AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



17 



of the peanut candy is glucose. The 

 people demand It." As the boy said, 

 "he wanted something that he could 

 chaw." Pure sugar won't make such a 

 candy. I would favor laws to prevent 

 adulteration, only the laws are evaded. 



Prof. Cook — I think the law all right. 

 I have a right to mix glucose with 

 honey, but I must say what it is when 

 I sell it. As 1 said, I think the law all 

 right, but it must be enforced, and this 

 duty does not belong to one man ; it 

 belongs to the Bee-Keepers' Union. 



Pres. Taylor — I think the law is all 

 right, the trouble is in its enforcement. 



Mr. Heddon — There is no trouble in 

 enforcing the law against murder. Peo- 

 ple dislike to be murdered. There is no 

 trouble in enforcing any law that the 

 people care enough about to have it en- 

 forced. The trouble with enforcing the 

 laws against the adulteration of honey 

 is that the public care very little about 

 the matter. They see the stories in the 

 newspapers about adulteration, but they 

 like the honey that they buy, it agrees 

 with them, they are healthy, and some 

 of their neighbors disagreeably so, and 

 the result is that they don't know nor 

 care whether honey is adulterated or 

 not. 



Now I am going to do a little proph- 

 esying about this matter of the adultera- 

 tion of honey. You know that years 

 ago I was abused and called unpleasant 

 names, etc.j because I plead for priority 

 of location, and kept everybody out of 

 my field. How is it now? Every man 

 wants his field, and to encroach on the 

 field of another is looked upon as unfair. 

 I also ©pposed the idea of persuading 

 everybody to engage in bee-keeping ; 

 again I was called selfish, but this mak- 

 ing bee-keepers of everybody has been 

 dropped, and bee-keeping has sought its 

 level, as all business will. It has gone 

 below its level, and will probably rise 

 again. Now what I am going to say of 

 adulteration will probably bring down 

 another shower of abuse, but I am going 

 to say that I think that the adulteration 

 of honey has never injured bee-keeping ; 

 that it has rather been a benefit, and 

 that in a few years all this hue and cry 

 among bee-keepers over the matter will 

 have died out. Yes, I know such views 

 are the rankest kind of heresy, but they 

 are my honest opinion. 



Glucose was first obtained by those 

 careful French and German chemists 

 that have been held up to us as models. 

 When its manufacture was first begun 

 in this country, it is possible that it was 

 somewhat crude, but as it has been made 

 for years, I believe it is as healthful as 



the corn from which it is made. It was 

 first used to mix with cane syrups. The 

 manufacturers of the syrups raised a 

 howl, they held up both hands, on one 

 was painted " horror," and on the other 

 " poison." They thought their business 

 was going to be injured, and they sought 

 to prejudice the public against the new- 

 comer. But the demand for "black- 

 strap" increased wonderfully. It was 

 learned that the stronger and blacker 

 the syrup the more glucose was needed 

 to bring it to the right flavor and color. 

 The opposition from sugar syrup makers 

 was soon over. 



About this time the hue and cry was 

 taken up by some of the bee-papers, and 

 the same changes were rung over again 

 with variations. Has the use of glucose 

 in cane syrups injured their sale? 

 Everybody knows that our " golden 

 drips " are largely glucose, yet they buy 

 them just the same. There is no attempt 

 at concealment. Go into a store and ask 

 for almost any brand of syrup, and in- 

 quire if it isn't part glucose, and the 

 answer will be, "Certainly." The fact 

 is, that those strong, dark cane syrups 

 have been improved by the glucose, and 

 everybody knows it. 



It is the same with confectionery, as 

 Mr. Cutting has said. It has been just 

 the same with those who have adulter- 

 ated honey. They have sought for the 

 strong, weed honey, as it would bear 

 more glucose. Time and again have C. 

 O. Perrine and Mrs. Spades bought my 

 strong fall honey and paid me a good 

 price for it because it was the kind of 

 honey that would be improved by the 

 addition of glucose. They put their 

 goods up in good shape, and could out- 

 sell me every time. They would get $9 

 a dozen for their glasses where I got 

 only $6, and the worst of it was they 

 were not troubled by the granulation of 

 their product, while I h:!,d often to take 

 back goods and re-liquify them. I once 

 sold $1,700 worth of honey in jars to 

 D. D. Mallory, of Detroit, and had to 

 take back half of it and melt it up 

 again. The people who sold mixed 

 goods had none of this trouble. They 

 sold to the same customers over and 

 over again, which they could not have 

 done had not their customers been satis- 

 fied. They made a market for our 

 strong fall honey tbat otherwise would 

 have been scarcely salable ; they pushed 

 its sale, and kept the markets supplied, 

 and I say they have not injured the bee- 

 keeper nor the public. 



Now, if we are going to fight adultera- 

 tion, let us decide why we fight it. If it 

 does not injure us, then why fight it ? Is 



