518 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



Aug-. IS, 1901. 



former, it is pliable and can be bent in any shape without 

 breaking. This was cut into shape on about the same 

 principle as all folding- cardboard boxes, only one side has 

 to be glued. The ends are cut to fold together, and are 

 held in place after the sack of honey is put in, by strings 

 around the packages. This outer covering or case makes it 

 practically as safe to carry honey in a paper sack as in a 

 tin pail or stone jar — perhaps safer, for with either of the 

 latter the honey is lost if it is tipped over. 



Probably most of those who read my first article on 

 this subject smiled incredibly when I said that possibly 

 extracted honey might be shipped in sacks, but I have not 

 much doubt but what it can be done. What will you give 

 me, Mr. Editor, for honey shipped in sacks, I to guarantee 

 that it reaches you in good condition, without leakage 

 occuring for one month after you receive it? Make me a 

 good offer. In after years, if most of the extracted honey 

 should be shipped this way, it might be quite an honor for 

 you to be able to say that you were the first one to buy in 

 sacks; and, for me, that I was the first to ship it in this 

 form. If I had only thought last fall when I had the honey 

 in those large sacks, to find out how much of a jar and 

 rough handling they would stand, I should know something 

 more definite about whether it could be shipped safely in 

 sacks. It would have been an easy matter to find out what 

 a sack could stand, by taking one and raising it up and 

 dropping it down at different heights inside a large can or 

 barrel until it would burst. Perhaps those would have stood 

 as much in this line as tin would — possibly more. Or, if those 

 I had in use were defective in this respect, it might be, and 

 is, by no means improbable that sacks might be made of 

 material that would stand as much, or more, strain and 

 rough handling than a 60-pound tin can. Then all that 

 would be necessary to insure safe shipment would be to use 

 wooden cases, the same as with tins, and pack two or three 

 inches of clean straw or hay all around between the case 

 and sack. 



The object in using sacks, it is probably needless for 

 me to say, would be the very great saving in the cost of 

 the package. Probably at least two dozen 60-pound sacks 

 could be sold for the price of one 60-pound tin can. And 

 the saving in freight would also be great. The empty 

 sacks could be rolled up and shipped to the producer, and 

 the freight on enough to hold many thousand pounds would 

 be but a few cents. And if one did not wish to make his 

 own cases, they could be shipped in the flat for less than 

 half what they can he nailed up. 



What about candying ? some may ask. In regard to 

 this I have only space enough left to say that I have lique- 

 fied candied honey in paper sacks. 



Southern Minnesota. 



[We are not quite ready yet to order shipments of 

 honey in paper sacks, and thus get honor unto ourselves I 

 But some day it may be just the thing. — Editor.] 



No. S.—Some Reminiscences of an Old Bee-Keeper. 



BY THADDEUS SMITH. 



I HAVE been in the habit of making such frequent visits 

 to "My Old Kentucky Home" that I hardly feel that I 



have lost my citizenship there, and I have not forgotten 

 or lost my interest in her citizens, especially those who may 

 be classed as belonging to a former generation ; and as I 

 purpose to notice some cotemporary bee-keepers of 30 years 

 ago, in whom I felt most interest, it is but natural that I 

 should call up the Kentuckians first. 



My neighbors, Dr. John DiUard, and Mr. D. Burbank, 

 of Lexington, and Prof. R. A. Broadhurst, principal of the 

 Kentucky Female Orphan School at Midway, were intelli- 

 gent, enthusiastic bee-keepers, well informed in the science 

 as far as it was then developed ; and so was Mr. Nesbit, of 

 Cynthiana, and Mr. (i. B. Long, of Hopkinsville. But 

 these did not keep themselves very prominent before the 

 bee-keeping public by frequent communication to the bee- 

 papers, because they had no " ax to grind " in the sale of 

 patent hives or Italian queens. 



The most clever writer and original inventor of that 

 State was Mr. D. L. Adair, of Hawsville, who contributed 

 many interesting and instructive articles to the columns of 

 the old American Bee Journal when published in Washing- 

 ton, D. C. Mr. Adair had originality with a bright, inves- 

 tigating mind, well stored, and a fluent, agreeable way of 

 expressing his ideas ; but some of his ideas and conclu- 



sions were peculiar. For instance, he held that bees could 

 live, if not indefinitely, yet for a long time, without admis- 

 sion of /;■«/; air to their compartment— that they could be 

 sealed up tight in a box, and they would live and remain 

 perfectly quiet without injury for a number of days. I do 

 not remember the limit of time he gave to their confine- 

 ment, or how long they would continue satisfied thus 

 excluded from fresh air. It was a singular position to take, 

 yet from the facts he gave and his plausible reasoning, one 

 could hardly dissent from his conclusions. I would like to 

 know if others have observed this fact, or if the theory 

 has ever been thoroughly tested and confirmed, or exploded. 



Mr. Adair was the inventor of an original controllable 

 movable-comb hive, quite different in principle from Mr. 

 Langstroth's hive, or from the hives of Mr. Langstroth' 

 many imitators. His hive was composed of a number of 

 sections, put together side by side and held in place by a. 

 simple and ingenious device. These sections were made of 

 thin stuff, just as wide as the width of a comb and the 

 space between combs together, and a triangular comb-guide 

 placed in each, and when put together formed a box, or the 

 hive proper — using boards for the ends. The sections were 

 about the size of a Langstroth frame, being somewhat 

 deeper and shorter, and could be taken apart easily, and 

 each comb separated from the other and examined— the 

 size of the hive depending upon the number of sections 

 used. Sections were placed at each end for surplus, either 

 for extracting or for comb honey in sections ; and thus I 

 think originated the "long ideal hive," or the long hive 

 with side-storing surplus arrangement. As this section 

 hive was made of thin material, an outer receptacle had to 

 be provided for its protection ; and these were made of 

 wood, brick, stone or cement, of such a size as would hold 

 the section hive with its surplus receptacles, that were 

 shoved into it through a door in the rear, and had to be 

 withdrawn for examination. 



I once made an Adair hive. It looked all right, but 

 somehow I never had the courage to put a swarm of bees 

 into it. It remained in my honey-room for a number of 

 years, and I kept thinking I would try a colony in it, but I 

 never did. In comparison with the Langstroth-Simplicity, 

 and with Smith's " Ouinqueplexal- Duplex- Combination, 

 etc., hive," it seemed too much bother. 



I think Mr. Adair really believed, at that time, that his 

 hive possessed advantages over the Langstroth, and other 

 frame hives. Hundreds of his hives were used in Kentucky 

 and Tennessee, but I doubt if anj' one uses them now by 

 preference. 



So far as I know, Mr. Adair should have the credit of 

 inventor, or original user, of the section honey-box. He 

 used sections for surplus both on the sides and top of his 

 brood-chamber. His section-boxes, no doubt, differed in 

 size and finish from the beautiful, polished white-wood sec- 

 tions now in use, but they involved the same principle, and 

 it was probably from them that the sections of to-day were 

 evolved. 



Mr. Will R. King, of Franklin, Ky., was a hive paten- 

 tee, or a vender of a patent hive, that he called " The Tri- 

 umph Hive," and an Italian queen-breeder. He took every 

 opportunity to call attention to and advertise his wares 

 through the reading columns of the American Bee Journal, 

 with which he claims that he has succeeded in having 

 queens fertilized in confinement, and the general way he 

 had of pushing his business, made me strongly suspect 

 him of being a Yankee. However, I do not believe he was 

 any kin to H. A. King, of New York, the hive-man who 

 disputed and contested Mr. Langstroth's claims so strenu- 

 ously, and, as some thought, not honorably. 



As far back as 1872, W. R. King claimed that he had 

 succeeded in having queens fertilized in confinement, by 

 having the queen and drones fly in a tent, excluding all 

 workers from it, and he gave a detailed account of the con- 

 struction of his tent and process in the old American Bee 

 Journal of that date. The plan and principle involved is 

 the same as that of Mr. Davette. that has lately been 

 resurrected and given a prominent place in several bee- 

 papers. The point strongly empliasized by Mr. King was 

 that all worker-bees should he kepi out of the lent, and the 

 queen and drones must never have been outside their hive 

 before set to flying in the tent. He accomplished this in a 

 different way from the plan of Mr. Davette, and I should 

 judge that Mr. Davette's way is the best, but they both 

 acted on the same principle — "keep the workers out." 



Thirty years ago, when the countrj- was full of black 

 bees and comparatively few Italians, there was great diffi- 

 culty in getting Italian queens purely mated, and the sub- 

 ject of controlling fertilization was an important one for 



