10 



THE AMERICAN APICULTVRIST. 



I am directly concerned, and which 

 I must touch upon here, invoh'ing 



THE AMENITIES OF APIARIAN 

 JOURNALISM. 



In the October number of the 

 "Apiculturist " appeared an article 

 by our Canadian friend, Mr. S. Cor- 

 nell on " Improprieties in Journalism" 

 which I read with mingled feelings 

 of pain and surprise. In that article 

 the American Bee Joui-nal is ar- 

 raigned for mutilating an article on 

 " Apiculture," which it copied from 

 the Popular Science Monthly, and 

 also articles on " Foul Brood " which 

 were alleged to have been copied 

 from the British Bee Journal. I 

 noticed at the time that the American 

 Bee Journal had republished my ar- 

 ticle on " Apiculture " from the Pop- 

 ular Science Monthly, but was not 

 aware of the " alterations, elisions 

 and additions " made by the Journal 

 until I read Mr. Corneil's article, and 

 my thanks are due to him for directing 

 my attention thereto. Either from 

 over-confidence in the Journal, or 

 pressure of work, or both, I neglected 

 to go over the article at all. And 

 even now, my confidence in Mr. 

 Corneil's veracity and accuracy is 

 such that I have not taken the time 

 and trouble to hunt up the articles, 

 compare them and verify the state- 

 ments. 



Assuming them to be correct, I 

 must here enter my protest against 

 the act of the American Bee Journal 

 in thus mutilating my article. There 

 are in all it seems about twenty 

 changes made and, as Mr. C. very 

 truly remarks, this is "unjust to the 

 writer of the article, unjust to the pub- 



lisher and deception practised upon 

 readers." Of course we knowthat edi- 

 tors frequently take the liberty of 

 abbreviating articles in manuscript, 

 making elisions, and of altering words 

 and phrases by way of correction, 

 and this prerogative is freely conceded 

 to them under certain circumstances ; 

 in such cases, for instance, as where 

 the composition is defective in gram- 

 mar, in spelling, etc., or where slan- 

 der or personalities are indulged. 

 But this is a very different matter from 

 garbling an article from a standard 

 magazine to suit the editor's own 

 whims, caprices, or prejudices. The 

 article on " Apiculture " needed no 

 correction either in "manner, matter, 

 or form " at the hands of the A. B. 

 J. If it was good enough for a mag- 

 azine of the character and literary 

 status o f the Popular Science Monthly , 

 it ought surely to pass for the columns 

 of the^. ^./. 



Under these circumstances, I am 

 justified in stating here that not one 

 word of the original manuscript of 

 that article was changed by the edi- 

 tors of the Popular Scie7ice Monthly, 

 by way of correction or otherwise. 



THE PAST SEASON 



Has not been, on the whole, favor- 

 able in this country for honey se- 

 cretion and gathering, and, as a 

 consequence, the crop is short. The 

 early part of the season and the latter 

 part, too, were too cool and wet for 

 honey. INIy own crop was mostly 

 gathered in July and the last week 

 or ten days in June. As to buck- 

 wheat honey there is next to none 

 here this season, while in 1884 it 

 constituted one-third of the crops. 



