumor, started 

 by a jealous enemy," as Mr. Thurber 

 states, it was to blame — not the Amer- 

 ican Bee Journal ; it made legitimate 

 conclusions merely from the statements 

 of the Gazette! 



We are exceedingly glad, however, to 



