.510 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CtlLttjRE. 



JtJLY 



L. has been accused of copying from the M. hive; 

 and the accusations were made by parties whom 

 Mr. Dadant would not dare to dispute until he gets 

 better posted than he evidently now is. 



Now, why do correspondents who are not well 

 informed on the subject— history of improvement 

 of bee-hives— attempt to teach others? The old gen- 

 tleman, Kev.Mr. Langstroth, directly contradicts all 

 who claim that he was the first or original inventor 

 of movable-frame hives. Mr. Langstroth, in an ar- 

 ticle written in defense of his former claim of pri- 

 ority, and published in the Albany Coimti-y (gentle- 

 man, and which article editor Samuel Wagner cop- 

 ied on page 142, Vol. I., No. 6, of the A. B. J., which 

 number is before me (and I have a copy of the 

 Counti'M Genlleman dated Apr. 10, 1S61, in which Mr. 

 L.'s MS. was set up), and 1 copy verbatim: "Since 

 my application for a patent, I have ascertained 

 that, prior to my invention, other movable frames, 

 besides those of Ruber's, were in use in Europe." 

 Does this settle the " vexed question "? 



Again, I refer to records to correct Mr. Dadant's 

 version of the Berlepseh hive. It is a matter of 

 record, that Baron von Berlepseh and Rev. John 

 Dzierzon invented a comb-frame hive, a description 

 of which appeared in the Bi«ic)i-Zei(i{»i(/ of May 1, 

 1852. The hive was called *'■ Stehendcr Rahmenluft- 

 er " (upright frame-ventilator), and the Baron men- 

 tioned that he "put bees in a hive with frames in- 

 stead of bars, in June, 1843." In 1850 he put project- 

 ors on the ends of the tops of his frames to keep 

 them evenly spaced. The Baron was of unquestion- 

 able repute, and his statements with the recoi-ds do 

 decide the question, and that, too, differently from 

 the said writers in last issue of Gleanings. Mr. 

 Dzierzon has not adopted or used comb sections, 

 because he can, with his bar-hives, work his bees to 

 better advantage than with the frames; and the 

 reasons for such choice is, he is more competent to 

 work bees scientifically by reason of his being a 

 professional bee-master. 



Mr. Dadant mentions that " the closed-end Quin- 

 by frame is the only outgrowth of the Ruber hive." 

 Pray tell me, sir, are not all comb-frame hives the 

 outgrowth of Ruber's leaf hive'j' Mr. Langstroth 

 acknowledges that the Ruber frame hive is what 

 he aimed to improve. Ovir worthy friend Dadant, 

 as umpire in the " vexed question " of inventors, 

 gives the "race "to Mr. Langstroth. Now, isn't it 

 too bad that the awarded winner should up and kick 

 it all to smash? And is it not very ungrateful in 

 the "Father" to go back, seemingly, on his stal- 

 wart disciples, and surrender all the glory that has 

 garlanded his name near a lifetime, as the inventor 

 of the Eureka hive to Mr. Reddon? Strange indeed! 

 But such is life in a rolling, inconstant world. 



Richford, N. Y., May 22, 1888. C. J. Robinson. 



Friend R., we are much obliged to you 

 indeed for the very vahiable facts which 

 you furnish, and " which, no doubt, as 

 you say, could not have been furnished by 

 any other man living than yourself. The 

 heading in small capitals on the article you 

 allude to was a mistake, and should "not 

 have been permitted to go into print. I 

 have no idea that the question will be set- 

 tled as to who was the inventor of the mov- 

 able-comb hive. Very likely there were in- 

 ventors and experimenters with combs 

 built in frames that have never yet come to 

 light. The age was ripe for development 



and progress in this line of work, and there- 

 fore quite a number of persons in different 

 parts of the world were experimenting in 

 the same line, oftentimes without one know- 

 ing what the other was doing. It is almost 

 impossible that one man should bring out 

 an improvement of this kind. Our section 

 boxes for comb honey, our best hives in 

 modern use, the honey-extractor, and all of 

 our modern conveniences, have been the 

 work of multitudes. Occasionally a single 

 individual gives things a big lift forward ; 

 but it is very rare indeed that a complete in- 

 vention is made by anyone individual. Like 

 the bees in the hive, he simply takes up 

 where somebody else left off, and pushes 

 the work forward. 



I have been very much interested indeed 

 in looking over the leaf of that old paper, 

 the Cultivator, you were so kind as to send 

 me. I find no date in the paper itself ; but 

 tlie communications are all dated 1841. 

 John M. Weeks, inventor of the first hive 

 patented in the United States, writes quite 

 an interesting essay on bee culture, dated 

 West Farms, Salisbury, Vt., May, 1841. I 

 suppose this paper called the Cultivator is 

 the same that is now called the Cidtivatm 

 and Country Gentleman. 



I feel, my good friend 11., from some of 

 the remarks you drop, that you do not quite 

 understand our good friend Langstroth, and 

 our friend Dadant as well. Very likely you 

 are in position to correct some minor mis- 

 takes of our modern writers ; but it does 

 not seem to me as if there were very much 

 conflict between your statements and those 

 given by Dadant" and Stachelhausen ; that 

 is, the discrepancies are of no particular 

 moment, either one way or the other. Quite 

 a number have suggested that, when Mr. 

 Langstroth gave our friend Ileddon's hive 

 such a reconimend, he indirectly suggested 

 that the Langstroth hive was, after all, not 

 an improvement on the hives before it, 

 but, rather, a retrograde. I believe, how- 

 ever, that a good many of us are not ready 

 just yet to accept this latter statement. In 

 the above old paper we find an inquiry 

 for the best work on bees. This inquiry is 

 dated Monroe, Mich., April, 1S40. The 

 editors answer as follows : 



John M. Weeks' " Manual, or Easy Method of 

 Managing Bees," is one of the best works on the 

 subject published in this or any other country, and 

 shows a knowledge of this valuable little creature, 

 not equaled or exceeiled by any writer since Ruber. 



A PECULIAR SEASON. 



FRIEND DOOI,lTTLE TKLT.S US HOW THK JUNE 

 FHOST.S; tTPSET HIS CALCULATIONS, ETC. 



HE season here in Central New York has 

 been a peculiar one thus far for bees. One 

 warm day, so the bees could fly, March 27th, 

 as nearly as I can remember (I am keeping 

 no diary this yeai', on account of so much 

 I, was the only chance of that kind they had 

 from November till April 26th. The last five days 

 of April were extremely warm (the mercury going 

 to 87° in the shade), considering the cold before it. 

 With May it came cold again, and held so during 



' biz ' 



