396 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



May 15. 



was the first one we have received. In fact, we 

 were not aware that the Jcnirnal wa.s out. We 

 could hardly, then, have been making a " hard 

 fight" to take away California subscribers. If 

 you win turn to our issue for December 15, last 

 year, you will see that we gave the Pacific Bee 

 Journal a good send-off, even before it was 

 born. This, surely, ought to exonerate us from 

 the charge of intentionally ignoring the paper. 

 It presents a really creditable appearance; 

 and its articles are from some of the bright and 

 practical bee-keepers of California. 



The following unsolicited testimonial regard- 

 ing Gleanings as an advertising medium 

 speaks for itself: 



Mr. A. I. Roof;— During- the past year we have used 

 many advertisirg mediums, and a summary of the 

 results obtained shows Gleanings in Bee Culture 

 to be far aliead of the other mediums used, in pro- 

 portion to the expense. It gives us pleasure to send 

 you this unsolicited testimonial. 



The Market Garden Co., 



F. W. Leavitt, Manager. 



Minneanolis, Minn., May 7, 1896. 



We desire to thank the Market Gardener for 

 this very kind favor. If more of our advertis- 

 ers would take pains to acknowedge the merits 

 of different periodicals in some such way as 

 this it would not only help the advertising me- 

 dium itself, t)ut advertisers, in the selection of 

 their papers. 



In view of what some of the correspondents of 

 the American Bee Journal have said, a sample 

 of which we give in our new department, 

 "From Our Neighbors' Fields," in this issue, 

 and in view of the further fact that, Apis dor- 

 sata would be of but little or no use to us for the 

 purpose of fertilizing the flora of this country, 

 Gleanings is opposed to any action on the part 

 of the general government for importing these 

 bees to our country. It would Involve consid- 

 erable expense, and very little if any good would 

 result, even if the expedition were successful. 

 Moreover, if money is to be used by the general 

 government for the benefit of bee-keeping, it 

 can be much more wisely expended in other 

 ways — for instance, the United States Experi- 

 ment Station, under the wing of the Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture ; or a national honey and 

 bee show at Washington would be more accept- 

 able to the mass of bee keepers. 



C. W. Dayton, in the Review, writing on the 

 subject of glucose in California, intimates that, 

 by the heading I put on an article he sent in, 

 and which was published some time ago in 

 these columns, I entirely "changed the aspect" 

 of said article; and that, by that heading, I 

 made it appear as if he, Mr. Dayton, was "out 

 of sorts at everybody, bee-keepers included." 

 When I first read the Review article, I was 

 quite inclined to believe that I had, uninten- 



tionally, slightly changed the thought of the 

 article; but upon looking it up I can not see but 

 that the heading clear through is a true index 

 to the whole article. I would say, in explana- 

 tion, that Mr. Dayton intimated in letters that 

 I had changed the wording of the manuscript it- 

 self, and therefore requested that I return one 

 of the pages, which I did. Before doing so, I 

 carefully compared this page with that part of 

 the article which he thought had been chang- 

 ed; but I found that we had printed it verba- 

 tim—word for word. If Mr. Dayton said some 

 things that he wishes now he had not said, as 

 seems to be indicated by the fact that he could 

 not believe he had written what the cold print 

 shows, he should not try to saddle the blame on 

 the editor who put the heading on his article. 

 The fact of the matter is, his statements were 

 a little overdrawn, and I said as much in my 

 footnote at the end. I did not then and do not 

 now believe that honey is adulterated in Cali- 

 fornia, with glucose, to the extent that Mr. 

 Dayton would have us believe; but if there is 

 adulteration there, I believe most heartily in 

 ferreting it out and bringing the guilty ones to 

 justice. 



the danzenbaker hive a success. 



I am using some of the Danzenbaker hives, 

 and expect to use them entirely, as I don't ex- 

 actly live iu the land of milk and honey that 

 Mr. W. W. Somerford mentions in Mar. 1st 

 issue, page 179. The hive he prefers is a ten- 

 frame, three to four stories high. It may do in 

 Texas, but is no good here, as I have tried the 

 ten-frame Simplicity, and have discarded it. 



On page 260, April 1, Mr. J. E. Hand says 

 that his objection to the Danzenbaker hive is 

 the difficulty he had in a hive he used several 

 years ago with end cleats; that his trouble was 

 in getting the first frame. Doubtless he has 

 not used or even seen one of Mr. Danzenbaker's 

 hives, as they have follower and wedge, and 

 present no trouble in removing the first frame. 

 As that seems to be his only objection, when he 

 uses one he will doubtless use them entirely. 

 The bottom and cover alone are quite an ad- 

 vantage over other hives. I have several eight- 

 frame Dovetailed hives, in which I am going to 

 use the Danzenbaker frames and sections 

 lengthwise, if I can't sell them. I am also go- 

 ing to use some of the sections crosswise in the 

 Dovetailed super; but I am of the opinion of 

 Dr. Miller, page 265, Apr. 1, that sections are 

 better running the same way that the frames 

 run in the lower story. S. D. Matthews. 



Hamilton. N. C, Apr. 20. 



