1887 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



il3 



water in the boiler, and a good cake of wax in the 

 pan with some water under it. What comes out of 

 the boiler will require melting over, as it is not 

 strained. 



Such a batch usually will make from 10 to 20 lbs. 

 of wax; anti lor tliose who have but few bees, this 

 plan is a very good one. The objections are, 1. It 

 doesn't get all the wax out clean; 3. It bursts too 

 many strainers, and they cost 5 cts. apiece; 3. It 

 takes two persons too much time to dt) the straining. 



I have studied over this wax business a great deal; 

 for as our bees increased it was taking so much 

 time. Finally, in the spring of 1W6 ] accidentally 

 made a dise(i\er\ which, for a large job at least, is 

 very much more satisfactorj-. We had several sets 

 of combs from which the bees deserted in the spring. 

 After the hard freezing was over, the weather came 

 on hot early, and those combs became wormy before 

 we eould use them. There was a large number of 

 them, and the worms had got under such headway 

 that it was not safe to put them in with the bees— 

 not even the Italians. They therefore had to be 

 melted up, and I could not get them through my 

 boiler fast enough. We had a big iron kettle stand- 

 ing out there in the yard, that would hold about 

 four bushels of potatoes to boil for the hogs. I got 

 my eye on that kettle. A thought struck me (so 

 hard that 1 nearlyjumpedoutof my boots). "There 

 is the wax-extractor that I have been looking for so 

 long, standing there waiting to be used." I had 

 three or four pails of water in it and a flre_ under it 

 right speedily, and soon had it hot. Those worms 

 quit eating beeswax. It is astonishing how much I 

 could nioU down in that kettle. 1 let the Are go 

 down. So much wax i-oseon top (as the mass cooled 

 off) that I dipped off, of clean wax, 35 lbs., nii'i strain- 

 ed it at one squeeze. I then dipped out a large milk- 

 pan full which I did not strain. As the wax, in the 

 pan cooled it sank in the center. I dipj)ed otit of 

 the kettle all the wax I could, and then let it stand 

 two days. At the expiration of that time I took a 

 crust otf the top of thekettle, abouttwoinches thick, 

 that took enough wax with it to hold it in chunks. 

 Tnder the crust the rubbish did not contain a par- 

 ticle of wax. I threw the top crust into a box. clean- 

 ed out the kettle, then put back the cakes dipped 

 otf before, not strained. Besides these I put in a lot 

 of trimmings from foundation, a nice lot of clean 

 cappings, and some unfinished cakes from my boiler 

 process. I melted them all up together, with three 

 or four pails of water in the kettle. I then strained 

 out two large dish-pans full of clean wax, one 

 squeeze for each pan. I dipped the wax out pretty 

 clean, then put in the rest of the wormy combs. 

 The crust was first taken olf the top of the kettle, of 

 the other batch. When I got the second batch hot I 

 dipped off all the wax I could, which was put in the 

 first of the next batch. 



With the big kettle we have worked out all our 

 wax the past season. It is a big improvement. Its 

 advantages are, 1. It takes much less time; 3. There 

 is absolutely no waste. I get every particle of wax, 

 and one strainer lasted all summer. Of course, 

 when the bees would work on honey it would not do 

 to work wax out of doors unless we wanted to cook 

 the bees, for hot beeswax has a great attraction for 

 bees, and they would fly into the wax in search of 

 honey. E. France. 



Platteville, Grant Co., Wis., Feb. 1, 1887. 



Friend F.. a good deal of time was occu- 

 pied at the Albany Convention in discussing 



this matter of rendering wax, and I believe 

 quite a few decided just as you have done, 

 that a large iron kettle, hung up outdoors, 

 is the very cheapest thing that can be used 

 where the quantity of old combs is large. 

 One of the brothers, whose name I can not 

 now recall, spoke of putting all the combs in 

 a coarse bag, and confining this bag under 

 the water contained in tlie kettle, by means 

 of a wire cloth. As soon as the whole appa- 

 ratus gets hot, the principal part of the wax 

 rises through the bag and meshes of wire 

 cloth, to the surface, and may be dipped off. 

 This makes the work automatic, as it were. 

 It is perfectly strained, and is therefore fit 

 for market as fast as it is taken from the 

 surface of the water. When no more wax 

 will arise, get out the bag while it is still 

 hot, and press it with your squeezers, or 

 some arrangement similar to a cheese or ci- 

 der p]-ess. The size of the apparatus would 

 depend on the amount of combs to be work- 

 ed. You do not speak of the solar wax- 

 extractor, and I presume you have not tried 

 it ; but why not, instead of pitching your 

 waste fragments into a box, pitch them di- 

 rectly into the solar wax-extractor, and let 

 old Sol get the wax out at his leisure V 



EMPTY FRAMES VS. EMPTY COMBS. 



SHALL WE trSE OUR SURPLUS EMPTV COMBS, WHEN 

 HIVING NEW SWARMS, FOR COMB HONEY 'f 



FEEL quite certain that neither friend West nor 

 friend Doane would wish to give a wrong im- 

 pression; yet, from a lack of sufficient data, 

 that is what has unintentionally been done up- 

 on page 93. In the first place I did not work ")') 

 colonies for comb honey. It is true that I set aside 

 that number in the spring with the intention of 

 running them for comb honey, but, before any sec- 

 tions were filled, five of the colonies were broken up 

 into queen-rearing nuclei; so friend Doane and I 

 began the season with exactly the same number of 

 colonies; /jut, his colonies were stronyer than mine. 

 His hives were ten-frame hives, while mine held 

 only eight; hence he had in use 100 more combs- 

 enough to have ipade 13^2 more colonies like mine. 

 If ray opponents think this view unfair, let me ask 

 if they would have considered it so had I changed 

 my colonies over into ten-frame hives, thus making 

 only 40 colonies of my 50? Right here, however, 

 comes in another point, and that is, that some 

 queens will put no more brood in a ten-frame than 

 in an eight-frame hive (and that is why I use the 

 latter), while many of them will; hence it would 

 probably be unfair to assume that 50 ten-frame col- 

 onies are equal to 631/2 eight-frame colonies; but I do 

 insist that, in a comparison like this, it is unfair to 

 assume that an eight-frame colony is the equal of a 

 ten-frame one. Perhaps 50 ten-frame colonies would 

 be equal, as honey-gatherers, to 57 eight-frame ones. 

 In regard to the ariiount of surplus, friend West is 

 nearly correct. I had 300 lbs. more than he gave me 

 credit for; viz., 7000 lbs. As he said nothing in re- 

 gard to the shape in which the honey was secured, 

 and as I raise comb honey, I presume the readers of 

 Gleanings concluded that it was all of that class. 

 Such is not the case; for 300 lbs. of mine was ex- 

 tracted, at the close of the season, from about 1000 

 unfinished sections, and the rest was in the shape of 



