592 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



A Remy lo Rey. f p i. F. Clarke. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 



BY DR. C. C. MILLER. 



I want in the outset to assure you that 

 I had not the slightest dream of discour- 

 tesy in speaking of you as " Rev. Clarke." 

 It so happened that immediately after 

 reading your letter I met a clergyman 

 who is pastor of a city church. I said 

 to him, " I want to ask you a question. 

 If I should call you ' Rev. Hill,' would it 

 be correct or not '? courteous or not ?" 

 He looked at me with a puzzled expres- 

 sion, and as I remained silent he said, 

 "Why, what do you mean ?" I said, "I 

 mean just what I say." He then said 

 laughingly, "That's a very common way 

 of speaking in our community, and is 

 never understood to mean any disre- 

 spect." 



In the Marengo Neivs I find, " Rev. 

 Eartlett received a telegram ;" al- 

 so, "Rev. Lamb preached ," and 



I'm sure the editor meant nothing but 

 respect. 



Just why it should be any more re- 

 spectful to add the initials of your name 

 I do not understand. I should not have 

 considered that you were treating me 

 with any greater courtesy if you had in- 

 terpolated the " C. C." between the two 

 parts of the name you used in speaking 

 of me. But custom rules in such things, 

 and if I committed what you consider a 

 breach of good manners, I can only say 

 I am sorry for my ignorance and will 

 try not to offend again. Far be it from 

 me to use in any but a respectful man- 

 ner a title indicating an ambassador of 

 the Christ whom I am trying to serve. 



Speaking of courtesy, I might inquire 

 whether it is altogether courteous on 

 your part in a letter professedly ad- 

 dressed to me for you to call me up, and 

 then before you are one-fourth through, 

 to turn from me to someone else, leav- 

 ing me uncertain whether I am at lib- 

 erty to sit down, or whether you have 

 anything more to say to me. Or were 



you following the German custom of 

 addressing inferiors in the third person? 



I think you would see less "chuckle" 

 and " gloat " in what I have said, if you 

 knew just how I felt about your theoriz- 

 ing. In a certain sense you stand be- 

 fore the world as a representative Amer- 

 ican bee-keeper. Twice elected to the 

 highest ofiSce in the gift of American 

 bee-keepers, editor at one time of the 

 first bee-journal on the continent, recip- 

 ient of a prize for a bee-poem, author of 

 a work on bee-keeping— whatever you 

 say has a weight that it would not other- 

 wise have, and if you make utterances 

 that may in the least degree excite ridi- 

 cule, it more or less touches the bee- 

 keepers of two nations. 



The theory as to bees injecting poison 

 into honey by the sting, I think you are 

 not solely responsible for, but I believe 

 you are alone responsible for the sting- 

 trowel theory. After you had made the 

 positive statement that the sting is really 

 a trowel with which the bee seals the 

 cell, I was anxious that you should 

 either withdraw the positive assertion, 

 or give some proof for the alleged fact. 

 I wrote you privately to that effect, with 

 I am sure no other feeling but care for 

 the truth and your reputation as an in- 

 dividual and as a representative man. 

 Your reply was kindly, but you gave no 

 proof, publicly or privately. I after- 

 ward appealed to you publicly, but met 

 with no greater success. After your 

 paying no attention to repeated calls, it 

 seemed to me I felt justified in asking 

 you to say that you had no proof. And 

 when you say that you feel " insulted 

 and indignant," I must say I think it Is 

 without just cause. 



You talk about rack and torture. Tut, 

 tut. Who thinks of such a thing '? 

 Why, bless you, 1 wouldn't hurt a hair 

 of your head. But I cannot agi'ee with 

 you that you would be telling a lie if you 

 should comply with my demand, as you 

 are pleased to term it. You have stated 

 a thing as positively true, and there is 

 no evidence that you know it is true. 

 You have given some reasons why you 

 thought it might be true, and I think 

 you have gone no farther. But that is 

 a very different thing from giving proof 

 of its truth. 



You say, "I will gratefully accept 

 correction of any opinion of mine that 

 can be shown to be an error." Now do 

 you really think that , fits the case ? 

 While it might be shown that you are in 

 error, is it not the reasonable and 

 straight thing for you to offer proof of 

 what you assert as a fact ? You have 

 never said that you saw the bees using 



