1897. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



37 



by the city authorities prohibiting the l<eeping of bees within 

 its limits, and appealed to the Union for instructions how to 

 proceed to prevent trouble. The Manager gave him the in- 

 structions, sent him copies of the Supreme Court decision and 

 the conflict was averted. 



In Stratford, Ont., trouble was brewing, but copies of the 

 Supreme Court decision promptly annihilated it — by the assis- 

 tance of Mr. Gemmill, one of our members, but who was not 

 the party to be injured. This shows the moral effect of a 

 strong organization like the Union, which not only defends its 

 members, but also averts calamities threatening the pursuit. 



J. C. McCtibbiu, in Fresno county, Cal., had his bees mo- 

 lested unlawfully by a warrant from ' a Justice of the Peace, 

 on a debt from a former owner, and appealed to the Union for 

 counsel. This matter is still unsettled; but the .Justice was 

 either not posted or wrongly informed. The Union is in duty 

 bound to defend its members in their legal rights, and Mr. 

 McCubbin does not appeal to the Union in vain. 



In Clarinda, Iowa, the City Council has been petitioned to 

 pass an ordinance prohibiting the keeping of bees within its 

 corporate limits. The Union has forwarded to the Mayor, 

 City Attorney, and each member of the City Council, copies of 

 the " Decision of the Supreme Court," on the point at issue. 

 That document will set the matter to rest, in all probability. 

 Should it not, then the attorney for the Union will be prepared 

 to '• light it to a finish." 



TROUBLE WITH COUMISSION-MEN. 



Last February we had a complaint about a car-load of 

 honey shipt from Ferris, Cal., to Chicago. It was extracted 

 honey and some of it was shipt in cans which had been used 

 before for coal-oil. Though thoroughly cleaned with gasoline, 

 the honey was considerably tainted. A dispute arose and the 

 Manager of the Union was appealed to by both sides to exam- 

 ine the honey. He did so and reported what he found". Some 

 of the honey which had been sold was returned to the commis- 

 sion house, as useless. The Manager of the Union suggested 

 that it could be used for making printers' rollers, and then no 

 loss would be sustained, as he had sold tons of it for that pur- 

 pose in years past. 



This matter involved much correspondence and consumed 

 considerable time. But not having heard anything of it for 

 six months we presume it was satisfactorily arranged some 

 time ago. 



HORRie i CO. 



Among the first complaints received about the unsatisfac- 

 tory transactions of the notorious merchants of Chicago, was 

 one from C. F. Lang, La Crosse, Wis. After much time had 

 been spent in finding Horrie, arguing the case and finally 

 threatening to bring suit, I received au offer to compromise 

 the account, from Horrie; sent it to Mr. Lang, who accepted 

 the offer, and then I secured a check for the amount and sent 

 it to Mr. Lang, closing that matter up satisfactorily. Horrie 

 & Co., it seems, would sell the honey for anything offered, be- 

 cause tliey were not posted about the honey trade, and as they 

 got their commission anyhow, the bee-keepers were the suffer- 

 ers by tlieir honey being sacrificed. 



Another complaint against Horrie & Co. was from Edw. 

 Smith, Madison county. Ills., for comb-honey shipt to them. 

 They claimed that the honey was unsatisfactory, and after 

 repeatedly calling on them and demanding a settlement or the 

 return of honey to the shipper, it was so returned and I have 

 the shipping receipt on file. Of course it was not properly 

 prepared for shipping (for they appeared not to know how to 

 do that) and Mr. Smith had to pay freight and cartage, but 

 had it remained much longer he would have lost the honey as 

 well. 



Still another complaint came on Jan. 16, from J. G. Stew- 

 art, Las Cruces, N. M., who shipt them a car-load of honey in 

 October, but could get no returns. I labored with them, and 

 they proraist to make out a statement of sales and send a 

 check to balance, which they did on Jan. 21, but of course the 

 statement was not satisfactory to the shipper, the expense and 

 the prices sold at, being too low. 



I tried to get Horrie to review his statement, and send 

 more money to the shipper, but he positively refused to do so. 

 As the laws give the right to the commission-man to sell pro- 

 duce at any price in his judgment fair, the condition and 

 quality being taken into account, it would be useless to sue for 

 an advance of price on a transaction closed. 



Bee-keepers should be aware of dealers of no reputation, 

 who quote high figures to induce shipments, and then make 

 no adequate returns. 



ARREST AND COUNTER ARREST. 



One of the most distressing circumstances being the case 

 of our old friend, C. Theilmann, of Wabasha county, Minn., one 



of the oldest and best-known bee-keepers in Minnesota, and is 

 considered a shrewd business man, but he is very impulsive, as 

 the sequel shows. He sold 11,000 pounds of honey to Bart- 

 ling & Co., of Chicago, for cash ; they were to pay at once. 

 He had shipt them honey before and was well treated. This 

 time he did not get his money and then went to Chicago to see 

 aboutit. He found that the honey had been all sold_forless 

 than they had agreed to pay him and he only got $250. He 

 sued them for embezzlement, in order to get the balance, but 

 the case was dismist. Bartling then sued Theilmann for 

 810,000 damages for malicious arrest, and stealing a valua- 

 ble paper— the statement of sales Bartling furnished him. 



The Union was then appealed to, but as Mr. Theilmann 

 had sued Mr. Bartling and been sued In return, it was not 

 deemed wise for the Union to interfere In such a complicated 

 matter— the result of too hasty action on both sides, perhaps. 

 The questions then were "embezzlement" and "stealing a 

 valuable paper "—neither of which being the real issue. 



I wrote to Mr. Theilmann's attorneys to watch the case 

 thoroughly, and use the influence of the Union to get a settle- 

 ment of the claim, and to see that he is protected in his rights, 

 personally and financially. 



DISPUTE ABOUT RATE OF COMMISSION. 



S. T. Fish & Co., of Chicago, a large commission house, 

 received considerable honey from Wildomar, Cal., on agree- 

 ments made by J. C. Souther, who claimed to be their Pacific 

 Coast manager, and was located at San Jose, Cal. He agreed 

 to sell the honey on 5 per cent, commission. When settling 

 for the honey, they deducted 10 per cent, as commission. As 

 Manager of the Union I made a demand on them for the over- 

 charge, amounting to S2 17.72. They declined to pay it, re- 

 pudiating Mr. Souther's agreement. However, I think they 

 will settle the claim as soon as they have all the facts in the 

 case, which I have lately forwarded to them. S. T. Fish & 

 Co. are good for their contracts, and I do not see how they can 

 repudiate the written agreements of a former employe. It is 

 evidently a misunderstanding between the house and Mr. 

 Souther, for which however, honey-producers are not respon- 

 sible. 



FINANCIAL STATEMENT. 



Balance as per last Report ^^oi'nn 



Fees from 38 members 38.00 



S809.61 

 Expenses, attorney fees, printing, postage, etc .S268.40 



Balance on hand S541.21 



Thomas G. Nkwean, QmeroX Mnnaaer. 



The Fight Against Commission Frauds and 

 the Honey-Adulterators. 



BY VAN ALLEN i WILLIAMS. 



Editor York:— We were highly pleased at the stand 

 taken by the North American Bee-Keepers' Association at the 

 Lincoln meeting in regard to that growing evil— Adultera- 

 tion. When we read your paper, we exclaimed, " Good ! Score 

 one for York !" and we wish to say. Score another for him for 

 the fight he is carrying on against the commission sharks, 

 even though he was the cause of one man in these parts get- 

 ting roped in §30 by his advertising for the firm ; which 

 shows the confidence reposed in the " Old Reliable " and its 

 editor. But you have been forgiven that mistake, for you 

 have proven by your good works since, that you were innocent, 

 and our confidence is more firmly establisht than ever. 



There seems to be a regular ring of those commission 

 sharks and swindlers— in fact, a regular combination. As 

 soon as the commission shark makes returns— if thoy ever do 

 —it will be a fourth or fifth of what the produce brought. The 

 mail that brings the returns to the shipper also brings a long 

 type-written letter from a "large-hearted" individual who 

 signs himself "Joseph Kipley; ex-Assistant Superintendent of 

 Police of Chicago ;" and gives a long list of references, includ- 

 ing State and City officials, and winding up with John V. Far- 

 well & Co The letter goes on to say that while there are 

 many firms doing an honorable commission business, it is a 

 deplorable fact that every large city is infested by a set of 

 commission sharks that are constantly preying upon the ship- 

 pers of produce, and having become so bold and numer- 

 ous in Chicago, they had formed what was called "The 

 Shippers' Protective Association," for the protection of coun- 

 try shippers, and that Mr. Kipley is Superintendent of the 



