April, 191 1 



109 



Am(>Fican ISee Journal 



as P. T. Barnum declared that the Ameri- 

 can people liked to be humbugged ; and as 

 the veteran showmian travell-ed in Canada, 

 also, no doubt he thought the same of the 

 Canadians even if he didn't say it. 



Yes, I know that "disinterested men 

 have measured the tong^ies of bees and 

 found that they are not all of one size," 

 and I suppose that bees of the same hive 

 would show variation. Men have not 

 changed so much in stature during many 

 hundreds of years at least, and yet there 

 are many variations in this biped. I'd 

 wager a good deal that Dr. Miller's brain 

 is "larger than that of many men, and I 

 also feel sure that his "controversial 

 bump" is above the average. And yet for 



all of that, has great-grandson might be 

 deficient in these respects. 



I almost forgot to ask you. Doctor, if 

 you had read what Prof. Cockrill said 

 at the Colorado convention, on page 75. 

 Here are the words : 



"The honey-bee is the last word in all 

 bee4ife. and has become so firmly estab- 

 lished in her position that little change 

 has taken place in her characteristics in 

 three or four million years." 



And you expect to change the length 

 of their tongues in a few months! 

 (Ha! ha!) 



There, I'm done, for 



"He who fights and runs away, 

 Will live to fight another day." 



Contributed 



Articles^ 



Uniformity of Hives and Fix- 

 tures—Comb-Honey Supers 



BY F. GREIXER. 



I.f some day in the near future all 

 bee-keepers should adopt the same kind 

 of a bee-hive, the same kind of comb- 

 honey super and extracting super, and 

 every other kind of bee-hive and fi.xture 

 of one uniform character, the manu- 

 facturers of these articles would be 

 saved a whole lot of trouble, and also 

 would the bee-keepers. I do not e.x- 

 pect this thing to happen. If every- 

 thing was uniform, this world would 

 be a monotonous place. As it is, it 

 isn't. Conditions vary so much that it 

 seems best for some to use different 

 appliances than some others use. We 

 also often become attached to an arti- 

 cle, and so familiar with it that we can 

 use it to very good advantage, even if 

 it is faulty, and we become loth to ad- 

 mit that there is anything better. 



At present I have taken about 100 

 sectional hives into use, and as I learn 

 to handle them I like to handle them, 

 although it produces some confusion to 

 have two different styles of frames in 

 the yards; but the advantages of this 

 hive are numerous when one learns 

 how to use it. Nearly 20 years ago I 

 gave practically the same hive a trial, 

 but it so displeased me at that time that 

 I discarded it. I have always derived 

 pleasure and satisfaction from experi- 

 ments made with different kinds of 

 hives and appliances. There are but 

 few of the new things that have been 

 brought out during the past three dec- 

 ades, but what I have tested, if it was 

 practicable for me to do so. There is 

 a great collection of all sorts of comb- 

 honey supers still stowed away in my 

 shop, awaiting their transformation 

 into something more to my liking. 



In viewing the different comb-honey 

 supers offered to the bee-keeper, there 

 is not one figuring prominently on the 

 manufacturers' lists, if it does at all, 

 which is so constructed that it keeps 

 the parts of sections clean most ex- 

 posed to the view of the prospective 

 purchaser. As far as 1 am informed, 

 the wide-frame super is the only one 

 accomplishing this. A double-tier su- 



per of this kind was introduced by A. 

 I. Root in the early 70's. adapted to the 

 lO-frame Langstroth hive. It was a 

 good super, but afforded too much 

 room in ordinary honey seasons. We 

 cut it in two, and adapted it to the 4x.5 

 sections, using it alongside of other 

 styles of supers. When the no-bee-way 

 section came into prominence, a hun- 

 dred of these supers were modeled over 

 by us for their use, and they have 

 served evr since, more of them hav- 

 ing been added. 



In my intercourse with different bee- 

 keepers of our State, I find really but 

 few who have any practical knowledge 

 of the wide-frame super, for the reason 

 they had to take what supply manufac- 

 turers offered them. As I always made 

 my own supplies I was not hampered 

 that way. I even made my own fences, 

 because the fences as sold by the deal- 

 ers are wrongly made — the cleats are 

 too narrow, and should be more than 

 twice as wide as they are made. 



The principal objection raised by 

 those unacquainted with the wide-frame 

 super is that it must be difficult to re- 

 move the filled sections from the 

 frames. This is not the case, for in- 

 deed they come out very easily; they 

 almost fall out if held flatwise. Bee- 

 keepers who have visited me during the 

 "casing time," were surprised that the 

 sections came out as they did, and with 

 so little effort on my part. 



The advantages of the wide-frame 

 super are in that they keep the sections 

 clean on all sides, and that if any manip- 

 ulation is necessary while they are on 

 the hive, the sections are shifted about 

 in fours. The bee-spaces around the 

 ends of the frames also insure a better 

 filling of the end sections than is at- 

 tained in supers without this bee-space. 

 By comparing the honey from such 

 differing supers that fact is easily 

 proven. 



It is said by advocates of other styles 

 of supers that there is more oppor- 

 tunity given for gluing up the sections 

 in a wide-frame super than in any 

 other; it is said that the bees apply the 

 glue more plentifully wherever there is 

 a crack, and the wide-frame super has 

 more such than any other. There is 

 some truth in the last assertion. I 

 would say that in a good honey season 



very little glue is deposited, no matter 

 what the style of super is, and often the 

 sections come off as clean as they went 

 on. In a slow season the cracks and 

 crevices are always filled with glue. 



When the wide frames are made as 

 they should be, the sections fit in very 

 closely. The joints between the bot- 

 tom-bars of the wide frame or the top- 

 bars of same, and the sections between 

 the two, give no opportunity to crowd 

 in any glue. There is a kink about 

 nailing wide frames. It may be so 

 well done as to draw the bottom-bar 

 " bowing " up, the top-bar slightly bow- 

 ing down. The sections when put in 

 place are then "hugged." But even 

 should a little glue be deposited along 

 the edges of a section, this is much 

 easier to be removed than when the 

 whole broadside is covered with the 

 "stuff," more or less. I notice of late, 

 by Mr. Crane's writing, that he slips 

 thin pieces of wood under his sections 

 in T-supers, to keep the bottom clean. 

 Comment is here unnecessary. 



The most annoying feature of the T- 

 super is in the gluing of the T-tins to 

 the sections. The bees have a way of 

 crowding in a lot of glue right here, 

 and this is clear across the section. 

 This gluing holds much more tena- 

 ciously than when the gluing is done 

 lengthwise of the section as in the 

 wide-frame super. This and other fea- 

 tures make the T-super one requiring 

 too much fussing to suit me. The 

 greater expense of the wide-frame su- 

 per, and the greater height by 73 inch 

 over the regular T-super, and by 5-16 

 or H inch over the section-holder type 

 of super, are the only objectionable 

 features of the wide-frame super. On 

 the other hand, it is the super for busi- 

 ness ; it may be handled in any way, 

 shape or manner. It is fool-proof. 



Naples, N. Y. 



The Stewart So-Called 

 Brood Cure 



Foul- 



BY C. I'. 1).\UANT. 



I was about to prepare a lengthy arti- 

 cle in reply to Mr. Henry Stewart's 

 assertions in the February number 

 concerning his claim of having discov- 

 ered a method of cleaning out and cur- 

 ing foul brood, when I received a copy 

 of the communication sent by Mr. I. E. 

 Pyles to the American Bee Journal, and 

 which I understand is to appear in the 

 present number. I refer the reader to 

 this. Mr. Pyles asserts, with the testi- 

 mony of his own eyes, that Mr. Henry 

 Stewart had numerous cases of foul 

 brood in his apiary last July, after 5 

 years of his treatment. This will suf- 

 fice to satisfy the average reader that 

 Mr. Stewart is not successful. How- 

 ever, I wish to say a few words in ad- 

 dition. 



Mr. Henry Stewart, in his article, 

 says that he believes me sincere. It is 

 not a matter of sincerity, /'/i my case. I 

 mentioned nothing but the testimony 

 of others. If there is a question of 

 sincerity, it is between himself and the 

 hundreds whose experience contradicts 

 his own. 



Out of curiosity, however, I wrote to 

 the two best authorities on foul brood. 



