40 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Jan. 16, 1902. 



Ono of the (juestions at our last meeting was. AVould it pay 

 us to exiiibit at Buffalo, knowing we had a duty of one anil 

 two-third cents per pound to pav to gain a market in the 

 United States ? I feel safe in answering it now, that I believe 

 it has paid our Association. First, by showing the world that 

 we can produce a very line quality of honey in Canada — in 

 fact, second to none : and that we as Canadian bee-keepers 

 take a pride in our pursuit to put our honey tastefully on the 

 market. I believe if we push for a market in the United 

 States, even by paying the duty, we shall gain it, because 

 American people seem to realize that Canadian laws are far 

 more strict than their own. Our pure-hfmey bill is all right : 

 let each member of our society try to enforce it, and by doing 

 so we shall make a market for our product. 



It will be laid before you for your consideration, the ad- 

 visability of making stronger the bill which we now have in 

 regard to sprayijig of fruit-trees while in bloom. We all know 

 it is a serious question in some parts of the country to bee- 

 keepers : let u.s all put our shoulders to the wheel and try 

 what can be done. 



The inspector of apiaries, so far as I have been able to 

 learn, has been attending to the duties of his department in a 

 manner which I trust will be satisfactory to all. His report 

 will, however, be submitted for your consideration. !Mv at- 

 tendance at the exhibit at Huffalo. and meeting with the 

 many bee-keepers of Ontario who do not belong to any bee- 

 keepers" association at all. has bmught me to think that they 

 do not realize the advantages given to the members of the 

 Ontario Uee-Keepers' Association. I would strongly advise 

 that a small pamphlet be published setting forth the workings 

 of our society and its advantage to bee-keepers, and have a 

 copy placed jn the hands of every bee-keeper in this land. 



The matter of forming a guild, or exchange, will be 

 brought to your notice by Mr. Andrew Patullo, M. P. for 

 North Oxford, who has so kindly consented to take that sub- 

 ject for the basis of a few remarks to us. 



In conclusion, I thank you for the confidence reposed in 

 me a year ago in placing me in the position I now occupy. I 

 trust you will all assist in making these meetings pleasant 

 and prolitable to each one of us, for in union alone there is 

 strength. John Newton. 



J. D. Evans, in reply to the President's Address, said he 

 was at a disadvantage, not knowing what was about to be 

 said. He wanted to praise Mr. Newton for the excellent and 

 responsible work he had done this year, as president, esue- 

 cially in connection with the Pan-American Exhibition : he- 

 had managed to do the thing economically. He thought it 

 would be an advantage to make the law in" connection with 

 spraying more stringent. In his own district he had no 

 trouble — the people were anxious to have bees about them. 

 They found It an advantage in fruit setting: even this year 

 they had apples when others had none. More educating 

 shou]d hp. done, and p/en/y q/ ii. Doctor Fletcher's address 

 in connection with the value of bees to tlie fruit-grower had 

 been circulated, and more work in such directions was desir- 

 able. 



Rev. W. F. Clarke congratulated the president upon his 

 good work; he was pleased to hear of the successof the exhibit 

 at the Pan-American. If Canadians would do justice to them- 

 selves they would hold their own with any countrv. 



A resolution of congratulation and thanks was passed to 

 Mr. Newton. 



Mr. Newton said he forgot in bis address to mention that 

 the thanks of the association were due to Mr. Miller for sup- 

 plying glass packages to help make the Pan-American exhiliit 

 attractive. A vote of thanks was then tendered Mr. Miller. 



FOUL BROOD. 



Prof. F. C. Harrison, bacteriologist, who has recently re- 

 turned from a year or more of study at the leailiiig bacteriolog- 

 ical institute in Europe, gave the result of his work during the 

 past season with foul brood. He stated that the work under- 

 taken with foul brood at the Ontario .Agricultnral College dur- 

 ing the past year has been rather limited. The only thing at- 

 tempted this year was some means of destroying germsof foul 

 brood in combs. One remedy had met with good success; that 

 was, disinfecting combs and hives with the vapor of formalin. 

 Pieces of comb had been taken containing wax and comb sev- 

 eral years old, dead brood, cajiped brood, and cells of honev 

 into which had Ihmui put foui-brood germs. These wer<' ]ilaced 

 in a box the size of the orflinary hive, the lower entrance in 

 the box having been plugged, leaving only sutlicient room for 

 the entrance of a rubber hose coming from the disinfecting 

 apparatus, similar to that for disinfecting i)lants, etc. The 

 formalin gas apparatus was as follows : 



An alcohol lamp, and upon it a reservoir with a 40-degree 



solution of formalin. When the alcohol lamp was lighted the 

 gas was soon generated. At the top of the box a one-half inch 

 opening had been left: out of this the atmosphere passed as 

 the box tilled with formalin gas. When the box was full the- 

 gas would pass out of the iipp^r orifice, detected by the odor. 

 The apparatus was then withdrawn, both openings plugged, 

 and the comb left \inder the influence of the gas for one hour, 

 after which exposure no growth was obtained, four tests in all 

 having been made. The honey-cells known to be affected gave 

 no growth. The pressure obtained in generating the gas 

 might in a measure account for the results. This cure would 

 be practical in a large apiary. Other appliances used in disin- 

 fecting would answer. 



Prof. Harrison also mentioned that some years ago he had 

 taken a lot of cells or spores and placed them on glass in semi- 

 darkness. He had tested them about every six months and 

 had made a test very recently. Although where the cells had 

 been placed nearly four years ago and exposed as per above, 

 the last test showed they were still alive, showing that the 

 spores were extremely resistant. In conclusion, Prof. Harri- 

 son said he hoped that the method of disinfecting he had given 

 would be tested during the coming season. 



Mr. Evans — I believe that this is one of the most impor- 

 tant statements yet made in connection with foul brood. 



Mr. Hall — Are the capped cells you mentioned, capped 

 larv;e. or capped honey ? 



Prof. Harrison — Capped larvie. 



F. A. Gemmill — I think that the method given should be 

 tested, and. if found better than the present, adopted. 



Mr. Hall — We often have doubts about the surplus combs 

 on infected hives, and other combs; these could be disinfected 

 in the method given. I am very glad to hear the report. 



.J. K. Darling — How about bees and brocd ? 



Prof. Harrison — Any in the box would, of course, suffer 

 the same fate as the germs. 



]Mr. Evans — Would it not be well to shake the bees off the 

 combs, then treat the combs and return the bees ? An experi- 

 ment in this direction might be tried. 



K. H. Smith — Does the treatment make the combs objec- 

 tionable to the bees ? 



I'rof. Harrison — It does not injure the most delicate fabric. 



Mr. Smith — Will the bees, if there are any dry scales, re- 

 move them from the base of the cells ? 



Mr. (iemmill — Do you think, if the scales were dry, they 

 would be disinfected in the scales? 



Prof. Harrison — Those I tested were moist, and it would 

 doubtless be better to moisten them. 



A. Laing— Why not turn the bees back to the combs, and 

 after ten days repeat the operation ? The bees would then be 

 practically clear? 



Prof. Harrison — As long as I fed carbolic acid, although 

 growing millions of spores, no foul brood could be produced ; 

 but as soon as I left off feeding, foul brood developed. 



Mr. Holtermanu — It would not do to return the bees tO' 

 the combs, and after ten days repeat the operation, bei-ause 

 the bees, when disturbed, take up perhaps infected honey and 

 return this to the comb, and there is no guarantee that they 

 may not repeat this operation the second time. 



A Member — What about McEvoy's method ? 



Mr. Holtermann — The combs are taken away, and the 

 bees cannot store the infected honey in cells. I am afraid 

 that bee-keepers, in their attitude, are rather inclined to de- 

 spise scientific help and investigation — not in words, perhaps, 

 as much as in attitude. Remedies and results are given such 

 as this, and yet bee-keepers go on just as before. 



W. F. Clarke — No wonder bee-keepers despise science 

 when the inspector has drilled into them to despise science, 

 and they are taught to hold to the theory of spontaneous gen- 

 eration, which no scientist to day holds. 



.Mr. Clarke read the Cheshire remedy, and wanted to knoyv 

 why this remedy had been ignored on this side of the Atlantic. 

 Was it national jealousy, personal feeling, or what? 



Prof. Harrison said if we will read Bulletin No. 12 .issued 

 by the Ontario Agricultural College, we will find considerable 

 work lias been done in this investigation. Carbolic acid will 

 not destroy the germ ; 2 percent solution will not destroy the 

 germ in six days : Iin5<i0will prevent the germination of 

 spores. The carbolic acid, in the strength mentioned by Mr. 

 Cheshire, will not kill the spores, but may pn'vent their 

 growth. Formic acid has a much greater value in disinfect- 

 ing. Some honeys have more formic acid than others : buck- 

 wheat has almost twice that of clover honey. Bee-keepers 

 had even noticed the sting more severe when the bees worked 

 on buckwheat honey. He (Mr. Harrison) had spent several 

 weeks with Mr. Bertrand, in Switzerland : he had also studied 

 the disease in Austria. In those countries they had a race of 

 bees which had a natural immunitv from foul brood ; for this. 



