130 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Mar. 4, 



diately after his graduation, went to the TheoloRical Semi- 

 nary. He was received into the Canonsburg church, Pa., 

 then under the pastorate of Rev. John McMillan. He was 

 licensed at Blairsville, Pa., in 1S.36, by the Presbytery of 

 Blairsville. He was ordained at La Porte, Ind., by the Pres- 

 bytery of Logansport. He was married to Sarah Morrison at 

 La Porte, lud,, in 1839. He celebrated his golden wedding 

 in 1889. He was pastor as follows: La Porte, Ind., 1837- 

 45; Van Buren, Ark., 1846-5-1; Henderson, Tex., 1855- 

 75. Since this time he has been largely engaged in evangel- 

 istic worlc. At the date of his sketch (Feb. (5, 1895) he had 

 been in Texas 41 years, and had never mist a day, by sick- 

 ness, from his ministeral work." 



« Price of Comb Honey vs. Extracted." 



BY G. M. DOOLITTLE. 



Following up that convention discussion, spoken of in my 

 last article (see page 81), I next find Dr. Miller stating the 

 question in a still different way, for he says : 



"In other words, the question now is. What is that honey 

 [extracted of the same grade as comb honey which sells at 22 

 cents per pound] worth to me on my table ?" At this Mr. 

 Ellis jumps up and says, "The same price," while Mr. York 

 demurs, and says, "The question is, ' What should consumers 

 pay?' " 



Now, If the Doctor knew what he was doing when he 

 stated the question at this the final statement, as is given in 

 the report, then I accept none of the replies given later, but 

 would answer by saying that one pound of extracted honey of 

 the same grade is worth to Dr. Miller, or on Dr. Miller's table, 

 just as much as it was in the year 1874, when he would have 

 had to pay from 30 to 40 cents per pound for a good article 

 of extracted honey. Is not that so? If not, why not ? Don't 

 all speak at once. Will not that pound of extracted honey, 

 " of the same grade," give just at much muscle, just as much 

 health, just as much buoyancy, and just as much pleasure as 

 it would in 1874? And if it will, is it not worth just as 

 much? This being the fact, and no one will question this, 

 why were some of those " Sucker " State people "off their 

 base " enough to be talking only 10 cents for something 

 which would give from 30 to 40 cents worth of muscle, 

 health, life, and activity, in the year of our Lord one thou- 

 sand eight hundred and ninety-six ? Will some one who was 

 at that convention rise and explain ? for I am in a state of 

 agitation over the matter. 



But should such a thing be possible that the good Dr. 

 Miller's brain got a little twisted, so that he did not make the 

 question exactly plain, which required Mr. York to put in his 

 demurer, and that Mr. York stated the question aright, then 

 taking the foregoing into consideration, the thing is very 

 simple; the consumer should pay from 30 to 40 cents per 

 pound for extracted honey of the same grade as comb honey 

 selling at 22 cents per pound, for we have already seen that 

 this said pound of honey was worth that in muscle, health, 

 etc., no matter whether the year was 1 or 1896. In this I 

 am borne out by Mr. Qrabbe, where he speaks of intrinsic 

 value, for intrinsic value is essential value, and muscle and 

 health is one of the greatest essentials to man in this world. 



But hold on : I see by looking closely, that this same Mr. 

 Grabbe says, " I don't think that we can say what the con- 

 sumer should pay, he decides that for himself." Does he ? If 

 so, how comes it about that it is decided for me just how much 

 of the price of my honey I shall pay for coal, for kerosene oil, 

 for boots, yea and for freight on my honey ? Have I, as a 

 consumer of these things, a chance to decide for myself what 

 I shall pay? Those who think I have, hold up your hands. 

 What, not a hand up ? Then if I, as a consumer of coal, of 

 boots and freight, have to pay just what I am charged for the 

 same, must not the consumer of my honey pay just what I see 

 fit to charge him for it? If not, then there Is something 

 wrong somewhere, and the sooner I find where this wrong is, 

 and remedy It, the better it will be for me, and what Is better 

 for me, will be better for the world. 



Can It be that It has come to such a pass with bee-keepers, 

 that they have to siy to others, " What will you give ?" and 

 when they have the "what will you give" price in their 

 hands, turn around, get down on their knees and humbly say 

 toothers, "What will you take?" Have we come to the 

 white man and Indian condition, who, after a day's hunt, 

 found their possessions to consist of a turkey and a turkey 

 buzzard, to be divided ; and have it said to us, as the white 

 man did to the Indian, " You can have the turkey buzzard 

 and I will take the turkey, or I will take the turkey and you 

 can have the turkey buzzard ?" If so, then we can well ex- 

 claim with the poor Indian, " He talkee no turkey to me !" 



And now I wish to put before the reader another line of 

 thought, even should it butt against some of the things I have 

 advanced in this and the preceding article. 



I have always considered Mr. Haldridge a level-headed 

 apiarist, and so consider him yet, but the most level-headed 

 are sometimes liable to make mistakes, and if Mr. B. was re- 

 ported correctly, on pages 22 and 23, he there made one of 

 the greatest mistakes of his life. Speaking on the price of 

 extracted honey, it is reported that he said, first, " without 

 any reference to the cost." Next he is made to say, " It is 

 immaterial, for that matter, what it costs the bee-keeper to 

 produce it." And lastly he says, "that it is not his [the con- 

 sumer's] business to know what it costs me to produce it" [ex- 

 tracted honey]. 



Well, if the above three quotations are right, then the 

 greatest of the Bible commands — "Thou shalt love they 

 neighbor as thyself " — has no place in the affairs of men to- 

 day. God created the world, sent it rolling through space, 

 and provided in it everything necessary for the physical wants 

 and comfort of man. Then he created man, and said to him, 

 " Go till [labor on] the soil, eat and live." Hence, we have in 

 labor (costs) everylhing which should regulate the price of any- 

 thing which any member of the human family desires. The 

 land (and this, in an economic sense, includes everything as it 

 came from the hand of God, unimproved upon by man, like 

 the soil, the trees of the forest, the fish of the sea, the bees in 

 their natural home, etc.) God gave free; man furnishes the 

 labor, and from labor applied on land comes wealth. Thus, 

 in order to do no injustice to any one, the labor part (cost) 

 should regulate the price of any article or thing desired by 

 man. As it costs in labor about six times as much to produce 

 a bushel of wheat as it does to produce a pound of comb honey, 

 six pounds of comb honey and a bushel of wheat should be 

 about equal as to price, and, remaining so, the bee-keeper and 

 the wheat-grower love each other [their neighbor] as them- 

 selves. 



This we see has been very nearly followed out, for when 

 wheat brought $1.50 a bushel, honey brought 25 cents per 

 pound ; when wheat went to 75 cents, honey brought 12K 

 cents ; and I have never heard any bee-keeper growl about 

 hard times, or low price of honey, when he compared honey 

 with wheat. Compare butter with honey, in the same way, 

 and we see no one is doing ought except loving their neighbor 

 as themselves, along this line. But when we come to lay the 

 labor cost of honey along side of coal, oil, railroad fare and 

 freights, salaries of officials, interest, taxes, etc., then we see 

 that it takes from two to five times as much of our labor in 

 bee-keeping to procure the same results to ua that it did 25 

 years ago. And as we bee-keepers look on this side, more 

 than on any other, and smart under the wrongs being perpe- 

 trated by those who are not loving their neighbors as them- 

 selves, thus defrauding us, by bringing on an inequality, an 

 unjust system, we get "our backs up" and talk as did Mr. 

 Haldridge, or propose a " Bee-Keepers' Exchange," in order 

 that we can match this "money power" in its wrongdoing, 

 and so force our share from them by using the same wrong 

 principles. Thus we are saying "an eye for an eye and a 

 tooth for a tooth," instead of striving to carry out the doctrine 

 of the Blessed Master, by working with might and strength 

 to put down this wicked, false system, and establish In its 

 place a system which will do no one injustice. 



Just a few words more and I will close this already too 

 long article. If the principles put forth by Mr. Baldridge and 

 the California Honey Exchange could be carried out to their 

 fullest extent (which is impossible), are we sure we should not 

 be wronging others? Listen: "Nightgowns, with tuckt 

 yokes and insertion, are being made at $1.00 a dozen; shirts 

 are being made at 30 cents a dozen ; coats are being ' finisht' 

 at 30 cents a dozen ; neckties are being made at .$1.25 a 

 gross," etc., according to " Prisoners of Poverty." Think of 

 forming an " Exchange" to keep the price of extracted honey 

 up to 22 cents per pound, and thus compelling some poor 

 human being, created in God's own image, to make 26 neck- 

 ties for the same, that the sick and starving children may 

 have something to soothe their irritated, coughing throats, 



