334 



TBE BEE-KEEPERS' HE VIEW. 



nothing so warms a man's heart as his baby's 

 smile. 



There, friends, you know something what 

 kind of a boy and man your editor has been. 

 I have told you things about him that have 

 never been told before. 



EXXRKOXED. 



How to Successfully Publish a Journal. 



I don't know whether any of the brethren 

 are thinking of starting a new bee journal 

 the coming year; if they are, here is a bit of 

 advice from the editor of that phenomenal 

 success in the journalistic field, the Ladies' 

 Home Journal. He says: — 



" Success in the periodical field lies, prin- 

 cipally, in two or three things: 1— Publish a 

 magazine that the public wants. 2 — Secure 

 the best talent obtainable in every depart- 

 ment, particularly a skillful editor, and a 

 publisher with good judgement. 3— Then, by 

 judicious advertising, let the people know 

 that you exist. Is that all? No, not exactly, 

 but the other necessities will make them- 

 selves apparent to you as you go along. The 

 above three rules are good ones with which 

 to start, and, perhaps, for some time, you 

 will not care for any others. They look 

 simpler than they are." 



Why There Will Never be any Comb Honey 

 Made by Feeding Glucose. 



Since the sugar-honey discussion began 

 some have expressed fears that glucose 

 would be used in the same way as sugar has 

 been advised. 



There are two reasons why this will never 

 be done. One is that bees will not take the 

 stuff unless it is largely mixed with honey. 

 The other reason is that a syrup of cane 

 sugar costs no more, if it does as much, as 

 glucose. Gleanuujs has a most excellent 

 editorial on this subject. It reads as fol- 

 lows: — 



" It has been intimated several times of 

 late that bee keepers feed glucose to bees to 

 get comb honey. We have all along doubted 

 whether this would be practicable, and ac- 

 cordingly, during the past summer, we or- 

 dered a small keg of the finest glucose made, 

 to test the matter for ourselves. We knew 

 the bees would not take to it very kindly, 

 but were greatly surprised to find that we 

 could not get them to even smell of it; and 

 Mr. J. B. Hains, of Bedford, Ohio, who 

 wished to prove the fallacy of the thing, 

 says this is his experience. We experimented 

 with three colonies of different tempera- 

 ments, and they all seemed alike to regard 



it with the same disfavor. Finally we 

 thought we would see, one day, if we could 

 not force it down 'em. We dipped our finger 

 into it, and allowed the glucose to stream all 

 over the cluster of bees; and while we were 

 watching them they did not even take the 

 pains to lick each other off, and we believe, 

 if we had dosed them much more, the whole 

 colony would have been killed. 



When the stuff" first came we thought we 

 would sample it. It looked beautiful, clear 

 as crystal, and as thick as nice well- ripened 

 honey on a winter day. We sampled it, 

 taking a good big spoonful. The first sen- 

 sation was not particularly bad: but as the 

 stuff' began to melt in the mouth it was 

 almost nauseating. It reminded us very 

 forcibly of old rotten potato parings. (We 

 never eat such things, but judge of their 

 quality by the smell.) We invited, in turn, 

 several others to taste it, and they all re- 

 garded it as positively bad. 



Now, the point of all this is right here: If 

 it is impossible to make bees take pure glu- 

 cose of the finest quality, it is impossible to 

 produce pure glucose comb honey by feed- 

 ing; and all the talk we have had regarding 

 the possibility of making glucose comb 

 honey is a waste of words — that is, if our ex- 

 periments were conducted carefully. This 

 is possible, and, we fear, may be done: 

 Twenty or thirty per cent of glucose may be 

 added to honey, and fed to bees; but the 

 pure article never. 



Again, the nasty flavor of glucose is so 

 characteristic that we believe we could detect 

 the smallest quantity of it in honey, either 

 comb or extracted. We believe we would 

 about as soon rely on a carefully educated 

 taste as on an elaborate analysis. Both to- 

 gether ought to be accepted as good proof of 

 the purity or impurity of honey. 



We want to give, right here, fair warning 

 that those chaps who are adulterating w ith 

 glucose, or contemplate doing so, had better 

 go slow. In the first place, it is impracti- 

 cable — yes, impossible — to get pure glucose 

 comb honey. In the second place, 25 to 50 

 per cent mixtures will tell their own tale. 



Later. — Since writing the above we have 

 had the pleasure of a visit from -Tohn H. 

 Larrabee, lately of the Michigan Apicultural 

 Experiment Station, at Lansing. In conse- 

 quence of his connection with the station he 

 has, of course, made many experiments in 

 apiculture; and among them was feeding 

 pure glucose and glucose mixtures to bees. 

 The pure corn syrup, the bees almost refused 

 to take, although by starving them to it he 

 has got them to store in a very few cells. 

 Practically, then, his experiment would agree 

 with ours mentioned above. By putting 

 from 25 to ,50 per cent of glucose into sugar 

 syrup or honey he could get them to take it 

 down." 



There is one point in the above to which I 

 would like to call especial attention, and 

 that is where the editor says that he would 

 as soon rely on an educated taste as on 

 chemical analysis to detect the presence of 

 glucose in honey. I agree with him most 



