444 THE BEEKEEPERS' REVIEW 



The Beekeepers' Review So!d 



At both St. Louis and Denver Delegate meetings there were a majority 

 of Delegates present that favored the turning over of the Review to some one, 

 so that the National Association could avoid the responsibility of publishing 

 the same. Just as we go to press we are informed that three Directors' 

 votes are in, all casting their vote in favor of turning over the Review with all 

 financial obligations to E. D. Townsend. Northstar. Michigan. The other two 

 Directors not yet casting their vote. We hope to publish the contract under 

 which the Review is sold and how the Directors voted relative to the sale in the 

 January Review. 



The Future Policy of The Beekeepers' Review 



There will be no radical change in the policy of the Review in the months 

 to follow. The present management has had good support by the Board of 

 Directors of the National, that he has formed the policy that the Review has 

 followed almost wholly himself during the two and a half years that he has 

 been manager, so but little change in policy may be expected by this transfer. 

 We take this opportunity to thank the Board of Directors, and Officers of the 

 National Beekeepers' Association for their loyal support during the period that 

 we have been manager of the Review, for, without this support it would have 

 been much harder for us at this office. 



More Finaiicia! Aid Promised 



Members of the National Association and Subscribers of The Review, will 

 receive more Financial aid during 1916 than heretofore. 



We have thought out a few more ways that we can help beekeepers finan- 

 cially. We will just mention one of them at present, that is to furnish our 

 subscribers with sugar by the barrel at wholesale price for feeding bees, or 

 other use. Over in England and other countries we might mention the asso- 

 ciations furnish their members sugar for feeding bees, why not in this country? 

 We are verv sure this opportunity will be appreciated very much in this 

 country. We will see! 



The Beekeepers' Review Sti^l the Official Organ of The National 



BeekeeT>ers' Association 



The transfer of the Review into private hands will make no diff'erence with 

 the service that the National will receive. The Review is still the official 

 organ of the National, as you will see bv referring to the Constitution that we 

 are printing in another part of this number of the Review. To sum the matter 

 up, the National will have just th? same advantages of the Review under the 

 changed ownership, without any financial oblicrations. This is the feature that 

 the Executive committee have been working for, for the last two years; an 

 official organ without the least financial obligation assumed by the National 

 Association. 



On another page of this number of the Review, under the caption "The 

 National Field" Secretary Foster defines some things that the National should 

 and should not do to better the beekeeping fraternity. We want to lav especial 

 stress upon a few pertinent remarks made in this letter. He says: "The Na- 



