102 



HA RD IVICKE'S SCIENCE- G OSSIP. 



speaking, some 105 lbs. This loss would therefore 

 increase the cost of material by about 2s. per hundred- 

 weight ; but suppose the maker had used the relative 

 number of ounces of saccharine as his sweetening 

 agent instead of sugar, his cake would only weigh 

 about 81 lbs. instead of 105 lbs., and his cost, instead 

 of being about 32s., would be nearly 41s. 6d. per 

 hundredweight, and for this reason it would be outside 

 the pale of commercial utility. It will be readily seen 

 that this would apply with even greater force to 

 sweetmeats and jam, in which the proportion of sugar 

 used is much larger than in the case suggested. How 

 then can it be expected to "give an impetus to the 

 sweetmeat trade " ? 



There are two peculiarities of saccharine which are 

 worthy of notice, its distinctive flavour, and its anti- 

 septic properties. The writer prepared two equal 

 quantities of apple jam, the one sweetened with sugar, 

 the other with its relative quantity of saccharine ; the 

 former was jam in the proper sense of the word: a 

 due blending in flavour of the fruit and sugar, but the 

 latter was not so — the sour fruit and the sweet sac- 

 charine were both present, but retained their distinc- 

 tive flavours. There was no blending, but the sour 

 passed away, leaving a sweetness behind that would 

 cloy if used even in only ordinary portions. These 

 trials were made some months ago, and although the 

 sample prepared with saccharine has been submitted 

 to the most trying tests, there has been an utter 

 absence of any fermentation such as would have been 

 produced either by the sugar or the fruit if submitted 

 to the same conditions. It therefore takes rank very 

 high as a powerful preservative, and except for the 

 reasons indicated respecting its bulk (which is insur- 

 mountable), it would on this account alone form a 

 formidable rival to sugar, and this would be a source 

 of deep regret, if it could be considered as possible, 

 for few would agree with D.r. Crespi in saying, " un- 

 fortunately it must not be forgotten that sugar is a 

 cheap and valuable food." I would rather say it is 

 a most fortunate fact that no inducement exists leading 

 manufacturers to replace an article which enters so 

 largely into consumption by one which "is not 

 changed in its passage through the body." As a 

 professional man, Dr. Crespi may think it is right 

 that "we range with science glorying in the time" 

 when progress does not " halt on palsied feet," but 

 one may ask him to consider the results of such an 

 innovation — such a revolution as he would picture 

 even possible : the tremendous loss of capital conse- 

 quent upon the transfer of the place of manufacture 

 from the factory to the laboratory, and the cessation 

 of the wage-earning power from the grower of the 

 beet or cane to the producers of the finished article. 

 Or, dismissing this as only a part of the incidence of 

 trade, the fearful loss of a nutritive food supply which 

 would be produced, more especially to the poor ; for 

 statistics show that, as price has gone down, the con- 

 sumption per head of the population has considerably 



increased, and therefore it follows that if " the joy of 

 youth and the solace of old age" is taken from manu- 

 factured products and a chemical introduced instead, 

 the poor would be the first]to suffer, and this (I take 

 it) is the last end and aim of true scientific research. 



G. H. Wicks. 

 Bristol. 



THE BEE AND THE DEVELOPMENT 

 OF HONEY IN FLOWERS. 



By G. W. Bulman, M.A. 



THE whole theory of the development of honey, 

 by the selective action of bees, &c, hinges on 

 the supposition, that those flowers secreting it obtain 

 some advantage in the struggle for existence. And 

 the advantage is supposed to arise thus : When bees 

 fly from flower to flower gathering honey, they carry 

 pollen grains from one to another. It has been 

 proved — in the case of certain flowers — that the off- 

 spring from a cross are more numerous and vigorous 

 than those from self-fertilised flowers. When a 

 flower secretes honey the bees visit it, and fertilise it 

 with pollen from another, it produces more numer- 

 ous, and vigorous offspring than the honeyless ones. 

 Thus in time the honey-bearers become a majority. 



" Those individual flowers which had the largest 

 glands or nectaries, and which excreted most nectar, 

 would be oftenest visited by insects, and would be 

 oftenest crossed ; and so, in the long-run, would gain 

 the upper hand." 



So says Darwin, and so his followers continue to 

 believe. The statement seems plausible, and it may 

 be we see in imagination the race of flowers secreting 

 more and more honey in obedience to the selective 

 action of the bee or other insect. 



A little reflection, however, and a careful con- 

 sideration of the facts of the case, quickly dispel 

 the illusion. It does not require the double million 

 magnifying glasses of extra power "to enable us to 

 see, that honeyless flowers, and scanty honey-bearers 

 are just as likely to obtain the advantages of cross- 

 fertilisation as any others." 



Consider the case of a race of plants at any stage 

 of the development of honey. There is the same 

 general likeness as we see in any particular species 

 to-day, and the same slight differences. Some secrete 

 no honey, and some comparatively much ; some are 

 larger, others are brighter coloured than their com- 

 panions. Now it seems quite obvious, that a bee 

 visiting a bed of such flowers, will not be guided by 

 any particular outward aspect to the flower with 

 most honey. It will have to go, and examine by 

 close inspection ; and will be just as likely to visit 

 the honeyless blossoms as any others. It will 

 scarcely be contended by any one, that a bee flitting 

 over a flower can judge by its outward aspect of the 

 amount of honey therein, without settling on it and 

 examining. The limpid drop of nectar is a thing not 



