1901 



GLEANINGS IN BEK CULTURE. 



wire cloth. And right here is the feature that 

 makes it a success : The old methods have 

 used perforated zinc, while Mr. Wardell uses 

 wire cloth. Now for results : 



These young queens fly out from the en- 

 trances from the upper story, come back and 

 are fertilized. If cool weather comes on it 

 does not make any difference, because there 

 is a large amount of heat from the cluster of 

 bees below that rises up through the wire 

 cloth. 



The great feature in favor of this method is 

 that, in the fall, or at the close of the season, 

 when it is desired to unite the bees, and the 

 5'oung queens have all been sold from the up- 

 per story, all one has to do is to rennve the 

 wire cloth from the two stories, and let the 

 bees run together. Thej' all have the same 

 scent, and there is no fighting. 



This scheme has also another advantage. 

 It economizes room in the yard, and brings 

 the nuclei up to a nice height for the apiarist 

 to work. We also make one colony do the 

 work of three nuclei ; and if honey is coming 

 in, the colony can store just the same ; but, 

 of course, the frames of honey would have to 

 be removed as fa'^t as filled with honey. If 

 one of the nuclei runs short of brood, all that 

 is necessary is to remove the upper story for a 

 minute or two, take out the empty comb honi 

 the nucleus, and substitute it for a frame of 

 brood from the colony below. Set this, bees 

 and all, into the nucleus, replace the upper 

 story, and all will goon as before. There will 

 be no fighting, because, understand, the bees 

 are all of the same scent. 



THE TRUTH ABOUT BEET AND CANE SUGAR, 



Since printing the article by W. K. Morri- 

 son, page 672, I have received two communi- 

 cations — one from the youngest member of 

 the firm, Huber H. Root, who is looking after 

 our exhibit at the Pan-American. Under date 

 of Sept. 2 he writes: 



In reading over the article on beet sugar in Aug. 

 1.5th Gleanings I noticed .some things I didn't be- 

 lieve ; but thinking that perh ips I didn't know much 

 about it I a^ked the beet-sugar man to give his opin- 

 ion of it, and, if he wanted to, to write an article in 

 reply, which he did. You may think that he, being 

 interested in the beet sugar industry, would not be 

 able to give impartial statements ; but Mr. Hershiser 

 and I botti know him to be a nan who would state 

 the exact truth, and, at any rate, there would be no ax 

 for him to gi ind, because bee-keepers as a rule do not 

 know what the source of the sugar is which they buy. 

 Ernest, in his footnote, says he was told that the 

 canneries- prefer cane sugar to beet, because the cane 

 has a higher sweetening power. Now, I have taken 

 the trouble to question some men, grocers, etc. who 

 have used both ; and when they say that beet sugar is 

 not as sweet, they also generally say that it also has 

 an unpleasant odor. This lets out the fact that they 

 h:ive, because cheaper, bought that which was not as 

 highly refined as it is when bought as granulated 

 sugar. Unrefined beet sugar has a bad odor, because 

 I smelkd it myself. Refined has none. In places 

 where the refined has been used, no one Can tell the 

 diff'^rence. 



Mr. Gilraore is a chemist, as you see by his article, 

 anil he knows what he is talking about. 



We may find two things that havp the same chem- 

 ical formula are different such as the diamond and 

 ch ircoal. but do xve ever see two substances which 

 hive the same chemical forniiila and also the same 

 physical characteristics wliich were not the .same? 



HUBEK. 



The letter referred to by Huber is one by 

 IMelvin R. Gilmore, who, it appears, is in po- 

 sition to know something about this whole 

 question of sugar. He writes: 



A STATEMENT FROM COMPETENT AUTHORITY. 



Mr. Huber Root called my attention to an article 

 published in Gleanings, Augu-t 15, and asked me to 

 lead it and give my orinion of some of its state- 

 ments. The writer, W. K. Morrison, seems to think 

 that sugar made from cane is better than that made 

 fjom beets. I do not know how he or any one can 

 know when he gets granulated sugar whe ther it's made 

 from cane or beet. Of course, if he sees the name of 

 a sugar-factory of Nebraska, Colorado, or Michigan, 

 o:i the sack in which it comes, he knows that he has 

 bett sugar, but otherwise there is nowav of know- 

 ing, for, even though it be from the refineries of 

 Havemeyer or Arbuckle, it may be from either 

 source, for these refineries handle raw bett sugar 

 from Germany, Belgium, Holland, France, Austria, 

 and Russia, as well as raw cane sugar from Java and 

 the Indies. 



One of the statements of the writer is that cane 

 sugar is sweeter than beet sugar, "just as Jer.sey milk 

 is richer than Holstein milk, and for this reason 

 alone it commands a higher price." In the first 

 place, I will say thai cane sugar does not command a 

 higher price than beet sugar; for in determining the 

 price ot sugar there is no question of its source but of 

 its quality. In the next place, I will say that the 

 sweetness of sugar, from whatever source, depends on 

 its polarization of purity of sugar. As the chemical 

 formula of sugar from both sources is the same (C,o 

 Hoo O,,), and their physical characteristics are both 

 the same, it results that neither one nor the other can 

 be said to be sweeter. The simile can not hold for 

 the Tf as' n that, while sugar is a fixed chemical com- 

 pound of so many atoms of carbon, hydrogen, and 

 oxygen, with certain phvsical characteristics result- 

 ing from the atoms of the molecule uniting in a cer- 

 tain way, milk, on the other hand, is a variable ph\ s- 

 ical combination of many chemical compounds ; ^nd 

 while the slightest variation in the component parts 

 of the molecule of sugar would make it other than 

 sugar, there cin be a great variation in the composi- 

 tion of milk and it would still be milk. It might con- 

 tain more or less water, more or less casein, more or 

 less fat, etc., and yet it is milk. 



The writer of the article claims that Dr. Wilej' says 

 that beet sugar is cane sugar and cane sugar is beet 

 sugar. I do not think that Dr Wiley con id say that. 

 He might say that they are identical, or that be< t 

 sugar is cane sugar, but not that cane sugar is beet 

 sugir, for the reason that "cane sugar " is the com- 

 mon name of the article which is chemically known 

 as " sucrose," just as ' grape sugar " is the common 

 name of the article chemically known as "glucose." 

 The name "cane sugar" was given at a time when 

 the only known source was cane ; but since then it 

 has been found in other grasses besides the cane, and 

 in a number of roots, as the carrot, parsnip, turnip, 

 and notahlj' in the beet. The writer of the article 

 further states that, bv thp "same proce.ss of reason- 

 ing, saccharin, which is .500 times sweeter than ordi- 

 nary sugar, ought to be cane sugar also, but it is not " 

 t should ssy it is not ! Saccharin is not a sugar at all. 

 having none of the characteristics of sugar except 

 that in a dilute form it gives a sensation of sweetness 

 to the tongue, while in concentrated form it would be 

 very bitter, and it is in no sense a food, as is sru'ir. 

 I do not know what he means by "the same pr' ce=s 

 of reasoning." but certainly no process of reasoning 

 could class saccharin as sugar. 



Melvin R. Gilmore. 

 Supt of Exhiltit of the American Beet sugar 

 Association at the Pafi- American Exposition. 



Buffalo, N. Y., Aug. ;31. 



I will reiterate what I have repeatedly said 

 in these columns, that beet sugar, such as we 

 have used for the last 20 years for feeding our 

 bees, has been eminently satisfactory. 



I will write to the parties who told me that 

 the canners on the Pacific coast will use 

 nothing but cane sugar, which they allej'p is 

 .sweeter, and ask for further informal ion. 

 Possibly those same canners are using beet 

 sugar of a fine quality when they supposed 

 they were using cane. 



