THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



65 



well qualified to take care of the apiary. 

 Col. Colmau theu proceeded to inject a 

 female suflVage slump speech into the 

 belly of his argumoiit. 



Mr. Monteith congratulated Col. Col- 

 man upon the stand he had just taken 

 upon the woman question. He doubted 

 not that woman had the potentiality in 

 her for doing the work referred to. So 

 far as the speaker's experience was con- 

 cerned, he had found the women well 

 qualified for the conduct of bee culture, 

 as soon as they could overcome their tim- 

 idity. 



Mr. Reihl desired to set himself right 

 with Col. Colman. He had misunder- 

 stood the gentleman. However, he still 

 insisted that the culture of , bees necessi- 

 tated hard work. 



Prof. Riley asked the following ques- 

 tions : Do the bees make or gather honey ? 

 Does the queen bee meet with the drone a 

 second time '? Would the gentlemen pres- 

 ent, when they come upon white bees, 

 please preserve them for the speaker ? 



Mr. Waiie was positive that bees gath- 

 ered honey. He had fed his bees on 

 syrups and found that they deposited the 

 syrup unchanged in the hives again ; the 

 honey, all knew, was frequently flavored 

 with buckwheat, etc., etc. 



Prof. Riley disagreed with Mr. Waite. 

 He was satisfied bees made honey, other- 

 wise man could mancfacture honey as 

 well as bees. 



The Secretary and Treasurer were in- 

 structed to solicit essays upon practical 

 subjects to be read at the next meeting. 



Prof. Riley consented to speak upon the 

 subject of "Do bees injure fruit," illus- 

 trating his remarks by diagrams. 



The meeting then adjourned to the 4th 

 of April, at 10 o'clock, a. m. 



For tlie American Bee Journal. 

 '* Whom the Gods would Destroy, they 

 first make Mad." 



Mr. Editor: — Having good reason to 

 believe that the columns of the " Old Re- 

 liable " are open even to the " heretics 

 and infidels," and having received let- 

 ters from bee-keepers asking me why I do 

 not defend myself, I will, with your per- 

 mission, answer a few of the charges 

 brought by Bros. King and Slocum. 

 While I recognize the fact that "jang- 

 ling " is neither wise nor profitable to any 

 concerned, still it does seem as though a 

 few " remarks back " were at this time 

 called for. What intelligent apiarist can 

 imagine for one moment that he alone is 

 " going to so reduce the number of bee- 

 keepers, as to secure fabulous prices for 

 his honey?" Supply and demand, cast 

 off production, etc., will attend to that. 

 Put truth and error together and agitate 

 them, and "truth will ever come upper- 



most, and ever will justice be done," as 

 long as production of honey costs as 

 much as at present. We do hope to com- 

 mand more " fabulous prices " than those 

 I quoted in our hist convention. 



I would ask Messrs. King and Slocum 

 if they would be benefited if each honey 

 producer would sell each of his three 

 nearest neighbors one-fourth of his api- 

 ary? 



This question answers itself. Would 

 it be to the apiarist's interest to do so? 

 (So does this one.) Again, would they 

 like an apiary on every square mile in 

 America? Honey producers, would we? 

 TFAy did the California bee-keepers peti- 

 tion Congress to grant them each a large 

 area of land ? We petition all men and 

 women to show up both sides of the sub- 

 ject when they write or talk upon bee- 

 keeping, even if their wares do go off 

 slower. 



" To be successful one must keep large 

 apiaries," etc. 



Who are the " successful " ones ? Whose 

 pictures are centrally located in Root's 

 Medley ? 



Have these men succeeded ? 



Do they " keep large apiaries " ? 



" This branch of industry has been neg- 

 lected." " Thousands of pounds of honey 

 are yearly going to waste." Thousands 

 of pounds of tannin goes to waste during 

 the clearine of our oak forests, and proba- 

 bly always will, so long as the drug stores 

 are well filled, and the cost of gathering 

 it twice exceeds the market price. 



The difference between " agriculture, 

 stock raising, etc.," and bee-keeping, is 

 that stock and grain gain their sustenance 

 from the land their owner owns. But no 

 more so with bees than with the fisher- 

 man, berry-picker or merchant. What 

 farmer cares how much his neighbor 

 produces. What salesman dees not care 

 how many " opposition stores " set up in 

 his town? Oh? we are different from 

 other folks — we raise queen cages, tin cor- 

 ners, kettle feeders, $5 bee hives and big 

 stories, for sale. (" Send stamp for circu- 

 lar.") "English Journals have no paid 

 contributors." That is nice. 



We too will give away to every one who 

 may happen to open a book, our best, 

 hard-earned discoveries, if they will in 

 turn support us in luxury, as tlie}^ do in 

 England. If farmers only could raise 

 honey for 113^ cents per lb. at retail, what 

 a nice thing it would be, wouldn't it? 



But here again the laws of nature say 

 "no." 



" Mixed farming" is becoming less and 

 less the order of the day in this section. 



Whether I loaded my gun heavy or 

 light, it seems that I made the fur fly, if I 

 didn't kill out-right. 



I do not know what K. and S. mean by 

 " progressive bee-keepers," unless it be 

 those who have " progressed" out of real 



