February 26, 1885. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
181 
better. I believe I am correct in saying that more than fifty exhibitors 
sent their honey for sale to the bee department of the exhibition in 
question. The fabulous story about some clergyman making £4853 by 
his honey might be believed in Hallamshire, certainly in no other 
shire throughout the British Isles. 
“A Hallamshire Bee-keeper” contrasts the Grantham honey fair with 
the efforts of the British Bee-keepers’ Association in the same direction. 
But who, let me ask, established the Grantham fair ? The credit belongs 
t > Mr. Godfrey, the excellent and energetic Secretary of the Lincolnshire 
Association. Mr. Godfrey for some time was a member of the Committee 
of the British Bee-keepers’ Association, and would have continued on the 
Committee had not his home been too far away to allow of his regular 
attendance in London. The Lincolnshire Association is a direct offshoot 
of the British Bee-keepers’ Association, an affiliated Association, a 
daughter of whom the foster-mother may indeed be proud. The British 
Bee-keepers’ Association, then, is distinctly entitled to some portion, at 
all events, of the credit of those “honey fairs” si dear to the heart of 
“A Hallamshire Bee-keeper.” And tons of honey have this year been 
offered for sale, and a vast amount has been sold at honey fairs in count¬ 
less shows throughout the land, directly and distinctly through the 
influence and example of the British Bee-keepers’ Association. 
“A Hallamshire Bee-keeper ” says that the Honey Company is “ to be 
a money-making one.” I trust it maybe, why should it not be ? It is 
started as a commercial speculation, in the hope that the capital subscribed 
may be of service to the shareholders, and also benefit the producers of 
honey. Gentlemen of good position and of public spirit have established 
the Company for go d and useful purposes, and I submit that their work 
is worthy of every encouragement from those interested in the progress cf 
apiculture and the welfare of the community. 
The numerous extracts from the Bee Journal and the references 
thereto cannot disprove the fact that the British Bee-keepers’ Association 
has not adopted any standard section. “A Hallamshire Bee-keeper” 
seems anxious to prove that the Association ought to have made so grave 
a mistake as to adopt or recommend a standard section, but possibly it 
has not. At the recent annual meeting the Association unanimously 
declined to accept any standard section, but I am sure that if “A 
Hallamshire Bee-keeper” has any suggestions to make, those sugges¬ 
tions will receive every consideration from the Committee of the British 
Bee-keepers’ Association. 
Your correspondent concludes his attack on the British Bee-keepers’ 
Association by asserting “that neither the Committee nor even the 
Association represents bee-keepers, nor one-tenth of them.” This assertion 
must of course be taken for what it is worth ; its worthlessness, however, 
is evidenced by the fact that the British Bee-keepers’ Association with 
its affiliated Associations, has a constituency of bee-keepers approaching, 
if not exceeding, ten thousand in number. This is a fact of which Mr. 
Peel and the Committee of the British Bee-keepers’ Association may 
indeed be proud.—A. B. M. 
[A letter received late from “ A Hallamshire Bee-keeper ” must stand 
over till next week.] 
STRAW SKEPS v. FRAME HIVES-WHICH ARE THE 
BEST? 
Looking at the question from my own point of view, I must advocate 
the former, including killing the bees to obtain their honey. I have for 
some years past always driven the bees from my straw hives and lifted the 
frames from my bar-framers, but my spare time becoming much more 
occupied, I had either to give up my bees or keep them on the simplest 
possible plan, which I contend is the old-fashioned one .that I have 
adopted. 
Kept in this way there is little to do but to hive the swarms and 
take the honey, which may very often be sold in the hive as it is. It 
appears inconsistent to me when I hear people, who continually eat the 
flesh of animals as food, say that it is cruel to kill bees to obtain their 
honey, for I think it is the more humane method of the two, for the bees 
are killed outright in a few moments, whereas, on the other plan, they are 
continually being tortured by having smoke driven among them, and on 
each occasion I should judge they suffer more than they do when they are 
“ brimstoned.” It always used to be against my feelings to smoke my 
bees. It is a pity that animals when killed do not have tbeir lives taken 
from them as painlessly as bees do when held over the brimstone pot. 
I would also advocate the old style of keeping bees for cottagers, for 
as a rule their garden, p : gs, &c., take up most of their time, and I find it 
pays [much better ; for even if we lose a stock occasionally in the winter 
through not feeding, yet almost all obtained is profit, which is not always 
the case on the other plan.—W. Kruse. 
THE BRITISH HONEY COMPANY. 
I am glad to see that the different letters on the above subject have 
provoked replies and roused bee-keepers to look to their own interests. I 
am sorry, however, that in my article, page 140, two slight errors and one 
omission occurs, which latter, according to “ A. B. M.,” was a “ delicious 
muddle,” but to him a delicious morsel, which alleviated the pain of the 
sting he says was so blunt. Let me here, then, correct my errors and 
explain the omission. Read then, “ The members of the British Bee¬ 
keepers’ Association have said so much against foreign honey being so 
much inferior to the British honey that the only reason I can see for 
them (the Honey Company),” &c. The three last words added in paren¬ 
theses will make my meaning plain. One error not challenged is in my 
second paragraph, sixth line from the top. Instead of “property” 
“ organ” should have been inserted. The next in the first paragraph is 
so trifling that it may be regarded as a straw clutched by the drowning 
man; but it has dra«n out a little more information how things are 
managed, and how the “ department was established at great cost.” We 
were told that this great cost was for the benefit of bee-keepers getting 
their honey sold. He says, “Bills must be printed, salesmen must be 
engaged, tents must be pitched, or rooms must be hired,” the very things 
that will either raise the price of honey to the consumer or considerably 
lower it to the bee-keeper, whether sold by a company or not. This I 
wish to see avoided. Regarding the standard sec ion, it appears that our 
timely letters had prevented the British Bee-keepers’ Association com¬ 
mitting the mistake of fixing a standard. The statement that “ the 
Association in compliau'e with requests from all quarters adopted a 
standard frame for the ‘bar-frame bive’ to the complete satisfaction 
of bee-keepers throughout the length and breadth of the land ” therefore 
falls to the ground. So instead of “A Hallamshire Bee-keeper” being 
my unfortunate friend it is “ A. B. M.” that is so. 
I was not aware that the British Bee-keepers’ Association was a 
national institution as “ Pro Bono Publico ” says, but we live to learn. 
Regarding your other correspondent, Mr. Herbert R. Peel, I scarcely ex¬ 
pected such aspersions from so distinguished a gentleman. I repudiate 
the charge by Mr. Peel where he says “ His ignorance of the matters on 
which he writes is most palpable.” I beg to inform him, just as he desires 
to inform me, that I do not write on things that I am ignorant of. I have 
a good knowledge of apiculture, and none but interested persons have 
ever said otherwise, although one of the members made a good attempt 
lately to lower my reputation with an editor through a letter, which fell 
into my hands, and so enlightened me as to who were my friends. The 
Editor of this Journal has favoured Mr. Peel by inserting his reply, an 
act of courtesy or justice that was denied me in his. I do not know who 
my friends are that Mr. Peel alludes to, but may tell him that my friends 
are his friends. I must observe that Mr. Peel is proprietor of the British 
Bee Journal , Chairman and one of the Directors of the Honey 
Company, and late Honorary Secretary and still a member of the British 
Bee-keepers’ Association, and that the majority of the Directors of the 
Honey Company are also leading members of the British Bee-keepers’ 
Association, who have experts going about the country advising bee¬ 
keepers to support the British Bee Journal. I do not know what 
the majority of bee-keepers thiuk, but all I speak to as well as myself are 
of the opinion that the three are so closely allied and interested in the 
welfare of one another that we cannot see that the Bee Journal is entirely 
“ free from trade interests or bias of any kind.” Mr. Peel makes two 
unwarrantable accusations against me—viz , “ I was not the originator of 
the Honey Company as ‘ A Lanark hire Bee-keeper ’ asserts.” I never 
said such a thing, neither did I say that there was “ a conspiracy between 
the British Bee-keepers’ Association, the Biitish Honey Company, and 
the Bee Journal to introduce American honey into England by means of 
a standard section.” As we are all liable to err 1 will regard these utter¬ 
ances as accidental. The main question at issue remains unanswered of 
showing how they mean to aid the bee-keeper by maintaining a fair 
price for his honey and give the consumer an advantage at the same time. 
Your Wimbledon correspondent, who is one of the Directors, points cmly 
to the profits to the Company.—A Lanarkshire Bee-keeper. 
TRADE CATALOGUES RECEIVED. 
Viccars, Collyer & Co., Central Hall, Leicester. —Floral Gems, Annuals 
Biennials , Perennials, Grasses, Aquatics, and Cactece. 
Waite, Nash, Huggins, & Co , 79, Southwark Street, London, S.E.— 
Wholesale Price Current of Agricultural Seeds for 18S5. 
John Forbes, Hawick, N.B.— Catalogue of Florists’ Flowers. 
R. J. Kane, Kells, Meath.— Catalogue of Vegetable and Flower Seeds. 
H. Elliott, Springfield, St. Heliers, Jersey.— List of Jersey Chrysan¬ 
themums. 
Alban Goodman & Son, The Deamond, Londonderry.— Catalogue of Vege¬ 
table and Flower Seeds. 
*** All correspondence should be directed either to “The Editor ' 
or to “ The Publisher.” Letters addressed to Dr. Hogg or 
members of the staff often remain unopened unavoidably. We 
request that no one will write privately to any of our correspon¬ 
dents, as doing so subjects them to unjustifiable trouble and 
expense. 
Correspondents should not mix up on the same sheet questions relat¬ 
ing to Gardening and those on Bee subjects, and should never 
send more than two or three questions at once. All articles in- 
