Oct. 19, 1899. 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



661 



of Missouri, which makes it a criminal offence to sell any 

 article intended for human food which contains arsenic, 

 calomel, bismuth, ammonia or alum — a verj' gfood law, per- 

 haps, if it had not been in the interest of some one's bak- 

 ing-powder. The same legislature let a duplicate of the 

 Brosius pure-food law die in the hands of a committee. 

 Why did not the Illinois law specify honey or apiarian pro- 

 ducts ? Simply because the politicians have not felt the 

 necessity of throwing taffy to the honey-producers as a 

 class. 



Let us away with this kind of nonsense; let us have 

 done with this political jobbery ; let us enact a national 

 pure-food law in the interest of the consumer, and not for 

 the benefit of any class of producers, let them be few or 

 many. Let us as a nation declare that it is a crime to adul- 

 terate, to falsely brand, to sell anything for what it is not. 

 If this lowers prices, let them go down. If it raises prices, 

 let them go up. Any business that cannot live in the face 

 of honest competition deserves to die. The honey-producer 

 has nothing to fear from the competition of any article or 

 compound that is sold for what it is, and does not carry a 

 lie on its face. There is great need for education along this 

 line. The moral sense of mankind must be awakened, and 

 they must be made to feel that to knowingly sell falsely- 

 branded or adulterated goods is to commit a crime, morally 

 if not legally. I have here an illustration of such criminal 

 work in the shape of a jar of so-called honey. It is labeled 

 "Kellogg's Pure White Clover Honey, Medina, O." 



I remonstrated with a dealer in our city about selling 

 adulterated honey. , He said it was nothing to him, that he 

 would sell a man mud if he wanted it. I said, " So would 

 I, but I would not sell him mud when he askt for honey," 

 neither would I sell him two parts glucose and one of honey 

 which some unscrupulous mixers had labeled " Kellogg's 

 Pure Clover Honey," for honey ; for it is not honey, and 

 the man who labeled it honey knew the label was a lie 

 when he put it on, if he ever thought enough about what 

 constitutes a lie to understand the real facts in the case. To 

 take a man's money for a mixture of glucose and honey 

 when he asks for honey is obtaining money under false pre- 

 tenses just as much as it is to give a check on a bank when 

 one never had any money deposited there. They send men 

 to the penitentiary for the latter ; why should not the same 

 penalty be inflicted for the former crime ? Will some hon- 

 est (!) mixer please rise up and explain ? 



There seems to me but one way to get at the root of this 

 evil, and that is by a national law making it a criminal 

 offence to adulterate or misbrand any food or drug in any 

 territory of the United States and the District of Columbia 

 for interstate commerce or exportation, and then let each 

 State pass a law of the same kind to reach the cases within 

 its own borders. Of course, you understand that the United 

 States cannot regulate the manipulation and sale of food 

 and drug products in the various States of the Union, but it 

 can control the matter in territories for interstate com- 

 merce, and when the goods are intended for a foreign 

 market. 



Now, what are the prospects of such national legisla- 

 tion as I have suggested ? I may say, in a word, that the 

 outlook for the passage of such a law is very good indeed, 

 and the most important thing for us as bee-keepers and 

 citizens of the United States is to see to it that our influence 

 goes to help forward the work of securing the enactment of 

 such a law, and that we do not waste any of our energies 

 on side-issues gotten up to promote the political interests of 

 some individual. 



During the summer I have noticed a good deal said 

 about Senator Mason and his pure-food committee. The 

 Senator was reported to have said that great pressure was 

 being brought to bear on him to get him to stop his investi- 

 gations, etc. Now, I want to say just here, that I have not 

 been quite sure that I knew why those investigations were 

 instituted, or where Senator Mason got the idea that there 

 would not be any Pure-Food Bill past by the next Congress 

 unless he drafted one and pusht it thru. What is the use of 

 wasting time and the people's money to prove the fact of 

 adulteration ? Why was it necessary to take Prof. Wiley, 

 the United States chemist, half way across the continent 

 to tell a committee what he knew about food adulteration ? 

 He had long before told all he needed to tell on the subject 

 before an intelligent congress of some of the best citizens 

 of the country, which congress met in the national capital, 

 and whose proceedings had been publisht and were accessi- 

 ble to Senator Mason or anybody else. Why should the 

 work of this body be ignored and a political junketing com- 

 mittee be created to prove the fact that food is adulterated ? 

 It is like spending money to prove the fact that the sun 



shines, or that water does not naturally run uphill. Every- 

 body who has given the subject a moment's thought knows 

 that food and drugs are openly and wickedly adulterated, 

 and the evidence of it can be found in any village or city of 

 the United States. The main thing now is, to find a way 

 to stop it, and I think this way will be found, even tho Sen- 

 ator Mason should stop his fight in order that his son might 

 draw the fat salary that one of the Chicago papers said he 

 had been offered. 



We do not need any new evidence, we do not need any 

 new Bill, we only need that every lover of truth and com- 

 mon honesty go to work and .see to it that the Pure-Food 

 Bill which has the endorsement of the National Pure Food 

 and Drug Congress, and which is known as the " Brosius 

 Bill,." becomes a law during the session of the next Congress. 

 This Bill has the endorsement of some of the best men in 

 the Nation, was carefully considered by the Pure-Food Con- 

 gress Committee, of which I had the honor to be a member, 

 and was then endorst by the Congress as a whole, and I do 

 not think there is anything to be gained by side-tracking 

 all of this work in the interest of any man's political aspira- 

 tions, let him be Democrat, Republican, Populist, or what- 

 not. 



I fully agree with Senator Cockrell, who said, when I 

 suggested to him that possibly the Bill contained some 

 crudities and objectionable features, " I am in favor of the 

 Bill. Let us pass it, and make the corrections afterward." 

 Our enemies would like to see us wrangle over amendments 

 until the Bill is killed, but I very much mistake the temper 

 of the men who compose the National Pure Food and Drug 

 Congress, if there is any wrangling about the matter. 

 These men are too much in earnest to split hairs about 

 minor matters ; once we get the law then we will make the 

 corrections. 



Now, I want to say a word to the members of the 

 United States Bee-Keepers' Association and to the public 

 generally about making this a personal matter^ You may 

 think you have no interest in the matter, but you have. 

 Adulteration reaches every home, it blights and withers the 

 prospects of every honest calling, and is no respecter of 

 persons. As I said before, it is sapping the foundation 

 principles of moral order, and every man, woman and child 

 who believes in common honesty is interested in its sup- 

 pression. Even the families of the adulterators themselves 

 cannot escape the ruinous effects of this the crowning crime 

 of the century. Let us remember then, to use the language 

 of Mill, " A person may cause evil to others not only by his 

 actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly 

 accountable to them for the injury." 



Emerson Taylor Abbott. 



Pres. Whitcomb's address and Mr. Abbott's paper were 

 then discust. 



Mr. Abbott— Honey is two cents higher in Ohio than in 

 Missouri. This honey, or imitation of honey, that I re- 

 ferred to in my paper, is made in Kansas City, Mo. 



Question— Then do you mean to say that this honey is 

 not put up by Root ? (Laughter.) 



Mr. Abbott— Some people are laboring under a mistake, 

 and that is, that the United States has nothing to do with 

 regulating foods. Congress cannot enact a law to prevent 

 adulteration in Missouri, but as soon as the adulterated 

 article moves out of the State then it can be handled. ^ By 

 the way, I have here copies of the Brosius Pure-Food Bill. I 

 wish you would come forward and get them later. I wish I 

 could speak to all the bee-keepers of the United States 

 about this Bill. You may think that you have nothing to 

 do with it. but you have. Adulteration reaches in every 

 part of the United States. 



Dr. Miller— There are thousands of people who have 

 not given the matter a thought. The Pure-Food Congress 

 has brought the matter before us. One point: I want a 

 law made that will protect the market at Marengo. If I 

 should make an effort to get legislation that will benefit 

 only me, it will never be done. If we get anything done it 

 will not be by legislation for any one point, but it will be 

 when we get legislation that will benefit every one. 



E. R. Root— It seems to me that there is not very much 

 to be said about Mr. Abbott's paper, but I want to say that 

 I endorse what Dr. Miller says, and I am interested in this 

 bottle of honey. " Your sins ;c';// find you out." You know 

 the city where this bottle of adulterated honey was put up, 

 Mr. Abbott ? Do you wish to give the name of the party ? 

 Mr. Abbott— Bliss Company. 



Mr. Root— Can you prove unquestionably that the Bliss 

 Company put this up ? 

 Mr. Abbott — I can. 



