THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



bee-keeping industry, but that horticulture 

 and fruit growing will lack the perfect 

 fertilization of the blossoms that conies 

 onl}' from the visits of bees. Tell him 

 that the effect of a bill like this is not a 

 mere conjecture; that over in Canada foul 

 brood bid fair to practical^ ruin the bee- 

 keeping industry when an inspector was 

 appointed. When the inspector examin- 

 ed 1 60 apiaries in 1890 he found foul brood 

 in 150 of them. In 1898 he examined 150 

 apiaries and found the disease in only 35 

 apiaries. 



SUPPLY-DEALING EDITORS. 



Also Something About Plain Sections. 



In the February number of the Progres- 

 sive Bee Keeper, Bro. Doolittle pays his 

 respects to the tendency of supply-deal- 

 ing editors to boom new things. In so 

 doing he makes use of the following lan- 

 guage:— 



The excitement now going on in some 

 of our bee papers over plain sections and 

 fence separators reminds one of a similar 

 craze which came over the bee papers 

 some years ago, regarding reversible 

 hives and frames. The reversible excite- 

 ment raged very nearly equal to the one 

 of the present, and caused hundreds and 

 thousands of bee-keepers to put dollars 

 into the thing; which dollars, if we are to 

 judge b}' the quietness regarding reversi- 

 ble frames of the present day, were en- 

 tirely thrown away; for if there are any 

 bee-keepers now using either reversible 

 hives or frames, they are not enough 

 pleased with them to say anything re- 

 garding that pleasure. It is to be sin- 

 cerely hoped that this plain section and 

 fence separator matter will not prove such 

 a oankrupt affair as did the other. His- 

 tory tells us that through the influence 

 of the New York Tribune, Horace Greely 

 was enabled to push to an issue the battle 

 of Bull kuii, when neither the countrv 

 nor the army was prepared for it; thus 

 bringing defeat and sacrificing hundreds 

 of lives for the unadvi.sable "push" of 

 one man; and while there can ])e no such 

 momentous issue at slake in bee affairs, 

 as there was in this countr}' in the earlv 

 sixties, yet I can not heljj hut think that 

 the course pursued by some of our bee- 



papers in pushing new things, is as ill ad- 

 vised as was the pushing of the battle of 

 Bull Run by the Tribune. I am not op- 

 posed to giving any new thing publicity, 

 and a chance for such new thing to make 

 its "mark in the world;"' but it does seem 

 that the throwing of the whole force of a 

 periodical into such things as reversible 

 hives and frames, deep cell comb founda- 

 tion, plain sections and fence separators, 

 etc., is ill advised, and has a tendency to 

 influence the readers of such a periodical 

 to invest money in something which will 

 surely sink it for them when the craze is 

 off, and reversible hives and frames, deep 

 cell foiindation, etc., are declared flat, 

 dead failures. As for me, 1 am willing to 

 "bide a bit," and use the old sections a 

 little longer, especially as they brought 

 the /'c/> />;7Vr in the market the past fall, 

 in an open race with all the others. 



In my opinion, this word of caution or 

 warning from Mr. Doolittle is timely. A 

 bee journal editor who makes and sells 

 supplies becomes so favorably impressed 

 with some new hive, implemeitt or device 

 as to begin its manufacture and sale. 

 Henceforth his journal will "boom" the 

 new article. With a view to being im- 

 partial, he may allow in his journal the 

 publication of objections to the new com- 

 er, but they will be overwhelmed by arti- 

 cles in its favor, by pictures, and by ed- 

 itorial argument. On the other hand, 

 some other supply-dealing editor, one 

 who does not deal in the new device, finds 

 diflniculty in recognizing its merits. The 

 contributions and editorials appearing in 

 his journal are almost certain to cast re- 

 flections upon this new candidate for pub- 

 lic favor, and to uphold standard goods. 

 Both of these editors may be thoroughly 

 honest, but self-interest has biased their 

 judgement, to the detriment of their 

 journals. 



A year or two ago the great power pos- 

 sessed by Gleanings was employed in 

 trying to popularize the deep cell founda- 

 tion. Perhaps that is putting it a little 

 too strong; perhaps it would be nearer 

 the truth to say "introducing or bringing 

 it to the notice of bee-keepers." On the 

 other hand, the Progressive used its in- 

 fluence in trying to defeat its introauclion, 

 or even its manufacture as an experiment. 



