516 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL, 



Aug. 16 1900 



superciliously, pooh-poohs the experience of such authori- 

 ties as Mr. Simmins, suggesting that he has not used the 

 proper kind of foundation in his experiments, or the bees 

 would not have scraped away the side-walls. Is it likely 

 that an expert of Mr. Simmins' standing would make ex- 

 periments with adulterated or inferior material ? This is 

 not very complimentary to Mr. Simmins' intelligence ! Mr. 

 Dadant, while denying that the bees scrape off the side- 

 walls, informs us that they " remodel " them. Will he 

 kindly explain the bees' modus operandi, how they can re- 

 model or reconstruct without first demolishing ? 



Mr. Bevins quotes from "Langstroth Revised " in con- 

 nection with this argument, a passage which reads: "It 

 is a remarkable fact that the bees thin out their foundation 

 to a certain extent and make it considerably deeper out of 

 the same material." So far from opposing my contention, 

 this— like all of Mr. Dadant's statements— goes to confirm 

 it, i. e., to prove that the bees' time and labor are wasted in 

 having to " thin down " the side-walls (as well as the base) 

 by excavating the wax where it is not wanted, and putting 



t where it is wanted, in other words, demolishing and re- 

 constructing — or "remodeling" — for they can no more 

 stretch, pull, or " draw out " the side-walls than the masons 

 can stretch, pull, or "draw out" the stubby wall of 

 cemented bricks three feet wide by two feet high into one a 

 foot thick and six feet high. 



Mr. Bevins quotes yet another passage from " Lang- 

 stroth Revised," viz.: "When foundation has been made 

 with a thin base and a heavy wall the bees draw it out more 



readily into comb." And why ? Simply because they have 

 more SO-cent material on hand to quarry into, but whose 

 intrinsic value is 25 cents only. With all proper respect for 

 Father Langstroth's memory, and with all due respect for 

 the revisers of his work, I maintain that the bees do not 

 " draw out " the walls, and I hereby challenge any one to 

 prove that they do ! South Africa. 



(Concluded next week.) 



Report of the Central Texas Convention. 



BY I,OUIS SCHOI.L. 



(Coutinued from pag'e 502.) 



CHUNK HONEY VS. SECTION HONEY FOR THE SOUTH. 



E. J. Atchley says that both are good. He used to think 

 that section honey was the best and nicest thing, and for 

 manj' years did not produce any other, and advocated the 

 production of comb honey in sections. Of course, section 

 honey is very nice, but he thinks the dollar is nicer. As 

 chunk honey brings more money in the South, there are no 

 more sections for him now. In the first place, he can pro- 

 duce at least one-third more chunk honey in frames, then, 

 when put in cans, it can be shipt at a less freight rate, 

 going as fourth-class. Section honey, in glass-front ship- 

 ping-cases, goes at first-class rate, and at owner's risk ; 

 while honey put up in two 60-pound cans to a case, if dam- 

 aged ^k route, will be .settled for by the railroad companies. 

 This is greatly in favor of comb honey put up in cans, and 

 Mr. Atchley has had enough section honey smasht to bring 

 down the price as low as that of chunk honey. Some ob- 

 ject to such a mess, but are sections ever set on the table ? 

 And when the section is cut, it is just that way, too. If cut 

 out of the section it is chunk honey, too, but nothing like a 



chunk out of a can, with nice honey all over and around it ; 

 and, indeed, there is nothing more inviting when hungry^ 

 and nothing nicer. If everything is favorable to produce 

 section honey, it is all right ; but two supers of chunk honey 

 can be produced to one of section honey. 



O. P. Hyde thought there never was anything nicer 

 than comb honey in one-pound sections, and he was slow 

 about changing his mind, as he was against such a mussy 

 way of putting up honey. Now he knows that the new way 

 of putting up nice comb honey in cans and putting in ex- 

 tracted honey to fill up the cracks and crevices, to prevent 

 the nice, tender combs from mashing, is the honey for the 

 South. Also, as he has always kept bees from a dollar-and- 

 cent standpoint, he must produce what is in demand. He 

 read a number of letters received in a few days from a firm 

 in Ft. Worth, asking them to ship honey. Out of a large 

 lot of this honej', amounting to over several hundred dollars, 

 only two cases was extracted, and the rest all chutili comb 

 honey in 60-pound and 12-pound cans. This gave a good 

 idea of the large demand for this kind of honey. The 

 proper name will be bullz comb honey from now on. 



R. B. Leahy askt what percent Mr. Hyde produced over 

 section honey. 



Mr. Hyde — About one-third more bulk, besides adding 

 about 15 pounds of extracted to fill up the 60-pound cans, 

 which sells at the same price as the comb honey. When 

 filling the cans with comb first, it is only possible to get in 

 from about 40 to 45 pounds. Sometimes double the amount 

 of bulk comb honey may be produced in frames, while it is 

 impossible to produce good section honey during a bad flow. 

 B. A. Guess has produced such comb honey almost ex- 

 clusively ever since he kept bees, while the majority went 

 over to produce comb honey in sections ; and while they 

 were all discussing section honey he thought his comb 

 honey was good enough, and he built a trade on such, and 

 now the demand is so great with that he can't supply it. 

 Producing section honey always seemed too scientific for 

 hom, and is the reason why he did not attempt it. Now he 

 is glad to see the bee-keepers come back again. 



Mr. Davenport says that such honey does not work with 

 him in his market at Waxahachie. He gets the fancy 

 trade, and has fancy section honey. 



J. J. Waldrip has produced extracted honey. For many 

 years he produced section honey, which paid very well. 

 For shipping honey, sections go as first-class freight, and 

 as the other goes as fourth-class, there is a saving of freight 

 in favor of bulk comb over section honey, which goes at 

 owner's risk. It gets smasht up, and is lost, while bulk 

 comb honey in cans saves honey, besides freight. 



Mr. Faust is for the dollar, and gave the same evidence 

 as did Pres. Hyde. 



Mr. Leahy explained why he thought the production of 

 bulk comb honey was not such a great thing, and for bee- 

 keepers to be convinced he told them just to ship some of it 

 to the North. But if it is to the benefit of the producer, 

 then it is a move in the right direction. As it can not be 

 sold in the North, it remains only for Texas, and therefore 

 there may be danger of an overproduction. Then, too, it 

 seems to him that bee-keepers were going backward to 30 

 years ago, when he first started with bees, the only differ- 

 ence being in better hives, foundation, and more scientific 

 methods. He also said that it was hard work to produce 

 fine section honey. 



QUEEN-REARING. 



Mrs. Jennie Atchley described her methods. As they 

 are largely queen-rearers their methods are based on a 

 large scale. Ten or 15 of their best cell-building colonies 

 are dequeened and made ready. Before doing this, an old 

 comb is put in some of the breeders' hives for young larv» 



