824 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



giving his "opinion " on the Bill — that 

 it was unconstitutional, and should be 

 "fought to the end" vigorously. 



Mr. Joseph G. Banning, President of 

 the Missouri State Bee-Keepers' Associa- 

 tion, also appealed to the Manager of 

 the Union, and was instructed to light 

 the Bill at every step — that the Union 

 would "see him through," etc. If it 

 had passed both houses, then the Gov- 

 ernor would have been appealed to, and 

 would in all probability have vetoed it. 

 President Banning afterwards wrote me 

 thus: "I thank you for your prompt 

 assistance." It was the prompt action 

 taken by the Union which brought this 

 foolishness to a stop, saved the State 

 from disgrace, and prevented the bee- 

 keepers from being annoyed by useless 

 legislature. 



The members of the Legislature re- 

 ceived the Bill from the Senate, and 

 promptly killed it, for they had been 

 " posted " by the printed matter of the 

 Bee-Keepers' Union ! The enemies of 

 our pursuit were foiled, and the Union 

 stuck another "feather in its cap." 



The Sugar-Honey Heresy. 



This " dogma " stirred up such a 

 furore in the early part of the year, that 

 the Manager of the Union received a 

 shower of letters in condemnation of 

 the " heresy." It was promptly met by 

 the promise of the Manager to " prose- 

 cute to the full extent of the law any 

 who may dare to offer for sale as honey 

 any of that sugar-syrup swindle." 



He stated publicly that consumers 

 must not be trifled with. Their butter 

 must be made from pure cow's milk, 

 and their honey must be pure nectar 

 from the flowers ! " Sugar-syrup " must 

 be sold under that name — not honey; 

 just as the law requires oleomargarine 

 to be sold under its proper name — not 

 butter. 



Bees and Peaches and Grapes. 



Mr. J. A. Pearce, of Grand Rapids, 

 Mich., was threatened by 25 peach- 

 growers, stating that his bees were eat- 

 ing their peaches. All nature was 

 perishing for want of moisture, and 

 some insects (bugs, beetles, etc.) had 

 appropriated the juice of a few cracked 

 peaches and grapes, and all was charged 

 to the bees. 



The kicking peach-growers were sup- 

 plied with the Arkansas decision that 

 bees were not a "nuisance" per se, and 

 that bee-keepers could and should be 

 protected in their rights. Upon finding 



out the legal status of the affair, they 

 subsided. 



To show that the bees are wrongly 

 accused in these matters, and that they 

 do not break the skins of fruit, I refer 

 to the following Report lately published 

 in many rural and metropolitan papers : 



" Exhaustive experiments have been con- 

 ducted under the auspices of the depart- 

 ment of agriculture to decide if the honey- 

 bees are deserving of the severe condemna- 

 tion received in some quarters from fruit- 

 growers. Neither care nor expense was 

 withheld. Hives were kept within a build- 

 ing from which the bees could not escape. 

 In this grapes, peaches, pears and plums, 

 varying from green to dead ripe, were 

 placed. The bees were deprived of food, 

 and left with the fruit exposed. Many came 

 to the fruit, but never broke the skin ; but 

 when they found it broken they fed upon 

 the exuding juice. They showed no ten- 

 dency to use their jaws in cutting open a 

 place. 



" The test lasted 30 days ; other bees were 

 tried with similar results. In all cases food 

 was taken only from fruit which had been 

 previously broken. Consequently it ap- 

 pears that bees will not injure sound fruit. 

 Professor Pan ton, of the Ontario Agricul- 

 tural College, says that this is what might 

 have been expected when the structure of 

 the bee's mouth is considered. It is quite 

 different in the case of wasps, which are 

 supplied with jaws suitable to break into 

 the skin, and in all probability they are the 

 cause of the injured fruit upon which com- 

 plaining observers have seen bees feeding." 



Mr. G. B. Woodberry, of Calif., was 

 also threatened by fruit-growers for 

 keeping bees in that locality. He ap- 

 pealed to the Union, and was supplied 

 with the Arkansas " gun," to use upon 

 the Board of Supervisors. 



On Dec. 5, 1893, Mr. G. W. Brodbeck 

 wrote to the Manager, giving the result 

 as follows : 



"The Woodberry trouble has quieted 

 down, at least for the present. The Super- 

 visors instructed the District Attorney to 

 look-up the decisions rendered, as given in 

 the Bee-Keepers' Union Report. He did so, 

 and concluded that it would not be wise to 

 incite or aid in antagonizing one industry 

 against another. So we trust that the in- 

 fluence of the Union will be effectual." 



Unfinished Business. 



Several cases in Wisconsin, Iowa, 

 New York, Canada, Nebraska, Te.xas, 

 Colorado, and elsewhere are under way, 

 and it would not be wisdom to publish 

 anything about them now. Several of 

 these, it is thought, will be necessarily 

 carried to the Supreme Courts — thus to 

 compel the highest tribunals to give bee- 

 keepers iheir rights. More anon. 



