172 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



Now I don't believe either statement is 

 correct; but if I had to stand by either 

 theory I'd take my chance with the one 

 he attributes to me. For with anything 

 short of poison for stores — anything they 

 could safely use in summer — bees will 

 winter perfectly if not too cold and not too 

 long confined. For, if hard pressed, you 

 see I could give them a daily flight and 

 never allow a freezing temperature. But 

 with the best stores in the world I hardly 

 think Bro. Taylor would say bees would 

 winter well confined six months at a zero 

 temperature. 



Referring to page 183, American Bee 

 Journal, the critic thinks I am led into 

 serious error when I advise steps to induce 

 a colony to fly. A case, no doubt, of unin- 

 tenntional, but none the the less clear, mis- 

 representation. Never mind for the present 

 the misrepresentation. Taking into ac- 

 count what Mr. Taylor esteems "a serious 

 error, " and what he says afterward, the im- 

 pression is left that he thinks he would 

 never be justified in disturbing a colony 

 so as to induce flight thereby. I am not 

 going to say Mr. Taylor is wrong, but it 

 may not be out of place to say that some 

 very good authorities do not agree with 

 him. On page 341 of Revised Langstroth 

 mention is made of a rather pleasant day, 

 Jan. 16, 1873, in one of the coldest win- 

 ters, after six weeks confinement, and 

 Mr. Dadant says, "We took occasion of 

 this to examine our weak colonies, being 

 anxious in regard to their condition. To 

 our astonisnment, they were found alive; 

 and our disturbing them caused them to 

 fly and discharge their excrements. Be- 

 ing convinced that all our bees were safe, 

 we did not disturb the strong colonies; 

 and a few of the latter remained quiet. 

 The next day cold weather returned, and 

 lasted three weeks longer. Then we dis- 

 covered that the weak colonies, that had 

 had a cleansing flight, were alive and 

 well, while the strong ones which had 

 remained confined, were either dead or 

 in bad condition." Clearly, it looks as 

 though too much leaning toward Mr. 

 Taylor's belief had led Mr. Dadant into a 



"serious error" in practice. But which- 

 ever view is right, Mr. Taylor has either 

 failed to notice, or else has not thought it 

 worth while to mention, the special cir- 

 cumstance connected with the case, that 

 the bees under consideration were in a 

 building "double-boarded and tar-papered 

 outside, and lined and papered inside," 

 with a foot of chaff between the hive and 

 the inside wall, a spout 3x3 inches lead- 

 ing out through the chaff. Under such 

 circumstances, suppose that during a se- 

 vere winter (this was in North Dakota) 

 the bees had been confined a number of 

 weeks, and a day came when bees on 

 summer stands would fly freely, but these 

 bees would not Ry, and suppose that 

 every time throughout the winter when 

 a flight-day came the wan:itli was not 

 quite enough to wake up these buried 

 bees for a flight, please tell us, Bro. Tay- 

 lor, whether you think it would be a seri- 

 ous error to to take them out for a flight 

 or to stir them up by pounding. 



Mr. Taylor says it hurts him terribly 

 because Editor Root and myself are not 

 thoroughly established that late feeding 

 induces late laying. I quoted De Layens 

 as raising the question, a man who is con- 

 sidered worth heeding, and hint that 

 fresh investigation might not be entirely 

 out of place. Mr. Taylor says he has 

 abundantl}' proven that continued feed- 

 ing will invariably start laying so long as 

 the bees can comfortably take the food. 

 But say, Bro. Taylor, it isn't like you to 

 be so utter]}' unfair as to take no notice 

 of the testimony given by Editor Root, 

 who said feeding did not induce laying, 

 and it seems fair to suppose that his feed- 

 ing was continued in comfortable weather; 

 •you apparently thinking no testimony Ijut 

 your own must be taken. After all, per- 

 haps there's no real difference of opinion; 

 for you think there's a difference between 

 fall and early sunnner, and I think we all 

 believe that feeding may make a differ- 

 ence in laying. If I understand you cor- 

 rectly, you think De Layens is wrong 

 when he says it is a mistake to suppose 

 "that late feeding induces late laying." 



