80 



SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE 



Report on Exhibits. 



We, your Committee on Exhibits, 

 beg to report a very creditable exhibit 

 of apiarian supplies and honey. How- 

 ever, we consider it short in many re- 

 spects. 



The largest exhibitor, Udo Toepper- 

 wein, of San Antonio, Tex., shows hives 

 of various kinds, both in the flat and 

 nailed up honey and wax extractors, 

 bee-smokers, and other appliances gen- 

 erally listed in the catalogs, besides bot- 

 tled honey and beeswax. A nice fea- 

 ture of Mr. Toepperwein's exhibit was 

 the distribution of delicious candy made 

 of honey. 



A. G. Anderson, Secretary of the 

 Emery County Bee-Keepers' Associa- 

 tion, of Ferron, Utah, has two jars of 

 sweet clover and alfalfa honey, of light 

 color and good flavor. 



T. F. Bingham, of Farwell, Mich., has 

 one of his latest improved bee-smokers. 



L. Werner, of Edwardsville, 111., 

 shows a bottle of Spanish-needle honey. 

 This honey is rather dark in color, 

 and strong flavored, otherwise resem- 

 bling buckwheat honey. 



N. E. France, of Platteville, Wis., 

 General Manager of the National Bee- 

 Keepers' Association, has gotten up a 

 neat Guarantee Label or Seal, for mem- 

 bers of the Association to be placed on 

 packages of honey for protection. Mr. 

 France also has samples of different 

 kinds of honey from 34 States, labeled 

 according to their source. One rea- 

 son for the small exhibit here at the 

 convention hall is on account of the 

 exhibits at the Fair. 



Exhibits of this kind in connection 

 with bee-keepers' conventions should be 

 encouraged. It draws out much inter- 

 est, acts as a source of advancement 

 in bee-culture, and adds materially to 

 the interest of the conventions. 



.Louis H. SCHOLL, 



David H. Coggshall, 

 A. G. Anderson, 

 Committee on Exhibits. 



On motion the report was approved. 



Pres. Dadant — We will now have the 

 paper by Dr. E. F. Phillips, of Wash- 

 ington, D. C, on 



WHAT SCIENCE CAN DO FOR 

 BEE-KEEPINO 



Science is classified knowledge. In 

 Apiculture observations can be made, in 

 infinite number, but until the facts dis- 



covered are systemized and classified 

 very little advance can be made, and 

 only with this classification does apicul- 

 ture become an exact science. 



By the majority of people science 

 is looked on as something entirely apart 

 from the practical. By most people a 

 scientist is supposed to be a man who 

 works on subjects which are of no 

 practical use whatever. The criticism 

 is heard on all sides that "book farm- 

 ing" is a failure, and that scientific men 

 who attempt to write on practical in- 

 dustries do not know what they are 

 talking about. In the first place we may 

 as well admit that there is entirely too 

 much truth in such criticism, but the 

 fault lies not with science but with the 

 men. Unless a scientist is wilHng and 

 anxious to listen to what the practical 

 man has to say, he can hardly expect 

 to arrive at proper conclusions. 



On the other hand, it is, to my mind, 

 a serious mistake for the practical man 

 to disregard what the scientist has to 

 say. Scientific training fits a man to 

 "put two and two together" and arrive 

 at a conclusion. When a host of ob- 

 servations are made, not every one is 

 qualified to study them and get at the 

 bottom of the subject. 



But for the fear of misunderstanding, 

 let us confine ourselves to Apiculture, 

 and see who are the scientists in that 

 work. 



In Apiculture the scientist is general- 

 ly looked on as one who studies the 

 anatomy of the bee, the effects of color 

 on flight, or similar subjects of no prac- 

 tical importance. This is entirely and 

 unqualifiedly an error. The man who 

 analyzes the results of different methods 

 of wintering, or the different ways of 

 producing comb honey, is engaged in 

 scientific work just as much as the man 

 who works on anatomy, although he 

 may not realize it. 



Assuming then that scientific work is 

 nothing but the systematizing of numer- 

 ous observations, there can be no doubt 

 in the mind of any one that Apiculture 

 is sorely in need of more such work. 



It must be admitted, however, that in 

 speaking of scientific work in Apicul- 

 ture the more or less theoretical prob- 

 lems are generally the ones to which re- 

 ference is made. I shall, therefore, not 

 speak so much of the need of scientific 

 methods on problems conceded to be 

 practical, as to discuss the practical im- 



