428 



I next used foundation 8 inches in widtli, 

 ■witli mucli the same result, after which I 

 tried 7 inches and 6 inches in widtli, which 

 gave more satisfactory results. The 7 inch 

 strips would sag enough to find a row or 

 more of drone-brood occasionally; but when 

 used only 6 inches or less in width, and 

 made of pure beeswax, the slight sagging 

 did not prevent the queen from lilling them 

 in every instance with worker eggs. But 

 now a new difliculty presented itself ; 

 below this narrow strip of foundation, the 

 bees would frequently build drone-comb, 

 and the much desired sheet of " every cell 

 of worker size" seemed yet in the future. 

 A remedy came at last. My frames hold a 

 comb 12 inches square, and, finding I could 

 not use foundation over 6 inches in depth 

 successfully, I divided the comb space in 

 the frame, in 2 equal parts, by placing a 

 temporary center bar into it; I next fastened 

 a piece of foundation 5% inches in width 

 to the top and a similar piece below the cen- 

 ter bar, and I had it. But what about that 

 center bar? Doesn't it occupy space that 

 ought to be filled with brood, &c ? Easy, 

 friends ; I had my lesson in center bars 15 

 years ago. These center bars of which I 

 write, are placed in the frame and fastened 

 with one % inch finishing nail in each end, 

 the head of which sligiitly projects on the 

 outside of the frame ends ; and as soon as 

 the comb is built, and sufficiently strong to 

 support itself by the side fastenings, the 

 nails are drawn out, a knife passed under 

 the center bar, and the bar withdrawn. In 

 one or two daj^s the space occupied by the 

 center bar is filled with worker comb. In 

 this manner I have obtained over 300 combs, 

 each a foot square, built solid without a 

 single drone-cell ; and have several hundred 

 combs in the hives, that still have the cen- 

 ter-bar left in, being filled witli honey and 

 deemed insufticiently strong, being built 

 late in the season ; but otherwise are all 

 worker-comb. From these the center-bar 

 will be removed when I make the usual 

 spring examination. 



Friend Godfrey, of Red Oak, to whom I 

 communicated my success with temporary 

 ceiiter-bars,prepared several hundred frames 

 in that way, and as far as heard from, with 

 the best result. 



Nearly two years ago I wrote to " Novice" 

 on the subject of comb-foundation sagging, 

 and suggested linen or some kind of thin 

 cloth for a base, and submitted to him a 

 piece of tracing linen, a remnant from a 

 piece used by my father in 1842 for the same 

 purpose ; he soon thereafter sent me two 

 specimens of foundation one apparently on 

 the same tracing linen, which I had sent 

 him, and the other on very thin muslin, or 

 cheese cloth. On page 64, Vol. V. of 

 Oleanitms, Novice informs us that the bees 

 would giiaw out the threads of the cloth, 

 &c. Desiring, however, to test the stretch- 

 ing quality, I placed them in a frame and 

 4'oined an 8 inch strip of common foundation 

 telow it. The common foundation sagged 

 very much, but the foundation on the trac- 

 ing linen, nor on the muslin sagged a parti- 

 cle, although the machine had broken part 

 of the threads one way, but by turning it so 

 that the broken threads run liorizontaly it 

 made no difference. Now Novice's bees 



would " get hold of a thread, and then they 

 would tear the cloth all out," but mine 

 behaved more respectfully, and built it out 

 into full combs. What made the difference ? 

 Was it because I covered the ends of the 

 threads by joining another piece of founda- 

 tion ? 



While on the subject of comb-foundation, 

 I will take the liberty of mentioning a case 

 of misplaced credit: Root claims being the 

 first to mention rolls for foundation 

 machines, and foundation miles long ; and 

 even Prof. Cook commits an error when, on 

 page 203 of his "Manual" he says: "It 

 was first made by Herr Mehring, in 1847," 

 and on page 204 : " They " (the Germans) 

 " used plates, not rollers, to stamp the wax,"' 

 and again he says; "In 1868, the King 

 Brothers, of New York, made and secured a 

 patent on the first rollers." Even Novice 

 used soap suds and slippery-elm bark to 

 prevent the wax from adhering to the rolls ; 

 until a friend called his attention to starch. 



Now .the fact in the case is this, comb- 

 foundation was made in Germany in 1842, by 

 my father ; they were made by a pair of 

 engraved rollers, and starch was used to- 

 prevent the wax from adhering to the rollers. 

 This I mention simply as a historic fact ; 

 and to corroborate my statement I refer the 

 readers to page 35 of " The Bee-Keepers' 

 Guide Book," which was issued in February 

 1868, and 10,000 copies circulated in little 

 over a year ; in it I give the following des- 

 cription, "among the earliest of which, 

 probably Kretchmer's comb-foundation can 

 be counted,— who invented and used them 

 in Germany, I think as early as 1843. The 

 device consisting of a strip of tracing linen, 

 coated with a composition of white wax and 

 starch, and upon which the comb-foundation 

 or base of the cells were impressed, by pass- 

 ing it through a pair of engraved rollers." 

 Here we have a description of engraved 

 rollers, and starch ; before Novice ever 

 mentioned rollers, and before King Brothers 

 applied for their patent, as a copy of the 

 book was presented to them as soon as 

 issued. And at the time the description 

 was printed, the device was nearly a quarter 

 century old. More anon by your servent 

 E. Kketchmeb. 



Coburg, Iowa, Nov. 9, 1878. 



For the American Bee Journal. 



Adulteration of Sweets again. 



Mr. Root has successively given three 

 motives for refusing to publish the petition 

 against the adulteration of sweets. The 

 first motive was that the petition was not of 

 sufficient importance. The second, that we 

 ought to let demand and supply regulate 

 these questions, and lastly, the third (proba- 

 bly suggested by the manufacturer of glu- 

 cose), is that the petition says that glucose 

 contains sulphuric acid and lime. Mr. Root 

 asserts that sulphuric acid and lime cannot 

 exist in an active state in the same sub- 

 stance. The petition does not assert that 

 both of these substances would be found in 

 an active state ; yet Prof. Kedzie has found 

 both of them in several samples of glucose 

 that he has analysed. 



