to use glucose only when it is worth less 

 than 4 cents, the price of sugar being 12, 

 with one-half honey or sugar, adding 

 that 2 pounds of glucose will not prove 

 more nourishing for bees than 1 pound 

 of honey. Such is the opinion of a dis- 

 interested editor, who has heard both 

 sides of the question. 



If we follow the advice of Mr. Hamet, 

 we will mix 10 lbs. of solid glucose, or 

 grape sugar, worth, at 4 cents, 40 cents, 

 with 5 lbs. honey, at 10 cents, 50 cents, 

 and obtain 15 lbs of the mixture for 90 

 cents. But this mixture will not prove 

 to contain more food than 1U lbs. of 

 honey, worth $1.00 ; and we can obtain 

 as much and a better food, by using 9 

 lbs. of white sugar, worth about 90 

 cents. Thus the profit is reduced to 

 nothing ! 



Besides, as we have only interested 

 affirmations to prove that glucose con- 

 tains no noxious substances, while every 

 report of disinterested chemists proves that 

 glucose is not always wholesome ; as on 

 the other side, glucose contains always 

 heterogeneous matters, while pure cane 

 sugar contains 99 per cent, of sugar, we 

 shall be on the safe side by feeding bees 

 exclusively with good honey, or with 

 pure, white, cane sugar. 



But that is not all. Mr. Hamet adds 

 that solid glucose has the inconvenience 

 of becoming hard in the hive, and that 

 bees are then unable to use it, nor even 

 to remove it from the cells. Mr. Root 

 does not deny the fact, but this did not 

 deter him from inciting his readers to 

 use such a poor substitute for honey. 



In Germany, also, they seem to have 

 very little confidence in glucose as food 

 for bees, since they are yet in search of 

 a cheap matter to be used in place of 

 sugar. A few years ago they were ex- 

 perimenting with extract of malt, which 

 in time, after many praises, was aban- 

 doned. 



Mr. Lewis Best, superintendent of the 

 Davenport glucose factory, in Gleanings, 

 says that his grape sugar is free from 

 all sulphuric acid and sulphate of lime. 

 He adds that he is ready to answer any 

 other question asked. In the November 

 number of the American Bee Jour- 

 nal I asked him several questions, but 

 he has not answered them. I will re- 

 produce one of them. 



If we mash ripe grapes, their juice, 

 or must, is heavier than water, on ac- 

 count of the sugar that this juice con- 

 tains. When this must, or juice, has 

 fermented, it is lighter than water ; the 

 sugar of the grapes having been changed 

 into alcohol — the weight of pure alcoliol 

 being less than four-fifths the weight of 

 pure water. Therefore, the more alco- 

 hol in a wine, the lighter the wine. If, 



to increase the quantity of alcohol in 

 our wine, we add to the must some solid 

 glucose, from the Davenport factory, the 

 sugar of the glucose is also transformed 

 into alcohol ; but, in spite of the trans- 

 formation of the sugar of the juice and 

 of the sugar of the glucose added, the 

 wine obtained is heavier than water. 

 What is the matter contained in the glu- 

 cose which causes such a result ? 



This wine, strengthened by glucose, 

 never has done fermenting ; it clarifies 

 so slowly that some wine-growers use 

 salicylic acid to stop fermentation and 

 make it salable. 



These results are not due to the addi- 

 tion of true grape sugar, for, every year, 

 I add to my grape juice the water in 

 which I have washed the cappingsof the 

 extracted combs. Yet, with this impure 

 honey, I make very good wine, which 

 has done fermenting and is as clear as 

 pure water, inside of two or three weeks. 



Why is it not the same with solid glu- 

 cose, if it is identical with the grape 

 sugar of which honey is constituted ? In 

 spite of the impure honey used, the color 

 of my wine is bright red, while the color 

 of the wine made with the addition of 

 solid glucose is dull red— nearly violet. 

 The same color can be obtained by mix- 

 ing a little lime in a glass of wine. Are 

 not such dissimilar results due to the 

 sulphate of lime, or to the sucrate of 

 lime, or to both of these substances con- 

 tained in the corn sugar of the Daven- 

 port factory ? It has not yet been proved 

 that the use of glucose is not without 

 danger. Can Mr. Best satisfactorily solve 

 the following : 



1st. As food to promote breeding, 

 we run the risk of lessening the endur- 

 ance and vigor of the young bees reared 

 on such food ; the best factories (the Da- 

 venport factory not excepted) being 

 unable to manufacture a product always 

 absolutely deprived of dangerous mat- 

 ters. 



2d. As food for winter : for glucose, 

 under some circumstances of impurity, 

 or during long protracted periods of cold 

 days, will act like molasses, and a great 

 many bee-keepers have tried molasses 

 as winter food with the worst results. 



3d. If we add to these results the fear 

 of spreading, in the minds of people at 

 large, the idea that our crops of honey 

 are due to the use of glucose ; and this 

 idea is already too much disseminated, 

 and may, as Mr. Chas. F. Muth has re- 

 marked, cause a serious damage to the 

 sale of honey either in comb or ex- 

 tracted. 



If we compare these risks to the small 

 profit (if there is any) in using glucose 

 as food for bees, we shall conclude that 

 the benefit is too small ; and I doubt not 



