1898. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



665 



Journal, he of course had not seen the rather warm discussion 

 In the bee-papers on facing comb honey, about two months 

 ago. He simply fixt it up to suit his dishonest pleasure. 



One case of the honey we saw opened had been taken by 

 a customer of Burnett & Co. without opening, and of course 

 was returned at once. 



It Is just as we said some time ago, it is wrong to face up 

 cases of honey for market, no matter to whom or where they 

 are sold. In this case, the commission man received the 

 blame, when the deception was entirely on the side of the 

 shipper. Goodness knows, the city dealers have enough sins 

 of their own to answer for without the producers trying to 

 unload their shortcomings also upon them. 



As will be seen by Mr. Doollttle's answer In the " Question 

 Box," he does not now, if he ever did, endorse the foregoing 

 method of packing comb honey for market, altho a couple of 

 months ago he seemed to think It would be all right provided 

 the honey was sold on commission, and the shipper thought it 

 to his interest to do so. We doubt if Mr. D. still holds such 

 views. We surely do not, for we are free to say we don't be- 

 lieve that, because a man may think it is right to follow a 

 certain procedure, that makes it right. Not by any means. 

 A man may think, or believe, that It's right to whip his wife, 

 or swear, or get drunk, or do anything else that is morally 

 wrong In the eyes of those who have educated consciences. 

 But his believing it right, or to his interest to do so, doesn't 

 make it so, by a long shot. 



Our advice to bee-keepers, when putting up honey for 

 market. Is to pack it honestly, so that no matter who buys it, 

 they will not feel that they have been swindled, or deceived. 



Two Departments In Gleanings in Bee-Culture 

 that have been somewhat conspicuous by their absence, are 

 beginning to appear more regularly. They are "Reports 

 'Encouraging" and " Reports Discouraging," the former tak- 

 ing up the most space. 



-.*"•-¥ 



Xlie Critic Criticised. — The Review critic, Hon. 

 R. L. Taylor, has given considerable attention to the literary 

 character of Gleanings, and the editor of Gleanings makes 

 some reply in his number for Oct. 1. He seems to think it 

 would be better for Mr. Taylor to stick to his legitimate work, 

 which Mr. Root considers to be to criticise theories and prac- 

 tices of bee-keepers, rather than infelicities of expression. 

 Mr. Root confesses he (Root) makes "slips" In writing. Is 

 thankful to have them pointed out, and thinks the apprecia- 

 tion would be more, and the profit as much, if they were 

 pointed out privately. 



Mr. Taylor having said that "helpful criticism is more 

 than meat and drink " to himself, Mr. Root thinks such things 

 out of place In a bee-paper, but since Mr. Taylor thrives on 

 that sort of diet, he gives him some, instancing Mr. Taylor's 

 saying " would " for " should," and " earliest " for " earlier." 

 He thinks if Mr. T. had a late dictionary he would not object 

 to " boil " in the phrase " bring to a boll ;" thinks the crimson 

 fluid from Mr. Taylor's sympathetic heart would not have 

 suffused his cheeks at the use of " canine " for " dog " If he 

 had consulted the Standard dictionary; hints that Mr. Taylor 

 has been naming words slang that are only colloquialisms; 

 and greatly enjoys Mr. Taylor's criticisms when confined to 

 theories and practices of beekeepers, but doesn't like being 

 taken to task for opinions he doesn't hold. 



We, also, enjoy reading Mr. Taylor's writings on practical 

 bee-keeping, but fully agree with Mr. Root's idea, that criti- 

 cisms of the language used by correspondents properly belong 

 to a purely literary periodical, and not to a bee-paper. While 

 we endeavor to have the English language used correctly in 

 this journal, we do not hold it up as a model, or expect any 

 reader so to regard it. Our aim is to have everything In it so 



plainly exprest, that even the youngest or dullest reader may 

 understand It. Then we are certain the oldest and most 

 learned will comprehend it all. 



-*-.-# 



Puttingr Comb Honey in Tumblers.— This 

 matter was brought up at the Omaha convention, and Editor 

 Root refers to it in the following paragraph from Gleanings 

 for Oct. 1 : 



During one of the discussions at Omaha, the practice of 

 putting up broken comb honey in tumblers by bee-keepers 

 was most severely condemned, for the reason that glucose- 

 mixers put a little chunk of comb honey into a tumbler of glu- 

 cose, and then labeled It "Pure Honey." This latter, going 

 out into the markets, disgusted consumers, and they naturally 

 think that, if honey tastes that way, they want no more of it. 

 It was urged that some good bee-keepers practiced putting up 

 broken comb honey In tumblers. But that made no differ- 

 ence ; they should be severely scored by the bee-keepers. 

 They could put up their broken comb honey in tin pails ; but 

 even then it was urged that they sell it around home. I think, 

 myself, that no bee-keeper should put up his broken comb in 

 tumblers, for the very reason that such a package is at once 

 suggestive of glucose. 



As we desire to emphasize the importance of the above 

 suggestion, we have reproduced this paragraph. Invariably, 

 in the Chicago market, when we find a tumbler or other glass 

 package with a piece of comb honey in it, the liquid part is 

 glucose, pure and simple. And it is most villainous stuff to 

 eat. Just the smallest taste is enough to sicken us. No 

 wonder civilized people, who purchase such a vile thing, at 

 once decide that "if honey tastes that way they want no more 

 of it." And then of course they fear trying again, when they 

 are offered the purest honey. So it goes ; and so It will con- 

 tinue to go until pure food laws are everywhere enacted and 

 vigorously enforced. 



Mr. J. Kerr, in the Australian Bee Bulletin, strongly 

 maintains that bees recognize and distinguish members of 

 their own colony from Intruders by sight, and not by sense of 

 smell as generally believed. — American Bee-Keeper. 



Mr. 6. G. WiCKSON, of the firm of G. G. WIckson & Co., 

 of California, called on us last week. Mr. WIckson's firm 

 deals in bee-supplies as well as goods In other lines, especially 

 farm and dairy implements. They have stores in three cities 

 on the Pacific Coast. Mr. W. has 150 colonies of bees in a 

 new house-apiary made to hold 300 colonies. He is a pleas- 

 ant, business-like gentleman, and evidently Is " cutting a wide 

 swath" in the lines he represents. 



Dr. a. B. Mason, Secretary of the United States Bee- 

 Keepers" Union, wrote us Oct. 11 : 



" I have been so busy since I got home [from the Omaha 

 convention] that I am behind with everything but my dental 

 work. I have not lookt at my bees, except one colony, since 

 a week before going to Omaha, and don't know whether they 

 have plenty of stores or are starving. The supers are all on 

 yet, there being so much honey-dew that I don't care if 1 don't 

 get time to extract it." 



Editor W. Z. Hutchinson, of the Bee-Keepers' Review, 

 made us a very pleasant call, Tuesday, O^it. 11, when on his 

 homeward journey from the fair at St. Louis, where he made 

 the final exhibit for the year. He went there from the Illinois 

 State Fair at Springfield, where he secured a number of cash 

 premiums, as noted In these columns last week. At St. Louis 

 he also captured a goodly lot of the premiums offered In the 

 apiarian department of the fair. Mr. Hutchinson thought 

 perhaps this might be his last year exhibiting at the fairs, as 

 the Review is getting in such condition financially as not to 

 necessitate his making the rounds of the fairs in order to win 



