The American Bee Journal. Vol. XVII. No. 14. April 6, 1881Various
History
The American Bee Journal. Vol. XVII. No. 14. April 6, 1881
Various
Bee culture -- Periodicals
The above subject is one which has provoked considerable comment, and
it appears we are not quite done with it yet. I dare say that there
is not a dealer of any note in Cincinnati, by this time, who imagines
that my jar honey is anything but pure honey, or who suspects any honey
when it comes from my store; and I am just as positive in the statement
that there is not a dealer in Cincinnati, having extracted honey from
New York or Chicago in store, who does not believe it to be glucosed.
There is hardly anybody in our community who suspects the purity of
the honey when my label is on the jar. Jar-honey, in general, is not
mistrusted any more in our city, unless the jar contains besides the
liquid, also a piece of comb honey. Such is the case in Cincinnati, to
all appearances, and I am willing to be corrected if wrong.
The subjoined letter from a party in New York, and my answer to them,
show an interesting difference in the state of the market for extracted
honey in our city and New York, the home of Mr. W. M. Hoge, Wm. Hogue
or John Long. To avoid misunderstanding, I may state that Hoge, Hogue
or Long, while in New York, was bottling honey for the firm of Thurber
& Co. In explanation of the letters following, I may state that the
editor of the _Cincinnati Grocer_ had been recommending my honey to
Messrs. Guernsey & Co., N. Y., who opened correspondence with me, and
to me he had recommended them as perhaps the best party to introduce my
honey in the New York market. The result was that I sent them 1 gross
of 1 lb. jars and 1 gross of ½ lb. tumblers, at cost, on 60 days’
time. The honey commenced granulating in the course of a month or more.
This fact, and the general mistrust to extracted honey in New York must
be taken into consideration to do the following correspondence justice:
New York, March 17, 1881.
Mr. C. F. MUTH--_Dear Sir_: Enclosed please find bill of lading for
the honey sent us. We find it totally impossible to sell the goods,
as parties here are afraid of glucose, etc. We waited for parties
to decide about them, and they concluded not to take them. We are
sorry, but such is the case. We have retained one box of each,
bottles and tumblers, to pay us for the freight paid on goods here.
Yours very respectfully,
GUERNSEY & CO.
To which I replied as follows:
Messrs. GUERNSEY & CO.--_Gents_: Your favor is at hand. I expect
the return of my honey with all the charges deducted you feel
disposed to make. I had supposed that there were some men in your
city with enough sense to determine the difference between honey
and glucose. My honey is _strictly pure_, and will pay you $100 if
you will prove that I am wrong. Yours truly,
CHAS. F. MUTH.
Cincinnati, Ohio, March 21, 1881.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account