128 



April, 1914. 



American ~Ree Journal 



testines the bacilli of diphtheria, of 

 tuberculosis, of typhoid fever, for in- 

 stance, and that in spite of this, we are 

 not attacked by these various diseases. 

 But let Qur farces of resistance weaken 

 some day, one of these microbes may 

 begin to multiply in predominancy over 

 the others, become aggressive and 

 complete the ruin of the partly de- 

 crepit organism, before real infection 

 appears. The microbe then passes 

 from the state of latent and unimpor- 

 tant parasite to the state of infection; 

 in such a case they say that from 

 safirop/iyte it has become palhogcne. 

 But the infection which has become 

 unlatched is really only tlie result of 

 a primitive condition of organic deca- 

 dence. The microbes live, therefore, 

 upon the deterioration of the beingi as 

 moss and rottenness grow upon old 

 trees already half dead. 



This fact that the microbes of most 

 of the infectious diseases exist every- 

 where in Nature explains how foul- 

 jjrood epidemics may arise suddenly 

 in spots where none had been noticed 

 before. There was no need of bring- 

 ing the germs from far away; they 

 were already there from a long time, 

 and they awakened from their sleep 

 only because they found favorable con- 

 ditions to multiply upon bee agglomer- 

 ations existing in a condition of least 

 resistance. 



The diverse varieties of foulbrood 

 are therefore not essentially diflrerent 

 within themselves, since they only ex- 

 press the development of local races 

 of bacilli. Thus foulbrood, in spite of 

 the bacteriological dissimilarity of 

 races, is essentially a unit. And this 

 unity is due to its being derived from a 

 similar initial weakness of the vital 

 forces of colonies of bees. 



Must we set aside entirely the reme- 

 dies which are solely anti-contagious 

 and antiseptic, to preserve our bees 

 from foulbrood ? I think so and this 

 is why. An example taken from human 

 medicine will demonstrate it clearly. 

 Thanks to bacteriological science and 

 to anti-microbal preservation measures 

 taken the past 30 years, they have suc- 

 ceeded in restraining the seats of great 

 epidemics: cholera, typhus, plague, 

 dysentery, etc. They have also consid- 

 erably diminished the number of cases 

 of mild infections: measles, scarlatina, 

 diphtheria, etc. But when we con- 

 sider the matter closely and figure it 

 up, what have we gained ? We have 

 prevented Nature from accomplishing 

 her work of selection, which suppresses 

 degenerate individuals through acute 

 diseases. 



But this law of natural selection is 

 an ineluctable necessity; we cannot in 

 any way avoid it. Unable to express 

 itself by the method of acute diseases, 

 it accomplishes its work under another 

 shape, that of chronic diseases and in- 

 fections. And, in fact, since mankind 

 has preserved itself from acute infec- 

 tions, it has become the prey of de- 

 generescence, insanity and chronic in- 

 fections: tuberculosis and cancer, 

 >yhich, at present, decimate the civi- 

 lized centers and increase in a very 

 alarming and accelerated way. 



We have thus gained nothing by the 

 change and the unnatural measures 

 that we have taken have turned against 

 us. since they have permitted a host of 



debilitated beings to remain in action 

 and impede the progress of the race by 

 their unhealthy presence, and by the 

 tainted offspring which they produce. 



Taking again the analogy with bees, 

 we thus see that if we should succeed 

 in efficaciously combating foulbrood 

 with anti-microbal measures alone, we 

 might preserve our bees almost com- 

 pletely, but we would give rise to other 

 diseases, acute or chronic, which would 

 arise to accomplish the inevitable work 

 of natural selection. 



The question therefore demands to 

 be taken from another angle. We must, 

 first, seek the causes of degenerescence 

 of the races of bees, the motives of the 

 weakening of the vital forces of colo- 

 nies ; that will be the best means to 

 secure them against destructive epi- 

 demics. 



What are the principal causes of 

 vital weakness that may be observed 

 among bees? There maybe first the 



Dr. Carton. 



lack of care and food, in the case of 

 old abandoned apiaries. We will not 

 discuss this ; it is too well known. But 

 for the large apiaries so well cared for, 

 where is the danger hidden? To my 

 mind, it comes from two preponderant 

 causes. First, alimentation with indus- 

 trial sugar, by feeding either in spring 

 or winter. This food is anti-physio- 

 logic, I have already demonstrated it 

 in the case of man (Les trois aliments 

 meurtriers.— P. Carton, Maloine, Paris, 

 1 f, 25), and it is a very important cause 

 of the digestive disorders which lead 

 to the worst diseases. It is in fact a 

 chemical product, devitalized and irri- 

 tating, since it is not associated with 

 diastase, with mineral matters and liv- 

 ing energy, like natural sugar contained 

 in fruits or honey. The danger of ali- 

 mentation with artificial sugar is at the 

 present day too much disregarded, as 

 well by doctors as by beekeepers. On 

 either side it will be well to think of it 

 at length and palliate the danger with- 

 in all possible limits. We should be 

 less rapacious towards our bees ; limit 

 their yield; avoid weakening them by 

 uncalled for feeding not in accordance 

 with Nature; not take away from the 

 bees the greatest part of thi-ir supplies. 



and, in case of necessity, feed with 

 honey kept in reserve, or exceptionally 

 with sugar half mixed with honey, to 

 lessen its noxiousness. 



There might be much to say also 

 against the intensive and artificial rear- 

 ing of queens. This artificial selection 

 is probably not equal to natural selec- 

 tion. The example of our finest races 

 of domestic animals, selected by the 

 hand of man, is there to prove it. Our 

 finest bulls never have the force of re- 

 sistance to tempestuous weather and 

 to diseases that is shown by wild cattle. 

 To terminate, I will give one more 

 argument in favor of this opinion that 

 foulbrood is due more to a weakness 

 of the organism of the bee than to a 

 microbal contagion. It will be fur- 

 nished to me by the fact that the best 

 treatment of foulbrood, recommended 

 up to this time, is without doubt that 

 whicli has to do almost exclusively 

 with the conditions of the colony and 

 but little with the fight against microbes. 

 In fact, the transferring upon frames 

 simply supplied with foundation and 

 placed in a clean hive body, acts first 

 by giving resistance to the colony, be- 

 cause it places it in the beneficial vital 

 excitement which characterizes natural 

 swarms at the time of hiving. It also 

 acts as a renovator of their organisms 

 by the salutary fasting which it deter- 

 mines. When man applies this pro- 

 cess, he does a useful work, for he 

 imitates the natural processes of reno- 

 vation, by causing an artificial revolu- 

 tion, which is analogous to a diet and 

 to the commotion which would be 

 caused by spontaneous disease. 



On the other hand, this treatment 

 has but little to do with microbes, since 

 the transferred bees retain within 

 themselves and upon themselves in- 

 fectious germs which again become 

 silent when the colony is again placed 

 in needed conditions of vital renova- 

 tion. 



As a practical conclusion, iet it be 

 understood that we must not at any 

 time abandon measures of supervision 

 and cleanliness, because we are never 

 entirely certain that the power of re- 

 sistance of our bees is complete. But 

 we must bear in mind, above all things, 

 that the preventive treatment of foul- 

 brood must consist principally in meth- 

 ods of breeding, of cultivation and of 

 nourishment inspired by natural laws, 

 just as curing methods must be under- 

 taken more as a work of renovation of 

 the colonies by transferring than as an 

 anti-microbal fight. 



Soft Sugar for Baby Nuclei 



BY C. .S. ENGLE. 



MR. ARTHUR C. MILLER caused 

 quite a little stir among the bee- 

 keepers when he reported that 

 he had successfully fed damp sugar to 

 colonies of bees that were short of 

 stores. When I came across his arti- 

 cle it "listened " good to me, so I de- 

 cided to try it. 



Here at home I always keep a few 

 colonies for breeding queens and to 

 build cells. I mate queens in nuclei, 

 and have either used feeders in mat- 

 ing boxes, in which I fed sugar syrup 

 or kept the boxes supplied with combs 

 of honev. After I read Mr. Miller's 



