726 



Tmm xmrnmiGMm mmm jQi'&mnmi,. 



FOUL BROOD. 



Origin of tliis I>rcii(l mnindy 



of tliis 

 Auioiis 



I>rcii(l 

 Bees. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 

 BY C. J. ROBINSON. 



Pursuant to 1113- primiise recorded on 

 page 520. I now proceed with tlie con- 

 tinuation of the subject of foul brood. 

 I am cognizant of the fact that state- 

 ments based on individual experience 

 are generally taken for naught, if in 

 contlict with popular opinion or pre- 

 conceived notions. However, un- 

 prejudiced mortals oft-times learn of 

 others who have acquired knowledge 

 through research and special practice. 

 In my former article, I set forth facts 

 showing conclusively that foul brood 

 in all its phases is liable to. and occa- 

 sionally does, originate in colonies by 

 reason of the rotting of chilled brood ; 

 that is to say. in case the rotting pro- 

 ceeds by a chemical action favorable 

 to hatching the inherent spores into 

 microbes (micro-organisms), then foul 

 brood is present. Whenever one or 

 more of the microbes (though so small 

 that they are invisible to natural sight) 

 gets a lodging on live brood, the germ 

 then feeds upon larva, and multiplies 

 so rapidly by fission, that all the brood 

 in a colony is soon a mass of foul virus. 

 but the animate mass — microbes — 

 though deadly poison to brood, cannot 

 harm imago or full-fledged bees. The 

 feeding of drugs, as antidotes, to bees, 

 is blissful ignorance. 



By accident, in 1882. some small 

 frames having brood in, were left in a 

 pile after extracting. The weather 

 was hot, and when I came upon the 

 pile a few days aftei- the boy laid them 

 down and left them. I found the 

 combs in a stage or inordinate fermen- 

 tation — putrefaction. proceeding to rot- 

 tenness. It ajjpeared so much like 

 foul brood that I suspected it a case of 

 spontaneous origination. I wrapped 

 the fermenting combs in a wet blanket, 

 and kept them warm until they were 

 rotten. I felt so certain that I had 

 foul-brood virus, that I thought to 

 test it. 



I took from a hive one frame having 

 brood in it, after brushing every bee 

 from it, smeared a small part of it with 

 some of the rotten mass, and covered 

 it with wire, wet sotliat bees could not 

 touch the smearing, and returned it. 

 Of the sequel, sulhce it to say, that if 

 the smearing did not reproduce true 

 foul brood, I am not competent to test 

 and determine. I have pointed out a 

 way by which the problem may be 



solved. If an}' who care to know the 

 facts will try — sceundrimi artcm — the 

 test, and fail to reproduce or originate 

 true foul brood, then it will be in order 

 for them to teach that foul brood never 

 originates from chilled brood. 



So recent as 1882, the time I an- 

 nounced m}' discovery of originating 

 foul Ijrood, there were none who would 

 admit that foul brood is a '-germ dis- 

 ease." Soon after, the germ theory 

 was not disputed, for it became a well 

 known fact, and now there appears 

 high authority corroborating ni}' claim 

 tliat foul brood ■• is caused by the rot- 

 ting of uncared-for brood." 



I here quote from the oflicial bulletin 

 issued by the Ontario (Canada) De- 

 partment of Agriculture, viz : 



Foul brood is a disease that is caused by 

 the rotting of uncared for brood. It usually 

 oriKinates in the spring, in weak colonies 

 that have spring dwindled so badly that 

 they have not bees enough left to cover or 

 care for all the brood, and if the spring 

 keeps raw and backward, the bees wiil 

 crowd together to keep each other warm, 

 ieaving the uncared for brood to die and 

 rot in the cells. The brood covered by the 

 bees in time to hatch, (which so increases 

 the force of the colony that a wider circle 

 of comb is covered by the bees), taking in 

 the space occupied by the decaying brood. 



Foul brood will almost be a thing of the 

 past, when every bee-keeper knows the real 

 cause of it, looks well after his bees in the 

 spring, and sees that the brood is well 

 cared for in every hive, and those that are 

 not really strong must lie crowded upon a 

 few combs, l)y using division-boards. The 

 disease is spread by the bees robbing foul- 

 broody colonies, and they carry the disease 

 just in proportion to the amount of dis- 

 eased honey they cany to their own hives. 



So much of the bulletin as that which 

 treats of the cau^c of foul brood I 

 have, in ray experience demonstrated ; 

 but Canadian bee-keepers, or scientists 

 of Her Majesty's realm, first made 

 known the most important discovery, 

 to-wit : that foul brood is caused 

 sometimes " by the rotting of chilled 

 or dead brood." The writer of the 

 bulletin seemingly takes to himself the 

 glory of being the ( riginal discoverer 

 of the ■' cause of foul brood." Eight 

 years before the bulletin appeared, I 

 published identically the same that is 

 set forth in the first paragraph of the 

 bulletin. (See Bce-Keepcrs^ Exchange 

 for August, 1882, also the Kansas Bec- 

 Kccper of about the same date ; and 

 the same is set forth in my article in 

 the American Bee Journal on pages 

 518 and 519 of this year.) 



Because foul brood makes its appear- 

 ance mysterioush', bee-keepers are 

 loth to believe that it is possible for it 

 to ever originate spontaneously from 

 dead brood. The acute editors of 

 Gleanings strenuously combat tlie asser- 

 tion that foul brood is caused by dead 

 brood. The junior editor comments 

 on the above bulletin, and attempts to 

 argue that the asserted claim is un- 



reasonable. In their issue of Sept. 15. 

 1890, Mr. Ernest Root mentions this : 



In another part (first paragraph 1 of the 

 bulletin, before describing the method of 

 cure, the cause of the disease is assigned to- 

 rotten or decayed brood, either from chill- 

 ing or otherwise. In fact, the inspector, 

 Mr. McEvoy, lays particular stress on this. 

 We cannot believe that foul brood occurs 

 without at least the germs of that disease. 

 We (ourselves) have had a great many 

 colonies in the apiary during the spring 

 that had more or less chilled brood, but 

 they (none of them) developed into any- 

 thing serious. Rotten brood man be a 

 favorable medhtm for tlier/rorvth of r/erm^ 

 if tlicy are already in'cscntin the hives 

 (Italics are mine), but we cannot think this 

 of itself, a cause. We may have the very 

 best of land in which to grow corn, but 

 corn will not grow unless there is first seed. 



He thinks that rotten brood is. a 

 favorable medium for the growth of 

 germs. In this he errs. Evervbody 

 knows it is live brood that fosters the- 

 ■•growth of the germs." There can 

 be no growth of germs in rotten brood. 

 for the rot is germs. Dead brood is 

 the medium in which the "ever-pres- 

 ent" spores grow into foul brood 

 germs. His reasons for. ■' we cannot 

 believe." are based chiefly on the cir- 

 cumstance that tlug have not had 

 chilled brood develop into foul brood. 

 His point is not well taken, because it 

 is not said that all cases of chilled • 

 brood pass into 'anything serious." 

 There are but few cases — one in hun- 

 dreds — that chilled brood rots into- 

 foul brood. In warm, dry climates, 

 foul brood seldom appears. It is iii 

 cold climates that brood is liable to> 

 and often does, get chilled. 



In Canada, bee-keepers are sorely 

 troubled with foul brood in their api- 

 aries. Hence the bulletin is issued as 

 a special law providing for an attempt 

 at eradicating foul brood from the 

 realm. No such law. nor such waiting- 

 and weeping, and burning by inspec- 

 tors, is known in the Sunny Soutli. 

 Will the -doubting Thomases" please 

 explain the why of this ditterencc. 



Again, if as Gleanings speculates., 

 foul bi'ood is an eternized agent, 

 created to curse, and stalks abroad, 

 why does the •■ critter" deal outmost 

 of its cursing in cold regions ? -Be- 

 lievers" or gtiesscrs. nor intuitive 

 science is par for answering. 



In the comments of the junior edi- 

 tor, referring to the growing of corn, 

 he does not meet the issue. Hoosier.s^ 

 of the wild West, and foreign peasants- 

 — yea. -rustics" — have learned that 

 to grow corn, seed must first be 

 planted; but do they not understand, 

 about the seed having a beginning?' 

 Some years agp the .senior editor, in a 

 foot-note referring to the claim that 

 foul brood sometimes originates frnm 

 chilled brood, used this illustration — 

 the corn won't grow, unless corn — 

 nothing else — be lirst jjlanted. Set 



