84 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL, 



Feb. 7, 1901. 



queens in these cages were nut successful in 

 introducing, and attributed the failure to the 

 pasteboard. In a Stray Straw in Gleanine:s in 

 Bee-Culture Dr. Miller had this to say about 

 it, he having used a number of the pasteboard 

 cages: 



The American Bee-Keeper, speaking of the 

 pasteboard-candy mode of introduction, says : 

 •' At this writing numerous reports are com- 

 ing in which show that failure more often re- 

 sults thru the use of the new plan than with 

 the older method." Isn't your Tcrdict a bit 

 hasty, Mr, Hill J In the few hundred cases 

 that have come within my knowledge, there 

 have been rare exceptions when the bees did 

 not remove the pasteboard, but that is the 

 only objection. As to the rest, there is un- 

 doubtedly additional security from the longer 

 time it takes to remove the pasteboard ; and. 

 without being sure of it, my present notion is 

 that fewer failures will occur with the jtaste- 

 board. 



Editor Root had this comment on the 

 above paragraph : 



A good deal depends upon the kind of paste- 

 board and the manner it is put in over the 

 candy. The first cages we sent out had the 

 strips cut too wide. We now cut them much 

 narrower, so that the candy is exposed on 

 both sides to the bees, as well as thru the 

 perforations in the center. It is true, there 

 have been failures by this phiii of imn)duc- 

 tion; hut the failures have bcrn ihie. 1 Iliink. 

 in all cases, to too much pasteboard ur to the 

 wrong kind of pasteboard. 



Should Brood-Combs be Renewed ? 



is a ([uestion sometimes askt. and answers to 

 the question vary according to the place. It 

 seems just a little strange that views on opjjo- 

 site sides of the ocean should be so far apart. 

 Good authorities on the other side say that 

 when brood-combs become old the cocoons 

 left in the cells from year to year diminish the 

 space for the growing larv.Te to such an extent 

 that it is not advisable to allow combs to re- 

 main without renewal, the proper time for re- 

 newal being given by diflerent authorities at 

 four to ten years. On the other hand. Ijee- 

 keepers in this country pay little or no atten- 

 tion to the matter of renewing combs, count- 

 ing that age alone does not rule them out. 

 Some of them say they have combs 10. 39, or 

 more years old, and can see no difference in 

 the size of the bees reared in them. But a 

 slight difference in size might not be easily 

 discerned with the naked eye, and those who 

 advocate renewal of combs argue that as each 

 bee that emerges from a cell leaves a deposit 

 in the way of a cocoon, the diameter of a cell 

 must become less, and as a result the bees 

 reared therein must be less. 



The only way to settle the matter definitely 

 would be to have instruments sufficiently 

 delicate to measure a very small fraction of an 

 inch, to find by actual measurement the dif- 

 ference in diameter between cells of new and 

 old comb. Such measurement has been made 

 by Editor Root, and unless the specimen of 

 comb measured by him was exceptional, we 

 may thank him for having set the question at 

 rest, and congratulate ourselves that the bees 

 do not show a lack of good judgment when 

 they show their preference tor old comli. .Mr 

 Root had sent to him a specimen of worker- 

 comb 25 years old. and says: 



There are just as many cells to the square 

 inch, of course ; but the bulloms of the cells 

 have from eight to ten layers of cocoons, 

 while the xidex of the cells have only one, and 

 at most two layers. This would seem to indi- 

 cate that, when the diameter of the cells gets 

 too small, the bees remove the excess oi 



cocoon walls, but leave the bottoms until they 

 get a packing of ten layers. This reduced 

 depth can, of course, be corrected by adding 

 more wax to thec»f/.-i of the cells. Now let's 

 see if this is true. There, I've stopt to meas- 

 ure, and find that the thickness of the comb 

 is from one inch to one and one-sixteenth 

 thick. Thickness of new brood-comb is about 

 seven-eighths: and. if so. this '^.Vyear-old 

 comb has been thickened from two to three 

 sixteenths because of the packing of nine and 

 ten layers of cocoons in the bottom of the 

 cells. The other fact seems to be that the 

 diameter of the cells lias not been reduced all 

 these years. If this is true with other old 

 combs, then worker-bees in a*2t5-year-old comb 

 will be just as large as in one six months old. 

 I'his I am inclined to believe correct, because 

 Nature w'ould surely make some provision for 

 the excess of wall-linings. 



I Weekly Budget I 



light for us to see hiii 

 see us. 



, even if he ca 



^WT^*rw*n^>fTrwT!r>rT^pir 



Dk. J. P. H. Biiowx.of Richmond Co., Ga., 

 writing us Jan. '22d said : 



'• Bees did fairly well the past season, and 

 where attention was given they will safely 

 pass over till they can gather from natural 

 sources in the spring." 



Mu. H. D. CvTTiXG, of Lenawee Co., Mich., 

 as a good many of our readers know, has been 

 totally blind for several years. On Jan. 1st 

 Mr. Cutting mailed us a picture of himself and 

 his dog *■ Duke.'' This dog is one of Mr. C.'s 

 most intijuate friends. He is 2 feet 11 inches 

 high, which is about 5 inches higher than an 

 ordinary dining-room table. He weighs about 

 Ifi.T pounds. Mr. Cutting says, " He is very 

 kind to me, also a great pet of cmr family." 



Mr. Cutting, as doubtless a great many will 

 remember, had charge of the Michigan api- 

 arian exhibit at the World's V'air here in Chi- 



Mr. Thom-is (i. NEW5HX. in his Philo- 

 sophical Journal for Jan. ISUh. had this to say 

 about our New Year's troubles: 



Fire. — We regret to learn that the office of 

 the American Bee Journal, of Chicago, 111., 

 as well as the bee-supply and honey depart- 

 ments, were wreckt l>y fire and water on Jan. 

 1st. This was a disastrous way of beginning 

 the New Year. As the editor of the Philo- 

 sophical Journal was editor of the American 

 Bee Journal for nearly 30 years, he deeply re- 

 grets this disaster. The present proprietors 

 (Geo. W. York it Co.) have our warmest 

 sympathy and best wishes for surmounting 

 the loss. As they issued the next week's Bee 

 Journal on time, we feel that they are equal 

 to the task. 



Mu. F. L. Field was one of our New York 

 subscribers until we received the following 

 letter, Jan. '23d: 



Dear Sir 



Now I want you to stop that paper of yours 

 I have had to or three little papars sent me 

 before that I could not stop it when paying 

 up. now I want this to end It If you send it 

 on you will never receive any pay when I sub- 

 .scribe for a paper I am capable of knowing 

 how long I want it with out anv of your help. 

 F. L. Field. 



The above is as nearly like .Mr. Field wrote 

 it as we can show it in type. His subscription 

 was in arrears only since July 1, 1900. If he 

 had been kind enough to have sent us a pos- 

 tal card when it expired, asking us to discon- 

 tinue sending it. we would have attended to 

 it. But Mr. Field very likely wanted the Bee 

 Journal, else he would have notified us in a 

 courteous way over six months ago. 



Many subscribers express their thanks to us 

 for continuing to forward the Bee Journal to 

 them after their paid subscription expires, or 

 until such time as it is more convenient for 

 theiu to remit. We are always glad to do 



Mr. H. D. Cutting and " Duke." 



cago in 1S93. At one time he was also presi- 

 dent of the Naticraal Bee-Keepers' Association, 

 being for a number of years one of the lead- 

 ing bee-keepers in Michigan. His many 

 friends will sympathize with him in his sad 

 affliction, for none of us who have the proper 

 use of our eyes can realize what it means to 

 be entirely deprived of it. 



Mr. Cutting has earnestly solicited us to 

 visit him some time— a thing which we would 

 like very much to do, and are still hoping that 

 we may have the pleasure of spending a day 

 or two at his pleasant home. It will be a de- 



I this, even if occasionally we do receive such a 

 cross-grained letter as Mr. Field wrote us. 



We would never think of fomiiq the Ameri- 

 can Bee Jcmrnal on any one, and alwa.ys stop 

 sending it when askt to do so. We do feel, 

 however, that when a man contiiuies to take 

 it from the post-office and reads it. he ought 

 to be willing to pay for it. 



Of course, whenever any I iiic finds he does 

 not want it any longer, then he should pay 

 whatever is due, and courteously request its 

 discontinuance. To do this is only common 

 honestv and ordiiuiry gentlemanlincss. 



