596 AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



wonder if there is a hitch somewhere. Possibly there would be a slightly greater 

 amount of sealed honey at the top of the frames to make the bees unwilling to enter 

 the sections. Still, that would contradict Mr. Frazier's assertion of as great per- 

 centage of brood. It would pay to look into this. Some points might be brought 

 out which would tend to clear up that perpetual mystery wbich is worrying Dr. 

 Miller — why ihey should get big crops down at Hamilton. Then, too, it might set- 

 tle the vexed question of "section honey " in the side frames. There would be no 

 reason for grudging a 10-frame colony 10 pounds of white honey in the side combs 

 of the brood-chamber, any more than to grudge 8 pounds to an 8-frame colony, if 

 the former had reared a correspondingly larger amount of brood, which would put 

 50 pounds of surplus above instead of 40. 



It is only fair to mention that the Heddon hive fulfills the condition of 8-frame 

 width with 10-frame capacity ; and those who run big apiaries, and who handle 

 hives instead of frames, need look no further ; but there are some of us (and I 

 think there always will be) who prefer to handle frames instead of hives ; and 8 

 frames, in one story, are certainly easier to handle than 16 frames in two stories. 



But, for the present, let us imagine that Mr. Frazier will be proved to be cor- 

 rect. What follows? That the Langstroth frame should be superseded by a 

 deeper one. 



Three objections may be urged : Deeper frames could not be so easily handled ; 

 deeper frames would not be interchangeable with extracting frames, or if they were, 

 the latter would be too large ; deeper frames would not be the standard size. The 

 first two sufficiently account for the prevalence of the Langstroth over the Quinby 

 size, without supposing that there is something mysteriously superior about it. 



Answers: — 1st. I have tussled with Dadant frames of the ordinary hanging 

 type, and want no more of them. But we are getting smarter now, and may get 

 smarter yet. I don't think this objection would amount to much if the frames were 

 the latest style Hoffman (they would have to be wired, of course) ; and I know it 

 would not if they were Aspinwall frames, as I have had an Aspinwall deep-frame 

 hive on trial this season, and taken solid comfort in it. (Closed-end frames, too; — 

 take notice. Dr. Miller.) Incidentally, it may be noticed that the Aspinwall hive 

 may be contracted without division-boards or dummies — one objection to 10-frame 

 Langstroth hives. 



2nd. The greatest good to the greatest numbers: most '^of us produce comb 

 honey; and quite a respectable array of authorities favor shallow frames for ex- 

 tracting supers. 



3rd. This is indeed a terrible objection to encounter. I may be annihilated, 

 but I will try it. In the first place, is not the length and width of the chambers of 

 more importance in preserving the standard than the depth of the frame? Then, 

 though it might not pay to make it even a minor change like this all at once, or to 

 make a change at all if we have all the hives we want already, that ought not to 

 stand in the way of future perfection. If we cannot do what we think best now, 

 suppose we imagine what it may be possible to do a hundred years from now, and 

 begin to work toward it. To cling to a standard because it is a standard, though it 

 may be a strong argument, is never a sufficient one. Looking at it from that point 

 of view — considering what is absolutely best — it seems useless to try to settle on one 

 depth of frame. There ought to be two— shallow and deep— because each has 

 advantages which the other has not. Some one has said that the Langstroth is a 

 happy medium between shallow and deep frames. If a medium always retained the 

 advantages of the extremes, that would close the argument. In this case it does 

 not, and would do so still less if what Mr. Frazier says is true. 



The cubical contents of hives has been the bone of contention hitherto ; now let 



