828 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVI'Jl.^ 



Continuing, he says : " It ought to be suf- 

 ficient evidence to this ardent advocate of 

 bee-beepers' rights that I was right and he 

 was wrong when the Commons of Canada 

 struck the penalties he proposed out of his 

 amendment altogether. " 



No sir : The House of Commons of Can- 

 ada did not strike the penalties out : they 

 were struck out somehow between the first 

 a" d second readings of the bill. The House 

 did not even have an opportunity of discus- 

 sing the penalties. I was there and heard 

 the second reading and before that reading 

 took place tlie penalties had disappeared 

 from the bill ; and I have no manner of 

 doubt but that McKnight's whole pages of 

 fool's cap written to Ottawa against ths bill, 

 and personal matter against S. T. Pettit, 

 had something to do with their disappear- 

 ance. Members would say to me: "What 

 ails that man McKuight ? Can you not agree 

 as to what you want ? If you will agree 

 among yourselves, we will do something for 

 you. Other people agree as to what they 

 want, cannot you ? " I never heard any one 

 give him any credit for his opposition, but 

 it had its damaging effect all the same. But 

 the House of Commons by giving even a 

 a part of what we asked acknowledged the 

 insufficieHcy of the Adulteration of foods 

 Act. 



Continuing, Mr. McKnightsays : " Modern 

 legislatures aim at making laws inflicting 

 penalties upon criminals in proportion to 

 the crime committed. " Well, at a super- 

 ficial glance, that sounds very well, but it 

 does not go far enough, for modern legisla- 

 tors aim at making laws inflicting penalties 

 in proporation to the conse({uences of the 

 crime commited. The consequences of 

 spurious Canadian honey being sold in the 

 markets of the world would result in the loss 

 of millions of dollars to Canadian bee-keep- 

 ers, and not only so but the reputation of 

 Canada as a food producing country would 

 suffer also. I cannot understand how any- 

 one can say that f.W. is the penality in the 

 adulteration of foods act for the penalty 

 may be as low as $r). 



Why say " Mr. Pettit came into the world 

 too late ? " I am in full accord with all Can- 

 adian bee-keepers, R. McKnight excepted, 

 and also with the general public in this 

 matter. My opinion is that Mr. McKnight 

 came into the world at just the right time ; 

 but that his early education was sadly neg- 

 lected, or he would possess the good 



common sense, out of deference to the wish- 

 es of the solid fraternity, to act the part of 

 ^ gentleman and withdraw his obstructing 

 opposition to the bill in question. 



He objects to the wording of the phrase : 

 " That which is gathered by bees from na- 

 tural sources, " contending that it includes 

 honey dew. No one will, or ever did, dis- 

 pute that point, but I do dispute the claim 

 that it legalizes honey dew. Honey dew 

 always has been legal, and hence no law can 

 legalize it. My claim was and is that the 

 wording of that definition does not affect 

 the legal status of honey dew. But Mr. Mc- 

 Knight advocates the passage of a law to 

 prohibit the production of honey dew, or 

 " bug juice, " if he must be so indiscreet as 

 to use that disgusting term. I presume 

 that would mean ordering nature and the 

 aphides to go out of that line of business. 

 Will a sane nian advocate such a law V 



Further along Mr. McKuight says :" as 

 for myself, the Association has nothing left 

 to bestow upon me. " Then he goes on in 

 a childish manner to boast of the offices he 

 has held. One would scarcely believe that 

 he would be found so strenuously opposing 

 the views, wishes and best interests of those 

 who have thus honored him — base ingrati- 

 tude, instead of co-oi)eration and goodwill. 



But it exceeds my utmost comprehension 

 how this man can put on the boldness to 

 claim that he ever was the delegate sent by 

 the Ontario Bee-Keepers' Association to the 

 North American. I am aware that he at- 

 tended some of these meetings and passed 

 as such, but his boasting it seem.s to me 

 calls for an exposure. Here are the facts. 

 " That little band of Canadian bee-keepers " 

 called by some a ring, so managed matters 

 that the midoubted right of the O. B K. A. 

 to appoint all delegates to other meetings 

 and Associations was taken from it and the 

 Board was made to believe that it had that 

 right. And there, in the board " that little 

 band of Canadian bee-keepers " divided the 

 plums among themselves year after year. 

 That is how Mr. McKnight became the 

 boasting delegate to the N. American. 

 "That little band of Canadian bee-keepers " 

 dared not to trust themselves in the hands 

 of the Association. The Association, for 

 peace's sake reluctantly suffered that usur- 

 pation to exist for several years, but it at 

 last became thoroughly aroused and it has 

 set itself squarely down upon that usurpa- 

 tion and in the future the association will 



