1895 



GLEANINGS IN Bj^E CULTURE 



447 



IMPROVED HIVE-COVEKS. 



By B. Taylor. 



Editor Oleanings: — I have read so many ar- 

 ticles in the bee-papers lately about hive-cov- 

 ers that I have concluded to send you a model 

 of the best hive-cover in the world. You know 

 everybody nowadays marks their wares " The 

 best on earth," hence I make my extravagant 

 claim in order to be in fashion. I have used 

 this style of cover for more than 30 years, and 

 believe it to be the best, all things considered, of 

 any in use, past or present. Before I had ma- 

 chinery I grooved them with a common panel- 

 plow, with a narrow bit. The grooving is, of 

 course, to prevent warping, which it does most 

 effectively. You know boards warp because one 

 side becomes longer than the other, caused com- 

 monly by one side becoming damper than the 

 other; then the damp side expands, and pushes 

 the board in a circle; the grooves prevent this 

 pushing power, as they allow room for expan- 

 sion without its pushing effect. I always put 

 the heart side of the lumber up, and groove 

 two-thirds of the way through in three or more 



SECTION SHOWING GROOVED CLEAT 



places, according to the quality of the lumber, 

 a soft board being less inclined to warp than a 

 hard one. I always paint the ends of the cov- 

 ers in the joint before the cleats are nailed on. 

 I cut the tops in lengths before planing; 

 groove them, then nail on the cleats; the covers 

 are then placed on a carriage, and run under a 

 set of planer- knives, and the most beautiful 

 covers you ever saw are made at the rate of 

 one a minute, each one entirely out of wind, 

 and true to a hair's breadth. 



Of course, you will ask the reason for the 

 shallow grooves near the edges. It is to pre- 

 vent the water from flowing under by capillary 

 attraction. I paint both sides of my cover — the 

 under side one and the top two coats of oil and 

 lead. I now have covers made thus thirty 

 years ago, as straight and true as when new. 



I have tried all kinds of costly covers of more 

 than a dozen styles, and would have none of 

 them as compared with these simple plain 

 boards. They are always convenient in the 

 yard or in winter quarters; they pack in small 

 compass when not in use; are the cheapest of 

 all to make, and will outlast any complicated 

 cover of several pieces; shed water perfectly, 

 if properly made, and deserve their title, " B. 

 Taylor's Handy hive-cover." 



Porestville, Minn., April 15. 



[This question of grooving a cover-board to 

 prevent warping has been brought up before. 

 We never tried it in our yards.— Ed.] 



THE DIVISIBLE BROOD-CHAMBER. 



THE QUESTION OF INFRINGEMENT, AGAIN. 



[I had hoped that this question might have 

 been drawn to a close in our May 1st issue. 

 But Mr. Williamson felt that, as he had been 

 an unwilling participant in the discussion, and 

 that, as he did not know his opinion, given on 

 page 368, was to be used for print, he should be 

 given space for further reply. After some cor- 

 respondence with Mr. Danzenbaker it was 

 granted, on condit'on that he would allow Mr. 

 Heddon to have the "last say." The article 

 came, and I assume that the condition was ac- 

 cepted. In order to have the whole matter 

 appear in one issue, and to end there. I sent a 

 proof to Mr. Heddon. Mi-. Williamson's article 

 is as follows:] 



Editor of Oleanings,:— Itwdswith ming-led feeling-s 

 of amusement aud disgust that I read Mr. Heddon's 

 " Reply to Attornej' Williamson," and it is probably 

 foolish to dig-nify such " reply " by any notice what- 

 ever. In fact, were not Mr. Danzenbaker's interests 

 involved iu the matter I should pay no attention to 

 it, since the intellig-ent reader will perceiv^e that the 

 alleged reply is not an answer to my statements re- 

 specting his right to hold the Danzenbaker hive to 

 be an infringement of his patent, but, rather, a mix- 

 ture of irrelevant citations from Walker on Patents, 

 misstatements of the law of patents, and reflections 

 upon my veracity. 



It will be a sufficient answer to Mr. H.'s reference 

 to " paid attorneys "to call attention to the fact 

 that, however interested an attorney might be to 

 present his client's case to the best advantage, his 

 interest and consequent bias could hardly be as 

 great as that of a party whose interests are at stake. 

 It is to be remembered that Mr. Heddon is most 

 vitally concerned in the matter in controversy, and 

 that it is Ixirely possible that, under the tremendous 

 influence of interest (I understand he gets $.5 for in- 

 dividual rights), he is quite as apt to feel under 

 compulsion to "say something " as would a " paid 

 attorney." 1 think that, under the circumstances, 

 my statements are fully as worthy of belief as those 

 of Mr. Heddon. 



Mr. Heddon says: " Allow me to call the reader's 

 attention to the fact that Mr. Williamson makes no 

 mention of patent law in equity." Permit me to 

 call attention to the fact that the only reference he 

 makes to "patent law in equity" is in his state- 

 ment quoted above. He may know what he means 

 by " patent law in equity," and its bearing upon his 

 case; but so far as his article is concerned he keeps 

 his knowledge strictly to himself. I rather suspect, 

 however, that lie uses this mysterious phrase as a 

 sort of verbal bug-a-boo. 



I am surprised, and yet at the same time flattered, 

 that one so well versed in patent law as Mr. Heddon 

 claims to be should admit himself insufficient to 

 cope with me by asking that opportunity be g-iven 

 his attorney to reply to me. It would seem that the 

 gentle reader will be justified in inferring from this 

 admission of Mr. Heddon, that tlitre is some force 

 in what was said in my heretofore published opin- 

 ion. I am also somewhat startled at the exhibition 

 of inconsistency in Mr. Heddon in his expression of 



