120 



THE AMERICAN APWULTURIST. 



Limgstrolli fraiiics. Snow piUd up 

 ijvur the eiilraiice. 



Allkx Stokksbuky. 



[Tlie snow may have had sonie- 

 l\\\\\\f to do vvith killing the bees; 

 liiink it did in some cases. Other 

 colonies had too much honey, and 

 probably did not have sufficient 

 room for the queen to lav, as the 

 combs were so full of stores ; thus 

 the colonies went into winter quar- 

 ters, weak in numbers, and then 

 the large quantity' of honey made 

 the combs colder than ice, and 

 as the bees could not get into a 

 compact cluster, they of course 

 died by freezing. Other colonies 

 may have lost their queens in the 

 fall, and in consequence died, as 

 bees will not winter without a 

 queen. 



Read the essays on wintering 

 bees sent you and you probably 

 will have better success in the 

 future.] 



THE STANDARD FRAME 

 OF AMERICA. 



Woodcock, I'a. 

 Mk. Allev: 



An cHlilorial may be found in a bee paper 

 piiblislied in New" York state criticising the 

 liritish Bee Juurnal for saying the "Lang- 

 stroth IVanie is'the standard in America, "and 

 the editor also says '• tlie British Bee Journal 

 would have come nearer the truth if it had 

 said that there are more American frames 

 in use in America than all other sizes put 

 together." Some of our best authorities say 

 that ninety per cent of the hives in America 

 take the Langstroth frame. What is your 

 opinion in llie matter? 



Aly bees are wintering well in chaff-hives 

 on the summer stands. Last year was al- 

 most a lailurc. My bees averaged only thir- 

 ty-six pounds i)er colony, spring count, and 

 no increase. 



I like the ■' Ai)i" very much; wish it \vas a 

 weekly. Yours, 



John H. Rux'ekt. 



ANSWKU BY HENRY ALLEY. 



The British Bee Journal is cor- 

 rect and so also are our best 

 authorities regarding the Lang- 

 stroth frame as being the standard 

 frame of America. 



The i)a[)er you allude to has 

 tried a gooil many years to con- 

 vince the beekeepers of the world 



that Mr. Langstroth was not the in- 

 ventor of the movable-comb frame. 

 P2very fair-minded person, as also 

 those well-informed in bee matters, 

 well know that to Mr. Langstroth 

 belongs the credit of inventino- the 

 inovable-comb frame. 



A former editor of that New- 

 York paper spent thousands of 

 dollars and man}' months' time in 

 a futile attempt to prove that Mr. 

 L. stole his ideas of the movable- 

 frame ; but the said editor lost the 

 money and time spent in investi- 

 gating the matter, and the more 

 he tried to disprove the fact the 

 stronger he found the evidence 

 that Mr. Langstroth was the origi- 

 nal inventor of the movable frame 

 system as applied to beehives. 



Finally, Mr. H. A. K. gave up 

 the chase in disgust, and soon 

 thereafter found it convenient to 

 retire to private life or to engage 

 in same other pursuit other than 

 that of an editor of a bee paper. 



The " American" frame which 

 Mr. King devised for the sole pur- 

 pose of evading the Langstroth 

 patent, had no practical merits 

 about it and was little better than 

 the old-style frame used years 

 before. 



Mr. King soon found he could 

 not evade the patent claims of Mr. 

 Langstroth, nor could he get 

 around it by the clap-tr»p arrange- 

 ment which he called the "■ Ameri- 

 can Hive," and when called upon 

 to pay a royalty for infringing 

 upon Mr. L.'s patent, he (King) 

 undertook to invalidate Mr. Lang- 

 stroth's claims. For this purpose 

 Mr. K. spent much time in visit- 

 ing Europe and other places in 

 search of evidence that would fur- 

 ther his scheme, but the enterprise 

 was unsuccessful, as Mr. Lang- 

 stroth still held the fort till his 

 patent expired. 



At that time Mr. Langsti'oth 

 also was looking up the evidence 

 Mr. Kino; said he had obtained 



