THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



79 



streuf^th of the colony — and answer only 

 the one as to the arrangement of the 

 combs. If all these questions were an- 

 swered, some of them would, I doubt 

 not, appear to be very important. I'or 

 instance, I infer, rather from what you 

 iit\i^U'it to say, than from what you do 

 say, that the five combs were left hang- 

 ing alone in the super. Do you think, 

 that is of no importance ? 

 . You saj' in your discussion of the ques- 

 tion concerning the arrangement of the 

 combs that I did not call attention to the 

 fact that comb c was left with the queen 

 for the deposition of eggs a much long- 

 er time than either of the others. May 

 it not be doctor, that you think me un- 

 fair, sometimes, because you fail either to 

 read or to remember all that I write ? If 

 you will peruse my article carefully you 

 will find that I stated, in substance, that 

 c was left in with the laying queen two 

 days; and the same fact appears, evidently, 

 in no less than four places in the table I 

 submitted; though, by what I afterwards 

 learned to be a typographical error in 

 your article, I was led into the error of 

 giving e a like excess of time; an error 

 which, as it happened, was of no great 

 importance. But I am not as yet able to 

 see any force in your argument founded 

 on the length of time c was left with the 

 laying queen. No one, I am sure, in his 

 right mind, would claim that bees build 

 queen cells on combs in numbers propor- 

 tioned to the number of larva; thev sever- 

 ally contain; besides we do not ktunc that 

 c contained more larvie than b. And, as 

 to your argument in the next paragraph, 

 from the fact that a cell was found on d 

 while larvic less than three daj-s old were 

 in comb c,^ no one would claim that there 

 were no exceptions to the bees' general 

 rule of action. I nowhere claimed that all 

 cells would be built on the central combs, 

 but that such combs had the preference, 

 just as my exhibit, which you copy, 

 shows. Now, be candid, doctor, do you 

 seriously claim thai bees have no prefer- 

 ence for the central combs for the build- 

 ing of queen-cells. 



But your strong reliance is the answer 

 of your friend of exceptionally large ex- 

 perience. I am somewhat out of patience 

 with you that you should be willing to 

 give the substance of his reply rather than 

 its tenor or exact text — one is so liable, 

 when concerned in an argument, to over- 

 look what might be material to the argu- 

 ment of the other side. But we must 

 take what you have given us; and, as to 

 that, we are not now concerned as to the 

 .soundness of 3'our friend's propositions, 

 but only as to their bearing upon the 

 present point, whether bees have a pref- 

 erence for the more central combs for 

 queen rearing. After considering the 

 matter as fairly as I can, I am bound, in 

 justice to myself, at the risk of encoun- 

 tering another charge of unfairness, to 

 say that the "substance" of your friend's 

 reply has no application in any particu- 

 lar. It says: '"It's not so much the posi- 

 tion of the comb as other things. " What 

 things? Why, a variety of combs, so that 

 there may be a choice by the bees among 

 them; new combs, and old combs, and ir- 

 regular combs. But your combs, doctor, 

 we have the best of authority for saying, 

 were alike; all smooth, and of the satne 

 age. Ask )'our friend: If the "other 

 things" were absent, as was the case with 

 your combs, what about the position ? 

 Have you an^' doubt about what the sub- 

 stance of his reply would be ? As to the 

 rest of the reply, I am sure you could not 

 claim that it contains anything but a 

 number of exceptions; and what we want 

 is a general rule; and your friend, so far 

 as appears, does not attempt to give any 

 applicable to the present case. 



Passing this point you go on to say: 

 "Other faulty reasoning I might men- 

 tion." Other than what, doctor ? That 

 implies that some point in my reasoning 

 has been found faulty. I suppose you 

 mean in the question I have just been 

 discussing; and we shall know whether 

 you really think so or not when we learn 

 wliether, in your next experiment in the 

 matter, you use just the five combs as 

 you did in your last, or whether you 



