AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



247 



An Explanation. —On page 109, we 

 remarked that the America7i Bee-Kceper 

 had offered a special "discount on the 

 tirst order for goods " from their adver- 

 tisers, when mentioning that periodical 

 — that some of the advertisers were 

 "greatly annoyed" about it, and would 

 repudiate the arrangement. In this, we 

 had special reference to the G. B. Lewis 

 Co., who wrote us the following: 



WeU, you see. Falconer has "gone and done it." 

 They are bound to " guarantee us " whether we 

 would or not. We gave ttiem strict orders not to 

 publish our "ad" in any such form, notwithstanding 

 which, you see, they have done it. What do you think 

 of such ways of doing business as this ? lias a 

 journal any legal right lo publish an advertisement 

 m the manner that he has done, advising our cus- 

 tomers that they will receive a discount from us 

 up<ai their first orders, contrary to our express 

 instructions ? Now. we see nothing to hinder nine- 

 tenths of our smaller customers from claiming this 

 discount, whether they were impelled to write us 

 for prices from their intelligence of our wherea- 

 bouts, learned from the "American Bee Journal," 

 "Gleanings," or any of the many agricultural 

 journals in which we advertise. G. B. Lewis Co. 



The letter referred to was dated Dec. 

 29, 1890, and reads thus: 



We beg to say that we cannot consent to adver- 

 tising as you suggest. The scheme looks to us more 

 like boys' play than business. And business trans- 

 actions of any kind should have some tangible 

 foundation upon which figures can be made. And 

 we think your plan would be unsatisfactory to you, 

 as well as to us. Hence, we decline to offer any 

 discounts for parties patronizing any particular 

 advertising medium. G. B. Lewis Co. 



The trouble seems to be that this 

 letter was not received until the Bec- 

 Keeper for January was printed, and 

 was, therefore, too late to stop the in- 

 sertion of their advertisement. Concern- 

 ing these two letters, the Falconer 

 Manufacturing Co., remark thus : 



You will note that they do not give us "strict 

 orders not to publish," etc., and consequently their 

 "adv." was not published contrary to their "express 

 instructions." 



Allowance must be made for the fact 

 that these two firms are rivals in busi- 

 ness, and the following letter will show 

 the present state of feeling, at least on 

 one side : 



We herewith hand you a copy of letter written to 

 the W. T. Falconer Manufacturing Co., which you 

 have our consent to publish, as well as the letter 

 written you, dated Jan. 7. We would say, also, that 

 we are not through with this matter yet. We are 

 not suited to have any paper present us to the public 

 in the light that they have, nor are we pleased to 

 have them offer discounts for us. We think we are 

 fully competent to conduct oiir own business. 



G. B. Lewis Co. 



This explanation is made necessary by 

 the fact that the Falconer Manufacturing 

 Co. claims that the matter, as published, 

 did them an injustice, and that they had 

 not inserted the advertisement without 

 authority for doing so. We regret the 

 misunderstanding, but there was nothing 

 left for us to do but to give the proof, 

 and here it is. 



We thought the offering of such a spe- 

 cial discount was unwise, and said so, 

 plainly but kindly. The publishers of 



the Bee-Kccper thought so, too, for they 

 omitted it from thcMr February issue (as 

 they have since informed us) before see- 

 ing our criticism; their objection to it 

 being that it would cause "a large 

 amount of extra work, in keeping track 

 of the discounts, in the busy season." 

 This was one of the objections we had 

 thought of, and was included in our 

 "etc." 



As this "discount" matter has been 

 discontinued, there is no cause for ill-feel- 

 ing, and we hope that harmonious rela- 

 tions will be restored all around. That 

 we had none but the best of intentions, 

 in mentioning this matter, is fully shown 

 by the kind way of presenting it, on pages 

 109 and 186. 



Concerning the copying so much of our 

 name, they write thus: 



As to our magazine being of similar name, we 

 regret as much as yourselves that such is the case, 

 but we assure you that the similarity never occur- 

 red to us until after the cover engraving was made, 

 and the name announced. As our magasine will be 

 spoken of as the " BeeKeeper" however, we do not 

 anticipate any confusion. 



As the matter cannot now be avoided, 

 we must all try to be as distinctive as 

 possible, and thus prevent confusion. 



Last Thursday two new bee-papers 

 came to our desk. The California Bee- 

 Keeper is a monthly, edited and published 

 by Wm. Sty an, at San Francisco, at $1 

 a year. Mr. Styan was a correspondent 

 of the "Western Apiarian," long since 

 deceased. It is nicely printed, well 

 edited, and gives evidence of long life. 

 We wish it success. There are 9,000 

 bee-keepers in California, and they ought 

 to support a good bee-periodical. It con- 

 tains 16 pages and a cover. 



The other new-born bee-paper is called 

 the White-Mountain Apiarist. It con- 

 tains 12 pages, and is edited and pub- 

 lished monthly by A. D. Ellingwood, at 

 Berlin Falls, N. H., at 50 cents a year. 

 Bro. Ellingwood's " better half " has one- 

 half of the Apiarist for a department 

 called " The Circle at Home," which she 

 fills with good, wholesome, honey-sweet 

 home reading matter. Such is a strong 

 "partnership" when they "pull to- 

 gether; and we wish them abundant 

 success. 



Dr. C. C. Miller is still laid up by 

 La Grippe — we are " almost there," too. 



