188 



^LEANINGS In bee CULTURE. 



Mar. 



Which?" " Bees are the cheapest help to lift honey 

 from the lower story to the upper." This article of 

 the professor's is in the January No. of the Ameri- 

 can Apiculturist ; and although I am wandering from 

 the subject. I wish to say that I consider this article 

 as the best of all the good things that friend H. has 

 ever written; and I wish, friend Root, that you 

 would copy it, even if you have to leave out — well, 

 some of my own articles. 



Last winter, when I visited friend Heddon, I was 

 prejudiced (if that is the word) against the raising 

 of comb honey. I had tried the wide frames, those 

 the same size as the regular brood-frames, and those 

 containing only one tier of sections; Ihad alsotiied 

 different kinds of crates or cases, but 1 had laid all 

 aside for the more simple, and, to me, more profitable 

 extractor. When I saw friend Heddon's case, hive, 

 honey-board, etc., I was very favorably impressed; 

 and, as he says, I scanned closely, and asked many 

 questions, until at last the whole arrangement so 

 appealed to my reason that, although I had nearly a 

 hundred Simplicity hives with American frames, I 

 decided to lay them aside for the Langstroth frame 

 and friend Heddon's case, hive, and surplus ar- 

 rangements, and make a specialty of comb honey. I 

 did 80, and the experience of even the poor season 

 of 1883 confirmed me in the belief that I made a wise 

 decision. 



In a back number of Gleanings a correspondent 

 remarks, that wide frames are "doomed;" and in re- 

 ply, you, friend Root, say that you had not yet heard 

 of it. Now, if you could read the letters that I re- 

 ceive since the apiarian world has become aware 

 that I am using the Heddon case, I think you would 

 begin to think that wide frames are at least goiruj to 

 he "doomed." The following is a fair sample of the 

 inquiries that I receive: 



Stedman, N. Y., Jan. 23, 1884. 



W. Z. Hutchinson:— Wni ynu be so kind as to an- 

 swer The followingquestions? 



1. What kind of a rest is used for the sections in 

 the Heddon case? 



3. Is the Heddon case taken to pieces to remove 

 the sections? 



3. Could the half-story Simplicities, as figured on 

 pages 226 and 38-1, Vol. X., Gleanings, be arranged 

 to answer the same as the Heddon case? 



4 Do you think Mr. Root's exceptions to the above 

 articles are well taken? L. D. Gale. 



From an experience of one season, with 150 Hed- 

 don cases, I will, with your permission, answer the 

 above. 



1. To the bottom of each division-board in the case 

 is tacked a strip of tin, one-fourth of an inch wider 

 than the boards are thick; the edges of the tin thus 

 project one-eighth of an inch, and furnish a support 

 for the sections. 



3. No: the Heddon case is not taken to pieces; the 

 sections being removed as follows. The case is in- 

 verted 4;4 inches above a bench or table, and sup- 

 ported at each end. A piece of 4 x 4 scantling, one- 

 half inch shorter than the width of the case, inside 

 measurement, is laid upon one row of sections, and 

 both hands brought down upon it " ker slap." The 

 sections of this row are thus loosened and started, 

 all at the same time, upon a slidiny journey down- 

 ward, the block and the hands Involuntarily follow- 

 ing. As the sections alight fairly and squarely iipon 

 their feet, so to speak, they sustain no injury. The 

 block is drawn up by inserting the fingers in holes 

 bored in the upper side, and placed upon the next 

 row, and that "slapped" out, and so on and so forth, 

 until all are out. In order that no pressure be 



brought to bear upon the center of the bottom-bars 

 of the sections, the block of wood is hollowed out 

 along the center of its under side. The same result 

 can be obtained by tacking small strips of wood to 

 the outer edge of the lower side. I can not help 

 wondering if friend Miller adopted this method of 

 removing the sections ( I presume he did ), and if so, 

 why he succeeded no better. Friend M., if you don't 

 succeed any better another season, I shall be tempt- 

 ed to come out to your place, and show you how to 

 remove the whole 38 sections— well, almost as soon as 

 you can remove the first section from a wide frame. 

 In removiiag our 3600 lbs. of honey last season, my 

 brother and myself did not break more than half a 

 dozen combs, and those were only partly finished 

 ones; and the lot of honey in which they were had 

 been left in the cases off the hives, during a cool 

 night near the close of the season, and I attempted 

 to remove them early in the morning. 



3. No: not unless smaller sections were used, as 

 the divisions would occupy some room. 



4. In my opinion, some of them are exceedingly 

 well taken, others are not; but to review those two 

 articles and the editorial comments, and do the sub- 

 ject justice, would make this article too long, hence 

 must be deferred until the next time I write. 



Just one word of caution or advice: To get a per- 

 fect idea of the Heddon system, one should not only 

 sec the case for holding the sections, but the hive 

 and honey-board, as each is complementary of the 

 others, and a slight mistake might change success 

 to failure. W. Z. Hutchinson. 



Rogersville, Genesee Co., Mich., March, 1884. 



Friend II., it seems tome there is some 

 misconception or misunderstanding among 

 us. Tlie tirst objection you mention to the 

 wide frame is, that the sections get covered 

 with propolis wliere those in the cases do not. 

 I can not understand you here, unless you 

 have used your wide frames separated a lit- 

 tle from each other, as you use the brood- 

 frames. If the wide frames are close togeth- 

 er, and wedged up, as we always intend to 

 have them used, it seems to me they are the 

 best protection against propolis of any sys- 

 tem. With Heddon's arrangement, as you 

 state it, I should suppose the bees had access 

 to the bottom-pieces of the section, unless 

 friend II. uses a honey-board made of slats 

 to prevent this ; and in that case it seems to 

 me the division-boards occupy space un- 

 necessarily. The plan you give for remov- 

 ing sections will answer as well for wide 

 frames with a little different follower to 

 crowd them out all at once. I think friend 

 Miller once told us about this . At Toronto I 

 saw them removing sections from all sorts of 

 cases and wide frames, by a follower that 

 pushed out the w^hole set at once. JMy ar- 

 gument in favor of cases would be. that they 

 are cheaper than wide frames. Of course, 

 we can dispense with separators with wide 

 frames, as well as with cases. You may be 

 right about a hive made so narrow as to hold 

 8 frames, or even 6, yet it seems to me during 

 a heavy yield of honey the bees would work 

 in boxes' put at the side of the hive, about 

 as fast as they would w'ork in those on top, 

 and that a much laiger amount of honey 

 would be secured by having sections at the 

 side, as well as above the brood-combs, es- 

 pecially where the hive is contracted to 8 or 

 (3 frames. The great results obtained by 



