922 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



operation of the national net-weight law as 

 applied to comb honey, and at the same time 

 show up the inconsistency of applying the 

 ruling one way in weighing in the wrapping 

 around hams and applying the ruling in 

 another way in eliminating the wood or 

 section around comb honey. We have re- 

 plied by saying that it would be about as 

 useless to oppose the ruling of the Commit- 

 tee in the Bureau of Chemistry regarding 

 the operation of the net-weight law as it 

 would be to butt our head up against a stone 

 wall. As a matter of fact we did file our 

 protest, but it did no good. Perhaps there 

 would be no objection in showing up the 

 inconsistency, or what appears to be such, 

 of applying the ruling one way with regard 

 to one food product and an entirely different 

 way in regard to another. While it is true 

 the Committee did not make the net-weight 

 law, that Committee, until the courts pass 

 on it, has interpreted its scope. In the 

 mean time it would be a little dangerous for 

 most of us to go contrary to its interpreta- 

 tion, even though there is an apparent in- 

 consistency in the way the ruling has been 

 applied. By complying we show good faith 

 on our part. 



No matter what the outcome, we do not 

 think the operation of the net-weight law 

 will entail any great hardship. If we can 

 only make up our minds to comply with it 

 (and we do not see but we shall have to, 

 whether we wish to or not), we shall find 

 that its effect will be no gTeat hardship. 

 That the law as interpreted by the Commit- 

 tee is causing some inconvenience there can 

 be no doubt. There must necessarily be a 

 readjustment, and it will take time to get 

 that under way. 



In the mean time Gleanings has coun- 

 seled its readers to " get into the band- 

 wagon," as we see no other alternative 

 except fine and imprisonment. When Uncle 

 Sam begins to make arrests (which he 

 doubtless will do later on) we will wake up 

 when it is too late, and our idea all along 

 has been that it would be better to comply 

 with the ruling until the courts set it aside, 

 and that is not impossible. 



The R. A. Burnett Co., of Chicago, are 

 probably among the largest dealers in comb 

 honey in the United States. This company 

 does not complain about the law, but rather 

 of the bungling way in which it is being 

 carried into effect. Here is what Mr. R. A. 

 Burnett says : 



The marking of weights on the wood frame is 

 causing retailers no end of trouble. To begin with, 

 the apiarist does not succeed in having them clearly 

 stamped in all instances. The majority of them use 

 too much ink, and it blots so that a "3" and an "8" 

 are almost indistinguishable, as are some of the 

 other figures. Then when they pack the honey in 



cases they put heavy and light weights in the same 

 case, so that the retailer buying a case of honey by 

 weight finds there are sections running from 10 oz. 

 to 19 oz. in the same case. Such a case is now 

 before us. 



We reason that the beekeeper thought it unneces- 

 sary to put frames of equal weight in a case, for 

 the reason they were marked on the wood; but when 

 the marking is blurred and the average clerk does 

 not note the difference in a frame that is well filled 

 and one that is not, it makes errors both for and 

 against all parties concerned. There has been so 

 much of that this fall that our salesmen deplore the 

 marking on said frames. They are often incorrect, 

 but mostly they are understamped as to weight. The 

 remedy, in our mind, is to grade the sections before 

 casing, so that there would not be over an ounce of 

 difference in any of the sections. This could be done 

 at the time of weighing by having a place on the 

 bench for the different weights to be set, so that 

 when they were cased it w'ould not be necessary to 

 do any more handling than was occasioned by the 

 first placing. Of course, all changes of an arbitrary 

 nature cause many people to make innocent mistakes 

 which result in trouble of a rather serious nature in 

 many instances. 



Chicago, 111., Nov. 5. R. A. Buenett. 



Producers and dealers alike should be 

 careful not to use an ink-jiad that is too 

 ivet. Use a common blotter, and absorb the 

 surplus moisture before using the stamp. 



By all means sort and grade honey ac- 

 cording to weight. We are doing it right 

 along, and find nothing difficult about it. 

 Said the foreman of our honey department, 

 Mr. Gayer, " The net-weight law is causing 

 us no inconvenience worth mentioning." 

 The reason of this is because every section is 

 graded and marked according to its weight. 

 Each section of a certain weight, or within 

 an ounce of a certain weight, is put in a 

 pile by itself, after which the several piles 

 are cased. Any producer or dealer who will 

 put honey of different weights in the same 

 case, and try to market it, will soon find out 

 his mistake. If he continues such foolish- 

 ness he will have to quit the comb-honey 

 business. 



It is an intolerable nuisance to have the 

 honey improperly marked, and then all 

 mixed up in one case. Producers and deal- 

 ers may rest assured that the buyer will go 

 elsewhere rather than to run any risk. 



=cage Method 



Some two or three years ago, notably on 

 pages 554 and 761 for Gleanings, 1911, 

 and again, pages 762 for 1912, there was 

 considerable discussion over the method of 

 introducing a queen by liberating her on a 

 comb and then immediately shutting her in 

 on a small area of one of the combs under 

 a hollow square of wire cloth, the wire cloth 

 being pushed down into the comb clear to 



