790 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Nov. 24, 1904. 



Plain Sections vs. ttie Slotted Kind. 



18.- (a) Hove yuu tried plain .vrti,ms.- 



(b) If so y what is your estimate of them as compared with sections 

 having insets? 



S. T. Pettit (Ont.)— a. No. 



C. Davenport (Minn.) — No. 



E. S. IvOVESY (Utah)— a. No. 



R. L. Taylor (Mich.)— a. No. 



O. O. PoppLETON (Fla.)— a. No. 



N. E. France (Wis.)— a. A few. 



J. M. Hambaugh (Calif.)— a. No. 



Rev. M. Mahin (Ind.)— a. I have not. 



Mrs. J. M. Null (Mo.)— a. I have nat. 



Prof. A. J. Cook (Calif.)— a. A'o. In theory they are 

 good. 



P. H. Elwood (N. Y.)— a. No, but I am favorably in- 

 clined to them. 



Dr. J. P. H. Brovi^n (Ga.)— I have tried both kinds, but 

 I prefer the slotted sections. 



Dr. C. C. Miller (111.)— a. Yes. b. I can't get more 

 money out of one than the other. 



C. H. DiBBERN (111.)— a. Yes. b. They are better, save 

 scraping- and expense in shipping-cases. 



Adrian Getaz (Tenn.) — a. Yes, in connection with the 

 fences, b. Better than any other arrangement. 



E. D. Townsend (Mich.) — a. Yes, we use the 4x5 plain 

 section, b. They appear to sell a little more readily. 



G. M. DooLiTTLE (N. Y.)— I do not see enough advan- 

 tage in the plain sections to warrant changing to them. 



E. Whitcomb (Nebr.)— a. I work for extracted honey 

 only. b. I confess that the plain section seems to catch 

 the eye more favorably. 



Jas. a. Stone (111.)— a. Yes. b. I like them so well 

 that I am setting aside all my old tin separators and get- 

 ting no other than the fence separators and the plain sec- 

 tions. 



Wm. Rohrig (Ariz.) — a. In a small way. b. If I were 

 producing comb honey for the market I think I would use 



plain sections largely. They are more easily cleaned, and 

 look more attractive when filled, than sections having in- 

 sets. 



Eugene Secor (Iowa)— a. Just a little, b. If one has 

 the fences and everything necessary to use plain sections 

 they are all right so far as getting honey is concerned, but 

 I don't like them as well in a shipping-case — so hard to get 

 hold of a section. 



L. Stachelhausen (Tex.)— a. I have. b. I like them, 

 but the customers at first did not, because they seem to be 

 smaller. Some talking was necessary before they accepted 

 them. More sections can be packed in the same shipping- 

 case ; that's the main advantage. 



G. W. Demaree (Ky.)— a. I tried them 20 years ago, 

 plain 4 piece sections made at home. b. In my experience 

 they require too much propolized " rigging up " to adapt 

 them to the essential " tiering-up system ". In ray estima- 

 tion there is no comparison between the open-top-and-bot- 

 tom sections and the plain sections, when it comes to sim- 

 ple, practical work. 



R. C. AiKiN (Colo.) — a. Yes. b. I want mine with the 

 insets 's only, and entire width of section. The old 4-piece 

 nailed section was better than the modern Ipiece as scal- 

 lops and insets are made. Top and bottom bars should be 

 the same width their entire length. Plain sections are so, 

 that is main reason they are better finished. I have been 

 kicking to have all sections embody that feature, but fac- 

 tory people would not heed me. It is six one way and a 

 half-dozen the other, so far as finish goes, whether the bee- 

 way is in the section or in the separator; but I have it go 

 clear to the side-bar — that counts. 



James A. Green (Colo.)— a. Yes. I have used them in 

 a limited way (up to 25 cases a season) for several years, b. 

 I prefer the sections with insets. I think it costs me more 

 to produce honey in plain sections than in the regular style, 

 principally because more combs are fastened to the separa- 

 tors. Plain sections are easier scraped, and more of them 

 can be put in a case of the same size, if this is desired. 

 These are their only advantages worth mentioning in my 

 estimation, while they have some serious disadvantages, 

 the principal one of which is their much greater liability to 

 damage, especially in the hands of the retailer. I believe 

 the use of plain sections has a tendency to lessen the de- 

 mand for honey, and consequently is a step backward. 



Sainfoin or Esparcet as a Honey-Plant— 

 Other Plants. 



BY C. P. DADANT. 



ON page 740 is a quotation from the Canadian Bee Jour- 

 nal concerning sainfoin as a honey-producer, and the 



statement that this plant does not produce honey in 

 marketable quantities. This is true of America, but would 

 be erroneous if applied to some other countries. 



Sainfoin, otherwise called esparcet — the scientific name 

 of which is Onobrychis sativa — is widely cultivated in 

 Europe, especially in France. Its name, " sainfoin ", is 

 French, and literally means " healthy hay " — sain-foin — 

 and I see by the Century Dictionary that in some parts of 

 the United States it has been introduced under the name of 



" French grass ". It is a perennial, gives a splendid hay 

 crop, and in some sections of the European continent it is a 

 first-class honey-producer. 



The small province of France, formerly called " Gati- 

 nais ", is the leading producer of sainfoin honey. Accord- 

 ing to the best authorities the honey of Gatinais has the 

 reputation of being of the whitest color and sweetest taste, 

 and is said to be in no way surpassed by white clover honey. 



Gaston Bonnier, the eminent professor who was presi- 

 dent of the International congress of bee-keepers at Paris 

 in 1900, says in his book, the " Cours Complet d'Apiculture ", 

 that sainfoin honey is one of the best appreciated grades. 

 He ranks it next only to the honey of the Alpine hills of 

 eastern France and Switzerland. 



From immemorial times the hotiey crops of Gatinais 

 have been considered as leading in the amount of produc- 

 tion, and this was all credited to the sainfoin, which is 



