.Entered as sccond-clasf? malu i a; 



I'usl-iinice at Hamilton, 111., under Act of March 3, 187a,) 



Published Monthly at $1.00 a Year, by American Bee Journal, First National Bank Building 



C, p. DADAXT, Editor. 



DR. C. C. MILLER. Associate Editor. 



HAMILTON, ILL, MAY, 1913 



Vol. LIII.— No. 5 



Editorial 



Comments 



Comb vs. Extracted 



On page 93, Mr. B. Keep urges that 

 effort should be made to popularize 

 and increase the demand for extracted 

 honey. He is quite right in this. But 

 in doing so he expresses some views 

 regarding the difference between comb 

 and extracted honey tliat seem hardly 

 warranted. 



He says : " Only a very moderate 

 quantity [of comb honey] can be eaten 

 by each individual — a little satisfies, 

 and the cost is more or less suggested 

 by the gingerly small portions served 

 to each person. There is, on the con- 

 trary, an unlimited field for extracted 

 honey." It will probably be no unfair 

 interpretation to say that Mr. Keep 

 means thereby to say that it takes a 

 much less quantity of comb honey to 

 satisfy the appetite than it does of ex- 

 tracted honey, and that when comb 

 honey is served at the table, it is served 

 in " gingerly small portions," and ex- 

 tracted honey in "unlimited " amount. 

 Whatever may be the custom in some 

 localities, " in this locality " the usual 

 thing is to pass the dish containing the 

 section, each one helping himself to all 

 he wants, although sometimes a sep- 

 arate portion is dished out on a small 

 dish, in which case there is always a 

 liberal helping. 



Is not the idea that it takes less comb 

 than extracted to satisfy the appetite 

 something entirely new under the sun? 

 Some prefer comb to extracted, in 

 which case it may take more comb 

 than extracted to satisfy, and vice versa; 



but taking consumers in general, if 

 Mr. Keep has a scintilla of evidence to 

 prove that it takes less comb than ex- 

 tracted to satisfy, let him produce it. 



Let us do what we can to increase 

 the sale of extracted honey, but let us 

 not make the mistake of trying to do 

 so by disparaging comb honey. 



c. c. M. 



Dr. Miller's Plan ot Reariug 

 Queen-Cells 



In the January number of the Ameri- 

 can Bee Journal, mention is made 

 that a facsimile of the illustration of 

 the Doctor's plan of rearing queen- 

 cells appeared in the New Zealand 

 Farmer, taken from the August front 

 cover. You might also have read the 

 suggestion made regarding the comb 

 of eggs to be supplied instead of foun- 

 dation in the first place. 



I am responsible for the article, and 

 the suggestion I then made has since 

 been demonstrated in practice with 

 complete success, and I consider the 

 plan excellent for amateur and others 

 for home queen-rearing. 



My plan is, instead of giving strips 

 of comb foundation in the first place, 

 a la Dr. Miller, on which, as the Doc- 

 tor says, the bees are likely to fill up 

 the gaps with comb, I get a bright, 

 clean comb filled with the eggs I want, 

 and then cut out the strips. The re- 

 moved strips can be put into another 

 frame to save waste. The frames of 

 strips are then put into strong colonies 

 prepared for queen-rearing by remov- 

 ing the queen, unsealed brood and 

 eggs, when, of course, cells are built 

 on the strips. In no case out of I>alf a 

 dozen trials that have been made at 

 one of our Government apiaries, have 

 the gaps between the strips been filled 

 with comb. 



This, I think, is a great improve- 



ment, and I would like Dr. Miller to 

 try it. I. Hopkins. 



Auckland, New Zealand. 



Friend Hopkins, unless I misunder- 

 stand you, I used the plan you mention 

 before I used my present plan, and 

 having full opportunity to compare the 

 two, I greatly prefer the latter. I sus- 

 pect that you have not tried both, and 

 that if you should do so you would 

 prefer my plan. You speak of my giv- 

 ing strips of foundation, and then 

 speak of the bees filling up gaps with 

 comb as something objectionable. 

 That sounds as if you suppose the bees 

 are expected to start cells on the foun- 

 dation. Not at all. No cells are built 

 on the foundation, and none are de- 

 sired, and no comb is built that is ob- 

 jectionable. I merely use foundation 

 to show the bees where to start build- 

 ing comb, using two starters in a frame 

 so as to get a larger contour. Then 

 the bees build out just the virgin comb 

 that is wanted, with young larv:e and 

 eggs at the outer edge of the comb, 

 precisely where the bees prefer to have 

 them for queen-cells. 



You speak of removing unsealed 

 brood and eggs from the queenless 

 colony that is to build the cells. I do 

 not find that necessary. The tender 

 comb that is built with larva; just 

 hatched at its outer edge is so much 

 to the bees taste that they do not care 

 much to start wild cells on the old 

 combs, and if 2 or 3 should be started, 

 there is no need to use them. If you 

 have not already done so, I wish you 

 would try this plan and see if you do 

 not like it. c. c. M. 



The method advised above by Mr. 

 Hopkins is very similar to the Alley 

 queen-rearing method, given in his 

 " Handy Book," now out of print and 

 reproduced in " The Hive and Honey 

 Bee," paragraphs 528-9. In the picture 



