THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



293 



whether it was a good place to winter 

 bees. I think with fresh water flow- 

 ing through it, a higher temperature 

 would be required than in a dry cave. 



2. I think the water would be a bene- 

 fit if it kept the temperature at 45° 

 and above. 3. If the conditions were 

 right, you could not get in too many. 

 — G. L. Tinker. 



1. Yes, I think it would. 2. It may 

 serve to equalize the temperature ; it 

 would have no other beneficial effect. 



3. As many as can be stored comfort- 

 ably. The above is theory with my- 

 self drawn from reading experiments 

 of others ; I have never wintered bees 

 save on summer stands. — Jos. E. 

 Pond. 



I think it would be a good winter 

 repository for bees, and that the 

 water would be beneficial. I have 

 had no experience with very large 

 numbers of colonies in cellars ; but I 

 should think this size of cellar would 

 answer for from 100 to 150 colonies.— 

 W. Z. Hutchinson. 



1. I should guess it would be an 

 excellent place, but you can tell bet- 

 ter by trying. 2. Perhaps a benefit. 

 3. If it is really well ventilated, it is 

 possible that it might bring through 

 in good condition all it would hold ; 

 150 colonies ought certainly to winter 

 in it well, and a less number would 

 probably do still better.— C. C. 

 Miller. 



1. I should say capital. 2. Yes, be- 

 cause it will aid materially to control 

 the temperature. 3. Just as many as 

 you can get in, providing you can 

 keep the temperature at 450 pahr., in 

 the coldest weather, which I believe 

 ■would be possible with such an ar- 

 rangement.— A. J. Cook. 



1. If the temperature be kept at 

 about 4.5° Fahr., the cave will no 

 doubt answer well. 2. The water 

 would be beneficial in equalizing the 

 temperature. 3. It will do to comfort- 

 ably nil it.— The Editor. 



Convention Notices. 



tW The next meetine of the Darke County 

 Union Bee-Keepers' Society wiU be held at Green- 

 vlUe, O., on Friday, May 27, lft87. 



J. A. Roe, Asst. Ste. 



VF The next meeting of the West Lake Shore 

 Central Bee-Keepers' Association will be held on 

 May 26, 1887, In Koekrinu Hall, at Kiel, Wis. 



Ferd Zastrow, Sec. 



|y The May meetinR of the Northwestern Illi- 

 nois and Soutiiwestern Wisconsin Bee-Keepers' 

 Association will be held at Rockton, His., on Tues- 

 day, May 24, 1887, D. A. FULLER, See. 



Tlie Neiv 'i'ork World says that many 

 a dealer who places a $10 advertisement in 

 his village paper begrudges his investment 

 ■when it is worth double to him what be pays 

 for it. Advertising rates in city newspapers 

 would astonish such business men. One 

 column in the Chicago Tribune costs the ad- 

 vertiser $26,000 per annum. The New York 

 Berald receives for its lowest price column 

 $.39,.i62, and for its highest price .?0.3,800, 

 The New York Tribune for the lowest, 

 $29,7,54, and for the highest price $85,648, 

 and these papers never lack for advertise- 

 ments to fill their columns. 



This mark Q indicates that the apiarist is 

 located near the center of the State named; 

 5 north of the center; 9 south; 0+ east; 

 *0 west; and this 6 northeast; "x) northwest: 

 o. southeast; and ? southwest of the center 

 of the State mentioned. 



For the American Bee JoomOL 



Legislation on Priority of Location, 



"WM. F. CLARKE. 



On page 251, under the side-head- 

 ing, " Where is it found ?" Dr. C. C. 

 Miller writes : "On page 218, in the 

 address of Kev. W. P. Clarke, occurs 

 the following statement : ' It is pro- 

 posed by some to pass a law securing 

 to the first-comer as a bee-keeper into 

 a neighborhood, the exclusive ower- 

 ship of the bee-forage within certain 

 limits !' Will Mr. Clarke kindly give 

 the names of some who have made 

 such a proposition, and also the place, 

 if any, where it has been mentioned 

 in any of the bee-papers V" 



A civil question is entitled to a civil 

 answer, and I shall do my best to give 

 it frankly and fully. In my reference 

 to " some," I had more particularly 

 in view Dr. Miller himself, Mr. Hed- 

 don, and Mr. Betsinger. At the out- 

 set of the discussion. Dr. Miller was 

 generally understood to advocate 

 legislative protection to " the first- 

 comer as a bee-keeper into a neigh- 

 borhood." Mr. Heddon hailed his 

 utterances at the Indianapolis con- 

 vention as harmonious with those 

 previously made by himself in favor 

 of priority of location,but did not agree 

 with the Doctor in trying to secure 

 it by legislation. After the discus- 

 sion had been going on for some 

 months, Mr. Heddon, on page 138, 

 withdrew his contention with some 

 facetious hits at the Doctor, and said, 

 " I give him the case for the present 

 at least." Mr. Betsinger, who was at 

 first inclined to oppose the Doctor's 

 views, announced himself as a convert 

 to them, on page 105. I reply, 

 therefore, that all three of these gen- 

 tlemen have advocated the proposi- 

 tion mentioned in my address, and, as 

 requested, I will now proceed to cite 

 quotations from the " place " wher« 

 they have done so, viz : in the Ameri- 

 can Bee Journal. 



The Doctor first aired his pet 

 scheme of legislative protection for 

 bee-keepers at the Indianapolis con- 

 vention in October last. There was 

 no verbatim report of his remarks in 

 advocacy of the movement, and I will 

 not pretend to quote him, but the 

 impression made on my mind and on 

 the minds of others was, that he 

 wished legislative recognition of a 

 right of pre-emption to territory in 

 which to keep bees. Thus Mr. Hed- 

 don understood him. He says in the 

 American Bee .Journal for 1886, 

 on page 709 : "Only a few months 

 ago I wrote on the subject of ' priority- 

 right of location,' trying to show why 



the prior occupant had the natural 



exclusive right Surely, none have 



forgotten how malignantly my posi- 

 tion was attacked Imagine my 



surprise at noting that at the Indian- 

 apolis convention a committee was 

 appointed to inquire into the desii 

 bility and feasibility of asking ou 

 Government to legislate this condi- 

 tion of aifairs." 



In the same volume, on pag« 743, 

 Dr. Miller thanks Mr. Heddon for 

 giving his view on page 709, and sub- 

 stantially endorses it. He says : " I 

 understand Mr. Heddon to claim that 

 the prior occupant has a natural ex- 

 clusive right, and that such exclusive 

 possession would result In the great- 

 est good to the greatest number. In 

 this we are very nearly, if not alto- 

 gether in accord ;" and he goes on to 

 specify as the point in regard to 

 which they are not quite in accord, 

 Mr. Heddon's "idea of a natural ex- 

 clusive right of the prior occupant " 

 securing of itself " the survival of 

 the fittest." Instead of leaving the 

 result to the operation of natural law, 

 the Doctor would secure it by legisla- 

 tion. He says further: "However 

 much thought Mr. Heddon may have 

 given to the matter of rights as to 

 ' priority of location,' I cannot be- 

 lieve he has given much thought to 

 it with the possibility of legislation in 

 view, but it seems to me that without 

 much thought upon this branch of 

 the subject, he has hastily settled 

 upon the conclusion that because 

 there was no legislation there could 

 be none, etc," No legislation on 

 whatV "Rights as to priority of 

 location " is the Doctor's own state- 

 ment of the case, which Mr. Heddon 

 would leave to the operation of nat- 

 ural forces, but which Dr. Miller 

 would have regulated by law. 



In the American Bee Journal 

 for 1886, page 775, Mr. Heddon reply- 

 ing to the Doctor, contends that the 

 "natural right of priority" is com- 

 petent to take care of itself without 

 such legislative aid as Dr. Miller pro- 

 poses. On page 794 of the same vol- 

 ume, Mr. W. H. Osborne urges the 

 following valid and strong objection 

 to the Doctor's position : " There 

 are persons in this village who have 

 kept bees longer than I have, and if 

 by reason of priority, I must sur- 

 render the business to them, such 

 legislation might seem more desirable 

 to them than to me." 



In the American Bee Journal 

 of Dec. 22, 1886, Mr. C. G. Beitel says: 

 " Again, when we scan closely a law 

 such as is contemplated, we cannot 

 fail to perceive what a source of liti- 

 gation it might prove. The question 

 of priority of location would often be 

 as difficult to establish as that of 

 priority of invention, etc." In the 

 present volume, on page 57, Mr. J. E. 

 Pond, under the heading, " Legisla- 

 tion for Bee-Keepers," and evidently 

 discussing Dr. Miller's proposition, 

 says : " The question of priority of 

 location of an apiary is one on which 

 my views are so well known, that I 

 need not, neither do I care to discuss 

 it ; but the question of legislation on 

 that subject is one on which more 

 light is needed, and for that reason 



