I 



1896. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



371 



scum on the water. I then took the bag out and put it under 

 the pressure of my own weight, and squeezed out l-i poiind of 

 wax — wax that was blacker than any I ever saw in the dark- 

 est brood-foundation. A few years ago I tried a similar plan 

 on a lot of refuse, and got about 10 per cent, more wax that 

 was quite dark, but in this case the solar work was rushed 

 through, and the stuff not left to drain as it should, for I 

 knew I was going to treat it again, and I wanted to get the 

 wax out as quickly as possible. I suppose in the last 15 years 

 I have produced 3,000 or 4,000 pounds of wax, the most of 

 It going through the solar. 



Another important point is the honey saved. Here and 

 there are bits of candied honey, covered cells and bits that 

 usually would be unnoticed, yet turn out quite a lot of honey 

 that is saved for feeding. No care is needed in picking out 

 patches of honey, for it will not be lost in the solar, but would 

 be by the water method. I always accumulate from the solar 

 more honey than wax. I always put a little water into the 

 pan, for the evaporation would make the honey into taffy — 

 too thick to pour. 



The first mistake with apiarists is to make their solar wax- 

 extractor too small. The next mistake is to make the box and 

 sash of wood. Wood will not stand the extremes of heat, wet 

 and dry. The putty will loosen and cracks open. I have a 

 sash part wood and part iron. The iron stays all right, but 

 the wood part is always more or less loose. The walls are of 

 brick built upon the ground, and the inner parts of tin. It is 

 6 feet square, and fronts south. Were I to build again, I 

 would make it longer east and west, or, what I think still 

 better, build with the corners pointing north, east, west and 

 south, making a hip roof with a southeast and southwest 

 slope, and so get the sun all day. Large glass is not neces- 

 sary. I have glass in mine that is not over 4 inches by 16. I 

 use straight-edge glass and oil the joints, the glass butted — 

 not lapped. 



A large solar will also serve as a liquefying concern. Once 

 in the month of March I liquefled a thousand pounds in two 

 days. The honey was in three and five pound lard-pails, and 

 all put in at one time. Fire was used beneath in this case, 

 but where the cans of honey are spread over the solar so that 

 the sun shines on each pail or can direct, the sun alone will 

 do the work, any ordinary clear summer day. 



Should I continue to produce extracted honey, and have 

 to liquefy the same, I would not do it with water or steam. 

 An appliance for the use of hot air — much on the plan of an 

 oven — will do the work just as well, and much cheaper, and 

 any kind of a vessel can be put iu. I have been using pails 

 lacquered and stenciled, and it is no little satisfaction to be 

 able to melt honey right in the pails when it has become can- 

 died in them. To set these pails in water would spoil the 

 paint and lettering, but the dry hot air does no damage what- 

 ever. Loveland, Colo. 



Plaatiug for Honey Aloae — Lindens. 



nY B. S. EUSSELL. 



In reply to Dr. Miller (see page 486, of the Bee Journal 

 for 1895) on the above topic, I would say that he demands 

 the proof that it will pay, and admits that he may have been 

 led astray in joining the crusade against planting for honey, 

 or making any effort to perpetuate or improve our great 

 honey-plants. He says he is ready to recant, provided the 

 proofs ars given that he is wrong. Now, it seems to me we 

 should have some evidence to prove that the Creator of the 

 bee did not understand the proper food required for its sus- 

 tenance before admitting so mischievous a theory to con- 

 troversy. 



Who will come forward and prove that it will not pay to 

 plant 'or honey alone ? I wish to see this evidence. Let's 



see. The field of this locality contains at least 100 square 

 miles for 100 colonies, and is growing larger as the flora 

 decreases. This decrease has been so rapid in the last 40 

 years as to be utterly beyond computation, yet it is safe to 

 say that for each acre of this field sown to honey-plants, 

 1,000 have been rendered as barren as any desert for honey. 

 And for each honey-producing tree planted in the field, more 

 than 1,000 of the very finest have been destroyed. Our 

 honey industry has kept in line with the general destruction 

 of the native flora, and the result is now visible to our people. 



In this once famous honey-belt where dearths were un- 

 known, with its countless numbers of prosperous colonies in 

 skeps, boxes and logs of all sizes and varieties, and the hollow 

 trees breaking down with their loads of honey, and bees on a 

 parity with gold and silver, may now be seen a lot of old pat- 

 ent hives of all kinds piled up in fence-corners, with now and 

 then a diminutive colony labeled "For Sale," or trade, and, 

 like the poor tramp, they are looking for a job. 



But with this great object lesson before our eyes, who is 

 there yet to still declare that it will not pay to plant for 

 honey, for they have tried it 1 How many square miles of 

 honey-plants has he placed in the field to substitute for the 

 thousands of acres of corn, wheat, oats, potatoes, rye, barley, 

 timothy, blue-grass, sorghum and tobacco raised in his field 

 annually ? How many lindens, poplars, honey-locusts, sour- 

 woods, willows, etc., did he use in the experiment to substi- 

 tute for the thousands destroyed in his field annually ? How 

 many years were required for the experiment? These are 

 factors that will bring the question to a point. 



It is seen that sowing a few acres in buckwheat, or a 

 small field of clover, or planting a few lindens, is no test what- 

 ever, and the fact remains that we must sow or we cannot 

 reap. 



1 am asked to point to a successful case of planting for 

 honey alone. I answer, the wise Creator gave us a most 

 beautiful example in North America, where each locality was 

 supplied with honey-plants suitable to its latitude before in- 

 troducing the honey-bee, and that he designed they should be 

 perpetuated there can be no doubt, as he supplied each 

 variety with an abundance of seed, so constituted as to admit 

 of almost endless improvement, which, unlike other plants, 

 have been wholly neglected, and are now mostly destroyed, 

 causing most disastrous results to the honey industry. The 

 situation is not only strange, but alarming, as many bee-keep- 

 ers now admit that the goose that layed the golden egg has 

 been killed. 



The Doctor asks, What shall we plant? I answer for our 

 latitude : 



First of all, lindens, for the following reasons : They are 

 long-lived, native trees, very hardy, and originally produced 

 more honey than all other plants and trees combined, and by 

 proper selection of varieties they will give a steady flow for 

 two months, with rare failure. 



2nd. They are the most beautiful shade or ornamental 

 tree on the earth, and require no trimming or pruning; but 

 maintain a most beautiful form until death, when their bodies 

 would again doubly repay the expense for rearing them, aside 

 from the honey and shade. 



Perhaps in other localities some other tree might be more 

 suitable for the purpose. We have 1,000 miles of public 

 roads on each 100 miles square — sufiBcient room for 650,000 

 lindens, or 2,000,000 to each county, or 182,000,000 in our 

 State; and it is thought our Legislature, at its next session, 

 will pass a law compelling all land-owners to plant suitable 

 shade-trees on said roads, and if so, why can we not have the 

 lindens ? Surely we can, if we make proper effort. 



I, for one, am sure that no man need fear a failure of 

 honey with 250,000 nice lindens in reach of his bees. The 

 Indiana State Bee-Keepers' Association, at Its last session, 



