333 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



May 1. 



the waste of bee life consequent upon feeding. 

 Mr. Chase admitted that it might be true; 

 "but," said he, "I tried it last season, and I 

 was satisfied that it paid me — waste or no waste 

 of energy." 



In discussing this problem we need to consid- 

 er that bees are comparatively cheap now, and 

 can be reared cheaply. If we sacrifice half a 

 colony of old bees, or even a whole one, and yet 

 secure in return a good big rousing swarm in its 

 place, and a yield of honey besides, is not the 

 trade a good one? Understand, I do not say 

 such a trade can be made; but I say, if it can 

 be made. 



There may be something in Mr. Elwood's 

 point, that the large use of sugar syrup might 

 make some difference in the present prices of 

 honey. Well, then, if honey can be bought 

 cheaply, Mr. Boardman's plan will work just 

 as well with honey as with syrup. Then if 

 some of the product does get into the super it 

 will do no harm, because it is honey; but the 

 dark stuff would not improve the appearance 

 of the nice clover and basswood section honey. 

 As Mr. Boardman manages, however, I do not 

 believe. that sugar syrup will go above, fori 

 believe he recognizes that there are conditions 

 when it may do so, and is careful to avoid those 

 conditions. 



In regard to the amalgamation matter, the 

 editorial in another column was written before 

 Mr. Elwood's article came; and I am pleased 

 to note that it is in harmony with what he lias 

 to say.— Ed.] 



ma I ^ 



DOES INVERTING DESTROY QUEEN CELLS "! 



FOOTNOTES IN AND OUT OF PLACE: DR. MIL- 

 LER'S COUNT ON THE T SUPER VOTES. 



By Dr. C C. Miller. 



I send herewith a letter that explains itself. 



Dear Dr. 3Iillcr:~l am, ] suppose, liaving the 

 usual interesting' and varied experience common to 

 novices in bee-keeping-. 1 just read all I can g-et 

 hold of, and consequently get a little too far ahead, 

 and befog-ged. I should like to know how you un- 

 derstand the following extract from Gleanings, 

 June 1, 1895, page 451 : 



" This plan of getting the swarming date of a num- 

 ber of colonies on the same day, so dispensing with 

 a watcher, is one I liave carefully followed in my 

 out-apiary for three seasons past. But I give them 

 now but nine days between visits; and when there, 

 instead of destroying cells one by one, I turn each of 

 the brood-cases upside down, which effectively and 

 positively dextrvys all embryo queois, and none can 

 escape, and the colony is safe for nine days. This 

 colony is swarmed on next visit; also all others like 

 it previously inverted. The other colouips are i/(- 

 verted if utrmw, or likely to swarm; and if they have 

 ceAls seeded next eisitAliey are swarmedinOielr turn; 

 but if they have young cells, or none at all, they are 

 inverted again and are safe till next visit, and so on 

 with all hives as they advance to swarming-strength 

 every nine days for the two or three months of our 

 swarming season, etc. T. Bolton." 



"Dunkeld, "Victoria, Aus." 



Well, doctor, this is something new to me, entire- 

 ly, and 1 have failed to find any comment on this 

 plan in any papers or books I have read. Does in- 

 verting the hive kill all embryo queens as he says ? 

 and, further, how does he swarm them on his next 

 visit ? The next few lines appear contradictory— 

 "if they have cells sealed next visit, they are 

 swarmed in their turn;" perhaps you with your 

 ripened experience can lift the fog somehow. Can 

 they have sealed cells if inverting destroys all em- 

 bryo queens ? 



I have now 14 colonies. I began with a few 

 swarms last spring, and harvested some .500 lbs. of 

 nice comb honey from 10 colonies, the best part of 

 which was gathered in the fall. I hived a swarm on 

 the 19th, which took me a little by surprise. There 

 was a full gallon of bees in that swarm. I looked 



all through the other hives, but could find no inten- 

 tion of swarming as yet in the shape of queen-cells, 

 although the hives are boiling over with bees, 

 and full of sealed brood. There were five capped 

 'queen-cells, and one uncapped, in the hive from 

 which the swarm issued. The bees are bringing in 

 honey fast from fruit bloom, and commencing to 

 draw the foundation in the supers. I often think of 

 the hardships of having to winter bees in cellars 

 east of the Rockies, and doubt whether I should 

 keep many bees under such conditions. 

 Merced, Cal., March 20. A. R. Gun. 



Now, Mr. Editor, the foregoing letter shows 

 the need of that sometimes praised and some- 

 times abused thing, the footnote. On page 451 

 of Gleanings for 1895, the unqualified state- 

 ment is made that turning the brood-cases up- 

 side down "effectually and positively destroys 

 all embryo queens, and none can escape, and 

 the colony is safe for nine days." The novice 

 reads that with a glow of enthusiasm. " There's 

 the very thing I've been wanting— so simple 

 and easy! Just turn all the brood-combs upside 

 down once in nine days, and the work is done. 

 Why has no one told me that before?" Then 

 our novice goes to his hives at the beginning of 

 the honey harvest, inverts them, leaves them 

 nine days, then inverts every nine days again, 

 but is saddened to find nearly every colony 

 swarming. Here's what you ought to have 

 done, Mr. Editor: you ought to have taken out 

 your little pencil, and written something like 

 this: "At one time there was a good deal said 

 about queen cells being destroyed when combs 

 were inverted, that being one of the strong 

 points in favor of inversion; but so many fail- 

 ures occurred that the matter fell out of use, 

 and latterly little or nothing has been said 

 about it. The novice will do well not to put 

 much dependence on the plan until he has first 

 tried it on a small scale." That's what you 

 ought to have written, Mr. Editor, and then 

 you ought to have tucked that note on to the 

 bottom of the letter on page 451. That's the 

 place for it, and not several pages away. 



When you send Gleanings to our good friend 

 at Lapeer, gather up all you have to say on one 

 page. That's the way he likes to have it. But 

 in the copy that you send to Marengo, please 

 say what you have to say about any thing that 

 is published in Gleanings right at the time 

 I'm reading it and not the next day. I don't 

 want to be bothered hunting up afterward, 

 perhaps having to read it all over again; but I 

 like to know what you think about it right 

 while it's fresh in my mind. And don't you 

 mind what Bro. Taylor says about writing on 

 the "spur of the moment," " without thought." 

 He's a good man, and means well; but when 

 he wrote what he did in Review about footnotes 

 he wrote on the "spur of the moment," and 

 " without thought." It may be all right to 

 write on the spur of the moment. We often 

 need spurs, and sometimes it's just as well to 

 write while the prick of the spur is felt. But it 

 isn't right to write without thought — neither 

 for an editor nor for an experimenter. And, 



