July 9, 1903. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



439 



life insurance. We haven't even asked members to come 

 in, or allowed them anything for soliciting new members. 

 At our Association I was the first to introduce this thinp of 

 joining in a body. Join the National in a body ; the more 

 we have the more we can work. I do hope that the day 

 isn't far off when the numbers in the National will increase 

 rapidly. Then, again, this subject of foul-brood legislation, 

 so many of our States need it, and the National Associa- 

 tion, if it has any strength, can be a great help. Local leg- 

 islation could not have much effect when it was transferred 

 over from another State. It had a name, was doing busi- 

 ness, and they had respect before the legislature, and so is 

 the National, and I think the day is coming when we will 

 all of us get our neighbor bee-keepers to join the National 

 Association. 



Pres. York — We have with us the president of the Na- 

 tional Association ; perhaps he would tell us some of the 

 plans of the Association as to using printers' ink. 



Mr. Hutchinson — I indorse all that Mr. Abbott has said. 

 I believe in advertising my business in other papers. I 

 don't know that there is anything to say in regard to the 

 future of the Association. Mr. Moore had an excellent 

 paper on that subject. We should go ahead and work, and 

 advertise, and get members, and, possibly, as Mr. France 

 says, if we get members enough this matter of organization 

 will settle itself ; but I don't know about that. I am sure 

 we certainly need the members. 



Pres. York — I believe the Board of Directors decided not 

 to print the annual report this year, thinking they could 

 use the money to better advantage in some other way. Of 

 course, that is their own affair ; it wasn't mine at all. I 

 took the report, and we have the report in the American 

 Bee Journal, anyway, whether it is in pamphlet form or not. 

 (Continued next week.) 



( 



Contributed Articles 





Uniting Weak Colonies in Spring— Formalin. 



BY T. A. GREBN. 



MR. HASTY wishes me to explain (page 296) why I do 

 not believe in uniting weak colonies in the spring, as 

 stated in my article on page 197. I know very well 

 that it is contrary to most of the teachings of the books, but 

 experience has shown me that it is but very seldom any- 

 thing is gained by uniting colonies early in the spring. 

 Two weak colonies put together will usually, in a very short 

 time, be no larger than either one would have been if they 

 had been left alone. The reason of this is that a large pro- 

 portion of each is old and nearly ready to die of old age. 

 The excitement of uniting, and the sense of prosperity 

 caused by the increased number of bees, induces the bees to 

 fly more freely, and otherwise exert themselves unduly, so 

 that not only these old veterans, but the young bees, are 

 soon worn out and rapidly perish. 



Now, if this is the case — and I can find plenty of com- 

 pany among practical apiarists in believing it to be true — 

 it is still more certainly true when one of the colonies is 

 queenless. The colony with a queen has been in a compara- 

 tively normal condition, which is not true of the queenless 

 one in which a much larger proportion of the bees are old 

 and nearly worn out. 



Some may say that it would certainly have paid to have 

 given a queen to the colony the bees o^ which lived so long. 

 Perhaps it would. The unusual longevity of these bees 

 might have enabled them to hold their own until they had 

 reared successors to themselves. But this is by no means 

 certain, and I feel morally certain that ordinarily if a 

 queenless colony the size of this had been united early in 

 the spring with an equally weak one having a queen, which 

 would be the usual way of procedure, its bees, instead of 

 living until September, would all have been dead before 

 June, and perhaps much sooner. 



Do not understand me as saying that it will never pay 

 to unite a queenless colony with a weak one in the spring 

 having a queen. If the colony has not been long queenless, 

 or if it has still a large number of bees, it may work all 

 right to give it a queen in any way. 



What I want to make clear is, that it does not usually 



pay the man whose time is of much value to fuss with weak, 

 queenless colonies early in the spring. 



FOHMAUN OR FORMALDEHYDE. 



We read a great deal lately about this new specific 

 against foul brood. As to whether we should call it forma- 

 lin or formaldehyde, those who are informed on the latest 

 chemical developments in the line of medicine tell me that 

 the active principle is formaldehyde, and that formalin is a 

 preparation of formaldehyde (patented, I believe), with the 

 object of fixing it in solid form. They say that formalde- 

 hyde, in its ordinary liquid form — which I believe consists 

 of the gas dissolved in water — is not only cheaper, but for 

 many purposes, and probably for ours, is better. 



In the enthusiasm over the results that seem to have 

 been obtained, let it not be forgotten that all that can be 

 claimed for it is that it obviates the necessity of destroying 

 infected combs. As the apparatus needed for effective 

 work appears to be somewhat expensive, and as we can 

 recover very nearly all the value of old combs by melting 

 them up into wax, it would appear that the margin of profit 

 is not sufficient to warrant the use of the method unless 

 there are a great many cases to be disposed of, or unless it 

 is to be used as a preventive measure. For instance, if a 

 man has a large number of extracting-combs from which he 

 has just extracted the honey, he learns that some of the 

 combs have contained infected honey. He does not know 

 which they are, and, even if he did, the progress of extract- 

 ing has doubtless spread the seeds of the disease through a 

 large number of the combs. Without some efficient system 

 of disinfection, it would pay him better to destroy the whole 

 lot than to try to use them again. 



Here is where the value of the fumigating method 

 comes in. It might pay the man who lives where foul 

 brood is prevalent to make a tight room large enough to 

 hold all his surplus combs, and fumigate them all at one 

 operation as a precautionary measure. But to go to almost 

 as much expense and trouble to disinfect a single hive full 

 of combs at a time, looks to me like being " penny wise and 

 pound foolish." Mesa Co., Colo. 



Forced or Artificial Swarming. 



BY M. D. ANDES. 



I HAVE just read Mr. C. Davenport's article on page 374, 

 on forced or artificial swarming. While I agree with him 

 that locality has much to do with the method that would 

 secure the best results, I believe Mr. Davenport is wrong 

 on some points. Without going into details I will simply 

 give my method, and the reader can see wherein we differ. 



I do not profess to be a bee-master, and am a very poor 

 writer, but I have had some experience outside of text-books 

 that has been worth many dollars to me in surplus honey 

 and time saved. 



I keep from 35 to 40 colonies of bees in 10- frame dove- 

 tailed hives, with Danz. supers for comb honey. 



My business requires my time at the office ten hours a 

 day, so I have but little time to be with the bees. Ten years 

 ago I commenced clipping the wings of my queens, and 

 ever since bee-keeping has been a pleasure. 



Now, when a swarm issues my wife or the hired girl 

 cages the queen, and when the swarm returns (which it will 

 be sure to do) the queen is run in with the bees, and the 

 hive marked. The same evening, when I get home, I remove 

 the colony to one side and put a new hive filled with drawn 

 comb or full sheets of foundation on the old stand, shake 

 and brush all the bees in front of this prepared hive on a 

 sheet or table-cloth, and let them go in like a natural 

 swarm. 



With all my experience I have never had but one to 

 swarm out treated in this way. By this method I do not 

 disturb colonies that are not inclined to swarm, and they 

 go on unmolested and store honey. 



By the plan advocated by Mr. Davenport and others, 

 one must be continually looking for queen-cells, thereby 

 disturbing the bees, and, no doubt, at a loss in the surplus 

 honey. d^ — / 



You may ask what I do with the brood. If I am treat- 

 ing a colony with a superior queen, I make nuclei and rear 

 some fine queens, otherwise I destroy all queen-cells and 

 place the brood on top of the weakest colony in the yard 

 with a queen-excluder between ; or, if this colony should 

 have a poor queen or an old one, I save the best looking 

 cell, kill the old queen, and leave out the excluder. This 

 will usually give me a good, strong colony with a young 



