THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



51 



a reduced price, if they could induce bees to use 

 (jnly drone eggs? What stupid creatures they 

 must be, thus to destroy hundreds of useful 

 workers to produce one queen, when a few 

 drone eggs might answer ; and as to spermato- 

 zoids, they could woriy a few drones aud get 

 all they need. (See Kirby, in Bee Journal, 



Vol. I.) 



But this tin ory is not unsupported. We are 

 assured thai Huber, Dzierzon, and Berlepsch 



agree in the same story up to a certain point, 

 and then only differ in the details. Thus, "I 

 differ in my story only in this with them, that I 

 attribute the fertility of fertile workers to their 

 pabulum of worker eggs arid spermatozoids ab 

 initio, whilst they attribute it to royal jelly." 

 That is, they speak of it as a whole, without re- 

 gaid to its composition, while the theory as- 

 sumes some special supposed fact included with- 

 in the whole. They call it royal jelly ; but 

 here it is "worker eggs and spermatozoids. " 

 "They commit the egregious error of attribut- 

 ing to the alimentary functions of the bee that 

 which, according to reason, philosophy, and 

 anatomical research elsewhere, is attributable 

 only to the organs of procreation, whether per- 

 fectly or imperfectly developed." Now, if the 

 author has not committed the same " egregious 

 error," T confess I am ignorant of the mean- 

 ing of language. He doses them on " eggs and 

 spermatozoids;" they on royal jelly. But if 

 worker eggs are essential to this, I should be 

 under obligations to be informed in what partic- 

 ular a queen produced as follows fails to be 

 perfect. A sheet of comb containing larvae 

 from two to four days old, is given to a nucleus, 

 and from these they produce queens, there being 

 no egg in the hive. 



In conclusion, I must be allowed to say that 

 I fail to discover any new theory here, but sim- 

 ply an attempt to explain some other person's, 

 in which attempt is manifested a great amount 

 of ingenuity, based upon inferences and specu- 

 lations, without the necessary facts to sustain it. 

 II. C. Barnard, M. D. 



Charleston, III. 



Bee Sting. 



An Andover correspondent of the Oxford 

 Democrat says that Mr. John Ilall was stung by 

 a bee, last {Saturday, w r hich caused him such 

 pain that it set him into spasms. In about fif- 

 teen minutes Dr. Wall w r as called, and expres- 

 sed fears that he would die. It Lad the same 

 effect that the bite of a rattlesnake would have 

 caused — but he is out of danger now. — Maim 

 Farmer, July 25. 



At the Paris Exposition in 1867, samples of 

 honey produced by the native bees of Cuba, 

 were exhibited in glass jars. The upper portion 

 was yellowish or amber-colored, while the lower 

 portion was brownish. It had a very sweet 

 but rather cloying taste. 



Daub yourself with honey, and you will have 

 plenty of flies. 



[For the American Bee Journal.] 



Open or closed top Frames. Both sides 

 of the question. 



We all rather like to have others think as we 

 do. It is a kind of compliment to our judg- 

 ment, which some great men are not indiffer- 

 ent to. 



When we have once adopted a theory or 

 process, Ave naturally defend our judgment by 

 defending the object of our adoption ; and to a 

 greater or less extent, all are unconscious^ in- 

 clined to become champions of their own opin- 

 ions. The contests that follow are sometimes 

 carried further than the facts will justify. It is 

 an easy matter to work ourselves up to a point 

 w r here zeal takes the judgment prisoner; and ex- 

 aggeration then seems to us the most powerful 

 argument. 



These reflections are suggested by reading 

 some of the late articles on bee hives — w T herein 

 much that is valuable has been brought out, 

 along with some little bad feeling and a great 

 deal of buncom. 



Keep cool, friends ! the dog-days are upon 

 us. Be earnest and courteous, but do not claim 

 more than is safe. There are some good points 

 in every hive, and cone are perfect. 



Now, I think Mr. See, in the June number 

 of the Bee Journal, claims more for the Lang- 

 stroth hive than the inventor does, and more 

 than it will be found entitled to, on trial. On 

 page 171, Mr. See says, "to remove the frames, 

 commence with the third one and push it 

 against the fourth, and then shove the second 

 against the third, and you can take out the first 

 or side frame ; and if you now wish to examine 

 the rest, you have the room to slip them on the 

 rabbets and can do so. And when you want 

 to close the hive, if the first frame taken out 

 will fit the place of the last comb moved, put it 

 in ; but if not, you must slide them all bach to 

 the place they originally occupied." 



Now, every praotical apiarian, knows that 

 the above is often necessary, and not more so 

 with a closed top frame hive, than with an open 

 one. Mr. See further says that it is necessary 

 to take all the frames out of a closed top frame 

 hive, till you come to the one you wish to re- 

 move. This may be necessary with any frame, 

 but it is not any more so in a closed top hive, 

 than in any other. When the tops of the frames 

 touch, the side of the hive is made movable, so 

 that the outside frame comb can be removed 

 easily. The hive can now be closed or even 

 left open, and the rest of the frames moved 

 about or removed, as easily as in any other 

 hive ; and that too when only one frame has 

 been taken out. The Langstroth hive requires 

 as much ; the closed top hive no more. Now I 

 find there are times when almost any one would 

 be glad to be able to remove the sides of a 

 Langstroth hive, and thereby get room to ma- 

 nipulate the frames. My bees cram their hivea 

 so full of honey, with a projection here and a 

 depression there, that I often find it very diffi- 

 cult to remove amy one comb, even when I havo 

 crowded.^ tike rest so close together that they 

 are in danger of being crushed ; and in these 



