23
TaN
BS
ALBERT R. MANN
LIBRARY
NEw YorK STATE COLLEGES
OF
AGRICULTURE AND Home ECONOMICS
AT
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
EVERETT FRANKLIN PHILLIPS
BEEKEEPING LIBRARY
Cornell University Libra
Forty-two years of bee-keeping in New Ze
Cornell University
Library
The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.
http://www. archive.org/details/cu31924003717679
To my Bee~keeping Friends in New Zealand.
J |
At the suggestion of several old beekeeping friends I promised some time ago
to write a brief history of the progress of Modern Commercial Beekeeping in
New Zealand, from its introduction into the country down to the present time.
This, with the consent of the Editor of the “N.Z. Farmer,’ was published in a
series of articles last year in the bee columns of that journal. Having records by
me, and my memory serving me well, enabled me to jot down fairly complete
particulars of such events as now seem to me to have had the greatest influence
in shaping the course of our beekeeping industry.
Seeing that I have taken a leading part in all movements herein recorded, the
frequent use of the personal “I” was unavoidable. To have given the names of
all connected with the pioneering of the industry would have made too formidable
a list, so I have only mentioned those that could not well be avoided.
While the “Reminiscences” were being published I had ample proof of the
interest taken in them, and I think any of the younger generation of our bee-
keepers who have read them will better appreciate the favourable conditions
under which they now work, as compared with the difficulties the pioneers of the
industry had to contend against.
Regarding the present condition and the future prospects of Commercial
Beekeeping in New Zealand. Having subscribed to most bee journals published
in the English language during the past 38 years, I have kept abreast of all
movements in the beekeeping world during that time, and am therefore able to
form a fairly correct estimate of the status of our beekeeping as compared with
that in other countries, and I have no hesitation in saying that we lead the
world in beekeeping. I am aware it is a big claim to make, but when we con-
sider that no other country has such an effective Apiaries Act for controlling
disease, or such compulsory Regulations for Government Grading of all honey
leaving the country, annual registration of Apiaries, and supervision over all im-
ported bees, besides permanent Inspectors of Apiaries. who are constantly travel-
ling from apiary to apiary, I don’t believe it will be thought an idle boast; and
with regard to Apiary Appliances, we are in the forefront with these.
As to the future there cannot be a doubt. The strides that the industry is now
making, with an assured oversea market for our surplus honey, warrant our
younger beekeepers launching out in all good faith in the future development of
a prosperous industry.
The official figures given by the Hon. Mr. Rhodes at the opening of the Bee-
keepers’ Conference in June, 1915, were encouraging: Number of beekeepers in
New Zealand the previous season, 11,200; number of hives of bees, 74,340; value
of output of honey, £50,000; and the industry only in its infancy under the new
conditions. It is expected that these figures will be doubled in a very short time.
In order that the oldest of my beekeeping friends may have a copy of these
jottings in liandy form, I have had a limited number reprinted for private circu-
lation only.
With fraternal regards,
I. HOPKINS.
Auckland, N,Z., March, 1916.
I. HOPKINS,
Forty—two Years of
Bee—keeping in New Zealand
1874-1916.
SOME REMINISCENCES.
By I. HOPKINS.
\,
THE IMPORTATION OF THE HIVE
BEE INTO NEW ZEALAND.
Previous to the year 1838 no variety
of the hive bee (Apis mellifica) existed
in New Zealand; consequently the
earliest settlers could not avail them-
selves of any portion of- the abundance
of nectar so freely secreted in the native
flora. There are two varieties of the
bee family indigenous to.the country,
neither of which are of any use as honey
bees. The smaller -of-the two (Dasy-
colletes purpurens) is common in the
Auckland province. On March 13,.1839,
the first hive-bees were landed at Mangu-
nga, Hokianga. They were brought from
England in the sailing ship James by
Miss Bumby, sister of the Rev. J. H.
Bumby, one of a party of missionaries.
There were two colonies, in straw skeps.
It may be of interest here to note that
for over fifty years the late Rev. W.
Cotton, chaplain to Bishop Selwyn, was
credited with introducing, in 1842, the
first bees into this country, and in the
earlier editions of my “Bee Manual” I
recorded this error. I subsequently re-
ceived proof of Miss Bumby’s importa-
tion, and also that of Lady Hobson from
New South Wales in 1840, which I duly
noted in later editions.
Some few years ago I had access to
some apiary notes made by a near rela-
tion of Miss Bumby, in 1843-5, which, in
the light of modern beekeeping, seem
rather quaint. The following is a speci-
men of the notes :—
No. 1.—KING HENRY VIII.
From Miss Bumby’s original stock.
queen swarmed December 27, 1843.
swarm October 3, 1844, °
The
New
Weight of :
Date. Honey Taken.
1844. lb. 02. Swarm.
2
MAO TR eccecnn Ba Edward.
3
July 138 ........ 28 0 Marianne.
Sept. 24, 1844.
October 2 ....... 4 8 4
Samuel.
December 23.... 10 8 October 10, 1844.
é 5
1845. Henry.
October 13, 1844.
MATCH, sisisisjecaun's Died Died off.
It would seem by the above that honey
was taken both in summer and winter,
and that the greatest take was in winter,
‘the total returns from King Henry VIII.
for 12 months being 46}lbs. of honey,
and four swarms.
It may here be mentioned that the
Rev. W. C. Cotton was the author of a
very interesting bee ‘manual, “My Bee
Book,” of some 368 pages. He also
published about the year 1844,
“A FEW SIMPLE RULES FOR NEW
ZEALAND BEEKEEPERS.
“(1) Be anxious to increase your stock
at first rather than to take a large
quantity of honey.
“(2) Get well acquainted with your
bees, and make them acquainted with
you. Handle them gently, and do not
blow on them. Leave them alone when
they are cross.
“(3) Always in swarming time have
a spare hive at hand.
“(4) If you have boxes to pile one
on top of the other, never disturb the
lower box, except when, after two or
three years, the combs have grown old
and want renewing; then, late in the
autumn, when the breeding season is
over, take the combs away from the
lower hox instead of the second.
“TO TAKE HONEY.
“(5) Take off the cover, blow some
smoke into the upper box between the
bars to drive the bees into the lower
box. Have a table ready, with a cloth
upon it; lift the box on to this, and
carefully cut out the outside combs,
stopping directly you come to those
which have brood in them. Return the
box with the brood-combs undisturbed.
This may be repeated as often as you
see through the window (of the hive)
that the honeycombs are sealed over.
“(6) After the breeding season is over
all the boxes except the lower one may
be entirely emptied in situations where,
as at Paihia, the hees work through the
winter.
“(7) Keep a stock book regularly, and
write down immediately anything curi-
ous which is observed.
“(Signed) WILLIAM CHAS. COTTON.”
The above rules were no doubt the
best that could be adopted by New Zea-
land beekeepers at that time, and the
system advocated was at least a great
advance on that of the sulphur pit
method, though quite out of date now.
Rule 7, however, concerning an apiary
register or note book, will always hold
good.
THE FIRST NEW ZEALAND BEE
MANUAL.
Somewhere in the early part of the
second half of the last century a useful
little manual, with the title “How to
Manage the Honey Bees in New Zea-
land,” compiled by an Old Beekeeper,
and revised by H. J. Hawkins, Belvedere
Nursery, and David Hay, Montpellier
Nursery, was published by Geo. T.
Chapman, Auckland.
The practical part of this little work
covers some 45 pages, and was fully up
to date at the time it was published.
The bar hive—not the bar-frame hive
—was the most advanced form of hive
then in use, from which the honeycombs
had to be separated from the sides with
a long knife when taking honey; bar-
frames as we know them now had not
then been invented. Notwithstanding,
however, all that the Rev. W. Cotton
and a few others had done: to awaken
an interest in the most humane system
of beekeeping in New Zealand, the old,
cruel and wasteful sulphur pit method
was generally practised down to the year
1880, when things took a turn for the
better, although the sulphur pit was still
largely in evidence until some eight or
nine years ago. 3 5314
PRIMITIVE BEEKEEPING.
As I have already intimated, beekeep-
ing in New Zealand for very many years
after the introduction of the hive-bee,
speaking generally, followed the primitive
methods in vogue among the cottager
class in Britain and other parts of
Europe at that time. Common boxes
with crossed sticks running through
them to support the combs were the
common form of hives, though a few
settlers who had been familiar with and
made straw skeps in the “Old Country,”
adopted that style of hive here. During
the first years of my travelling among
our beekeepers as Government Apiarist,
I came across several lots of well-con-
structed skeps. They were made of
twisted straw laced with split supple-
jack cane, and were very neat and cosy-
looking. It grieved the owners very
much when they were compelled to do
away with them and adopt the more
serviceable frame hive.
A prominent feature of this primitive
hive system was the sulphuring of the
bees at the end of the season to obtain
the honey they had stored. A small pit
was dug a foot or so in depth; half-way
down two cross-sticks were placed, on
which some sulphured rags were hung, a
match was applied to the rags, and the
box containing the bees placed over the
hole, covered by a sack. In a short time
the sulphur fumes killed the bees, and
what honey was in the box could be re-
moved with safety to the owner. There
were a few individual exceptions to this
style of bee-keeping, settlers who had
profited by the teaching of the Rev. W.
Cotton, and secured the honey without
destroying the bees, but the majority
used the sulphur pit.
THE HONEY MARKET IN
DAYS.
For some years after I came to New
Zealand, 51 years ago, the only honey I
saw for sale was what the Maoris
hawked about in old kerosene or some
other old tins. A conglomeration of honey,
wax, and bee grubs (the latter was con-
sidered a delicacy by the older Maoris),
all mixed together, usually obtained
from bee nests in the bush, which were
plentiful in those days. Occasionally
strained honey, free from wax, ete.,
would be offered, but as it was generally
believed (and with good reason) that the
straining cloths used by the Maoris were
parts of discarded blankets that had
served as body wrappers in the heyday
of their usefulness,- the vendors found
very few customers among the older
colonists. The first honey ~I’ remember
seeing on the market properly put up in
tins, was in 1868. I cannot now say
whether it was imported or of New Zea-
land production; at all events, it was
horrible stuff, wherever it came from. I
was no connoisseur of honey at the time,
but the nauseous taste made me remark:
“Tf that is honey, I never want any more
of the so-called ‘Nectar of the Gods,’ ”
—the rest was thrown away. I, how-
ever, later on discovered the true flavour
of honey after I became a beekeeper and
produced it myself, and have been a con-
sumer ever since.
Some time in the ’70’s I heard of an
extensive box-hive apiary established
near Gisborne, and was informed that
the method of taking honey was to cut
out the honeycombs from the boxes and
dump them into a large tank (in which,
I presume, a strainer had been fixed) to
drain. When the drainings had well-
nigh ceased, a man with bared ‘feet
tramped about on the combs to press out
as much as possible of the remaining
honey. It was then put up for market
in small tins, and, so far as I am aware,
THOSE
this was the only apiary that we may
term « commercial bee-farm then in New
Zealand. Possibly some honey was im-
ported in those days, but if so, it must
have been in small quantities, as I never
saw any served up at meal times; in
fact, the majority of families only used a
little occasionally as a medium for
children’s medicine, such as “borax and
honey,” ete.
BEEKEEPING IN OTHER COUNTRIES
The leading beekeepers in most Euro-
pean countries had endeavoured from
time to time to improve upon the old and
wasteful methods of beekeeping, and had
to some extent succeeded, but it is to
America we owe acknowledgment for the
greatest benefits received in this direc-
tion. Many of our best apiary appli-
ances were invented by enterprising
American beekeepers, and others have
been vastly improved in that country.
Our popular form of movable-frame
hive came from there, and our comb-
foundation was brought to its present
state of perfection in that country; in
fact, there is scarcely one article com-
‘prised in an up-to-date apiary outfit but
what owes its best features to American
ingenuity. It is not necessary to go into
particulars of dates, etc., of the different
inventions; it will be sufficient to say
‘that the crowning point came with the
invention of machinery by A. I. Root and
another in 1876-7, that turned out full
sheets of comb-foundation with high side-
walls, in almost the same condition that
we have it now. I have always con-
sidered that what is usually termed
“Modern beekeeping” commenced at that
date, for without such comb-foundation
the full benefit of the movable frame-
hive could not have been gained.
THE FIRST STAGE OF PROGRESS
IN NEW ZEALAND.
When I first took a practical interest
in beekeeping, early in 1874, no one in
New Zealand, so far as I could learn,
knew anything about the progress of the
industry in other countries. I had
gathered from scraps I had read that
much had been done to get out of the old
ruts, but could get no information that
would guide me beyond a gin-case hive
—the first kind I adopted,at the Thames,
where I then lived. I was most anxious
to learn the best methods, as I very
early conceived the possibility of bee-
farming being made a profitable business
in New Zealand; the country seemed so
well adapted for it. My enthusiastic talk
about taking up beekeeping as a busi-
ness, and raising tons of honey, gave my
intimate friends the impression that I
was really going off my head and becom-
ing a fit subject for an asylum. Later
on, when I had started with all the latest
appliances, they admitted that I must
have had method in my madness. In
looking back I can quite understand that
under the then condition of beekeeping
knowledge they had.good reason for their
supposition.
I had what I may term very good
success with my gin-case hives, and by
boring several good-sized holes in the
-roof of them, I was able to get boxes full
of clean honey and comb, which I had
placed above. From information gained
from a publication, “The Cottage Gar-
dener,” I constructed bar-hives, that is,
boxes with movable bars (not bar-frames )
running across the tops, and movable
covers—the “Stewarton,” ‘“Carr-Stewar-
ton,” and others. They were a slight
improvement on gin-cases, as there was
better communication between the lower
and upper boxes, but were not the thing.
THE FIRST MOVABLE-FRAME HIVE
IN NEW ZEALAND.
The very first movable-frame hive seen
in this country was one sent by a friend
in California in 1876, to the late Mr. G.
8. Graham, of Auckland, who was inter-
ested in beekeeping. Captain Wildman,
of the Thames, was an intimate friend of
Mr. Graham, and he presented me with
two duplicates of this hive he had made
for me immediately after the original
landed. It was known in California as
the “Harbison” hive, after the name of
one of the original and most extensive
beekeepers of that State, who was using
such hives. It was, however, as I after-
wards discovered, a German hive, made
and used by the Baron of Berlepsch, and
known as the “Berlepsch hive.” It con-
sisted of a long box standing on end,
with a door at the back, exactly like a
small cupboard; the movable-frames were
in a compartment at the bottom; it was
a difficult job to remove them. I gave
them a trial later on, but soon discarded
them.
FURTHER PROGRESS.
In 1878 I learned through a correspon-
dent to. an English journal, who was
then residing in Algeria, something of
the doings of A. I. Root in America. I
at once communicated with the latter,
and received in return a copy of “Glean-
ings” and his price list. In the mean-
time, I had sent to London for the best
bee book obtainable, and to my intense
delight received a copy of “Langstroth
on the Honey Bee.” An order for a
comb-foundation machine, honey extrac-
tor, smoker, and several other appliances
was sent at once to Root. In the inter-
val before their arrival I set about mak-
ing a number of Langstroth hives, so
that when Root’s goods arrived I was
all ready to set up a fully-equipped
modern apiary, the first of its kind in
Australasia.
It took some little time even after
receipt of the new appliances from
America to get thoroughly - underway,
so that it was at the commencement
of the season of 1879 before the whole
of my apiary of fifty colonies was fully
established on modern lines, My first
100 Langstroth hives were cut and made
by hand (mostly at night time), but
subsequently I arranged with Messrs.
Bagnall Bros., of Turua, sawmillers, to
cut them by machinery, which they have
continued to do ever since.
The first thing needed after the ar-
rival of the machine for making it was
comb-foundation. By the way, this ma-
chine cost me £14 landed in Auckland,
and was, I believe, the second one to
leave the United States, the first going
to the late Mr. Raitt, of North Scot-
land.
I well remember my first attempt—
with the kindly aid of Mr. W. Dey,
now of Hamilton, Waikato—to make
comb-foundation. Although we worked
closely to the printed instructions re-
ceived, and with proper utensils, every-
thing went wrong, so much go that at
the end of a strenuous day we had
succeeded in covering ourselves and sur-
roundings with wax, and had turned
out the large quantity of three pounds
of comb-foundation that was usable.
Subsequently, with enlarged boilers, I
have turned out 200lb in the same time.
After a while everything worked along
smoothly and successfully, and ‘The
Apiary” at Parawai, Thames, becamea
notable visiting place. The then county
chairman, Mr. Walter Brodie, used to
bring along every noted visitor to the
Thames—at that time a flourishing dis-
trict. The late Sir George Grey visited
the apiary more than once, and was
greatly interested in the new method of
beekeeping. He promised me a number
of exotic plants, great nectar yielders,
he had introduced, and were growing
on his island of Kawau.
The late Mr. C. T. Wren, nurseryman,
of Remuera, Auckland, had sent to A.
I. Root for bee goods towards the latter
part of 1879, not at the time being
aware of what I had already done.
When a friend informed him he paid
me a special visit, and while congratu-
lating me on being first in the field,
expressed his disappointment at not be-
ing first himself, as he fully expected to
be. Mr. Wren was afterwards my Auck-
land agent.
THE FIRST HONEY RAISED UNDER
THE NEW SYSTEM.
Unfortunately for my prospects of
raising much extracted honey, my
apiary was too near the bush which
covered the hills adjacent, and from
which the bulk of my honey was
gathered. Nearly all honey from mixed
bush is too dense to extract from the
combg in the ordinary way; it was 60
in my case, and I could only secure a
comparatively small quantity with the
extractor. J therefore turned my at-
tention to the raising of comb-honey
in one-pound section boxes, which sold
well at 10/ per dozen wholesale; in
fact, the demand exceeded the supply
for a long time. Speaking of section
boxes reminds me that at the time
mentioned they were in four pieces,
which had to be nailed together, a
most difficult job, and when many
thousands were on order, made up,
some idea of our difficulties of pioneer-
ing will be realised.
THE FIRST CONTRIBUTIONS ON
MODERN BEE CULTURE TO THE
PRESS.
In 1879 I was in possession of all the
most notable bee books of the time, in-
cluding Root’s “A.B.C. of Bee Culture,”
in parts, as it had then been published
in “Gleanings in Bee Culture,” “Langs-
troth on the Honey Bee,” “The Times’
Bee Master,” “Bevan on the Honey
Bee,” the Rev. J. G. Wood's little work,
and one or two others; but only “Langs-
troth” and the “A.B.C.” were of any
service as regards the new methods of
bee management. These, together with
copies of “Gleanings,” the ‘American
Bee Journal,’ and “British Bee Jour-
nal,’ which were reaching me regularly,
I studied very closely, so that by the
close of 1879 I was well versed in every-
thing that had been done in advanced
bee culture.
Early in 1880 the then editors of the
“Thames Advertiser” and “Auckland
Weekly News” asked me to write a
series of articles on the new system of
bee culture for their papers, which I
did weekly for six months, explaining
the complete system. Evidently the
papers had a large circle of readers, or
the articles were copied into other
papers, as in a very short time letters
began to pour in from all quarters of
New Zealand and Australia asking if
I could supply the, hives and appliances
mentioned, or tell the writers where
they could be obtained. This suggested
to me the idea of running a supply
business with my apiary in the mean-
time until the opportunity came to
go into bee-farming on a large scale.
A SUPPLY BUSINESS.
Having arranged with Bagnall Bros. for
a large supply of hives and frames, as
well as section boxes, I soon had a big
trade, with half a dozen men at work.
We sent hives and all other appliances to
Australia and all parts of New Zealand.
I was then running an apiary averaging
60 colonies—the maximum often reaching
80—which necessitated me working from
4 am. till 10 p.m., and often all night.
My working capital, owing to a previous
heavy loss, was very small, hence my
having to work long hours to recover
myself,
My supply business brought me into
intimate relations with some very fine
gentlemen residing in all parts of Aus-
tralasia, who were more ‘or less inter-
ested in beekeeping. The friendly rela-
tionship of several who have not since
passed over to the great majority, con-
tinues to ‘this day. Quite recently Mr.
Chas. Fullwood, formerly of “Brisbane,
but now of Melbourne, one of my very
earliest customers, called upon me while
on a visit to this country. This friend-
ship I prize very highly.
INTRODUCTION OF ITALIAN BEES
INTO NEW ZEALAND.
Writing Root in 1879 re his sending me
one or two colonies of pure Italian bees,
his reply, which I have before me, dated
June 3rd, 1879, advised me, as being the
most convenient and safest for the bees,
to apply to Mr. R. Wilkin, San Buena-
ventura, California, who could supply me.
This necessitated some delay while cor-
respondence passed between us, otherwise
I would have had Italian bees early in
1880, or most likely at the latter part of
1879. As it was, however, I did not re-
ceive my two colonies till after two
colonies had been landed ¢rom California
to the order of Mr. J. H. Harrison, of
Coromandel, and the Canterbury Accli-
matisation Society, one for each.
My two colonies, in the firet place, cost
me 10 dollars (£2 1/8) each at San
Buenaventura, to which must be added
5 dollars 75 cents, freight and sundry
expenses from San Buenaventura to San
Francisco, and 10 dollars’ freight from
San Francisco to Auckiand each colony,
making in all £9 10/6, all of which had
to be paid in advance, but fortunately
the bees arrived safely and in good con-
dition. J, of courwe, started at once to
breed queens, and Italianise my apiary,
and by the close of the season 1881-2 I
had 45 pure Italian colonies, and a num-
ber of hybrids or crosses. At that time
it was difficult to get purely-mated
queens, as there were so many black bees
about, and it was ‘only by breeding
plenty .of queens and constantly weeding
out the mis-mated ones, that one could
get his apiary Italianised.
FIRST EDITION OF “THE NEW
ZEALAND BEE MANUAL.”
After ithe close of my Press articles, I
was requested to bring them out in book
form, and in September, 1881, the first
edition of my “Bee Manual” was pub-
lished. It took well, and just 13 months
after, a second edition was brought out.
The book had a large circulation in Aus-
tralia, and being as suitable for ‘that
country as this, when the third edition
was called for I altered its name to that
of “The Australasian Bee Manual,” under
which title it is registered.
STARTING THE FIRST COMMERCIAL
BEE FARMS AT MATAMATA.
My business grew very rapidly, the
demand for the new beekeeping ap-
pliances kept my staff very busy. There
was also a large demand for colonies of
bees, and that for Italian queens was
growing, but notwithstanding I had the
prospect of a large business in front of
me, my interest was centred in bee-
farming on a large scale, not in the sup-
ply trade. I ‘had frequently declared
that honey could be raised in tons under
the new methiod, and was laughed at for
talking nonsense; this made me deter-
mined to prove it at the earliest oppor-
tunity, and that opportunity came earlier
than I had anticipated.
In the first months of 1882, the late
Major T. L. Murray. who was then man-
ager of the Thames branch of the Bank
of New Zealand, and who took special
interest in the new beekeeping, told me
about the magnificent crops of white
clover blossoms ive ‘had recently seen at
Matamata, extending for many miles in
all directions. The whole country, he
said, when viewed from the neighbouring
hills looked as if covered with a thin
layer of snow, and suggested my getting
permission to establish a bee farm on the
estate. The date Mr. Wil, tire then
editor of the “Auckland Weekly News,”
who had also visited Matamata, told me
about the clover, and he, unknown to me,
suggested to the late Mr. J. C. Firth, the
owner of the estate—which comprised in
all 87,000 acres—that he should engage
me to establish one or more bee farms on
his property amidst the white clover.
The description given me of the large
area of white clover set me longing to be
there with my bees, as I pictured to my-
self the number of out-apiaries that
could be established; in fact, I concluded
that there would scarcely be any limit
to the number of colonies that might be
kept. While this was uppermost in my
mind, I received w letter from Mr. Firth,
much bo my surprise and delight, stating
he would come to the Thames to see me
about establishing « bee farm at Mata-
mata. Wihen we met, I found him very
eager to start bee farming on his estate.
It then became a question to him of get-
ting bees and someone to manage them,
and as I was ithe only person who had a
goodly number of colonies available in
frame hives, and being the only one who
understood the new system thoroughly,
he made me a very good offer to go my-
self and take my bees, and as many more
as I could get.
I wanted, of course, some little time
to think over it, and to visit Matamata
befiore I could decide one way or the
other, as it would mean giving up my
business—though I was anxious to go,
and hoped everything would be favour-
able. Eventually everything was ar-
ranged for my going, my business was
passed over to Messrs. Bagnall Bros. and
Co., and I left the Thames with all my
bees—45 pure Italian colonies, and about
10 crossbreds—and appliances in Mr.
Firth’s steamer for Matamata, in August,
1882.
THE MATAMATA APIARY.
The homestead of the estate was sit-
uated about seven miles from the land-
ing, on the Waihou River, where my
bees were transhipped from the steamer
to wagons. The spot chosen for the
home apiary was about 400 yards from
the homestead, in a naturally sheltered
spot. A house and large workshop, with
honey house attached, had been erected
close to, so that in a few days the apiary
was fully established. The apiary being
comparatively small, I was anxious to
purchase some colonies, and eventually
arranged with Mr. Parsons of Te Awa-
mutu, and Major Jackson of Kihikihi, to
sell me all the colonies they could spare.
Mr. Parsons’ bees were in small frame
hives of his own construction (not
Langstroth hives), and Major Jackson's
thirteen colonies were in Berlepseh
hives; in all I secured fifty colonies.
These were packed on a four-horse
wagon. We reached Cambridge the first
night, and Matamata the following
afternoon, without the least mishap,
although parts of the road were so bad
that the wheels sank in ruts up to the
axles, and we had to use a spade to
clear them.
In due course the bees were all trans-
ferred to Langstroth hives, so that at
the commencement of the season I had
about 100 colonies of a mixed assortment
of Italians, hybrids, and black bees. All
the pure Italians were kept at the home
apiary, and with the others I established
THE FIRST OUT-APIARY.
As my first: object was to increase the
bees and to Italianise all I had bought,
I gave little attention to the taking of
honey the first season, so that only 4
ton or so was secured for use on the
station, and as presents to friends. The
following season of 1883-4 ten tons were:
taken from 200 colonies in the out-apiary”
(that is, 150 spring count, increasing to
200 colonies), and this was about the
average yield while I remained at Mata-
mata.
Unfortunately, however, for bee-farm-
ing, the land at Matamata soon got
“clover sick.” White clover would grow
magnificently for about three years and
then die out completely. This was a
great disappointment to everybody,
especially to me, as I had expected to
establish at least six or eight out-
apiaries.
IMPORTING HOLY LAND QUEENS.
Little was known of a practical
nature concerning several varieties of
Eastern bees other than Italians, hence
the glowing reports circulated about
them at the time. So much, however,
was thought of some varieties, that Mr.
D. A. Jones, of Canada, accompanied by
Mr. Frank Benton, of the United States,
went to Cyprus and India in 1879 to in-
vestigate them. Mr. Benton eventually
established an apiary of 100 colonies in
Cyprus for the purpose of rearing Cyp-
rian queens for export to Europe and
America. Subsequently he established
apiaries in Palestine, Carniola, and other
Eastern places, for raising queens of the
several varieties.
Naturally I was very anxious to test
these Eastern bees of which so much
had been said in their favour, and know-
ing Mr, Wilkin, of California, with whom
I had previously dealt, had some in their
purity, I sent to him for five nuclei of
pure Holy Landers and five of Cyprians.
My order went forward in June, 1882,
and on August 24, 1882, the ten nuclei,
erated together, were shipped by Messrs
Stearns and Smith, of San Francisco,
reaching me safely the following month
He was, however, unable to send me
Cyprians at that time, so those that
came to hand were five pure Holy Land-
ers, and five crossed Holy Landers—
Italians.
OFFICIAL PERMISSION TO SEND
QUEEN BEES THROUGH THE POST.
As I anticipated doing an extensive
queen trade, it was necessary—as there
were some restrictions with regard to
sending live animals by post—to get per-
mission to send queen bees by mail. I
therefore prepared a specimen shipping
cage, which was sent through Mr. J. C.
Firth to the Postmaster-General, Wel-
lington, on October 9th, 1882, together
with a request that queen bees, with
their accompanying worker bees, be
allowed to go. by post. To this request
the following reply was received—the
original of which I have before me:—
Post Office and Telegraph Department,
Wellington, October 20, 1882.
Sir,—The Postmaster-Genera] has very
much pleasure in authorising you to send
queen bees through the post in the boxes
(shipping cages), of which you sent a speci-
men with your application of the 9th inst.
Postmasters will be instructed to take every
care of the packages.—I have the honour
to be, Sir, your obedient servant,
(Signed), W. GRAY, Secretary.
THE FIRST COMMERCIAL QUEEN-
REARING APIARY IN AUSTRALASIA.
Before leaving the Thames I had sup-
plied Italian queens, but chiefly locally.
Orders, however, were coming in from
distant parts during the winter of 1882.
These I took with me to Matamata to
execute from there. As soon as the
season set in I raised both Holy Land
and Italian queens for sale, and issued a
price list. During the season of 1882-3,
and subsequently, queens were sent to
all parts of New Zealand as well as to
South Australia, Victoria, New South
Wales, Queensland, Tasmania, and later
on to several of the South Sea Islands.
With the exception of Queensland, those
queens I sent were the first of the kind
seen in the several colonies.
Considering the difficulty encountered
of late years in queens travelling safely
when caged for some days, it may be
well to mention that I do not remember
one loss in the mails, even when sent
to Australia, although in those days the
queens had to take their chance in the
closed sacks with lettera, ete. On one
occasion a queen sent to South <Aus-
tralia was 22 days on the trip, caused
by some unaccountable delay of the
package in Sydney. Two letters arrived
from the beekeeper—one complaining of
the delay ‘and the other stating he had
received the queen and two or three
bees alive. I wrote him at once that
if she did not turn out satisfactory
after her long confinement I would send
him another. Subsequently he wrote
10
me that she quickly recovered, and wae
doing well.
My queen trade developed very
rapidly, and for a considerable time the
home apiary of about 60 colonies, and
(in the season) some 75 nuclei, was
chiefly devoted to the breeding and test-
ing of Italian queens for home use and
for sale.
THE TRADE IN COMB FOUNDATION.
The demand for Langstroth hives and
all the new bee appliances increased
enormously after passing over my busi-
ness to Messrs. Bagnall Bros. and Co.
Large orders came by every mail from
Australia and all parts of New Zealand.
There was an extraordinary rush into
the new beekeeping during the next few
years. As comb-foundation was one of
the chief requisites with the hives, and
I was then the only person making it
in the whole of Australasia, it may be
readily understood that I was kept very
busy manufacturing it. My difficulty
was in getting beeswax fast enough for
the purpose. An open order was given
to the New Zealand Loan and Mercan-
tile Agency to get every scrap of wax
possible from their Australian and New
Zealand branches, and to send it along
as soon as their parcels reached from
a half to one-ton lots. On one occasion
I had to send to England for two tons
to keep me going. Agents in Melbourne
and Sydney were appvinted for the sale
of comb-foundation, and several hundred-
weights were sent to them by each
steamer during the spring and summer
seasons. The first cwt that went to
Australia was to the order of my old
friend, Mr. Chas. Fullwood, alreaay men-
tioned.
“Some of the New Zealand agents, be-
side the branches of the Loan and Mer-
cantile Agency, were F. W. Isitt, Christ:
church; J. Adamson, Hastings; R. Cock,
New Plymouth; W. Tyree, Nelson; J.
Barkley, Westport, and others.
COMB-FOUNDATION MACHINES.
Soon after A. I. Root placed his origi-
nal 10-inch roller machine on the market
several others came forward, all differ-
ing a little in some respect. There were
the “Dunham,” “Vandervort,” “Given-
press,” “Van Deusen Flat-bottom Ma-
chine,” “Pelham’—all American—and a
very expensive English machine made
‘of brass. I imported and had in use
at Matamata, in addition to the Root
machine, all the other Americans, with
the exception of the ‘‘Pelham,” which my
friend, Mr. G. A. Green, now a leading
nurseryman of Auckland, had imported
and lent me for a while, so that I had
six machines in use. They were really
under trial to see which was the best.
My choice eventually fell upon the Root,
though for very thin section foundations
I preferred the “Van Deusen” machine,
and kept to that till I gave up busi-
ness.
The improvement made in the Root
machine from time to time kept it
ahead of the others, till eventually it
superseded all of them. My friend, Mr.
George Stevenson, of Gisborne, was
early in the field with a “Given-press,”
which he always believed in. I must con-
fess it was a failure with me. I could
make three times the quantity of better
foundation with a roller machine than
with the press, in a given time.
A NOVEL FOUNDATION MACHINE.
While on the subject of comb-founda-
tion machines I am reminded of a very
novel one. Not long after I received
my first one, Mr. John Blair, of the
Great Barrier Island, paid me a visit at
the Thames. I remarked after he had
gone that he seemed more interested in
the comb-foundation machine and the
making of comb-foundation than in any-
thing else. Some time after I learned
that he had made a machine which
‘answered the purpose; it was ingeni-
ously constructed of two wooden rollers
studded with hob nails.
ADULTERATED BEESWAX.
Two or three Auckland firms who
had country connections used to buy up
ali the wax they could get. It came
forward in small parcels, from 5 or 101b
up to 30 or 40lb, and was generally
bought by barter—exchanged for other
goods. The price given was from 6d to
7d per Jb for clean wax. When the
parcels had accumulated to several cwts
it was shipped to England, where double
the first cost or more was obtained for
it.
After I got properly under weigh, and
was buying up all the wax I could get.
the price went up to 9d and 10d in a
very short time. Some cute individuals
then thought it worth their while to
11
resort to adulteration. At first it was
earried out in a very crude manner,
easily detected. Mutton fat (tallow)
was the adulterant. This, however, gave
the wax an unnatural pale colour, and
a greasy feel when handled, so that it
could be detected at once. On one occa-
sion I was victimised and put to con-
siderable loss over adulterated wax.
Three or four sacks of wax reached
me at the Thames sent by an Auckland
firm with whom I had had many pre-
vious transactions. I was on the point
of leaving with a large exhibit of bees
and bee material for the Auckland
Spring Show, and as I had many orders
on hand for comb-foundation my wife,
who had assisted me many times to
make it, undertook, with the aid of a
stout lad, to have plenty ready to fill
orders on my return. I was away a
week, and on my return found Mrs.
Hopkins in great trouble. She had about
a couple of ewt of sheets ready, but
could not get them through the rollers
of the machine; the sheets seemed “rot-
ten.” She had been trying off and on
for two days, and did not get one sheet
through. As it was dark, and I was
tired, I said I would investigate matters
in the morning, cheering her up by
saying it was simply a matter of ad-
justing the rollers.
The next morning at daylight I
tackled the job, but with no better suc-
cess, the wax sheets, as my wife had
said, were simply “rotten,” and would
not hang together to go through the
machine. Luckily there was some wax
still left in the sacks, and on investiga-
tion I found a lot of it adulterated
with tallow, hence the cause of the
trouble was revealed. A week’s work
gone, and a big loss beside. If I had
examined the wax before I left the
trouble would not have occurred; it
taught me a lesson I profited by after-
wards.
COMMERCIAL ADULTERATION OF
BEESWAX.
As the demand for beeswax increased,
so the price advanced, and when it had
reached over 1/ per pound, wholesale, the
temptation for fraud brought some very
clever imitations of the genuine articlo
into the field. The old clumsy system
of tallow adulteration was a thing of
the past; the later fraudulent substance
was infinitely more difficult to deteet,
There were immense quantities sold
throughout the Dominion. Nearly every
grocer, oil and colour man, merchant,
and chemist in Auckland was taken in.
The first to come round with the stuff
was a German traveller. He found out
I was a big buyer of wax, and intro-
duced himself and the composition to
me. I will give him credit for not trying
to take me in, but he wanted me to
take others in. The stuff he offered
deceived several who considered them-
selves experts in wax. It was offered
to me in lots of one ton or more, landed
in Auckland from Germany, at £46
13/4 per ton (fivepence per lb), beeswax
at the time being worth over £100 per
ton. Needless to say he made no deal
with me, and I never heard any more
of him.
Some time after, however, wa tall,
smart-looking man, with all the appear-
ance of an experienced commercial travel-
ler, came to me and said: “You are a
large buyer of beeswax, I understand.”
“Yes,” I answered. ‘Have you any for
sale?” “Yes,” he replied; “I can sell
you several cwt at a price.” “Have you
a gsample?”—upon which he opened his
gladstone bag and handed me a sample.
I was so used to handling wax at the
time that at the first touch of the
sample I handed it back to him with-
out examining it, and said, “That is not
beeswax.” “No?” he queried, as inno-
cently as possible. He then told me he
was travelling for a firm who was sell-
ing it as genuine wax. I could not
contradict him, but told him not to offer
it as beeswax or he would get into
trouble. Notwithstanding this warning,
however, he must have sold some tons
of it in Auckland. He was getting 10d
per pound for it, and I have reason to
believe it was the same stuff that was
offered me at 5d.
It was such an excellent imitation of
the genuine article that it deceived old
buyers. On one occasion a leading Auck-
Jand merchant, with whom I had had
many transactions in wax, came to me
and said he had arranged to buy five
ewt of wax. Would I come and look at
it? He was a bit suspicious about it
owing to the quantity sent to him. He
had submitted a sample to the expert
buyer of a leading firm, who declared
it genuine, and would take it himself if
the merchant did not want it. “Oh,
but I do want it, if it is genuine,” re-
12
plied the merchant. But this did not
satisfy the inquirer, and he came to me.
As soon as I saw it I told him who -
he had bought it from, which he said’
wag correct, and I condemned it. When
the party came for his cheque he was
told to take the stuff away, and was
threatened with prosecution—he quickly
cleared out.
About two years after this an Auck-
land man commenced to manufacture a
fraudulent imitation of beeswax, and
must have made a very good thing out
of it before he was eventually trapped
Although I knew my man, and what
was going on very well, the law at that
time was such that it was a very risky
thing to accuse a man of fraud without
you could bring overwhelming evidence
to prove your case. It is different now,
when one can invoke the health and
food laws in all such cases. Eventually,
the culprit was punished by receiving
six months in gaol. This, I think, put
a stop to the fraud, for I have not since
heard of any adulterated beeswax being
sold.
THE FIRST BEE JOURNAL IN
SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE.
Previous to leaving the Thames I had
it in mind that a monthly bee journal
would soon be needed to push the in-
dustry ahead. When I broached the
subject to Mr Firth, shortly after get-
ting everything into working order at
Matamata, he fell in with the idea, with
the result that the first number of “The
New Zealand and Australian Bee Jour-
nal” was published in July, 1883, under
my editorship, the annual subscription
being 6/, post free. I was most fortu-
nate in securing some very able contri-
butors; in fact, I do not think any bee
THE
‘journal in the world, before or since,
has had better. They came forward
voluntarily in the interest of the indus-
try, and without fee or reward.
Although the journal had a fairly
large circulation for a magazine devoted
entirely to bees, it barely paid its way,
and gave nothing for the work entailed
in editing and publishing it. As regards
myself, it was a labour of love, and I
looked for no remuneration. It had,
however, done a vast amount of good
during its two years’ life, and would
not have then been given up had not
another journal taken it over to con-
tinue the bee matter. Mr Henry Brett
(the present head of the Brett Printing
and Publishing Co., Ltd.), who had just
started the “New Zealand Farmer, Bee
and Poultry Journal,” now “The
Zealand Farmer, Stock and _ Sta-
tion Journal,” made arrangements
with Mr J. C. Firth to take over
the “Bee Journal,” provided I would
edit the bee section. This I agreed to
do, and have been in that position ever
since—just 32 years. The “Bee Journal”
ceased publication after June, 1885—
greatly regretted by both New Zealand
and Australian beekeepers.
In this connection it may be of in-
terest to state that I have before me the
reply of the Chief Postmaster, Auckland,
to the request of the publisher that the
“Bee Journal” be registered as a maga-
zine for postal rates. It runs as fol-
lows :—
“Auckland, 5th July, 1883—I beg to
inform you I have received provisional
authority to pass the ‘Bee Journal’
through the post offices as a magazine.
Copies may now be posted at magazine
rates.—(Signed) 8. Biss, C.P.M.”
IMPORTING QUEENS DIRECT FROM
ITALY.
Taking matters as they happened as
near as may be in their chronological
order, the next item of importance was
the successful importation of Italian
queens direct from Italy, which was then
considered a great feat. In July, 1883, I
communicated with the late well-known
queen. breeder, Chas. Bianconcini, of
Bologna, and subsequently sent him an
order for eight of his. best queens at £1
each. In due time I received advice
that they would leave Naples on the
10th November, 1883. They reached me
at Matamata on January 9, 1884—a long
trip. Four of the eight queens came
safely, the rest dead. These were, of
course, the first queens to come to New
Zealand direct from Italy. Mr Full-
wood had previously sent me one from
Brisbane—one of some he had imported
direct. I had several transactions: with
Chas. Bianconcini afterwards, and always
found him a very decent fellow. He
died some years ago. My orders after
the first were always for twelve queens
(£12), and I usually got six through
alive. On one occasion, however, I lost
the whole twelve, so that the queen
trade was not all profit in those days.
13
IMPORTING SYRIAN, CYPRIAN,
HOLY LAND, CARNIOLAN, AND
SWISS ALPINE QUEENS DIRECT.
I was determined on my own account,
and in the interests of New Zealand bee-
keeping, to test all the Eastern bees,
which were in vogue at the time. The
craze for them had got hold of me, and
I felt I must have them; consequently,
in May, 1884, I sent an order to Mr T.
B. Blow, of Welwyn, Herts, England,
who was doing a considerable business
with Mr Frank Benton, to arrange with
the latter to send me queens of each
of the above races or varieties. The
“British Bee Journal” of June 15, 1884,
had the following paragraph in its
columns in connection with my order:—
“We are informed that Mr T. B. Blow
has a commission to forward Syrian,
Cyprian, Holy Land, Carniolan, and
Italian bees to New Zealand. We under-
stand from Mr Blow that he has com-
missioned Mr Frank Benton—of whose
connection with Eastern bees our readers
will be well aware—to execute the
order.”
Mr Benton at that time had queen-
rearing apiaries in Cyprus, Palestine, in
the Carniolan Alps, and other places.
The Italians mentioned above came from
the Swiss Alps, on the bordering line
of Italy, where it was understood the
best Italian bees came from.
The queens reached me after some
little unavoidable delay. The Carniolan
queens were dead, but the others ar-
rived in fair condition, In the meantime
another shipment of twelve queens ar-
rived from Chas Bianconcini on Sep-
tember 26th, 1884, six being alive.
Taking into account the great expense
attached to importing queens, and the
losses, my charge of 15/ for a tested
queen of either variety was not all profit.
I was calculating as near as I could
some little time ago my total outlay for
imported queens, and I made it about
£200. It is recorded in the “New Zea-
land and Australian Bee Journal” for
December, 1883, when mentioning the fact
that a shipment of queens from Italy
was expected shortly, that: “We had
imported previously 22 colonies from
America.”—"‘We,” that is, myself.
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EAST-
ERN BEES COMPARED.
It may be well here, as I had all these
bees in their purity, including Carniolans
at a subsequent date, to give my ex-
perience and opinion of them. I kept
very careful records at that time of the
comparative value of the differ-
ent varieties and their crosses, as 1
realised that ultimately we should have
to cultivate one variety—the best.
The Holy Landers and Syrian bees were
so near alike in their characteristics
that I may bracket them together. 1
found them fair workers, but not so
good as Italians, and of about the same
temperament as to handling. They were
lighter in colour and a trifle smaller than
Italians. The Cyprians, well—I have
seen many contradictory statements con-
cerning them—so far as their working
qualities are concerned, there cannot be
two opinions about them—they are
beauties; but their temper for handling,
ugh! they are demons. I know that
some thave spoken very highly of them
with regard to their temper; well, mine
came direct from the Island of Cyprus,
sent by the person who bred them there,
and I can assure my friends I was no
novice at handling bees at that time.
If any person had told me before I got
the Cyprians that I could be conquered
by bees I would have laughed at him,
but I confess the Cyprians beat me.
Until the colonies got strong they
seemed to be as easily handled as Ital-
ians, but when up to full strength they
were simply unmanageable. I always
worked with my shirt sleeves turned up,
and I can truly say that on one or two
occasions a pin point could scarcely have
been put between the stings on both
arms and hands. JI was determined to
master them, but in the end they were
the victors. Smoke made them more
vicious, and the more smoke I gave them
the worse they were; they would even
try to sting the tin smoker. I tried
crossing them with Italians, but, if any-
thing, the hybrids were worse. I and
my assistant had on two or three occa-
sions to make an ignominious retreat;
we then considered it time to get rid
of them, which we did. Two or three
customers who bought Cyprian queens
from me before I had fully realised their
viciousness had to get rid of theirs. 1
subsequently sent them Italian queens
to replace the Cyprians.
Carniolans were sent me nine years
ago from the American Government
Apiary—two queens in nucleus colonies.
14
They proved very prolific indeed, so much
so that they consumed a very large part
of the honey they gathered in providing
for their brood, and naturally this in-
duced swarming.
Of all the bees yet tried under domes-
tication none have been found to come
up to the Italians; that is the opinion
of practically the whole commercial bee-
keeping world. The majority of British
beekeepers, however, seem to prefer the
common bees, but that predilection arises
chiefly, I think, from the want of ex-
perience of Italian bees.
FIRST EXHIBITION OF BEES,
HONEY, AND APPLIANCES.
The first exhibition of bees, honey,
beeswax, and all the new appliances,
such as movable-frame thives, honey ex-
tractor, ‘comb-foundation, etc., took
place in November, 1879, at the Auck-
land Agricultural and Pastoral Associa-
tion’s Spring Show, held at the race-
course, Ellerslie, I being the only ex-
hibitor. For business reasons I staged
an extensive exhibit, and had my bees
in an observatory hive at work, flying
abroad through a hole pierced in the
wall of the building, while the work
going on in ‘the interior of the hive
could be seen by visitors through glass
on each side of each frame without be-
ing interfered with by the bees. I had
similar exhibits each year at the as-
sociation’s shows until I left the
Thames. It is needless to say that
great interest was created in the new
bee culture, and very much good re-
sulted in bringing honey to the fore
as an article of food.
FIRST GENERAL BEE AND HONEY
SHOW IN NEW ZEALAND.
Several communications had passed
between our leading beekeepers during
1883 on the subject of holding a bee and
honey show at an early date. It was
realised that a large and attractive ex-
hibition of honey, and the appliances
used to secure it, would promote the
use of honey in the household, and
thereby create a greater demand for it:
It was considered advisable to arrange,
if possible, to include our exhibits in
that of the next “Auckland Gardeners’
Horticultural Society’s” Exhibition, to
be held in March, 1884,
After making application, and waiting
some time, the committee of the so-
ciety decided to agree to our proposal,
but the time then left to prepare ex-
hibits was so short that we almost con-
cluded to abandon the business for that
year. As, however, it had been intended
to call a meeting of all interested in
the formation of a beekeepers’ associa-
tion, we decided in favour of getting
as many exhibits together as possible
for the show, and holding the meeting
on the first day, viz., March 21st, 1884.
The exhibition was held in the Drill
Hall, Auckland, and a very fine one it
was. The hall was about 150ft long by
60ft wide, and the bee exhibits were
allotted 50ft in length of the end stag-
ing. Notwithstanding that the time
to prepare exhibits was so limited, the
show of bees, honey, and appliances was
a most creditable one. Distant bee-
keepers, however, who would have at-
tended and brought exhibits, were pre-
vented on account of so short notice.
The principal exhibitors were Bagnall
Bros., I. Hopkins, Capt. Daly (Waikato),
G. Stevenson (Gisborne), T. J. Mulvany
and Son (Katikati), and H. B. Morton,
Auckland, and the value of the awards
£10 14/.
FORMATION OF THE FIRST NA-
TIONAL NEW ZEALAND BEE-
KEEPERS’ ASSOCIATION.
As previously intimated, a meeting
of all interested in this movement had
been called by advertisement for the
first day of the show, to meet at the
Park Hotel, next the Drill Hall, Auck-
land, at 4 pm. The following report of
the meeting is clipped from the “ New
Zealand and Australian Bee Journal” for
April, 1884:—
“Meeting of Beekeepers—A numer-
ously attended meeting of beekeepers
was held at the Commercial Hotel,
Auckland, on the evening of the 21st
ult. The meeting was called for the
purpose of forming a Beekeepers’ <As-
sociation. Mr. I. Hopkins was voted to
the chair, and Mr. H. H. Hayr was asked
to act as secretary. The chairman read
the advertisement calling the meeting,
and asked Mr. J. L. Bagnall, the con-
vener, to explain the object to be at-
tained.” Mr. Bagnall, after going fully
‘15
into the matter, and explaining the ad-
vantages to be gained by beekeepers
throughout the land working in unison,
moved:—“That in the opinion of this
meeting it is desirable to form an as-
sociation of beekeepers.’ The motion
was seconded by Mr. T. J. Mulvany, ot
Katikati, who said, in support of it —
“He hoped an association would be
formed embracing the whole of New
Zealand, and that provision would be
made for forming branch associations in
any locality where there were sufficient
beekeepers to do so.” The motion was
earried, and it was then resolved:—
“That the name of the association
should be the New Zealand Beekeepers’
Association, and that a committee be
formed, consisting of the chairman, sec-
retary, Dr. Dalziel, Messrs. Mulvany,
Newland, Graham, Robinson, Shadwell,
and Bagnall, to communicate with bee-
keepers in all parts of New Zealand,
and frame rules to be submitted to a
general meeting called by the com-
mittee.” The committee met on the
3rd June, Mr. I. Hopkins in the chair.
A code of rules was carefully considered,
and made ready for presentation to a
general meeting, and the secretary was
empowered to communicate with his
Excellency the Governor requesting him
to become patron of the New Zealand
Beekeepers’ Association; also with Sir
George Grey, that he become president;
and with the Mayor of Auckland and
Resident Magistrate, that they accept
the vice-presidentship of the association.
The general meeting to consider the
rules drawn up was held at the Com-
mercial Hotel, Auckland, on August 7,
1884. On the motion of Dr. Dalziel, the
rules were adopted, and it was resolved
that they be printed in book form, The
election of officers for the first year (the
presidentship being postponed) resulted
as follows:—Vice-presidents, his. Wor-
ship the Mayor of Auckland and his
Honor Judge Smith; committee of man-
agement, Colonel Bailey, Major Noake,
Captain Daly, Dr. Dalziel, and Messrs.
Bagnall, Hopkins, Mulvany, Newland,
Robinson, Shadwell, and Stevenson; sec-
retary and treasurer, Mr. H. H. Hayr.
It was suggested that a _ reference
library of all the standard works on
bee culture be formed, and also all bee
journals, American and English, be ob-
tained, which was subsequently acted
upon, and a library was formed,
THE FIRST BRANCH ASSOCIATION.
A meeting. of beekeepers, called by
circular, was held in Buchanan’s Hall,
Pukekohe, Auckland, on February 23rd,
1884, for the purpose of forming a bee-
keepers’ association, Mr. W. Morgan
acting as chairman. Dr. Dalziel, as con-
vener of the meeting, explained the
advantages of an association, and it
was decided to form one, and that the
name be the “Auckland Provincial Bee-
keepers’ Association.” The following
officers were then elected:—Messrs. J. C.
Firth and I. Hopkins had to decline the
presidentship of the association owing
to want of time to carry out the duties,
and the distance they lived from Puke-
kohe; vice-presidents, Captain Hamlin,
M.H.R., Captain Jackson, R.M., Messrs.
Pounds, Bagnall, and I. Hopkins; trea-
surer, J. Collins; secretary, Dr. Dalziel;
general committee, Messrs. Allen, Beloe,
Brown, Elliott, Jamieson, Morgan,
Savage, and Sproule. At a subsequent
meeting rules and regulations for the
conduct of the association were re-
ceived and ratified.
Both the national and branch associa-
tions were now in full working order,
and subsequently held regular periodical
meetings, from which much good re-
sulted. It may be mentioned that the
N.Z.B.K. Association appointed a corres-
ponding committee, consisting of mem-
bers residing in the different beekeeping
centres throughout both Islands, whose
duty it was to send quarterly reports
of the progress of beekeeping in their
respective districts to the parent asso-
ciation, to canvass for members, and to
promote the formation of branch asso-
ciations. We found the scheme to
answer very well, as it kept us con-
stantly in touch with all beekeeping
centres.
ESTABLISHMENT OF A HONEY
DEPOT.
Much dissatisfaction had been ex-
pressed from time to time by leading
beekeepers as to the great differences
in the buying and selling prices of
honey in connection witn the middle-
men. While the producer was receiving
a low price, the consumer was charged
a very high one, and the bulk of the
profit was retained by the middle-
man, At a committee meeting held on
November 21st, 1884, it was decided, on
the suggestion of Mr. Hopkins, to estab-
16
lish a honey depot in connection with
the N.Z.B.K.A., for the sale of mem-
bers’ honey. Mr. H. H. Hayr was ap-
pointed agent in charge, at a remunera-
tion of 10 per cent. on all honey sold,
he to find storage room. The following
scale of prices was fixed py the com-
mittee:—Comb honey (in sections), 10d
per Ib; extracted honey, 6d per 1b, in
bulk; 84d per Ib in llb tins; and 15/ per
dozen 2lb. tins or vessels. It was also
resolved that honey sold at the depot be
for cash or promissory note, the cost
of such note to be charged to the
vendor. The depot business was not
allowed to progress very long on smooth
lines, but we were determined to keep
it going if possible, and even to put our
hands in our pockets to support the
scheme rather than the middleman
should rule us.
OUR FIRST TROUBLE.
The committee realised from the out-
set that unless all, or nearly all, the
honey coming to Aucklane was sent to
the depot to be sold there would soon
be trouble, as the grocers and other
wholesale purchasers could see that the
establishment of the depots and the fix-
ing of prices every quarter would curtail
the big profits they had been getting
on honey. They at once determined to
boycott the depot. In order to induce
every beekeeper to send his honey to
the depot it was decided that on pay-
ment of an annual fee of 5/ to the
association any beekeeper could secure
all the privileges of the depot without
becoming a member of the association,
if he so desired.
This, however, had little effect in
gathering in many of the small bee-
keepers owning from half a dozen to
ten colonies, of which there were large
numbers within a radius of twenty miles
from <Auckland’s centre. The large
grocers induced the most of these, by
offering an advance on their previous
prices paid for their honey, to deal
direct with them. The consequence was
that the sales from the depot fell to a
vanishing point. The beekeepers’ action
in dealing direct with the middleman
instead of through the depot was really
not understandable, as the depot re-
turns to the producer were very much
larger, and in cash, whereas the deal-
ings with the middlemen were in most
cases by barter, and at a much lower
exchange value. Such was the case,
however, and the committee, with a de-
termination not to be beaten, author-
ised the secretary to engage hawkers
to hawk the honey from house to house.
This succeeded for a time, and relieved
the depot of most of the honey that had
accumulated, but this scheme eventually
broke down, and we rearised we were
beaten through the foolish action of the
small beekeepers. There had been such
a rush into the beekeeping ranks during
the previous three years that in the sea-
son of 1884-5 honey was to be seen in
large quantities in all the auction rooms.
Fairly good honey, put up roughly in
kerosene tins, could be bought for 2/6
per tin (60lbs), and eventually a lot was
carted away for nothing, the auc-
tioneers being glad to get rid of it.
THE FIRST CONFERENCE OF NEW
ZEALAND BEEKEEPERS.
Arrangements had been made to hold
the first annual conference of New Zea-
land beekeepers under the auspices of
the New Zealand Beekeepers’ Associa-
tion at its annual meeting, to be holden
in Auckland on March 20tn, 1885. Every
effort had been made by the committee
to bring together a large number of bee-
keepers from different parts of the coun-
try. In conjunction with the conference
a number of papers on different bee-
keeping subjects were prepared for read-
ing, and the first annual report and
balance-sheet was printed for distribu-
tion. At 4 p.m. on the above date the
conference was called to order, the at-
tendance being very satisfactory indeed,
Beekeepers were in attendance from
such distant places as Gisborne, Tara-
naki, Tauranga, Southern Waikato, and
from districts north of Auckland. Every-
thing passed off very satisfactorily, and
the result was that a vast step had been
made in the promotion of advanced bee
culture.
THE FIRST BEE AND HONEY SHOW
HELD UNDER THE AUSPICES
OF THE NEW ZEALAND BEE-
KEEPERS’ ASSOCIATION,
Realising the great benefit to the in-
dustry (in an increased demand for
honey) that had arisen as the result of
the previous show. the executive com-
mittee of the Association were deter-
mined to make this, their first exhibition
of beekeepers’ products, a credit alike to
17
the Association and to the industry.
How far they succeeded in their efforts
may be judged by the extracts from the
“New Zealand and Australian Bee Jour-
nal” for April, 1885, given further on.
Although this show was held in the
very earliest days of our modern system
of beekeeping—only seven years after it
was introduced into the country—there
has never been a bee and honey show
approaching it ‘held since in New Zea-
land, although over thirty years have
passed by since then, more’s the pity.
EXTRACTS FROM “NEW ZEALAND
AND AUSTRALIAN BEE JOURNAL.”
APRIL, 1885.
“As our readers are aware, it had been
arranged by the New Zealand Bee-
keepers’ Association to hold their annual
Show in connection with the Horticul-
tural Exhibition on the 20th and 21st of
March. The Gardeners’ Horticultural
Association had obtained permission to
hold their exhibitions in the Govern-
ment Drill Shed, a large iron building
about 150ft long by about 60ft wide... .
The table allotted to the bee department
stretched across the end of the shed far-
thest from the entrance, about 60ft in
length.”
The whole of this table, which was six
feet wide, was fully occupied with our
exhibits.
“The central part of the stage was
taken up by an exhibit of Matamata
clover honey, both comb and extracted
(my exhibit—I.H.). The extracted
honey was shown in tins and glass—
liquid and granulated. Of this a ton wag
staged in 2]b, 101b, 201b, and 60lb tins,
and a small lot in glass. The get-up of
the tins was admired by everyone; the
tins had been japanned, and on each was
a beautifully lithographed label in col-
ours. A kind of pyramid was formed of
the tins, which did much to enhance the
appearance of the exhibit. On either
side of the tins (as part of the Mata-
mata exhibit) the crates of comb honey
in llb sections (of which there were 16
each containing 48 sections, 768lb in all)
were placed, and on top of these the
glass jars of extracted honey: the whole
forming a conspicuous feature in this de-
partment.”
In addition to the above, as part of
this exhibit, there was a large quantity
of comb-foundation, both stout and thin,
made on four different machines.
Messrs. Collins (of Tuakau) and Beloe
(of Pukekohe) had very fine and large
exhibits of comb honey in sections, and
the former had as well a very ingenious
shipping crate for comb honey calculated
to prevent damage to its contents.
Messrs. Hanlon (of Whangarei) and
Blackwell (of the Great Barrier) staged
very neatly got-up packages of extracted
and comb honey.
Mr. G. Stevenson (of Gisborne) was
very unfortunate in losing his very fine
exhibit while on its way to Auckland on
board the s.s. Thomas Russell, which was
wrecked. Not to be beaten altogether,
Mr. Stevenson made up another very fine
exhibit of extracted honey in tins and
glass, comb honey, and comb foundation,
although, as he said, as an exhibit it was
much inferior to the one that was
lost.
Messrs. Bagnall Bros. staged a com-
plete outfit of all apiary appliances, and
also Italian bees and queens, and a
stocked observatory hive, which created
great interest among visitors.
Mr. G. Epping, of Normanby, also sent
w fine exhibit of comb-foundation of two
grades, but unfortunately it was delayed
on the road, and did not arrive till after
the close of the show.
THE PRIZE LIST AND AWARDS.
Although the cash value of the prizes
offered was not very extravagant, the
list indicates a worthy effort on the part
of the Association to provide something
to aim for. The following is the list of
prizes and awards, which ‘has not been
equalled at any similar show held
since :—
(Judges, Messrs. J. Newland and E.
Parsons.)
s. d. s. d
Best Italian queen, accom-
panied by some of her
progeny; 1 entry. Messrs.
Bagnall Bros., 1. .......... 20 0 10 0
Best queen of any other race,
accompanied by some of ber
progeny; no entry ......... 10 0 5 0
Best and largest display of
bees of any race; no entry 20
Finest extracted honey, not
less than 201b; 3 entries.
I. Hopkins, 1; G. Steven-
SOD; 2s cis: Wecsrsterseicatene a elaecs WR 10 0 5 0
Largest display of extracted
honey; 1 entry. I. Hopkins,
Des dgtndys ys. aaagistaye 5 ances a oes 20 0 10 0
o
ot
2
oO
tions, not less than 20Ib;
5 entries. I, Hopkins, 1;
W. Beloe, 2 ........+202. 10
Largest display of comb honey
in sections; 2 entries. W.
Beloe, 1; I. Hopkins, 2.
Best and neatest got up
packages of extracted honey
for marketing; 4 entries. I.
Hopkins, 1; G. Blackwell, 2. 15 0 5 0
Best and neatest got up
packages of comb honey for
marketing; 3 entries, J.
Collins, 1; W. Beloe, 2..... 15 0 5 0
Best hive for comb honey
with surplus arrangements;
1 entry. Bagnall Bros. and
Cig Me. secretes aie aes ctsanstcndecd 10 0
Best hive for extracted honey,
with surplus arrangements;
1 entry. Bagnall Bros. and
CO: 5 dis 3 shai oR Oe aS 10 0
Best hive for observatory
purposes, stocked with bees
and queen; 2 entries. Bag-
nall Bros. and Co., 1....... 15 0
20 0 10 0
Best collection of apiarian
appliances; 1 entry. No
WALC: guatantes as siyepte. ae aeeottaie aie
Best comb foundation for
brood and extracting frames,
manufactured in Australas-
ian colonies; 3 entries. I.
Hopkins, 1; no 2nd award. 10 0
Best comb foundation for
sections manufactured in
the Australasian Colonies;
3 entries. I. Hopkins, 1;
G. Stevenson, 2; .......... 10 0 5 6
Best shipping crate for comb
honey; 2 entries. J. Col-
lins, 1, no 2nd award....... 5 0
As I have always strongly advocated
the taking advantage by our Associa-
tions of our principal Agricultural and
Pastoral Association’s winter shows to
make large and attractive exhibits of
honey, etc. as an advertisement of our
industry, I thought it advisable to give
pretty full particulars of our pioneer
efforts in this direction of over thirty
years 2g0, as an incentive to our present
Beekeepers’ Association to do likewise.
OTHER DISTRICT ASSOCIATIONS.
The establishment of the New Zealand
Beekeepers’ Association acted as a
stimulus in the formation of others, not
only in New Zealand, but also in Aus-
tralia. Mr, A. E. Bonney, a prominent
beekeeper in South Australia, with whom
I was in frequent correspondence, was
instrumental in calling a meeting of per-
sons interested in beekeeping, which was
held at the Chamber of Manufactures
Hall, Adelaide, on July 11, 1884. A
strong association was formed, with the
Hon. R. D. Ross, M.P., as president, and
Mr. A. E. Bonney secretary.
This was followed soon after by the
formation of the “Coromande) Bee-
keepers’ Association.” in October, 1884.
Mr. J. H. Harrison president, and Mr.
J. D. Colebrook secretary and treasurer.
At this time there was some talk of
forming an Otago Beekeepers’ Associa-
tion. lt was eventually formed, but not
till some time later.
Although there was no association at
Timaru, Col. C. 8. Bailey, who was an
enthusiastic beekeeper, and one of the
executive committee of the N.Z. bee-
keepers’ Association, was, so far as the
work of promoting advanced bee culture
is concerned, an association in himself.
The gallant colonel, who had kept bees
in the Old Country, did an immense
amount of good for the industry in
South Canterbury. He promoted the
first bee and honey show held in that
part in December, 1884. The local press
spoke very highly of the exhibits and
of the energy the gallant colonel dis-
played in getting up such a fine exhi-
bition both at Waimate and Timaru
shows.
Instead of referring to them again,
it may be well to give here the dates
of the formation of associations which
took place later on: The New South
Wales Beekeepers’ Association was
established in July, 1887, Mr. Angus
Mackay, Instructor in Agriculture,
N.S.W. Technical College, being chosen
as president; The Otago Beekeepers’
Association, with its headquarters in
Dunedin, was formed in October, 1887,
the late Mr. I. G. Brickell being presi-
dent, and Mr. W. C. Brown hon. sec-
retary, Mr. Brickell, assisted by other
members, gave demonstrations periodic-
ally in the Botanical Gardens, Dunedin,
in the wav of handling and transferring
bees. ;
The formation of the Queensland Bee-
keepers’ Association took place in 1885,
and the first annual meeting was held
on August 20, 1886. President, J. B. L.
Isambert, M.L.C., and E. C, Cusack sec-
retary. The Maitland (New South
Wales) Beekeepers’ Association was
formed in the latter part of 1887, and on
August 27th of the same year the Hunter
River Beekeepers’ Association was estab-
lished, with Mr. R. Scobie president, and
R. F. Munday secretary. Other associa-
tions formed at much later dates will be
enumerated later on.
19
It will be seen from the foregoing that
the new bee culture made very big
strides both in the Australian Colonies
and New Zealand during the first seven
or eight years after its introduction into.
Australasia. These notes are all taken
from my “Bee Journal,” so are correct.
THE FIRST SIX-COMB REVERSIBLE
HONEY EXTRACTORS USED IN NEW
ZEALAND.
For the first few years after the new
beekeeping had become well established,
the type of honey extractor in general
use in America and elsewhere was the
fixed basket, two-comb “Novice” (A. L.
Root’s).
One of the first to realise the need ot
larger extractors was my friend R. Wil-
kin, of California, and in the latter part
of 1882 he constructed an eight-frame
reversible one, On May 7th, 1883, he
wrote me (I have this letter before me)
explaining details, and also sent diagrams
of the parts of his big extractor—by tne
way his letter was published in the “N.Z.
and A. Bee Journal” for August, 1883.
Shortly after this date I drew out the
plans for a six-comb reversible-basket ex-
tractor, which was constructed by Messrs
Masefield and Co., Auckland. Owing to
my being unable to superintend the mak-
ing of it, it was constructed in a more
expensive manner than I expected. The
whole of the internal gearing was made
of brass tinned over, and the body of
stout kauri lined with steel tin—its cost
was £28 10/. This price, when the bili
came in, gave me a shock, and was the
tragical part of the business; the comical
part came when the firm advertised the
same extractors at £15, immediately
after mine had been delivered. The ex-
planation from the firm was that I had
to pay for the making of all the moulds
in the first place, which the firm claimeA
they could use in making others.
The extractor was a very fine one.
There was, however, one drawback, the
handle was on top of the vertical shaft,
there being no side gearing to govern the
speed of the revolutions. The conse-
quence was that when set going with
six heavy combs in the basket, one had
to let go the handle and wait till the
extractor slowed down. Eventually side
gearing was fitted—quite a number.came
into use in the next few years,
ADOPTICN OF A STANDARD HIVE
FOR NEW ZEALAND.
We, in New Zealand, in fact, I may
include Australia, were very fortunate
in adopting a standard hive right from
the start of our career in modern com-
mercial beekeeping. It has saved us no
end of confusion and expense. Practic-
ally the ten-frame Langstroth hive be-
came the standard in New Zealand and
Australia as soon as I introduced it.
made it known through the Press, and
manufactured it for sale. Two years
after its introduction, that is, in 1880,
there were a goodly number of Lang-
stroth hives in use in New Zealand, and
early in 1881, quite a number were sent
to Australia.
As several newcomers from England
wanted to introduce the British hive
they had been used to in the Old Coun-
try, and realising that if we did nov
formally adopt a standard hive at once,
and fight against the introduction of
others, there would soon be trouble, I
broached the subject in the “ New Zea-
land and Australian Bee Journal” for
August, 1883. I pointed out the difficul-
ties the English and American beekeep-
ers were in through having many sizes
of hives in use, and that we ought form-
ally declare and adopt some hive as
the standard one for New Zealand. Of
course, it was a foregone conclusion that
the 10-frame Langstroth would be chosea.
and it has been the standard hive ever
since.
STANDARD HIVES IN AUSTRALIA.
Very shortly after our formal adop-
tion of a standard hive, the question of
following our example cropped up in
Australia. I, of course, urged the adop-
tion of the Langstroth hive, and wrote
strongly in favour of it. Mr, W. Abram,
the well-known beekeeper of Parramatta,
who had not then been long out from
Germany, opposed my suggestion, and
advocated the Berlepseh hive, which he
had used in Germany. A controversy
between us on the comparative merits of
each hive took place in the “Sydney
Town and Country Journal,” lasting six
months. The result was the Victorian
Beekeepers’ Association (the only one
then in Australia) declared at one of its
meetings in favour of the ten-frame
Langstroth as the standard hive for Vie-
toria, which practically meant for Aus-
tralia.
20
PATENT HIVE MEN IN AUSTRALIA.
One of the most impudent attempts to
claim a monopoly in the manufacture of
movable-frame hives and some other
apiary appliances by securing letters
patent on them, although they had been
invented and in use many years before
the patents were issued, occurred in
Victoria, Australia.
In November, 1884, I received a letter
from a gentleman residing in Melbourne,
directing my attention to certain patents
which had been granted on November
29, 1882, to one C. J. Lee and S. L.
Chapman, also to a prior patent granted
to C. J. Lee and James Baker in July
of the same year. My correspondent also
forwarded a copy of a letter of his which
appeared in “The Leader” (Melbourne)
of July 26, 1884, pointing out that the
articles patented had been in use long
before the dates such patents were
granted.
Taking the patents according to
priority, the one granted to C. J. Lee
and J. Baker in July, 1882, was for per-
forated zine plates to prevent the
queens rising into the supers (queen
excluders). There were four claims in
the patents granted to C. J. Lee and
8. L. Chapman in November, 1882, viz.,
surplus honey frames in movable com-
partments (movable frames, containing
lib sections), metallic ends to frames
(metal ends), metallic plates for the
frames to rest on (tin rabbets), and
removable bottom boards.
As the correspondent to “The Leader”
pointed out, the movable-comb hive, with
frames, sections and other appliances,
had been explained, and most of them
illustrated in the first edition of Hopkins’
“Bee Manual,” published and circulating
in Australia in 1881. I think there can
be little doubt about the description of
the patented appliances having been
taken from my manual.
I published the whole of the corre-
spondence, and also the dates and par-
ticulars of the invention of each article
re-patented, to Messrs. Lee, Chapman
and Baker in the “New Zealand and
Australian Bee Journal” for December,
1884,
A few months later Mr. Herman
Naveau, of Hamilton, Victoria, who had
purchased his hives from Bagnall Bros.
and Co., received the following notice:—
“The Australian Apiary and Bee
Ranchers Company, Limited.—Caution to
the Public—As I have been informed
that my letters patent are being
infringed by parties making and selling
similar hives, I hereby inform them that
Lam the sole proprietor of letters patent
for the manufacture of movable-frame
hives, ete., and shall take proceedings
against anyone infringing the same—
(Signed) §S. L. Chapman, proprietor.”
With this was enclosed the following
letter: —“Toorak Road, South Jarra,
30th March, 1885. -H. Naveau, Beekeeper,
Hamilton.—Sir,—As I am informed that
you are making and selling hives similar
to mine I have to request that you will
inform me how many hives you have
made and sold, and to whom.—I am,
sir, yours truly (signed) S. L. Chapman,
manager.”
Needless to say, I advised him and
others to take no notice of threats, and
subsequently I offered to fight the case,
if need be, personally. However, after
the exposure in my journal, the whole
business was quashed and nothing more
was heard of patent hives, ete, in
Australia.
STIRRING HONEY—AN ACCIDENTAL
DISCOVERY.
While at Matamata I accidentally
stumbled on a scheme of improving the
texture (grain) and also to a certain
extent the colour of granulated honey—
a simple process to which no one can
take objection. On one occasion I had
overlooked removing some honey from
the lower part of an uncapping can that
had drained from cappings until it had
so far granulated (though still soft) that
it would not run through the honey
tap. There was quite 100lbs in the can,
and knowing that by stirring the honey
it would be made soft enough to run,
I worked it well with a wooden paddle
until it ran slowly through the tap.
Not having been properly strained I
set this honey apart from that I was
marketing. Some time after when it
had become firmly granulated I was sur-
prised to find the grain, or texture, of
this particular honey much finer, and
the colour somewhat lighter than that
extracted from the same combs. After
giving the matter much thought I won-
dered whether the stirring of the honey
had made the difference, and as the last
of the honey had been extracted I had
to wait until the next season before
conducting conclusive tests. The result
of several tests proved to my own satis-
faction that stirring hone when com-
21
mencing to granulate does improve: it.
I have carried out the process ever since,
and at the Government apiaries, and also
made it known through the columns of
the “New Zealand Farmer” on different
occasions. I understand it is now gen-
erally practised by our leading bee-
keepers.
I had never read or heard of the pro-
cess before I stumbled upon it, so that
probably it can be claimed as a New
Zealand discovery.
THE BREAKING-UP OF MATAMATA
APIARY.
During the season of 1886-7 I was
threatened on more than one ocvasion
with a severe breakdown of my health,
the strenuous work of the previous eight
years was beginning to tell, and on the
advice of two medical men I decided on
making a change. In May, 1887, I re-
moved to Auckland, the change and a
couple of months’ comparative rest did
me much good. The young man who
took charge of the apiary had been a
cadet with me and was quite capable of
carrying it on successfully, but unfor-
tunately for him the estate, owing to
some financial difficulties, was wound up
a few months after I left, when the
whole of the bees and plant were sold,
and also the land.
It gave the owner of the estate great
satisfaction when my final balance-sheet
was made up to learn that the net profits
from the bees for the whole of my term
was nearly £400 per annum. The ex:
penses were very heavy, the freight from
Auckland for most of the time until
the train ran through to Lichfield was
£7 per ton. Mr. Firth frequently told
his visitors in my presence that the bees
were the only things paying on _ his
estate. It was a good augury for the
future of bee-farming in New Zealand
that the first commercial bee farms es-
tablished should have been so profitable.
and it was very satisfactory to me. I
was very sorry indeed when the bees
with everything else on the estate had
to be sold.
BEEKEEPING AUCKLAND
AROUND
IN 1887.
When leaving Matamata I took with
me to Auckland a number of colonies
containing my best breeding queens to
keep the queen trade going, as it was
then very extensive. During the season
of 1887-8, I increased my colonies to 40,
and was fairly successful in raising
purely mated queens. When the follow-
ing season set in, I was horrified to find
symptoms of foul brood in several colon-
ies. Being anxious to find out where the
disease had come from, as this was my
first experience of it, I went all round
the district extending to a radius of
two miles or more, hunting for bee-
keepers, spending two or three days on
the job. The result was I found quite
a number of box-hive beekeepers with
from five to a dozen boxes each, which
had been occupied by bees at some time
but in most cases were now more than
half unoecupied—the bees had died. On
examination I found all the combs dis-
eased, and the owners ignorant of the
cause of their bees dying. The diseased
joxes and combs were left on their old
stands and free for other bees to enter
and carry the germs away.
Under such circumstances I concluded
it was impossible to carry on queen
rearing, and gave it up, much to my loss.
Three years after I arranged with Mr.
Thomas Blackwell, of the Great Barrier
Island, to raise all my queens, there
being no disease there, I found Mr. Black-
well a very conscientious queen breeder
and he supplied me with all my queens
while I was in business. I did not go
out of beekeeping, but just kept a few
colonies to experiment with.
In the meantime I had joined Mr. H.
H. Hayr, who had been acting as agent
for Bagnall Bros. and Co., and myself,
and our firm was registered as, “ Hop-
kins, Hayr and Co.” In November, 1888,
by mutual arrangement, the business
came into my hands, and the firm was
henceforward known as “I. Hopkins
and Co.”
THE AUCKLAND HONEY MARKET
TN 1887.
I was well aware before leaving Mata-
mata of the terrible condition of the
Auckland honey market, that after the
failure of the New Zealand Beekeepers’
Association to establish it on something
like a sound commercial basis the mar-
ket had gone from bad to worse, but I
was hardly prepared to find it so bad as
it was. After one or two preliminary
inquiries, I realised that it was necessary
to spend two or three days in visiting
places of business in and around Auck-
land where honey was sold, and also
22
the beekeepers producing it, before L
could formulate a scheme for improving.
the market.
I found at the start-that every auction
mart where produce was sold had more
or less pressed honey in all kinds of sec-
ond-hand tins, most of them rusty and
covered with paper (torn), and bits of
sacking, in place of lids. Much of the
honey had been in the marts for
months, unsaleable, and no small amount
of it was fermenting. None that I saw
was fit for consumption. On my sugges-
tion several of the auctioneers had the
stuff carted away as rubbish. I learned
that a good deal of comb honey, when
in season, came into Auckland, and that
most of it was sold by auction. Pressed
honey averaged 14d. per pound in biscuit
and kerosene tins; comb honey in sec-
tions (few more than three parts full)
from 2/ to 2/6 per dozen, and good ex-
tracted honey in 2Ib, tins ranged from
6/6 to 8/ per dozen.
These prices were ruinous, and the
most careful beekeepers who sent the
best honey into Auckland, were ready
to support any scheme for the better-
ment of the business. Although the re-
turns did not pav, having more or less
capital expended in hives and plant, they
had to make what they could out of
their bees, always hoping things would
improve.
IMPROVING THE MARKET,
Amidst this unsatisfactory condition
of things there was one reassuring fea-
ture. Quite a large number of those
who a few years before had rushed into
beekeeping, thinking that a small for-
tune could be made easily at honey-rais-
ing, finding their expectations unrealised,
and that they were likely to lose instead
of gain by their venture, had dropped
out of the business during the last two
years. The chief drawback still remain-
ing was the box-hive men, of which I
shall have more to say later.
After my investigations I saw there
was only one way of improving matters,
and that was to get control of the honey
market if possible, supply a good article
for a fair price, and so gain the con-
fidence of the retail suppliers and con-
sumers. It would cost money to carry
out the scheme, and would take some
time to accomplish, but it had to be
done.
When the season of 1887-8 set in I
employed a man to go through the auc-
tion marts every morning, report to me
what honey had come in, and its condi-
tion, then either he or I bought it all.
In that way we kept the market clear,
and although we had to buy good, bad,
and indifferent honey, and sometimes
made a loss, as we only put the best on
the market, we gradually worked the
prices up to 10/ and 10/6 per dozen 2ib
tins, and 4/6 per dozen for section honey,
with return of crates or payment for
them. This meant an increage jin the
price of nearly 50 per cent in the one
case, and about 100 per cent in the other,
most of the increase going jnto the
pockets of the producers. Before the
commencement of the second season I
had practically secured the whole of the
honey trade. Although I had strong
opposition at first from the middlemen,
the increased demand for honey brought
about by placing a good article on the
market pleased them so much that I had
their trade up to the close of my busi-
ness.
STARTING THE “AUSTRALASIAN
BEE JOURNAL.”
Scores of letters expressing regret
reached me from all parts of Australia
and New Zealand after the first ‘bee
journal ceased publication. The writers
hoped I would soon start another, and
these letters increased in number after
I left Matamata. As my _ inclination
was in sympathy with the writers I
started the first number of the ‘“‘Aus-
tralasian Bee Journal” in July, 1887.
This journal was entirely my own, and
as in the former one, 1 had many able
contributors, who came forward as
friends to assist me with their articles
without fee or reward. I look back with
very great pleasure to the many bee-
keeping friends I made in those days,
both in Australia and New Zealand.
Among my Australian contributors of
articles were: Messrs. C. Fullwood and
C. C. Cusack (Queensland); T. E. Wil-
lis and (Miss) S. A. B. (New South
Wales); Herman Naveau and Z Sum-
ner (Victoria); A. E. Bonney (South
Australia); and Thomas Lloyd Hood
(Tasmania), besides a number of others.
My New Zealand contributors were very
numerous, residing in all parts of the
country, from Southland to North
Auckland. Among the principal were
23
Messrs. T. J. Mulvany (Katikati); Obed
Poole (Auckland); Rev. Father Madan
(Matata); G. A. Green (Auckland); W.
C. Brown and C. B. Morris (Dunedin) ;
and many others, their only object
being to push the industry ahead.
Unfortunately, the long-threatened
breakdown in my health came before the
close of the third annual volume, and,
much to my regret, 1 was compelled to
cease publication of the journal, which
was incorporated with the “New Zea-
land Farmer.”
REVIVAL OF THE NEW ZEALAND
BEEKEEPERS’ ASSOCIATION.
It was no fault of the Executive Com-
mittee that the Association had practi-
cally ceased its operations some twelve
months or so before I left Matamata.
The loss of the bee journal had contri-
buted more to its decline than any want
of sympathetic action on the part of the
committee. The journal was the
medium of communication between the
widely-scattered members, and when
that went it was impossible to keep up
that friendly and business intercourse
between them so necessary to the suc-
cess of such an institution.
One of the first suggestions made after
the starting of the “Australasian Bee
Journal” was the revival of the N.Z.B.K.
It was first mooted in the third number
(September, 1887) of the new bee jour-
nal, and ‘was followed by a number of
letters in support. Eventually a meet-
ing of all interested in re-establishing
the “National Beekeepers’ Association
of New Zealand” was called by adver-
tisement by myself for the 7th March,
1888. There was an enthusiastic meet-
ing, the Association was re-established,
and the following officers were elected:
President, Mr. Frank Lawry, M.H.R.;
vice-presidents, Mr. Obed Poole and G. L.
Peacocke (editor “New Zealand
Farmer”); secretary and treasurer, Mr.
I. Hopkins; executive committee, Messrs.
G. A. Green, H. Hayes, T. Herbert, S.
Hooker, J. Oldham, W. Esam, W. Dig-
nan, F. Stephens, R. J. Kendall; corres-
ponding committee (with power to add
to their number). Messrs. L. J. Bagnall
(Turua), T. J. Mulvany (Katikati), W.
A. Neale (Hawke’s Bay), N. Shoemaker
(Taranaki), C. Jans (Inglewood), C.
Morris (Otago), Rev. Father Madan
(Bay of Plenty), and H. Hyatt (Wai-
kato). Other members of the committee
were subsequently appointed.
The duties of the committee, as out-
lined, were to furnish periodical reports
to the executive committee and to the
“Australasian Bee Journal,” of the pro-
gress of beekeeping in their several dis-
tricts.
The sub-committee appointed to re-
arrange the rules for submission to a
general meeting met on the 9th March,
and they were adopted at the general
meeting held on the 16th of the same
month. The meeting also adopted the
suggestion of the sub-committee that a
Foul Brood Bill be drafted by the Asso-
ciation for presentation at the next ses-
sion of Parliament, and that the presi-
dent (Mr. F. Lawry, M.H.R.) be re-
quested to take charge of it, the execu-
tive in the meantime to secure the signa-
tures to a petition for the passing of a
Bill, of all beekeepers in favour of such
a course. A sub-committee, consisting
of the president, secretary, and the Rev.
Father Madan, was appointed to draft
an Act to be submitted to the executive
committee at its next meeting.
The meeting of the sub-committee ap-
pointed to draft the bill met at the
secretary’s house on March 20, 1888, and
after a long and careful consideration
of the several clauses a bill was framed
ready to submit to the executive com-
mittee, and after some slight amendment
it was adopted, a vote of thanks being
accorded to the framers of the bill.
FOUL-BROOD.
Before continuing the matter of the
Foul-Brood Bill, it will be as well to give
a little of the known history of foul-
brood in New Zealand prior to 1887.
When I threw aside my former occu-
pation to take up bee-culture for a live-
lihood the thought of failure never for a
moment entered my head. I could see
nothing but success in front of me. Later
on, however, when I read of the devasta-
tion among the bees in England and
America caused by foul-brood, and the
uncertainty of the suggested remedies
effecting a cure, the dread of such a dis-
ease attacking my bees and upsetting
all my plang became a kind of nightmare
to me. The one thought that dominated
all others was to be constantly on the
watch for symptoms of disease, and to
destroy all combs showing one or more
abnormal-looking cells. While at the
Thames I destroyed quite a number, and
24
the same at Matamata, which, with later
experience of undoubted diseased combs,
I was certain I had in my extreme cau-
tion destroyed perfectly healthy combs.
Quite early in the ‘80’s I learned
from private correspondence that there
was something wrong with the bees in
the Hawke’s Bay and Taranaki districts,
which subsequently proved to be foul-
brood. The late Mr. R. Harding, of
Mount Vernon, Hawke’s Bay, who was a
great bee enthusiast, wrote me for pub-
lication on August 13, 1883: “That
scourge of the apiary (foul-brood) is
rampant in all parts of this provincial
district, several apiaries having been
depopulated through it,” ete. Mr. Hard-
ing twice lost all his bees through the
disease, notwithstanding that he had
tried all the then recommended reme-
dies.
In 1883 Mr. L. J. Bagnall wrote me
from Thames that foul-brood had ap-
peared in his apiary, and he attributed
the outbreak to a neighbouring apiary,
which was comprised of bees bought
from Maoris in box hives, and as he
thought it was likely to be a consider-
able distance up the Thames Valley,
among other Maori box-hives, warned
me to be on the look-out at Matamata.
During the following four years the dis-
ease had spread to almost all parts of
New Zealand, and it was making such
havoe among the bees that many of our
beekeepers were becoming disheartened.
As there were known to be two distinct
forms of the disease, which the United
States Department of Agriculture was
investigating at the time, I sent six
samples of diseased combs (three from
Southland and three from Auckland) in
October, 1907, to Dr. i. F. Phillips, in
eharge of Apiculture, Washington, for
examination. As the result of his in-
vestigation he declared each sample to be
affected by the form of disease known as
Bacillus larvae.
THE DRUG CURE (?).
In England, Canada, the United States
of America, Australia, and European
Continental countries foul-brood was
playing havoc among the bees in the
eighties, and threatened to be as dis-
astrous in this respect as the disease
known as “pebrine” had previously been
among the silkworms. Jn New Zealand
it was killing off the bees wholesale,
and many of those who had intended to
take up beekeeping as a business gave it
up in despair.
The late Frank R. Cheshire, F.LS.,
F.R.M.S., and others in England and on
the European Continent, were endea-
vouring to find some means of cure in
one or other of the known germicides.
At one time salicylic acid solution, of
a certain strength, for spraying over
affected combs, painting over hives, and
mixing with syrup for feeding the bees,
was given out as a cure if properly
applied. This, however, practically
proved a failure. Then came the Sproule
and Cheshire cure, which consisted of
a solution of Calvert’s No. 1 phenol
(pure carbolie acid in crystals), used
much in the same way as the salicylic
acid. After Cheshire had experimented
with this drug, and declared he had
cured bad cases of disease with it, it
was generally believed that a genuine
cure had been found. The remedy was
tried throughout the beekeeping world,
and though’ some cases of cure were re-
ported, it generally failed, and was given
up everywhere except in England and
perhaps some other parts of Europe.
Other drugs, both in solution and
vapour, have been tried without success,
yet many British beekeepers stick to
drug treatment to this day, notwith-
standing that such treatment has long
since been abandoned in other countries.
The most the drugs ever did was to
check disease in some cases.
THE BOX-HIVE MAN.
In addition to the trouble we pre-
viously had with box-hive and other
careless beekeepers, in spoiling the honey
market, they were now the cause of a
more serious difficulty to battle against.
As they had no interest in their bees in
so far as depending upon them for the
whole or a part of their livelihood, it
mattered not a jot whether their bees
died from disease or not. The boxes
containing the diseased combs were left
just as they were before the inmates
had died, for other bees to enter and so
spread disease. When warned of the
mischief caused in this way, I do not
suppose one box-hive man in fifty took
the trouble to destroy the diseased
boxes and contents. In fact, many
stray swarms that were caught were
dumped into these same boxes to spread
disease and die off ag their predecessors
25
had done. We did everything possible
to alter this state of things without
avail, and it was then only a matter of
giving up beekeeping altogether or
struggling along as best we could, always
hoping for better things to turn up. I
made a solemn vow at that time that if
ever the opportunity came I would do
my utmost to do away with box-hives
and their owners from beekeeping in
New Zealand altogether. That time did
come, but it took twenty years to bring
it about—“better later than never.”
THE FIRST APIARIES BILL.
As already stated, the draft of the bill
drawn up by the sub-committee of the
New Zealand Beekeepers’ Association ap-
pointed for the purpose in March, 1888,
was submitted to and adopted by the
executive committee on the 28th of the
following month. It was also decided,
in order to strengthen the hands of the
president (Mr Frank Lawry, M.H.R.),
who consented to take charge of the bill,
to obtain as many signatures as possible
of beekeepers throughout the colony,
praying the Legislature to pass the bill.
Petitions were sent to members of the
corresponding committee residing in
different parts of the country from
Otago to Auckland, which were subse-
quently returned signed by 470 leading
beekeepers, and were forwarded to Mr
Lawry at Wellington, in June, 1888.
The following is a complete copy of the
bill as presented to the Parliament of
New Zealand during the session of.
1888. I am pleased to be able to give
it, as, when compared with our present
Act, it seems somewhat of a curiosity.
It must be understood, however, that we.
had to provide for the administration
of the Act without any expense to the
Government, as the Treasury was nearly
bankrupt at the time. It must be fur-
ther understood that the drug treatment
of foul brood was then fully believed
in, hence the schedule attached.
FOUL-BROOD AND DISEASE IN BEES
PREVENTION ACT.
1. The ‘Short Title of this Act is ‘‘The
Foul Brood and Disease in Bees Prevention
Act, 1888.”
2. In the construction of this Act, if not
inconsistent with the context:—
“Bee-keeper’ means any person -who
keeps or allows to be kept on his pro-
perty one or more colonies of honey-
bees.
“Bee-expert’”” means any person skilled in.
apiculture appointed by law to carry
out the provisions of this Act with
regard to the examination of bees,
beehives, or combs alleged to be dis-
eased, and the ordering of measures
to be taken with respect to diseased
bees, hives, and combs, by the owner
or other duly-authorised person.
“Hive” shall mean any box, basket, skep,
barrel, or any other receptacle in
which bees are domiciled.
“Colony of bees’? means the number of
bees confined in any hive.
8. For the purposes of this Act there
shall ‘be appointed by the Governor one or
more bee-experts to carry out the duties
hereinafter set forth.
4. After the passing of this Act it shall
not be lawful for any beekeeper knowingly
to keep or allow to be kept upon his pre-
mises any colonies of bees infected with
“foul-brood’’ or other contagious bee dis-
ease, without taking the proper means
described in the first ‘Schedule to cure such
disease; and if, for more than seven days
after becoming aware that any bees on his
premises are affected with contagious dis-
ease, he shal] neglect to destroy by fire or
to take the proper measures to cure such
‘disease, he shall be liable to a fine not
exceeding forty shillings.
5. If, in any locality where colonies of
pees are kept within six miles of other
domesticated bees there is reason to sus-
pect that any such bees in such colonies are
diseased, it shall be lawful for any two
beekeepers to send in writing a notice to
the owner of such colonies, and require
him to satisfy them by any reasonable
means that his bees are free from disease,
or otherwise that he has taken measures to
eradicate the disease by destroymg the in-
fected hives, bees, and comb, or otherwise
by treating them by one of the modes de-
scribed in the First Schedule. A copy of
such notice shall be forwarded at the same
time by the complainants, accompanied by
their names and addresses to the nearest
Magistrate.
6. On receipt of such notice the owner of
such bees of which complaint has been
made, shall forthwith take steps to satisfy
the complainants by whom the notice was
sent, either by allowing them to inspect
the suspected bees, combs, and hives, or
by other reasonable means, that the said
pees, combs, and hives are free from dis-
ease, or that he has taken the proper
measures to eradicate the disease if the
same exists.
7. If after the expiration of three days
from receipt of the notice the keeper of
the suspected colonies neglects to reply to
the notice, or if, having replied, he fail to
satisfy the senders of the notice as set
forth in the preceding clause, it shall be
lawful for them to complain In writing to
the nearest Magistrate, reporting such neg-
lect, a copy of such complaint being at the
same time sent to the offending beekeeper:
and on receipt of such complaint the said
Magistrate shall, without delay, instruct
a constable to accompany the complainants,
and with them to enter upon the premises
of the offending beekeeper, and then and
there to require him to open such hives and
26
expose such combs as the said complainants
may direct; and, in case of his refusal, to
authorise the said complainants themselves
to open and examine such hives and combs
as they may deem necessary.
8. If after such inspection the said com-
plainants shall be satisfiet or or suspect
the existence of disease in all or any of
the hives so inspected, the constable shall
require the said beekeeper, or, in case of
his refusal, the said complainants, to cut
out from each suspected hive a portion of
comb not exceeding six incnes square,
and to place each portion or portions of
comb in separate tin cases or boxes, mark-
ing the same with a legible mark corre-
sponding to a mark placed upon the re-
spective hives from which the portions of
comb were taken, and then and _ there
to seal such case or box, and to deliver the
same thus packed and sealed to the con-
stable for transmission to the nearest ex-
pert, together with a document signed and
in the form set forth in the Second
‘Schedule; also, the cost of carriage, and the
payment of the expert’s fee as hereinafter
provided for. Provided always that if the
keeper of the infected bees shall, in the
opinion of the complainants, take sufficient
steps to destroy by fire the suspected hives,
combs, and bees, then it shall be unneces-
Sary to send the suspected combs to the
bee-expert, as above described.
9. On receipt of a parcel of comb for ex-
amination, the bee-expert shall examine the
same without delay, and if, in hig opinion,
the comb is infected with contagious disease,
or if it be free from disease, he shall notify
the fact in writing forthwith to the com-
plaining beekeepers, as also to the con-
stable; and shall transmit with such noti-
fication directions as to the steps to be taken
with respect to the colony or colonies of
bees from which the combs were taken; and
upon the receipt of such notification from
the bee-expert, the constable shall notify
the keeper of the infected or suspected
bees of the result of the examination, and
require him, within three days, to carry out
the instructions of the bee-expert to the
satisfaction of the complaining beekeepers;
and, in case he shall fail to carry out such
instructions within the time specified to the
sitisfaction of the complainants, they shall
report such default to the nearest Magis-
trate, who shall direct a constable to accom-
pany the said complainants to the premises
of the keeper of the infected colonies of
bees, and shall authorise such constable to
carry out the instructions of the bee-expert,
and in snech latter case the offending bee-
keeper shall defray all the costs of the ex-
amination by the bee-expert, and for the loss
of time and other reasonable expenses in-
curred by the complaining beekeepers or
such constable.
10. If the offending beekeeper shall wil
fully obstruct the carrying out of the in-
structions of the bee-expert, he shall be
liable to a fine not exceeding twenty shil-
lings for each infected hive.
11. The fee payable to the bee-expert for
examination. of one sample of comb shall be
five shillings, and for other samples gent
from the same apiary, at the same time, one
shilling for each additional sample.
12. In the case of any examination of
suspected comb by the bee-expert, his fee,
and all costs attending such examination
and incidental to the complaint, shali be
Payable by the complaining beekeepers if
the comb or combs be reported upon as free
from contagious disease: but if found to be
infected by disease, then such fee and costs
shall be payable by the keeper of the
diseased bees.
13. After samples of comb have been taken
from any suspected hive or hives for the
purpose of examination by the bee-expert, if
such hive or hives shall be removed or in-
terfered with in any manner whatsoever by
any person, or if any person shall obliterate
or otherwise render illegible any official
mark placed upon such hive or hives, save
and except upon the authority of the bee.
expert, the keeper of such hive or hives
‘shall be liable to a fine not exceeding sixty
ghillings for each hive or mark so interfered
with.
14, All fines and penalties made payable
under this Act shall be recoverable sum-
marily under “The Justices of the Peace
Act, 1882.”
SCHEDULES.
FIRST SCHEDULE.
In bad cases, total destruction of bees,
hives, and combs by fire.
In mild cases, or as a preventive, any of
the following remedies:—
No. 1. Salicylic-acid, solution for mixing
with syrup for feeding pees, painting the
interior of hives, and spraying combs and
frames—Salicylic acid, 1oz.; soda borax,
loz; water, 4 pints.
Medicated syrup for feeding bees affected
with contagious disease:—(a) For use from
August to May: Ordinary table sugar or
honey, 10lb.; water, 7 pints; vinegar, 1oz.;
salicylic-acid solution No. 1, 1loz.; salt, loz.
Mix and boil for a few minutes. (b) For
use from May to August: Ordinary table
sugar or honey, 10lb.; water 5 pints; vine-
gar, loz.; salicylic-acid solution No. 1, 1oz.;
salt, $0z. Mix and boil for a few minutes.
No. 2. Absolute Phenol: Pure phenol in
crystals, 120z.; water, 30z. Shake well until
dissolved.
No. 3 Phenol Solution: Pure phenol solu-
tion, No. 2, loz.; water, 1 pint. Shake well
until the oily appearance has entirely dis-
appeared.
Phenolated Syrup:—For use from August
to May: Sugar syrup as given in recipe for
medicated syrup (a) (omitting salicylic-acid
solution No. 1), 1 pint; phenol solution No.
3, loz. For use from May to August: Sugar
syrup as given in recipe (b) (omitting the
salicylic-acid solution No. 1), 1 pint; phenol
solution No. 3, 1oz.
No. 4. ‘Phenol solution for spraying bees
and combs: Absolute phenol solution No. 2,
g0z.; water, 5 quarts.
General Treatment of Diseased Bees: —
Remove the diseased bees with their hive
from its position and put another hive, fiat
has previously been disinfected by painting
the interior with No. 1 solution of salicylic-
acid or No. 3 solution of phenol, in its place
27
Transfer the frames, combs, and bees from
the old hive, spray them with No. 1 solu:
tion or with No. 4 solution, and put them
in the new hive. Remove most or all of
cher honey, and feed the bees on medicated
oc phenolated syrup until cured of disease.
The old hive must be thoroughly disinfected
in the manner described, as also the hands,
and everything that bas been in contact
with the diseased bees or their hive.
SECOND SCHEDULE.
To the Bee-expert [Here insert name
and address].
I, Constable [Here insert name and ad-
dress], have this day sent you [Here insert
number] portion or portions of combs
marked [Here insert marks on combg], cut
from hives believed to contain or have con-
tained diseased bees, and I desire you to
examine such combs and report to me and
to |Here insert names and addresses of com-
plaining beekeepers] in writing your de-
cision and the steps to be taken with such
bees, combs, and hives from which such
portions of comb were taken.
amination and report enclosed.
I have &c.,
A.B., Coustable.
Fee for ex-
The bill was very favourably received,
and Mr Lawry was promised the support
of the Government. It was read the first
time, but was shelved at the end of the
session. The next session being the last
of that Parliament, Mr Lawry thought
it would be useless to bring it on, and as
we were beginning to find the drug treat-
ment a failure, the bill was dropped alto-
gether.
In the light of later experience I have
often thought that it was just as well
it did not become law, but it was a
creditable effort to get. control of bee dis-
ease in those early days.
ADULTERATED HONEY FROM
AMERICA.
Few of the younger generation of bee-
keepers are aware that early in the
“eighties” some of the canning houses in
America were flooding the markets of
the world with a spurious honey com-
posed, according to the “San Francisco
News Letter,” of August 30, 1884, of 565
per cent of glucose, 25 per cent of water,
and only 15 per cent of honey. In 1886
it began to be sold in New Zealand, and
two years later our markets were full of
it, to the detriment of the sale of pure
honey. The above analysis of the spuri-
ous honey was confirmed by Mr R. J.
Kendall. When on his way to New Zea-
land from America he visited the largest
canning factory in San Francisco, and
was shown over the works by one of
the head men. Mr Kendall had kept bees,
and was aware of the adulteration going
on, consequently he tasted the so-called
honey being bottled, and when he chal-
lenged his host as to its purity, was toid
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 Ib 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 Ib.
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.
‘Dear Sir,—I have just received your
telegram re the omission to place an im-
28
port duty on imported honey. UT nave
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 ‘s 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 beer
taken off. It blocked out at once the
American and other fraudulent honey
from our markets. J, however, who first
suggested the duty. suffered by our
action. I had at this time opened ap a
fairly good trade with New South Wales
for our best honey, 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 comp:led by
Mr T. J. Mulvany and myself, the print-
ing and publishing being left in my haads.
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 his 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
an American beekeeper, thus indicating
as much that we had not talent enough
among the whole of our beekeepers to
produce an original one. I sincerely hope,
for the credit of our New Zealand _bee-
keepers, that such a thing will never
occur again. The title of the original
pamphlet was: “Honey, the Natural
Sweet for Human Food; Its General Use
Conducive to Health and Economy.” It
was published in March, 1888.
BEEKEEPERS’ PROTECTION FUND.
In the early days of our commercial
beekeeping on modern lines there was
a good deal of passive opposition on the
part of farmers against the establish-
ment of apiaries in their neighbourhood,
and in two or three instances, to my
knowledge, in the Auckland province, it
threatened to become active. The farm-
ers’ complaint was that the bees, in
gathering nectar from their clover pas-
tures, were depriving their cattle of a
considerable amount of fattening mat-
ter, and giving nothing in return. On
the face of it this seemed feasible to the
ordinary farmer, and as the
same complaint had been made
in America we were in_ dan-
ger of having to contest a lawsuit,
which, if it turned out unsuccessful to
the beekeeping interests, might have
ruined the industry at the time, and its
effects would probably have been felt at
the present day.
The threatened action against a bee-
keeper in the Te Awamutu district on
account of his “trespassing bees” by a
neighbouring farmer brought the matter
to a climax. The complaint of the bee-
keeper was first made known to me as
editor of our bee journal, and
I brought it = at once _ before
the executive of the New Zea-
land Beekeepers’ Association, when it
was decided that if an action took place
the ablest lawyer we could get should be
engaged by the Association to fight the
case; it was decided also to form a de-
fence fund by a levy of one shilling an-
nually from all members of the parent
and affiliated associations, to be solely
devoted to defend beekeepers against
such actions.
Realising the gravity of the situation
from what had already occurred in
America, I saw it was necessary to' bring
some kind of proof forward that the so-
called trespassing bees did incalculable
29
good instead of harm to pastures. After
consulting my friend, Mr. T. J. Mulvany,
who owned an extensive library on agri-
culture, and agricultural chemistry, 1
published in the “New Zealand and
Australian Bee Journal’ for August,
1884, and following numbers, an article
on ‘‘Apiculture in Relation to Agricul-
ture,” which had more than a local in-
fluence in convincing farmers that it was
to their interests to encourage beekeep-
ing rather than oppose it. The question
is now better understood among the
faiming community, so that it is hardly
likely that any one of our settlers would
be so foolish as to oppose the keeping
of bees now or in the future. Still,
there are other questions which make it
desirable to have a general defence fund
in hand. I was sorry our National Bee-
keepers’ Association at the last confer-
ence (1914) postponed consideration of
the question when the motion to form
a defence fund was brought forward, the
matter is of so much importance and the
expense per member so trifling.
RAILWAY FREIGHT ON HONEY
AND HIVES.
The executive committee of the New
Zealand Beekeepers’ Association was
fully alive to the fact that in compari-
son with other agricultural implements
and produce, the freight over the railway
lines of the country for hives and other
beekeeping implements, and also for
honey and beeswax, was exceedingly
high. Consequently, in June, 1888, a
sub-committee was appointed to go into
the matter and report to the executive
at the next meeting. On July 6, 1888, at
the usual monthly meeting the following
report was read:—
“Vy, Chairman and Gentlemen,—Your
sub-committee, on going through the
supplement to the ‘Government Ga-
zette, dated January 30th, 1888, con-
taining the scale of rates and charges
on the New Zealand railways, we found:
lst.—That extracted honey of local pro-
duction, packed, is rated under class Cc,
and the charge per ton for 100 miles
is £1 13/7.
“Ind.—The same as above for export.
in not lesg than l0cwt. lots, is rated
under class D, and the charge per ton
for 100 miles is £1 6/6.
“3rd.—The same in kegs or casks is
rated under class B, and the charge per
ton for 100 miles is £2 1/6.
30
“4th.—Beeswax is rated under class
A, and the charge per ton for 100 miles
‘is £2 9/4.
“5th—Of apiarian implements only
bee-hives are mentioned, and these are
rated under the highest class (A), the
same as beeswax, and the charges are
the same.
“6th_We are given to understand
that goods not specified in the ‘Gazette’
are rated under class A, so that all
apiarian implements are charged the
highest rates.
“With regard’ to the carriage of honey
you will notice there is a difference in
the charges between the highest and
lowest rates of 15/ per ton for 100 miles.
Your sub-committee cannot see any
reason why there should be this or any
difference in the charges. Honey, if
properly packed, is as easy of carriage,
whether in cases or casks, as any other
class of goods, and it cannot possibly
affect the cost of carriage to the Rail-
way Department whether the honey is
intended for export or for local con-
sumption. We notice that beer in casks
is carried at a lower rate than honey
in casks. We are of opinion that honey
securely packed, either in cases or casks,
in large or small quantities, should be
rated under class D, the same as fresh
fruit, to which (so far as they may both
be considered as country produce) honey
can be compared.
“Beeswax, though a raw material pro-
duced in the country, chiefly used here
for apiarian purposes, and exported, is
at present charged an exorbitant ra'te
compared with other country produce,
and we can see no reason why it should
not be rated the same as recommended
for honey, in class D.
“Beehives and all other apiarian appli-
ances which can fairly be compared with
agricultural implements, we are of
opinion, should be carried at the same
rates as the latter, under class C.
“Taking into consideration the fact
that a great deal of ‘the material con-
nected with apiculture hag to pass twice
over one or other of the railway lines
of the colony, and the complaints con-
stantly being made of the high rates for
carriage, we are of opinion that if our
recommendations are carried out, it will
be the means of giving an impetus to the
industry of beekeeping throughout ‘the
colony, and cawse an increase to ‘the
revenue of the Railway Department from
this source.
“We would suggest that if our recom-
mendations meet with your approval,
and the report be adopted, copies be
sent to the Hon. the Minister of
Public Works, Mr. Lawry, M.H.R., and
Mr. C. Hudson, Traffic Manager, Auck-
Jand Railways, with a request from
your committee that the recommenda-
tions be favourably entertained.—G. L.
Peacocke, chairman sub-committee.”
The report was unanimously adopted,
and it was decided to act as suggested.
Subsequently a reply was received
from the Minister of Publie Works, in
which he regretted he could not see his
way to alter the railway tariff in the
direction suggested.
THE FIRST ONE-PIECE SECTIONS
MADE IN NEW ZEALAND.
At the commencement of the season of
1888-9 I was agreeably surprised by re-
ceiving from the late Mr T. G. Brickell
some samples of one-piece sections manu-
factured by himself on machinery im-
ported from A. I. Root, United States,
America, and soliciting orders, which L
gladly gave him. The samples he sent
were plain, and my first order for 5,000
was contingent upon his grooving one
end to fasten foundation in without the
use of melted wax. This he did, and 1
subsequently had many thousands from
him. They were a great boon to our
beekeepers raising comb honey, and were
the same as those now in use. The bass-
wood sections from America, however,
proved the best, as none of our native
timbers are so suitable for the purpose,
and we now import them from the A. I.
Root Company.
DENSE HONEY.
“Thick” honey, as it is usually called,
that is, honey that cannot be thrown
from the combs by the ordinary pro-
cess—the extractor—has been more or
less of a nuisance to New Zealand bee-
keepers, ever since IT can remember. It
does not seem to be confined to any
particular district, but it evidently
gives more trouble in the North Island
than in the South. especially in the
Waikato, and districts north of Auck-
land. Much of our native bush yields
dense honey. and my first experience of
it in 1879 came from the bush. I¢ still
remains more or less of a query as to
what it is gathered from. and T think
our apiary inspectors would benefit
/
many if they would take the matter in
hand and discover the source of this
thick honey. I believe much of it is
gathered from ti-tree (Leptospermum
scoparium).
POISONOUS HONEY.
That there are two plants in New
Zealand which yield poisonous honey
does not admit of doubt to those who
have carefully studied the matter. New
Zealand, however, is not singular in this
respect, for such plants are fonnd in
most countries, chiefly among the heath-
worts (wild azaleas and rhododendrons),
and laurels. My first knowledge that
there were native plants yielding such
honey came from Maoris at the Thames,
in 1878. They not only gave me the
native names of the two plants they
knew of, but described very accurately
the symptoms and effect on human
beings of honey poisoning; and also
gave me to understand that such honey
if allowed to remain exposed for six
weeks after it is gathered, can be eaten
in safety. to all of which I have since
had proof of correctness.
During my 42 years of beekeeping
in New Zealand I have only known of
four clear cases of honey poisoning;
that is, where the poisoning could be
distinctly traced to honey eaten by the
sufferers, so that the risk is not very
great. The danger lies in eating honey
obtained from wild bee nests in the
bush in the month of October. when the
Wharangi (Brachyglottis repanda) is
just going out of blossom, and again in
March and April, when the Waoriki
(Ranunculus rivularis) is in blossom—
the latter flourishes in swampy districts.
As the honey season proper, on which
commercial beekeepers rely, does not
commence until about the beginning of
December, and no honey is taken till
the latter part of that month (more than
three months after the Wharang: yields
nectar) it follows that no honey from
that source can reach the market. And
again, the honey season of the com-
mercial beekeeper has ended before the
Waoriki begins to blossom, so that
there is absolutely no risk in purchasing
honey of a known brand put on the
market.
I have always endeavoured to get at
absolute facts in cases of alleged honey
31
poisoning, in order to correct unreliable
reports that get about. In two cases my
inquiries led to an acknowledgment that
the trouble was not caused by honey;
in one of them I ate some of the so-
called poisonous honey without ill
effects.
One of the most severe cases I have
known occurred in the Bay of Plenty,
ten miles from Matata, in the autumn
of 1889, when two young Maoris lost
their lives. As I could not go personally
to investigate the matter, my friend, the
Rev. J. R. Madan, who was then sta-
tioned at Matata, undertook the work
and furnished me with a full report,
which I published in the “Australasian
Bee Journal” for December, 1889. They
were out pig-hunting (three young
Maoris), when they came across a bee
nest in an old tawhero tree, overhanging
a deep ravine, and obtained some of the
honey from it, According to the sur-
vivor, neither of them ate more than
‘about half a pound of clean honey in
the comb. About two hours afterward
symptoms of poisoning set in, giddiness
and vomiting, then delirium and cramps;
they all made for a stream to drink
water. (An old custom with Maoris
when suddenly taken ill.) One was
overcome on the way and fell uncon-
scious. while the other two were found
dead in the stream; they had apparently.
from their bruised condition, fallen over
the precipice leading to the stream. The
one who fell on the way recovered con-
sciousness early next morning, and made
his way to a settlement near at hand,
when searchers went forth and dis-
covered the other two.
The immediate cause of death was not
honey poisoning. but exposure and
drowning. Had they been overcome be-
fore reaching the precipice like their
mate, they would likely have recovered.
In another case T investigated per-
sonally, six Maoris were poisoned but
all recovered. This latter occurred in
October (spring) and the former in
autumn.
During the past 42 years I have
eaten large quantities of honey
gathered in many districts without ill
effects, so that the risk of injury from
eating commercial honey is practically
nil.
FROM 1892 TO 1905.
The various notable events in the pro-
gress of commercial beekeeping in New
Zealand from its inception up to the
year 1892, have all, I think, been set
forth, it now only remains to deal with
the last but most important stage in its
- history.
The time that elapsed between the
years 1892 and 1905 was, without doubt,
the most dreary and disheartening
period experienced by advanced beekeep-
ers in New Zealand. Box-hive men and
bee disease (foul brood) held sway, ulti-
mately reducing the industry of commer-
cial beekeeping to near the vanishing
point, while, in the absence of legislative
power, nothing could be done to mitigate
the evil. Hundreds lost heart and
dropped out of beekeeping, while only
the pluckiest, and those who had sunk
all their little capital in the business
struggled on in the faint hope that things
would be better some day. Only those
who laboured through that weary time
with their bees, constantly engaged in
an uphill fight against foul-brood, which
the box-hive and other careless bee-
keepers were propagating, can realise to
the full the blessings of our present con-
ditions under legislation.
THE ADVENT OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE.
It was to be expected, under the fore-
going condition of things, that numerous
complaints reached the Department of
Agriculture. These met with a sympa-
thetic response from Mr. T. W. Kirk,
chief of the Horticultural Section of the
Department of Agriculture, to whom
they were submitted. He strongly ad-
vised in his annual reports the appoint-
ment of someone experienced in modern
bee culture to undertake the duties of
placing commercial beekeeping on a
sound footing. As the result of Mr.
Kirk’s advocacy, a sum of money was
voted by Parliament in the session of
1904 for the promotion of bee culture.
In November of that year I received a
letter from the late Secretary of Agri-
culture—Mr. J. D. Ritchie—asking me if
I would undertake the position of Gov-
ernment Apiarist. Although I had then
settled upon going to England, having
retired from business more than two
years before, the opportunity of getting
at the box-hive man was too great an
32
allurement for me to miss the oppor-
tunity. Consequently I accepted the:
position, and gave up my trip.
RAPID PROGRESS.
On January 23rd, 1905, my duties com-
menced, and as I had all along urged.
legislation to control our difficulties, it
was now fully expected that such meas-
ures would soon receive attention. Our
advanced beekeepers looked forward
with confidence for better times, the
Department’s action had put new life:
into the industry, and everything prayed
for in the past seemed about to be ac-
complished.
During the interval between my ap-
pointment and submitting my first official
report — about ten weeks—I had seen
sufficient in my inspection of 119 apiar-
ies containing 2,450 colonies of bees
(nearly 25 per cent of which were in
common boxes), to further confirm the
necessity of at once taking steps to
bring about legislation to control the
industry, and oust the careless box-hive
men. Subsequently I found in some dis-
tricts as many as 60 per cent of box-
hives, hundreds of them empty of bees,
but still on their old stands, the inmates
having succumbed through disease and
starvation. These diseased boxes were
free for other bees to enter and carry
away infectious germs, yet in the ab-
sence of legislation there was no legal
power under which I could destroy them
or their combs. Some few box-hive men
were amenable to reason, and made
away with their diseased bees and boxes.
while the majority did not care a rap,
and would neither destroy nor allow
them to be destroyed. I, therefore,
strongly urged legislation in my first re-
port—March 31st, 1905—which was suv-
ported by my chief, Mr. T. W. Kirk.
FORMATION OF BEEKEEPERS’
ASSOCIATIONS.
Knowing that any reform in the way
of legislation would receive the support
of all our advanced beekeepers, but
realising at the same time that to have
the desired effect this support would
need to come from united bodies of bee-
keepers, instead of from individuals, 1
set about the formation of beekeepers’
associations in the chief centres of bee-
keeping, as we could not then foresee
what, if any, opposition we might en-
counter.
Early in 1906 I had the pleasure
assisting in the formation of the first
one—“The Southland Beekeepers’ As-
sociation”’—(all previous associations
being defunct), with my friend, Mr.
James Allen, as president, an office he
recently relinquished. This association
has done excellent work all through its
career, and it is worthy of mention that
it was the first association to give unani-
mous support to the amenments to the
Apiaries Act, which have since been
adopted by Parliament. The Waikato,
Hawke’s Bay, Canterbury, and Poverty
Bay Beekeepers’ Associations were
formed not long after. These associa-
tions, by giving their unanimous support
in favour of legislation, strengthened the
hands of the Department, and made it
comparatively easy to bring about the
desired result.
The formation of the South Taranaki,
North Otago, Pahiatua, South Canter-
bury, and Marlborough Associations fol-
lowed in point of time, and these in their
turn have added fresh strength to all
movements in the interests of commer-
cial beekeeping in New Zealand.
STARTING THE FIRST STATE
APIARY.
Some attempt had been made to start
an apiary at the Ruakura Government
Farm before I joined the Department,
of
33
but as there was no one on the farm
who understood the management of bees,
nothing beyond purchasing some colonies
and hives and placing them on the farm
had been done. In September, 1905, I
was requested to start a permanent
model apiary with the fifteen colonies of
bees already on the farm. A site was
chosen, an extracting-house built on
cheap but efficient lines, as a model for
beekeepers with little capital, and
everything was done that could in any
way assist beginners by example.
It was decided to increase our opera-
tions up to about 100 colonies, so as te
provide sufficient work during the busy
season to keep two or three cadets going.
Ag my duties required my travelling all
over the Dominion, someone had to be
appointed to take charge, and in
January, 1906, Miss Lena Livesay was
appointed to the position as manageress
of the apiary, a position she filled in a
most efficient manner until she retired
in May, 1909, to go to her people in Eng-
land. She has now a large apiary in
Canada, where, according to recent ad-
vice, she is doing well.
If we may judge of the usefulness of
the Ruakura State apiary by the many
hundreds, I may say thousands, of pro-
spective beekeepers who have visited it
to glean information how to start to the
best advantage, and the successful train-
Bratt ae
A CORNER OF THE RUAKURA STATE APIARY.
ing of cadets every year since it started,
then there can be no question as to its
having fulfilled an important function in
the progress of advanced bee culture in
New Zealand. Nearly forty young
women and several young men have been
trained, one having come specially from
England, and another young lady from
the same country is about to leave to
take up a cadetship at the apiary for
next season. Three young women came
from Australia, two of whom are now
working in partnership as commercial
beekeepers near Drury, in the Auckland
province. All the former cadets I have
heard from have been successful as
apiarists.
It may here be mentioned that all
cadets are required to go through a full
season from September to end of follow-
ing April, and are at the end of their
term put through a thorough examina-
tion before being entitled to a Govern-
ment certificate; if unsuccessful in their
examination, no certificate is issued. It
may be worthy of note that only one
cadet has failed, chiefly through sick-
ness.
LEGISLATION.
Early in 1906 I was requested by my
chief to draft an Apiaries Act in time
for it to be prepared for the ensuing
session of Parliament. This was done,
and I had the satisfaction of learning
(as my chief has since declared) that the
draft, after passing through the law
otficer’s hands, came back practically un-
altered. It was duly submitted to Par-
liament as a Government measure, and
passed into law, but unfortunately three
words had been added to one of the
sections while in committee, that com-
pletely frustrated the chief feature of
the whole Act—the absolute exclusion
of all else but movable comb hives as
domiciles for bees.
It was a great disappointment, but as
the Minister for Agriculture subse-
quently explained, there was only a few
minutes left to get the bill through, and
he (Hon. Mr. McNab) had either to ac
cept the amendment or lose the oppor-
tunity of getting it through that
session. He, however, promised to bring
the Act before Parliament next session
to have the three objectionable words
struck out. In the amended draft, the
word “honey” had been inserted in sec-
tion 8, sub-section b, which would have
a4
made it illegal for honey to be sold or
given away from any apiary affected
with foul brood.
Fortunately, my chief and myself were
called before the Parliamentary Commit-
tee when the new bill was being con-
sidered, and we got the word “honey”
expunged; otherwise, as nearly all our
apiaries had more or less foul brood in
them, they would have had to close
down. The amended bill went through,
and was made law exactly in the form
we wanted it in the session of 1907,
thanks to the assistance given by our
Beekeepers’ Associations.
NEW REGULATIONS UNDER THE
APIARIES ACT.
In my annual report for 1909, I sug-
gested the compulsory registration of
all apiaries in order to assist and save
the time of the inspectors, and also that
strict supervision should be exercised
over all imported bees to prevent
disease being introduced from other
countries. Both these suggestions, with
reculations connected with the export of
honey added by the chief of the division
(Mr. T. W. Kirk), have since received
the sanction of Parliament, been Gazetted
and become law.
The Apiaries Act, as it now stands, is
without doubt the best of its kind now
in force in any part of the world for pro-
tecting the interests of commercial bee-
keeping.
STATE APIARY AT THE CHRIST-
CHURCH EXHIBITION.
As one of the Department’s working
exhibits at the Christchurch Inter-
national Exhibition, 1906-7, the Govern-
ment decided to have a model apiary. It
was thoroughly equipped with honey
house and every modern appliance, and
‘was run as a model bee farm, the honey
secured being exhibited in the Depart-
ment’s quarters. The apiary occupied
about half-an-acre, surrounded by a six-
foot fence of wire-netting, over which
sweet peas were grown; it was a most
attractive and popular exhibit, and did
an immense amount of good in making
the modern system of beekeeping known,
as ‘vell ag being instrumental in creating
a greater demand for honey. In this
connection a vote of thanks was for-
warded to me passed at the first meet-
ing of the Canterbury Beekeepers’ Asso-
ciation (which wag formed shortly after,
with Dr. Cockayne as its first presi-
dent) for the good that had been done
to Canterbury beekeeping by the
example of the Exhibition apiary. The
Exhibition opened on November 1, 1906,
and closed in May, 1907. During its
currency the Ruakura Apiary was prac-
tically neglected, as the manageress
(Miss Livesay) assisted me at Christ-
church the whole six months,
APPOINTMENT OF THE FIRST
INSPECTORS.
At the beginning of 1908 two apiary
inspectors were appointed, one for each
Island (Mr. R. Gibb for the North, and
Mr. W. B. Bray for the South Island),
their duty being to do everything pos-
sible to assist legitimate beekeepers, to
cope with disease (foul brood), and to
abolish box-hives. A permanent im-
provement soon set in, which hag been
going on ever since. Subsequently the
two first inspectors resigned to take up
bee farming themselves, and four were
afterwards appointed, Messrs. G. V.
Westbrook and F. A. Jacobsen for the
North, and L. Bowman and E. A. Earp
for the South Island. These have been
supplied with motor cycles, which en-
able them to do much more work than
formerly; they also act as graders of
all honey for export. Under the fos-
tering care of the Department of Agri-
culture our industry of commercial bee-
farming is advancing rapidly, and I ven-
ture to say stands at the head of the
bee-keeping world.
FOUL BROOD AT THE RUAKURA
STATE APIARY.
The districts around that in which the
Ruakura State Apiary is situated were
among the worst in the Dominion for
foul brood. I saw some of the very
worst cases there that I have seen in
any part of the country, not alone in
single hives, but in whole apiaries, and
over the whole country there about.
The colonies I started the State Apiary
with that were already on the farm
were affected. By constant attention
and treatment we were able to keep the
disease from spreading, and when we
left for the Christchurch Exhibition
there were six colonies out of over 70
slightly affected with foul brood. When
we returned in the following June, 1907,
35
we found disease had spread through
robbing to nearly every colony. Being
winter we could not then undertake
treatment, but early in the following
season we treated a number of the worst
cases, and replaced bad with clean combs
in others. Ag this did not turn out so
satisfactory as we hoped, I decided to
treat the whole of the colonies together
the next spring, and did so between the
4th and 9th November, 1908. There
were in all 72 colonies, which, in the
treatment, were reduced to 64. There-
sult was very satisfactory indeed, for
although we still get a touch of disease
in one or two colonies every season, by
strict vigilance it gives ug no trouble.
Disease still lurks in the district, but is
now in a fair way to be suppressed
altogether.
AN ANXIOUS PERIOD DURING THE
TREATMENT.
The process of treatment was that
popularly known as the “McEvoy,” and
during the course of the operation we
had a most anxious time through a sud-
den change in the weather. We had
waited till the first week in November
(as stated), when the weather is usually
settled and warm, before undertaking
treatment, and it was so on this occa-
sion, with a fair flow of nectar on, but
no sooner had we put the bees on to full
sheets of comb-foundation on the fourth
day than a sudden change took place,
and a severe cold snap came on which
cut off the flow of nectar, and put comb-
building out of the question. The bees
were now in a starving condition, and on
the next (fifth) day began to drop from
the sheets of foundation. The situation
was most critical, as we were threatened
with the loss of the whole of the 64 colo-
nies. While in an almost hopeless state
of mind it suddenly occurred to me to
feed with warm syrup. This we did,
and placed the feeders on the bottom
boards after making room for them, and
sprinkled a little syrup over the bees.
Although many of the colonies were
much weakened, the scheme saved the
situation. Fortunately, favourable wea-
ther soon set in again, and comb build-
ing started. This circumstance acted as
a warning against starting treatment
too early in the season. The middle of
November, I think, quite early
enough.
is
STATE QUEEN REARING APIARY.
During the first three years of my
tour among our beekeepers in nearly all
the principal beekeeping centres of the
Dominion, examining thousands of col-
onies of bees in many hundreds of apiar-
ies, and giving attention to the method
of management among the majority, I
could come to no other conclusion than
that our bees were deteriorating. Ex-
cepting in very few cases no system of
select queen rearing was carried out; the
bees were allowed to breed their own in-
discriminately, good, bad and indifferent,
on the swarming system. Even where
some attempt had been made to improve
the bees by importing and introducing
queens from America and elsewhere as
breeding stock, it seemed to me the good
results that might have followed this
system, if thoughtfully carried out, were
nullified in most instances by the absence
of a little reflection. The majority of
importers were obsessed with the idea
that by introducing “fresh blood,” that
is, imported queens from different breed-
ers, every second season or so (some went
so far as to import them every season
for a while), their bees would rapidly im-
prove. When the suggestion was made
that they would do better by introducing
two or three queens from a reliable
breeder, as breeding stock, then after re-
queening their apiaries from this stock,
to select the best colonies to breed from
each season, instead of introducing fresh
and unknown blood into their apiaries
so often, it was in most cases scouted.
But the matter is now better understood,
and I am quite satisfied that in conse-
quence our bees, taken generally, have
much improved during the last few years.
My suggestion to the Department in
1908 to establish a queen-rearing apiary
at the Waerenga Experimental Farm,
for the purpose of working up a superior
strain of queens for distribution, was ap-
proved, and in September, 1908, it was
started with 32 colonies. I chose Waer-
enga because it was in a manner isolated,
few bees were kept in the district, and
the situation was a long distance from
the bush and wild bees. After the first
season we had entirely cleared the dis-
trict of disease (foul brood), and no sign
of it had been seen up to the time the
apiary was dismantled—five years after.
36
DISMANTLING THE WAERENGA
APIARY.
It was not long after the apiary had
been established before ample proof was
forthcoming of the value of select queen
breeding in the production of an im-
proved strain of bees. Letters testifying
to the good qualities of the queens ob-
tained from the apiary were voluntarily
sent to the Department; unfortunately,
however, some misunderstanding got
about concerning the working of the
apiary (which I need not now go into)
that militated against its usefulness, and
at the end of the fifth year the Depart-
ment decided to close it down.
What followed, however, was gratify-
ing to both the Department and myself,
for just as the above decision had been
arrived at, it was discovered by the bee-
keepers themselves that there had never
been the slightest foundation for the mis-
understanding, and the Department was
asked to retain the apiary. The Depart-
ment would have done so, but unfortun-
ately the request came too late, as the
bees and plant were sold. Two deputa-
tions have since waited on the Minister
of Agriculture asking for a State queen-
rearing apiary to be re-established, and
I am practically certain that the request
would have been complied with had it
not been that every penny the Govern-
ment could spare was required for war
purposes. I urgently suggest that as
soon as an opportunity occurs our Na-
tional Beekeepers’ Association should
press upon the Department the import-
ance of re-establishing the queen-rearing
apiary.
THE NATIONAL BEEKEEPERS’ ASSO-
CIATION OF NEW ZEALAND.
The establishment of the above insti-
tution in September, 1910, was a great
step forward in the onward progress of
commercial beekeeping in this country,
and laid the foundation for the big
strides that have been made since. The
credit for its initiation, under a slightly
different name, is due to the Canterbury
Beekeepers’ Association, which brought
about a conference of beekeepers at Wel-
Ington in the above month, Co-opera-
tion between all our beekeepers in mat-
ters that concerned the general welfare
of our industry was the dominant note
struck at the first conference, and much
headway has been. made in this direction
during the intervening years.
Ne
It was intended to make the conter-
ence an annual function, but much to the
regret of many nothing eventuated in
1911; in fact, the association had all but
become defunct, and it was chiefly owing
to the exertions of Messrs C. A. Jacobsen
and E. G. Ward, of Canterbury, that the
association was resuscitated, and the
second conference held in August, 1912.
Mr Jacobsen was then appointed presi-
dent, and Mr Ward secretary.
The third conference was held in June,
1913, at Wellington, at which the at-
tendance of beekeepers from all parts of
the Dominion was much larger than
heretofore, indicating that the idea of
co-operation was making good theadway.
This was the most important meeting
that had then taken place, a new and
improved constitution was adopted, and
the general business transacted induced a
more hopeful outlook for co-operation
in the future. At that conference Mr
Jacobsen resigned the presidency of the
association, and Mr James Allen, of
Southland, was elected in his place, with
Mr R. W. Brickell, of Dunedin, as sec
retary and treasurer.
Similar conferences were held in June,
1914, and in June, 1915, at poth of which
the interests of our industry in all parts
of the Dominion were well represented.
At the close of the last conference, Mr
James Allen resigned (for health rea-
sons) the presidentship, much to the re-
gret of every beekeeper. Mr Brickell
also resigned (for business reasons) the
secretarvship. Mr J. S. Cotterell, of Te
Aroha, was elected president, and Mr.
Stewart Wright, of Dunedin, as secre-
tary, Mr. Brickell still retaining his
position as editor of the Association’s
journal.
“THE N.Z. BEEKEEPERS’ JOURNAL.”
The above, as the official organ of the
National Association, was started in
July, 1914, with the then secretary, Mr.
R. W. Brickell, as editor. During its
career it has served a very useful pur-
pose. It has come out at the end of its
first year with only the small deficit of
£8 9/10, which may be considered very
satisfactory.
N.Z. CO-OPERATIVE HONEY
PRODUCERS’ ASSOCIATION.
This Association was initiated
some three years ago (1913) by a few
of our most progressive beekeepers in
37
the Taranaki province. It is a trading
concern in the form of a company with
a capital of £3,000, the shareholders
being confined to New Zealand bee-
keepers, its object being to deal with
New Zealand honey, both for export and
local consumption. It has already en-
tered into a contract to supply the
Bristol and Dominions Producers’ Asso-
ciation, annually for three years, not
less than 100 tons nor more than 500
tons of high-grade honey for export to
Britain—the terms are very satisfactory
to producers. It is now establishing
branch depots in all the principal bee-
keeping centres.
That such an institution is absolutely
needed in the onward progress of com-
mercial beekeeping in New Zealand there
can be no doubt, and it depends upon
the whole-hearted support of all en-
gaged in that business to make the Asso-
ciation the complete success it deserves.
THE INITIATION AND PROGRESS OF
OUR HONEY EXPORT TRADE.
These reminiscences would not be com-
plete without some reference to the pro-
gress of our honey export trade and the
trouble our pioneers in the business had
to contend against.
Early in my career as a modern com-
mercial beekeeper in New Zealand, I be-
came convinced that owing to the adapt-
ability of the country (its flora and
climate) to this industry, large quan-
tities of honey over and ebove our
own requirements would be 1 ised, and
sooner or later we should have to
look for a market outside of New Zea-
land for our surplus. This idea was con-
firmed when I raised the first big lot ot
honey in the season of 1883-4—ten tons
—which was really a big lot in those
days. It was such fine honey that a case
or two of 2lb. tins were sent to England
in March, 1884, as presents, and to test
its value on the English market. The
sequel was amusing; one case will suf-
fice. It was a City of London firm,
which dealt largely in first class honey,
chiefly English and Narbonne. The
sample was submitted to the firm’s expert
buyer, whose report upon it was, that
“it ig a very good sample of honey, but
there is too much wax in it.” The fact
of it was, the expert (?) had never seen
before honey so hard and dry, and he
was puzzled—I am certain there was
not half an ounce of wax in a ton of it;
there may not have been any.
The climax came when the merchant
stated in his letter that with regard to
the foreign article, “We only deal in
Narbonne honey, but we will offer 23d.
per Ib. landed in London for similar
honey to sample.” The whole of it was
sold in Auckland at the rate of 7d. per Ib.
This, I felt absolutely certain, was the
first New Zealand honey raised under the
modern system to reach England.
The first commercial transactions ot
any note in the export trade that really
constituted the opening of the English
market for our New Zealand honey,
were made by myself in 1888. For sev-
eral years afterwards I shipped a good
deal each season to England and New
South Wales, until “foul brood” had
played such havoc among the bees that
there was little or no first grade haney
to be obtained. From that time (1892)
until the last few years there was no
systematic export trade, a small consign-
ment was sent now and again by indi-
vidual beekeepers, the market was unre-
liable, and there was frequently a loss on
the transactions due to the heavy ex-
penses. In the past, the best of our
honey has been retailed in England as
“English” honey at 10d. and 1/- per Ib.,
while the New Zealand producer has been
Tucky if he netted 3d. These are facts.
USE OF THE HYDROMETER.
Many years ago I realised the neces-
sity of working out some scheme by
which a given sample of liquid honey
could be tested accurately for its ripe-
ness by the average beekeeper; that is,
to make certain the water content of the
sample ig within the point which might
set up fermentation. It at once oc-
curred to me that if we found out the
minimum specific gravity by the hydro-
meter at which we could depend upon
honey keeping any length of time with-
out deteriorating, our purpose would be
served. I therefore set about the inves-
tigation, and, after making some 250
38
tests, I came to the conclusion that any
honey showing a specific gravity of 1.420
ox over can be marketed without risk.
These figures are now accepted by the
N.Z. Honey Producers’ Association, and
the hydrometer is coming into general
use among our beekeepers.
BRISTOL AND DOMINIONS
PRODUCERS’ ASSOCIATION.
This Association, which has been re-
cently formed with its headquarters at
Bristol, England, deals, as its name indi-
cates, with New Zealand produce. It has
already got practical control of the
whole of our honey export trade to the
mutual benefit of the Association and the
producers. It deals direct with the New
Zealand Honey Producers’ Association,
as previously stated, and the honey pass-
ing through its hands is put up and sold
in England as New Zealand honey, under
the latter’s brand. The price guaranteed
for all honey of first grade is 4d. per lb.
in bulk, f.o.b. in New Zealand, without
recourse, and any surplus after sales,
less cost of bottling and 5 per cent. com-
mission, is returned to New Zealand.
GRADING HONEY FOR EXPORT.
The event which I consider will have
the greatest influence for good in the
advancement of our export honey trade
is the compulsory grading regulations,
which came into force on December lst,
1915. The Government brand on the
cases denoting the quality or grade ot
the contents, will give confidence to the
purchaser, and ensure the bona-fides of
the transaction.
CONCLUSION.
I hope those of the bee-keeping frater-
nity who have taken the trouble to read
through these reminiscences will have
found something to interest them in the
brief account of some of the pioneering
work of the old beekeepers of New Zea-
land.
Reprinted from ‘‘New Zealand Farmer,’’—13892.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11