G16 



THE? MMEKicftrf mmn jouRrtSEr. 



that these hives are non-swarming. 

 His theory is that bees never swarm 

 unless they have drones or drone- 

 brood. In this hive the cells are all 

 worker size, and cannot be changed 

 to drone size. 



Of course the combs can never 

 break down. The wood in the frames 

 that I have, is basswood, and the bees 

 are tearing it slightlj'. Mr. Aspinwall 

 says that they will not do this if the 

 wood is pine. 



Mr. A. and one of his neighbors 

 have tried this style of comb for two 

 or three years, and are satisfied of its 

 value. Of course the hive is very 

 heavy. If it is a perfect non-swarmer, 

 it will be valuable. 



The machiner}' to make the combs 

 is expensive, but the hives can be 

 cheaply made. Mr. A. has secured a 

 patent on this comb. I think that there 

 is no doubt but he is justly entitled to 

 it, as I believe it is new. 



Agricultural College, Mich. 



HONEY. 



It is Not " Digested," but Coii- 

 ceiitrated, Nectar. 



Written f</r the American Bee Jf/umal 



BY .1. \V. M'KINNEY, M. D. 



The article on page 523, by Prof. 

 Cook, would seem to demand a I'eply 

 from me. I should have done so 

 sooner, but for business eugagements 

 that occupied most of my time. 



In this short reply, I shall try to 

 avoid the contemptuous manner that 

 t-ropped out so plainly in the Profes- 

 .soi-'s article. He accuses me of being 

 ignorant of the matter of which I 

 wrote. He also says, "Nearly everj' 

 assertion made," in my article, " is un- 

 true, as any doctor ought easily to 

 convince himself." " Cane-sugar fed 

 to bees is changed to a glucose-like 

 sugar, and from a neutral to an acid 

 substance." 



In answer to the Professor's con- 

 temptuously sounding interrogations, 

 I would say that I know what "litmus 

 paper is " — have been familiar with its 

 use for many years ; and Fehling's test 

 for glucose, also. With these means 

 of acquiring knowledge at my com- 

 mand, I fail — sadly fail — to find any 

 evidence that nectar gathered by the 

 honey-bee is " digested " by the insect 

 to " make " it into honey. 



From reliable sources, we learn that 

 honey contains crystallizable sugar, 

 and, according toSoubciran, two other 

 kinds of sugar, one of which is changed 

 by acids, and has the property of turn- 

 ing to the right the plane of polariza- 

 tion, and the other not acted on by 

 acids, and possessed of a strong left- 



hand rotating power. In addition to 

 these saccharine substances, Guibourt 

 sa)'s, " Hon 63' also contains tnannite 

 and a, vegetable acid." 



It does seem to me that the Profes- 

 sor would recognize the fact that un- 

 crystallizable sugar is generated bj" 

 dissolving cane-sugar in water, and 

 subjecting it to a sufficient heat for 24 

 to 48 hours, in an open vessel. The 

 length of time necessary for such gen- 

 eration depends, to a great extent, 

 upon the consistency of the syrup. 

 Thin syrup takes on this change more 

 readily than thicker, and occurs as 

 readily outside the hive, and inde- 

 pendent of the bees, as when fed to 

 them. 



The presence of such uncrystalliz- 

 able sugar in sugar-cane molasses, is 

 certainly not due to having been 

 digested by bees. The presence of this 

 sugar is an isomeric form of glucose. 

 exists in honey, and in the juices of 

 fruits, and in nectar. 



The Professor has signally failed to 

 prove the proposition, or to show that 

 honey is " nectar digested by the bee." 

 To simply assert it, docs not prove it, 

 by an}' means. His chemical formula 

 for honej' (2CbHi2 08) is as foreign 

 from proving it 'digested nectar," as 

 the formula given b}- Fowues for gum- 

 arabic (which is C24 H02 O ) is foreign 

 from proving that common cane-sugar 

 is the same substance, the formula of 

 which is written precisely the same, 

 (C24 H2, O,.., ). 



I did not say in my former article 

 that " nectar and honey were identi- 

 cal ;" but I did mean to say, and would 

 here repeat, that whatever the change 

 in nectar while undergoing the pro- 

 cess of concentnUion, tliat change is not 

 due to the digesti re function of tlie bee. 

 The rational conclusion is, that honey 

 is nectar concentrated by the action of 

 heat and atmospheric conditions. That 

 honey is not always of the same con- 

 sistenc}-. even when the nectar is gath- 

 ered from the same source, is due to 

 atmospheric conditions. 



Perhaps the Professor would tell us 

 that thin honey, with a tendency to 

 ferment, as is sometimes the case with 

 extracted honey, is in consequence of 

 the bees that gathered it having been 

 troubled with indigestion or dysi)epsia. 



I agree with the Professor when he 

 says, "We never gain anything by 

 concealing or misrepresenting the 

 truth ;" and I would add, neither do 

 we gain by adhering to an error. 

 " Tell the truth " is the good motto ; 

 and the Professor thinks he would be 

 carrying this motto out by continuing 

 to call honey " digested nectar." 



On his suggestion, I will beg the 

 pardon of bee-keepers, and carrj' out 

 the above motto, calling honey nectar 

 concentrated by heat and atmospheric 



influences. At the same time I would 

 insist that the physiological function of 

 digestion of the honey-bee, be not per- 

 verted from its legitimate office to that 

 of a laboratory for "making" honey. 

 Nectar, digested by the bees, would 

 not be honey, but according to physi- 

 logical laws it would be chyme. 

 Camargo, Ills. 



[The foregoing article is somewhat 

 caustic, but the Professor's article was 

 of the same nature, and called for a 

 similar reply. We want to learn all 

 that can be said on this subject, 

 and hence have given place to the 

 articles of Prof. Cook, Dr. McKinnej- 

 and others. See editorial on page 

 611.— Ed.] 



APICULTURE. 



modem Salient Features in its 

 Advancement. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 



BV HENRY K. .STALEY. 



1 notice among a good many bee- 

 keepers of America, that there is a 

 feeling or inclination springing up, 

 which is prejiidiced against a man 

 patenting the productions of his brain. 

 And, why should he not ? He uses up 

 many houi's of valuable time — during 

 each second of which he travels with 

 the earth in its ambit around Old Sol 

 at the rate of 18.38 miles per second ; 

 and over which he will never pass 

 again — at least when quick ; unless the 

 components or elements of his bodj% 

 after disintegration have, through va- 

 rious changes, been imbibed, and 

 through assimilation converted into 

 the flesh of other human beings or ani- 

 mals ; for it is within the bounds of 

 possibility that the apple which caused 

 the fall of our first parents, may have 

 composed part of the apple by means 

 of which Sir Isaac Newton was able to 

 discover the laws of gi'avitation, or the 

 force of centripity ; and lavishly 

 spends, if he's got it, his money, trying 

 to germinate the embi-yo of some new 

 invention, as yet incased in its hard- 

 shell covering, not knowing whether 

 he will be able to get back the money 

 expended or not. The above anaco- 

 luthon may not be pardonable, but I 

 just wanted to show how valuable 

 time is. 



COMPENSATION FOR OUR SERVICES AND 



■WORKS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH 



HUMAN NATURE. 



Show me the man that is willing to 

 fill a public ofiice without receiving 

 any emoluments therefrom ; show me 

 the man that is willing to work day 



