Afril 21, 18«7. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
321 
and they are as soon and well filled as his neighbours’ 
wooden ones, and not so fragile as glass. 
My tin crates were made to economise space and keep 
the comb free from smoke, dust, and vermin. They were 
of two kinds; the one sort were in three, and the other 
in one piece, with covers on lids, top, and bottom. They 
were made of stout tin. The sides were bent or kneed at 
the top, so that the end of the section stood a quarter 
of an inch free from the sides of the crate, and the under 
■edge kneed half an inch in, so as to give the section a 
bearing of a quarter of an inch. The sections were made 
all one breadth of 11 inch, kept separate by strips of tin 
bent at the proper distances to keep the sections rigid 
and in their place. Two pieces of wood, one at each end, 
reduced the surface of tin and filled the space, when with¬ 
drawn allowed the sections to be easily lifted. When 
■emptied of bees, and the lids put on and paper gammed 
around they were impervious to everything hurtful and 
light to be sent by rail. Paper pasted inside the back 
and front destroyed the conducting nature of the tin; 
but, even although it is left exposed, it is no worse than 
tin separators, which I never sized nor never will. 
The crate covering the whole of the hive was made in 
the same fashion as the above, but was braced together 
by angled tin to support the sections at bottom and single 
tin at top. As the bees had access to every part of the 
crate, the outside ones only had the quarter-inch space 
at ends for bees to travel round, which causes them to 
complete their sections better than when the section is 
kept close to the crate. 
ORIGIN OF FRAME HIVE3 AND SECTIONS IN ONE PIECE. 
I think it quite within my province to give some evi¬ 
dence on the above. One says we get all our appliances 
from America, while others say the reverse. Who was 
the originator of making boxes all in one piece of wood ? 
It is an old art in joinery. I have seen coffin sides-made 
in one piece, and it is only a pity that one could not be 
filled with the whims of disturbers of the peace, and 
buried out of hearing. 
Thirty-five years ago I made hundreds of octagon 
supers as well as quadrants for the octagon hive all of one 
piece, and have still the machine that made them and 
samples of the boxes beside me, which anyone may see. 
In 1857 the Germans had in this country frames made 
from one piece of wood, and in that same year both the 
French, Germans, and English exhibited moveable-comb 
hives at the International Show, while about the same 
date I could be seen manipulating my moveable-comb 
hives on board the steamer from Arran and doling out 
honeycomb to the astonished spectators, while in 1855 I 
put into a Buchanan Street Station warehouse in Glas¬ 
gow some hundred pounds of honeycomb in frames of 
sectional supers, the first that appeared in Glasgow. I 
quite agree with the very sensible advice given by 
“Felix” not to squabble over who was the original con¬ 
triver, but accept things as they are. Still, I have a 
strong desire to give information, as well as to give due 
credit to continental and American bee keepers for what 
they are entitled to, but for nothing more.—A Lanark¬ 
shire Bee-keeper. 
THE HONEY QUESTION AND THE BEE-KEEPERS’ 
UNION. 
Dr. Geo. Walker says, page 260, that he “ thought the traditional 
schoolboy knew what gross profit meant, and the difference between it 
and net profit. . . . Net profit is the gross profit less the working 
expenses.” I £ Dr. Walker will leave the “ schoolboy ” alone, and go 
aud inquire of the first youth he can find who is in a mercantile counting 
house, he will learn that there are other items to be deducted besides 
working ex|>enses from the gross profits before the net profits can be got 
at. The aforesaid youth will tell him that “ net profit ” is the balance 
on the debit side in the profit and loss account. 
Then he takes me to task for saying they made 15 per cent, gross 
profit, instead of 17 per cent. In his eagerness to prove me wrong he 
does not see that seventeen is greater than fifteen, while I named this 
latter as being an exorbitant rate of profit; but I am correct for all 
that, as it is the rule in all business houses to calculate their profits on 
the gross selling price and not on the buying price. By so doing they 
do not sound so large for one thing; then it is more correct. For 
instance, an article which costs 6d. and is sold for Is. is called 50 per 
cent, profit— vide Dr. Walker it would be 100 per cent. 
Then he grasps at the word “ turnover.” They bought £ 1000 worth 
of honey, and sold £700 worth at a profit over cost of £100, thus leaving 
at cost price £400 in stock ; yet he says they only turned over £600. 
Here again his “business ” is at fault. How could he buy £1000 worth 
of honey and pay for it, and not turn this sum over ? This £400 worth 
he has in stock it seems he cannot sell. He may have to take £200 to 
get rid of it, yet it does not seem to have been valued except at cost 
price; if it had^been, perhaps, the balance sheet would have looked 
worse. 
I hinted that they only bought the finest samples of honey. He says 
this is not so, as they bought £200 worth of inferior honey, which they 
cannot re-sell, nor can they sell Heather or any dark coloured or strong 
flavoured honey, saying, “ It is not the slightest use our trying to push 
the strong flavoured or dark honey if the grocers will not take it, and 
we cannot afford to throw away our shareholders’ money.” Here we see 
he denies the impeachment, then admits it, and sets up a plea of 
“extenuating circumstances but he also unconsciously shows that his 
company has failed to accomplish what it promised to do for the benefit 
of honey producers—viz., provide them with a ready money market for 
all their produce to the extent of its funds, and create a demand for 
British honey in particular ; but instead of doing this, they are wasting 
their capital and energy in competing in price and appearance with 
foreign honey, as instead of appealing to the public to use their honey 
like Hoge does with his “Horehound Honey,” they just have a traveller 
selling to grocers, who, of course, only buy what is in demand. Did 
Holloway sell his pills for less because others made pills ? No, he 
caused a demand for them amongst the class who used them, and then 
dealers kept them in stock to supply that demand ; and this is what the 
Bee-keepers’ Union will do. In 1885 Dr. Walker said they would turn 
over their capital six times yearly ; this would be a “ turnover ” (with 
£6000 capital subscribed) of £36,000, rather a slight difference between 
this and the fact. Even the Canadians could do more business in six 
weeks in a strange country than the company could do in twelve months 
in their own town, and not undersell them either. 
A word about honey. If it is light coloured it is praised, if dark it 
is condemned ; here prejudice or ignorance—chiefly ignorance—is the 
cause. I produce a honey which is a dark olive green colour, and my 
Clover honey is a pale straw colour, and all who can judge Clover 
honey say it is matchless. If I sold by looks only to strangers the 
Clover would always go, but if I first let them taste, then the dark 
would sell fifty times to one of Clover, and the buyers always after¬ 
wards associate the dark green colour with the honey they like. 
Dr. Walker says he declines to do anything to help on the 
N. B. B. K. U. If I consider him in the relation of Director of the 
H. Co., it is quite natural and likely for him to do so, as no sensible 
person would think of sending his produce to the H. Co. for 6d. per lb., 
and have his name carefully taken off and replaced by the Company’s 
labels if he could sell with his own name on through the Union for 
Is. per lb.; but Dr. Walker is a member of the executive of the 
B. B. K. A. which is established to teach bee-keeping “ as a means of 
bettering the condition of cottagers and of agricultural and other 
labouring classes,” and how they propose to benefit them, except by 
getting them a good price for their honey, does not appear ; yet this is 
the banner they have hoisted for thirteen years, and what has drawn 
support from the gentry and clergy. A little reflection should show 
Dr. Walker and his friends that any scheme calculated to put 
a greater price in the producer’s pocket for his crop should be 
looked on with great favour, for good paying prices would in¬ 
crease the number of bee-keepers on the one hand, and those 
already keeping would largely increase their stocks on the other, 
subscribers to their funds would feel their money was doing some 
good, and the associations could consinue to flourish. Asa member of 
the B. B. K. A. we certainly expect Dr. Walker to give the Union all the 
moral support he can, as we shall create a demand for the members’ 
honey, and, without advancing the price to the consumer, get a greater 
one for the producer. The H. Co. need not complain, as they can then 
deal in foreign honey, or even in bee-keepers’ supplies to supply the 
extra demand. 
I am afraid some are thinking the Bee-keepers’ Union proposes 
receiving the members’ produce at one centre, and then re-selling it. 
Oh no ! we shall not do anything so foolish. We shall provide labels for 
him to put on himself, and if he cannot sell it himself at his own price, 
then he can send it to the fairs. These will be the talk for miles round, 
and will be visited by thousands of people, who will get a taste of pure 
honey, and will buy, perhaps, a pound or two. These will have the 
producer’s name and address telling the buyer where to get more like the 
sample, and a caution against buying honey except it has the Union 
labels on. The producers will thus have constant and ready markets 
perhaps hundreds of miles away, and, except the first and the surplus 
