160 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



Feb. 22, 1906 





filled, gives us the least trouble in removing- the filled sec- 

 tions from it, andean not be easily disarranged when hand- 

 ling it in the bee-yard before or after going on the hives — in 

 other words, may be handled roughly without serious re- 

 sults. That super suits us best, provided perfect honey is 

 produced in it. 



Candidly, now, is there a super offered for sale by any of 

 our manufacturers to-day that can make such claims ? Not 

 that I know of! The very best of them have a section-holder 

 with no top-bar — many have no bee-space at the ends and 

 around the holders. Some use a section-holder which con- 

 tains only 3 sections, going the short way of the hive. This 

 latter arrangement brings one end of two-thirds of the sec- 

 tions in close contact with the super walls. If the section- 

 holder were the long way of the hive it would hold 4 sections. 

 This arrangement brings one end of only half of the sec- 

 tions in close proximity to the super-walls, and is the best 

 we can do. 



With a bee-space at the end, and perhaps a double bee- 

 space at the sides, we have a super that will be free from the 

 defects mentioned above, and will give us sections uniformly 

 filled and sealed. If in addition we give the section-holders 

 a top-bar, and thus keep the tops of sections clean, it will 

 seem to me that we need not seek for anything better. Such 

 a super would be called a wide-frame super, and is the most 

 practical of anything I have ever used or seen, or have seen 

 described. 



Some bee-keepers who have had no experience with wide 

 frames are afraid there maybe difficulty (?) in taking the 

 filled sections out of them. If they had had any experience, 

 they would have found it a great deal easier than to take the 

 honey from T-supers, and just as easy as taking the sections 

 out of the section-holders with no top-bars. There is no 

 super on earth that gives us more trouble than the T-super. 

 I find it impossible to " get the sections out" without set- 

 ting a large percent to leaking. I have used them for 20 

 years, and have followed the instructions given by many on 

 how to empty a super, but have not yet learned the trick, or 

 a better way than carefully to remove one section after 

 another with the super right side up and follower removed. 

 The difficulty lies in loosening the section from the T-tin, 

 which can not always be accomplished without cracking the 

 honey. I can generally remove the honey from 4 wide-frame 

 supers in less time than from one T-super, and do it with- 

 out breaking or cracking a single section. 



The cleaning and scraping is equally more expeditious 

 with sections from a wide-frame super.. Dr. Miller, some 

 time ago, claimed in this Journal that the bottom-bars of 

 wide frames were apt to sag slightly, and the bees then had 

 a detestable way of crowding bee-glue into the space be- 

 tween the top of the section and the top-bar of the wide 

 frame. This shows that Dr. Miller has had some experience 

 along this line. It must be he has used wide frames, and 

 the wonder is that such an insignificant matter could induce 

 him to abandon the wide frame for the most worthless super 

 ever invented. If I were bound to use the T principle, I 

 would at least abandon the long T tins, and, instead, rivet 

 little x tins to the separators, as shown in the picture here- 

 with. This arrangement makes the separator the supporter 

 of the sections instead the T-tins, and reduces the bearing 

 surface between the supporting tin and the wood of the 

 sections to a minimum, and also reduces the number of 

 pieces of the super. There is no difficulty whatever in re- 

 moving filled sections from such a super. 



I have some 25 or 30 on hand, which I would sell cheap 

 to Dr. Miller, or to any other man. together with that many 

 more regular style T-supers, for I have decided not to use 

 them again. They hold 24 no-bee-way 4x5 sections, and are 

 well painted. I object to them because they are so frail, 

 and have to be handled so very carefully or they are out of 

 order before we know it. 



The regular T-super is still more objectionable on ac- 

 count of the space between the rows of sections at the top 

 of the super, caused by the T-tin at the bottom. To fix 

 things right, thin strips of wood must be inserted to prevent 

 an undue amount of propolis being run in between the ends 

 of the sections. But as every one well knows, the principal 

 drawback to these supers is that the tops and bottoms of 

 the sections become very badly soiled. Only a sandpaper- 

 ing-machine can ever make them presentable. The sections 

 from such supers as have a bottom-bar for them to rest on, 

 at least keeps the bottoms clean, and by casing bottomside 

 up, our cased honey presents a tolerably fair appearance. 

 But the T-super does not give us even this advantage. The 

 tops and bottoms are both badly besmeared, and when the 

 honey is cased, even after we have done a big lot of scrap- 

 ing, it looks unsightly. 



Let Dr. Miller examine the two pieces of sections which 

 I mail him to-day, and tell us which he would rather clean 

 up — the one from the T-super, or the one from the wide- 

 frame-super. All my sections from T-supers and open 

 section-holders were as badly besmeared last year as the 

 one I send him. The photograph shows how badly this is. 



The sections which come from the wide frame supers 

 may have little ridges of bee-glue along their edges, but 

 this may be removed very easily with a few strokes of a 

 knife. 



The sagging of the bottom-bar of a wide frame holding 

 4 sections is of very little consequence, and may be almost 



Supers used by F. Grehter. 



wholly prevented by a heavy bottom-bar. Those I use are 

 too thin, as they are only '+-inch thick. I should now make 

 the top-bar and bottom-bar of equal thickness, but not more 

 than 5-16 thick. I would not expect very serious trouble 

 with such ; in fact, I don't experience very much trouble 

 with them as I have them now. Occasionally I have to take 

 off a bottom-bar and turn it over before nailing it on again. 



A serious fault of the fences is that they are not a per- 

 manent fixture. Many a time the bees widen the spaces the 

 first year to such an extent as to cause the finished honey to 

 show that "wash-board" appearance. Fences should be 

 made of beach or maple wood — hard wood, at any rate ; then 

 they would last; I have fences in my rubbish heap which, 

 were nearly eaten up by the bees. Many others have lost 

 the little cleats. It seems the furniture-glue is not as strong 

 as the bee-glue. These things do not tend to bring fences 

 into greater favor with me. 



In constructing a wide-frame super, it is a question 

 whether the separator should be nailed to the frame or 

 should be a separate fixture. Each method has its advan- 

 tages. If the wide frame can be filled with sections before 

 putting in the foundation, it would be an advantage. Mr. 

 Betsinger manages precisely as Mr. Getaz describes on page 

 843 (1905), filling the sections with foundation, but has the 

 advantage of handling them in fours. Even should his sec- 

 tions not fold exactly square, they are held in shape by the 

 wide frame, and by having the 4 blocks of wood nailed down 

 on a board just right, the wide frame with its sections may 

 be laid on them, and the foundation adjusted and- fastened 

 on by use of melted wax. This way of fastening foundation 

 into sections may appear meritorious to some. I have, for 

 the sake of the experiment, tried it, and luck would have it 

 that the so-produced honey found its way into the culinary 

 department of our house. A heavy hatchet was required to 

 knock it out of the sections, and I don't doubt Mr. Getaz in 

 the least when he says that such honey may be shipped any- 

 where ; but I timidly ask, Do we produce honey for the Hot- 

 tentots in South Africa, or for the civilized people of Amer- 

 ica ? I advise those who can not produce an unobjectionable 

 article for human food profitably, would better get out of 

 the business. 



At present prices we can produce comb honey without 

 comb foundation at a profit to ourselves, and it will not be 

 necessary to depend upon the trade " among the gilded par- 

 asites of high finance," as Mr. Atwater puts it in a Novem- 

 ber bee-paper. If we can not supply all the comb honey that 

 is wanted, extracted honey, I fancy, will come to our rescue, 

 and the masses would only be the gainers. Let us produce 

 a pure, wholesome article of comb honey, or not say any 

 more about adulteration of syrups, honey, or other food 

 products. Ontario Co., N. Y. 



