THE AMERICAN APICULTURIST. 



187 



cell, these deposits in each cell beinji; 

 about a sixteenth of an inch tiiick. If such 

 addition were made to all parts of the cell 

 walls, the cells would be each one narrowed 

 about an eli;lith of an inch, niakinji: the 

 cell less than half its usual diameter; and 

 it is eas}' to bolicve tiiat bees raised in 

 such cells would be a "pigmy race." In 

 the comb under examination, however, I 

 find that the addition is only at the bottom 

 of the cell — at least, the addition to the 

 side wall is very tritlinj;. Is this the Sicn- 

 eral rule, that, in old comb, the bottom of 

 the cell is <j:radually tilled up but that the 

 diameter of the cells remains practically 

 unchanged? If this be the case, then per- 

 haps we may conclude that tiie only mat- 

 ter uecessary to consider, as combs grow 

 old, is to see that sufticient additional 

 space is allowed between combs to nuike 

 up for their increased thickness. Is any 

 thing further uecessary? 

 Marengo, III. 



That " Prediction." 



M. A. Kkllet. 



On page 130 of the Apr, you say, refer- 

 ring to making sugar from honey, " it can 

 and will be done." And, again, near the 

 bottom of the same page, you quote from 

 a former Apr, "The extractor must go." 

 Now, the point I am trying to make is 

 this : Is said sugar to be made of comb 

 honey? or must we return to the "days of 

 our dads" and strain our honey? 



Now, broilier Ijeekeepers of tlie Apr 

 family, don't you think we have got the 

 laugh or at least a small smile at the man- 

 ager's expense? 



But, in all candor, Brother Alley, there 

 are some things that I do like about your 

 advanced ideas on more than one point. 

 In the first place I am not so sure but that 

 "the extractor must go; but sugar from 

 honey is away ahead of me yet. 



I like your remarks on transferring. I 

 always use and always have used twine 

 for fastening in the combs. 



Let me congratulate you on the score 

 of making a lirst-class journal. I think 

 the Api as good as the best, and in one or 

 two respects better than the best of all the 

 other bee-papers I read. I do not write 

 to flatter, for I think you are above feeling 

 flattered by anything I might say. 



As to honey-boards (which you say 

 must go), I do not know how I should 

 get along without them. They seem nec- 

 essary to my present system of apicul- 

 ture, but 1 may see cause to make a 



change. It may be best to call a halt as 

 to so many fixtures. 



The honey of the future nmst be pro- 

 duced cheaply. To do this the fixtures 

 must be simple and cheap. 



Now, I am no "cheap John," don't 

 think it; but my opinion is that the inex- 

 oi'able laws governing supply and demand 

 will surely bring honey down and keep it 

 below the present moderate prices. 



Bees in this county wintered with little 

 loss. The indications were for a good 

 harvest of white clover honey, but, alas! 

 it rained the entire month of May. This 

 month so far has been dry. The fogy bee 

 men in the hills have been rejoicing over 

 a great flow of honey-dew. They are 

 welcome to all of such stuff so far as I am 

 concerned. 



While clover will soon be gone. Then 

 comes our two months of starving time, 

 for our bees get nothing here for about 

 that time in midsummer. 



Milton, W. Va. 



Written for the American Bee Journal. 



Foul Brood. 



Jamh;s a. Clark. 



Theories of the first cause of the disease. 



As to what may be the first cause of foul 

 brood I believe no theory has as yet been 

 advanced that will satisfactorily cover all 

 cases. 



The theory of Cheshire, that it is caused 

 by bacilli or minute vegetable organisms, is 

 the one generally held by those who have 

 studied the disease. If we accept this, 

 we must suppose that all cases of foul 

 brood are traceable to infection from some 

 first case or cases. Bacilli can no more 

 grow without seeds than corn or wheat. 

 It seems somewhat difficult to account for 

 all cases on this supposition, although if 

 Cheshire's theory be true, that the bacilli 

 or spores may be deposited by the bees 

 from infected hives on the blossoms they 

 visit, to cling to and be carried away^by 

 other bees that visit the same flowers, we 

 can easily see that the disease might be 

 quickly spread over wide reaches of ter- 

 ritory. The intervening links micht then 

 be destroyed in some way, leaving cases 

 of foul brood apparently many miles away 

 from any source of contagion. Even with- 

 out this way of spreading, the disease may 

 be carried far and fast by swarms escap- 

 ing to the woods, and by robbing. 



The cretlence given to Cheshire's con- 

 clusions is no doubt largely because they 

 are in accord with what is known as the 

 " germ theory " of disease. This is very 



