220 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Apr. 15 



regulations for the enforcement of the act, notice is given that on 

 the 12th day of October, 1908, in the District Court of the Unit- 

 ed States for the District of Utah, in a proceeding of libel for 

 seizure ana condemnation of 1240 cases of canned corn, each 

 case labeled and branded " 2 Doz. 2 lbs. Sweet Corn, Audubon 

 Canning Co., Audubon, Iowa," wherein the United States was 

 libelant and Fred J. Kiesel Company, a corporation, was con- 

 signee and claimant, the said claimant having elected not to ans- 

 wer, and the case having come on for a hearing, the court ad- 

 judged the goods misbranded, and ordered that they be redeliv- 

 ered to the claimant upon the filing by it of a good and sufficient 

 bond in accordance with the provisions of section 10 of the act. 



The goods were misbranded when received by the Fred J. 

 Kiesel Company in interstate commerce, in violation of section 

 8 of the aforesaid act, for that the brand on each case represented 

 the contents thereof to be 2 dozen 2-pound cans of corn, whereas 

 in fact the cans contained less than 2 pounds. 

 The facts in the case were as follows: 



On or about September 19, 1908, an inspector of the Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture located in the possession of the Fred J. Kie- 

 sel Company, a corporation, Ogden, Utah, 960 cases, each con- 

 taining 24 cans of coin, which were a part of 1240 cases con- 

 signed to it by the Audubon Canning Company, of Audubon, 

 Iowa, and received by it on or about the 15lh day of August, 

 1908. The said 960 cases of corn were marked and branded " 2 

 Doz. 2 lbs. Sweet Corn, Audubon Canning Co.. Audubon, la." 

 An examination of a number of the cans of corn made by the in- 

 spector showed the combined weight of can and contents to be 

 not over 24 ounces avoirdupois. On September 22, 1908, the 

 facts were reported by the Secretary of Agriculture to the United 

 States attorney for the district of Utah, and libel for seizure and 

 condemnation was duly filed with the result hereinbefore stated. 

 H. W. Wiley, 

 f. l. dunlap, 

 Geo. p. McCabe, 

 Board of Food and Drug Inspection. 



It is not necessary to state the exact weight of 

 a package of honey; but if such weight is men- 

 tioned on the label or blown in the glass, the 

 vender of the article will be likely to get into 

 trouble with Uncle Sam if the contents do not 

 come up to the weights specified. 



SHUTTING BEES IN THE HIVE WHILE IN THE CEL- 

 LAR; THE HIRSHISER PRINCIPLE TESTED AT 



\v. z. hutchinso.n's. 



Up to a few years ago it has been good ortho- 

 dox teaching to say that bees while in the cellar 

 must not be confined in the hives. Three or four 

 years ago Mr. O. L. Hershiser brought out a spe- 

 cial bottom-board having a rim some four or five 

 inches deep, wtih wire screen at the sides. This 

 special bottom was so made that when applied to 

 the hives the bees could be shut in, at the option 

 of the user, either for moving on a wagon to out- 

 yards or for wintering in a cellar. When we 

 first examined the principle it seemed to us as if 

 this might work since so much space was left un- 

 der the frames; so two > ears ago we put our whole 

 150 colonies on rims embodying this principle 

 with side ventilation, feeling sure that it was all 

 right, and that any laees that might fly out and 

 die would be confined within the hives, leaving 

 the cellar itself, especially the floor, free of any 

 of the dead carcases from the hive 



Our older readers will remember that the ex- 

 periment was disastrous — that we lost a large per- 

 centage of the colonies; and those that did survive, 

 when set out on their summer stands were so weak 

 that they either died outright or were practically 

 worthless for the entire season. See Gleanings, 

 page 556, Apiil 15, 1907. 



It appears that Mr. W. Z. Hutchinson, of the 

 Bee-keepers' Kenjieiv, some time ago criticised the 

 Hershiser bottom-board as a " harmless inven- 

 tion," but the deep space under the frames with 

 copious ventilation apparently did appeal to him 

 as good for moving bees. At all events, he had 



occasion to move some bees quite a distance be- 

 fore he could put them in a cellar; and to prevent 

 them from flying out while being hauled, a half- 

 depth body was put under each hive, having a 

 wire-cloth screen tacked on the bottom, thus em- 

 bodying in a measure the Hershiser principle. 

 In the mean time it turned warm, and the bees 

 became uneasy. However, the noisy bees were 

 put in the cellar just the same, where they con- 

 tinued to "roar" until the weather turned cold. 

 Mr. Hutchinson thought this would do no harm; 

 but Mr. J. L. Byer, in the American Bee Journal, 

 in commenting on this procedure, expressed the 

 conviction that something serious might follow. 

 The sequel showed that the bees did not winter 

 well. 



Mr Hutchinson, as the winter wore on, found 

 that, if hedid notput those roaringbees out early, 

 he would lose practically all of them. Fortunate- 

 ly afier being set out the weather was not cold, 

 and the bets recovced to a great extent, so the 

 loss was only about 25 per cent; but he thinks 

 that if the bees had been left in the cellar, say 

 until the first of April, very few of the colonies 

 would have remained alive. 



While the losses did not prove to be very seri- 

 ous, it was sufficient to make Mr. Hutchinson 

 feel cautious in the future in regard to the advis- 

 ability of fastening bees in the hive. Whether 

 the disturbance incident to putting the bees in 

 the cellar in the first place was directly or indi- 

 rectly responsible for the result, Mr. Hutchinson 

 does not say, but he does say, "While I do not 

 know it to be a fact, I believe that, if the bees 

 had not been fastened in, the uneasy bees would 

 have left the hive and died on the cellar bottom, 

 and the colonies free from this disturbing element 

 would have become comparatively quiet. " That 

 would be our opinion based on our experience at 

 Medina. 



Apparently Mr. Hershiser is or was getting 

 good results from his indoor wintering, using 

 this shut-in principle. Indeed, we visited his cel- 

 lar some two or three winters ago, and found the 

 bees in fine condition, with scarcely a dead bee 

 on the hive bottoms. But he had ideal condi- 

 tions — a good circulation of air, and a bone-dry 

 cellar with cement bottom. The furnace drew 

 the air from the cellar, carried it up through t^e 

 house, then on being cooled drew it back to the 

 cellar. This necessarily modified the tempera- 

 ture, and at the same time gave a good circula- 

 tion, and good air; for the upstairs rooms were be- 

 ing ventilated often. 



SHALL WE exploit "NLY THE TRUE AND TRIED 



OR GIVE SOME NEW IDEAS A CHANCE.? THE 



BEARING OF LOCALITY. 



We understand that at the late Philadelphia 

 convention the bee-papers (Gleanings among 

 the rest) received some criticism because they 

 published some swarming methods that have not 

 been thoroughly tested out. While we publish 

 some methods that we know are a proved success 

 when the environments and the man who makes 

 the experiment are taken into consideration, we 

 also publish some other methods on which we do 

 not place our indorsement, but which we give 

 for the purpose of drawing out discussion. Over 

 and over again we have spread before the bee- 



