Established in 1861 THE AMERICAN Oldest Bee-Paper in America Bee Journal
Weekly, $1 a Year. } Devoted Exclusively—To Bee-Culture. { Sample Copy Free. VOL. XXXIII. CHICAGO, ILL., JAN. 11, 1894. NO. 2.

EDITORIAL

GEORGE W YORK. EDITOR

The Weather, up to Jan. 5th, here in Chicago, has been more like fall than winter. Reports seem to indicate that bees are wintering well, so far.

Mr. John Hager, Jr., of Arabi, La., has sent us a box of specimens of honey-plants now in bloom in his locality, among them white clover and golden-rod. We wish to thank Bro. Hager for his kindness, as it is something unusual for us to see blossoms of honey-plants in the month of January. Louisiana, as well as the other States in our Sunny Southland, ought to be a Paradise for the bee-keeper and his bees. Doubtless it only needs a little more push and energy to wonderfully develop the bee-industry in that region of almost perpetual sunshine and blossoms.

Gleanings in Bee-Culture for Jan. 1st, 1894, appeared with a few very nice improvements. The principal one is the proposed “leading” of the reading matter—that is, putting strips of lead or metal between the lines, so that they will be further apart. This paragraph is “leaded,” while “The Stinger’s” department in the Bee Journal is “solid,” as printer’s say.

This “leading,” Bro. Root says, will reduce the amount of reading in Gleanings about one-fifth, and as Bro. Hasty, in the Review for March, 1893, figured that the Bee Journal then contained over 16.000 more words of bee-reading per month than Gleanings, hereafter the Bee Journal will be more than ever at the head of the list in quantity of bee-matter published; and as to quality of contents—well, we can safely leave that to our subscribers, whether or not it is up to standard.

Bro. Root has also put in some nice new departmental headings, which, with the “leading” of the type, give to Gleanings an exceedingly neat and tasty appearance.

☞ It is hardly necessary for me to say that the Italians are my choice among all the bees that I have ever seen, either for comb honey or for extracted.—Doolittle.

Bro. Pringle, of Canada, who had in charge the Ontario honey exhibit at the World’s Fair last summer, left for home on Dec. 21st. He had been in Chicago ever since April 6th, being the first apiarian superintendent to reach the Fair grounds, and the last to leave.

The day before departing for his Canadian home, Bro. Pringle kindly called to bid us “good-bye,” at the same time bringing with him, for “ye editor,” a quart jar of fine clear extracted honey, as a memento from Bro. McEvoy, Ontario’s popular Foul Brood Inspector; also a pound jar of honey from Mr. D. Chalmers, of Poole, Ont.; and, besides, a beautiful one-pound section of honey as a slight remembrance from Bro. P. himself. We want to thank all these friends for their “sweet” expressions of good-will, and assure them that we very gratefully appreciate their kindness and thoughtfulness.

We expect soon to give our readers a picture of Ontario’s magnificent honey exhibit at the Fair, with full description of the same.

The Wisconsin Honey Exhibit.—At the annual meeting of the Wisconsin State Bee-Keepers’ Association, in February, 1893, Mr. Franklin Wilcox, of Mauston, Wis., was chosen to collect, prepare and arrange an exhibit of honey and wax at the World’s Columbian Exposition. The sum of $500 was allotted by the State Board with which to make the exhibit.

The months of February and March did not prove to be the most favorable time for collecting comb honey that should fairly represent the State. After considerable correspondence, and some travel, Mr. Wilcox succeeded in obtaining about 800 pounds of comb honey, 500 pounds of extracted, and 200 pounds of beeswax, of the crop of 1892. Damages from freezing and rough handling reduced the quantity somewhat before it was finally installed at Chicago.

The rules of the Exposition Company sent out at that time limited the amount from each exhibitor to 50 pounds of extracted, and 100 pounds of comb honey, which prevented filling up the exhibit with a large quantity of fancy honey from two or three exhibitors, as might have been done with less cost.

Among those who furnished honey from the crop of 1892, were J. J. Ochsner, of Prairie du Sac, who sent some of the finest comb and extracted honey, also some choice beeswax; but the most attractive exhibit by Mr. O. was his name and post-office address built of comb honey by the bees in letters formed for them as a guide.

Mr. C. A. Hatch, of Ithaca, and E. C. Priest, of Henrietta, furnished extracted honey and beeswax. Messrs. Frank McNay, Franklin Wilcox, and A. E. Wilcox, of Mauston, each furnished comb and extracted honey and beeswax. Messrs. Gustav Gross, of Milford, and Adolph Vandereicke, of Lake Mills, contributed their best.

The extracted honey was nicely put up in glass jars, of different sizes and styles, designed to show those commonly used in the retail trade. It nearly all appeared on exhibition in the granulated form. This was partly because Mr. Wilcox believed that people should learn to know that pure extracted honey will granulate, and partly because he could not give it time enough to melt it so often as necessary to keep it in the liquid form.

Wisconsin Exhibit at the World’s Fair.

After completing the installation of the crop of 1892, Mr. Wilcox applied to the State Board for funds to replace the old crop with the new, when it should be ready. This was promptly refused, and Mr. W. abandoned the exhibit for a time. About the middle of August, finding a good crop of choice honey, and that other States had greatly improved their exhibits, he again appealed to the Board for funds with which to pay transportation and installation charges on the new crop, and succeeded in getting the promise of $100 for that purpose.

As the time was short, he called for immediate contributions, and obtained over 50 pounds from J. W. Kleeber, of Reedsburg, 300 pounds from J. J. Ochsner, and 200 pounds from himself and son, with which he replaced a portion of the old crop of comb honey.

This was arranged on five large arches, as shown in the illustration herewith, with pyramids of honey underneath. Those columns with a square base and two balls on the top are beeswax. The remainder of the wax is in fancy balls, bells, hearts, etc., and may be seen on top of the sections, glass and jars of honey. Mr. Ochsner’s letters do not show very well in the picture. They were in the front end of the showcase under one of the large arches.

The Wisconsin exhibit was entered as a State exhibit, and of course individual exhibitors were unknown to the judges, consequently the award was to the State as a whole.

As in the case of the Michigan exhibit, the success of the Wisconsin display was mainly due to the untiring efforts and wisdom of one man—in the former to Bro. Cutting, and in the latter to Bro. Wilcox, whose picture is shown on another page. Both of these good men worked faithfully and hard in securing and placing their respective exhibits, and of course each won worthy and lasting honor, if not financial reward. We trust that neither Wisconsin nor Michigan bee-keepers will soon forget the two men who did so much to win new laurels to these already much-crowned States.

The Vermont Bee-Keepers’ Association will meet in the Van Ness House at Burlington, Vt., on Jan. 24 and 25, 1894. Among the topics to receive attention are these:

President W. G. Larrabee’s address, including a report of the North American Bee-Keepers’ Association meeting in Chicago.

Experimental work: What has been done at the State Farm—O. J. Lowrey and T. H. Wheatley.

Upward and entrance ventilation: How much for winter?—H. P. Langdon.

Is spring protection necessary after bees are put out of the cellar?—M. F. Cram.

Discussion: Advantages and disadvantages of shallow frames.

Why is honey so much better flavored in some years than in others?—R. H. Holmes.

How shall we manage our bees so as to secure the most honey?—E. J. Smith.

In the Secretary’s announcement we find the following paragraphs:

The Van Ness House kindly donates the use of a hall for the convention, and reduces their rates to $2.00 per day, to those attending the convention.

If you have any new or useful invention or article, please bring the same to the convention.

If you live within reach of Burlington, don’t fail to attend the meeting, and bring your lady friends with you. All interested in apiculture are expected to come without further invitation. Bring your badges.

The C. V. R. R. Co. have reduced their rates as follows: Return tickets—From stations within 33 miles of Burlington, 2 cents per mile each way, with minimum rate of 25 cents, and maximum rate of $1.00; 34 miles and over, fare one way. Tickets are good going Jan. 23rd, 24th, and 25th, and good returning the 25th and 26th, between the following named places to Burlington: Malone and Ticonderoga, N. Y., Richford, Cambridge Junction, Rutland, and White River Junction.

H. W. Scott, Sec. & Treas.

Barre, Vt.

GENERAL QUESTIONS

ANSWERED BY
DR. C. C. MILLER,
Marengo, Ill.

In this department will be answered those questions needing IMMEDIATE attention, and such as are not of sufficient special interest to require replies from the 20 or more apiarists who help to make “Queries and Replies” so interesting on another page. In the main, it will contain questions and answers upon matters that particularly interest beginners.—Ed.

Contraction—Improvement in Bees.

I tried contracting the brood-chamber of four colonies during basswood honey-flow, and three of them would persist in building comb on the vacant side of the dummy. One even got so far as to have quite a comb there, (mostly drone-comb) with the queen laying in that side.

The combs in the brood-chamber were very nearly all worker, and instead of the queen using them, and the bees storing above, they capped them over half full of honey. They worked in the super some, but not like bees ought to when there is a good honey-flow. They had, I think, five Langstroth frames, maybe six.

I fitted a thin piece of board over the vacant part of the brood-chamber. One of the four stayed “contracted” all right. It had six frames. This one was a new swarm, and worked all right in the super, but re-swarmed in August.

1. I would like advice on contracting, and how to do it. Ought I to contract all summer, where the bees get enough honey to breed strong all the time? Also, there is lots of pollen here all summer.

2. In Mr. Simmins’ essay on page 689 of the Bee Journal for 1893, he gives as one of his means of preventing swarming, the withdrawal of the two outer combs, and inserting near the center of the brood-nest two empty frames. Are not these empty frames apt to be filled with drone-comb?

3. On the same page he speaks of rearing young queens in the fall to requeen with, also as a means of preventing swarming. What is the object of rearing them in the fall?

4. Would not cells saved at the swarming season do as well?

5. Where the bees of a neighborhood are about half blacks and half Italian, or a good share hybrid, would you advise a person to try to Italianize, suppose his bees were about half and half?

6. Where the bees of a neighborhood are two-thirds black, and you want to produce comb honey mostly, would it be best to breed from your best black queens, rather than to try to Italianize?

7. Don’t you think (of course the big queen-breeders don’t read this department) that if the black bees had been bred as scientifically, and as much care and study given them as has been bestowed on the Italians, in the last 20 or 30 years, they would have been to-day as good, if not better than the Italian?

E. S. M.

Denison, Iowa.

Answers.—1. I have contracted down to five, four, three, and in some cases down to only one or two combs, having no combs built in the brood-chamber. A division-board or a dummy was next to the comb or combs left, and the space partly filled with dummies. One or two years I filled in the vacant space with hay. If two dummies were put in next the brood-comb, with half an inch space between them, there was no trouble about combs being built in the vacant space left. But please notice that there was no queen in the hive. Without a queen, bees don’t seem so intent on building comb, but with a queen you would likely find them clustering in the open space left beyond the two dummies, there to build combs.

With the queen left in the hive, as in your case, you should have filled up the vacant space in some way, so the bees couldn’t occupy it. If the space for the brood-nest is limited, the tendency of the bees is to build additional combs at the side, even if one or two dummies are in the way. Perhaps it is not necessary to have the dummies so close to each other as you get farther away from the brood-nest. At the farther side, next the wall of the hive, the bees are not so likely to commence building, even if the space is an inch or more.

I doubt if any one would advise you to contract all summer. I think contractionists would tell you to hive a swarm on five frames, then after those five are well occupied, and the bees working well in the supers, to add the other frames. Some of them might perhaps tell you to take out part of the frames from an old colony, but I rather think that now-a-days contraction is mostly confined to swarms. I don’t, however, count myself the highest authority on contraction, for after having done a good deal in that line I have gone back to the plan of allowing same number of combs summer and winter.

2. Yes, put an empty frame into the middle of a brood-nest at a time when there was any likelihood of swarming, and I should expect a good share of the comb built to be drone, especially if there was no drone-comb in the other frames.

3. Bees having a young queen are not so likely to swarm as those having an old one, and rearing a queen in a hive in the fall would not interfere with the harvest as would rearing one before the harvest.

4. There might not be much difference, only the later a queen is reared this year, the younger she will be next, and the less likely to swarm.

5. Yes, I’ve done that very thing, and I would keep on trying, for you will not get through with the trying for a good many years.

6. No, I would do my best to work in Italian blood.

7. No, I hardly think so. Between you and me, I don’t think there has been such an immense amount of science squandered on the breeding of Italian bees. They are what they are, because of the surroundings in their native habitat. While some have taken great pains in breeding, I think a large number to-day would say that an Italian queen imported from Italy 30 years ago was just as good as the average queen in America to-day, and every year many queens are imported from Italy and sold at a high price, which would hardly be, if there was no advantage in it. And I don’t know that any one claims that any improvement has been made in Italy, in the past 30 years.

Langstroth
Biographical

No. 64.—Franklin Wilcox.

FRANKLIN WILCOX.

One of the prominent figures on the wonderful gallery of the Agricultural Building at the recent World’s Fair, where were found the more wonderful and beautiful exhibits of the apiary, was Mr. Franklin Wilcox, of Mauston, Wis. We had never had the pleasure of a personal acquaintance with him before the past summer, but now we feel that in Bro. Wilcox, as in many other nice bee-folks whom we first met the past year, we have indeed a good and true friend. So we are glad to have this opportunity to also present to our readers another leading bee-keeper—one who has done so much for advanced apiculture in the State where he lives, and who takes such a deep interest in the prosperity of all.

Like a great many of the famous men of the United States, Bro. Wilcox had the good fortune to be born in the State of Ohio. We are not sure that this fact has anything to do with his success as a bee-keeper, but somehow we imagine there must be something encouraging in the feeling that one hails from a certain locality where have come many who have won deserved distinction, even to filling the highest position of honor in the gift of the Nation. However that may be, at any rate Franklin Wilcox was born in Hardin county, Ohio, in 1840. He moved to Wisconsin in 1851, and settled in Juneau county, near where he now resides. There being no school to occupy his mind, for a few years he spent much of his time in the summer season hunting his father’s cows—for pastures were bounded only by the horizon, and the cows seemed anxious to find the outer edge; in the fall he frequently went with his father bee-hunting, and there learned from observation some practical lessons in bee-keeping, and we think he would spend a little time each fall yet, in the woods, “lining up” the wild bees, if time would permit.

At the commencement of the late War, he went into the army and served to the close, being wounded at South Mountain, Md., in September, 1862, which disabled him from active service for one year.

At the close of the War he married, and settled on a farm where he still lives. He thinks himself quite content with his comfortable home, a good wife, and four children.

In connection with his farming summers and teaching a country school winters, he kept a few colonies of bees, as some farmers do now, until about the year 1877 or 1878, when he subscribed for the American Bee Journal, and soon after added Gleanings, “Cook’s Manual,” and several other bee-works. After a few months’ reading, he chose a hive, and commenced bee-keeping in a new way, that astonished his parents and some of his neighbors.

He now commences each season with from 200 to 300 colonies of bees, and realizes as much profit from them as any farmer with the same amount of capital and labor.

Mr. Wilcox has been the Secretary of a farmers’ mutual insurance company for the past 15 years, which does business in four towns only, and carries a capital stock of $500,000.

On a previous page is found a description and illustration of the Wisconsin State apiarian exhibit at the World’s Fair, which Bro. Wilcox superintended in such a pleasing and satisfactory manner.

In Sunny Southland

CONDUCTED BY
MRS. JENNIE ATCHLEY,
Beeville, Texas.

Everything Booming in Texas.

I will now tell you about the weather up to date (Dec. 28th). We are having summer weather, and the bees are just booming on wild currant, which began to bloom about a week ago. The boys are to-day transferring bees from 16 box-hives that they brought in last evening, and they say that the robber-bees are not bad at all, as the bees are busy on the currant bloom. To-day the thermometer registers 75° in the shade; at sunrise this morning it was 66°, and at sundown last night 70° above zero.

On Christmas day husband rode out some, and plucked an orange out of Major DeGan’s orchard, where he saw trees bending with fruit of many varieties of oranges; also the Japan plums were in bloom. The Major’s fish-pond was partly covered with water-lilies, and stocked with the finest perch he ever saw, and they were very gentle; they would come right up to him for food. Then he went out to some of the many gardens in Beeville, and found vegetables in great profusion—radishes, white head cabbages, lettuce, mustard, English peas, new Irish potatoes, and a great many other things too numerous to mention.

The lowest the mercury has been here up to date is 33° above zero, and we are now having lovely weather, and everything shows a springlike appearance. I will keep close watch of all the honey-plants, and at the end of next season I will be prepared to tell all about them, etc. If we have fine weather ten days longer, our strong colonies will fill their hives with new currant honey, as it is very plentiful here.

We have drones hatching, and our swarming will begin about Feb. 15th, or 45 days from now.

Jennie Atchley.

Sending Queens by Mail.

I think Mr. Faylor is a little “off” when he says, on page 697 of the Bee Journal for November, 1893, that no queens are any good after being transported through the mails. The best laying queen, or one of the best, I ever had, came clear across the ocean, by mail, from Italy. She lived fully three years; and, in fact, I have received thousands of queens by mail from different parts of the country, and do not remember ever having a queen damaged in the mails in good weather. I have received them nearly dead, and they turn up O. K. Still I believe some queens are injured in transit, both by mail or in nuclei by express, as I have received such reports.

But my opinion is, that nine-tenths of all the queens that arrive in good condition by mail (that is, lively) are just as good as those not so transported. There are hundreds, yes, I will say thousands, of bee-keepers that can testify in this case, if they will. Please let let us hear some of the evidences; the court is ready. This is a very important question.

Jennie Atchley.

Fruits and Vegetables.

As some friends have not yet gotten enough about southwest Texas, I’ll tell them about the fruits and vegetables. Grapes grow and fruit the heaviest here of any place I ever saw; some bunches of ripe grapes weighing 2½ pounds, and very rich in flavor, and they always fruit—no failures.

Oranges do well here, but have to be irrigated during the dry seasons. I drove by any orchard yesterday that was loaded with ripe oranges, and I tell you it was a pretty sight.

Bananas do only moderately well, but I do not believe the people here understand their culture. There is hardly ever any ice here thicker than a knife-blade, but I see the people wrap up and protect the banana-trees.

Pears do excellently, and young trees grow into bearing very quickly, compared to some countries. Blackberries, strawberries, raspberries, dewberries, currants, and all small fruits do well here. Peaches do well if the varieties are chosen that are acclimated to this latitude. Apples only bear sparingly—it is too warm for them, and the trees do not live long. The whole country here is covered or strewn with wild currants, and they bear every year, and are very fine.

Jennie Atchley.

Hints that May be Valuable.

If you wish nice yellow beeswax everytime, do not use any iron vessel in rendering it. Use tin, brass or copper, as iron will make it dark.

Don’t rest too long, as you may lose considerable, and the “Stitch in time saves nine” adage holds good in bee-keeping, surely. Have you got your sections, frames, and the supplies all ready for next season? If not, you had better see about it, as no bee-keeper in the world can reap a full harvest, and be behind with his supers, hives, frames, etc. It is always best to be ready, whether the harvest comes or not. But should it come, and find the tub bottom up, but little is caught.

It is not best to ask too many questions when you start out in apiculture. Remember that one idea learned yourself, is worth more than if two were told you.

Remember that you may read agricultural papers for years, and without any practice you are no farmer. It is the same with bees. It is right and proper to learn all you can from others, but to be real successful you must learn some yourself.

Jennie Atchley.

Many Vegetables and Few Neighbors.

If a person doesn’t have all the vegetables he can use, it is his own fault, as they can be raised at any time of the year here. I notice cabbages just beginning to head-up now, and tomatoes are plentiful, as the vines seldom are killed by frost. Cabbages grow best in winter, and, to make this short, I will say that people are making garden all the time—while some are harvesting, others are planting. I planted peas, lettuce, radishes and cabbages to-day (Dec. 14th). I have only been here three months, and have raised one crop, and we do not have the time to devote to our garden that it needs, to make a real success of it, still we can, with very little trouble, have all the vegetables we need.

Sweet potatoes, Irish potatoes, onions, carrots, artichokes, and celery are all paying crops here. Every known variety of melons do well. There are plenty of ripe water-melons now, and I see new vines coming up.

Now, all of this may seem flattering, but it is true, nevertheless. But this is a new country, out from the towns, and thinly settled. Willie and Charlie say they traveled nearly all one day—about 20 miles—without seeing a house, and it was a public highway, too, or what we call a “county road;” so you see there is room here for you. But you must be content to live without a near neighbor, for awhile, at least.

Jennie Atchley.

Grading of Honey.

I have lately been looking over some old bee-papers, and find that the grading of honey has occupied considerable space, with but little accomplished, as I look at it. Now, it is a very easy matter for us bee-keepers to school ourselves, also easy to school the dealers, but schooling the public is a different thing altogether, and I yet believe that the simple figure plan is the best, such as No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, etc. For to get the consumers to know what grade of honey they are buying, the grade should be on each section, the producer saying something like this: If you wish honey like this, buy my No. 1 or No. 2, as the case may be. John Smith, producer, Chicago, Ills.

Every producer should mark his honey in plain figures, and then the public will soon know how to buy honey, and these plain figures are so easily read. Just think of White, Extra White, Superfine, etc.—too much name for me. I shall brand what section honey I produce, No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc., and try to school my Southern consumers to understand the meaning of the same.

Jennie Atchley.

Resources of Honey, Etc.

I am told that everything that has thorns on it produces honey, and if that be the case, there are but few shrubs that do not furnish honey. West of this place, for 40 miles, or as far as I have been out, it is thickly covered with shrubs, vines, etc., not much taller than one’s head, and I will name a few for the benefit of bee-keepers who might wish to make inquiry.

Catclaw is very thick in places, so thick that cattlemen sometimes have to pay Mexicans a big price to go into the catclaw brush and “round out” their cattle. “Waheeah” is another sticky brush that is very plentiful, and a good honey-producer. “Wesach” is about the earliest bloom we have—now ready to bloom—and fine for bees. Then we have black and white chapparal, both good for bees. Mesquite is here in abundance, and also yields honey, and there are a great many other plants that yield honey that I know no name for.

And now, while the honey-producing plants have thorns, the bee-keeper feels some of them, in the way of drouths, skunks, cutting ants, moth-worms, and other drawbacks; but if one will make up his mind to overlook these troubles, he will find this a fine bee-country.

Jennie Atchley.

Bro. Chas H. Thies, of Steelville, Ills., has been greatly bereaved in the death of his mother on Dec. 19th. In a kindly letter written to us on Christmas Day, he speaks thus tenderly of his blessed mother:

Friend York:—While I have never met you, and you have never met me or any of us knowingly, yet I feel as though I could divide my sorrow by writing you a few lines. In the past years, when I felt troubled or sad, I could tell my mother, which seemed to unload just half of my trouble, and she was always very glad to share in our troubles and sorrows, as well as in our joys. But since Tuesday, Dec. 19th, she has not been with us, for God saw fit to take her Home, where sickness, pain or death will never more reach her.

She told us before going, that she would like to stay with us longer, but that if God wanted her she was ready to go.

We are all grown up, and do not need a mother to supply us with our daily bread, etc., but yet we should have been glad to have had her with us a few more years. We are trying in this case, as in many others, to say, “Thy will be done,” yet it seems a little harder now than in many cases, particularly for my aged father, who is now 70 years old.

But one thing we are glad of, mother did not suffer long. If each of us only can truly say, when our time comes, “I have fought a good fight,” we have the assurance of meeting her again.

Yours very truly,
Charles H. Thies.

[Yes, Bro. Thies, one by one our loved ones are passing to the other side of the river, and we all will soon be called to follow. Then “what a meeting and a greeting” there will be!

Although we are personally acquainted with but few of our readers, yet in their sorrows as well as joys, we feel deeply interested, and wish to assure them that especially in the sad hours of bereavement they have our sincerest sympathy. Surely, we are only a large family, and of all folks bee-keepers, it seems to us, are more interested in each other’s welfare than are any other class of people on this earth. Please remember, then, that the Bee Journal is always ready to hear from its large family of readers, and, whenever possible, will be only too glad to help them.—Ed.]

QUERIES AND REPLIES

Queenless and Broodless Bees.

Query 905.—If the queen and all the brood of a colony were removed, 1st. Would the bees thus suddenly deprived, stay in the hive, or scatter around? 2. Would they (after the first two or three days of mourning for the queen) go to work and store honey?—Tenn.

I don’t know.—Eugene Secor.

They would speedily be “no more.”—Will M. Barnum.

1. Most of them would scatter around. 2. No, or very little.—Dadant & Son.

1. Scatter more or less. 2. Store some. Not profitable.—P. H. Elwood.

1. Stay in the hive, as a rule. 2. Some, but in a very discouraged way.—J. H. Larrabee.

1. They would be likely to scatter around. 2. It is doubtful if they would.—J. M. Hambaugh.

1. I think they would leave, as I have seen swarms do in early spring that had no queen.—Jas. A. Stone.

They would stay and work until they died of old age. then the worms would destroy the combs.—E. France.

1. They will stay in the hive. 2. They will store honey, but will be robbed in a short time.—H. D. Cutting.

I have never tried this, and can only guess what would happen. Better try it, and report results in the Bee Journal.—C. H. Dibbern.

1. They would not all abandon the hive unless they were robbed or had no honey. 2. They would not be apt to store much honey.—G. L. Tinker.

1. Yes, they would stay at home. 2. Yes, if there was nectar to be gathered, but they would soon dwindle out in the working season.—Mrs. J. N. Heater.

1. They would stay. 2. I was not aware that bees quit their “job,” and went into mourning for a queen. Mine don’t—they keep at work.—A. B. Mason.

1. They would stay in the hive. 2. They would go to work, but not in the brisk condition that they would if the conditions were normal.—J. P. H. Brown.

1. They would stay in the hive. 2. They would store honey tolerably well, and that without devoting even two or three days to mourning.—R. L. Taylor.

1. They would stick to the hive. 2. No, they are hopelessly queenless, and seem to be wholly discouraged. Such a colony will do practically no work.—A. J. Cook.

Bees without a queen, or the means of rearing one, are discouraged, and manifest little interest in life, knowing by instinct that their “time is short.”—Mrs. L. Harrison.

1. Much would depend; they might not, sometimes they do one thing, and sometimes the other. 2. I have known them to do so; ordinarily I do not think they would.—J. E. Pond.

1. Sometimes they would, and sometimes they wouldn’t. 2. If they staid, they would use their opportunities for storing, without waiting two or three days to mourn.—C. C. Miller.

1. I am sure I cannot tell. I can see no reason why any one should treat a colony of bees in this way. 2. I do not think they would. Try it, and then you will know.—Emerson T. Abbott.

1. They would stay in the hive, but would do little work, and would rapidly dwindle away. 2. They would get along much better if allowed some brood, or even a single queen-cell.—J. A. Green.

1. They would run all over the hive and fly around, looking for their queen, or “scatter around,” as you put it. 2. Yes, to a certain extent, but not as much as they would have done had the queen been left with them.—G. M. Doolittle.

1. They would likely stay, especially if they were Italians. 2. Yes, some. All colonies would not act alike. Some will not store much honey even with a young queen in prospect, until they get her; others will work well while rearing a queen.—S. I. Freeborn.

1. They would probably stay. 2. I know a case of this kind. A bee-tree was cut in the early summer, the bees were put into a hive, but the queen was killed. The dead queen was suspended in the hive against the cover. The bees filled the hive one-third full of comb and honey.—M. Mahin.

1. Some irritable bees will swarm out, but they usually return and assume the same attitude of other queenless bees. 2. Yes, they store honey, but probably with not as much vim as with a laying queen, but usually they store more honey, as none is used in brood-rearing. But somehow I never did gain much by caging queens during a harvest.—Mrs. Jennie Atchley.

When treated in this way they show great excitement for several days, but they will generally submit to the inevitable, and in some cases they will store honey rapidly—if nectar is abundant—and in other cases they will do but little good. But if you will give them a bit of comb containing young larvæ to build queen-cells, they will work all right.—G. W. Demaree.

“The Honey-Bee: Its Natural History, Anatomy and Physiology,” is the title of the book written by Thos. Wm. Cowan, editor of the British Bee Journal. It is bound in cloth, beautifully illustrated, and very interesting. Price, $1.00, postpaid; or we club it with the Bee Journal one year for $1.65. We have only three of these books left.

Contributi^ons

Mailing Queen-Bees Long Distances.

Written for the American Bee Journal
BY W. A. PRYAL.

Although a number of queen-breeders of this country have been fairly successful in shipping queens to foreign lands through the mails, still, a few of these breeders, as well as many others who have not been favored with a foreign order, have been pretty unlucky in sending queens across the continent of America at certain times of the year. One would think that if a man who has been successful in shipping bees, say to Australia, would also send them every time to any part of the Pacific Coast without losing a single bee. Yet, such is not the fact. I have known of breeders who have sent their queens almost everywhere, but who cannot send them to California without frequently losing some.

There are many causes for this, some of which I shall try to tell about in this article. What I shall write about will be based altogether on observations and experiments last summer. In carrying on these experiments, I did it not only for my own benefit, but also for the benefit of the queen-breeders of the country. It had become annoying to me to receive a queen dead, that I was hoping would come to me alive. Sometimes I would have a colony to which I wanted to introduce an Italian queen, and expected one from the East in a few days. I would, consequently, let this colony remain queenless, as I hoped to give them the queen which I expected in a day or two. But how provoking it would be when the queen, which was expected with so much anticipation, came to hand as dead as dead could be. This state of affairs not only happened once, but a number of times. It was for the purpose of learning a way to get queens to this State alive every time, that I gave a good deal of attention to the subject. That I learned something of value, I am satisfied; that my experiments will be of value to those breeders who ship to these distant parts, I also hope.

When I would get one of these queens dead, I would first look to see if the food in the cage had given out. In no case have I ever found that the food was anywhere near exhausted by the bees. More often the food would be hardly consumed; sometimes it was so hard that I would not be surprised but it would have required a good sized sledge hammer to break the so-called candy sent as food for the poor bees to exist on while in transit.

Then I would look to the ventilation. This I have considered an important thing in shipping queens; too often the shipper trusts to the ventilation provided by the manufacturer of the cages he uses. For short distances, these ventilation holes made by the manufacturer are quite sufficient, but for long distances and through a very hot country, they are far from being just right. It is well that the maker does not undertake to make them as open as a saw-mill, for they would, in the language of Bill Nye, allow too much atmosphere to enter them. This would not do during the early or late months of the year, should the breeder have occasion to ship at those seasons.

I find that one of the reasons that much of the candy used in the cages becomes hard, is because the wood of which the cage is made soaks up the moisture of the candy; in other words, the honey, of which the candy is partly composed, is absorbed by the wood. This state of affairs is easily remedied by coating the hole, where the candy is to be stored, with beeswax or paraffine. This should also be done, as it prevents the candy from becoming poisoned by the wood, as is sometimes the case.

Another thing that I learned was unnecessary during the heated term of the year was, that it is dangerous to send too many bees along with the queen. I have found that some breeders will send as many as 16 in a two-ounce cage during July, when nine or ten were plenty enough. One breeder had the former number in an ounce cage; it stood to reason that so many bees raised the temperature in the cage to a very high degree when the bees were crossing the deserts where it is naturally hot. No bees in the world could live through such a trying time as they must necessarily be subjected to in a small compartment where each individual bee helps to raise the temperature in a climate, which, as I have said, is already too hot.

There is nothing so successful for feeding bees for a journey across the United States as soft candy. The softer it is the better; the only trouble is that we cannot use it as soft as we would like to. This is owing to the fact that when too soft it is apt to run in the cage, and not only daub the bees, but also the mails, should any of it get outside the cage, as it will likely do if the bees do not eat it as fast as it shifts about. Then, when it is soft, there may be trouble by the bees that may happen to die during the trip, getting stuck in the soft candy, so-called. Should several such dead bees get stuck at the entrance to the food compartment, there may be a likelihood that the remaining live bees may not be able to get to the food, and consequently starve to death.

So, from all these things, I think that while the Benton queen shipping-case is a very good one for shipping queens several hundred miles, it will have to be modified somewhat for sending such insects long distances, without making it as large as the export cage, which I find to be a very good cage to send bees in to even this State. Though this last-named cage is about the best cage I have seen for getting queens alive to this part of the world, it is too large for shipping dollar queens in, as the breeder cannot well afford to pay the extra postage and cost of such cages just for shipping a queen for which he only receives 100 cents. And yet, considering the fact that if the queen is shipped in one of the smaller cages, and she should die before she reaches the purchaser, the shipper would have to replace her, it would be cheaper in the long run for the breeder to have used a larger cage in the first instance. But as my experiments have been directed toward using as small a cage as possible, and yet secure the same results as if a large cage were used, I shall confine my observations to such lines, as, in truth, I think I have been doing.

North Temescal, Calif.

(Concluded next week.)

The Ladies’ Home Journal, of Philadelphia, Pa., and the Bee Journal—both together for one year for only $1.65. The first-named journal is the grandest monthly for the home that is published in the world to-day. New or old subscribers to either journal can take advantage of the low rate of $1.65 for the two papers. This offer expires on Feb. 1, 1894. Send all orders to the office of the Bee Journal.

Wintering Bees in the Cellar.

Written for the American Bee Journal
BY M. M. BALDRIDGE.

On Dec. 4th the thermometers in this city said it was from 12° to 18° below zero. In my bee-cellar, where I have 28 colonies, my thermometer said it was 44° above zero at that time, and that is the lowest I have seen it to this date (Dec. 11th). The highest temperature since Nov. 15th (the date my bees were put into the cellar), that I have noticed, is 50°, but I presume it has been as high as 55°, and perhaps 60°. The range of temperature anywhere between 40° and 60° is satisfactory to me. This will make the seventh winter, I think, that I have used this cellar for bees, and I do not recollect that I have ever lost a colony of bees in it. I have sometimes found in the spring, after the bees have been out-doors awhile, one or two queenless colonies, but that I do not of course attribute to any fault with their winter repository.

In placing my bees in the cellar, I prefer to give each hive some slight ventilation at the top, by raising the cover the thickness of a 6-penny wire-nail, one at each corner. I leave each entrance open the entire width of the hive. No cloths, summer or winter, are used on or about my hives, as I have no use for them. As before stated, I prefer to lift up the hive-cover slightly while in winter quarters; still, I have some winters left some of them waxed down, and I did not notice in the spring but that such colonies were in just as good condition, and with combs as bright and free from mold, as the others. Either plan seems to be all right, according to my experience, when the temperature ranges from 40° to 60°; but perhaps I had better add that the air in my cellar is about as dry and free from impurities as the living rooms of a house should be.

There are three windows to my cellar, and these are left open the entire summer, and closed only just prior to the date the bees are carried in. During the winter I, or some other member of my family, go into the cellar almost every day. The part where the bees are, is divided off by a board partition, but the door that opens into the bee-room is seldom shut, and then only during an extremely cold spell. I keep the entire cellar dark, and never hesitate to visit the bee-room whenever I so desire, as I do not believe even frequent visits therein do a particle of harm. But one thing I seldom neglect, which is, to keep the dead bees swept up from week to week, and removed from the cellar. This prevents tramping on them, and thereby avoids bad smells, or a tainted atmosphere.

My hives while in the cellar occupy but little room, as they are arranged in tiers, five colonies in each tier, and the tiers not more than six inches apart. The bottom hive in each tier is kept about a foot above the bottom of the cellar.

My hives are the “shallow things,” only seven inches deep inside the frames, but I do not see but the bees winter as well in them as in deeper ones, side by side, and, in general, I think a little better. But were it otherwise, I should prefer to use such hives to deeper ones, and for reasons too numerous to mention here. I have now used the 7-inch frames since 1876, the year I was keeping bees in the city of Shreveport, La., and 17 years’ experience with them has taught me that, whether North or South, East or West, I would not use a deeper frame. No, sir; not if made a present of as many hives as I might desire to use!

St. Charles, Ills.

Bees Improving Themselves, Etc,

Written for the American Bee Journal
BY DR. E. GALLUP.

The second season after moving to Iowa, I had occasion to go to Postville on the stage. At Decorah we stopped for dinner, and to change horses. I saw a man in a back yard all bundled and tied up from head to foot. As I approached to see what was up, he ordered me away, saying that I would get stung to death, etc. But seeing that he was at work with bees, I still advanced, but he said very excitedly, “You foolish man! I tell you to keep away from here, or you will certainly get stung to death!” I remarked that bees very seldom stung a fool, etc.

On inquiry, I found that he was to receive $5.00 for destroying a very powerful colony that had been in a large hive for a number of years, had never swarmed, and had become so vicious and strong in numbers that it was dangerous to live in the neighborhood.

Here was the largest honey-bees that I ever saw, without an exception. They looked as though they were a cross between a common honey-bee and a bumble-bee—large, light-grey, hairy bees, with quite a flat and stubbed abdomen. Their wings were more like a drone than a worker, etc. The operator said that they were vicious Italians. One thing was certain, he went about the operation of destroying them in the most awkward manner possible.

Now, in this case, and all the cases that I mentioned last week, were where bees had improved themselves, especially in size of colonies, working qualities, etc. Thinking the matter over, and dreaming of large bees, large hives, large colonies, etc., for a long time, led me to get up the large twin hive that Mr. Doolittle mentions in one of his articles. My standard hive contained 12 Gallup frames. My first large hive contained 4 times 12, or 48 frames—24 in front, and 24 in the rear. The balance of large hives that I made contained 36 frames—18 in each end. By closing the passages between the two apartments, I could work two colonies in each hive, if my plan did not work to suit. But I never worked two in a hive.

My first and earliest natural swarm I hived in the largest hive, confined them to one end, and used a division-board. As soon as they commenced building drone-comb, I filled out with ready made worker-comb, and just before basswood bloom, opened the passage-ways, filled up with comb, and spread the brood one-half in one end and one-half in the other. The queen was from my Grimm-Hamlin stock, and extra prolific, and she spread herself grandly in the laying business. We had the best and longest basswood bloom that I ever saw, and I took from that hive, by extracting from one end one day and the other end the next day, 600 pounds of honey in 30 days—not by actual weight, but by measure. It was so thick and matured that it all candied in short order, that I took out that season. I took in all about 750 pounds for the season, besides what was left in the hive, and it was left completely full. This was all the product of the bees of one queen.

The following season none of my large colonies swarmed, but all superseded their queens. Their queen-cells were extra large, and contained extra-large queens, with the largest amount of royal jelly left in the cells that I had ever before observed. Now, you had better believe Gallup “hollowed” and swung his old hat! He had got a non-swarmer, a great honey-yielder, etc. You could hear him from Maine to California—through the American Bee Journal. In fact, they heard him in Germany.

But the third season the colonies in large hives were the first to cast swarms nearly 3 weeks earlier than those in my standard hives, and here was another dilemma. The swarms were so large that I had to pile up three standard hives on top of each other, in order to get the bees all in.

The fourth season they cast swarms again, but here was another drawback: the fall was an extra open one, and they piled in so much pollen that they nearly ruined one-half the combs, and then having so much pollen they got the diarrhea before spring, and dwindled badly. But I demonstrated one fact, which I believe to be a fact, that one can rear long-lived queens large and prolific; also that their workers are longer lived than ordinary, else how could all those extra-large colonies that I have mentioned, both blacks and Italians, keep up their extra-large number of workers the entire year?

I forgot to mention that I had two ¾inch holes in the ends of those hives—one near each side at the top, and when the bees were gathering so rapidly, one could see the stream in early morning passing out of those holes, thus demonstrating that evaporation of nectar was going on very rapidly inside the hive. Water would also be dripping from the lower entrances. We understand that a portion of that probably was from the breath of the bees.

Now we have demonstrated, at least to our own satisfaction, that bees can certainly be improved under judicious and intelligent management instead of retrograding; and the great wonder to me is, that they have held their own under the bad management of as large a proportion of queen-breeders as we formerly had.

Now, Mr. White, your argument that the blacks are superior to Italians because one can rear black bees from Italians under unnatural and unfavorable conditions, is about like the argument of the large queen-breeder that I before mentioned, who claimed that when he tried to rear queens from the eggs or larvæ just hatched, many of the larvæ sealed up were not larger than kernels of wheat. You see that he was rearing them under the greatest possible unfavorable and unnatural conditions, hence his argument was drawn from false premises.

You can readily see how the old man Gallup hollowed and swung his hat about his non-swarmer, etc., before he was “out of the woods.” No wonder that bees are afraid to sting him! I have always held that bees seldom sting a fool, for that was the most satisfactory answer that I could give to a majority of people that asked why they did not sting me. Of course I have another reason, but that is the quickest and easiest manner of disposing of the question, and proves satisfactory to a majority of questioners.

By the way, I am asked why, in my method of queen-rearing, I kept the colony five days before giving the brood. Because the bees were all young, or nursing-bees, and it takes about that time before a sufficient number become outside gatherers, and we want all the favorable conditions possible.

Santa Ana, Calif.

Foul Brood and Its Propagation.

Written for the American Bee Journal
BY RANDOLPH GRADEN.

It was gratifying to me to see such persons as Messrs. Hutchinson, Muth, and others differing from Mr. McEvoy’s treatment of foul brood. Still, I do not intend to be understood as meaning that Mr. McEvoy cannot cure foul brood by his method, as the word “foul” is a German word, and its meaning is “rotten,” and any decayed, dead brood may be called “foul brood;” but I do know from experience that Mr. McEvoy’s method will not cure the disease that I had to contend with here in Michigan, for hives and frames used without first being disinfected, would soon become diseased. I have never destroyed any hives or frames, but have always kept them in use after being disinfected.

Mr. McEvoy says that frames are so cheap that they might as well be burned; still, I can disinfect the frames as fast as they can be nailed together, say nothing about the cost of the frames, and time and trouble in getting them from the factory.

What seems to me very queer is, that soon after my article appeared in the Bee Journal about a year ago, I received a letter from the President of the Ontario Bee-Keepers’ Association, asking for my method of curing the disease, as he wished to bring it before a meeting to be discussed. Now, why should they want my method when they have the discoverers of the cause and cure of foul brood in their midst?

Since I discovered my method of curing the disease, I would not pay the price of a 2-cent postage to know how others treat the disease; but, then, they might want to know how to treat the foul brood that some bee-keepers have in their apiaries in the United States, as it appears from descriptions that the disease that myself, Messrs. Muth, Hutchinson, and others have had to contend with, is different from that experienced by some in Canada, that Mr. McEvoy has treated; more so than the difference in the United States basswood and Canadian linden honey. The honey might all be acceptable, but the disease that I have had to battle with would not yield to any treatment that I have seen made public, not excepting Mr. McEvoy’s.

Still, I saw in the Bee Journal of Sept. 7, 1893, page 308, a challenge to me, by which article Mr. McEvoy does me an injustice, in saying that I warned bee-keepers not to be misled by him. Now, if Mr. McEvoy had not been so hasty in his conclusions, and in misrepresenting my words and meaning to the public, and had looked a little more carefully at my article, that he referred to, he would easily have seen that I only warned such as had my method (and not the bee-keepers at large) to follow my treatment, and not be misled by Mr. McEvoy’s article or method, as I am just as much interested in the success of my method of treatment as he is in his, no matter if I am but a wee bit of a fellow compared with him, in the eyes of the public.

Now as to the challenge: Does Mr. McEvoy think that I have a foul brood apiary, or kind of foul brood hospital here, so as to have a foul-broody colony whenever I wish? If so, I must answer, No, sir! Nor have I seen any foul brood in the last two seasons, for if I had, I should have cleaned it out before this time. Nor am I able to cause it (that is, such as I am writing about) with dead brood, as I am not writing about the chilled or drowned foul brood of which it seems Mr. McEvoy speaks, but such as I have had in my apiary, and such as it appears that Messrs. Muth, Root, Hutchinson, and Mrs. Atchley and others have described; but if I had a foul-broody colony, or if Mr. McEvoy will wait until I can get one, and allow me to amend the challenge as follows: The $100 each to be deposited in a savings bank of Detroit or Wyandotte, Mich., subject to withdrawal upon the decision of three judges (one to be selected by me, one by Mr. McEvoy, and the third by the first two appointed), thereupon Mr. McEvoy to come here, and in my presence treat a colony by his method as given in the American Bee Journal, without disinfecting or scraping or cleansing the hive in any manner but to put the bees back into the same hive that they occupied when diseased—then, if after the lapse of 60 days they are found to be in a healthy condition, he to take the $200; if not, then it is to be given to me; and if he is willing to accept it in that way, I will let him know when I get or find a foul-broody colony, as I could not accept his challenge in the way he makes it, for several reasons.

I said in my former article, that in my next I would give the reason why I do not give my method to the bee-papers to be made public, because when my article on that subject appeared in the Bee Journal about one year ago, I got quite a shower of letters of inquiries, the first of which I answered at once, giving my method as best I could in a hurry; but as each mail brought more letters, I saw it was impossible for me to answer all, as some did not inclose as much as a stamp for reply. So I thought I would reply to all in the Bee Journal, but as I got my method nearly ready to send to the Bee Journal, I received three very sharp letters, one of which was very insulting, and the address not properly given. Now, to give my method to such as they—no, sir! I thought I would rather lose a few dollars, than to let such as they have my method, which cost me so much in bees, time and trouble.

Still, many that asked in good faith must be answered, as I have been at bee-conventions and met many bee-keepers, and always found them the cream of society, and as every bee-keeper in the land ought to have my method, no matter whether his bees have foul brood or not, for what Mr. McEvoy and some others caution bee-keepers against, I just recommend, and vice versa. Still, the Doubting Thomases should not get my method to laugh at and poke fun at, but to such I would say that I am ready to put up $100 or $150 against the same amount, that if they will send me a foul-broody colony that has enough bees left to form an ordinary colony in May or June, and if after the lapse of 60 days I cannot return them in a strong and healthy condition in the same hive and frames (hive to be a single-walled, movable-frame), then I will forfeit the $200 or $300; but if the bees are strong and healthy, then I am to get the money.

So I had printed a very limited number of leaflets containing my method, which are placed within the reach of all asking in good faith, but as soon as they are gone, or enough to pay the printing and expenses, no more will be sent out by me, as I will give it away to be given as premiums.

I can agree quite well with Messrs. Muth, Hutchinson, Mrs. Atchley and others, in regard to the disease of foul brood, except in regard to its propagation or spreading. I think they mostly claim that honey is the medium through which the disease is spread. Now I have evidence which proves beyond a doubt that bees in robbing a foul-broody colony do not carry the disease to their hives in honey, but I don’t wish to be understood as saying that the disease cannot be carried in honey, for honey that is extracted from foul-broody combs, where the foul matter is thrown out of the comb into the honey, for such I have never tried, for I always boil and skim it properly before feeding it to the bees.

In regard to the spreading of the disease, my observations have been such that at times when a foul-broody colony was in my apiary, all hives or colonies that stood near by became affected, and at other times a strip or line in a certain direction from the first affected colony for some distance every colony would become affected, and at other times it would be some other direction, etc., while at another time a diseased colony may stand and become quite rotten, and no bad result to other colonies near by, which goes to show that it depends entirely upon what kind of weather we have when the disease is in the apiary, as the odor, which is nothing more than small particles of the substance from which it arises, which is driven out of the hive by the bees fanning at the entrance. Should the air be heavy, or such that when smoke comes from a chimney it shoots upwards quickly, the disease does not spread as fast as when the air is light so that the smoke from a chimney comes to the ground and moves along the ground slowly, the air carrying the deadly odor from hive to hive. Now, dear reader, did it ever occur to you that this is one way in which the disease spreads? For when the air is lighter, or the same as the particles of disease or odor, it simply moves or floats around, and woe be to the hive or colony that chances to be in its way!

Now here, in regard to that disease, I will give some food for thought. Why do not such colonies of bees, that rob foul-broody colonies, always become affected with the disease? I imagine I hear a long list of persons who answers “They do;” while I say, emphatically, they do not!

Now, how many have had foul brood among their bees, that had some colonies in the swarming season that were badly affected with the disease, yet strong enough to cast a swarm, that swarmed and were hived? If so, did you watch for the hatching of the first brood? and was it diseased, or did the first brood hatch and appear healthy? If so, why was it not diseased, for the bees came from a foul-broody hive with their honey-sacs filled with the deadly honey?

Now those having my method of curing foul brood, if they will look over the foregoing article, and at my method of treatment, they will easily see how my method originated with me, and why I recommended some things that others strictly forbid; also why I say that comb foundation made from foul-broody combs, as made by the leading manufacturers, is perfectly safe to use, unless it is exposed to the foul or diseased matter, after it leaves the dipping-tank at the factory.

Taylor Centre, Mich.

Convention
Proceedings

The Illinois State Convention.

Reported for the “American Bee Journal”
BY JAS. A. STONE.

The Illinois State Bee-Keepers’ Association met at Springfield on Dec. 12 and 13, 1893. The meeting was called to order by Pres. J. M. Hambaugh at 11 a.m., and opened with prayer by Rev. A. H. Bates. Welcome address was made by Col. Chas. F. Mills, and responded to by Mr. S. N. Black.

The President announced at this point that a recess would be taken and membership fees received. The convention then adjourned until 1:30 p.m., at which time the meeting was again called to order by Pres. Hambaugh.

The President’s address was first in order, which was attentively listened to because of its merits. The Secretary’s and Treasurer’s reports were read and approved.

The committee on Legislative Bills reported, which report was adopted, and the committee discharged.

The discussion on the Code of Rules for Fairs was taken up, and, on motion, action on the same was again postponed until it should come out in print in our forthcoming Report.

An essay was read by Geo. F. Robbins on the “Rights and Duties of the Illinois State Bee-Keepers’ Association.”

Mr. Becker spoke to quite a length, and thought that by some mode of procedure we should adopt some way of finding out the condition of our neighbors’ bees as compared with our own, at intervals during the working season.

BEES AND GRAPES.

Mr. Becker asked why bees did not work on grapes last year.

Mr. Dadant answered, because the dry weather did not cause the grapes to crack, and added that he had starved bees to death on grapes, and had, on one occasion, pricked a pin-hole in a grape, and it was the only one on the whole bunch that was touched, and that only as far in as they could reach.

Mr. Riehl, of Alton, said that bees could not injure sound grapes or fruit, except over-ripe raspberries.

Mr. Vandenburg said that bees cannot puncture grapes—he was sure of that.

A committee on resolutions was appointed, composed of Messrs. Black, Smith and Stone.

A committee was also appointed composed of Messrs. Hambaugh, Poindexter and Draper, to formulate plans by which a member’s honey can be put before the public as pure.

A motion prevailed, that a committee on census be appointed, to decide the best plan of finding out the monthly condition of the bees of the members of the association. Messrs. Becker, Smith and Dadant were made such committee.

A committee on Congressional Legislation was appointed, composed of Messrs. Dadant, Draper and Poindexter.

The convention then adjourned until 8:00 a.m. the next day, and that the members attend the meeting of the Horticultural Society in the evening.

SECOND DAY.

At 8:00 o’clock a.m. on Dec. 13th, the meeting was called to order with Pres. Hambaugh in the chair. The Congressional Committee reported a resolution which was unanimously adopted, petitioning Congress to make and enforce laws compelling those who adulterate honey, to name it with its true name.

GETTING APIARIAN INFORMATION.

The committee on the same reported as follows, which was adopted as amended:

Resolved, That on or before the 15th day of May, July, September and October, the Secretary be instructed to send out a return postal card to each of the members of the association, requiring reports as follows:

1st. The number of colonies.

2nd. The prospect of a honey crop.

3rd. The amount of honey gathered to date.

4th. Honey gathered No. 1 or not.

It shall be the duty of the Secretary to send the above report each month to the bee-papers for publication.

C. Becker,
J. Q. Smith,
A. N. Draper, Com.

The committee for the same reported (and the report was adopted) favoring an experimental station to be conducted by a person to be named by the State Bee-Keepers’ Association.

I will say here that the meetings in session in the State House failed to get the required number—250—to secure their return one-third rate. It was promised by the passenger agency, and when they found we were all going to meet at the same time, they raised the required number from 100 to 250. On account of their acts, the various societies “resoluted.”

Resolutions of greeting were drawn by a committee for the purpose, and adopted, sending greetings to the State Grange and to the State Horticultural Society. The committee was composed of Messrs. Black, Beall and Smith.

The election of officers for 1894 resulted as follows:

President—Hon. J. M. Hambaugh, of Spring.

Vice-Presidents—1st, C. P. Dadant, of Hamilton; 2nd, J. Q. Smith, of Lincoln; 3rd, S. N. Black, of Clayton; 4th, Mrs. L. Harrison, of Peoria; and 5th, Chas. Hertel, of Freeburg.

Secretary—Jas. A. Stone, of Bradfordton.

Treasurer—A. N. Draper, of Upper Alton.

Mr. Robbins offered a resolution of thanks (which was adopted) to the Legislative Committee for their conscientious performance of the duties intrusted to them. On motion, it was voted that each member of the association be requested to send a copy of the resolution of this society, relative to adulteration, to their various members of Congress, with the solicitation of their assistance in having it enacted into law.

Resolutions of greeting were sent to and received from the State Horticultural Society, and the State Grange, all in session in the State House at the same time.

Mr. C. P. Dadant read an essay at the evening meeting of the Horticultural Society, on “The Importance of Bees in Horticulture,” which was received with the best of feeling among the horticulturists, many of whom are also bee-keepers.

A resolution was reported as follows, and adopted:

Resolved, That the Illinois State Bee-Keepers’ Association desire to return their sincere thanks to the Hon. E. L. Merritt, Chairman McKinley, and others in the House, and Senator Dunlap and others in the Senate, for their valuable services in obtaining the appropriation for the honey display at the World’s Fair.

The resolution of greeting from the State Horticultural Society was as follows:

To our fellow co-laborers, the members of the Illinois Bee-Keepers’ Association:

Brethren:—Feeling that our interests are identical, although we each aim to accomplish the same end by different means, you by extracting the sweets from our blossoms; we (while you are deriving benefits from the mixing of the pollen to fertilize and make our trees and plants fruitful) expecting to derive our reward from the sale of the beautiful fruit; we desire to extend to you the right hand of fellowship, and wish you success in your effort to extend the production of honey; and notwithstanding the fact that your bees may get their heads together and plot for the eating of our grapes and other fruits, yet we still have faith in the utility of the little bee as a helper to the fruit-grower, and admire her industrious and business habits.

Henry Augustine, Pres.
H. M. Dunlap, Sec.

REPORTS OF BEE-KEEPERS.

C. P. Dadant, of Hamilton—Number of colonies, 350; increase, 30; honey produced, 400 pounds of honey-dew and 500 pounds of Spanish-needle honey. Bees in good condition for winter, packed out-of-doors.

Geo. Poindexter, of Kenney—Number of colonies, 90; increase, 3. Amount of honey obtained, 2,000 pounds of clover, and 800 pounds of extracted fall honey. Bees wintered in the cellar, and are in good condition now. He clips the queen’s wings to prevent swarming, and believes in ventilation to induce the bees to work in the supers.

A. N. Draper, of Upper Alton, had about 300 colonies in the spring, and sold 60 colonies, with no increase during the season. He had about enough honey to winter the bees out-of-doors, packed in forest leaves. His bees are kept in four apiaries. He says that white clover was a failure this year. He prevents swarming by having large hives, and plenty of ventilation. He harvested the most honey from asparagus, of which there are a hundred acres in the neighborhood. This honey is of poor quality.

Chas. Becker, of Pleasant Plains, had 53 colonies in the spring, and increased to 62. He took about 700 pounds of honey. The bees are in good condition for winter. He grows small fruit in connection with bee-keeping. For extracting he uses three sets of full frames—supers full of comb to each hive. Induces the bees to go into the supers by placing partly-filled sections in the middle of the supers. He raises the hives from the bottom-board during the swarming season, and thinks it prevents swarming, and induces the bees to work in the supers.

J. Q. Smith, of Lincoln, had 53 colonies in the Spring. Increase 23. He had no honey until August, except honey-dew, which he fed to the young swarms. In the latter part of August he got 1,800 pounds of fair fall honey, principally heart’s-ease and sweet clover, with Spanish-needle at the last. He wintered his bees on the summer stands, packing the top with leaves, and no protection on the sides.

Geo. F. Robbins, of Mechanicsburg, had 60 colonies, spring count, and increased to 80. He produced 1,100 pounds of honey, half comb and half extracted. There was some honey-dew, and the balance heart’s-ease and Spanish-needle. Bees are in good condition for wintering out-of-doors. He covers the brood-frames for winter with honey-boards made of cheap lumber and burlap, with chaff or leaves above. He covers some of the smaller hives with larger ones, and fills the space with leaves.

Mr. Black asked Mr. Dadant if spring stimulating paid. Answer—If properly done, it may pay. He used to practice it when they did their own work, but quit it when they began to hire. Mr. Dadant thought that bees wintered, and also went through the spring, better in the sun than in the shade. He thinks the chaff hive a failure.

C. M. Beall, of Clayton, had 10 colonies in the spring, and no increase. He had no honey except 150 pounds of honey-dew. The bees were in good condition for wintering in the cellar. He has no winter loss in the cellar.

J. M. Hambaugh, of Spring, had 115 colonies in the spring, and increased to 120. He produced 1,000 pounds of extracted—half honey-dew and clover mixed, the balance Spanish-needle of superior quality. His bees were in good condition for wintering, partly in the cellar and partly on the summer stands. He removes the honey-board for cellar wintering and replaces it with a ventilator, giving air at the top.

S. N. Black, of Clayton, had 37 colonies in the spring, and 44 now. He produced 150 pounds of mainly white clover, buckwheat and heart’s-ease honey. Bees were in fair condition for wintering. He has but little loss either in cellar or out-door wintering. He expected to put them into the cellar this winter.

On motion by A. N. Draper, Article 5 of the By-Laws was amended, changing the words “Upon the Executive Committee,” to “Upon an order signed by the President, and countersigned by the Secretary.” Carried by a two-thirds vote.

The convention then adjourned sine die.

Jas. A. Stone, Sec.

“A Modern Bee-Farm and Its Economic Management,” is the title of a splendid book on practical bee-culture, by Mr. S. Simmins, of England. It is 5¾ × 8½ inches in size, and contains 270 pages, nicely illustrated, and bound in cloth. It shows “how bees may be cultivated as a means of livelihood; as a health-giving pursuit; and as a source of recreation to the busy man.” It also illustrates how profits may be “made certain by growing crops yielding the most honey, having also other uses; and by judgment in breeding a good working strain of bees.” Price, postpaid, from this office, $1.00; or clubbed with the Bee Journal for one year, for $1.60.

RAND^oM STINGS
From “The Stinger.”

Only a bee!
Only a bee, as it flew through the air,
And tried to hum the sweet elfin air.

Only a bee!
Only a bee, and yet when it stings,
The air with loud cries of pain loudly rings.

Only a boy!
Only a boy, on mischief bent,
Only a boy who was not content.

Only a grave!
Only a grave on yonder hill,
Contains a corpse both cold and still.

The man who wrote that “poem” must have thought himself funny; to The Stinger he was a—I don’t think I shall say fool this time, but I hope the next time he tries his hand at rhyming, he will give us something with more sense in it. No bee has yet driven a boy into an untimely grave; the boy of these times cannot be killed so easily as the writer of the above lines would seem to imply.

However, The Stinger would say to all boys bent on teasing the bees: Keep away from the dear little insects until after they are fed, or they might hurt you.

In casually looking through the November number of the Review, I saw the name of Mr. H. A. Burch mentioned along with that of James Heddon. I remember the time when the name of Mr. Burch figured quite prominently in the pages of our bee-papers. It was he, I believe, who used to furnish the delightful series of “Walks and Talks” for the earlier volumes of the old Bee-Keepers’ Magazine.

These “Walks and Talks,” with some other articles that appeared in the Magazine, gave it a tone that I do not find in any of the bee-publications of this later day, I am sorry to say. It seems, that although we have some very good writers on apiculture pure and simple, still we have none of those classic writers of a number of years ago. My taste may be somewhat vitiated, and I am unable to recognize the beauty of style of the leaders in apicultural literature of the present time.

If I remember correctly, it was the same James Heddon that I just referred to, that found fault with the writings of “those literary fellows.” Yet it is this same critic who has secured no less a writer than the Mr. Burch I have mentioned above, to as *sist him in building up his (Heddon’s) newspaper. While complimenting Mr. H. on his good taste in securing such an eminent writer as Mr. Burch, I must say that he was a little too severe on a class of writers who did much to make apiculture what it is to-day.