.:\MERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



175 



Report of tlic Xortli American 

 Bee-Keepers' Convention. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 

 BY W. Z. HUTCHINSON. 



(Continued from page 142.) 

 The Secretary then read an essay 

 from Prof. A. J. Cook, of Agricultural 

 College, Mich., on 



The Analyses of Honey. 



Without any question, the adultera- 

 tion of honey is one of the most serious 

 obstacles to success that now stands in 

 the way of bee-keepers, but like any 

 other thief it can be restrained if it can 

 be caught. We now know that through 

 the aid of chemical analyses we can de- 

 tect this arch enemy. And, of course, 

 detection means capture. 



Heretofore there has been doubt re- 

 garding the ability of chemical science 

 to certainly distinguish the genuine 

 from the spurious. The formulf© in use 

 gave the maximum and minimum 

 amounts of water. Every bee-keeper 

 knows that since the advent of the ex- 

 tractor, and the often under ripe pro- 

 duct, which is surely genuine honey, 

 though not of best quality, the above 

 rule would not be reliable. 



Again, the amounts of cane and re- 

 ducing sugars were to guide in making 

 the determination. These vary largely 

 in honey of undoubted purity, and the 

 limits fixed upon were arbitrary. It is 

 quite possible that these limits were not 

 correctly fixed. We know that bees re- 

 duce the sugar in transforming nectar 

 to honey, and it stands to reason that 

 this reduction may be much decreased if 

 honey is stored rapidly. 



Again, honey comes from such varied 

 sources, that a very large number of 

 analyses must be made to fix upon the 

 limits. It seems certain that the old 

 rules are not entirely reliable. 



The third means to a correct determi- 

 nation rests with the polariscope. It has 

 been supposed that honey would always 

 give a left-handed rotation. But when 

 we find that this varies from 1^ to 25° 



direct, and from 6° to 30° indirect— in- 

 deed some genuine honey gives a right- 

 handed fotation — we may reasonably 

 assume that arbitrary limits may mis- 

 lead here as before. And that owing to 

 the fact that bees may reduce the sugar 

 more or less, and to the innumerable 

 sources from whence nectar comes, we 

 may conclude again that very many 

 analyses must be made, to determine the 

 range in all the varied cases, and that 

 very likely the limits set in the past 

 have been too narrow. 



From the investigations made the past 

 season, through the kindness of Drs. 

 Wiley, Kedzie, and Scovell, in which 

 over 50 samples of honey from different 

 sources were analyzed, we have it pretty 

 conclusively shown that our chemists 

 now can malie determinations that are 

 practically conclusive. We can also de- 

 tect a mixture of even one-fourth, or 

 much less, of glucose with honey, by the 

 high right-handed polarization. Yet we 

 find that some honey from honey-dew — 

 very poor, rank stuff— gives the same 

 high right-handed polarization. As the 

 rank honey-dew honey could never be 

 put on the market, we see that practi- 

 cally we are secure at this point. It is 

 desirable that we have a way to surely 

 detect this honey-dew honey from honey 

 adulterated with glucose, aside from the 

 appearance and taste ; and I congratu- 

 late the bee-keepers that we have one of 

 the best chemists of this or any other 

 country. Dr. H. W. Wiley, heartily in 

 sympathy with us, who is now engaged 

 in solving this problem, and who. if the 

 thing be possible, will discover some 

 re-agent that will make even this de- 

 termination sure. As glucose will al- 

 ways be the greatest adulterant, owing 

 to its cheapness, light color, and slow- 

 ness to granulate, we see that we have 

 the "detective" that can lay fast hold 

 of this defrauder — adulteration. 



If glucose were fed to bees and so con- 

 verted into honey, I do not know 

 whether we could detect it or not. That 

 is a problem which 1893 is to solve 

 But this is not very practical, for bees 

 are so adverse to taking glucose that it 

 can never be fed at a profit, and so such 

 honey, whatever its character, will never 

 be produced. The very fact that it is 

 not a good food for bees, makes us re- 

 gard it with ill-favor even though con- 

 verted into honey. But as just sug- 

 gested, that is not a question of practi- 

 cal importance. 



The experiments of the past season 

 show that the chemist cannot by use of 

 the present methods determine honey 

 from cane-sugar from that of the best 



