1894 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



147 



sheaf of grain, was a part of the work in mak- 

 ing the self binding rca])!'!-. Useful inventions, 

 then, are a part of the growth and experience 

 of the race, and no one man should be permitted 

 to seize any thing that was made possible only 

 by the work of past generations, and tax the 

 coming generations for their use. In the coop- 

 erative commonwealth that I am more inter- 

 ested in than in any other one earthly question, 

 inventors will be paid for their work from the 

 public treasury, and all inventions will be free 

 to the people; but until the better time comes, 

 we must use such laws as we have or nothing; 

 and those who use them so as to get some re- 

 ward for their time in experimenting should 

 not be blamed for so doing. Now to the ques- 

 tion of 



T\VO QUEENS IN A HIVE. 



Early in the 'SO's I commenced experiments 

 to control increase. The first move was to 

 make a large number of stands, large enough to 

 hold two hives. In the spring I placed one 

 hive on each of those stands. When the bees 

 swarmed they were hived in one of my small 

 hives placed where the old colony stood. The 

 old colony was moved to the other end of the 

 stand, with its entrance turned in the opposite 

 direction. This gave all the flying bees to the 

 swarm, and made them strong for gathering 

 surplus. The old hive was given a young 

 ■queen, and would in nearly every case be strong 

 and heavy by the end of the white-honey sea- 

 son. At the end of this the queen was removed 

 from the swarm, and the two hives were set to- 

 gether again as one colony. This plan worked 

 well, and I extended my experiments until it 

 culminated in the revolving stand, eight years 

 after. The revolving stand revealed the fact 

 {new at least to me) that two queens could be 

 kept in one colony, and I at once saw, as I 

 thought, the possibility of using it as a means 

 to prevent swarming, and at once began work 

 in that direction. And now, friend Root, I will 

 say here before going further, that, until I had 

 demonstrated that this could be done (that is, 

 two queens be worked in a single colony). I nev- 

 er heard, either by print or speech, a single sug- 

 gestion of the possibility of doing this thing. 

 I know that there had been accounts of two 

 queens being found temporarily in the same 

 colony under accidental circumstances; but 

 that two queens could be worked there perma- 

 nently, and at the will of the apiarist, was a 

 thing that I had never even heard mentioned, 

 and I think I may be excused for claiming pri- 

 ority. 



The Wells plan, as mentioned by Mr. Cor- 

 neil, seems to b^^ nearer my method than any 

 thing else I have seen yet. It is quite different, 

 and was never intended to regulate swarming. 

 I know from my own experience that a division- 

 board of perforated zinc, as used by Mr. Cor- 

 nell, would not do. His account of his experi- 

 ments is a plain straight story; but it in no- 



wise covers my plan. His advice, not to spend 

 much money in this direction at present, is en- 

 tirely in harmony with my own, for you will re- 

 member that I said, long ago, that I should not 

 offer any thing for sale or experiment iiutil I 

 was sure I had something useful to oiler. 



[Mr. Taylor is quite correct. We are mutu- 

 ally indebted to each other, and it is a sad com- 

 ment on our U. S. patent system that some In- 

 ventors, having made a slight improvement on 

 an old idea or a set of ideas have been able to 

 get a patent, covering not only the improve- 

 ment but the old ideas in connection with it. 

 We do not wish to say that it is generally done, 

 but it has been done under important patents 

 recently expired. Neither do we wish to be 

 construed assaying that we denounce our pat- 

 ent laws; but we do agree most heartily with 

 Mr. Taylor in thinking that no one man should 

 be allowed to gobble up in a patent the fruits of 

 others' brains. 



Along with the above article came a private 

 letter calling attention to a hive Mr. Taylor 

 had sent. That you may all see what the hive 

 is like, we take pleasure in showing you cuts of 

 it.— Ed.] 



TAYLOR'S SECTIONAL BROOD -CHAMBER. 



I shipped you yesterday, from Spring Valley, 

 one of my shallow-brood-chamber hives. The 

 hive sent was one of a lot made for my own use, 

 about 1882, and is the precise kind I have and 

 still use. If you will set each section on a sepa- 

 rate bottom you will see the reason for the bev- 



eled rabbeted sides; viz., to always maintain a 

 bee-space, whether of a single piece or two or 

 more of them together, both on top and bottom, 

 as well as between each section. 



I still think this hive has as few loose parts, 

 and is equal or superior to any other hive yet 

 brought to notice. B. Taylor. 



Forestville, Minn., Jan. 4. 



[For a fuller description of this hive, see 



