

I'uhlisht Weelily at JIS A/ie/i/^rtii Street. 



$1J)0 a Year—SamjiiG Copy^ P'rGe, 



37th Year. 



CHICAGO, ILL., OCTOBER 21, 1897. 



No. 42. 



Is It Worth While to Have a Tariff or Duty on 

 Hooey ? 



BY CHA8. F. MUTH. 



Questions. — "I notice that the new tariff law doubles 

 the old duty of 10 cents per gallon on extracted honey. Does 

 enough Cuban honey come into our markets to make it worth 

 while to us to have any duty at all? I suggest that C. F. 

 Mulh could give some information on this. Perhaps Weyler, 

 the Spanish butcher, has entirely stopt honey-production in 

 Cuba. — California." 



Answer. -rl think it of the greatest importance to bee- 

 keepers to have a fair protective tariff on importations of 

 honey, because I know from experience that our present low 

 prices would still be lower, even with a tariff of 20 cents on a 

 gallon, even if Butcher Weyler had not destroyed all chances 

 for a honey crop for several years to come. 



I was never able to compete with Eastern prices until we 

 tried our hands at importations from Cuba. We received at 

 one shipment 87,000 pounds, and had bought it cheap — about 

 2 cents a pound below the price we paid to our neighbors for 

 the same qualities. We had it shipt via New Orleans and 

 Ohio and Mississippi steamer, advanced 20 cents a gallon 

 duty, charges to New Orleans and freight to Cincinnati. We 

 had bought for cash, and the shipper had received a more 

 satisfactory price than he ever had before, and offered me his 

 next crop at the same figura. 



That season we could, and did, compete with our Eastern 

 competitors, and — last but not least — we offered to our neigh- 

 bors the same prices we had paid for the Cuban honey, and 

 received all we could handle. My Cuban shipment caused a 

 decline of 2 cents a pound in the price of extracted honey, 

 and if no duty had been on honey, the decline would have been 

 4 cents a pound, without any doubt about it. 



The tariff on honey had been lowered to 12 cents on a 

 gallon during the existence of the Wilson Bill, and the result 

 was that two cargoes of honey two years ago, and two or 

 three cargoes three years ago, supplied the principal manu- 

 facturers of this country at prices we could not meet. Take 

 the tariff off of honey, and our bee-keepers would have to 

 take to the comforts of the Chinaman, or quit the business. 



I enclose an essay of mine, of 1892, which expresses my 

 idea on the subject. Mr. 0. O. Poppleton, of Florida, has 



been in Cuba, superintending a large apiary, and likely Is able 

 to give us more light on the subject of production. 



Hamilton Co., Ohio. 

 [The essay to which Mr. Muth refers, reads as follows : — 

 Editor.] 



honey and sugar competition. 



"Extracted honey seems to have become a staple article 

 in spite of all the obstacles put in its way. The bounty on 

 sugar, with the exclusion of honey, discrirninatps against the 

 production of bee-keepers, and is an injustice which Mr. 

 McKinley and his committee would not have been guilty of, 

 had they been posted on the subject. It is of vital interest to 



Chns. F. Miitn. 



a large class of industrious and loyal' citizens to have honey 

 come In under the same laws protecting the production of 

 other sweets. Bee-keepers must spare no efforts to have jus- 

 tice done them in this respect. 



"lam in favor of a protective tariff. The West India 

 Islands have a honey harvest of about eight months in a year, 

 while the season on this continent does not exceed four weeks, 

 on an average. If the duty were taken off the import of 

 foreign honey, Cuba alone would swamp our country, and 

 deal a blow at the most vital parts of apiculture. 



"Bee-keeping, being a branch of agriculture, which re- 

 ceives the fostering care of our Government, should by no 

 means be neglected. Bee-keepers must spare no efforts to 

 guard against such calamity." 



