Character of the Review. 



llecietriiuj 



Current apicultural literature is, as indicated by its name, one of the 

 distinctive features of the Review. Errors and fallacious ideas are 

 faithfully, but courteously and kindly pointed out, while nothing- 

 of value is allowed to pass unnoticed. But few articles are copied 

 entire, but the ideas are extracted, g-iven in the fewest words possible, 

 and coiiniiciitcd ujjon when tliouyht advisable. 



It is Practice I 



In its character. It does not waste columns in the discussion of fine- 

 spun theories, and those numei-ous phases of bee-keepinj;- that may be 

 interesting", but have no practical bearing- upon the bread and butter 

 side of the business. It aims to publish only such matter as will aid 

 in making- bee-keeping- a more safe, pleasant and profitable ])ursuit. 



No S i ft e - Is,s i i es 



Are tolerated in the Review. It may not publish so much matter as 

 some of the other Bee-Journals, but in the amount of practical, valu- 

 able, helijful bee-keeping- information furnished, it is behind none 

 of its competitors. It is not so much a question of how larg-e is the 

 journal, or how often does it come, hut what information does it bring 

 when it does come? 



Its Cori'espoti dents 



Are successful, practical bee-keepers, most of whom have numbered 

 their colonies bj- the hundreds and sent honey to market by the ton, 

 and who can write from experience articles containing- information of 

 some real benefit to honey producers. 



Ttie Ed i to I' 



Has for twenty years been a practical bee-keeper, and is thus in a 

 position to choose wisely in selecting- matter for his journal, and is 

 also able to write from the standpoint of actual experience upon all 

 subjects pertaining to practical bee-keeping- — to criticise, if necessary, 

 the views of correspondents. 



No SuirpUj Trade 



Is run in connection with the Review, and for this reason the price 

 must be such that there is a profit in its publication, but it leaves its 

 editor free frcm even an unconscious bias, and his views in reg-ard to 

 hives, implements, methods and devices are wholly disinterested. 



Neat TijpofjrapJnj 



Is one of the features of which the Review may he proud. Good 

 ])aper, type, ink and rollers, and a g-ood pressman are employed, and 

 eng-raving-s used when words cannot so clearly describe. This neat- 

 ness may not add to the value of the information g-iven, but it does 

 add to the comfort and en joj'uient of those who read it. 



In Coneliisfoti, 



The Review g-ives reports of the work done at the Michig-an Ex- 

 perimental Apiar)-— g-ives them as soon as possible after the work is 

 done, while they are of a fresh and newsj- ch;vracter. It g-ives Hasty's 

 monthly three-pag-e review of the other American Bee Journals, and 

 F. L. Thompson's review of the Foreign Bee Journals, as well as the 

 extracts and short editorial comments, and when there is occasion for 

 it, some topic is made the subject of sjiecial discussion, in which the 

 views of leading- bee-keejjers are gathered together in one issue, thus 

 allowing a close comparison of views. 



