AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



117 



^'.^'.^^' 



Tie MlcMEaii State ConYeution. 



BpporU'd for the •• Aincriean Bee Journal "' 

 BY W. Z. HUTCHINSON. 



The Michigan Bee-Keepers' Associa- 

 tion held their 28th annual convention 

 on Jan. 2 and 3, 1894-, in the Common 

 Council Chambers in the city of Flint. 

 The convention was called to order by 

 President Taylor, and the following 

 members paid their dues : 



M. H. Hunt, Bell Branch. 

 L. A. Aspinwall, Jackson. 

 Hon. R. L. Taylor, Lapeer. 

 Wm. Anderson, Imlay City. 

 H. D. Cutting, Tecumseh. 

 W. Z. Hutchinson, Flint. 

 August, Koeppen, Flint. 

 Earl Post, Atlas. 

 E. M. Miller, Swartz Creek. 

 M. S. West, Flint. 

 H. Webster, Byron. 

 H. L. Hutchinson, Mayville. 

 E. G. Grimes, Vernon. 

 Byron Walker, Evart. 

 Chas. Koeppen, Flint. 

 Andre Torry, Flint. 

 M. McWain, Grand Blanc. 

 L. H. Root, Prattville. 

 Jas. Cowe, Imlay City. 

 Juo. Cowe, Imlay City. 



Pres. Taylor then read the following 

 essay, entitled, 



Apicultural Work at Experiment 

 Stations. 



If I appear to any to go into devious 

 paths in a brief treatment of the topic 

 assigned me, it is owing to the latitude 

 which the topic itself gives me. 



And first I ask, do bee-keepers want 

 it ? that is, do they want that sort of 

 work at the stations? I am sometimes 

 in doubt about it. I judge somewhat 

 from the course of my own feelings in 

 the matter. Before I became connected 

 with the work and began to study into 

 it, I was not inclined to esteem it over 

 highly, but now if I were to express my 

 thoughts and feelings freely, you would 



no doubt think me on the verge of the 

 domain whose inhabitants are called 

 cranks. Such is the effect of contact 

 and acquaintance. Now, while the 

 great body of bee-keepers has not the 

 enthusiasm which close contemplation 

 begets, yet if called upon they would 

 vote pretty unanimously in favor of the 

 work. 



Then the question suggests itself, why 

 would they vote for it? Provision has 

 been made by the general government 

 by which the agricultural college of 

 each State is to receive annually a cer- 

 tain sum of money to be devoted to the 

 support of an experiment station in the 

 interest of agriculture and kindred pur- 

 suits generally. This sum was to be in 

 the first instance, as I understand it, 

 $15,000, and after that to be increased 

 by the sum of $1,000 each year until 

 the amount of 250,000 is reached, 

 which is then to remain fixed at that 

 point. That is, that is to be the course 

 of affairs, unless the ideas of economy 

 of the present administration at Wash- 

 ington require that this money be kept 

 in the general treasury. This is a con- 

 siderable sum of money, and apiculture 

 is equitably entitled to all and more 

 than it is now getting in this State. 



Now is it simply because they are 

 equitably entitled to it, that the bee- 

 keepers would claim a just share to be 

 devoted to apicultural work, like a 

 school-boy unwilling that his fellow 

 should use his sled whether he wants it 

 himself or not? Or is it because they 

 feel it is not only their right, but to their 

 advantage? Have they such a lively 

 faith in the probable value of results 

 that they will scrutinize and study 

 them ? That bee-keepers should have 

 an active interest in these matters is of 

 the utmost importance if the work is to 

 go on. Those in authority are generally 

 quite ready to be directed by the will of 

 those they serve, if they can learn cer- 

 tainly what that will is. 



Can the work be made of real value? 

 Take one item. For myself, I have be- 

 come more and more impressed with the 

 importance of a thorough knowledge of 

 foundations designed for use in sections 

 for the production of comb honey. Much 

 has been guessed, but so far as I can 

 learn little is yet known on this subject. 

 In the experiment of which I recently 

 gave an account, one of the objects 

 aimed at was to determine, if possible 

 if there was a difference among themi 

 and, if so, what kind was of such a 

 nature as to enable the bees to work it 

 down most nearly to the thinness and 

 character of natural comb. To me the 



