cyj^' 



tt Journal, 



DEVOTED TO THE INTERESTS OF THE PRODUCERS OF HONEY. 



VOL. XX. 



CHICAGO, ILL., MARCH 19, 1884. 



Published every Wednesday, by 



THOMAS G. NEWMAN, 



EDITOR AND Proprietor, 



The Vice-Presidents of the National 

 Convention. 



A recent letter from a Canadian 

 gentleman, who was at the Toronto 

 Convention, throws some light on the 

 subject of the vice-presidents of the 

 North American Bee-Keepers' Con- 

 vention. He says : 



Toward the close of the convention, 

 some one who managed to keep his 

 mind on business a little during the 

 general jollification, said that the 

 vice-presidents ought to be elected. 

 This was agreed to. and after some 

 talk it was decided to re-elect all the 

 old ones except where any objection 

 was made. The next thing was to 

 find out who the old ones were, which 

 was solved by the Rev. W. F. Clarke 

 pulling a small pamphlet out of his 

 bag and handing it to the chairman. 

 Tlie list was read, and some changes 

 were made, including appointments 

 for Manitoba (Hon. Mr. uallbridge), 

 and some States not before repre- 

 sented. After it was all done, it was 

 found that Mr. Clarke's list was not 

 for 1882-S3, but for a year or two be- 

 fore. However, it did not seem to 

 make much difference— sometiiing had 

 been done, and the gasmeter was rap- 

 idly tilling, and the stream of talk 

 was turned on again. As far as I can 

 remember no record of the vice-presi- 

 dents was taken, except by Mr. 

 Bengougli, the short-hand reporter to 

 whom Mr. McPherson refers in his 

 letter to the Bee Journal of the -^th 

 inst. That is the plain, unvarnished 

 tale. It is to be hoped that Dr. Miller 

 will be a more methodical secretary 

 than his predecessor, wtio did not take 

 a note during the proceedings. 



It seems rather a queer thing that 

 at such an important series of meet- 

 ings no minutes were read or kept, 

 but everything left in the hands of an 

 outside party, and on account of some 

 disagreement between him and his 

 reporter that the bee world should be 

 deprived of valuable information. 



The following, from the Reporter 

 who was censured for not furnishing 

 the report, is due both to him and our 

 readers : 



Editor Bee Journal :— A friend 

 has shown me your issue of March 5, 

 containing your article on the " Re- 

 port of the National Society." I have, 

 no doubt, that your readers would be 

 interested in ?»(/ story, after reading 

 Mr. McPliersoii's reference to " war- 

 like correspondence," " unbusiness- 

 like conduct," etc. The following 

 letter sent by me to Mr. Jones will, I 

 think, make the wljole matter clear. 

 The Mr. Moore mentioned is the 

 friend to whom Mr. Jones first spoke, 

 and who in turn told me {on the 

 morning of the first day's session, 

 only a few minutes before it com- 

 menced), that Mr. Jones wanted a re- 

 port of the convention. 



" Toronto, Oct. 16, 1883. 



D. A. Jones, Esq., Beeton, Ont.— 

 Dear air: I regret very much that I 

 was not in the office when you called 

 on Saturday. :Mr. Moore has shown 

 me a letter to him in which it is 

 stated tliat you could have got a re- 

 porter to report the convention for 

 $25. I have seen reason to regret that 

 this reporter was not engaged, as I 

 consider three days and two nights of 

 my time are fully worth that amount, 

 to say nothing of the time consumed 

 in transcribing the notes. 



" I spoke to IMr. McPlierson at the 

 convention when he attended — I be- 

 lieve the first evening— and thus gave 

 him timely notice of the probable cost 

 of the report. He spoke as though 

 the matter was in your hands, and, 

 therefore, when you brought the mat- 

 ter beftu-e the "convention. I again 

 mentioned to you that at newspaper 

 rates the transcript would be woith 

 over SIOO. I afterwards spoke to Mr. 

 iluth an,d yourself, hoping that an 

 arrangement might be made, before 

 the officers of the convention dis- 

 persed, by which the whole business 

 would have been thoroughly under- 

 stood and properly settled. Sir. Muth 

 said that a few officers could make up 

 the amount if necessary, and as there 

 was to be a meeting in the honey 

 house that evening, I felt satisfied to 

 leave the matter in the hands of the 

 committee. 



" When the matter was mentioned 

 to me at first, on the morning of the 

 first day, by Mr. Moore, I supposed 

 that Mr. McPlierson was one of the 

 officers of your association, as it was 

 stated to me that he was willing to 

 contribute $25 towards the report of 



the proceedings. I presumed that 

 you intended to make arrangements 

 with the committee by which Mr. Mc- 

 Plierson 's share of $2-5 would be ac- 

 cepted as part, and the association 

 would be asked for the balance. I, 

 therefore, went on with tlie work, 

 trusting you to make it all right. On 

 the morning of the first day, when the 

 Rev. Mr. Clarke asked me for whom 

 I was reporting, I told liim you had 

 engaged me. and he said, ' Mr. Jones 

 IS good for it." That is the way I 

 felt, and this is why I did not make a 

 definite arrangement at the start. I 

 knew that the association would not 

 allow any member to pay out of his 

 own pocket for work done for them as 

 a body. I trust that you will appre- 

 ciate my proposition in this mattei- 

 in order to bring it to a conclusion. I 

 am willing to forego the time already 

 spent on it, and hereby offer without 

 prejudice to furnish a report of the 

 proceedings for $75. 



Yours truly, 



Thos. Bengough." 



I submit that this letter answers all 

 charges preferred against me. It 

 shows : I . That I never undertook to 

 furnish a report for $2-5. 2. That at a 

 very early stage in the proceedings I 

 told Mr. McPherson what the report 

 would cost, and that later on, and 

 while the matter was being discussed 

 in convention, I informed Mr. Jones 

 on the same point. S. That I never 

 refused to transcribe my short-hand 

 notes, but, on the contrary, I offered 

 as early as October to do the work for 

 2.5 per cent, less than the price men- 

 tioned. 4. That I spoke to the Treas- 

 urer of the National Society with a 

 view to instructions. 5. That the 

 convention deliberately decided to 

 have the report published, and that I 

 am dot responsible for the failure, as 

 I never reeeiveri an official requisition 

 for tlie transcript. 



The report is actually much longer 

 than I anticipated when I spoke to 

 Mr. McPlieison, and at newspaper 

 rates would he worth at least SI 50, 

 while at tariff rates for convention 

 work, it would be worth nearly S200. 

 I am willing, however, to take SIOO, 

 the amount calculated on, and will 

 guarantee a first-class report. In or- 

 der to avoid further " unbusiness-like 

 conduct," I would suggest that a 

 check be deposited by the Treasurer 

 with some responsible person here, 

 with instructions not to pay it until I 

 have delivered the report into his 

 hands. 1 will then proceed at once 

 with the work, and will guarantee 

 perfect satisfaction. 



