ie 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW, 



tents and appearance. 1 think I have never 

 fally understood myself. But there is an- 

 other reason why I fear to do so. I think 

 the humblest and niont self esteem lacking of 

 all editors would get a little conceited if 

 everybody sent him such complimentary let- 

 ters. Not that I object to conceit, by any 

 means. The more a man has the better, 

 and the greater his chances of success, if he 

 can succeed in not showing it to others, but 

 there's the difficulty. 



I must take exceptions to a part of your 

 explanations. I did not say that you had 

 taken especial pains to secure correspon- 

 dents whose ideas were in accord with your 

 own, and did not intend to give that idea. I 

 intended to say that men differing in some 

 of their ideis with those "who stand by the 

 Review and help make it what it is," do not 

 care to send in their views on the other side 

 and be in the minority, and then after the 

 discussion, and upon the dismission of the 

 •topic, see the weight of the editor's opinion 

 given against them. In other words, no one 

 likes to stand up wlien they are sure to be 

 knocked down. Further discussion has 

 seemed to be oat of order in the next num- 

 ber as the space is needed for the next topic. 

 This has a strong tendency to shut up all 

 who do not thiuk the same as these regular 

 contributors previously mentioned. Right 

 here I would say that I somewhat doubt the 

 advisibility of giving your own decision, 

 after all is in, unless you wish to keep the 

 subject open in future numbers. 



Do I understand you to say in the last 

 paragraph that the Review is a local journal 

 and seeks for its principal support from 

 subscribers in the central and northern parts 

 of the U. S. and in Canada, and therefore 

 the views of some of the most extensive and 

 experienced producers in the world, those in 

 New York State, as well as a few in Vermont 

 and those in the South and on the Pacific 

 Coast are not therefore as valuable to your 

 readers ? 



If so, then I must admit that part of my 

 article is settled, but I hope you don't mean 

 that, and would remark that Mr. Ernest 

 Root has of late realized more than ever 

 that New York men know considerable, 

 though many years have passed since the 

 ideas recently adopted by him were new. 

 To make it clear I repeat, I think that not 

 only do bee keepers in the East, South and 

 West, but those in the Central Northern 

 States, who, on many subjects, have differ- 



ent views from you and those of the majority 

 of your regular contributors feel in spite of 

 your cordial invitations, that it is wisdom 

 for them to keep out. 



As to the one-sidedness of contributions, I 

 can attribute much of this to the reaction 

 caused by other bee editors in the past hav- 

 ing gone so far the other way. If I had 

 favored the closed-end frame hive for the 

 past ten years and read a certain journal 

 meanwhile, and several years ago had started 

 a bee journal, I should at once have called 

 out all the closed end frame writers possible, 

 not because I wanted to be unfair or push 

 that frame and not give any other a fair 

 chance, but to help counteract the one-sided 

 writings ' and teachings that had thus far 

 appeared before the majority of the bee 

 keepers of the country. All these years the 

 most extensive producers that used hanging 

 frames have opposed the bevel joints or 

 edges, and other features of a much adver- 

 tised hive, that only beginners that knew no 

 better would as a rule use. 



The journal that pushed it had the largest 

 circulation, and perhaps the majority of its 

 readers looked upon the bee keeping world 

 through no other source. It almost had a 

 monopoly. 



It could lead the ideas of the bulk of its 

 subscribers and start beginners with what 

 was decided upon, no matter what the lead- 

 ing apiarists thought. We know that an 

 editor whose paper has a large circulation 

 can start the hive fashions, boom any new 

 fixture, overwhelm its readers with attract- 

 ively written and illustrated articles in favor 

 of them, and follow one with another in 

 such quick succession that the average bee 

 keeper is carried away in spite of himself. 

 Or the opposite may be done : articles not in 

 favor of certain things may be laid on the 

 shelf so long that they lose interest, or may 

 be used separately one by one, and without 

 plain illustrations, and thus give no strong 

 impression. 



After the editor of a certain journal deci- 

 ded to come over in favor of the closed end 

 frame hive we saw how quickly its influence 

 was felt among bee keepers. 



I have used the Hoffman frame since 1879, 

 and from an idea received from Mr. Alley I 

 widened my top bars in 1885 to 1% inches 

 wide. It makes a grand frame but somehow 

 it has not yet been shown up or illustrated 

 in any journal in a way to suit me. Now if I 

 were to become the editor of a new journal 



