April 12, 1900. 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



227 



very populous in bees, of all ages, with honey and pollen 

 coming- in from the fields, enough to supply their wants. 

 Of course, this honey and pollen part can be supplied by 

 the apiarist, if deficient in nature ; but the populous in bees 

 part can not possibly obtain with a divided colony." 



If I understand that correctly, it means not only that a 

 good queen can not be reared in less than a full colony of 

 bees, but that the colony must be "very populous in bees." 

 I can hardly say that I am glad to know the requirements 

 are so exacting, but I am very glad to be left no longer in 

 doubt. If I have been correct in interpreting Mr. Doolittle, 

 he has changed his views in the past 12 months — a thing we 

 must all do occasionally if we are to make any progress. 



The important thing about the matter, sufficiently im- 

 portant to be worth while to take up several pages of this 

 bee-journal with it, is to have it clearly and emphatically 

 known that no nucleus will do to rear queen-cells ; or, to 

 put it in the words of Mr. Doolittle, that ''good queens are 

 reared only in a colony very populous in bees." For if it 

 should be believed that a quart of bees is just as good as a 

 strong colony to rear queen-cells, there are thousands who 

 would rear queens in nuclei, and thousands upon thousands 

 of dollars would thus be lost in the honey-crop by means of 

 poor queens. If we are to have the best in the line of 

 queens, I believe it can hardly be emphasized too strongly, 

 that up to the time queen-cells are sealed they must be in 

 full colonies. From that time on I do not feel so sure about, 

 but I think that a nucleus of good strength will be all right 

 after the cell is sealed. McHenry Co., III. 



The Marks Frame and the Case Feeder. 



BY F. GREINKR. 



WITHOUT fear of contradiction I am safe in saying 

 that the physical make-up of man is such that no 

 two persons can be found among the many millions, 

 that represent another in every particular, altho all are 

 built on the same general plan by the Creator. The nose is 

 centrally located in every face, and the other organs bear 

 the same relationship to the nose, are groupt around it the 

 same in one person as in the other, etc. What is true in 

 the physical make-up is also true in the spiritual and intel- 

 lectual. And that is the reason why we do not all of us see 

 all things alike ; why we so often disagree on the things 

 relating to our pursuit ; why one man rides this hobby, 

 another a different one ; why the deep frame meets the re- 

 quirements of one, the shallow frame the ideas of another, 

 etc. Just so long as we live this state of affairs will remain, 

 and the bee-keepers will continue to fix, and change, and 

 remodel, and improve. 



If I now attempt to say a few words about a new brood- 

 frame and a new bee-feeder, it is with that thought, to per- 

 haps meet the requirements of some one who is still seek- 

 ing for something better, or at least for something to suit 

 him better ; for changes are not always improvements. 



The Marks frame is not an entirely new thing — it was 

 even mentioned and illustrated in Gleanings in Bee-Culture 

 a year or two ago. However, a good thing has many a 

 time to be pusht and brought before the public again and 

 again before it is recognized as such. 



The spacers of the above frame are simple pieces of yi 

 or li inch hoop-iron about two inches long. They are in- 

 serted at the upper ends of the end-bars into properly cut 

 saw-kerfs, in imitation of the Hofi^man frame. Mr. Marks' 

 idea is to place both spacers on one and the same side of 

 the frame. It is plain that the Marks frame with the 

 spacers thus arranged must not be used reverst, but must 

 be placed spacers against the flat side of the next frame. 

 On this account it has been criticised. But, really, is this 

 a serious disadvantage ? 



In discussing the merits of this frame with a number 

 of bee-keepers of our county, one of them said : " ■Wh3', 

 with that frame one can not possibly get it into a hive the 

 wrong way." Another one of those present took the oppo- 

 site view. 



The fact seems to be tlie Mark^ frame may be put in 

 wrong side to, but no one with any eyes at all ivould put it 

 in wrong. With the swinging frame — the Hoffman or any 

 other frame — in returning combs to a hive it may occur 

 that we are uncertain as to which way they had been in the 

 hive ; we may make a mistake and get one wrong. We do 

 not find this out until we have tried. The frame must then 

 be taken out again and reverst, for no frame, when once 

 matcht in, fits exactly in any other place. I confess I have 

 occasionally had some trouble in this direction. With the 

 Marks metal-spaced frame this would not have happened. 



. However, if any one should like the Marks spacer, and 

 not the other feature of the frame, there would be nothing 

 to hinder changing one spacer over to the other side of the 

 frame. But from what experience I have had with any of 

 the self-spacing frames, I would to-day rather have the 

 spacers on one side than otherwise. We do not nowadays 

 manipulate the frames very much, and when we do, we 

 want to return them in the order they came out, at least in 

 nine cases out of ten, so what's the difference ? 



FEEDERS AND FEEDING. 



In localities where the surplus is gathered mostly from 

 white clover, the practical bee-keeper finds stimulative feed- 

 ing early in the season of great advantage. Such feeding 

 has to be done every day, and in small doses, and the feeder 

 that admits this kind of feeding without opening hives and 

 disturbing bees, it would seem, would at once find favor 

 among bee-keepers. I herewith present a drawing of such 



a feeder as has been in use here among the bee-keepers in 

 the eastern part of this county (Ontario) for a good many 

 years. As I do not know who the inventor is, I will name 

 it the " Case Feeder," as Mr. H. L. Case explained its work- 

 ings before the Ontario County Bee-Keepers' convention a 

 short time ago. 



The drawing almost explains itself. The feeder is a 

 shallow tin box about four inches in diameter. The bottom 

 is removable and perforated. The long spout is to reach 

 clear to the outside of the hive, and the feeder may be filled 

 ■without opening the hive or disturbing the bees. It is a 

 time-saver. 



As Mr. Case says, just go thru a large bee-yard and 

 take all the covers of the hives off and put them back on. 

 Do that with 100 hives, and you will find it quite a job, es- 

 pecially with clumsy chaff hives. This feeder is tuckt 

 away under the cushion immediately over the cluster of 

 bees, the spout running to the outside, either at the rear or 

 side of the hive. The filling is done by the help of a little 

 funnel with an elbow to it. As soon as the feed is poured 

 in, the spout must be closed with a tight-fitting cork. There 

 is but little work connected with this kind of feeding, and 

 no heat is lost opening hives. Ontario Co., N. Y. 



% 



Reversible Frames, Beeswax, Etc. 



BY G. M. DOOI,ITTI,E. 



A CORRESPONDENT writes : " I have been reading 

 up some old bee-literature, and in it I find quite a little 

 about reversible frames. Are they something of value ? 

 If so, I shall desire to make some before the swarming sea- 

 son opens. Please tell us something about them in the 

 American Bee Journal." 



Answer. — Reversible frames were one of the disputed 

 questions of the past, they having quite an extended airing 

 some 12 to 15 years ago. Very many of our most prominent 

 bee-keepers gave them a very thoro trial, but so far as I 

 know there is not an apiarist of any prominence using 

 them to-day ; or, if any such are using them, they do not 

 consider them of enough value to say anything about them 

 in bee-literature now. 



The main thought and object for which they were 

 brought into existence was that of compelling the bees to 

 store all of their honey in the sections, by reversing the 

 frames as often as the bees lengthened out the cells along 

 the top-bars of the frames and filled them with honey. By 

 thus placing this honey in an unnatural position it caused 

 the bees to remove it, and as there was now brood in the 

 upper part of the frames, the bees would be constrained to 

 store this removed honey in the sections. 



At first sight this theory looks very nice, but when it 

 was put into practice it was found the bees did not " think " 

 as did the theorist, and colonies so workt accumulated no 

 more in the sections than did others that were let alone, 

 while at the end of the season the colonies let alone showed 



