J36 
SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR. 
bees gather nothing but honey and pollen yet, almost 
in the same sentence he declares that “pollen does not 
enter into the composition of wax,”, if not, then it appears 
that they do gather something else than the two sub- 
stances mentioned, since the v/ax is, most certainly, not 
formed at the expense of the honey, as the comb is always 
prepared prior to its collection ; then, it is asked, might 
not those bees appearing to have nothing, be, in fact, 
laden with materials for forming the comb 1 This reason- 
ing and the question that it lead ^ to, show clearly that 
the conclusion that “it must be honey” is not “irresist- 
able,” and it would seem furthermore to show that Mr. 
LaTaste does not always require “indisputable facts” be- 
fore being convinced. Had he caught these bees of doubt- 
ful burden (as was done with those gathering the honey- 
dew) and killed them and inspected and tasted the con- 
tents of their stomachs, then might he afford to talk 
about “irresistable conclusions.” 
But, before leaving this part of the subject it is asked, if 
Mr. LaTaste supposes that when bees, as is often the case, 
are seen working upon mud, they ate extracting honey 7 
for, it is presumed that he will hardly contend that they are 
gathering pollen; yet, if, while at work, “bees gather 
nothing but honey and pollen,” and if it is not the latter 
that they are collecting from the mud, the conclusion, ac- 
cording to Mr. LaTaste’s reasoning, is irresistable that it 
must be honey. Moreover, he may not be aware of the 
fact that bees are attracted by corn cobs saturated in 
urine, and that such have been used by bee hunters as a 
means of ascertaining the whereabouts cf wild bees ; that 
they will collect upon such materials and work most dili- 
gently, and that in going off, no pollen can be descried in 
the cavities ot their thighs; therefore, his logic would argue 
that the conclusion was irresistable that it was honey ’ ! 
No wonder, then, that under the force of such circum 
stances and conclusions, he should feel assured that “bees 
never starve, for, verily, if they can extract honey from 
mud and urine, would it seem, that no such calamity as 
a famine could ever befall that industrious and w^onderfully 
discerning little insect. 
Mr. LaTaste farthermore says, that the honey which 
bees gather from flowers “is the indentical substance 
sought after by the humming bird and butterfly” — then, 
must he declare it as his belief, that the saccharine matter 
of the nectary of flowers is identical with the characteris- 
tic properties of honey ; for, in his article in the Medical 
Journal, he said, that “he believed that honey existed al- 
ready formed, and was deposited by the bee just as it was 
gathered” — if so, then he believes that a clover bloom is 
filled with honey, in all respects identical with the sub 
stance found in the cells of the honey comb, and if this is 
the case, ought it not to be detected by the sense of taste 1 
But can it 'i Moreover, if Mr. LaTaste believes that bees 
deposit honey just as they gather it, and admits that they 
gather from the honey-dew as well as from flowers, he 
must believe and admit that the honey-dew and nectary 
of flowers possess identical properties; in doing which, 
however, he will admit an absurdity palpable to all who 
may have tested tne two substances by smell, touch, sight 
and taste. 
Towards the conclusion of his “examination,” Mr. La- 
Taste has the following complimentary paragraph:— 
^‘While I legret that I cannot agree with Dr. Baker in his 
theory of the sources of honey, I cannot withhold the ex- 
pression ol the pride I feel in havingiheaid ofone so intelli- 
gent as he, in combatting the absurd notion that honey 
possesses poisonous properties.” 
It would seem that his criterion of one’s intelligence is 
the fact of their disagreeing or coinciding with his views ; 
be this as it may, he is thanked for the compliment, how- 
ever inconsiderately paid ; for, it would ajipear that his 
cause for self congratulation w^as rather quesfonabk, 
since the agreementj that gratifies him, was based, ac- 
cording to his own showing, upon a groundless theory 
which promulgated an error injurious to the cause of 
truth When one believes that honey is the extract of 
flowers, they are constrained to admit that it is sometimes 
poisonous, since it is known that an extract must contain 
the propert’es of the material from which it is made. The 
correctness of this position cannot be controverted by the 
idea that bees v/ill not extract from poisonous blooms ; 
for, even the most casual observation has noticed them at 
work upon flowers known to be poisonous — the mock- 
orange, swamp iaur-el and yellow jessamine, for example. 
Well, according to Mr. LaTaste, they must be gathering 
honey or pollen, either of which is poisonous, and both of 
which are used as food in the hive; therefore, will it not 
do to rely upon the sagacity of the bee, unless it is ad- 
mitted that their products, injurious to man, are harmless 
to the bee, in which case Dr. Campbell s remark will 
again come in, explaining how honey may be poison to 
man and nutriment for the bee. 
Mr. LaTaste may finally be convicted, out of his own 
mouth, of the belief that honey is sometimes poisonous, 
notwithstanding all his declarations to the contrary, and 
disgust at the absurdity of the belief. It has previously 
been shown that he says he believes that “honey does 
exist already formed, and that it is deposited just as it is 
gathered,” corroborating this belief, it has also been shown 
that he said that the nectary of flowers, sought after by 
the humming bird and butterfly, is the identical substance 
collected by bees as honey ; it may now be quoted, where 
he says that he “admits that the nectar of some blooms is 
poisonous.” Now, then, if the nectar of some blooms is 
poisonous, and if the nectar of flowers w “identical” with 
the honey that bees gather and deposit as they find it, 
he must certainly admit and believe that there is such a 
thing as poisonous honey “already formed,” whether a 
^ee ever touch it or not. 
In reference to the source of honey-dew, but little will 
be offered. Mr. LaTaste admits its existence and its na- 
ture, but objects to the idea of its being precipitated from 
the atmosphere; still, he adduces the different opinions 
of so many different observers, that he shows the question 
to be an unsettled matter, in which the opinon ofone in- 
telligent man is as good as another’s ; besides, it is pre- 
sumed that he will not olject to the demand for an “in- 
disputable fact” to prove that honey-dew is an exudation 
from the leaves, before acquiessence can be yielded to his 
belief. It seems, too, that in his researches upon the sub- 
ject, he has found, at least, one Naturalist who believes, 
like the hunter, that it is “a species of gluey dew which 
falls sooner or later ” I would remark here, that my 
mind is not indissolubly wedded to the belief that the 
honey dew falls from the atmosphere ; it is open to con- 
viction upon proof to the contrary. The time of its ap- 
pearance, as much as anything else, lead to the idea that 
it was precipitated like common dew. If it be an exuda- 
tion from the leaves, why does it occur only at night T 
Acquiescence cannot be yielded to Mr. LaTaste’s asser- 
tion that no honey-dew would have been found upon the 
surrounding rocks and trees, since his simple statement 
affords no “indisputable fact ’ of its correctness. 
In leaving the subject, it may be remarked that the be- 
lief that honey is not the product of flowers, but of the 
honey-dew, and that this last falls from the atmosphere, is 
by no means, of recent date ; nor is it limited to a few It 
IS the prevailing belief among that class of people who 
learn what they know from experie nce and observadoo, 
and who study nature, not from books, but as they find it, 
in God’s wide universe. 
Before closing. I beg permission to correct Mr LnTaste 
in representing me as believing that “old peach” was 
mixed in the honey that sicaened the Grecian soldiers 
• luring the retreat of the ten thousand after the death ot 
the younger Cyrus — I expressed no such belief. The 
