548 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



Aug. 29, 1901. 



Contributed Articles. I 



t-fr^^^K 



A Trio of Questions— Bee-Book Reviews. 



BY I'KOF. A. J. COOK. 



I REGRET if an}- -have questioned the wisdom or cour- 

 tesy of my reviews of the bee-books. I believe we all — 

 Dadant, Cowan. Root, and myself — wish only the truth. 

 If we have made mistakes — and. of course, we all have — we 

 are only too thankful that they be corrected. I always 

 rejoice with exceeding joy at any kindly criticism of my 

 books, or my journalistic articles. As Mr. Root says, I am 

 not always right. If any earnest student thinks me wrong, 

 I like to know, that I may re-examine, re-test, and very 

 likely find I am in error. Then how quick I will be to cor- 

 rect.- I am sure all our authors in question are of like 

 mind. 



There are two good reasons why these criticisms should 

 not be withheld, viz : 



1. It brings mooted questions before us to be studied 

 and rightly decided. 



2. Though possibly corrected in latest editions, the 

 hosts have only the older editions, and surely they are 

 entitled to have their text-books corrected. 



BEES EVAPORATING HONEV IN TRANSIT TO THE HIVE. 



The criticism of my position on this subject warrants 

 reply. Surely. I seem to be almost discourteous and dog- 

 matic, when I say, " I know bees never do this." I do not 

 mean to call in question the truthfulness of those who 

 claim to have seen the falling mist. I have never seen it, 

 though I have tried to discover it often. When I say, "I 

 know," I refer to the appended theory, "Evaporation of 

 the nectar." If some one should report seeing a bee car- 

 rying a large substance, and should add that he believed it 

 an iron wedge weighing a pound, I would have no right to 

 doubt the first part of the statement. I would have a per- 

 fect right to say I know regarding the second part. 



The water of nectar holds the sugar in solution. It is 

 a close integral part of the liquid. It can only be sepa- 

 rated, so far as we know, by force, heat, or centrifugal 

 motion. The bee can not possibly exert any of these on 

 nectar within its honey-stomach. The statement of falling 

 mist we may not dispute. The impossibility of evapo- 

 ration we may affirm, and so say "we know." I repeat, if 

 such droplets do fall from the bees, they are fecal, or 

 respiratory — shall we say sweet atoms? 



KILLING BEES TO STING. 



I also speak with a sort of offensive dogmatism on this 

 point. I have over and over suggested to ray students to 

 perform the following experiment : 



With a glove on anger the bees, till a dozen, more or 

 less, sting the glove, and actually pull out their stings. 

 Then they were to catch as many from the combs by taking 

 hold of the wings. Each lot was put into a cage provis- 

 ioned with honey or "Good " candy. In a few days allot 

 the first lot would die, while all of the others would live 

 for weeks. Often the second cage was peopled with bees 

 taken as they were about to fly from the hive in quest of 

 nectar. 



This explains why Mrs. Clark's bees that stung her cow 

 to death were so generally destroyed. She reports that her 

 apiary was seriously depleted, while thousands of bees 

 were dead near the carcass of the cow. We all know that 

 bees may sting and not lose the sting. Of course, such 

 cases may not prove fatal. 



SCIENTIFIC USE OF TERMS. 



The dictionaries are conservative. They allow expres- 

 sions which expert usage would not permit. Physiologists 

 do not confound digestion and assimilation. It would not 

 be exact, and so would be unscientific to do so. Is it not 

 wise to go to the best and latest specialists in physiology 

 for our definitions ? If we do so we vcill say that digestion 

 is to fit the food for absorption ; and that assimilation has 

 to do with metabolism or tissue changes. The entomolo- 

 gist is wise in not calling a larva a worm, for it is not. 

 The entomologist might possibly use the term miller for 

 moth ; it would be rare, however, but he surely would not 



say moth-miller. He would as correctly speak of a female 

 ■woman. Are we not wise to consult the up-to-date special- 

 ists in our use of scientific terms ? 



Los Angeles Co., Calif., May 20. 



[The above article was received at this office the latter 

 part of May, and through some unexplainable way was 

 overlooked until now. We regret the long delay exceed- 

 ingly, but trust it has not entirely lost its value. — Editor.] 



Valueless Figures as Applied to Bees- 

 Breeding. 



In- 



BY G. M. DOOLITTLE. 



FREDERICK B. SIMPSON is one of the comparatively 

 new writers for the bee-papers, yet his articles are full 

 of life and "spice." I have read them with much 

 interest, and hope he will continue to write more and more, 

 especially so as he may gain more and greater light on 

 many of the vexatious problems with which apiarists have 

 to deal. I judge from his writings that he is more thor- 

 oughly conversant with the vexatious problems relating to 

 horses, than he is with those relating to bees. But if his 

 life is spared he will doubtless learn all about many, if not 

 all, of the bee-problems. And I bid him " Godspeed," that 

 he may know of the height and depth, of the length and 

 breadth, of this most fascinating, as well as often most 

 vexatious, pursuit — bee-keeping. 



On page 485, I find these words from his pen : 



'■ In the American Bee .Journal for .June 20, Mr. Doolittle gfave us 

 some fljjures, but as he tailed to notice that the mother of the drone 

 with which a queen mates is entitled to probably the same share in 

 the results [greater, in my opinion — G. M. D.] as the queen's mother, 

 and also that the mother, or mothers, of the drones with which the 

 breeding queen's daughters mate are also entitled to some share, his 

 figures are of little value." 



Just so. And even at the risk of appearing " sassy " I 

 wish to say that his, " whereas the real cause of quality is 

 skillful i<'/t'rf/o?;," and, " which qualities should be proved 

 to be hereditary iii each pedigree," as given in his 

 " in-breeding " article, are equally of little value, as applied 

 to bees. And all the illustrations which have been given 

 in the bee-papers during the past 30 years, no matter by 

 whom given, as comparing the breeding of horses, cattle, 

 sheep, poultry, or swine, with that of breeding queen-bees, 

 have been equally valueless, for there is no common ground 

 (on vfhich to stand) between them. 



Suppose Mr. Simpsdn, with all of his horse knowledge, 

 was obliged to turn his highly bred mare out into a 10,000 

 acre forest, filled with twice that many stallions of all 

 grades, sizes and colors, she going way out of his sight and 

 hearing before she met even a single one of them ; of how 

 much value does he think would be any words he could say 

 about his "skillful selection " the "hereditary in each pedi- 

 gree," or about the " mother of the stallion with which his 

 mare mated ?" The fact is, the breeder of queen-bees is 

 " all at open sea " in this matter of the selection of drones, 

 and all talk along the line of what drone any queen mates 

 has no value attached to it whatever. 



I have had a standing offer, out for years, of $500 to 

 the man or woman who would give me a practical plan 

 whereby I could mate a queen-bee to any individual drone, 

 with the same certainty that a horse-breeder could mate his 

 stock. And I know of several other queen-breeders who 

 would give from that to twice tiiat amount. Here is your 

 chance, Mr. S. And not only a chance to get the S$SES, but 

 also to receive the heartfelt gratitude of thousands of bee- 

 keepers of the present age. and those who are to come after 

 us during the centuries yet to come. And, until this prob- 

 lem is worked out, it is useless to talk about " hereditary," 

 " variations, how started, intensified, and established." or 

 anything of the kind. And the " great big tent " plan, 

 lately agitated, should it prove successful, would not at all 

 meet the requirements of the Simpson horse-breeders, nor 

 claim my S500 ; for that would be like turning out the 

 mare, in the supposed case, into a forest containing from 

 50 to 1000 stallions, with the simple guarantee that they 

 were raised from one mother. Some would be weaklings 

 along some or all lines, lacking of proper form, propor- 

 tions, etc., and would be something that no careful stock- 

 breeder would ever listen to, although it might be some- 

 what of an improvement over the first, or what we now 

 have. 



Those who have accused the present race of queen- 



