1885 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



killed as many as four by one hive at one time. I 

 have purchased one Italian colony, and with this 

 and the Italians I already have I rear my queens to 

 Italianize the black colonies, which I buy near here 

 at $3.25 each. 



Bees gather honey and pollen now only in the 

 morning, and I am increasing with sugar. We are 

 having solid hot weather now— thermometer gets in- 

 to the nineties every day; generally about 9.5 to 98°. 

 The hottest it has been this summer was 103° in the 

 shade. When I get more bees and more experience 

 in the business in this country, I will send you an- 

 other report. L. W. Gray. 



Troy. Orange Co., Fla., July 21, 1885. 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' PHOTOGBAPH. 



A LIST NOW NEAHLY COMPLETE, OF THE KKIENDS 

 WHOSE PICTURES APPEAR IN THE PHOTOGRAPH 

 MEDLEY OF THE NEW-ORLEANS BEE-KEEP- 

 ERS' CONGRESS. 



fRIEND ROOT:— I sec in Gleanings of August 

 Ist a suggestion from Dr. Roberts, in regard 

 to numbering the faces in the N. O. photo- 

 graph. 1 think it would be better to begin in 

 the upper left-hand corner as we look at it; 

 that being the way we read, it will come more natu- 

 ral. To aid this numbering and naming, I send the 

 inclosed list. I hope we shall have better success 

 than Dr. K. has had thus far, as he has named only 

 two, and one of those wrongly. It is our friend P. 

 J. Christians, of New Orleans, the cashier of this 

 business, who sits next to friend Vial Ion, of BAyou 

 Goula, La. 



(Top row, bfttliiiiiiiKHt tlif lift.) 

 No. I, Judge W. H. .XndiewK. MoKiniit^v. Texas. 

 No. B, J. (}. A. Wallace, Briprhtoii. Ontario. 

 No. «. Dr. 1). McKenzie, Cai rollton. La. 

 No. T, Ernest R. Hoot, Metlinn, Ohio. 

 No. 9, OM-ar F. Bledsoe, Grenada, Mis>. 

 No. II. C. M. Bliss. Vox Lake. Wis. 

 No. IS, R. (irlnse'l, Baden, Mo. 



No. U, George Vincent, 63 Decalvu- St., New (Jrleans. La. 

 (Bepinning second row on upper left-hand corner.) 

 No. I.). O K. Kloinnoy.San Antonio, Texas. 

 No. Ifi, Tlioinn- I". Kerr, San Antonio. Texas. 

 No. 19, L. .loliii; on, Walton, Ky. 

 No. 22,1)1. D I(. Kox,.Tesnit'8 fiend. La. 

 No. 2:!, Mrs. K. K. 1'. tc rs. Shelbina, Mo. 

 No. 24, K. K I'rt.iw, SIirltiiti.T, Mcv. 

 No. 26, Mrs. Lu.iM<la M.nii on, I'eoria, HI. 



.27, Mr 



. T. M,H, 

 I. lilies. 



No. 28, Mrs. 



No. 29 Mrs. Dr. .1. Oien. Laporte City, low.i. 

 No. ."to. Dr. Jes^e OW'n, Laporte City, low.-i. 

 No, 33, S.yU-ester Johnson, Irvintfton, Ind. 



(Third, or middle line. l>e(;inninK on left.) 

 No. M, J. W. Park, ( oinniliin. Texas. 

 No. 36.Amos Al.r.iM.-, H, nton, La. 

 No. 39, Col. O. M. Hl,int..ii. (ivpenville, Miss. 

 No. 40, C. Grimm, .'.-Itii S..I1 , Wis. 

 No. 41, J. B. MaM.n, Meihaiu,- Falls, Mnine. 

 No. 42, W. S, Hart. Hawks Park, Fla. 

 No. 43, H. C Austin, .\uslin Sprinus, Tenn. 

 No. 44, C. F. Muth. Cincinnati, Ohio. 

 No. 4.'>, Dr. J. W. Hudson. Maysville, S. C. 

 No. 51, S. W. Salisbury, Kansas City, Mo. 



(Fourth line, left haiid.i 

 No. 53, J. A. Schudemayer, Black .luck Pprines, Texas. 

 No. 55, J. W. Winder, Carrollton. La. 

 No. 60, Dr. J. P. H. Brown. Augusta, Ga. 

 No.61,Dr. W. F. Robert*, Clinton, La . 

 No. 62, S. C. Boylston, Charleston, S. C. 

 No. 64, J. A. Gieen. Dayton, 111. 



(Lower line, left hard.) 

 No. 66,. I. M. Killouirb.Sai. M.nr.os, Texas 

 No. 67, B. K. Carroll, Dresd.'n, Texas. 

 No. 72, James Formrook, Watcrtown 

 No. ?3. Thcmias a. Newman. Chicago, ill. 

 No. 74, A. 1. Root, Medina. Ohio. 

 No. 77, P. J. Christians. New Orleans, La, 

 No. '(8, P. L. Viallon, Bayou Goula, La. 



From 75 colonies in the spring, I have to rejiort 40 

 Increase and 6i0) lbs. of honey. My bees on gray 

 I ind failed to store any honey during horscmint 

 b'oom, while those on black land, only 13 miles 

 away, did well. Gray land has made a partial fail- 



Wiv. 



ure in honey throughout this section, so far as I can 

 learn. 7—0. R. Flournoy, 75—115. 



San Antonio, Tex., Aug. 10, 1885. 



Thanks, friend F. I think your plan will 

 be the most practicable one ; and if some one 

 will supply the names for the missing num- 

 bers, we shall not need to devote any more 

 space to the subject. 



PREVENTING APTER-SWARMS. 



more about friend heddon's method. 



T|p FTER reading the last issue of Gleanings it 

 Ww'] ^^''™^ ^^ ™^ that justice to myself and your 

 ^^m readers calls for a few more words from me, 

 "*^'- upon this interesting and important subject. 

 In regard to my method as given in a former 

 issue, and discussed by Mr. Doolittle on page 556, I 

 think I never laid it down as infallible, though I do 

 not now recall to mind a single case of failure in 

 my practice. It seems that others are not all meet- 

 ing with the same success that has crowned my ef- 

 forts in the direction of preventing after-swarms 

 without even opening a hive. 



There are, no doubt, two ways to account for this 

 great variance regarding the reports concerning 

 success with the method. It may be accounted for 

 by a difference of locality; and, again, by difference 

 of manipulation. All systems of manipulation do 

 not give us the same results in all locations. When 

 I read Mr. Doolittle's method of introducing virgin 

 queens, my mind pictured the same disastrous re- 

 sults as are described by Mr. Ellison, should I at- 

 tempt to apply it in my apiary. I am, however, of 

 the opinion that the cause of failure on the part of 

 the few who have failed, is inoKtly owing to their 

 lack of performing the work in keeiiing with the 

 spirit of the method. I presume I neglected to be 

 explicit enough in describing it, or forgot some- 

 thing, the same as I forgot to add the extracting of 

 the old combs, in the concluding sentence of my 

 article on modern transferring, on page .562. Sever- 

 al have reported success in "Preventing after- 

 swarms," by simjily hiving the prime swarm on the 

 old stand, and removing the old hive to a new loca- 

 tion. They claimed the cause of success to rest in 

 the fact that this removal drained the old hive of a 

 larger proportion of its bees, especially the older 

 portion; and so when the young queens came to 

 hatch, the bees would find themselves too few in 

 numbers to swarm, and all supernumerary queens 

 would be dest'-oyed, and thus no after-swarming 

 would take place. The theory is correct, but I 

 found that it did not go far enough to insure suc- 

 cess. I added to it letting the old colony remain, 

 practically upon the old stand with the swarm; and 

 just before the queens were ready to hatch, then re- 

 move the old colony to another stand, and thus de- 

 prive it of its flying bees; and then what is left to 

 swarm, except queens? Under such conditions, 

 how coidd they swarm? 



Is it not evident, that those who have failed have 

 not done their work so as to secure these conditions? 

 Have they bees that cast prime swarms, ten to four- 

 teen days before the queens begin to hatch, rather 

 than seven days before? Then they must not move 

 the old colony so soon after prime swarming. But 

 some one says, "No. My colony cast their second 

 swarm the next day after they were removed to 

 their permanent location." 



