282 



Tmm m^&mmiQmn mmm j©^KKair. 



•of hone}-, from tlie middle of October 

 to tlie middle of Marcli ; and unless a 

 person dislikes to disturb his bees in 

 •early spring, 15 pounds furnish a great 

 plenty. I consider one of my colonies 

 well supplied, when it has four frames 

 a little more than half filled. 



I am aware that when bees are put 

 ■on short stores, spring replenislnng is 

 necessary. But are all aware of the 

 benefit of spring feeding, where apple- 

 blossom honey is desired ? 



Two weeks ago I put into eacli of my 

 hives, two comljs well filled with good, 

 thick syrup, made from white sugar. 

 Eacli hive warmed right up, and began 

 to breed heavily. Apple-trees will be 

 blossoming shortly, and then we will 

 see if the 125 pounds of sugar that I 

 fed, are not returned. 



Cambridge, Mass., April 19, 1889. 



EVOLUTION. 



A Di>>eii§§ion of tlie Dzierzon 

 Partlieiiogeiie$i§ Theory. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 

 BY J. F. LATHAM. 



Dr. C. C. Miller prefaces his strict- 

 ures on mj' article on page 168 with 

 an apparent misrepresentation ; and 

 seems to relish dealing in irrelevancy 

 througliout his discourse, if I rightly 

 construe it. 



Notwithstanding the cautionarj- re- 

 marks of the editor, on page 198, at the 

 close of the Doctor's article, I now 

 would ask indulgence for a few I'e- 

 marks in response. If I am mistaken 

 in regard to misrepresentation, I must 

 acknowledge, with the doctor, that I 

 am not scholar enough to understand 

 his language, unless he surmises that 

 I am hinting at the quality of queens 

 from the egg, and queens from the 

 Jarvffi. That was not the object of the 

 first sentence in my article ; but as my 

 attention has been drawn to it by the 

 doctor, I am more than willing to ad- 

 mit that "some instruction" might 

 emanate therefrom. 



With reference to the demure pro- 

 fession of inability to understand what 

 I say ; and the further modest desire 

 for an interpretation in "plain En- 

 glish," candor prompts me to admit 

 that I think the Doctors perch is too 

 ■elevated for his vision. 



In his second paragraph, the Doctor 

 asks, "What are the points in it that 

 Ave are to know, to enable us to rear 

 better queens ?" As he has failed to 

 profit by "instructions," I can only 

 answer candidly, that is what I woidd 

 like to know ! But I believe tlie best 

 queens are reared from the egg, during 

 he swarming impulse, or soon after. 



The doctor next takes a " round " 

 with atrophied (food) glands, and par- 

 thenogenesis, and asks, " Now are we to 

 understand that Dzierzon is all wrong, 

 and that parthenogenesis, at its present 

 stage of development, is not a verj' 

 substantial reality ?" etc. Yes ; the 

 hatching of an egg laid by a virgin 

 queen is a reality ; but from my diag- 

 nostic stand-point, the siibslantiality of 

 the reality exists in its procreative 

 value. If the existence of atrophied 

 (food) glands in the queen-bee are con- 

 clusive evidence that at one period 

 during the development of her species 

 the requirements of mother and nurse 

 devolved upon her, as specific duties 

 in the perpetuation of her kind ; while 

 at the present time, the progeny of an 

 unfecundated queen are represented in 

 what I believe to be useless drones ; 

 the relative merits of the former and 

 latter qualifications seem to be too well 

 established to admit a radical response 

 to the Doctor's query. 



My experience warrants me in say- 

 ing that Dzierzon is all right in teach- 

 ing that the eggs of a virgin queen 

 will hatch, and result in the produc- 

 tion of drones ouly ; but at this point 

 in the economy of Nature, so far as I 

 have been able to note, the procreative 

 functions of the queen and progeny 

 terminate, inclusively. 



Here I would like to ask, if what is 

 termed Dzierzon's theory, i. c, parthe- 

 nogenesis, was an original demonstra- 

 tion by Dzierzon. I have reason to 

 think that the Dzierzon theoiy, so- 

 called, was not original with Dzierzon, 

 from the fact that glimps'ss of the idea 

 crop out in writings that existed long 

 before the race from which Dzierzon 

 sprung, were known in history. 



In his third paragraph, the Doctor 

 again puts in the plea of inability to 

 understand, and unburdens himself of 

 what appears to be a misconstruction. 

 Perhaps I have read the Bible as much 

 as the Doctor, and my faith in the 

 credibility of its teachings may be as 

 genuine as his, also ; but I have no 

 recollections of having read a single 

 passage in it in which it is purported 

 that any part was drawn from Acadian 

 .and Turanian sources ; and this is the 

 first time that I have ever received an 

 intimation that anyone believed, or 

 taught, that the Bible, in specific terms, 

 signifies that any of its contents were 

 drawn from Acadian and Turanian 

 sources. But I cannot comprehend 

 wliy the records of events, which mod- 

 ern archajological research discloses to 

 have existed in written narrative, ages 

 prior to their compilement into the 

 book of Genesis, should be any less a 

 " direct revelation from God Himself," 

 tlian after the narrative had been so 

 compiled. If the attributes of the 

 Deity are not omniscient, the idea of 



revelation, special and specific, n'light 

 be readily comprehended, and easily 

 reconcilable to the limits of a spi'Jcial 

 providence. 



There are many things in the o'pen 

 book of Nature, and signally so, ia a 

 colony of bees, when in the enjoyment 

 of health and activitj-, tliat should 

 prompt an observing mind to the fact 

 that the visible is but a mirror of the 

 invisible, and that the God of the Uni- 

 verse cannot be contracted to the lim- 

 its of particularized environments. As 

 the Doctor seems to not agree with me 

 on this point, let us " agree to disa- 

 gree," and drojj the matter. ■ 



That there " are men who do not be- 

 lieve in the Bible as a Divine revela- 

 tion," I have also long known ; but 

 from long association and dealing with 

 those men, I am prone to the belief 

 that they till their place in the world 

 as reputably as, what is termed, the 

 best of those who do believe iu "Di- 

 vine revelation ;" and would .scorn to 

 injure the most hapless of God's creat- 

 ures, or cheat a fellow bee-keeper in 

 the quality of his supplies — knowingly 

 sell him a colony of bees infected with 

 foul brood, or create a demand on his 

 purse by recommending fallacies in his 

 pursuit. 



In his fourth paragraph, the Doctor 

 inquires where those Acadian and Tu- 

 ranian records were, prior to their com- 

 pilation in the book of Genesis. I am 

 very willing that the Doctor should 

 solve the problem himself, for I enter- 

 tain no doubts but that he will find the 

 task a pleasant and instructive one. 



The last two paragraphs of the Doc- 

 tor's article hardly merit a passing no- 

 tice ; but as I liave no desire to falsify 

 anything, or wound the sensibilities of 

 anj- one, much less the contributors to, 

 and readers of, the American Bee 

 Journal, I will try to meet liis asperi- 

 ty as succinct!}- as I can. In assigning 

 a signification to the word " purport- 

 ed," the Doctor has my free consent to 

 define it as he pleases ; but to the can- 

 did readers of the Bee Journal I will 

 say, that I used the word only to ex- 

 press explanation, or signification. If 

 my information is correct (and I have 

 no reason to doubt its veracity), there 

 exists in the lately-deciphered litera- 

 ture of the Assyrians, a narrative of 

 the " creation," the Paradise, the flam- 

 ing sword, the cherubim, the flood, the 

 ark, the Tower of Babel, the disper- 

 sion, etc., whicli is purported, in my 

 same information, to have been trans- 

 lated from the Acadian and Turanian 

 dialects, or languages in which it ex- 

 isted as an epic, and liad so existed 

 2,000 or more years B. C. 



From the above date it is quite cer- 

 tain that the narrative of the " crea- 

 tion " was not original with Moses, or 

 the Hebrew race ; nor was it made a 



