552 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Aug. 28, 1VU2. 



may pass into the system. From this standpoint we may 

 say that 95 parts of honey-sugar are worth 100 parts of cane- 

 sugar for the purpose of assimilation. 



We already have been saved the expense, so to speak, 

 the physiological expense, of conversion of that sugar into 

 assimilable forms. Honey as a food material, turnishes in 

 a palatable, wholesome and readily digestible and easily 

 assimilable condition, sugar which may act for the produc- 

 tion of heat, for the development of energy, and also for 

 the formation of fat within the body. From the foregoing 

 considerations you see, we could not live on honey alone, no 

 matter how desirable from many other standpoints, simply 

 from the fact that it does not possess any of these protein 

 or albumenoid substances which furnish the necessay nitro- 

 gen, neither does it furnish the bone-forming material. I 

 think, however, it is one of the most digestible, most agree- 

 able, most palatable, and most assimilable of all forms of 

 sugar. 



With regard to its position as a medicine I cannot say 

 very much. It is used as a demulcent and as an anti-irri- 

 tant for affections of the throat and coughs, and so on. It 

 is slightly laxative in its character and it has some value as 

 a medicine in that direction. But I thiuk it is used medi- 

 cinally principally for coughs and colds and affections of 

 the throat, although possibly to some extent as a laxative. 

 In former times it was employed medicinally to a much 

 greater extent than it is now. 



Rearing Queens Another Jury Member Speaks. 



KY E. S. MILES. 



I have read the articles on " Rearing Long-Lived Queens 

 and Bees," by Dr. Gallup, and since they do not seem to 

 commend the queens as now generally reared I have been 

 expecting to see some of our queen-breeders defending their 

 methods. As the Doctor has left the case with the "'jury," 

 and seems to expect a verdict (see page 471), or at least a 

 defense, I beg leave to give a little of my experience with 

 queens. 



Now, I cannot site the readers back to 30 or 40 years 

 with bees, as I have had bees just 10 years this season. Af- 

 ter having all kinds of queens, as to manner of rearing, and 

 after having owned several dozen queens from several dif- 

 ferent breeders, I wish to say positively that my experience 

 has been altogether different from Dr. Gallup's. When I 

 first began with bees I noticed, every now and then, in the 

 bee-papers, some one, like Dr. Gallup, who would tell how 

 natural-swarming queens were so much better than others, 

 that for several years I was afraid to try to rear any queens 

 except as I could save cells at swarming-time. After a few 

 years' experience I found that there was a great difference 

 in queens from swarming-cells, and I also found that a good, 

 fair nucleus would sometimes rear a fairly good queen. 



Now, I use the 8-frame hive, but don't think that I don't 

 know a good queen, for I have had two stories and 10-frame 

 brood-chambers, and have also known colonies to be in 

 large boxes, box-hives, etc., so I know pretty well what a 

 queen ought to do here in the way of producing bees. 



I clip every queen as soon as she begins to lay, and keep 

 a record, so I can tell, without any chance of making a mis- 

 take, whether a queen lives one year or six. Every pur- 

 chased queen is clipped before being introduced, so there is 

 no chance for superseding without my knowing it. Of all 

 the queens I ever purchased or reared by artificial methods 

 I never had one that did not get up to 5 Langstroth frames 

 of brood ; and all but one or two purchased queens filled 

 from 6 to 8 of the combs in the 8-frame hives. 



As to the longevity of the queens, I believe the trans- 

 portation through the mails, or something that happens to 



them between the place of rearing and their final home, 

 does shorten their lives ; but that it shortens the lives of 

 their workers, I never could see. 



One of the poorest queens I ever saw was a " super- 

 seder." She could fill only S frames, and those scattering, 

 nearly half the cells missed, and she gave out when less 

 than two years old. Another one, I believe the poorest 

 queen I ever had, was from a swarming-cell, and as fine and 

 large a queen as I ever saw, but absolutely worthless, and 

 lived less than a year. 



I have had a great many " swarming and superseding" 

 (jueens give out at two and three years. On the other hand, 

 some of the most profitable colonies have been " mothered " 

 by queens reared by the " Doolittle method " or modifica- 

 tions thereof. I have never had one such give out the second 

 year, as the Doctor says they do, and I have had several do 

 good, profitable work the third year. 



So I write this not to argue with any one, not to criti- 

 cise, but in the hope that some beginner may save valuable 

 time in learning how good queens are reared. 



I do not wish to be understood as claiming that natural- 

 swarming queens are not good, but only that there are poor 

 ones among them ; and that queens reared under artificial 

 methods from the best stock are worth more than natural- 

 swarming queens selected haphazard as to stock. And, 

 further, I would as soon have them as swarming queens 

 from any stock. 



I hope to hear from more of the "jury." 



Crawford Co., Iowa, July 25. 



The Bee in Law — Keeping of Bees ; Damages— 

 When, and When Not, Recoverable. 



BY K. D. EISHEK. 



1. Definition. — Damages are the indemnity recoverable 

 by a person who has sustained an injury, either in his per- 

 son, property, or relative rights, through the act or default 

 of another. 



2. General Prineiples. — Whenever an injury is done to 

 a right, actual, perceptible damage is not indispensable as 

 a foundation of an action : but it is sufficient to show the 

 violation of the right, and the law will presume some dam- 

 age. 



But no damages are recoverable for a mere inconveni- 

 ence attending the existence of a public benefit ; or for any 

 lawful act lawfully done, which, if causing damage, is 

 damniun absque injuria ; or for any act causing no legal in- 

 jury, which is injuria sine datnno : or for an injury caused 

 wholly or in part by the complaining party's own wrongful 

 act, default, or negligence. 



3. Noninal Damages. — Proof of the violation of any 

 legal right entitles the injured party to some damages. If 

 no actual damages appear, nominal damages are given for 

 the technical injury. 



4. Substantial Damages. — Where actual injury and the 

 violation of a right are proved, substantial damages may be 

 awarded as compensation to the injured party, and in cer- 

 tain cases as punishment to the wrongdoer. In arriving at 

 the proper amount of damages, the courts follow defined 

 rulse. 



5. Remoteness. — Immediate or consequential damages 

 may be considered. No one is held responsible for all the 

 consequences of his acts or defaults, but only for those 

 which the law considers the natural consequences. These 

 are either the direct consequences or they are indirect. For 

 all direct consequences, whether they are such as inevitably 

 ensue, or such as have naturally ensued in the particular 

 case, the person guilty of the cause is held absolutely liable. 



