526 



June 21, 1906 



American Ttee Journal 



the poppy. It has been suspected that something else than 

 either pollen or honey makes the bees so wild over poppies — 

 but that doesn't signify when the object is simply to get the 

 bees into our floral view. The hollyhock also draws bees 

 well, at least it often does. The old single kinds draw 

 rather better than the grand Chaters which present-day 

 floriculture would want. And great sport it was for the 

 children to capture bees without danger by closing a holly- 

 hock over them. Even if it was a bumble-bee, all the same. 

 Alas, my prime favorite among the flowers does not draw 

 bees at all — so I can't propose that for the list. Page 408. 



Water as a Swarming Discourager 



Dr. Miller is quite right that it is hard to stop the 

 swarmtng-act, once begun. Yet I can give a method which 

 will succeed if you can be on hand soon enough — say when 

 not more than a quarter of the bees are in the air. Squirt 

 a powerful and undivided stream of water into the entrance. 

 Do it relentlessly, with nozzle pressed to the entrance, till 

 most of those inside are wet. It doesn't seem to do much 

 harm; but seeing (as he says) they'll be at it again next 

 day, the occasions are few when it is worth while. To set a 

 big wire-cloth catcher right over the hive is rather better 

 practise — but that is not what was asked for, and it has its 

 own drawbacks, also. Page 409. 



Not a Hard Bee-Puzzle 



The puzzle propounded by H. D. Black, on page 410, is 

 not a hard one, I think. In a location where bees can get a 

 surplus only one year in 10, one should not expect them to 

 have so much brood at one time as in a good location. Very 

 likely the pollen-resources of the place may be still poorer 

 than the honey-resources. 



(Wfribufed 

 Article 



Chicago-Northwestern and National 



BY DR. G. BOHRER. 



THE Chicago-Northwestern and National Bee-Keepers' 

 Conventions, held in Chicago, on Dec. 19, 20, and 21, 1905, 

 probably constituted as able a body of bee-keepers as 

 ever assembled in this or any other country. I will name a 

 few of them : 



M. M. Baldridge, of Illinois, a veteran bee-keeper whom 

 I met at the first convention of bee-keepers of a national 

 character ever organized in North America, which was dur- 

 ing the winter of 1871. at Indianapolis, Ind. I cannot recall any 

 others who were there that are now living. It was called 

 "The North American Convention of Bee-Keepers," in or- 

 der that it might embrace our cousin bee-keepers from 

 Canada, as there were one or two present. Among them was 

 Rev. William Fletcher Clarke, who was something of a 

 writer, but probably not a man of extensive practical 

 experience in apiculture. 



At Chicago there were several Canadian bee-keepers pres- 

 ent who are intensely practical. I say "intensely," because they 

 demonstrated by their mode of discussion of any subject, that 

 they have but" little use for any thought not backed by 

 experience. 



Then, there was present that veteran, C. P. Dadant, who 

 was one of the Rev. L. L. Langstroth's greatest friends and 

 admirers, and who, with his father, revised Langstroth's book 

 on bee-keeping, and who in practice has blended the ideas of 

 both Langstroth and Quinby by using the length of frame used 

 by the former and the depth used by the latter, which is about 

 2% inches deeper than the Langstroth frame. That Mr. 

 Dadant is a most successful bee-keeper no one will ques- 

 tion who is familiar with him as a business man. 



Besides Mr. Dadant there was another stalwart bee- 

 keeper, as well as the author of " Forty Years Among the 



Bees,"— Dr. C. C. Miller— and his assistant in apiculture, that 

 amiable, distinguished, and exemplary lady, Miss Emma M. 

 Wilson, who edits the Sisters' department of the American 

 Bee Journal. 



N. E. France, our untiring general manager, was there, 

 who has been the medium through which many differences 

 have been adjusted, and foul brood diagnosed and exter- 

 minated. 



There was also present Mr. Whitney, of Wisconsin, 

 another thoroughly practical man and an enthusiast, of ~~ 

 summers. 



Others present were: Mr. Hershiser, of New York; Mr. 

 Hilton and Mr. Hutchinson, of Michigan; the latter being 

 not only an author, but the editor of a bee-paper. Other 

 editors of extensively patronized bee-papers, who were in 

 attendance at this convention, were Ernest R. Root, W. H. 

 Putnam, and George W. York. Besides these there were 

 nearly 200 ladies and gentlemen of extensive practical experi- 

 ence in bee-keeping. 



The discussions of this gathering of distinguished bee- 

 keepers are now on record, and I hope that the same will, 

 by installments at least, be given to the bee-keeping public. 



On account of a shortage of time I did not have the 

 pleasure of being present at more than two sessions of the 

 National, consequently I have little comment to offer in 

 regard to its proceedings. At the Chicago-Northwestern 

 session that I attended, the question as to which has the 

 brighter future, comb or extracted honey, was considered. 

 I, being called upon, stated that with a strong National pure- 

 food law, extracted honey would be far the greater product, 

 as people will in time learn that honey free from wax (which 

 is wholly indigestible), is not only the most wholesome form 

 in which to use it for food, but that it is also the cheapest 

 to the consumer, as the producer can put it on the market 

 cheaper than he can afford to place, comb honey there. 



The people are learning very rapidly that such a thing 

 as artificial comb, filled with artificial honey, sealed by human 

 hands, is not accomplished. They are also learning that_ the 

 producer of comb honey, as a rule, sells his honey by weight, 

 and that the retail dealer sells it very largely by the piece, 

 so that the consumer of section-honey pays the same price 

 for a light-weight section as he does for a full-weight sec- 

 tion, or one that weighs a pound. This fact is doing, in my 

 opinion, a vast amount of harm to the section-comb honey 

 market; but I hope to be able to discuss this and other ques- 

 tions that were before the conventions, in the near future. 



Lyons, Kansas. 



Frank R. Cheshire on Foul Brood 



BY REV. ROBERT B. M'CAIN. 



THE name at the head of this article is one to conjure 

 by. The world has not known a higher authority in 

 the realm of scientific bee-culture than Frank R. 

 Cheshire. It is a great wonder that his name does not more 

 often appear in the discussion of the "deep things" of our 

 craft. Of his two volumes which contain the results of his 

 monumental work on " Bees and Bee-Keeping," the first, 

 which is devoted to the scientific aspect of the subject, is 

 undoubtedly the most thorough, exhaustive and exact work 

 on the subject extant. The second volume, which treats of 

 practical bee-keeping, is larger in size, but is in the main 

 out of date owing to the great improvement that has been 

 made in hives, equipment and the practical management of 

 bees in recent years. Chapter 12 of this second volume is an 

 exception to this statement. It is entitled "Diseases and 

 Enemies," and contains the most comprehensive and thor- 

 ough discussion of the subject of foul brood, from the scien- 

 tific point of view, to be found in literature. 



In justification of the review of this subject at this 

 time, a quotation from the closing paragraph of the chap- 

 ter seems sufficient. Mr. Cheshire says : 



"Our modern hives keep the old pests (such as wasps, 

 spiders, mice, etc.) pretty much at bay, but infectious dis- 

 orders are on the increase, and are also appearing in new 

 forms. It is no safeguard to shut one's eyes to the danger. 

 Safety rather lies in a knowledge of the magnitude of any 

 evil, and respecting this one, slackness is all but crimi- 

 nal." 



The greater part of the chapter under consideration is 



