THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



§9 



they left the hands of their Creator he 

 l)ronounced them perfect. This started a 

 discussion regardinjr the soundness of 

 cvohitionary doctrines. When it reached 

 this stajje, Bro. York thouy;ht it had pass- 

 ed beyoml the province of a bee journal, 

 and he cut it oflF. I think he had a per- 

 fect right to do this. Perhaps he might 

 have done so in a manner more agreeable 

 to Friend Thompson; but, so far as the dis- 

 cussion was concerned, I think he was 

 justified in stopping it. I am thoroughly 

 of the opinion that a discussion of evolu- 

 tion versus biblical statements is entirely 

 out of place in a bee journal; but we have 

 here an illustration of how easily and 

 quickly a discussion in a bee journal may 

 drift to that point — of how easy it is to 

 wander from the original subject. 



In his article in the Review friend 

 Thompson was discussing discussions, 

 and this particular discussion was men- 

 tioned, together with others, for illu.stra- 

 tion. 



I have recently explained, in a previous 

 issue of the Review, how the discussion 

 started in regard to Trusts. Friend Sny- 

 der thought that the facing of comb honey 

 had done more than all else to lower 

 prices. Friend Doolitlle thought not; he 

 thought Trusts had done more than all 

 else to lower the price of honey. Mr. 

 Taylor thought too many sins were laid 

 at the door of Trusts; and here we are, 

 drifting out upon the wide sea of political 

 economy. You would be surprised at the 

 letters I have received since the publica- 

 tion of the articles by Messrs. Taylor and 

 Doolittle — surprised at the difference of 

 opinions. Some say " Why, where has 

 that man Taylor been all of his days that 

 he doesn't know any better than that i"' 

 "I just wish you would let Doolittle go 

 lor Taylor; he would soon lay him out." 

 "I could scarcely restrain myself when I 

 read Doolittle's article; I am glad you let 

 Taylor answer him." 



As I said before, there is no question 

 regarding the interest and profit of a dis- 

 cussion of Trusts; but the same can be 

 said of discussions regarding thousands 



of other things, that would be be entirely 

 ovit of place in a bee journal. Perhaps 

 you will ask, why allow such discussions 

 to get started? You see, don't you, how 

 ihey /niz't' started? How they have drift- 

 ed on and on, from one phase to another, 

 until the original subject is no longer in 

 view; and the bearing upon apiculture 

 practically lost. In this connection, it 

 must not be forgotten that the various 

 industries are knit together in a perfect 

 network; that it is difficult to discuss one 

 without often touching upon its bearing up- 

 on the others. A bee journal is often called 

 upon to discuss outside subjects hi their re- 

 lation to bee-keepiH<i ; and exactly which 

 outside subjects are of sufficient impor- 

 tance, or the relation of which to bee-keep- 

 ing is sufficiently extensive to warrant their 

 discussion in a bee journal, and how long 

 such discussions shall be continued, and 

 how far they shall be allowed to wander 

 away from bee-keeping, all of these points 

 must be decided by the editor. That is 

 what he is for. This is the view that I 

 have always held. If I have ever written 

 anything giving the impression that I be- 

 lieved any one who ivished should be al- 

 lowed to write n'hat he wished, and hoiv 

 he wished, and that it then became the 

 duty of the editor to publish it, and to 

 allow discussions to run on and on and 

 to wander where they may, if I have 

 ever given such an impression, I wish to 

 correct it. I do believe, however, in giv- 

 ing everyone a fair show; in allowing 

 corres])ondents all the freedom that is 

 consistent with connnon sense; and when 

 a discussion is begun I also believe that 

 "so long as the original subject is kept in 

 z'ieiv, and personality and abuse do not 

 take the place of argument, and each 

 round brings out new facts and views," 

 that it is well to let it continue — even if 

 "the fur does flv." Am I inconsistent? 



»»»»»»*»». 



DON'T FORGKT THE LUC.A.LITV. 



Upon another page Mr. Adrian Getaz 

 has upon this subject a most excellent 

 article. It is kind, candid, fair and rea- 



