448 



Gleanings in Bee Culture 



advertising queens for sale in tlie principal bee- 

 journals, and conlinued to do so during the rest of 

 the season. 



Through some inadvertence on the part 

 of the editors the item above shpped into 

 our columns without having been ftrst re- 

 ferred to the New York State Inspectors, 

 for we do not intend that any item of this 

 kind shall find a place in these pages with- 

 out giving the party to whom they refer the 

 courtesy of a reply. 



We have heani from a couple of the New 

 York bee-keepers, objecting to the state- 

 ment, and Mr. Charles Stewart, one of the 

 State inspectors, writes as follows: 



In a recent article in Gleanings a writer stated 

 that a certain queen-breeder who had European 

 foul brood had been sending out queens. In just- 

 ice to the queen-breeders of this State 1 wish to say 

 that we have fully investigated this statement, at a 

 considerable cost to the Agricultural Department, 

 and find that a certain small breeder did have dis- 

 ease in his apiary, but did not send out queens dur- 

 ing that time. The inspector of that division finds 

 no disease in that yard at the present time. 



Charles Stewart. 

 New York State Bee Inspector, Third Division. 



Johnstown, N. Y., July 8. 



We believe this version of the matter is 

 correct. Mr. Burr, with the best of inten- 

 tions, must have misunderstood his inform- 

 ants. From a casual conversation such as 

 Mr. Burr reports, one could have very easily 

 gathered a wrong impression. We do not 

 believe that any person, much less a jniblic 

 official, would knowingly say he had been 

 derelict in his duties if he honestly believed 

 he was innocent. 



not administer treatment, then it is time to 

 call in an insi>ector. It is at just such times 

 when we need police authority. See what 

 Mr. .1. L. Byer says on this subject on page 

 45o of this issue. 



EVERY ONE HIS OWN FOUL-BROOD IN- 

 SPECTOR. 



Unfortunately many bee-keepers have 

 the idea that, when they once get a foul- 

 brood law and one or more foul-brood in- 

 spectors, their responsibility is at an end. 

 If foul brood develops in their yard they at 

 once lay the blame all on the inspector. 

 The fact is, it will take a hundred men to 

 cover all sections of a State where foul brood 

 has obtained much if any headway. The 

 most that any inspector can do is to visit 

 the district once a year where foul brood is 

 reported to exist. Usually no State has 

 more than $2500 appropriation to carry on 

 the work of inspection, and most States 

 have a great deal less. It transpires, Uiere- 

 fore, that most States can not afford to nave 

 more than one or two men in the field; and 

 if they visit the worst spots once a year by 

 request, they will be doing all they possibly 

 can do. 



Foul brood, both European and American, 

 has gotten an awful start, and it is going to 

 need the combined efforts of bee-keepers and 

 inspectors to hold the disease in check. This 

 simply means that every bee-keeper should 

 go over his own hives carefully; and if he 

 finds disease, apply treatment without wait- 

 ing for the inspector, who may have on his 

 calendar a hundred other calls just as urgent 

 as his. Every intelligent bee-keeper ought 

 to be his own foul-brood inspector. When, 

 however, he finds that one of his neighbors 

 is negligent and careless, or one who will 



THE CASE OF DR. HARVEY W. WILEY, THE 

 ADVOCATE OF HONESTY IN THE PREPiHRA- 

 TION OF FOOD STUFFS, AND THE FRIEND 

 OF THE PEOPLE. 



Our readers are familiar, of course, with 

 the attempts that have been made lately to 

 oust Dr. Wiley from the position of Chief 

 Chemist of the United States — attempts that 

 may yet prove successful unless the people 

 rise up and demand his retention in a posi- 

 tion he has filled so well. Dr. Wiley has 

 been the most persistent foe of misbranded 

 and adulterated foods that this country has 

 ever known. He has, first and last and all 

 the time, been the consistent champion of 

 pure food. 



It is due to him more than to any other 

 man in the country that the national pure- 

 food law was enacted in 1906. During the 

 time that this bill was before Congress, the 

 doctor experienced all kinds of opposition, 

 and from that day to this it apjiears that 

 the "interests " that have been making rail- 

 lions on adulterated and misbranded foods 

 have been trying to discredit him Since 

 the National law was enacted a good many 

 States have passed pure-food laws to con- 

 form to the national measure. 



After the law went into effect, Dr. Wiley 

 and his associates on whom devoloved the 

 duty of interpreting the law, sought to com- 

 pel every manufacturer who had been put- 

 ting out adulterated or cheapened food prod- 

 ucts either to quit adulterating or state the 

 exact amount of adulterants on the label of 

 the packages. The general effect of this pol- 

 icy has been to drive adulteration out of the 

 country; for no one knowingly will buy poi- 

 sons or adulterations; but in the mean time 

 the big corporations, whose interests have 

 been affected, have been after Dr. Wiley. 

 He has incurred the displeasure of the blend- 

 ed-whisky peojjle because he insisted that 

 all whiskies must be properly labeled. He 

 ruled that all jireservatives in food products, 

 of an injurious character, would have to be 

 eliminated. In doing this he incurred the 

 violent opposition of the manufacturers of 

 catsups, meats, jellies, and jams, especially 

 that class who have been using benzoate of 

 soda;* but in this he was partly overruled 

 by his superiors. 



Again, if we are correct, he insisted that 

 all glucosed products should be labeled " glu- 

 cose " and not "corn syrup." The public 

 has known that glucose is a cheap syrup of 

 low sweetening power, and of doubtful food 



* It was proven in the testimony that a very small 

 amount of benzoate of soda would enable manufac- 

 turers to use partly decayed fruits, especially toma- 

 toes, for maKing catsup. It was also proven that 

 sound fruit, such as our mothers use, need no poi- 

 sonous preservative. Even granting that benzoate 

 of soda is not injurious of itself, if its use permits of 

 the use of spoiled fruit it should not be permitted. 



