6:^8 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Oct. 7, 



organs frequently exist; that the geographical distribution of 

 species In ocean archipelagoes is exactly that which geology 

 shows would be necessary if evolution were true ; that the 

 succession of species in time, as shown by geology, is equally 

 in accordance with the requirements of evolution ; and in- 

 numerable minor classes of phenomena, all illustrated and 

 proved by such a wealth of actual happenings that, as has 

 been well said, if evolution did not occur, the Creator has 

 taken infinite pains to delude man into the belief that it did'; 

 and that every explanation hitherto offered by non-evolution- 

 ists, of the coincidence of those seven great proofs, is not only 

 Intangible, but extremely misty. 



Mr. Doolittle simply shakes his head, and says, " Will 

 you attempt to prove that, because bees can find their hive 

 when moved five feet from where it stood an hour before, in 

 the year 1897, that they could not find their hive when 

 moved one foot away 6,000 years ago ? This you must do if 

 you would attempt to sustain your position. Something tangi- 

 ble, please." And when I remind him that by the nature of 

 the case, if evoluliou is true, that we cannot miraculously 

 transport our eyes to a point several thousand years back in 

 time, and then back to the present time again to tell what 

 they saw, but, on the contrary, if evolution is true, it is just 

 what is to be expected that we cannotdo any such thing. Mr. 

 Doolittle remains immovable, and I can imagine him saying to 

 himself, "That's just the reason I put the argument in that 

 way." It is strange he does not see how, by this method of 

 defense, he opens branches innumerable along the line of the 

 defenses of revelation, inspiration, and miracles, to all who 

 may choose to enter and overthrow his belief on those subjects 

 also. Evidence, it seems, ceases to be tangible as soon as it 

 depends on the combination of two or more mutually corrobor- 

 ating sets of circumstances. It should be one and indivisible, 

 he claims. Any other kind has no force whatever. 



And then, why sLx thousand years ? Evolution or no evo- 

 lution, we know by the direct evidence of our senses, com- 

 bined with the coldest logical deductions, that animal life has 

 existed many millions of years, and that bees came into ex- 

 istence In a former geological period. What bearing, then, 

 has a limitation of just six thousand years on this question, 

 unless, indeed, we follow the opinion of the monks of the mid- 

 dle ages, in considering fossils the work of the devil ? Are 

 geology and paleontology to be thought into nothingness ? 

 There is no "must" about it, in the form in which Mr. Doo- 

 little puts the case. But there is another " must," and it is 

 this : The time must be left indefinite and long. The fact 

 that Mr. Doolittle implies that if there is a permanent evolu- 

 tion there must be a perceptible difference in one year, con- 

 firms the inference that ignorance Is chiefly responsible for his 

 Podsuappian attitude, since in matters on which he is an au- 

 thority he does not adopt that spirit. Apparently some other- 

 wise fair-minded people make it a religious duty to remain 

 Ignorant on this subject. But while we adojire singleness of 

 purpose, they cannot expsct IS to authorize bigctry. It his 

 been well said, that the religion of them that put aside truth 

 is in a bad way. They are the ones who attempt to stand in 

 " God's shoes," by saying he mu.st have done so and thus. If 

 God is anything, God is truth, and the reasoning, truth- 

 searching spirit is the highest form of religion. The burden 

 of proof lies on those who assert that the apparent explana- 

 tion of facts Is not the true one. 



Every one of Mr. Doolittle's questions, with the modifica- 

 tions pointed out above, is answered in the aflirmative by the 

 study of evolution as a whole. The tangible work of genera- 

 tions of scientists, the ground gone over again and again, ac- 

 cepted by the overwhelming majority of those whose opinion 

 on this subject is alone authoritative, and easily accessible to 

 all, Is not so easily disposed of by a trick of special pleading. 



Mr. Editor, you might as well give up trying to keep evo- 

 lution out of this journal, if such things are admitted. If a 

 matter is discust at all, it ought to be discust righily. More- 

 over, evolution pertains to the natural history of the bee, and 

 Is necessarily assumed whenever wo speak of the mutual in- 

 fluence of flowers and Insects. Montrose Co., Colo. 



[We never wish to discourage in this journal a discussion 

 of any kind that gives evidence of being of any practical value 

 to bee-keepers. But just how a long lingo of longer words 

 on evolution of the bee, or any other animal. In the Bee Jour- 

 nal, would be of advantage to anybody, Is — well, we must con- 

 fess that our noddle is too thick to understand. Better leave 

 that to publications specially devoted to the discussion of 

 scientific and philosophical problems. — Editok. | 



Bee-Paralysis Caused by Unwholesome Food. 



BY L. B. SMITH. 



I notice in a recent number of the American Bee Journal, 

 that Dr. Gallup, of California, seems to think that bee-paraly- 

 sis is an inherited disease. In this I cannot agree with the 

 grand old writer, altho I have had some evidence that pointed 

 that way. But after having had seven years' experience with 

 bee-paralysis, I am sure it is caused from unwholesome food, 

 and is not an inherited disease, as the Doctor seems to think. 

 Still, I am open to conviction, and if he or any one else can 

 bring up sufficient evidence that it is a contagious disease, like 

 foul brood, I am willing to be convinced. But until better 

 evidence is brought forward, I shall hold my present views. 



I will now try to bring up the evidence to establish my 

 theory, of unwholesome food being the cause of this disease. I 

 have been a practical bee-keeper for 18 or 20 years (on a 

 small scale), and never saw a case of this disease until I came 

 to this county (Lampasas), about seven years ago, and never 

 saw honey sour in the hive, or any of the so-called "honey- 

 dew," uutil I came to this county ; and every year that we 

 have a " honey-dew" crop, we have plenty of soured honey, 

 and paralysis is sure to make its appearance. I have watcht 

 this closely for the past seven years, and bees always have 

 paralysis when their stores are mostly composed of this honey- 

 dew. 



To further prove that it is caused from unwholesome food, 

 this year has been a year noted for the scarcity of honey-dew 

 in this locality, and I have not seen a sick bee this summer. 

 Notwithstanding bees have been doing nothing for the past 

 six weeks on account of the drouth, we have had a good time 

 for this disease to develop, but I have not seen any trace of 

 it among my 70 colonies. But some 10 miles away bees have 

 been gathering the so-called "honey-dew," during most of 

 this hot, dry weather, and the consequence is, those bees have 

 their hives filled with " honey-dew," and it is soured, and is 

 bursting the cappings from the cells, and the bees are dying 

 with paralysis by the thousands. Is this not evidence enough 

 within itself ? I think it is. 



But to still further prove my position, I have taken all 

 the honey from bees suffering from this disease, and fed them 

 sugar syrup, or good, thick well-ripened honey, and uever 

 failed to cure them when they were not gathering any of the 

 " honey-dew " stuff. If this is a disease (paralysis, I mean) 

 like foul brood, and contagious, as some seem to think, why is 

 it that bees will get well without any doctoring when they are. 

 fed on good, wholesome food? 



To still further show that it is the food, and not a disease, 

 I have sent many queens to friends where I came from (the 

 northern part of this State), and sent queens, too, whose bees 

 showed that they were affected with paralysis. (The parties 

 to whom I sent the queens knew, of course, that my bees were 

 affected.) Not one queen has developt the disease in their 

 new home. Mind you, the place to which these queens were 

 sent is a prairie country, and bees never gather any honey- 

 dew there. 



I would be pleased to hear from others that live in locali- 

 ties where they never have any honey-dew, or other unwhole- 

 some food, such as decayed melons, cider, etc. 



Now, I have tried to give the facts just as they exist. I 

 have no ax to grind, and am not interested in the sale of bees, 

 or queens ; I am only a farmer, and a bee-keeper in a small 

 way. Lampasas Co., Tex., Aug. 20. 



No. 2. — Establishing a Standard for Queens. 



BY DR. E. GALLII'. 



As I am a poor hand at remembering dates, I will try and 

 get facts and let the dates take care of themselves. 



A number of years ago it was the fashion to partition off 

 a small room in the garret of the house and put in a colony of 

 bees, and take out honey when we could get it. Sometimes 

 they would live there for years and become very numerous. 



Again, we often used to see accounts of large colonies of 

 bees found in caves, etc. The argument against such tremen- 

 dous colonies was that all the bees came from one queen, and 

 the bees were short-lived in the working season, consequently 

 there could be no such large colonies. Now, I am inclined to 

 think there is a grain of truth in those statements concerning 

 the large, powerful colonies, etc. 



When I lived In Wisconsin a neighbor had a powerful col- 

 ony in a small house built purposely. They had been kept 

 there for a nu-.iber of years, consequently had superseded 

 their queen no one knows how many times. They became so 



