1871.] 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Ill 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Washington, December, 1871. 



We need copies of the first number of the cur- 

 rent volume of the Journal (July, 1871), and will pay 

 twenty cents each for them, till our want is supplied, 

 to such subscribers as do not tile their papers and will 

 send them to us. 



We regret to learn that on account of the edi- 

 tor's ill health, the publication of the next volume of 

 the "Annals of Bee-culture " will be delayed till 

 the spring of 1873. Heretofore this work was issued 

 in the fall, which is not thought to be as suitable a 

 time as that now proposed, and the occasion will be 

 availed of to make the desired change. 



Two years ago we suggested the addition of 

 glycerine to sugar syrup as a bee feed, to prevent 

 candying. We found it satisfactory on trial, and 

 several correspondents used it with advantage. Add- 

 ing half an ounce or one ounce of glycerine to a pint 

 of the syrup while yet warm makes a suitable mixture, 

 though a larger proportion of the former may be em. 

 ployed where it can be procured cheap enough to 

 make it an object. Pure inodorous glycerine is itself 

 an excellent occasional bee feed, but is commonly too 

 high in price for economical use ; nor should we advise 

 it to be used exclusively, if that were not an objection. 

 We have never tried cream of tartar to prevent candy- 

 ing, and incline to doubt its availability for that pur- 

 pose. 



It is commonly supposed that only since the intro- 

 duction of movable comb hives has it been ascertained 

 that young bees in vigorous colonies, remain within 

 their hives eight or ten days after being hatched, en- 

 gaged in nursing, comb building, &c. But this is an 

 erroneous impression. Lucas, in his ^^Introduction 

 to Practical Bee-culture,''^ written in 1818, and pub- 

 lished at Prague in 1820, states it distinctly as a fact 

 then well known, and confirmed by observation, that 

 "young llfces do not show themselves outside of their 

 hives till the ninth day after their birth, when, if the 

 day is fair, they join in the general jubilation of the 

 colony, and thenceforward participate in the out-door 

 labors of the workers." Lucas probably used an ob- 

 serving hive, though he nowhere expressly states that 

 he did. 



In a late number of the Bienenze^tung a correspond- 

 ent denies the correctness of the general opinion that 

 queen bees will, under nocircumstances, employ their 

 stings, except against their peers or rival queens. He 

 states that when properly excited they will sting like 

 other bees, though the same causes or treatment will 

 not produce in them the requisite excitement. They 



will bear much teasing and pretty rough handling,with- 

 out showing symptoms of irritation ; and to induce 

 them to sting some special manipulations, not easily 

 described, seem to be necessary — such as threaten to 

 endanger life. The correspondent, Mr. Tittel, of Frei- 

 dorf, says he received his first sting from a queen bee 

 on the 31st of May, 1869 ; was stung by another on 

 the 14th of June ; and by a third on June 18th. On 

 the 23d of June, 1870, he was stung successively by 

 six queens ; on the forenoon of the 38th, twice by the 

 same queen, and in the afternoon repeatedly by an- 

 other. And in thei nterval between that date and the 

 8th of October following, he managed to get himself 

 stung by queens more than twenty times. — The sting- 

 ing, he states, produced very little pain and scarcely 

 any swelling. The sting was never retained in the 

 wound ; and in no instance did it penetrate deeper 

 than one-tliird its length. 



A Mr. Gindley had previously reported in the Bien- 

 enzeituug for 1866, that he had been stung by a queen 

 bee. Though he felt a slight pain, no swelling was 

 produced. 



The Rev. Mr. Kleine, of Hanover, made numerous 

 efforts to cause a queen to sting him ; but was suc- 

 cessful only once. 



The following communication reached us so 

 late that we have little room left for i-emarks. The 

 bees accompanying it were crushed in the mail to a 

 shapeless mass, and no offensive odor was perceptible. 

 As in this case the bees died in their hive, the disease, 

 whatever it is, seems to differ materially from that 

 prevalent in several of the Western States in 1808. 

 In every instance then, we think, the bees deseited 

 their hives, usually leaving considerable stores of 

 honey. The honey of -the hive in question should be 

 examined, as it may possibly contain some noxious 

 principle fatal to the bees that gathered it. — Honey 

 gathered from fir trees has been known to be very 

 destructive to bees, some large apiaries having been 

 ruined by it. 



What is it ? 



About a week since I noticed an unusual stir about 

 the entrance of one of my strong hybrid stocks. At 

 first glance I suspected robbery, but more minute ob- 

 servation showed there were no robbers about, as the 

 ejected bees were evidently of the same family. For 

 the past three days, bees have been compelled to re- 

 main in-doors, as the mercury is too low to permit 

 flying. This morning I visited the hive again and 

 found a fearful quantity of dead bees on the bottom 

 board and about the entrance. I cannot detect any 

 symptoms of dysentery. " What is it? 



We have had a dry season this year, and several 

 late honey-dews. My impression is that this honey- 

 dew has something to do with it. — Let us have the 

 opinion of some of our experienced apiarians. The 

 hive — a two-story Langstroth — contains a hundred 

 pounds of honey. I have forty-nine colonies besides 

 this one, in ray home apiary, which as yet present no 

 symptoms of disease. 



W. D. Mansfield. 



Canaanville, Ohio, Nov. 17, 1871. 



