24 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Jan. 14, 



■^fr A 



GBORCE: W. YORK, - Editor. 



PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY 



GEORGE W. YORK & COMPANY, 

 118 Mlcbigan St., - CHICAGO, ILL. 



$1.00 a Year— Sample Copy Sent Free. 

 [Entered at the Post-OfiBce at Chicago as Second-Class Mail-Matter. 



VoLinVII. CHICAGO, ILL, JAN. H m No. 2. 



Editorial Con}nfcr)t$^ 



Our Advertisers, we have every reason to believe, 

 are all worthy of the patronage of our readers. We do not 

 intend to permit any other kind to get into our advertising 

 columns. Uence we invite you all to patronize them, and 

 thus do what you can to encourage honorable dealers. We do 

 not endorse those who advertise in other bee-papers, unless 

 they be such as are also found in the Bee Journal. We say 

 this for the reason that some have complained to us, and un- 

 justly, for advertising for firms we did not advertise for. We 

 try to be extremely careful about admitting advertisers into 

 our columns, but should any of our readers be dealt with un- 

 fairly by any of them, we trust they will report to us at once. 

 We won't knowingly advertise for dishonest firms, and we 

 shall consider it a great favor to be informed concerning any 

 unsavory deals made by our advertisers. We are extremely 

 anxious to help kill out all frauds who scheme to fatten upon 

 the hard-working aud economical bee-keepers. That's a part 

 of our work. 



A Sweet Clover L,awsuit. — It seems there is now 

 a case \a the common pleas court of Delaware, Ohio, wherein 

 will be decided whether or not any officials have the right to 

 destroy sweet clover when growing upon private property. 

 Dr. H. Besse, an old reader of the American Bee Journal, is 

 the plaintiff in the case, and the township trustees of Delaware 

 are the defendants. The Gazette — a local newspaper — con- 

 tained the following in its issue of Dec. 29, 1896: 



A damage suit was filed in the common pleas court last 

 Saturday nicht, that grows out of a strange circumstance. Dr. 

 Henry Besse, one of the best known apiarists in this country, 

 seeks to secure damages in the sum of $3,210 for the cutting 

 down of a clover crop upon which his 97 colonies of bees 

 depended for food for the winter. The defendants in the case 

 are the members of the board of township trustees of Brown 

 township — Messrs. Lyman P. McMaster, James Salmon and 

 Joseph B. Glenn. 



The petition is a long one, and recites that the plaintiff is 

 In the bee-business, and owned a plat of ground of 4}.2 acres, 

 upon whicl] lie planted mclilotiis, or sweet clover, and while 

 the growth was In full bloom the defendants cut it down ; and 

 as the result, his 97 colonies of bees were "idle," which 

 otherwise would bo " working " and bringing him in a profit 

 in his business, so it is alleged. 



We are informed that there was a law that once prohibited 

 the cultivating of this clover, and the defendants thinking 

 that It was still In force, took it upon themselves to got the 

 sweet clover cut down, hence the suit for the recovery of 

 money alleged to have been lost by the transaction. The 

 matter will be fought to the end. All parties to the trouble 

 are well known residents. 



This will be an interesting case. It is not now known ex- 

 actly, writes Dr. Besse, when it will be brought to trial, as 

 there are several important cases ahead of it. But it will 

 likely be very soon. 



Dr. Besse, in giving us the particulars of the matter, says : 



I had a fine field of sweet clover in full bloom when the 

 trustees of my township served notice on me to cut it down 

 and destroy it, as a noxious weed, which I refused to do. They 

 then came with 12 men and a mowing machine and destroyed 

 all that I had growing on our farm, and also on an adjoining 

 farm, the owner of which had given me the privilege of sowing 

 the same. Since then I have employed an attorney to look 

 into the case, and he finds that the law classing sweet clover 

 with noxious weeds was repealed in our State (Ohio) last win- 

 ter, aud melilot, or sweet clover, is not mentioned in the list 

 of weeds to be destroyed by the farmers of Ohio. This I trust 

 will be good news to all Ohio bee-keepers at least, if not to the 

 whole fraternity who read it. 



Now I have commenced suit against the trustees in our 

 court for damages, and shall prosecute it. 



I am a bee-keeper of 60 years' experience, having com- 

 menced when 15 years old. H. Besse. 



Before entering the suit, it seems that Dr. Besse, being a 

 member of the National Boe-Keepers' Union, applied to the 

 General Manager for directions as to what he should do. 

 After some time, he was informed that the Advisory Board 

 were divided in their opinion, and had come to no conclusion. 

 After that. Dr. Besse's attorney wrote several letters to the 

 Union, but says he received no reply thereto. 



Now, it seems to us that if ever there was a case that the 

 Union should undertake, it is this very one — where it would 

 seem such an easy matter to win. It would establish a very 

 valuable precedent, and raise the Union several notches in the 

 estimation of the bee-keeping world. Of course, we suppose 

 some of the able Advisory Board had good reasons for deciding 

 against the Union's aiding Dr. Besse, or they would have 

 favored it. 



lu our next number we expect to have something interest- 

 ing on this very subject of sweet clover as a noxious weed. It 

 was fully discussed at the late Chicago convention, and will 

 be found in the report which is now appearing in these col- 

 umns. We shall also keep our readers informed regarding 

 the progress of Dr. Besse's suit, as all will be greatly inter- 

 ested In the final court decision. 



Questions About tbe Tyvo Unions.— Mr. E. 



S. Miles, of Crawford Co., Iowa, sends to us some questions 

 regarding amalgamation, etc., which he would like to have 

 answered, and as they will no doubt interest others, we give 

 them here, taking the liberty to attempt to furnish the infor- 

 mation sought. Here is what Mr. Miles writes ; 



Mr. Editor: — I am watching the progress of the United 

 States Bee-Keepers' Union with interest, and my dollar is 

 ready to go in if it gets to running all right. 



1. If I should join the National Bee-Keepers' Union, 

 would I be entitled to a vote on the adoption of the New Con- 

 stitution ? 



2. If it failed to carry, " where would I be at '?" 



o. There is some doubt iu my mind as to who is to be the 

 President, Vice-President and Secretary of the Lew organiza- 

 tion. If the officers of the National Bee-Keepers' Union are 

 to constitute the Board of Directors of the United States Bee- 

 Keepers' Union (see Art. IV., Sec. 2 of the New Constitution), 

 and the officers elected at the Lincoln meeting of the North 

 American Bee-Keepers' Association are to become members 

 only (see Art. III., Sec 2) of the New Union, where are tbe 

 President, Vice-President, Secretary and General Manager 

 coming from ? I cannot see any provision in the New Consti- 

 tution for their election this year ; nor can 1 see how the 

 members of the old Union can elect otHcers for the new ? 



4. Did the old North American Association die when the 

 new Union was born ? If so, why did they elect officers and 

 fix the place of meeting again ? 



I have not Intended this for a criticism at all, but am 

 merely hunting for information. E. S. Milks. 



We number our replies to correspond with those above : 



