I8y8 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



325 



advice on the course to be pursued, sending the Union's docu- 

 ments to be scattered among the interested parties. Mean- 

 while the Advisory Biard decided that the Union should take 

 part in Mr. Buchheim's defense. It is expected that the ap- 

 peal to the Supreme Court will be heard in a short time, when 

 a lively time will be given to the enemies of the pursuit. 



ABE BEE.S A NUISANCE ? 



F. H. Hunt, of Redlands, Calif., has been sued by W. F. 

 Whittier for damages, and prays for an injunction restraining 

 him from keeping bees within one mile of his land, claiming 

 that the bees befoul the water used for irrigating and domes- 

 tic purposes, also sting men who work in the adjoining field to 

 the apiary. Mr. Hunt's apiary was located there before Mr. 

 Whittier planted his orchard, and should have prior right to 

 the location — if there is to be any preference. 



We have corresponded with the attorney in charge of the 

 defense, and have given all the aid in our power, stating many 

 points of law relative to the rights of bee-keepers, and fur- 

 nlsht him with the Union's ammunition, printed arguments 

 and decision of the Supreme Court of Arkansas, etc. The 

 trial is to come off on Jan. 12, 1898, and we hope will be 

 another victory for the rights of apiarists. 



This case is of unusual interest, for many California api- 

 arists are in danger of similar lawsuits instigated by fruit-men 

 who are sworn enemies of the pursuit. 



Thomas G. Newman, Oeneral Manager. 



2096 Market St., Sap Francisco, Calif. 



[While we are a little late in publishing the foregoing 

 report, it nevertheless will be interesting reading, as it shows 

 what the National Bee-Keepers' Union did during the year 

 1897. But we are now enabled, by the delay, to show our 

 readers — many of whom are Mr. Newman's old friends — a 

 reproduction of his latest photograph, which, to us, seems to 

 Indicate that his residence in California has not tended to im- 

 prove his health very much. — Editor.] 



Proceedings of the Colorado State Convention. 



REPORTED BY F. L. THOMPSON. 



IContlnued from page 310 1 



Tlic Honey-Industry in Colorado. 



It seems that some member of the Horticultural Associa- 

 tion lately claimed that our spraying law could not be enforced, 

 and added something to the effect that bee-keeping was of 

 small importance. I do not know who the man was, except 

 that he was some Western slope man, and do not know his 

 exact words. 



I will consider his last assertion or implication first. Our 

 Secretary has fairly reliable data to show that last year's pro- 

 duct of the Eastern slope alone in comb honey was aljout 

 1,000,000 pound sections. I learn on good authority that 

 Orand Junction sent out six carloads, and that the other por- 

 tions of the Western slope sent out not less than six more, 

 making 12 in all, or 240,000 pounds. Let us call the net 

 gain on comb honey 5 cents a pound. That Is surely low 

 •enough. Then 1,240,000 pounds of comb honey at 5 cents a 

 pound represents a net gain to the State of .$62,000. I do 

 not know how much extracted honey was produced ; doubtless 

 several hundred thousand pounds. 



VALUE OF HONEY. 



The farm honey of the Western slope is also not included 

 In the above estimate. All in all, the lowest estimate of the 

 ■direct cash value of the honey-industry cannot be less than 

 $70,000. But this is only half the story. R. L. Taylor, of 

 Michigan, who was director of the Apicultural Experiment 

 Station for several years, stated that the benefits arising from 

 the cross-fertilization of blossoms by bees are worth more to 

 the people at large than the cash value of the honey itself. He 

 Js a horticulturist as well as a bee-keeper. I have never seen 



that statement contradicted ; and, indeed, I do not suppose it 

 can be, as many proofs show that such benefits are great, not 

 only to the fruit-men, but also to gardeners and farmers. We 

 might, then, modestly place the value of apiculture at .f 140,- 

 000; but let us be very modest and say $100,000. Perhaps 

 my intellect is very feeble, but I really am unable to see that 

 an industry worth .$100,000 is of small importance. 



I know nothing of the comparative value of the fruit- 

 industry ; but we know that It has a Horticultural Board, 

 whose mileage expenses are paid by the State, a Secretary 

 with a salary of $1,000, two rooms in the Capitol, a library, 

 a number of display cases, appropriate furniture, a high 

 grade typewriter, stationery, etc.; possibly, on the whole, an 

 annual expense of .$1,500 to the State. Now, if the fruit-in- 

 dustry is worth $100,000 to the State, why do we not get 

 $1,500? If it is worth $200,000 to the State, why do we 

 not get $750? If it is worth $500,000, why do we not get 

 $300 ? We have a few county inspectors, but the fruit peo- 

 ple have theirs, too, except for the publication of our annual 

 report, we get nothing from the State. 



SEEMING INJUSTICE. 



The truth of the matter seems to be that our legislators 

 being only disposed to appropriate so much anyhow to indus- 

 tries benefiting the State, a few conceive it is to the interest 

 of the industries already represented to keep others out, be- 

 cause every new sharer means a less share to each one. But 

 if this is the case, I would recommend to those who discuss 

 the matter to first recognize statistics to some extent. We 

 bee-keepers may not be politicians, as some are, but we can 

 see the sun at noonday ; and If such motives peep out they 

 put ideas in our heads that otherwise we might not have en- 

 tertained. Injustice arouses a keener desire for justice. 

 Judging by what the the fruit-industry receives, what ought 

 another rural industry, contributing as do all rural pursuits 

 to the health of the Nation, not only physically, but morally 

 ae well, to have a State appropriation when it reaches the 

 value of .$100,000? A room In the Capitol, expenses for dis- 

 plays both in and out of the State, advertisement of the value 

 of honey as a far healthier food than cane-sugar or commer- 

 cial glucose, this feature alone being worth more to the State 

 than the whole would cost; a library, an executive adminis- 

 tration, either independently or in connection with the Horti- 

 cultural Board, and a remuneration for the exceedingly neces- 

 sary and valuable services of a Secretary, which shall be in 

 just proportion to that received by similar officials. 



VALUELESS LAND USED. 



Let us now suppose that the fruit-industry should be said 

 to be worth some fixt sum of money to the State, such an esti- 

 mate being based on the net value of the fruit alone. It has 

 been suggested to me that if that were the only base of calcu- 

 lation, the result would be incorrect. The industry would 

 really be worth less. For, as a rule, horticulture takes the 

 best farming land — land that might have been put in grain, 

 hay or potatoes ; so that the real value of the horticultural 

 industry, as such, is not represented by the net value of the 

 crop, but by the difference in value between the fruit and the 

 staple which might have been raised on the land the fruit- 

 trees occupy. This will cut down considerably whatever 

 figure may be assigned to horticulture, based on the net value 

 of fruit; and this net value may so-netimes be less than noth- 

 ing, especially in the case of perishable fruit. Two producers 

 of peaches at Montrose got back only enough to pay for the 

 boxes. 



On the other hand, estimates of the value of the honey- 

 industry are influenced by no such_ consideration. Apiaries 

 occupy an exceedingly small portion of land ; and this land 

 need not be, and generally is not, of any particular value for 

 other purposes. Not only so, but the product is a spontaneous 

 one in the form of floral nectar, which would utterly go to 

 waste if not for the bees. The value of honey is a clear gain 

 to the State, and, finally, what is not generally understood, 

 honey is as valuable an article of diet as fruit, and should be 

 as plentifully used. Being concentrated, it is one of our 

 cheapest foods. It is not merely to be regarded from the 

 chemical point of view as one of the sugars, but from a hy- 

 gienic standpoint it Is already what the other sugars have to 

 be reduced to before they can be assimilated, thus saving the 

 wear and tear of the system and the tendency to Bright's dis- 

 ease and kindred disorders which the free use of cane-sugar 

 in modern times is causing. The muscular energy which 

 science has discovered to be the result of sugar as food can be 

 obtained in no safer way than by eating honey. It follows 

 that the Industry of honey-production Is Intrinsically valuable, 

 as substituting a cheap and wholesome article for other more 

 or less harmful members for an essential class of foods. 



