AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



713 



mistake, and we felt a good deal smaller 

 than usual when we beheld what we had 

 done, or left undone. In bicycle parlance, 

 that was the nearest we have come lately 

 to taking a regular " header !" 



Reversing: Bi-oo«l, Ktc. — The fol- 

 lowing we have received in regard to Mr. 

 Doolittle's management of weak colonies: 



On Mr. Doolittle's article on page 628, I 

 would like to ask two questions : 



1. What does he mean by reversing the 

 brood to build up rapidly ? (I use the 

 dovetailed hive, and Langstroth frame.) 



3. In changing frames of brood as spoken 

 of, from No. 1 to No. 2, etc., is smoking 

 sufficient, or will the bees require sprink- 

 ling with peppermint water, as recom- 

 mended in uniting colonies ? W. R. 



Macon, Mich. 



We referred the above questions to Mr. 

 Doolittle, who replies thus: 



1. By reversing the brood is meant, plac- 

 ing the frames of brood which occupy the 

 center of the brood-nest on the outside, and 

 those outside in the center. To illustrate : 

 Suppose six combs in a hive contain brood, 

 this would be termed the brood-nest. The 

 two center combs would be likely to be 

 nearly or quite full of brood; the two next 

 (one on each side of the two just men- 

 tioned) would be from j<2 to Ig full, while 

 the two outside frames would be about X 

 full of brood. To reverse, is to put-the two 

 combs )4 full in the center, and the two 

 full ones on the outside. By so doing the 

 queen will fill all six of the combs with 

 brood clear down to the bottom corners, in 

 short order. 



2. No smoking or sprinkling is necessary, 

 for with me bees never quarrel when united 

 by alternating frames of bees, as the bees 

 are so completely mixed up that they do 

 not know whom to fight. 



G. M. Doolittle. 



Dr. Ho^vard^s Foul Brood Book 



— Bro. Root gave in Gleanings for May 15th, 

 a very generous and kindly notice and 

 endorsement of Dr. Howard's book on foul 

 brood, for which we wish to express our 

 thanks. Having had much experience with 

 the dreaded scourge, Bro. Root is quite 

 competent to review such a book, and here 

 is the major portion of what he said con- 

 cerning it: 



So far as we are able to judge, it is the 

 most practical and reliable book on the 

 subject of foul brood alone that we know 

 of. It treats it practically and scientifically. 

 It reviews and criticises the works of Che- 

 shire, McLain, Mackenzie, and Wm. Mc- 

 Evoy. The whole is put in popular form, so 

 that any one can understand the scientific 



aspect of the disease. It is made up of a 

 series of propositions, each one of which 

 the author demonstrates very carefully in 

 a page or two of matter. After reading 

 them through we can thoroughly indorse 

 them. For instance. Prop. 2 is particularly 

 sound. It reads as follows : 



The decomposition of chilled or dead brood does 

 not produce foul brood; and putrefactive non- 

 pathogenic germs do not produce those of a patho- 

 genic character. 



The latter portion of the work is devoted 

 to the treatment and cure of the disease. 

 He says on page 25 : 



I regard the use of any and all drugs in the treat- 

 ment of foul brood as a useless waste of time and 

 material, wholly ineffectual, inviting ruin and total 

 loss of bees. Any method which has not for its ob- 

 ject the entire removal of all infectious material 

 beyond the reach of botti bees and brood, will prove 

 detrimental and destructive, and surely encourage 

 the recurrence of the disease. The reader is re- 

 ferred to the criticisms in the following reviews for 

 further discussion of the methods of treatment. 



After discussing the treatments recom- 

 mended by Cheshire, McLain, Mackenzie, 

 and McEvoy^ he indorses the latter's plan 

 by the following : 



From my experience with " bacillus alvei," its 

 nature and growth, it would seem clear that Mr. 

 McEvoy's method, though simple and plain, would 

 prove eflScient, for it has been noted that any 

 method which removes the foul-brood "bacillus" 

 from the reach of bees and brood will cure the dis- 

 ease. His plan has for its aims, first, to remove all 

 foul combs with their contents from the bees, and 

 destroy them by fire: secondly, to cleanse from the 

 bees all the honey taken with them, which contains 

 the infectious germs, before any brood-rearing is 

 commenced. The labor of these first four days 

 taken away generally removes most of the infected 

 honey, when full sheets of foundation are given, 

 and worked out; the infected honey is consumed in 

 comb building; brood-rearing is commenced in new, 

 clean combs, and a healthy colony results. The 

 work of handUng the infected colonies is done " In 

 the evening," in order that no robbing may result, 

 to carry the infection to other colonies. 



Our readers will remember that this is 

 essentially what we have recommended, 

 and what we used with such success in cur- 

 ing some 75 diseased colonies in our own 

 apiary several years ago, with the excep- 

 tion that we boiled the hives. We at one 

 time thought it was not necessary to dis- 

 infect them. Later experience showed that 

 colonies treated and put back into their 

 old hives without boiling, showed sooner or 

 later the same old disease; but when the 

 hives were immersed in nearly boiling 

 water, the disease never reappeared. 



It would seem that the author, before he 

 began his investigations, was prejudiced 

 against the McEvoy method ; but the mere 

 fact that his studies and researches changed 

 his previously mapped-out conclusions 

 would indicate the fairness with which he 

 went about the work. In the concluding 

 paragraph of the book, he says : 



Thus it will be seen that McEvoy's method of 

 treatment, which at first was so unpopular, and 

 seemed so far from being correct, has, much to my 

 surprise (and, need I say, disappointment ?) been 

 shown to be the only rational method laid down 

 among all the writers on this subject. 



Many of our scientific investigators have, 

 in the past, endeavored to make their ex- 

 periments prove their previously conceived 



