AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



633 



stated in the Dop-uty Collector's letter. 

 It is very manifest, that the person who 

 drafted the proviso, liad in his eye only 

 domestic animals, and had no thought 

 of any other animals, and, in fact, no 

 thought of bees, or that bees would be 

 called "animals." I am afraid that the 

 proviso is so restricted that the Secre- 

 tary of the Treasury will have no discre- 

 tion. However, I have asked him to see 

 whether he can give it some construc- 

 tion that will help us out. 



Edwin Willits, Acting Secretary. 



Accompanying this letter from the 

 Secretary was one from Prof. Cook, 

 which we produce herewith : 



Dear Friend Root .-—This looks bad. 

 We have a friend "in court" who will 

 do all that is possible for us. It will be 

 bad if we have to wait for special legis- 

 lation. A. J. Cook. 



Agricultural College, Mich., April 24. 



It looks as though we should have to 

 submit to the inevitable until special 

 legislation can be enacted in our behalf. 

 As the Acting Secretary says : " The 

 person who drafted the proviso had in 

 his eye only domestic animals." Perhaps 

 I should add further, that the Deputy 

 Collector has probably made an error in 

 regard to bees through the mails. They 

 are not prohibited by law. The January 

 Postal Guide for 1891 gives a list of the 

 European countries to which queen-bees 

 may be sent, and in that list is Italy. It 

 would be a little strange if, reciprocally, 

 Italy could not send any queens to us. 

 If she cannot, it is a very recent enact- 

 ment of the postal magnates. We will 

 have the law tested again at an early 

 date. 



Xroutole About Bees. 



A neighbor of Mr. Elbert Greeley, at 

 Lorain, O., circulated a petition, asking 

 the City Council to pass an ordinance to 

 prohibit the keeping of bees in the city. 

 Mr. Greeley writes us as follows on the 

 matter : 



At a meeting of the Town Council, 

 held on April 20, a petition signed by 

 several citizens, asking that steps be 

 taken to abate a certain bee-nuisance, 

 was referred to a committee for investi- 

 gation. 



At the next meeting, the committee 

 reported that they had investigated the 

 matter by visiting near neighbors and 

 obtaining their views on the question, 

 and while inany claimed that there was 



no cause for complaint, others con- 

 tended that there was, and stated their 

 grievances. 



The report was accepted, and the 

 committee discharged, the Council 

 deciding that it would be unjust to 

 declare the bees in question a nuisance, 

 while there were other places in the 

 town where bees were kept, against 

 which there had been no complaint. 



I do not know what move my neigh- 

 bor may make next, but understand 

 that he will sue me for damages, claim- 

 ing that my bees prevent him from rent- 

 ing his house, which is located on the 

 adjoining lot. 



There are a number of others in the 

 town (population about 5,000) who 

 keep bees, but no word of complaint has 

 been uttered about any bees but mine, 

 and one man has about the same num- 

 ber as myself — 10 colonies. 



Some of the signers of the petition for 

 the removal of the bees have told me 

 they would never have signed the peti- 

 tion had they known it was spite work. 



Mr. France is right about the Bee- 

 Keepers' Union. No bee-keeper knows 

 when he may be called upon to defend 

 himself in court, against the attack of 

 some spiteful neighbor, who thinks to 

 injure him through his bees. Therefore, 

 I say, join the Union at once"; do not 

 delay. 



I think the Union should have a 

 cipher, for use by telegraph, in case of 

 emergency. In my case the petition 

 was only circulated three or four days 

 before the meeting of the new Council, 

 giving me no chance to defend myself. 

 I also think that every member of the 

 Union should have a copy of the By- 

 Laws. Elbert Greeley. 



Lorain, O., May 4, 1891. 



The Council took the wisest course in 

 its disposition of the petition, as, from 

 the evidence at hand, it appears to have 

 had its origin in a spirit of petty malice. 

 Common justice demanded that Mr. 

 Greeley's bees should not be declared a 

 nuisance, and ordered removed from the 

 city limits while bees kept by others, 

 within the limits of the same city, were 

 not even mentioned. 



The Constitution of the Bee-Keepers' 

 Union has been published in the Bee 

 Journal, and also in the Annual Re- 

 port for the last two years, a copy of 

 which is sent to every member. There 

 are no By-Laws. 



