1805 



(JLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



177 



I have come to think that humidity may have 

 something to do with the fostering of the mala- 

 dy. I have two colonies that came near being 

 exterminated last spring: yet when warm dry 

 weather came on they built up rapidly and be- 

 came strong enough to lay up stores for winter. 

 With the wet weather we have had of late, the 

 old symptoms have returned, and they are near- 

 ly as bad as ever. 



We have had a good deal of steady cool weath- 

 er so far, and there is not a flower to be seen; 

 yet, going among my bees yesterday, Jan. 24th, 

 they were seen bringing in immense loads of 

 what appeared to be pollen of rather peculiar 

 color. The same day a neighbor remarked that 

 my bees were swarming on his cotton -seed 

 meal, and then I recognized the peculiar color 

 as that of cotton-seed meal. They certainly 

 bring in the most enormous loads of it. I won- 

 der if it will serve their purpose as well as pol- 

 len. I am going to buy some cotton-seed meal 

 and give it a trial. 



There is every indication that we are going to 

 have a fine honey crop this year. There has 

 been so much cold weather that it is almost 

 certain we shall have no bloom killed by frost. 

 It will take a month of warm weather to start 

 the trees to budding, by which time we ought 

 to be measurably safe. 



Ky the way, a singular and most unfortunate 

 thing happened in our neighborhood last fall. 

 An unusual quantity of sugar-cane was raised, 

 and the making of molasses lasted nearly three 

 weeks, during which time the bees were drown- 

 ed by the peck in the cane juice and in the boil- 

 ing syrup. Our stocks were greatly reduced in 

 numbers by this occurrence. If I live till next 

 year I intend to close up the entrances with 

 wire cloth during the grinding season. 



I am going to try sulphite of soda in syrup, 

 for bee-paralysis. It is said to be a good germi- 

 cide. 



Columbia, Miss., .Ian. 25. 



[And here is another article that seems to up- 

 hold pretty well the position of Mr. Ford.— Eo.] 



BEE-PAKAI.Y8IS I'RIMAKILV FKOM THE (^UEEN, 

 NOT FHOM THK. FOOD. 



I notice what has been written on bee-paraly- 

 sis by different ones. In 1877, while in Milford, 

 Wis., I bought a queen of an eastern breeder. 

 She was very prolific, and produced fine bees. 

 After her l^ees were two or three weeks old they 

 would swell up and shake and tremble, and 

 crawl about until they died. In the fall I add- 

 ed a small swarm to the diseased one. and next 

 season she tilled her hive with bees, but all the 

 while they kept dropping oft' with paralysis. I 

 reared six queens from her, and every one of 

 them produced bees with paralysis. I let no 

 drones fly from this queen, so all the young ones 

 were mated with good drones. I sprayed them 

 with salt and water many times; I also sprayed 

 with a mixture of carbolic acid and water, hut 

 all to no purpose. All remedies failed. Some- 



times there would be a pint of dead bees at each 

 hive. I also noticed that, as the queens grew 

 older, more bees died from each hive; and if I 

 had not added frames of brood from other hives 

 they all would have died. I kept them three 

 years: and as I concluded there was no redemp- 

 tion for them I killed all the bees and queens, 

 and put new swarms on the combs, and 1 have 

 never seen a sign of it since; therefore I believe 

 the fault lies in the queen, as no paralysis ever 

 appeared from the combs where the bees had 

 been killed. 1 do not think that sour honey has 

 any thing to do with it. I have also learned 

 from the queen-breeder of whom I got her that 

 his whole apiary was affected with it, and that 

 the drones from such diseased (lueens would 

 show the disease in their progeny, even when 

 they had been mated to a healthy queen. 

 Kedtield, N. Y., Jan. 18. J. R. Rked. 



BEE -PARALYSIS. 



A CRITU^UE OF PENDING THEORIES. 



Bu Dr. J. P. H. Browu. 



Bee-paralysis seems to be one of those occult 

 diseases whose etiology is beyond the ken of the 

 bee-keeper. I have never, to my knowledge, 

 Seen a case of it. but I have read the writings 

 of others upon the subject, with much interest. 



In Gleanings, p. 54, this year, there is an ar- 

 ticle on the subject by Mr. S. A. Shuck, who 

 advances the idea that it may be caused by 

 poisonous, sour, or unwholesome honey. Now, 

 Mr. Shuck's opinion may be considered untena- 

 ble when placed by the side of so high an au- 

 thority as Frank R. Cheshire, who considers 

 this disease to be caused by a bacillus (l>acillus 

 (T(ti/toiri, after a Miss Gayton, who first called 

 his attention to itj. He says these bacilli are 

 not only in the affected workers, but also in the 

 queen. If such be the case, then it becomes a 

 more terrible disease than foul brood — harder 

 to reach and more difficult to eradicate. Any 

 germicide sulticiently powerful to destroy these 

 bacilli in the workers or queen, by any admix- 

 ture of food, would also either destroy these in- 

 sects or impair their future usefulness ; hence 

 total destruction of every bee in the hive would 

 be the only infallible remedy. 



Cheshire's bacillus theory has given rise to 

 the remedy of changing queens. This course 

 seems to have worked with some satisfaction 

 with a few of the reporters of this disease to the 

 journals, while others have reported that they 

 could see no benefit. Mr. O. O. Foppleton, a 

 very intelligent bee-keeper of long experience, 

 reports in Tlic Bee-keepers' Review, p. :i(u, that 

 he '■ changed queens, with no result."' If Che- 

 shire is correct in his observations upon bee- 

 paralysis (in many other instances he has not 

 been infallible), then, let me ask, what benefit 

 does the infected hive receive from a change of 

 queen? The infected workers are still in the 



