22 HISTORICAL NOTES ON BEE DISEASES. 



was nearly free from disease. After a long search only two or 



three bacilli were found in this latter ovary. Cheshire now believed, 



apparently, that he had demonstrated the disease in young larvae, 



in older larvae, in pupae, m drones, in workers just gnawing out of 



the cell, in young nurse bees, in old, worn-out bees, and finally in 



the queen and eggs unlaid. Such data as are offered here by Chesliire, 



of course, are insufficient to prove any etiological relation of a bacterium 



to a disease. 



Cheshire, September 1, 1884. 



In an earlier paper (p. 19) Cheshire adhered to the view held 

 by Dzierzon and others, that foul brood was of two kinds. 



The view which he expresses in a later article ^ is that there is 

 but one disease and that one is caused by Bacillus alvei. After he 

 had examined a number of samples of comb affected with the disease 

 he reached the conclusion that Dzierzon was in error in asserting 

 that there were two kinds of foul brood, one mild, the other malig- 

 nant. While all cases of foul brood, he says, are due to Bacillus alvei 

 and to this extent are identical, yet in some cases the spores of this 

 organism are larger, more robust, and more virulent than in others. 

 Wlien the disease manifests itself early in the development of the 

 brood he contends that it is more difficult to cure, if any difference 

 exists, than when the symptoms appear later in the disease. He 

 contends further that if this disorder is due to the disease lurking 

 in the queen she must be removed. 



The doubt that was entertained as to the effectiveness of the car- 

 bolized sirup treatment caused Chesliire to perform another experi- 

 ment. In a healthy colony he placed, on August 6, six combs secured 

 from more than one source, and all affected with foul brood. On the 

 following morning he poured medicated sirup into the combs. Similar 

 feedings were continued daily in liberal quantities until the sixth 

 morning. After this a tin-pan feeder was used, which was not allowed 

 to become empty of sirup. Eggs were laid and brood reared in the 

 foul-brood combs which had been inserted. Almost all the larvas 

 that were reared were healthy. Many of those that were near the 

 lower edge of these frames, however, were affected and passed through 

 the first stages of the disease. These larvae later disappeared by being 

 carried out, it was supposed, by the workers. Only three or four 

 sealed cells with diseased brood now remained, and it was believed 

 that these would be cleaned out by the bees as soon as the cappings 

 were broken. With these exceptions, he says, the hives were, on 

 August 23, as perfect as could be desired. Following the description 

 of his experiment, Cheshire writes : 



> Cheshire, Frank R., Septemlwr 1, 1884. The Cheshire treatment of Bacillus alvei (foul brood). British 

 Bee Journal, Vol. XII, No. 153, pp. 294-296. 



