358 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



his favor, either by the ignorance or 

 prejudice of a jury, other bee-lseepers 

 would be likely to be sued to recover 

 damages done to pastures, vineyards, 

 and gardens by bees ; and any one 

 owning a few square rods of land, 

 devoted to almost any purpose, may 

 try to recover damages from all the 

 owners of bees in the vicinity. 



As soon as this Union was formed, 

 I made the necessary preparations to 

 defend this sheep-bees case. Among 

 otlier things I wrote to Messrs. Dem- 

 aree and Pond, as both were lawyers 

 as well as bee-keepers, to know upon 

 what terms they would undertake tlie 

 defense of the case. Mr. Demaree 

 responded that it would be difficult 

 for him to leave his home at the time 

 mentioned, but if it was deemed 

 essential, he would do so ; but sug- 

 gested that the case might be studied 

 by Mr. Pond and others, and " points 

 of law " might be written out for use 

 by the local attorneys, and it would 

 be less expensive and do just as well 

 as to take the more expensive method. 



Mr. Pond replied that if it was 

 deemed necessary he would go to 

 Wisconsin and conduct the case, but 

 that he did not think tlie Union could 

 afford to employ him, and pay the 

 necessary traveling expenses. lie 

 said that he could not afford to do it 

 for less than " day-pay" for the time 

 occupied in coming and going, etc. 



After consulting with the Executive 

 Committee, I concluded to employ 

 local attorneys, and have Messrs. 

 Demaree and Pond review the case, 

 examine the authorities, and write 

 out " points of law " for use at the 

 trial. 



This arrangement was made, and 

 the " briefs " were prepared and sent 

 to me ; several other lawyers also 

 prepared " briefs " and presented them 

 to the Union. These were all sent to 

 the local attorneys for use at the trial. 



I paid SoO each to the two local 

 attorneys, $25 to Mr. Pond, and $6 

 for court fees. Mr. Demaree gener- 

 ously donated his "brief" to the 

 " Union Defense Fund." 



The Judge made a thorough ex- 

 amination of the laws of the State, 

 and concluded that their existed no 

 laws or rulings upon which he could 

 instruct the jury; and thus ended 

 that case. 



The Union made such a stir in the 

 matter, showing such lighting en- 

 thusiasm among bee-keepers, that 

 there would have been a lively time 

 had there been a trial on, the merits 

 of the case. 



In Calitornia, a suit has been tried 

 in a Justices Court against Mr. 13olin, 

 for alleged damage done to grapes by 

 his bees. This suit was lost )n the 

 lower court, because witnesses were 

 obtained who testified that they had 

 seen the perforation and destruction 

 of the grapes done by Mr. Bolm's 

 bees. In vain did tlie defendant's 

 attorneys prove by a score of wit- 

 nesses that the bee's tongue could 

 only be used to extract sweets from 

 the flowers— not to bore after them. 

 The evidence of the eye-witnesses of 

 the i)laiiitilf had weight with the 

 jury, and they accordingly returned a 

 verdict against the defendant for $75 



and costs of suit, which amount to 

 over $60. The damages claimed were 

 $299. 



The Xational Bee-Keepers' Union 

 advised Mr. Holin to appeal from the 

 decision of the Justice's Court, and 

 assured him that the Union would 

 stand by him, and aid in the appeal 

 by sending money, obtaining legal 

 advice, depositions from scientific ex- 

 perts as to the incapability of bees to 

 puncture grapes, etc. The appeal was 

 taken and again lost. The represen- 

 tative of the Union in San Bernardino 

 wrote as follows concerning this trial: 



" The case occupied the Superior 

 Corrt for live days, there being about 

 twenty witnesses on both sides. The 

 jury retired on the evening of the 

 fifth day, and on the morning of the 

 sixth brought in a verdict in favor of 

 the plaintiff for the sum of $25 and 

 costs of suit. A very strong defense 

 was made, and had it not been for 

 what we claim a mis-instruction of 

 the court, we would have won the case. 

 The jury asked to be instructed by 

 the court the meaning of the words 

 " willful " and " negligence," and in 

 defining the latter is where the error, 

 we claim, was committed, taking the 

 facts from the province of the jury. 

 Mr. Bohn has asked for a new trial." 



As Manager I have been appealed to 

 for advice and encouragement in 

 settling disputes relative to the inter- 

 ests of bee-keepers, and their rights 

 under existing law, and I have cheer- 

 fully given the necessary time and 

 attention to these cases, and obtained 

 legal advice in order to "defend (fee 

 rights of bee-keepers" against jealous 

 or envious neighbors. 



In January, as Manager of the 

 National Bee-Keepers' Union, I served 

 a notice on the Rev. Robert West, 

 editor of the Advance, to either pub- 

 lish a retraction of his false state- 

 ments relative to the manufacture of 

 comb, filling it witii glucose, and 

 deftly " capping the so-called honey- 

 cells by machinery " — or take the 

 consequences of a law suit. After 

 much squirming, he published a re- 

 traction, saying : " We were misled 

 by what seemedto be good authority." 



In the case of Mr. Freeborn, we are 

 well aware that the bees did not 

 annoy or damage the sheep as 

 claimed. In the case of Mr. Bohn it 

 has been shown that the bees cannot 

 puncture sound grapes, and that they 

 did no damage to the raisin industry. 

 These cases grew out of the jealousy 

 and ill-will of neighbors, and the bee- 

 keepers should be defended in their 

 rights, in the interest of the pursuit 

 in general. 



A few cases have been noted where 

 the bees were a real annoyance and 

 in jury \o neighbors— in all such cases 

 it'is but just and right that the bees 

 should be removed when a com- 

 promise cannot be otherwise effected. 



THE BEE-KEEPBKS OF AMERICA 



should lose no time in joining an 

 organization created fiu' the purpose 

 of defending the rights and protect- 

 ing the interests of l)ee-keepert. 

 AVhere lliere has been only hundreds 

 during the past year, there should 

 have been thousands. It has to some 



extent been a trial year— an experi- 

 ment. It has proven a success even 

 with a small membership. Now let 

 us all co-operate, and, if necessary, 

 maintain our rights as bee-keepers in 

 the highest courts of the land? That 

 can be done only by having sutficient 

 money to defray the expenses, and 

 such are usually high. This will be a 

 small matter, if all will bear their 

 part of the burden. One thousand 

 dollars of expenses when divided 

 among 1,000 persons, is only a 

 dollar for each, and can easily be 

 borne ; but when one has to pay it all, 

 it becomes a heavy burden; and, to 

 many, one that would be impossible 

 to bear. United effort is essential to 

 successfully defend our chosen pur- 

 suit ! If we can raise a column of 

 patriots sufficiently strong to present 

 a formidable front, we shall dare the 

 envious ones to " bring on their law- 

 suits," and by " an imposing array " 

 and " unbroken front," gain a lasting 

 and permanent victory ! 



It is with considerable satisfaction 

 that I submit to the members of the 

 Union the following 



FINANCIAL STATEMENT. 



There are 324 members in the 

 Union, and there has been one assess- 

 ment of $1 each for the Defense 

 Fund, making $324; and 2-5 cents each 

 for the (General Fund, for printing, 

 stamps and stationery, amounting to 

 $81.00. Total receipts, $405.00. 



The expenditures on defense ac- 

 count were for legal expenses and 

 fees in the Freeborn case, $131 ; in 

 the Bohn case, $118.75; leaving a 

 balance in the treasury on June 1, 

 1886, of $74.25. 



The disbursements from the General 

 Fund for printing, stamps and station- 

 ery, have amounted to $66.00, leaving 

 a balance of $15 in the treasury. 

 ****** 



As I stated a year ago, I neither 

 sought nor desired the office of 

 Manager, and accepted it as a duty. I 

 have done my best for the interest of 

 tlie Union, and am both ready and 

 willing to transfer the office to my 

 successor as soon as such is elected. 

 Fraternally, 



Thomas G. Newman, 



General Manager. 



Read lit the N. Y. State Convention. 



Mm of a New York Bee-Keeper. 



WM. F. CLARKE. 



A New York bee-keeper, whose 

 native modesty forbids his name ap- 

 pearing in print, has favored me with 

 some notes of his "midnight mus- 

 ings." as he calls them, and I have 

 permission to utilize them in any way 

 calculated to advance the interests of 

 bee-keeping. It may be premised 

 that he is a firm believer in reversible 

 frames, out-door wintering, and hiber- 

 iiiitiou. I have much pleasure in 

 voicing some of these musings and 

 enabling my (|uiet correspondent to 

 whisper audibly for the benefit of 

 bee-keepers generally. He is evi- 

 dently impressed with the duty of 



