28 



the head men. Mr Kendall had kept bees, 

 and was aware of the adulteration going 

 on, consequently he tasted the so-cadled 

 ■honey being bottled, and when he chal- 

 lenged his host as to its purity, was told 

 in confidence that it only contained 15 

 per cent of honey, the rest being glucose 

 and water with flavouring. 



Mr Kendall brought a bottle of the 

 stuff to Auckland, and without telling 

 me what it was, invited me to taste it 

 and say how I liked that honey. After 

 sampling it, I said, "If that is honey, it 

 is a very poor sample," and that "I had 

 never tasted such honey before." He 

 then told me what it was, and how he 

 came by it. The quantity of honey in it 

 being so small, and the glucose the 

 chief constituent, the most appropriate 

 name for the stuff would have been 

 adulterated glucose. 



No one knew better than myself the 

 injury this imported fraud was doing to 

 our legitimate honey trade; consequently 

 I realised that something must be done 

 to prevent this spurious stuff being im- 

 ported and sold as honey, otherwise com- 

 mercial beekeeping in New Zealand 

 would be ruined. At a meeting of the 

 New Zealand Beekeepers' Association 

 held on May 4, 1888, I brought the mat- 

 ter forward, and suggested that the 

 association should take immediate steps 

 to induce the Government to place an 

 import duty of 2d per lb on all honey 

 coming into the country. The meeting, 

 being in accord with the suggestion, 

 passed the following resolution: — 



"That in the interests of the honey in- 

 dustry in New Zealand, and to protect 

 the legitimate honey producer and the 

 public against the importation of spuri- 

 ous honey, a duty of twopence per lb. 

 should be imposed upon all honey im- 

 ported into the colony." 



This resolution I forwarded to our 

 president at Wellington. As it happened, 

 our action was taken at a very oppor- 

 tune time, as the Customs tariff was then 

 being revised and was before Parliament. 

 A copy of the proposed new tariff was 

 received by me, and as there was no men- 

 tion of honey in it I at once wired to our 

 president, Mr F. Lawry, drawing his at- 

 tention to the omission, and also sent 

 an explanatory letter. In reply I re- 

 ceived the following: — 



"Wellington, May 30, 1888. 

 "DeEur Sir, — I have just received your 

 telegram re the omission to place an im- 



port duty on imported honey. I have 

 seen the Premier (Major Atkinson), who 

 has expressed deep regret at the inad- 

 vertence, and promised to use his utmost 

 endeavour to rectify the error. I have 

 reason to believe that he will succeed in 

 doing what we require." 



The following also formed part of the 

 same letter: — 



"Re the Foul Brood Bill, I think it will 

 pass, as I have been offered a very large 

 measure of support. The Bill Is now 



in the hands of the printer; the second 

 reading comes on on June 14, when, of 

 course, I shall make a speech explanatory 

 of the disease, and the serious drawback 

 it is to the beekeeping industry in this, 

 colony. — Yours truly, 



"(Signed) F. LAWRY." 



The Customs tariff was subsequently 

 amended and the desired duty placed on 

 all imported honey, which has never been 

 taken off. It blocked out at once the 

 American and other fraudulent honey 

 from our markets. I, however, who first 

 suggested the duty, suffered by our 

 action. I had at this time opened iip a 

 fairly good trade with New South Wales 

 for our best honej', but, following our 

 lead, the Government of that colony 

 placed a similar duty on imported honey, 

 which closed my trade with New South 

 Wales, 



HONEY PAMPHLETS. 



The New Zealand Beekeepers' Associa- 

 tion, realising the need of encouraging 

 the general use of honey as a food, ar- 

 ranged to get out a 12-page pamphlet 

 describing the uses to which honey can 

 be put as food and for medicinal pur- 

 poses. The pamphlet was compiled by 

 Mr T. J. Mulvany and myself, the print- 

 ing and publishing being left in my hands. 

 Many thousands were issued, and each 

 beekeeper received them at actual cost 

 price, purchasing as few or as many as 

 he wished. A space was left blank on the 

 front cover for the purchaser's name and 

 address to be printed in after hie order 

 was received. The pamphlet did an im- 

 mense amount of good in increasing the 

 demand for honey; it was kept in type 

 for a long time, so that a fresh issue 

 could be made from time to time. 



I was very much surprised when one 

 of our Beekeepers' Associations some 

 three years or so ago induced the Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture to publish in its 

 entirety a honey pamphlet compiled by 



