AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



335 



1. Difference in the development con- 

 ditions. 2 and 3. Large queens are to 

 be preferred to smaller ones, but we 

 often see small queens more prolific than 

 some large ones. 4. To a great extent 

 — by observing the laws of queen-devel- 

 opment. — J. P. H. Brown. 



1. It may be caused by ancestry, or 

 from lack of care during development. 

 Traits of family character very often 

 overbalance stature. 2. All things con- 

 sidered, yes. 3. Good evidence of 

 strength and faultless development. 4. 

 Largely. — Mrs. J. N. Heater. 



1. I don't know any more than I 

 know why there is a difference in the 

 size of poultry of the same stock. 2. I 

 do not think they are. It can only be 

 told by testing. 3. A good queen can 

 only be told by her progeny, and large 

 queens use the same sized cells that the 

 small ones do. 4. I don't think it is, as 

 yet. — J. E. Pond. 



1. Some are smaller by nature, and 

 some because of defects in the method 

 of their rearing. 2. Yes, if not abnor- 

 mally large. 3. Because they are likely 

 to be better developed. 4. Yes, in so 

 far as he can select the parents and con- 

 trol the nourishing, etc., of the imma- 

 ture queen. — R. L. Tatlok. 



1. The queen honey-bee is the result 

 of development, and this fact alone re- 

 moves all surprise why they vary in size. 

 2. Not always, and perhaps seldom. 

 The medium size is preferable. Nothing 

 that is over big of its kind, or over small 

 of its kind, is likely to be the best. 4. 

 Yes, by proper management he may 

 have his queens fully developed. — G. W. 

 Demaree. 



1. Temperature and the amount of 

 food given the larvas. 2. Abnormally 

 large queens are seldom good layers ; so 

 also are the small ones, as well as short 

 lived. 4. Yes, good, normally-devel- 

 oped queens ; but I claim that they must 

 be fed for queen development from the 

 time the egg hatches, to get the best 

 laying, most vigorous, long-lived queens. 

 — G. L. Tinker. 



All queens are small when not laying, 

 and increase in size just in proportion to 

 the number of eggs they are laying each 

 24 hours. Queens which are reared 

 under favorable circumstances are us- 

 ually of about the same size when they 

 are virgins, and queens should never be 

 reared under other but favorable cir- 

 cumstances ; hence it is in the bee-mas- 

 ters' power to rear queens of the normal 



size. — G. M. DOOLITTLE. 



1. Generally those started from the 

 egg, or very young larvaj, and well fed 

 from the beginning, are large and well 

 developed. 2. Not always. I have had 

 small queens that were very prolific, and 

 I have had large ones that were value- 

 less. The largest and finest looking one 

 I ever had. never laid an egg, though 

 she was in a good, strong colony in the 

 height of the breeding season. I prefer 

 a queen normal in size, that looks wide- 

 awake. 4. It is in the bee-keeper's 

 power to secure well-developed queens. 

 — M. Mahin. 



1. There are only two main causes. 

 In the first place, some good queens 

 produce small, slim queens that are just 

 as good as any, as far as I can see. In 

 the second place, any queen reared from 

 a larva too old, will likely be small, a 

 poor layer, and short-lived. 2. The 

 larger queens are usually preferred by 

 me, unless it is in the stock, as first 

 mentioned. 3. On account of her stout 

 looks and general appearance ; however, 

 the largest queens are not always the 

 best— any of them, large or small, will 

 turn out to be worthless sometimes. 4. 

 Permit me to select my queen mothers, 

 and I will insure you large queens.— 

 Mrs. Jennie Atchlet. 



COWVESfTIOW JDIRECTORY. 



Time and place of meetina. 



1893. ^ 



April 5, 6.— Texas State, at Greenville, Tex. 

 A. H. Jones. Sec, Golden, Tex. 



April 6, 7.— Kansas State, at Ottawa, Kans. 

 L. Wayman, Sec, Chanute, Kans. 

 Apr. 10, 11.— Utah, at Salt Lake City, Utah 

 R. T. Rhees, Sec, View, Utah. 



April 18.— Colorado State, at Denver, Colo 



H. Knig-ht Sec, Littleton. Coio. 



May 4.— Susquehanna Co., at Montrose, Pa 

 H. M. Seeley, Sec, Harford, Pa. 



May 4.— Allegany Co., at Belmont, N Y 

 H. C. Farnum, Pres.. Transit Cridge, N. Y 



In order to have this table complete. 

 Secretaries are requested to forward full 

 particulars of the time and the place of 

 each future meeting. — The Editor. 



North American Bee-Keepers' Association 



President— Dr. C. C. Miller. . . . Mareneo Ills 



Vice-Pres.-J. E. Crane Middlebury Vt 



Secretary— Frank Benton. Washington D r" 

 Treasurer- George W. York ... Chicago" Ills' 



» > • » 



National Bee-Keepers' Vnion. 



PRESiDENT-Hon. R. L. Taylor.. Lapeer, Mich 

 Gen'l Manageb-T. G. Newman. Chicago, ill! 



