194 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



Mareh 1, 19C6 



something that does weigh a pound, and more than a pound, 

 to even up. 



Mr. Muth — That cuts no figure in the sale of honey at all, 

 because the retailers adjust the prices. They sell by the piece 

 and not by the pound. The retail grocers do not want full 

 sections. They want to make money. 



Dr. Bohrer — People sometimes tell me. "I would buy the 

 section honey, but it is called a pound, and it does not weigh 

 a pound. I will not buy it." And they give it a seven 

 "letting alone.'' That is another reason why I say extracted 

 honey will come to the front when people learn it is absolutely 

 pure. 



Pres. York — Personally, I have never heard anybody say 

 these things. I would like an expression on this point. Have 

 you actually heard people object to light-weight sections? I 

 have never heard that complaint. 



Mr. McCain — Ever since I have been bee-keeping, I have 

 used the Danzenbaker section, and you know that is light 

 weight. I believe it is really true that there is some objection 

 to it. I have been asked repeatedly, "Does it weigh a pound?" 

 "No," I would say, "it weighs about 14 ounces;" and they 

 hesitate whether they will take it or not. 



Mr. Muth — You asked the consumer, didn't you, or the 

 consumer asked you? I believe if you go around and sell to 

 a lot of grocers, they want short-weight sections. 



Mr. McCain — I never had that trouble in Chicago. I 

 never was questioned about it in that way here, but at home, 

 in a town of about 5,000. the general impression is that a 

 section of honey should weigh a pound. 



Dr. Bohrer — The only reason the grocer wants it that 

 way is because he buys by the pound and sells by the pie'ee. 



Mr. Whitney — I had an order last fall for some honey in 

 sections, and the groceryman wrote me to be sure not to have 

 the cases weigh over 22 pounds net. 



Pres. York — How many sections to the case? 



Mr. Whitney — Twenty-four. I had sent him short sec- 

 tions, and they just exactly suited him. 



Pres. York — We will go on to the next question. 



Late Feeding of Bees. 



"Should your bees be short of stores at this date, what 

 would you feed them?" 



Rev. McCain — Full frames of honey. 



.Mr. Johnson — My impression is that in feeding bees at 

 this time of year, you cannot, because you cannot separate 

 the cluster; it is usually too cold for that if they cluster at all. 

 I have wintered colonies that had hardly any honey in the 

 hives at all, by merely laying sections flat down, right over the 

 frames. The bees will always take honey from above and 

 pass it down, but it seems they will not take it from below 

 and pass it up. In this way, I have wintered bees almost 

 entirely. You may have to look in a little in the winter, and 

 probably give them some more sections. 



Member — Do you mean in a cellar? 



Mr. Johnson — No; out-of-doors. 



Mr. Hutchinson — You can feed candy. Make a sheet of 

 candy that you can lay over the tops of the frames, and cover 

 up with a cloth, and you can feed them out-of-doors very 

 well. Or you can feed syrup in the cellar if you wish. It is 

 more trouble. I was with a bee-keeper last spring at Manistee, 

 Mich., who did not have money to buy sugar with, and he kept 

 feeding them (sugar) syrup all winter long. He took a 

 Mason fruit-jar and had a hole cut in the cover large enough 

 so that the jar would just fit that hole. The bees came 

 through in fine shape, feeding on the syrup all winter long, 

 having very little honey in the combs. I would prefer candy, 

 if I had it to do, but that shows what can be done. 



Mr. Ferris — I took 10 2-frame nuclei, put them in 

 cellar in mid-winter, for experiment. I took a 2-quart Mason 

 jar full of syrup, 10 pounds of syrup to 1 pound honey, and 

 fed them. All of the nuclei made me full colonies, averaging 

 100 pounds of honey each the next year. I did not lose one 

 of the 10. They all came through in good shape. I did that 

 only as an experiment. 



Mr. Whitney — As an experiment, I have carried colonies 

 through from February with a 2-pound cake of maple sugar. 

 That is better than anything else I ever saw to feed bees, 

 and I think it is about as handy as anything. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 



A discussion of the question regarding a continuance of 

 the committee in the interests of legislation for bee-keepers 

 in Illinois was first taken up. 



Importance of Foul Brood Legislation. 



Mr. Wilcox — If you do not have a compulsory foul- 

 brood law, you will have no foul-brood law at all. No foul- 



brood law can be effective for the purpose intended without 

 power to treat or destroy the bees ; or, I will say, with the 

 power to enter upon the premises of any bee-keeper for the 

 purpose -of inspecting, treating or destroying the bees, we 

 can exterminate foul brood. We know that in Wisconsin. 

 Experience has demonstrated it. It is necessary to have the 

 power; it is not necessary to use it very often. There will 

 be very few instances in the history of any State where it will 

 lie necessarv to use all the power which the law ought to 

 give you. That is the essential fact in the case? Mr. France 

 has been inspector for many years, and he was thwarted at 

 every corner when he first started out. by want of authority ; 

 but when authority was written in the law. and he showed 

 them he had authority to enter upon premises and treat or 

 destroy bees, they surrendered peaceably, and thanked him 

 afterward for what he had done. To-day, in that State, there 

 is no one, to my knowledge, who objects. They are convinced 

 that it is for their interest, and we are glad we have the law 

 just as it is. I do not see how we could improve it. 



Mr. Dadant — A little while ago Mr. Wheeler made the 

 statement that in his opinion some bee-keepers do not want a 

 foul-brood law, and that it was in contradiction to my state- 

 ment. I did not say there were no bee-keepers who do not 

 want a foul-brood law, but my belief is that those who oppose 

 it are in the minority. The fact is, I am sure of it. Mr. J. Q. 

 Smith told us he did not think it was necessary, but when 

 we told him if he happened across a man whose bees had 

 foul brood, and he refused to have it attended to, we ought 

 to have some method by which he could be compelled to have 

 it attended to. he admitted it was so. People who have good 

 judgment will not object to it. When they find a doctor ready 

 to treat their colonies, and do it kindly, they will certainly be 

 willing to have their bees treated. But the man who does not 

 care whether people succeed or not, who cares nothing for 

 his bees or his neighbors' interests, if that man's bees have 

 foul brood, and we have a foul-brood law, the inspector ought 

 to have the right to exercise full authority in the case. 



Mr. Russell — There are bee-keepers probably in Illinois 

 as well as in Minnesota who object to a compulsory foul- 

 brood law. I want to tell this convention that those are the 

 very people for whom we need a foul-brood law. We have 

 them who will not allow an inspector to inspect their hives. 

 They sell bees and scatter the disease throughout the State. 

 It is for these people that we need a foul-brood law — for the 

 obstinate ones that we need a compulsory law. 



Air. Wheeler — The convention probably did not under- 

 stand me exactly in regard to the foul-brood law. The fact 

 is, this Chicago-Northwestern convention has talked for years, 

 and so strongly, that it is an absolute fact that wc can cure 

 foul brood. You people take that for granted in all your 

 argument. Now', I will take the ground that you do not cure 

 it; that your methods are not up to the point of curing it. 

 You want to go to work and pass laws obliging us to allow 

 an inspector to come into our apiaries and experiment. We 

 take the ground that you cannot cure the disease. You may 

 cure it apparently for two or three years, but it will come 

 back if you have genuine foul brood. Now, what good does 

 an inspector do? What good does destroying the hive do? 

 It reminds me of a time about 20 years ago when the potato- 

 bug made its appearance. My father went out and hired 

 boys to pick bugs, and many other people did the same. 

 There were a few neighbors, however, who would not pick 

 bugs, for they said the cost would be more than double the 

 value of the potatoes. We wanted to pass a State law com- 

 pelling people to burn up the bugs, to burn up their potato 

 patches. That is exactly the ground you are taking in this 

 foul-brood law. We can experiment. Go ahead and experi- 

 ment and learn a cure; find out exactly what will be a cure. 

 I know it can be cured, apparently; for a year or two it will 

 disappear almost entirely— no sign of it ; but almost as sure 

 as the sun is to rise, the next season it will make its appear- 

 ance. Bee-keepers say, "My neighbors have it." That is 

 not the fact. I can prove it. I have experimented along all 

 sort of lines with fumigating, putting combs into an air-tight 

 lank, and fumigating with formaldehyde. 1 bought two big 

 tanks, put in combs, fumigated the bee-hives as the California 

 man said — everything that had ever been tried and written 

 about I experimented with. And you can for all practical 

 purposes take care of your bees, shake them out of the hives, 

 give them empty combs and empty frames, and for a few years 

 your bees are clean. But invariably it shows itself again. 

 Before it makes its appearance to the human eye. the germ is 

 there in the combs, and a bee-inspector might come along and 

 declare those bees free from all disease, and in a few months 

 there would be a few more cells and the next year it would 

 appear. 



Dr. Bohrer — Do 'I understand Mr. Wheeler to say that 



