1872.] 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



219 



chusetts, on the 14th, just eight da3's after leaving 

 lionie. His healtli had been tailing for more than a 

 year, but lie continued to do business until the day he 

 left. He had Catarrhal Consumption as well as heart 

 disease. He was fully aware of his critical condition, 

 and entirely resigned to the divine will. His wife 

 found tjour letter of May 30</i, in his pocket, and sayx 

 that if he had not been so very feeble he would have called 

 071 yotc u'hen passing through Neio York. 



Mr. Quinby was in our office a few days since, 

 and the original letter was shown to him, and 

 compared with the extract given above. One 

 error was found. Mr. L. said " catarrhal con- 

 sumption as well as heart disease." The extract 

 read, "as well as the heart disease." The 

 word "the" was inserted before the word 

 " heart." What base purpose was served in 

 publishing this extract ? ilr. King thought it 

 an act of courtesy to Mr. L. to announce the 

 death of his son, and the recei)tion of such a 

 letter by any editor, under similar circumstan- 

 ces, would be accei^ted as a request on the part 

 of the writer to so announce it. The publication 

 of the business jjart of the letter would have 

 been sadly inappropriate in that connection, and 

 would have caused greater complaint from the 

 " crew" than even what was done. 



This, then, is the "garbling" for a "base 

 purpose " of which Mr. King is publicly accused 

 by the "Oracle" at Washington. 



Such accusations show to what extremes the 

 jealous rage of the " old man " lias driven him 

 in defence of a sinking cause. All of Mr. King's 

 acts are attributed to "base motives," and aie 

 regarded as " poisoned arrows, designed to kill." 

 Even Mr. King's efforts in behalf of Mr. Lang- 

 stroth, through his journal, and at Cincinnati, 

 were rejected with scorn, and Mr. King accused 

 of "publishing Mr. L. as an object of charity." 

 " What were virtues in other men, are in hinr 

 vices," for he did not publish his appeal in the 

 Journal until Mr. Warner and Mr. Bickford had 

 made an abortive eti'ort ; and at Cincinnati he 

 did not inaugurate the movement till L. L. had 

 been consulted, and to his assent, had added the 

 story of his misfortunes. 



More anon, 



M. E. Williams. 



Much of Mr. Williams' article needs only a 

 brief reply. To those only tolerably well ac- 

 quainted with Mr. King's course in this bee-hive 

 controversy, the correct apijlication of Mr. 

 Wiliiams' introductory sentunents will intui- 

 tively suggest itself. 



Tlie charge that Mr. Wagner having a pecuni- 

 ary interest in the Langstroth patent,"" interfered 

 with the issue of other patents, involves the 

 integrity of ofiticials in the office. We give, theie- 

 fore, the following statement of Prof. J. Brain- 

 ard. Chief Examiner, in the class to which bee- 

 hives are attached. 



" When I rejected Mr. Quinby's application, I was 

 not personally aetiuainted with the late Samuel Wag- 

 ner, and tirst became aware of his invention, by tind- 

 iug the drawings of his patent for artificial combs, in 

 the portfolio of the office. 



"Mr. Wagner never solicited or received any in or- 

 mation on the subject of pending applications lor 

 patents, so far as I am aware, from this office. He 

 never in any way volunteered to give information, 

 but only gave it when specially requested. 



" I deeply regret that his death puts it out of the 

 power of the office, to avail itself in the legitimate 

 dischai-ge of its duties, of his extensive knowledge of 

 the history of bee-culture, and the state of the art iu 

 foreign countries. J. Brainard." 



The following letter of Mr. King, in the 

 March 15lh number of the " Indianapolis Jour- 

 nal," which has just come to hand, ought to be 

 published in this connection. 



[For the National Bee Journal.] 

 Correction. 



Messrs. Editors : — Having been traveling in the 

 west for a month past, I have not seen the late num- 

 bers of your valuable journal ; but since my arrival 

 here I learn that one of your correspondents* has 

 given publicity to a report that reflects unfavorably 

 upon the decisions of the examiner in charge of aixri- 

 cultural imi)lenients. I first heard the story about a 

 year ago, but the Commissioner of Patentsf was the 

 party named, with whom I was not personally ac- 

 quainted ; but i have known Professor Brainard, the 

 examiuer, for many years, and I assure your readers, 

 that the report, so far as it reflects on his character, 

 must be lalse. He was professor of chemistry iu the 

 Medical College of Cleveland, Ohio, and when he re- 

 ceived the appointment as examiner here, he was 

 placed at the head of one of the most important de- 

 partments iu the Patent Office, namely. Agricultural 

 Implements and Products of Agriculture. 



It is a common remark of attorneys here, that Prof. 

 Brainard is one of the most thorough, critical and 

 conscientious men in the office. They say his initials 

 are on most of the drawings iu his department, and 

 a case is sure to be lost if there is any evidence of 

 priority of iuveution in any one of the thousands of 

 applications for patents on agricultural imi>lements 

 in his dej^artment. It is possible that some seek to 

 obtain patents with money where their case lacks 

 merit, but none acquainted with Prof. Brainard could 

 believe for a moment, that he could be tempied froai 

 the path of duty. He authorizes me to say that while 

 it is true that he has consulted Mr. Waiiner in refer- 

 ence to his knowledge of foreign inventions, he has 

 never communicated to him regarding pending appli- 

 cations, nor received from him gratuitous advice re- 

 lating to official business. 



H. A. King. 



WasMnQton, D. C, Feb. 26, 1873. 



Mr. King it will be seen, sustains Prof. Brain- 

 ard against iiis own associate editor. 



" That broadside of Wagner, Otis, & Co., with 

 pigtail illustrations !" Alas ! Alas ! 

 Hajret lateri lethalis arundo. 

 Fixed in the side, the deadly dart remains. 

 Friend Beadle, how could you have the heart 

 to do it? Never again, we entreat you, hang- 

 out from your office windows such ensnaring 



Mr. Wagner owned four counties in this patent. 



*Does Mr. King mean to say that his own associate 

 editor, the correspondent referred to, wrote without 

 his advice, consent, or even knowledge ? 



t Does Mr. King wish to make the late Commis- 

 sioner of Patents, Col. S. S. Fisher, suspected of be- 

 ing a party to another conspiracy I 



