April 23, 1885. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
341 
we can quite corroborate what Dr. Walker said in his paper 
on “ Feeding Bees.” “ I find young bee-keepers do not 
spare their money in buying all kinds of bees, any new¬ 
fangled hive, or useful or useless appliances.” Again and 
again we have advised economy, mildly suggested that it 
were tar better for the novice to undertake two or three hives 
and look after them properly, than mismanage an apiary of 
some ten or fifteen hives. Again and again we have suggested 
that the buying of imported Ligurians is not in itself a sign 
of genius-—at all events, as far as bee-keeping is concerned— 
nor that is it necessary to buy all the furniture depicted in a 
catalogue ; but in spite of all our best endeavours they will 
“ g an g their ain gait,” and buy their experience for them¬ 
selves. With a lively recollection of our own experience, 
and in extenuation of our own case, be it remembered, that 
it was long before the formation of the B.B.K.A that we 
started bee-keeping; we can fully sympathise with the ill- 
directed enthusiasm of the novice, and our object is how to 
curb this enthusiasm as far as his pockets are concerned. 
Like Uncle Dick in “ David Copperfield,” who strove in 
vain to steer clear of Charles I., it is nearly impossible for 
any bee-keeper to avoid the much-vexed question—Which is 
the best hive ? If we believe one man, presumably sane, 
though the wildness of his sentiments fail to convey that 
idea, we ought to burn every straw skep in Great Britain ; 
if we would follow the advice of another we ought to shun 
the bar hive as an invention of the—hive-maker. Having 
tried most kinds of hives, from the old-fashioned straw skep 
to the capacious Pettigrew, from the single-bar hive to one 
containing some thirty bars, and also the Stewarton hive, 
we prefer the bar-frame hive containing some ten bars as the 
most useful for all purposes. Not that we deny for one 
moment that the Pettigrew system, scientifically managed, 
does produce astonishing results; but we contend that 
the same science and the same management devoted to the 
bar-frame hive system would produce even more astonishing 
results. It has been said—but doubtless our statement will 
be denied—that even Mr. Pettigrew himself, towards the end 
of his life, was convinced of the superiority of the bar-hive 
system. For the novice its fatal facility of inspection in 
season and out of season is one of its greatest disadvantages. 
We have heard of one bee-keeper showing his bees by lamp¬ 
light to an admiring circle of friends ! “ The force of folly 
could no farther go.” This, of course, is not the use but the 
abuse of the system, from which the skep system is to a great 
extent free. It reminds one of children who plant seeds, but 
who are continually pulling them up to see if they are grow¬ 
ing, and if they do not survive this maltreatment it would 
be foolish to blame nature or the seedsman. It is true that 
Herr Gravenhorst, one of the most advanced German bee¬ 
keepers, uses straw hives, but then they combine the advan¬ 
tages of the straw skep with those of the bar hive, as all the 
combs are moveable, and, as he explained to us when we asked 
the question, the reason of his using such hives was that 
there was a better market in Germany for run honey than 
for comb. —The Surreyshire Bee-keeper. 
(To be continued.) 
HOW CLOSE IS THE CONNECTION ?—THE HONEY COM. 
PANY AND THE NATIONAL BEE-KEEPERS’ ASSOCIATION ? 
I AM surprised that “ A Local Adviser,” on page 279, comes out i'o 
answer me with assertions after I clearly ask for proofs, and, what is more, 
pleads ignorance of what he writes about. He says he gets his Journals 
through Smith’s, and yet receives Blow’s and others’ catalogues (very 
likely), and is not a member of the B.B.K.A, Perhaps he is a member of 
some county association, and possibly his name as a local adviser has 
been published in the Bee Journal ; if so, his name and address can be 
seen by anyone who cares to do so. But there are persons who are not 
members of any association who get their Bee Journal direct from Mr. 
Huckle, which I was alluding to, the names of whom can only be had 
from him and are in the possession of Mr. Blow. I asKed if this gentle¬ 
man is an exception ? if not, can anyone who wishes have a list also ? 
It would be more to the point if Mr. Huckle or Mr. Peel answered this 
question. 
There is one sentence in his letter which all would do well to consider 
—about people using the Bee Journal to puflE their wares. I intend to 
improve on this in another letter. Of course it does not look well for a 
hivo inventor to describe his hive and give it a “ puff,” and then say he 
does not make them but that they can be had from Mr. So-and-so, and 
Mr. So-and-so says in the advertisement columns that he is the only 
authorised maker, it being understood between them that he gives a 
royalty to the inventor, who is posing as a public benefactor, describing 
his hive free for all to make, and when one of them does happen to let 
it out that he receives a royalty for his influence in causing business the 
editor comes out a few numbers later with a statement that he gets 
nothing at all, but that he does it all for the public good. Of course, “ A 
Local Adviser ” does not like these things. 
The N.B.B.K.U. which he alludes to, in connection with Mr. Hewitt, 
is a distinct scheme to supply the public with pure British honey only 
(who may be willing to pay more for it), and to secure this extra market 
value to the producers and not to a “ honey riDg.” I hold that if the 
public can depend on what they are buying, foreign honey will stand no 
chance; but if the Honey Company is to send out foreign honey (to say 
nothing about glucose) labelled with the British Isles as a trade mark, 
and so “ balance the price between British and foreign honey,” as the 
champions of the Company propose, there will be no profitable British 
bee-keeping. How could we compete with Cuba, where 600 lbs. per stock 
is the average from December to March, and not id. per lb. expenses to 
get it to Liverpool ? How is it to be to the interests of the British pro¬ 
ducer to have this honey flooding the country, put up in “ proper bottles 
and labels which will take the eye,” and cannot be well discovered by 
sight from British, say by the Honey Company, just as he is getting 
ready for his harvest ? Of course, they cannot produce in Cuba, Sycamore, 
Heather, Clover, or other kinds of British honey ; but these are not to be 
taken into account by the Honey Company. If we fail here through a bad 
season to get honey they say it would be very unbusiness-like to tell 
their customers that they cannot supply any more (Heather or Clover) 
honey, but will rather send them some foreign honey instead. Is this the 
way to educate the public to appreciate the pure British product ? Will 
they not rather disgust them ? Could anything be more alarming than 
this balancing of the prices ? Even the Americans are up in arms de¬ 
manding a heavy import duty on Cuban honey, lest it makes their honey 
lower still. They evidently do not like 630 lbs. of honey per average stock 
in ordinary seasons, with no winter difficulties or expensive hives either, 
along with cheap negro help, to compete with them. They also talk of 
bringing down the price to such a level as to increase the demand by its 
cheapness ; but will they benefit anyone but themselves ? The only 
legitimate way to encourage bee culture is to get as good a price as 
possible for the honey, and if the price obtained is a very paying one 
the profits will induce others to enter the field until the supply exceeded 
the demand; then the price would naturally fall, until the supply and 
demand were balanced. 
“ A Local Adviser ” has misunderstood those remarks of Mr. Hewitt 
about its not being to a bee-keeper’s interest to have others share his 
field, as the context will show. If he will follow his example, find hives 
and all appfianc&s, and give practical lessons in profitable bee culture for 
nothing to benighted bee-keepers, and then teach the cottager how to 
make his own hives and appliances also for nothing, instead of being a 
local adviser, persuading everyone to keep bees, telling them of the 
glorious profits and pleasure, and selling them expensive appliances, he 
might have some right to sneer at him. 
Since writing the above I note the letter from Dr. Walker in the 
issue for the 9th inst. I am surprised to see him say the N.B.B.K.U. 
proposes to raise or keep up the price of honey by means of “ strikes.” 
Nothing of the kind has been proposed ; we simply want to get the price 
people are willing to give for our pure guaranteed produce, whatever that 
price may be. He ha9 been improving on the remarks of the editor of 
the British Bee Journal for April 1st, which are as follows :—“ There are 
not wanting persons who would advocate something like a honey ring or 
a trades’ union system, by which they would fix the price, hut their policy 
is a shortsighted and selfish one hut as he and Mr. Peel are, in fact, 
forming a “ honey ring ” they may well think everyone else is. Is not 
their policy a “ shortsighted and selfish one?” I fail to see where our 
policy is selfish. We seek no private profits over what each one can get 
on his honey. We are going to provide fairs and markets all over the 
land for honey, just as there are corn markets, Onion fairs, goose fairs, 
horse fairs, &c. ; but as yet only one honey fair, and that only for Lincoln¬ 
shire. According to Dr. Walker’s account, that ton of honey he speaks of 
would be worth at least Is. per lb. wholesale to take the lot. How his 
mouth must have watered to see it offered for 64d. Does he think it is 
just for him, as a committee member of the B.B.K.A., which claims 
to be devoted to the encouragement of bee culture amongst the 
poorer classes, to endeavour to share in the proceeds therefrom ? Would 
it not be more manly to have introduced the owner of this ton of honey 
to some broker in the wholesale trade, who, for about half or 1 per cent, 
commission, would have got its full value, and if he was in immediate 
want of cash and could not wait till it was disposed of to advantage, 
have got him an advance on it from some banker ? The B.K.U. will 
arrange all these matters for its members. Thus, if we get a good crop 
and its members do not clear out at the fairs, &c., and cannot wait until 
it is required—say, in early spring—it can be sent to the various produce 
depots, and two-thirds or three-fourths of its value borrowed on it from 
the bank, just a3 com, wool, tea, and other produce is manipulated or 
financed ; thus we shall be able to hold our own surplus crops from a 
good season over to a bad one. All this we can do if bee-keepers combine 
together so as to make each operation worth the venture. We are pro- 
