Members of the North-Eastern Conven- 

 tion were in "large majority" at New York, 

 when the National Society unanimously 

 elected us its President, and we defy any 

 one to prove that we in any way sought the 

 office, or spoke a word to any one on the 

 suDject. The unanimous re-election was 

 also unsought on our part, and was first 

 suggested by Mr. King, a member of the 

 committee on nomination of officers, who 

 compliments the management in the above. 



From the tone of the extract read at the 

 North-Eastern Convention, one would think 

 that we were anxious to continue in that 

 office. On the contrary, although gratefully 

 appreciating the honor, we shall be glad to 

 be relieved. Every year the National Asso- 

 ciation has cost us from $50 to $60. We 

 have spared neither time nor money to ad- 

 vance its interests, and we feel sure that all 

 right-minded persons appreciate our well- 

 meant endeavors. 



At the National Convention of 1878, an in- 

 vitation was received from Austria for a 

 Representative from America to attend the 

 Bee Congress at Prague. The Convention 

 resolved that if its President could attend 

 the European Conventions for 1879, he 

 should represent the " North American Bee- 

 Keepers' Society." As all know, he went, 

 attended Congresses or met delegations from 

 bee societies in 8 different countries of 

 Europe, furthering the interests of honey- 

 producers by giving lectures on honey, its 

 production and consumption, wherever an 

 opportunity presented itself. Full reports 

 were made in the Bee Journal and other 

 bee papers from time to time. As not a cent 

 of the expense attending this journey was 

 paid by the National Society, can any one 

 in justice complain if he found an oppor- 

 tunity to do some business to reimburse 

 himself in a small measure for time and ex- 

 pense devoted to the interests of honey- 

 producers generally ? 



The National Society had provided a 

 milage fund for its Representatives who 

 attend bee and honey shows ; but he neither 

 asked for nor received one cent of it. Verily 

 such management is "in the interest of the 

 American Bee Journal and for his per- 

 sonal benefit" (as stated in the Utica Con- 

 vention), and will cause it to "die a disgrace 

 to American apiculture !" Would the co- 

 operative man have managed so foolishly 

 had he been the President ? 



In order to publish a full report of the last 

 National Convention in the Journal for 

 November, we omitted nearly all the adver- 



tisements, abbreviated all the other articles, 

 and condensed the Honey Market Report. 

 This is said to be a crime by our adversaries. 



The American Bee Journal is de- 

 nounced because it sells supplies for the 

 apiary, but the instigator of all this is a bee 

 supply manufacturer, and seems extremely 

 anxious to have his wares receive special 

 mention in all the Convention reports. He 

 is even now greatly incensed at us because 

 we did not include such in the list of articles 

 exhibited at the National Convention. We 

 were not the Secretary, took no note of the 

 proceedings, and saw no exhibit from him. 

 It was not with other articles exhibited, and 

 if there, was kept from view or not exhibited 

 sufficiently to attract official attention. 



In Gleanings for March, page 132, it is 

 insinuated that Prof. Cook stole the idea of 

 the cage he took to Washington from this 

 man ; but the facts are that Prof. Cook got 

 up no cage, and only took such cages as 

 were sent to him by others for that purpose. 



This manufacturer of supplies and de- 

 nouncer of bee papers refuses to be com- 

 forted, until bee-keepers shall subscribe 

 sufficient money to start his co-operative 

 paper "whose editor" is to be "disinterested 

 in the manufacture or sale of supplies for 

 the apiary"— except, perhaps, the queen 

 cages, honey knives, bee smokers, atomizers 

 and tin-foil foundation manufactured and 

 sold by its founder. 



We have neither time, space, nor relish 

 to follow up all that unprincipled men may 

 say against us or the Journal. In this ar- 

 ticle we have refuted by unimpeachable 

 testimony the principal charges made by 

 those who desire to create a name and a 

 place in the bee-world by endeavoring to 

 cause confusion and discord. All that they 

 have said is as easily shown to be the 

 machinations of evil-disposed persons as the 

 foregoing, but we know our readers prefer 

 to have the Journal filled with matters 

 pertaining to the practical management of 

 the apiary, and we hope not to deem it nec- 

 essary to refer to such unpleasant matters 

 again very soon. 



The Bee Journal is no pauper, impor- 

 tuning apiarists for the crumbs which may 

 fall from their tables. It asks no favors 

 other than those it is entitled to in the 

 legitimate order of business, always return- 

 ing a full value for moneys received, and 

 recommending nothing that is unworthy 

 of confidence ; it has acted fairly, squarely 

 and openly— evading no issues affecting the 

 general interests of its patrons, and never 



