832 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Nov. 15. 



and the two other words that he mentions, 

 " scrooch " and " smoled " (which I think 

 should be " smole " ), had their origin in any 

 such place? If I am not greatly mistaken, 

 the word " sass " had its origin in the homes 

 of our New England ancestors — homes, albeit 

 peopled by an illiterate folk, yet as clean and 

 pure as any homes the blessing of God ever 

 smiled upon. No worse charge can probably 

 be laid to the word " scrooch " than that it is 

 illiterate. Mr. Taylor can not conceive how 

 it can conve)^ any other meaning than is con- 

 veyed by " crouch." To me it conveys a lit- 

 tle different and a stronger meaning than 

 "crouch." That is merely an admission of 

 illiteracy on my part, because I am more fa- 

 miliar with ' ' scrooch ' ' than ' ' crouch " ' in 

 every-day conversation. I do not justify Mr. 

 Root in using it as a correct word in GIvEan- 

 INGS. He should use the correct word, so 

 that his readers would learn, if they hive not 

 already learned, to attach to the word 

 " crouch " all the meaning they now give to 

 " scrooch." But because it should be cast out 

 on account of incorrectness, it does not follow 

 that it is right to slander it as to the place of 

 its birth. 



"Smole" bears upon it the marks of hav- 

 ing originated, not in the bad places Mr. Tay- 

 lor mentions, but among cultured people who 

 could see the comical side of applying to 

 verbs not coming regularly in the list, the 

 rule to change the " i " of the present to " o " 

 in the past, as ride, rode; write, wrote. 



More likely than that either of these words 

 had its origin in a den of thieves or in a sa- 

 loon is it that the word "mugwump," to 

 which Mr. Taylor says he makes no objec- 

 tion, had its origin in some such place, for it 

 was at first used opprobriousl}' by politicians 

 as a name for good and true men who felt 

 they had a right to vote outside of the strict 

 party ticket. 



I do not yield to Mr. Taylor in my admira- 

 tion for correct, choice language. I enjoy 

 reading it, and, so far as I have the ability, 

 try to write it. But I do not find what Mr. 

 Taylor says is true in my case when he sa3's, 

 ' ' What we like is easy. " I do not find it easy 

 to write pure English that satisfies me. 



At the same time, I do not believe that it 

 detracts from good English to use at times 

 humorous expressions, and to drop into fa- 

 miliar style. "A good many like it," among 

 them those refined in taste and pure in 

 thought, who perhaps could not, if they 

 would, echo the vile language of the places 

 Mr. Taylor accredits as the birthplace of the 

 class of words whose use I justify. 



Mr. Taylor's arraignment is entirely too 

 severe. He could hardly be more severe if he 

 were speaking of slang or obscene language. 

 At one time, when I said something about Mr. 

 Taylor's being somewhat given to scolding, he 

 wanted me to cite a case. As an instance, I 

 recommend to him the second paragraph of the 

 quotation I have made from him at the be- 

 ginning of this article: " The language of the 

 raas.ses is rotten," etc. If that isn't scolding, 

 and severe scolding at that, then I have no 

 correct idea as to what scolding is. Mr. Tay- 



lor should remember that one can catch more 

 flies with honey than with vinegar. 



Asked why he singles out Gleanings, Mr. 

 Taylor replies in substance that he finds er- 

 rors more plentiful there than in the other 

 journals. Can it be possible that Mr. Taylor 

 thought what he was saying? GLEANINGS is 

 not as near perfection as it should be, but I 

 feel sure there are several others in which Mr. 

 Taylor would find more plentiful picking; and 

 if he so desires I will privately name to him 

 another bee-journal which I think he will find 

 contains on a single page more glaring errors 

 than he will find on any 100 consecutive pages 

 of Gleanings. 



In reply to the question why he neglects to 

 criticise the Review, Mr. Taylor says, "Well, 

 Editors Root and York attend to that thor- 

 oughly, and sooner than I am able to get into 

 print. ' ' If these two gentlemen have made a 

 business of criticising the Reviezu, I think it 

 has escaped the attention of their readers. 

 Reviezu is a good journal, and ably edited; 

 but I venture to say that if Mr. Taylor will 

 look through it with the same desire to find 

 errors with which he scans Gleanings, he 

 will find for every error mentioned by Editors 

 York and Root nine others left to the tender 

 mercies of the Reviezu critic. 



I think — and the thought is strengthened 

 by what I have heard other bee keepers say — 

 that one who knows nothing about Mr. Tay- 

 lor except what he knows from reading his 

 department of criticism will we likely to think 

 of him as a man keen to find fault in others, 

 and anxious to hold his victim up to public 

 gaze in such a way as to give the most pain 

 possible. Let ns hope that he will mend his 

 waj's, and show himself in his true colors as a 

 man full of the milk of human kindness, be- 

 ing a critic in the better sense of the word, 

 and keeping always in mind the injunction of 

 the couplet that heads his department: 



Blame where you mu.st, be candid where you can, 

 And be each critic the Good-natured Man." 



Marengo, 111., Oct. 1, 1898. 



DRAWN FOUNDATION, AGAIN. 



Tested in Convention, but no Gob. 

 BY L. STACHELHArSEN. 



In Gleanings for July 15 j'ou published my 

 letter concerning the new foundation. On the 

 17th and 18lh of August the South Texas Bee- 

 keepers' Association had its annual convention 

 in Floresville. At this convention I showed to 

 the members two sections of honey in which 

 this drawn foundation was used. A large num- 

 ber of bee-keepers tested the honey, and no- 

 body could perceive any difference between 

 this artificial and the natural comb. Nobody 

 could detect any fishbone nor any thing like 

 it. This is of more value, as some bee-keep- 

 ers had an unfavorable opinion of the drawn 

 foundation. vSo we see it is a success in this 

 respect too. Now a few words about the ad- 

 vantage of this foundation : 



If we uncap a frame with sealed honey, ex- 

 tract it, and give it to a strong colony (that is, 



