AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



341 



gives the results of his experiments to a 

 waiting, eager, and weary world. And 

 then what are they worth to any one ? 

 Has he proven them ? No ! If they were 

 proven, they would be true ; but that 

 the opposite is the case any one can see 

 by reading the " Mysteries of Bee-Keep- 

 ing " or the " A B C of Bee-Culture," or 

 any standard work on apiculture, and 

 verify the assertions of these observers 

 in the apiary. 



Now, after reading the chapters in 

 these standard works,on laying workers, 

 and then seeing them in the act of de- 

 positing eggs, and watching these eggs 

 hatch drones, just as this writer said 

 that they would do ; after reading Cook 

 and Cowan on the anatomy of the honey- 

 bee — that workers are females to all in- 

 tents and purposes, their only defect 

 being a want of development; and then 

 to be told that some one "don't think" 

 that they ever lay eggs — I say I don't 

 think, but that I know that that writer 

 bases his conclusions on insufficient evi- 

 dence. 



Another has found a laying queen in 

 an upper story from which he is morally 

 certain that there is no means of egress 

 (a virgin queen can go through a pretty 

 small hole). In opposition to the teach- 

 ings of the above writers, as well as 

 those who have made a careful and 

 studious observation of the habits of the 

 queen, and her habits for years, he 

 jumps to the conclusion founded on in- 

 sufficient evidence, that queen mated and 

 became fertilized in the hive ! He sits 

 down and writes to Mr. Doolittle, giving 

 his views, and when Doolittle suggests 

 not only the possible or most probable, 

 but veteran bee-keepers will say the 

 certain solution to the difficulty or prob- 

 lem — a hole in the super — the bee- 

 keeper answers, " I am not that kind of 

 a bee-keeper." While he may not be 

 the kind of a bee-keeper that tolerates, 

 or has a hole in a hive, I ask in all can- 

 dor and earnestness, what kind of an 

 observer is he who takes a single inci- 

 dent or accident like that to contradict 

 and overthrow all the evidence that goes 

 to prove that queens mate only in the 

 air? 



Another follows some plan of intro- 

 ducing queens — more than likely it is an 

 old one, discarded years ago by the 

 veterans, or one that involves more work 

 and fussing with the bees than queens, 

 bees and all are worth, or as much time 

 as to sit over them in a July sunshine 

 and guard them with a shot-gun, to pre- 

 vail on them to behave themselves ; yet 

 up he bobs serenely with an infallible 



method of introducing queens that is 

 the joy of his heart. He would impart 

 it to the American Bee Journal or 

 Gleanings, Alley or Doolittle, for a small 

 consideration. 



Yes, I can safely say that, like taxes 

 and the bill collector, they are always 

 with us— those that jump to conclusions, 

 and base their assertions upon insuffi- 

 cient evidence. Every season some one 

 proves on these insufficient data that 

 bees do steal eggs for the purpose of 

 rearing a queea. The authors of text 

 books quoted above tell us that it may 

 be done, that it is not impossibl«, or 

 rather that they are not prepared to 

 doubt its possibility ; yet they have 

 never seen it, and their langugae im- 

 plies a doubt. 



Twice during my bee-keeping experi- 

 ence I have been almost certain that I 

 had almost proven that bees do steal 

 eggs ; but after losing several queens, 

 and having valuable cells torn down, I 

 instituted a rigid search through the 

 colony, and found an old queen only 

 capable of laying, or at least she only 

 laid, an occasional egg here and there, 

 from which the bees were trying to rear 

 a queen— I might say, to supersede her, 

 but that would be jumping to a conclu- 

 sion. As I destroyed her, I have no evi- 

 dence as to what would have taken 

 place. So my triumph where Root had 

 failed — ignominiously failed — many 

 times. Had it not been for my rigid 

 training as a physician, I would have 

 rushed into print with an account of my 

 success, based on Insufficient evidence, 

 that would have been a reminder of my 

 folly in after years, when more careful 

 experiments, or the evidence of others, 

 had overthrown my ill-based deductions. 



Pity the editors, pity the readers, pity 

 the writers, who have these so-called 

 facts in articles attempting to prove 

 that which we all know, or may know, 

 are without* sufficient data to make 

 them of any value whatever, continually 

 thrust before their eyes, and offending 

 their judgment of the fitness of some 

 men to observe even trivial matters 

 connected with our beloved pursuit. If 

 what I have written seems harsh or 

 pitiless, it refers as much to myself as 

 others, for who can stand in judgment 

 on his own pet theories, or see the weak 

 places in the evidence that supports 

 them ? 



Musson, La. 



Have You Bead that wonderful book 

 Premium offer on page 325 ? 



