80 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



of wisdom found occasionally in all pro- 

 fessions, have lightly "pooh-poohed"' the 

 whole business as sinnply another freak 

 of an experimenter. 



The writer recalls one fellow bee man 

 to whose attention he called the initial 

 article of Mr. Williams, and who became 

 greatly interested. Early one morning 

 in the latter part of July his apiary was 

 visited, and Mr. Bee-man found busy 

 shaking his strongest colony of bees in 

 front of the hive; there was no nectar 

 within a hundred miles, and had not been 

 for three weeks. Yet this enthusiast 

 was determined to test the new theory 

 and make those "lazy bees" work. This 

 might be termed carrying a theory to 

 extremes. 



That feature of apiculture which in- 

 vests it with endless fascination to the 

 real lover of Nature is the constant series 

 of surprises to which we are treated by 

 our insect friends. There are just enough 

 of these surprises happening along to 

 set at variance all rules, and teach us 

 that the sum of our knowledge only 

 furnishes a very small unit with which 

 to measure the uncounted things we have 

 yet to learn. After all, our real knowl- 

 edge of the bee has made comparatively 

 small progress during the past century, 

 when measured by the general progress 

 of the arts and sciences, and when the 

 relative importance of the products of 

 the hive in ancient commerce is com- 

 pared with that of today, one may 

 wonder whether we have progressed 

 proportionately with the other things 

 since the days of Solomon. 



Concerning the matter of "shaking" 

 in general, there is, beyond question, 

 something of value for the practical 

 bee keeper if the real inwardness of the 

 process can be arrived at, even ap- 

 proximately. The underlying reason of a 

 thing and its successful adaptation to 

 practical methods furnish the only logical 

 cause of progress in any channel of 

 productive activity. It is with a belief 

 that there is "a reason" that this article 

 is written. 



REASON OR INSTINCT? 



About all we know of bees, that is to 

 say, what is printed in the books which 

 have become standard authority, and 

 current publication in the journals, ap- 

 pears to be based upon the conception 

 that the activities of the hive arise purely 

 from instinct or reflex action; as one 

 would walk, or breathe, or digest food. 

 Some of the best scientific thought of the 

 present time has been devoted to the 

 exploitation of this view, which, possibly, 

 may safely be assumed to be correct 

 as a general principle, applying to bees 

 in their natural state, unassociated with 

 man. The theory of reflex action is a 

 convenient one by which to explain things 

 otherwise beyond explanation, and in the 

 sharp controversy over the problem of 

 animal intelligence it affords a convenient 

 peg on which warring scientists may 

 hang their superfluous raiment while in 

 the heat of battle. 



Certainly we know that sealed brood, 

 isolated in a hive and allowed to hatch in 

 confinement, widely separated from any 

 other bees which could possibly act as 

 tutors to the young, will develop a 

 company of insects which will carry out 

 all the ordinary hereditary occupations of 

 the hive, and, in so far, as this may bear 

 upon the issue, justify the theory of 

 reflex action; but these same untutored 

 youngsters will presently astound us with 

 some peculiarity of action entirely differ- 

 ent from anything ever before en- 

 countered, in a manner which causes one 

 to sit up and take notice. We are prone 

 to explain such happenings by the general 

 term of "instinct," which is, in fact, no 

 explanation at all, but the subterfuge of 

 a totally bewildered mind, chiefly desirous 

 of maintaining its public reputation for 

 astuteness. 



What we know of thought, intelligence, 

 action proceeding as a result of such 

 thought or intelligence, or reflex action 

 proceeding from specialized nerve centers, 

 is based on our knowledge of the human, 

 taken as a standard of comparison for all 

 other similar problems arising in the 



