148 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Mar. 11. 



from Mr. Hutchinson, we got the following from Mr. T. F. 

 Bingham, of Clare Co., Mich., on the same subject. — Editor.] 



I noted in the report of the Lincoln convention, that it 

 was probable that drawn combs would soon be made full- 

 depth without the intervention of the honey-bee. In the cur- 

 rent number, page Tl2, it is stated that drawn combs }'4-inch 

 deep have been made by Mr. Weed, and that such combs 

 would enable bee-keepers to produce comb honey as cheaply 

 as extracted, and adulteration would become a thing of the 

 past, etc. 



In this light, how do the old stories look, that combs 

 were made and filled with glucose, capt with a hot iron with- 

 out so much as "if you please " of the bees ? At that time 

 the "old reliable" American Bee Journal denounced the 

 whole story as a fake, and that if believed the story would be 

 a great damage to the bee-keepers and the pursuit. If so 

 then, what will its effect be now ? Can bee-keepers stand 

 more beeswax now, than then ? Italian bees injured comb 

 honey by their waste of material, and it has added the new 

 word " fish-bone " to comb-honey literature. 



Allow me to enter a protest against more wax in comb 

 honey. We have it in excess already. It may yet become 

 profitable to abandon yellow bees, comb foundation, and the 

 honey-extractor in order to meet a demand for the best honey 

 that can be procured. 



No one can blame the mixers for mixing low-grade honey ; 

 neither can they be blamed for buying drawn combs to put in 

 bottles of honey. It would be no worse to put combs made of 

 beeswax in honey than to put honey in such combs. As to 

 such combs doing away with adulteration, nothing could so 

 aid it. 



It seems very strange to me that bee-professionals should 

 try to invent or encourage anything that no one could fail to 

 see would be an injury to every one interested in the pursuit, 

 and the consumer also. I think that bee-keepers and bee- 

 papers should aid adulterators as little as possible, and do all 

 in their power to prevent adulteration. 



I like the course taken by the various journals regarding 

 the adulteration of honey — the American Bee Journal in par- 

 ticular. T. F. Bingham. 



[In order that a little more light may be thrown on this 

 subject, we take the following from Gleanings for Feb. 15, 

 written by Editor Root. — Editor.] 



I believe that Mr. Hutchinson is thoroughly honest in his 

 convictions on this matter. In fact, I once thought as he 

 does; but Mr. Weed knockt my theories into smithereens by 

 hard/act.s in the apiary. 



He had been experimenting and testing this new product 

 for nearly two years before we said anything about it in print. 

 He has put it on our hives, and had the bees draw it out — in 

 fact, tried it under all sorts of conditions. The proof of the 

 pudding is in the eating ; and the results in our apiary so far 

 seem to show that Mr. Hutchinson's fears are groundless. 

 The comb from the new product is ?iot tough and leathery at 

 all. After a long series of experiments we have about come 

 to the conclusion that, in the use of foundation, the bees do 

 not utilize or in any way make use of the wax in the biise or 

 .septum ; but they will utilize all the wax in the side-walla to 

 the depth of ■'» inch. Ordinary roller-mill foundation has a 

 surplus of wax in the wrong place. We are aiming in the 

 new product to put it in the ritjlil place. With this end in 

 view, Mr. Weed has been experimenting along the line of 

 making deep-cell foundation, the bases of which are just as 

 thin as the natural ; and the walls, instead of 3/1000-inch 

 thick, as in the natural, are 8/1000. Careful measurements 

 last year showed that the bees reduced this 8/1000 down to 

 about 3/1000. The surplus wax was simply used to build 

 up the depth of the cells. 



I grant that there is fish-bone to some extent, resulting 

 from the use of comb foundation ; but the reason of this is 

 that at present there is more wax in the bases than there 

 needs to be ; and the wax in the side-walls is in such shape 

 that the bees do not utilize all of it. The result is that a mid- 

 rib is left in the center of the comb, thicker than will be found 

 in combs built wholly by the bees. In the now product we 

 propose to put this wax whore it will not be detected in the 

 eating. The very snag, then, that Mr. Hutchinson is afraid 

 we shall run into is the iicry one wo would avoid in the new 

 product. In other words, it is not proposed to use more wax 

 than we now use in thin foundation ; but we do aim to put 

 that wax In such shape that bees will utilize it in such a way 

 as to leave no midrib or fish-bone in comb honey. 



Mr. Hutchinson need have no fears that we shall rush on 

 the market the new deep-cell foundation in any quantity this 

 season. At present we have only one small machine, and 



turn out pieces about 4x5 inches. We are working on another 

 machine to make samples perhaps 5x8 inches. The machinery 

 and dies necessary for the purpose are very expensive, and, 

 even with the larger machines, theoutput will be very limited. 

 If bee-keepers are holding back their orders for foundation, 

 expecting the new product in quantity this season, they will 

 be disappointed. They had better make their requirements, 

 irrespective of the new article, and in the meantime we will 

 try to furnish a super or two of the new deep-cell foundation 

 to those who wish to try it. E. R. Root. 



The Honey Liked Best —Difference in Tastes. 



BY JOSEPH BEATH. 



In answer to Query 40, " What honey is generally liked 

 best?" it depends upon three things : Ist, the quality of the 

 honey ; 2nd, the taste of the individual, both natural and 

 acquired ; 3rd, prejudice. 



In the first place the honey from the same flowers varies 

 considerable at different times and places, probably owing to 

 the weather, soil., etc., being very much stronger sometimes 

 than others. 



Second, as to taste ; our natural tastes vary a good deal, 

 but not nearly as much as our acquired tastes. Whatever we 

 are accustomed to we usually like, as, for instance, eating 

 oysters, chewing tobacco, taking snuff, etc. 



Third, as to prejudice. I will give a little experience: 

 Thirty-eight years ago I came to Adams county, Iowa ; at the 

 sa-ne time my neighbors came from New England, and they 

 fully believed there was no corn equal to the little Yankee 

 coru with which to make johnny-cake or corn-bread. The 

 Western yellow corn would do to feed, but not to make into 

 bread. The Yankee corn was so much sweeter! Well, an 

 old gentleman, named Harlow, went to mill with two sacks of 

 corn — one Western yellow for the chickens, and the other 

 Yankee corn to eat, and on the way he forgot which was 

 which. "Oh," said the family, " we can easily tell the Yan- 

 kee coru by cooking a mess of one and then a mess of the 

 other; and they cookt that way until both sacks were empty, 

 but were never able to tell which was Yankee or which was 

 Western ; but it killed the prejudice of the whole community. 



Some years ago we had a very smart young man teaching 

 school in an adjoining district, and I went to sell them some 

 honey where he was boarding. I took along some clover and 

 heart's-ease honey, and sold them either 25 or 30 pounds (I 

 have forgotten which). I showed both to the lady of the 

 house, and askt her which she would take. She said, " Fred 

 said he wanted clover honey. Which is the clover honey ?'' 

 I answered : " I would just as soon as not tell you which is 

 the clover honey, but I would like to see whether Fred knows 

 clover honey or not. So take which you like, and if you want 

 to change it I will do so." After tasting, she could not tell 

 which she liked best, aud took half of each. 



Well, they used it all, and neither Fred nor the family 

 could tell which was the clover honey, or which they liked 

 best. 



READING AND BINDING THE BEE .70URNAL. 



First, I always have a pencil handy, and when I find any- 

 thing that I think I will want to refer to hereafter, I write- 

 the title and page on the top of the frontpage, I find this 

 much handier than writing it in a book or any other way that 

 I have tried or have seen mentioned. Then, when I want to 

 hunt up anything, I take my journals and turn them over one 

 at a time. I have them bound since 1879, with a very few 

 copies missing. 



As to binding, years ago I got a binder which I still keep 

 them in but not bound. At the end of the volume, I take a 

 brad-awl and punch about four copies at a time, keeping one 

 for a pattern so as to have all the holes alike, then sew them 

 together with strong twine. I formerly put covers on, but do- 

 not any more, as they are kept away from the dirt. 



NOT WILD PARSNIP, BUT HEMLOCK. 



On page 61, I see wild parsnips mentioned again, and S. 

 B. Smith tells about parsnips that had gone wild, or self-sown 

 for 10 years, and then they got seed from them for years, but 

 never was poisoned. He theu gives two instances of roots 

 being taken from a field, the one killing a horse, aud the 

 other in a few moments caused a burning sensation in the- 

 throat and stomach, and severe pain, which tho attending 

 physician said was poison from eating wild parsnip. 



Now for the explanation: In the first case, it was the- 

 common parsnip, which, self-seeding for a hundred years, 

 would never make poisonous; while in tha second case (of 

 both the horse and man) it was hemlock, of which there ar& 



