AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



451 



face with red and ^reen. They are 

 borne singly, on terminal shoots, have a 

 pleasant, slight perfume, and are very 

 showy. The seed-vessel, which ripens in 

 October, is formed of a number of scales 

 surrounding the central axis in the form 

 of a cone. It is remarkable that young 

 trees under 30 or 35 feet in height, 

 seldom or never perfect their seeds." 



Should anyone who has never seen this 

 tree, come upon it when it is in full 

 bloom, he would be measurably aston- 

 ished at its beauty. I do not think that 

 there is any tree in our forests that can 

 bear a comparison with it, and, besides, 

 the beholder would not for a moment 

 question its honey-yielding properties — 

 I have seen its beautiful tulip-shaped 

 flowers (which are 2 inches, or more, in 

 depth) heavily laden with bees, which 

 were so earnestly struggling for the 

 honey which the flowers contained, that 

 they actually turned the blossom upside 

 down, its natural position being erect, 

 like that of the tulip, which it very much 

 resembles; and indeed Mr. D., in his 

 beautiful description, frequently speaks 

 of it.as the " tulip tree." 



I am very sorry to state that we find 

 this tree somewhat difficult of trans- 

 plantation, which, I think, arises from 

 the fact that, like our hickories, it has a 

 top root, and all trees of this class I find 

 difficult to transplant. 



I' will close by saying that while Mr. 

 Downing speaks of this tree as the 

 white-wood or tulip tree, and sometimes 

 the yellow poplar, he classes it as a 

 magnolia, Liriodendron tulipifera. 



FOUL-BEOOD. 



The valuable article on this malady on 

 page 347, by C. J. Robinson, Richford, 

 N. Y., was most welcome. I have had 

 but slight experience with this trouble, 

 which, most fortunately, I overcame, and 

 I hope never to see it again. Neverthe- 

 less, should the occasion require us to 

 again deal with it, how can we so prop- 

 erly prepare ourselves for its destruction 

 as by reading the experience of those 

 who have successfully treated it ? 



A perusal of Mr. Robinson's last arti- 

 cle, led me to make reference to other 

 articles on the same subject, and from 

 the same pen, which may be found in 

 the last volume of the Bee Journal, 

 pages 326, 518 and T26, and I must, 

 say that should I, unfortunately, be 

 called upon again to battle with this 

 scourge, I feel better equipped to en- 

 counter the enemy, and freely confess 

 that my thanks are due to Mr. Robinson 

 for the valuable information he has 

 afforded us on this truly vexed question. 



Another thought has just occurred to 

 me : Had I not carefully preserved my 

 Bee Journals (which I bind each year, 

 as they come to hand), how would I 

 have been enabled to make the refer- 

 ences before spoken of, and how ob- 

 tained the information sought after. 



I am proud to state that I have been 

 a subscriber to the American Bee Jour- 

 nal (and an occasional contributor) 

 since Volume I, No. 1, and all of them 

 have been carefully preserved and bound, 

 with the exception of a very few missing 

 copies, the loss of which I very much 

 regret. 



Beaver, Pa., March 16, 1891. 



Trade-Mails anil MarielinE Honey. 



benj. e. rice. 



The above seems to be the topic under 

 consideration at the present time, but as 

 for myself, I would not give 5 cents per 

 bushel for all the trade-marks one could 

 get up for all hee-keepers to use, as I 

 have one of my own, that answers all 

 purposes, and it reads like this : "War- 

 ranted Pure Extracted-Honey, from the 

 Apiary of Benj. E. Rice, Boscobel, 

 Wis." 



By its use I sell all the honey that my 

 bees can produce each year, and one 

 year I sold, in my home market, 18 full 

 barrels of extracted-honey, besides about 

 300 pounds of comb-honey. 



I cause my mark to be placed on 

 every receptacle — yes, and every pound 

 section — that leaves my honey-house or 

 apiary, and I really think that this idea 

 of adopting a trade-mark, to be uni- 

 versally used by bee-keepers, will create 

 more dissatisfaction than has already 

 been caused among them. 



Then, if one wished to dispose of adul- 

 terated honey, all they would have to do 

 would be to attat;h the bee-keepers' 

 trade-mark to it (which, of course, guar- 

 antees purity), and it would go like hot 

 doughnuts in Winter. 



It is often said that there is no one so 

 sharp but that there is some one else his 

 equal, so if any kind of a trade-mark 

 should 'be designated by some one, it 

 would be only a question of time before 

 a duplicate of it would be used by others, 

 and I believe the best and safest way is 

 for each bee-keeper to have his own 

 private mark or label. Then, if any of 

 those dishonest honey adulterators 

 should counterfeit it, there would be only 

 one that would really be affected, instead 

 of all bee-keepers. 



