1895 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



267 



minute an intruder runs against the linen 

 thread it will draw the wooden plug out and al- 

 low the spring clips to come together and com- 

 plete the circuit of the battery, when the bell 

 will ring in the bedroom and give the alarm, 

 unknown to the thief. In our own case, for- 

 tunately or unfortunately, the thii f did not 

 come any more. If he had he would have been 

 surprised. Now, this plan will protect 100 colo- 

 nies at a cost not to exceed $i.'>0 for material, 

 and perhaps three or four hours' time in put- 

 ting up.— Ed.] 



THE HEDDOX DIVISIBI-EBROOD-CHAMBER HIVE; 



THE DANZENHAKER HIVE, AND THE 



QUESTION OF INFRINGEMENT. 



When Mr. Heddon saw the article by Mr. 

 Danzenbaker, which we published on page 221, 

 he requested the privilege of replying to the 

 same, saying his reply would be fair, courteous, 

 and logical. As Rambler and one or two 

 others had expressed themselves privately as 

 of the opinion that the D. hive was a direct in- 

 fringement on the Heddon patent, if any thing 

 was, it seemed no more than fair to Mr. 

 Heddon that the request be granted. It is im- 

 portant, I think, that the question of infringe- 

 ment, if any, and just what Mr. Heddon's 

 patent does cover, be discussed fairly and can- 

 didly — more so than for the parties to resort to 

 the process of law. The reply is as follows: 



THE DANZENBAKER (?) HIVE. 



Bro. Root;— I have just read Mr. Danzenbaker's 

 article and your editorial comments regarding the 

 same. On this, above all other subjects, do bee- 

 keepers need information. I am very glad to note 

 your sincere and intelligent views regarding our 

 national laws giving adequate titles to the earners 

 of property. First, I will say that I am surprised at 

 your statement that you have not received the 

 Quarterly edition of my paper, devoted to bee cul- 

 ture. It was mailed you promptly, over six weeks 

 ago; but we know mistakes will occur in our offices 

 and on our railroads. But now allow me space to 

 make clear to your readers the relation between 

 Mr. Danzenbaker and myself. 



Bro. John H. Martin (Rambler), of California, has 

 sent a communication to me which will appear in 

 my April issue. In that communication occurs the 

 following: 



Recently in my travels in this State I have found 

 a great variety in the size of brood-frames, and tlie 

 tendency seems to be toward the shallow frame. 

 Mr. Brodbeck, of Los Angeles, reduces the depth of 

 the Hoffman an inch or more. Mr. Flory, in Central 

 California, uses a similar frame. These straws 

 show the tendency of the times; and the shallow- 

 er the hive used, the more pronounced becomes 

 the liability of infringement. Mr. Heddon says 

 that, when straws become sawlogs, there is some 

 meaning to them. Here comes the sawlog. When 

 in Los Angeles a few days since, attending our State 

 convention, my attention was called to a divisible- 

 brood-chaniber hive, invented and patented by Mr. 

 F. Danzenbaker, of Washington, D. C. I do not 

 know what Mr. Danzenbaker's claims are; but this 



1 do know, that, at first glance, any person at all 

 familiar with the Heddon hive, would snyatonce, 

 " Why, there is a Hi ddon hive." A closer examina- 

 tion reveals the fact that t)ie thumb-screws are 

 mis.sing; and the case, insiead of having eight 

 frames, contains ten, and thei'e is a sheet metal 

 lining in the ends which also serves for supporting 

 tlie frames, which are adupliCMte of the Heddon. In 

 making his frame close fitting toaeiher, and also to 

 the case, tlie combination is clearly an infringe- 

 ment upon the Heddon claim. 



The sheet-metal lining and rest, or frame-sup- 

 port, used by Mr. Danzenbaker, we consider very 

 objectionable, expensive, and a failing effort to 

 overcome supposed weaknesses that do not exist In 

 our hive. 



That sheet metal will not hold the frame tightly 

 together, nor tightly to the case, for shaking and 

 inverting; and if it would, it would be an infringe- 

 ment upon that special function of my invention, 

 in the use of close-titting frames, at the same time 

 closely fitting the ends of the case. Whether Mr. 

 Danzenbaker's features are better or worse, they 

 can not be made, used, or sold, without laying all 

 parties liable for infringement. My circular quotes 

 patent laws, giving all the reasons why. The only 

 damage Mr. Danzenbaker's hive can do is to lead 

 bee-keepers into infringemeiits, and away from bet- 

 ter devices. 



Mr. Martin says that a brood-chamber, made in 

 divisible parts, and used as specified in our patent, 

 is well adapted to California, and we are sure he is 

 correct; for it is equally adapted to any spot on 

 earth. While it was constructed principally for 

 safety and time-saving in manipulating the apiary, 

 it has been repeatedly demonstrated, since we 

 brought out the hive, that a divisible or multiple 

 brood-chamber winters bees more safely, and that 

 they breed up faster in the shallow tiers of frame, 

 than in any other style of hive. Hundreds have so 

 testified; but, as stated before, to fully carry out 

 safety and economy in manipulation, the frames 

 must be fixed, and our manner of adjusting them 

 tightly to each other at their ends, by the use of set- 

 screws, and sufficiently close to the ends of the 

 case that they are readily movable, yet the bees can 

 not go behind them, is the only one we believe to be 

 possible, so long as bees keep their present in- 

 stincts. The set-screws are the only device which 

 will securely hold the frames, for the needed manip- 

 ulations in carrying out to completion the new 

 system of management. Mr. Martin is acquainted 

 with the state of the art, consequently he knows 

 what is my property, and in his article makes that 

 knowledge Known to our readers. It must be his 

 inquiry relates to the question as to whether there 

 may not be a flaw in the Mf/e upon which I depend 

 for the protection of my property. I am quite cer- 

 tain there is not, Bro. Martin ; but if there were, do 

 you understand that bee-keepers would rob me of 

 what they know to be the results of my labor, pro- 

 vided the sheriff was absent ? Laws are not virtues, 

 but necessary evils; necessary to protect virtue 

 and industry from crime and idleness. Law doesn't 

 make right and wrong, per sc. You know of what 

 my invention consists, and you know it is my 

 property, whether I had any patent-deed to it or 

 not. But I have, as you know; and allow me to add 

 that it is a good strong one, for, as the great author- 

 ity. Walker, states, " The state of the art to which 

 an invention belongs, at the time that invention 

 was made, must be considered In construing any 

 claim for that invention." 



