THE BEE-KEEPEKS' REVIEW 



149 



narrow circle, whose entire time and 

 streng'th g'o, lifelong-, to his vocation. 

 Every man should have at least one 

 avocation, to which he maj' turn for 

 that change of life-current which is 

 far more restful than mere idleness. 

 Some intellectual diversion should 

 always be in hand; growing- larger and 

 more generous, more valuable more en- 

 grossing, with passing years. Itmaybe 

 that in middle life the avocation will 

 claim quite as much time and strength 

 as the vocation, and it may even happen 

 that in later years the last shall be 

 first and the first shall be last, in inter- 

 est and devotion; but the harness which 

 enables one to pull his share of life's 

 load should never be taken off. ' ' 



■Miru/^m^HM^k 



The Sibbald System. 



I have published a whole lot of criti- 

 cism of the Sibbald plan of preventing 

 swarming and controlling increase. 

 Some think it isn't new, that it has 

 been tried and discarded, others think 

 it is similar to plans already published 

 (and it is in some respects), and others 

 who have tried plans somewhat similar 

 have found them desirable. This 

 method has certainly got to run the 

 gauntlet, and, if it can't stand the 

 criticisms, if it is valueless for the pur- 

 pose for which it is intended, the 

 sooner it is known the better. The 

 same is true if it proves valuable in 

 different locations and under varying 

 conditions. 



If I understand Mr. Sibbald aright, 

 it is not so much intended as a method 

 for artificial increase, as it is to over- 

 come the swarming fever, after which 

 the two divisions are to be united. If 

 we desire increase, knoiv that we want 

 it, and are going to have it, there are 

 probably better methods of making the 

 division, but to get rid of the swarming 

 fever, and have the forces again united 

 in about four daj's, is the prime object 

 of the plan. Mr. E. R. Root, in his 

 criticism of the plan, evidently over- 

 looked this point of the length of time 



that the two divisions are to be kept 

 separate. He speaks of keeping them 

 apart ten days. If he will read care- 

 fully he will see that Mr. Sibbald 

 speaks of making the union in "three 

 or four days." 



My advice is still what it has been 

 all of the time. Don't be prejudiced 

 for or against the plan, but give it a 

 trial upon a sufficiently large scale to 

 make the experiment worth something. 

 When through, let usknow the results; 

 that is what bee journals are for, to 

 get at the truth of things and let bee- 

 keepers know it. 



The Abbott- Hutchinson-Sugar-Honey- 

 Discussion. 



I am going to waste a few more lines 

 on this subject, then I think I shall be 

 done. Mr. Abbott publishes, in his 

 April issue, two articles that were first 

 sent to me, and comments upon the fact 

 that I declined to print them. It prob- 

 ably was not so intended, but it gives 

 the impression that I am not willing to 

 give both sides a hearing. The facts 

 are, that these two articles were only a 

 small portion of the articles and letters 

 that were received on the subject; the 

 majority protesting against a discus- 

 sion of the subject. The truth of the 

 matter is, there has never been a fair, 

 square, honest discussion of the matter. 

 For instance, Mr. Abbott said that 

 Prof. Cook and Mr. Frank Cheshire 

 did not agree that bees changed over 

 cane sugar when they handled it. I 

 showed him that they agreed perfectly, 

 and gave page and verse where the 

 matter could be found. Mr. Abbott 

 ignores this point entirely; and I am 

 through with the matter unless some of 

 my opponents bring up &o\xi& arguments 

 on the subject. 



One of Mr. Abbott's correspondents 

 expresses his delight at the "stand 

 that Mr. Abbott has taken." I don't 

 know as there is anything praise- 

 worthy ii:i this "stand." It is simply 



