184 



THE AMERICAN APICULTURIST. 



these things, which uow appear so famil- 

 iar to us older beekeepers, are to the 

 average man or woman who for the first 

 time begins to inqnire into these matters. 

 Loss of young queens at mating time. 

 Not a single anthor of our staiulard 

 works on bee culture has ever thrown any 

 light on this subject so far as I have sei'U. 

 They all tell us that the young queens 

 are lost by entering the wrong hive on 

 their return from their wedding flight, or 

 they may be captured by birds, etc. There 

 is hardly a shadow of truth in the causes 

 paraded to tliis day to account for .so many 

 missing young queens at mating time. 



In tlie early part of May, 188i, I made 

 up about twenty-five uuclei as a com- 

 mencement of tiie queen-rearing season, 

 and gave each of them a maturing queen 

 cell;"but before tlie cells h.id time to hatch 

 out there came on an unusually cold spell 

 for the time of the year, and the result 

 was the loss of about fifteen out of the 

 twenty-five queen cells by reason of be- 

 ing eliilled during the cold nights. The 

 weather continued cool for some days and 

 there was delay in getting other cells 

 ready and this delay brought on an ab- 

 normal condilion in the nuclei, by reason 

 of the presence of too many old and in- 

 difierent bees. The sequel was many of 

 these nuclei were an entire failure. They 

 " balled" every young queen given them 

 — always at mating time, and this, not- 

 withstanding they were supplied from 

 time to time with hatching brood with a 

 view to restore the nuclei to normal con- 

 dition. Here I got my first clew direct- 

 ing to the real cause of tlie loss of young 

 queens at mating time. The cause is the 

 presence of old, cranky, jealous bees, not 

 necessarily laying workers, for in the 

 cases I have "mentioned and in divers 

 others since then, under careful observa- 

 tion, no signs of the presence of fertile 

 layers could be discovered. 



I have noticed that under these condi- 

 tions the young queens are never dis- 

 turbed till they attempt to seek a mate, 

 and tlien the persistent spiteful " balling," 

 commences and tiine limes out often, re- 

 sults in the ruin, or actual death of the 

 young queen. By means of smoUe and a 

 close watcii over such abnormal nuclei I 

 have saved the lives of many .\oung 

 queens but such rescued queens are hard- 

 ly worth the time and lal)or bestowed on 

 them, as they are generally maimed and 

 cowed by the severe ordeal through wiiich 

 they have passed. Tiie remedy is to give 

 hatching brood to the nucleus, and when 

 the young queen is three days old. or 

 thereabouts, move the nucleus hive to a 

 new location in the apiary. This will draw 

 ofl' the old Ijees, as they will go back to 

 the old stand, and the young queen will 



be left to mate and enter upon her life's 

 labors under the care of young friendly 



bees. 



Swarming-out in the spring. 



Nearly all authors and writers, so far 

 as I have seen, are wide of tlie mark as to 

 the true cause o^ swarming out. They tell 

 us that young queens are lost at mating 

 time by entering the wrong hive, and that 

 the swarming-out mania is caused by 

 "dissatisfaction" with the condition of the 

 hive, impending starvation, etc. Such 

 facts are only apparent. In fact they are 

 not facts at all. Swarming-out is the re- 

 sult of the absence of a .sufticient quantity 

 of young bees to keep company with the 

 queen when a general fiight of the workers 

 takes place. Finding herself so nearly 

 deserted, the queen becomes excited and 

 takes wing with the workers and the ex- 

 cited colony may return to their home, 

 and they may not; in the latter contin- 

 gency, it is a case of " swarming out." A 

 queen-and-drone guard placed at the en- 

 trance of the hive will prevent the excited 

 queen from taking wing, and the cause is 

 removed. 

 Patent bee-gums — Consistency a jewel. 

 The editors of the Apicultukist and of 

 the Review, have both taken A. I. Root 

 tlirougha course of bulldozing because he 

 opposes patents on bee implements. I am 

 pretty well acquainted with the bee litera- 

 ture of the past, and have to say that Mr. 

 Hoot has been consistent in his course 

 touching this matter of "patent bee gums,' 

 and this is more than I can consistently say 

 for Prof. Cook, the two editors aforesaid, 

 and a number of others who of late have 

 been laboring to persuade the bee-frater- 

 nity that patent bee gums are a great bless- 

 ing. It appears not to have occurred to 

 these innocent people that the question of 

 right and wrong in our patent laws is not 

 tlie question at issue. " Patent bee gums" 

 have been in tlie past, and are at the pres- 

 ent a disgrace to the apicultural pursuit, 

 and because of this imnior:d feature of the 

 business I oppose and combat it. 1 am 

 glad that at least one American editor has 

 the manliness to stand to his convictions. 

 Christiansburg , Ky. 



The only reptv 1 have to ni.nke to the remarks 

 of Mr. Deniaree iof;.inlinj>: (.atont.-; is this: most 

 of tho^e i.cople who "kick" ag .inst patents and 

 patent laws are those who do not po.-isess a sum- 

 cient amount of ingenuity or mechanical skill 

 themselves to invent of devise an article of any 

 practical worth. Those who take advani.-.ge of 

 the patent laws to protect their interest are satis- 

 fied that the iiresent law s are as near rignt as any 

 that can be framed. 1 do not agree with Mi". 

 IXMiiaree when he says ]Mr. Koot is right in the 

 position that he (Koot) has taken «!'/.''M,'"M!''i 

 ■ uestion. Hut of this more will lie said in « "Other 

 issue. The attention of Mr. Demarec is called to 

 tl,e arti.Oe ot Mr. 11. I>. T.->.vl;<r on ^"y", ';'';, '"^f 

 of this isMie. Vo one shou d ""J'!'''-^'=" '' ''"V\.[ 

 invite a controversy on this subject. 1 do not 

 nor do I want it. 



