(Entered at the PosK)ffice at Chicago as Second-Clasa Mail-Matter.) 

 Published Weekly at $1.00 a Year, by George W.York & Co., 334 Dearborn Street. 



GEORGE W. YORK, Editor 



CHICAGO, ILL., DECEMBER 20, 1906 



Vol. XLVI— No, 51 





mm 





Cdlforial Mote 

 and Comments 



-ffz 



A Merry Christmas wo wish to every 

 reader of the old American Bee Journal. 

 And may each one live to enjoy many 

 more Christmasses in the years to come. 



A Sweet-Eating Nation 



This is what we are, if one may judge 

 from the amount of sugar consumed in 

 the United States during last year. It 

 is 75 pounds for each person, according 

 to the following paragraph taken from 

 the Farm Journal for December: 



One billion one hundred and eighty- 

 two million pounds of sugar were im- 

 ported into the United States last year 

 from our three insular possessions- 

 Hawaii, Porto Rico and the Philippines. 

 Of that vast quantity considerably more 

 than half came from Hawaii, and only 

 a small part from the Philippines. Nine 

 hundred and fifty million pounds were 

 produced in the United States proper. 

 In addition to this we imported from 

 Cuba, (lermany, Dutch East Indies, 

 Brazil and other countries, more than 

 3,000,000,000 pounds ; the total con- 

 sumption in the United States last year 

 being about 75 pounds per capita, or 

 more than 6,000,000,000 pounds, less 

 than one-sixth of which was produced at 

 home. 



It does seem that if people generally 

 knew how much superior honey is to 

 sugar, that the former would soon take 

 the place of the latter to a much greater 

 extent than it does now. We know of 

 no better way to familiarize the public 

 with the excellent qualities of honey 

 than through advertising. The National 

 Bee-Keepers" Association has the oppor- 



tunity of getting a whole lot of honey 

 information in the newspapers at a very 

 trilling expense. We hope it may soon 

 be put into effect. 



New Pure Food Law and Honey 



As probably nearly all of our readers 

 know, we have a National Pure Food 

 Law, which goes into effect Jan. i, 

 1907. Mr. C. P. Dadant, President of 

 the National Bee-Keepers' Association 

 has this to say about it : 



Letter from C. P. Dadant. 



Is the new Pure Food Law going to 

 be of any benefit to the bee-keepers in 

 their sales of honey? I can answer 

 this question in the affirmative, and with 

 emphasis. Allow me to state a few 

 facts. 



We have been producing honey — 

 principally extracted — for nearly 40 

 years. In the early days of extraor- 

 dinary production, there was much dif- 

 ficulty encountered in selling, because so 

 many people were prejudiced against 

 the granulation of honey. This preju- 

 dice still exists, but not in the same 

 uniform condition as in the 70's. 



Then glucose began to appear, and 

 the adulterators plied their industry by 

 furnishing a mixture which resembled 

 honey, and did not granulate. An at- 

 tempt was made to secure a pure food 

 law, concerning the sweets at least. 

 In 1880-82, petitions were circulated, 

 asking Congress for a law. My father 

 took the pains of circulating a special 

 petition signed by bee-keepers, and se- 

 cured some 10,000 names. This num- 

 ber would be small to-day, but it was 

 large for that time. We were greatly 

 encouraged in our efforts when we 



found that the honest sugar manufac- 

 turers were also working for the same 

 end. But all this was of no avail, and 

 the petitions were buried. 



Many and many times we deplored 

 the fact that there was no way by which 

 we could drive the spurious honey from 

 the market. But we have at last reached 

 the goal. Just one instance will 

 show it: 



I number among my friends a whole- 

 sale grocer who has for years carried 

 on a most successful and straightfor- 

 ward business. He was handling spu- 

 rious honey, in years past. To all my 

 representations he would say: 



"We can not avoid handling this stuff. 

 Our customers ask for it and others 

 keep it. We can nut help ourselves; but 

 we make no secret of the fact that we 

 know it to be impure. We would like 

 to handle your product, but it is too ex- 

 pensive." 



This \ear, the same person told me 

 tins: 



"We are now happy to be able to say 

 that we can handle your honey. In 

 fact, we can not handle any but pure 

 honey, and I am right glad of it. I 

 have always disliked to sell anything 

 that did not show plainly its nature, on 

 the label. The Pure Food Law will 

 cause trouble only to those who prepare 

 these spurious goods, because it sets 

 their business to naught. Give me your 

 prices, and we will make an order. We 

 1 1 in not sell much at first, but we know 

 wc need not fear the competition of a 

 spurious article from our competitors in 

 the wholesale grocery line, for they 

 have to quit handling it also." 



A few days later, we filled a large 

 order for this firm. I asked how the 

 goods sold. The reply was: 



"This pure honey business is a little 

 new. Some people object to granula- 

 tion, but nothing can stand in the way, 

 when we say that we have your guar- 

 antee, and are willing to add ours to it, 

 as to the purity of the goods. Pure 

 honey is going to sell, through the 

 wholesale trade, as it never did before." 



Those are the facts as I find them. 

 Hurrah for the pure food laws! And 

 although I have been for many years 

 bitterly opposed to Prof. Wiley because 

 of the big blunder he made with that 

 comb honey story in the long ago. I feel 



