AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



ITT 



tween a pure and an adulterated honey. 

 Some of the samples which we examined, 

 and which were purchased in open mar- 

 ket in different cities of the country, 

 were found to be adulterated with glu- 

 cose, and it was claimed that such an 

 aduleration was unlikely, and that the 

 chemists had been mistaken. Prof. 

 Cook took a great deal of interest in this 

 matter, and asked permission to send a 

 number of samples of honey and honey 

 substitutes, designated only by number, 

 to the laboratory of the Department of 

 Agriculture for examination. He also 

 sent similar samples to the laboratory of 

 Prof. Kedzie, of the Michigan Agricul- 

 tural Experiment Station, and to Prof. 

 Scovell, of the Kentucky Agricultural 

 Experiment Station. In all 53 samples 

 of honey were received at our laboratory 

 from Prof. Cook, and these have been 

 analyzed, and the data transmitted to 

 him. 



We have not yet been informed by 

 Prof. Cook of the nature and origin of 

 the samples, and therefore cannot tell, 

 as far as that is concerned, what success 

 we have met with in distinguishing be- 

 tween the good and the bad ; yet Prof. 

 Cook has already published the fact that 

 all three of the chemists engaged in this 

 work have detected every spurious or 

 adulterated honey which was contained 

 in the lot. On the other hand, a few 

 samples which were of known purity 

 have been classed as "suspicious," but 

 not condemned as adulterated. The 

 general result is that the chemist work- 

 ing with ordinary care, and with well- 

 known processes, is able to detect all 

 ordinary adulterations of honey, but at 

 the same time he may include among 

 the spurious articles some samples which 

 are genuine. 



The special forms of adulteration 

 which we were expected to determine 

 were glucose and cane-sugar. Both of 

 these adulterations are very easily de- 

 termined. 



Some of the samples of honey received 

 were obtained by feeding directly to the 

 bees cane-sugar syrup which was stored 

 rapidly and at once extracted. Other 

 samples were obtained from bees which 

 were storing honey very rapidly from a 

 known source, and this honey was taken 

 as soon as , deposited. These general 

 items of information I have gleaned 

 from the article Prof. Cook has already 

 published in regard to that examination. 



I am sorry not to be able to entirely 

 agree with Prof. Cook in his definition 

 of honey. A few years ago I defined 

 honey at the saccharine exudation of 

 flowers gathered and stored by bees. 



This definition may properly be applied 

 to any saccharine exudation of flowers 

 or plants gathered and stored by bees, 

 provided they are not aided in this mat- 

 ter by any artificial means. In other 

 words, cane-sugar which a bee would of 

 itself extract from a plant would very 

 properly be classed as pure honey when 

 stored by the bees in the hive ; but cane- 

 sugar fed to the bees in the form of 

 syrup and simply stored by the bees in 

 the hive could hardly be deemed a pure 

 honey. This is a matter, however, which 

 it is not within my power to determine, 

 and I shall be much interested in know- 

 ing the result of the discussion now 

 going on among your own members on 

 what constitutes pure honey. 



The problem of the adulteration of 

 honey has been somewhat complicated 

 within a few years by the discovery that 

 certain honeys or saccharine exudations 

 gathered by bees show at ordinary tem- 

 peratures a right-handed rotation. Such 

 honey was formerly supposed to be of 

 coniferous origin, that is, gathered ex- 

 clusively from pine trees. Later it has 

 been shown that such honeys are prob- 

 ably derived from exudations produced 

 by this aphis or plant-louse, either di- 

 rectly from the trees, through the in- 

 fluence of the louse, or through the or- 

 ganism of the louse itself. This exuda- 

 tion is commonly known as "honey- 

 dew," and entomologists are undecided 

 whether or not the honey-dew passes 

 through the organism of the louse, or is 

 the result of the attack of the louse 

 upon the plant. At any rate, such exu- 

 dations show peculiar properties, and it 

 is doubtful whether, under the definition 

 given above, they could be classed as 

 genuine honeys. 



It is said by Prof. Cook that a number 

 of the samples of honey sent by him 

 were of plant-louse origin, but the num- 

 bers representing these samples are not 

 yet known to me. I have, however, 

 found in the number sent by him, six 

 which are peculiar in their optical prop- 

 erties showing a slight right-handed ro- 

 tation not due to cane-sugar, and which 

 I would class as suspicious honeys. It 

 is more than probable that it will be 

 found that these honeys are of plant- 

 louse origin. 



Prof. Cook doubts whether or not a 

 honey made from pure cane sugar, 

 which has been stored for some time in 

 the hives, can be detected from a gen- 

 uine floral honey gathered and stored 

 by bees. In the present state of our 

 chemical knowledge the doubt of Prof. 

 Cook is well founded. I am confident 

 that it will not be long before we shall 



