February, 1913 



American l^ee Journal 



pondent who "expresses the view that 

 the queen was probably a drone-laying 

 queen. However, he can offer no spe- 

 cial opinion as to the matter of her 

 laying from one to 100 eggs in a cell." 



The sender desires an opinion from 

 this quarter. If I may be allowed a 

 guess in the matter, I should guess it 

 was a case of laying workers, possibly 

 preceded by a drone-laying queen. It 

 is a common thing for laying workers 

 to lay a plurality of eggs in a cell. 

 Generally, however, this plurality will 

 be found in queen-cells or drone-cells, 

 while possibly only a single egg will 

 be found in each worker-cell. Some- 

 times the first intimation of the pres- 

 ence of laying workers is the finding 

 of a lot of eggs in one or more queen- 

 cells. It is just possible that very care- 

 ful counting might have reduced that 

 "100 eggs in one cell" to a smaller 

 number, for it is not the easiest thing 

 to count such eggs. 



As to Bee-Terms 



Among editors of bee journals none 

 is more wide-awake than Rev. J. G. 

 Digges, editor of BeeKeepers' Gazette 

 and Irish Bee Journal. He is not only 

 up to date, but sometimes ahead of 

 date. Witness the word "beekeeper " 

 which he uses. No such word is to be 

 found in the dictionaries ; perhaps not 

 in any dictionary. Instead of that the 

 word " bee-keeper " will be found. But 

 Editor Digges says it ought to be 

 " beekeeper," and with him " beekeeper'' 

 it is. If he has no authority for 

 the word, he has justification for it. 

 When two nouns are used together to 

 name a single object, it seems the right 

 thing to join the two words by a 

 hyphen as soon as the use becomes 

 common, or even before it is common. 

 Later, the hyphen drops out and the 

 two words are written together as one. 

 Thus a house keeper would be written 

 "house-keeper" for a time, and then 

 "housekeeper," as it now appears in 

 the dictionary. By the same rule "bee- 

 keeper" should become "beekeeper" 

 whenever its use is common enough, 

 and in all conscience it seems to be 

 common enough now. Dictionaries 

 record what is usage; as soon as 

 others join Editor Digges in allowing 

 bee-keepers to do without a hyphen, no 

 doubt the word "beekeeper" will ap- 

 pear in the dictionary. 



Knowing this up-to-date character 

 of Editor Digges, one who opens to 

 page 107 of the Beekeepers' Gazette, 

 will be somewhat surprised to find 

 "honey bee," not a single time, as if a 

 typographical error, but a number of 

 times. To keep company with it. 



"humble qee" appears on the same 

 page. What authority has he for any- 

 thing of the kind ? The dictionary 

 gives " honey-bee " and " bumblebee." 

 Think of the inconsistency of a man so 

 far ahead of the dictionary as to write 

 " beekeeper," and then so far behind 

 the times as to write in two separate 

 words what the dictionary joins with a 

 hyphen, and then to disjoint another 

 which does not have even a hyphen ! 



If that sharp-witted Irishman has 

 any authority, any justification, any 

 reason for his course, let him produce 

 it. If not, a prompt apology will be 

 expected at this office, postage prepaid. 



Ha.s Honey Advanced with Other 

 Food Products? 



The high cost of living is in the air 

 nowadays, and it is natural that the 

 bee-keeper should inquire whether he 

 is getting his share of the advance. It 

 may be of interest to see how mar- 

 ket quotations of honey compare dur- 

 ing a few past years, taking the same 

 month each year, say September. New 

 York and Chicago may be taken as 

 representative ; at least they are two 

 of the most important markets. Tak- 

 ing four years, beginning with 1909, 

 the highest quotations are as follows : 

 N. Y. N. Y. Chicago Chicago 

 comb extracted comb extracted 



1909 15 S'/z 16 8 



1910 16 9>i 17 9 



1911 16 lOK 18 9 



1912 16 8-4 18 10 



If we lump together the four quota- 

 tions of each year we get : 



1909 47>^ 



1910 51>^ 



1911 53'A 



1912 52>^ 



According to that the increase for 

 the period from 1909 to 1912 is only 10 

 percent. That does not compare very 

 well .with the 25, 30, or more percent 

 advance of most other eatables. 



There may be some good reason for 

 all this, yet it hardly looks as if the 

 bee-keeper is getting all that should be 

 coming to him. But just how the 

 thing can be remedied is one of the 

 things that "no fellow can find out." 



United effort is probably the only 

 possible and evidently distant solution 

 of the problem. 



A Venomous Error 



Some errors die hard. Errors api- 

 cultural seem especially tenacious of 

 life. One is reminded of this upon 

 reading in a leading apicultural journal, 

 in a scientific article, " Then the cell is 

 sealed after the bee has deposited in it 

 a drop of poison." Just exactly how 

 the drop of poison is deposited in 

 the cell is not stated, but a full state- 



ment, more or less according to popu- 

 lar belief, would run something like 

 this: "The poison of the bee's sting 

 consists of formic acid ; formic acid is 

 contained in honey; the formic acid in 

 honey is dropped into the honey from 

 the bee's sting just before the cell of 

 honey is sealed." Of those three state- 

 ments, the central one is true, sand- 

 wiched between two errors. 



A few years ago it was shown — was 

 it by Dr. Langer ? — that the poison of 

 the bee's sting was something other 

 than formic acid. Even if that poison 

 were formic acid, pure and simple, is 

 there a particle of proof for the brazen 

 assertion that just before a cell of 

 honey is sealed over the bee drops into 

 it poison from its sting ? In the honey 

 harvest thousands of cells of honey are 

 sealed over in a day. If each cell has a 

 sting thrust into it before the sealing 

 it ought not to be a difficult thing to 

 see it. But no one has ever yet claimed 

 to have had a sight of the performance. 



Lately it has been shown by Reiden- 

 bach that instead of formic acid being 

 derived from the bee either through 

 its sting, its blood, or in any other 

 way, it is developed in the honey itself 

 by exposing to the air a thin layer of 

 honey. What more satisfactory proof 

 could be asked ? 



Yet for years to come we are likely 

 to be told: "Just before a cell of 

 honey is sealed over a bee drops into 

 it a ration of formic acid from its 

 sting ?" 



European Foul Itrood 



The article on another page by L. 

 Harris, will be read with surprise by 

 those who are somewhat familiar with 

 the literature of European- fouhbrood, 

 as it has generally appeared in this 

 country. Yet close readers will be 

 somewhat prepared for the surprise by 

 having read what was said by Morley 

 Pettit, lately quite closely in accord 

 with the present article. It is difficult 

 to comprehend by those who are 

 familiar with European foul brood in 

 the United States, how it can be possi- 

 ble for any one to say "the poorest 

 quality of glue is quite fragrant in 

 comparison with an advanced case of 



European foul brood and if one 



gets close down to the entrance and 

 can exercise his olfactory powers, it 

 can be detected even if there are only a 

 few cells diseased." The writer does 

 not know just what Mr. Harris would 

 call "an advanced case " of European 

 foul brood, but is certainly quite famil- 

 iar with cases having "only a few cells 

 diseased," and would say that in such 

 cases not only is it not possible to de- 



