1888 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTUEE. 



641 



analyses which have been made of honey, the 

 amount of cane sugar varies. Thus I find the anal- 

 yses generally give from one to three per cent of 

 honey as cane sugar. Yet not infrequently the 

 amount equals five or six per cent, while in some 

 cases even twelve and sixteen per cent of honey 

 has been found to be cane sugar. Here, then, mark 

 the second uncertainty. Owing to the more or less rap- 

 id gathering, ths digestion of nectar is more or less 

 perfect. The chemist, then, would find much cane 

 sugar, and would report adulteration, when the 

 honey was entirely pure, right from the bees, and 

 through them from the flowers; but owing to im- 

 perfect digestion, the cane sugar was very promi- 

 nent. Such honey would be sweeter than though 

 more reduced, or digested, and so might have high- 

 er intrinsic value. 



We see, then, that the chemist can not tell us ab- 

 solutely whether honey is adulterated or not. 

 There is reason to believe that absolutely pure 

 honey has been pronounced as probably adulterat- 

 ed. The chemist was honest and able, but did not 

 understand the whole question or its many difficul- 

 ties. 



But what of the polariscope test? This test de- 

 pends on the property of various substances to de- 

 flect the rays of polarized light to the left or right. 

 Thus, cane sugar changes the polarized ray to the 

 right; so does dextrose, one of the reducing sugars 

 of honey. On the other hand, la?vulo8e, another 

 of the elements or sugars of honey bends the ray 

 strongly to the left. Dextrose and Itevulose are 

 often called invert sugars; for when cane sugar is 

 heated with a mineral acid like hydrochloric it is 

 changed to dextrose and Iwvulose. Dextrose and 

 la?vulose are obtained from fruits as well as from 

 honey. Glucose is a term used to designate all the 

 invert or reducing sugars, and is exactly synony- 

 mous with grape sugar. 



Now, usually honey rotates the ray of light, 

 owing to the la^vulose, from two to twelve degrees 

 to the left. Fkom two to twklve. Are not these 

 numbers very suggestive? In the first case, two 

 degrees; there was likely much dextrose, possibly 

 aided by not a little cane sugar or sucrose; while 

 in the latter case the laevulose vvas in the ascenden- 

 cy. Now, suppose the ray bends wholly over to the 

 right. "Hey ho 1" says the scientist— " adultera- 

 tion ! " When, in fact, it was pure honey; but the 

 cane sugar and dextrose were still more pronounc- 

 ed. Surely, if the ray often varies from two to 

 twelve, left-handed rotation, we may certainly be- 

 lieve it will often show a right-handed deflection. 

 I fully believe that we have as yet no reliable 

 methods to detect adulterations. 



I am very certain that adulteration is never 

 practiced by bee-keepers, and is very rarely prac- 

 ticed, if at all in these days, by dealers. This opin- 

 ion is not a mere guess, but the result of extended 

 inquiry. 



To conclude, Mr. Editor, I have already com- 

 menced just such a series of experiments as you 

 suggested in last Gleanings. By aid of our chemi- 

 cal department we shall soon know the exact truth 

 of the matter. We shall not only test the present 

 methods of analysis thoroughly, but shall strive to 

 find if there is a method which is sure and practi- 

 cal to tell pure honey from that which is adulterat- 

 ed. 



I have several kinds of pure honey, but 1 wish 

 more. May I ask the subscribers of Gleanings to 



send me, say a pint of honey? I should like many 

 samples, and wish to know in each case from what 

 source the honey was gathered. Will those who 

 know they have a pure article of some special 

 kind, as basswood, clover, buckwheat, teasel, tulip, 

 fruit, etc., send me a pint or quart? I will pay ex- 

 press. Before sending, please drop me a card stat- 

 ing kind, and I will write instructions for sending. 



Agricultural College, Mich. A. J. Cook. 



Many tJianks, my good friend Cook. I 

 am very, very glad" to have that one sen- 

 tence from you, saying, " I am very certain 

 that adulteration is never practiced by bee- 

 keepers, and very rarely, if at all in these 

 days, by dealers.'' I wish our regular agri- 

 cultural and religious papers, and especially 

 the American Grocer and papers of that 

 class, would copy this widely, and pass it 

 around, as coming from Prof. Cook, of the 

 Michigan Agricultural College. We ought 

 to rejoice and be glad, when an opportuni- 

 ty com^, of saying truthfully tliat adultera- 

 tion and frattd throughout our land are not 

 practised as extensively as the papers have 

 stated. Why, it is a terrible thing to lose 

 faith in humanity ; and such stories as have 

 been circulated in regard to the adultera- 

 tion of honey do more to unsettle confidence 

 in one's fellow-man than almost any thing 

 else ; and, saddest of all, when we lose faith 

 in each other we very soon lose faith in 

 God. 



THE MOVABLE-COMB HIVES OF EAR- 

 LY DAYS. 



FRIEND DADANT GIVES US SOME FACTS IN RE- 

 GARD TO MOVABLE COMBS AS FAR BACK 

 AS 1807. 



R. C. J. ROBINSON shows, in his article of 

 July 1st, that he did not understand what I 

 intended to say when 1 wrote that, in the 

 race for a practical movable-frame hive, 

 between Berlepsch, Munn, Debeauvoys, 

 and Laugstroth, our friend was the winner. I did 

 not mean that he arrived first, as in a race-course, 

 but that he invented the most practical hive of the 

 four. 



Had I intended to quote the first-known inventor 

 of movable frames, placed inside of a box, I would 

 have mentioned Prokopovitsch, a Kussian apiarist, 

 who, according to a pamphlet published in France 

 in 1841, had cultivated bees in movable-frame hives 

 for 15.5 years before (Apiculteur, April, 1862, page 313). 

 It was this hive that Berlepsch tried in 1843, but 

 which proved so impracticable that he did not even 

 mention the fact in his book. I can not find where 

 Mr. Robinson found that Berlev»sch and Dzierzon 

 invented a movable-fi-ame hive. It is certain that 

 the invention is due to Berlepsch alone; for in his 

 book. The Be€, in the chapter headed " My Life as a 

 Bee-Keeper," he writes: " It was in 184.') that Dzier- 

 zon appears for the first time on the stage, and that 

 the Bienen Zeitung was originated by Barth and 

 Schmid .... The former discovered the mov- 

 able-comb hive; the latter opened, in their journal, 

 a free arena .... Before 1845 I did not know 



the movable-comb hive Till 18.51 1 had 



the displeasure of cultivating bees in movable- 

 comb hives, so miserable. . . . But after several 

 years passed in silence I came on the stage, in the 

 years 18.53 and 1854, in the Bienen Zeitung, with my 



