187L] 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



113 



that the opponents of natural queens have not 

 said, and cannot say, one word against it. They 

 have only done their best to make beekeepers 

 believe that an unnatural mode is as good as the 

 way that the Creator of all has given to the in- 

 sect to reproduce or propogate itself. 



The result of my experiments with natural as 

 against artificial queens is, that I j^refer to raise 

 and keep one natural queen with any two of the 

 best ai'tificial queens that I have as yet been able 

 to raise ; and 1 have raised artificial queens in as 

 large colonies, as I have used for natural ones at 

 same time of year. And if the artificial queen 

 sent to me by Mr. Dadant is a good sample of 

 what he can raise by artificial process, I would 

 not give one natural for all that he has' ever 

 raised, all that he has at present, and all that he 

 will raise in future — though he says in his article, 

 believe my experience, and do so and so. If he 

 has given me a specimen of his experience with 

 the same truthfulness as he has given me a 

 sample of fairness in his dealings, I want none 

 of it. 



JOH.V M. PlilCE. 



Buffalo Falls, Iowa, Oct. 10, 1871. 



[For the American Bee JournM.] 



What Harm? 



Dear Journal : — There seems to be a dis- 

 position on the part of some writers to froM n 

 down the custom of describing new hives and 

 other devices in the columns of the Journal, 

 which, if successful, would detract very much 

 from the general interest and value of this peri- 

 odical. 



Bee-keeping is yet comparatively in its in- 

 fancy ; movable frames are just beginning to be 

 adopted ; the melextractor and other devices 

 are practically on trial ; and where one bee- 

 keeper adopts these, hundreds are still looking 

 on and awaiting results. In consequence of 

 this progressive state of bee-culture, numbers of 

 thoughtful piactical men are devising real or 

 fancied improvements ; and hence it becomes of 

 paramount importance that the Journal's read- 

 ers have descriptions of such improvements, that 

 they may avail themselves of such as their jvidg- 

 nient approves. The simple fact of tliis or that 

 thing being patented, should not prejudice an 

 impartial mind against it. It may be very valu- 

 able, or altogether worthless ; but if the in- 

 ventor did not believe his discovery to be a valu- 

 able one, he certainly would not incur the 

 trouble and expense of securing letters patent, 

 and the far greater trouble and expense of in- 

 troducing it to the public. This, however, is of 

 no sort of consequence to any person, save the 

 one immediately interested, for no intelligent 

 beekeeper will be imposed upon, while much 

 that is valuable may be gained by reading de- 

 scriptions of the vast number of patented and 

 non-patented bee devices that are found worthy 

 of adoption by our best apiarians. 



It is quite pi'obable that the time has gone by 

 when any patented bee devices will really pay 

 the patentee ; therefore it would seem that few 



should feci encouraged to secure letters patent. 

 Yet the facts prove tlie reverse to be true, and 

 while such persons are disposed to incur the 

 risk, others should not complain, for no one is 

 obliged to purchase ; and no one need be hum- 

 bugged while bee books, and bee journals, and bee 

 intelligence are everywhere available. 



When such beekeepers as Quinby, Gallup, 

 Ilazen, Thomas, Alley, and many others, con- 

 struct, test, and recommend hives, it is quite safe 

 to place confidence in them ; and when they 

 kindly write a description for the Journal, let us 

 not greet it with contemptuous allusions to that 

 which is none of our business. 



The fact that a perfect hive has not yet been 

 invented — a fact that is clearly proven by the 

 great variety in form of hives used by the best 

 apiarians in the country, should deter all who 

 have the true interest of beekeeping in view 

 from discouraging the efforts of first-class men 

 in this direction, but rather gladly welcome the 

 largest freedom to all who furnish such de- 

 scriptive articles. We therefore repeat our 

 text — ^^ What liarm''^ can these articles do? 

 May they not, on the contrary, possess positive 

 value ? We believe the latter to be the senti- 

 ment of nineteen out of twenty of the Journal's 

 readers. 



How much better for all concerned, if those 

 writers who are unfortunately afficted with an 

 hereditary or acquired habit of fault-finding, 

 would ventilate it by pointing out wherein hives 

 are faulty, ratlier than indiscriminately pitch 

 into every one who has the temerity to write of 

 an improvement that has cost much study and 

 experiment. We do not wish to be understood 

 as being an endorser of patented or unpatented 

 humbugs of any kind, for we well know that un- 

 scrupulous men have taken advantage of the 

 general ignorance of beekeeper^-, and imposed 

 upon them all sorts of worthless bee traps. But 

 that time has passed — intelligence assiimes the 

 place of darkness, the underlying principles of 

 bee economy are getting to be well understood ; 

 and therefore our voice is for improvements — 

 especially when made by our leading apiarians. 

 Let all such write freely for our excellent 

 Journal, thereby enhancing its value and use- 

 fulness. Geo. S. Selsby. 



Winter sport, Me., Oct. 4, 1871. 



[For the American Bee Journal.] 



Comments on Divers Topics. 



Mr. Editor : — It has been some time since I 

 troubled you with an article for your valuable 

 Journal ; not because I have lost interest in the 

 subject, but because I have been too busy to 

 write, even to my friends and regular corre- 

 spondents. Still, I have not failed to swallow 

 everything new that I discovered in the Journal ; 

 though some of it I have to throw up again. 

 For instance, the difterent plans of non-tlying 

 1 fertilization. Like Amateur, I have "grasped 

 j at every plan that had the least shadow of suc- 

 cess, and some that had none ;' ' but the result 

 \ has been the same in every case — a failure, I 



