THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



273 



of cleaning' it but sometimes it is the only 

 way to get improved laundry facilities. 



Providence. R. 1. Sept. 1, 1907. 



I Dear Friend Miller— Criticisms of the 

 National and its officers are all right if 

 proffered in the right spirit. You say that 

 the editors of the Bee-Keeper are anxious 

 to see the National prosper and become a 

 real benefit to the bee-keepers of the 

 land. This mav be true, but in the col- 

 umns of the Bee-Keeper 1 find only fault 

 finding and sarcastic flings — no spirit of 

 friendliness nor helpfulness. 



You say Mr. France "resents criticism."' 

 He ought to resent such criticism as ap- 

 pears in the Bee-Keeper regarding the 

 National. Every member with a sense of 

 justice in his heart will resent it. 



The circulars sent out by Manager 

 France may not be above criticism, and 

 if Mr. Miller, or any one else, will take 

 the trouble to write and tell him in what 

 way they can be improved, do this in a 

 friendly helpful spirit, there will be no re- 

 sentment. 



1 have worked side by side with Mr. 

 France in Wisconsin, New York and 

 Michigan; 1 have roomed with him many 

 a time at conventions: I have visited him 

 at his home: and 1 know him as no other 



man in the work knows him, and a more 

 whole-souled, useful, tireless worker for 

 the good of bee-keepers, 1 never met: 

 and he needs cheering words, encourage- 

 ment and helful criticism— not incessant 

 fault finding. 



Having said this. 1 can't refrain from 

 saying that the editors of the American 

 Bee-Keeper are both good men, excellent 

 bee-keepers, splendid writers, and warm 

 friends of mine; in fact, each of them has 

 performed an act that might almost be 

 said to have sealed our friendship. The 

 private letters they write me are delight- 

 ful; they are kind and considerate, and 

 full of sympathy: and I am sometimes led 

 to wonder if the course taken by the Bee- 

 Keeper regarding the National is not 

 prompted by something that does not ap- 

 pear upon the surface. 



No. friend Miller, you seriously misun- 

 derstand me if you think I am opposed to 

 the success of co-operation in the East. 

 1 am pleased over the success, and have 

 said so several times, but I am saddened, 

 yes and "maddened," at the senselessness 

 of the attack upon the National that was 

 opened at the same time, and by the men, 

 or some of them, who helped to make co- 

 operation a auccess. Because co-opera- 

 tion was a success, why attack the Na- 

 tional and its ofificers? — Editor.] 



Natural or Artificial Supersedure of 

 Queens, Which ? 



R. L. TAYLOR 



OT^HE most important item of expense in 

 ^^ the production of honey is labor, and 

 every year it is challenging our considera- 

 tion with increased force. I often find 

 myself excited with surprise at the per- 

 sistence of certain operations of the apiary 

 that, perhaps in the case of the novice, or 

 when labor was easily obtained and cost 



little, were well enough, but are now costly 

 as well as useless. Take the clipping of 

 queens' wings, an operation still practiced 

 by a vast number of apiarists, involving 

 much labor and to what end ? I prac- 

 ticed this invention of the evil one for 

 several years under the advice of those 

 high in apiarian councils, and now, after 



