445 



deserves the name of bee-keeper will do 

 so either; but keep it in its place, and 

 like alcohol and opium, it will be found 

 that it was not made in vain. 



I made an addition to my apiary last 

 spring and tind that I have now on hand 

 some 25 or 30 queens that are neither 

 superannuated or impure and will have 

 to be replaced, and I intend to use the 

 Lycoperdon as long as my supply holds 

 out as I find it fills my biil exactly. 



Oakford, Pa., Sept. 17, 1879. 



For tne American Bee Journal. 



Apiarian, or Apiarist? 



N. CAMERON. 



We are accused in the last Journal, 

 of "riding a little hobby" on account 

 of using a good adjective for a noun. 

 This is nothing uncommon; there is 

 hardly a page in the dictionary but one 

 or more nouns and adjectives may be 

 found with the same orthography. We 

 are told that the difference of opinion 

 was settled in vol. 13, p, 165, A. B. J. 

 If the opinion of one man can settle a 

 question of this character, then it is 

 settled. But, alas ! our best laid 

 schemes " gang aft aglee." The old 

 readers of the Journal will remember 

 that this same question was settled by 

 the Journal, vol. 7, p. Ill, the other 

 way. Now, who can tell but the Jour- 

 nal may again turn about on this 

 question. While we accord to every- 

 body the right to use " apiarian" only 

 -as an adjective, we at the same time 

 claim the right, with many other " dis- 

 tinguished apiarians," to use it as a 

 noun. Many, if not a majority of the 

 leading writers on apiculture, both in 

 this country and in Europe, use this 

 word as a noun. It is a change that 

 meets with favor from progressive men 

 and we are for progress in the science 

 of words as well as apiculture. All we 

 asked was fairness. We doubt if there 

 is another bee paper published in the 

 world, that will not allow its corres- 

 pondents to use in its columns " apia- 

 xian" as a noun. The Journal, by 

 substituting "apiarist" for its corres- 

 pondents whenever they use "apiarian" 

 as a noun, and allowing others to use 

 " apiarist" as an adjective is evidence 

 to my mind that the Journal is some- 

 what prejudiced on this word, and is 

 the one that is riding the hobby instead 

 of myself; and a miserable, old, spring- 

 halt and sprained hobby of the Kirby 

 age it is, without any pedigree, or, as 

 the boy said, " of doubtful antece- 

 dents," and so exceedingly jealous of 

 the little hobby that we ride, that we 



are excluded from competition in the 

 race for popular favor. The smooth, 

 well-built and improved horse is put 

 out of sight, while the ungainly, raw- 

 boned beast of a primeval age is ex- 

 hibited, labelled, "This or nothing!" 

 Lexicographers do not coin words, 

 neither is the word "apiarist " derived 

 form the Latin word apiary. Then, 

 wherein lies its particular claim to our 

 favor V Ugly from every point of view, 

 and without legitimate parentage, we 

 cannot see that we are under any par- 

 ticular obligations to make a pet of it. 

 Therefore, Mr. Editor, allow us to say 

 that great " apiarians" will differ, and 

 we see no reason why all honest dif- 

 ferences should not be mutually 

 respected. 

 Lawrence, Kansas, Aug. 18, 1879. 



[In nearly every printing office in the 

 country where MMS. constitute the 

 majority of copy given out to the com- 

 positor, it has been found necessary to 

 adopt a standard authority for his 

 guidance, not only in the spelling of 

 words, but in the substitution fre- 

 quently of grammatical language for 

 that which he finds written ; and in the 

 matter of punctuation, manuscripts are 

 seldom found correct. The Journal 

 is no exception to the above-mentioned 

 custom. Our compositors would as 

 soon give Mr. Cameron's " alass," for 

 alas; or "primevii," for primeval; or 

 " anteceedents," for antecedents; or 

 his "prejudice," where prejudiced was 

 evidently intended, etc. We claim the 

 same right to substitute common (not 

 universal) usage in the application of 

 the noun " apiarist," that we do in the 

 application of recognized usage in 

 punctuation, and more especially are 

 we justified in doing so, when supported 

 by the only authorities which we can 

 find committed upon the subject, viz : 

 Kirby, Webster, Worcester and Zell. 

 Nor does his " horse " tirade detract 

 anything from the respectability of the 

 authorities cited. That our honored 

 predecessor, in vol. vii., p. Ill, was of 

 opinion that the adjective should be 

 used as a noun, does not make it bind- 

 ing upon the present editor, or any of 

 his successors, to adhere to an error 

 when convinced of its existence. Kirby, 

 Webster, Worcester and Zell may be 



