292 



THE BEE KEEPERS' REVIEW, 



.should be produced by the bee-keeper who 

 is a bee-keeper and it is'a mistake to use a 

 large hive for the former or a small one for 

 the latter. Using full sheets of foundation 

 in the sections, or brood frames without 

 them are both mistakes. Honey can be 

 ripened artificially, but it is a mistake to do 

 so. Extracting from the brood frames is a 

 mistake, as the pollen is thrown out, injur- 

 ing the flavor and color of the honey, be- 

 sides giving it a tendency to sour. For 

 this reason it is a mistake not to use perfo- 

 rated zinc to keep the queen out of the super. 

 In liquefying honey it should not go above 

 150°, neither should it be left unsealed to lose 

 its aroma. It is an unpardonable mistake 

 to put upon the market any kind of honey 

 that is unripe, untidy or unclean. To get 

 foul brood into the apiary by neglience is a 

 big mistake and to try to hide it is another 

 mistake. Bee-keepers, and others who are 

 not bee-keepers, make a mistake when they 

 stand and fight beligerent bees, knocking 

 their hats to pieces. The proper course is 

 to make off instanter, with the hat well 

 down and the hands over the most tender 

 parts of the face, and enter the nearest 

 building, or some cover. To stand and 

 fight near a hive is to have re-inforcements 

 pour in. The bee-keeper should be pre- 

 pared, with smoke, veil, and even gloves, to 

 stand his ground in such emergencies. 



Bee Journals make the mistake of shut- 

 ting down on discussion just as it becomes 

 interesting to their readers — just as the 

 sparks of truth and light begin to fly from 

 the friction of mind and the clash of 

 thought, in short, just as the " fur begins 

 to fly. " They also make the mistake of 

 soft-soaping this " brother " and gushing 

 over that friend, and then " sitting down " 

 on the other fellow, and denying him a 

 hearing. Mr. Pringle would like to see 

 them with a little more editorial courage 

 and independence, and with less provincial- 

 ism and less fear of Mrs. Grundy. With one 

 or two exceptions they seem to fear to criti- 

 cise one another. When an editor allows 

 his own whims and prejudices toinfluence 

 him as an editor, he makes a mistake, as he 

 does when he draws his quill through sen- 

 tences which do not suit him in the man- 

 uscript of a correspondent who is responsi- 

 ble for his own utterances, and who prob- 

 ably knows, as well as the editor, what he 

 ought to say in the premises. On the whole, 

 the journals are doing excellent work and 



some of them are giving treble value to the 

 ordinary bee-keeper for his money. 



Legislation for Bee-Keepers was the 

 title of a paper read by Mr. R. McKnight of 

 Owen Sound, Oat. He referred to the 

 Michigan law prohibiting the keeping of 

 bees nearer than ninety feet of the highway 

 and called attention to its lack of the neces- 

 sary requirements to fit the case. Bees kept 

 ninety feet from the highway with no barrier 

 between them and the highway are a great- 

 er menace to passersby than those but nine 

 feet away with a hedge or high fence along 

 the margin of the highway. He then quoted 

 in full an old law of Ontario regarding the 

 right of property in bees. Wild bees belong 

 to whoever finds them. A swarm belongs to 

 the owner so long as he can prove his right 

 of ownership, and he can go after them 

 wherever they may settle but he must com- 

 pensate the owner of the land for any dam- 

 age done. If the owner gives up following 

 a swarm and some other person undertakes 

 the pursuit, such other person has then 

 the same rights as the original owner. A 

 gwarm not followed becomes the property of 

 the owner of the land upon which it settles. 

 Quite a little space was given to a reviewing 

 of the foul brood law. The principal fault 

 that the essayist had to find with this law 

 was the unlimited power placed in the hands 

 of the inspector. He has power to say 

 whether an apiary is infected with virulent 

 foul brood, whether it shall be destroyed by 

 fire or whether the owner shall have an op- 

 portunity of curing it. He thought that this 

 placed too much power in the hands of one 

 man. The law allows the Ontario Bee- 

 Keepers' Association to make rules govern- 

 ing the conduct of the inspector but noth- 

 ing has been done in this direction. The 

 law has been in force five years, and has re- 

 sulted in much good, but Mr. McKnight be 

 lieved this was largely due to the fact that 

 the present inspector had combined the work 

 of a doctor ( of foul brood ) with that of in- 

 spector. An unscrupulous or vindictive man 

 might do a great injustice in his official ca- 

 pacity, and there ought to be a disinterested 

 third party to whom an appeal could be 

 made and whose decision should be final. 

 The ipse dixet of one man should not be 

 deemed sufficient to warrant the destruction 

 of another man's property. The bill pro- 

 hibiting the spraying of fruit trees while in 

 bloom may protect from the hands of igno- 

 rant fruitgrowers, but well informed orchar- 



