456 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Xlie Texas State Convemtioii was 



held on April 4th and 5th. The officers 

 elected for the ensuing year are as follows : 



President— Rev. W. K. Marshall, D. D., of 

 Marshall, Tex. 



Vice-President— W. R. Graham, of Green- 

 ville. 



Secretary— Dr. Wm. R. Howard, of Ft. 

 Worth. 



Treasurer— A. M. Tuttle, of Gainsville. 



It was the 15th annual meeting, and had 

 the largest attendance of bee-keepers ever 

 known in the State. Dr. Howard says, 

 "We had a fine meeting;" and Bro. Gra- 

 ham reports " a glorious good time in every 

 way." Good for Texas ! 



A report of the meeting will appear soon 

 In the Bee Journal. 



Queeiiless Colonies, the Progressive 

 Bee-Keeper says, should be given a frame of 

 hatching brood before introducing a queen. 

 If no young bees are given them, they will 

 dwindle away, and sometimes all die before 

 any more bees hatch. Unless you desire to 

 increase your number of colonies at the 

 expense of honey, it doesn't pay to give a 

 queen to queenless colonies, unless they 

 are very strong. 



Hedclon^s Alleged Adulteration 



— The Bee Journal, while it does not aim 

 to copy extensively from the other bee- 

 papers, yet desires to keep its readers 

 posted as to the news of events transpiring 

 in the bee-world, and in order to do this, 

 must occasionally repeat what has already 

 appeared. In Gleanings for March 15th, 

 under the heading of "Chemical Analyses 

 of Heddon's Honey," Bro. A. I. Root has 

 this to say : 



For several years back reports have been 

 coming to us, to the effect that James Hed- 

 don, of Dowagiac, Mich., was selling honey 

 adulterated with glucose. Believing him 

 to be a good, straight man, and one of the 

 veterans among honey-producers, we as- 

 sured each one who wrote us, that there 

 must be some mistake, for we said it was 

 not possible that Mr. Heddon could think 

 of doing anything so unwise and foolish. 



At the Ohio State Convention in Cleve- 

 land, however, held on the 19th and 20th 

 days of February, 1890, a sample tumbler 

 of honey was shown us, after one of the 

 sessions, said honey having been purchased 

 of one of Mr. Heddon's customers. I had a 



talk with the man who bought the honey, 

 and I told him that, from my acquaintance 

 with such mixtures, I was satisfied in my 

 own mind that the sample contained a large 

 per cent, of glucose. The matter was talked 

 of more or less between all the sessions by 

 quite a number of the bee-keepers; and 

 although we discussed it in a quiet way, a 

 reporter for a large daily got hold of it, 

 and had it written up in flaming style. As 

 soon as Ernest got wind of it, he button- 

 holed the reporter and desired him to keep 

 the whole out of print, because he (Ei-nest) 

 thought there must be some mistake, and 

 there the matter dropped. 



Complaints still kept coming, however, 

 and finally, by my direction, Ernest asked 

 a well-known bee-keeper to purchase two 

 cans of honey from Mr. Heddon, and for- 

 ward them on to us. This bee-keeper did 

 so, and also sent an affidavit to the effect 

 that the same honey was reshipped to us 

 without taking from the depot, and this toe 

 have in our possession. The honey was re- 

 ceived with Mr. Heddon's tag attached to 

 the cans, and it seemed to be (judging from 

 the taste), adulterated largely with glucose, 

 and a poor quality at that. A sample was 

 submitted to Prof. H. W. Wiley, chief 

 chemist at Washington, D. C, through 

 Prof. Cook, and here is his report: 



Prof. A. J. Cook, Agricultural College, Mich. 



Dear Sir :— The sample of honey sent by 

 you on the 20th inst., numbered 100. and 

 has been entered as Serial No. 11G53; on 

 analysis it gave the following numbers : 



Direct polarization at 23 deg 56.3 



" '• " after inver. .48.7 



Per cent. 

 Sucrose (calculated from above read- 

 ings) 5.8 



Reducing sugar, calculated as dextrose.. 58. 11 

 " " " " invertose.59.95 



Water 21.30 



Ash 28 



The sample is undoubtedly adulterated 

 with at least 50 per cent, of glucose, al- 

 though, as you know, it is not possible to 

 determine the exact amount on account of 

 the difference in rotation of the various 

 glucoses. 



Trusting that this analysis will be satis- 

 factory, I am respectfully, 



H. W. Wiley, Chemist. 

 (11653— E. E. E.— J. S. C.) 



Washington, D. C, April 1, 1893. 



A sample was also submitted to Prof. 

 Cook, and was by him also pronounced 

 adulterated with glucose. 



You may ask why we did not write to 

 Mr. Heddon in regard to this thing. We 

 did so, but received anything but a satis- 

 factory answer. 



I believe we practice and preach that 

 kind of charity that " is kind, and suffereth 

 long;" and that is the reason why we did 

 not publish the analysis before; but the 

 affidavit below, of a more recent case, it 

 seems to me, demands that the bee-keepers 

 of our land be notified of these things. 



