214 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Mak. 15. 



mean to say that he is a wicked man. This 

 vast sum of money that he controls has been 

 given Into his hands in answer to prayer, and 

 his life and work have been before the world 

 almost like a modern miracle. I admit that 

 this is not quite a pai-allel case, for in one sense 

 MuUer is a poor man. He uses this property 

 for the benefit of the orphans and destitute of 

 the great city of London. Now, is it not possi- 

 ble that some of these men of property you 

 mention are using their property in- a like way? 

 Ernest just infoi'ms me that our schools of 

 learning — our colleges and seminaries — were, 

 many of them, founded, and now kept going, 

 by our millionaires. In regard to your Bible 

 texts, if you will consult your pastor or our 

 doctors of theology, and the commentaries, 

 they will tell you that the word "rich "in a 

 scriptural sense refers to those who lead a life 

 of selfishness and ease; so in reality the word 

 describes the way a man lives, rather than his 

 standing at the" banks. We all respect and 

 honor a man whose word and signature are as 

 good as gold: but we as a people do not respect 

 nor honor' him who looks with disdain upon the 

 workingmen of our land, especially those who 

 work with muscle as well as brain. Let us 

 work and pray that our rich men may become 

 Christians, and the spirit of Jesus Christ will 

 manage the money matters. 



You err, friend H.. in assuming that money 

 must be earned in order to be honestly owned. 

 Some years ago a babe was born in Hoboken, 

 N. J., and he was worth f 40.000,000 before he 

 could use a cent. That money founded the 

 Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken— 

 one of the grandest institutions in this or any 

 other land. (Jrand old Pelei' Cooper was worth 

 millions ovei' and over; and yet every working- 

 man in New York loved him as "he did his 

 father. When he drove along Broadway, by 

 general consent the teamsters made way to let 

 the old philanthropist pass by in his plain old 

 shay. Why? Because he gave to the people 

 of the world the celebrated Cooper Institute in 

 New York, whei-e free instruction is given in 

 all the arts and sciences. George Peabody gave 

 817.."i00.000 to the poor of London, to improve 

 their homes. Vanderbilt gave half a million to 

 the Fisk Univei'sity, of Nashville. Tenn. Space 

 would fail us if we were to tell all the good 

 things that rich men have done for mankind. 

 Certainly, God designs money to move in large 

 masses, just as he collects the water in lakes 

 and seas. What would the world be if the 

 water were all equally divided ? 



You ask, '• Are not our legislative halls full of 

 lawyers? Perhaps you do not mean to reflect on 

 the lawyers of the present day. The class in 

 the text you quote certainly does not mean 

 lawyers as we know them at the present time. 

 Please remember that our fathers, sons, hus- 

 bands, bi'others, ai'e lawyers; and to condemn 

 them in toto would be as unjust and unkind as 

 to say that the grocers of our land ai'e all ras- 

 cals. Since I have been on the school-board of 

 our town I have become acquainted with more 

 or less of our lawyers, because we always find it 

 wise to have at least one lawyer on the l)oard; 

 and I hav(! learned to respect them and to look 

 up to tliem as I have never done before. As a 

 rule, they urge people not to go into law; and 

 several times I have seen tln^m give their time 

 gi-atis to point out to farmers, and other classes 

 of people uneducated in law. the folly and in- 

 justice of the tiling they had in mind. We 

 know there are many of them who ;ire not 

 Christians, and we lament it; yet I have known 

 even these to give advice that was very much 

 in line with what we might expect from the 

 pastoi's of our chut'ches. If we have the I'ight 

 kind of love toward oar neighbors we certainly 



shall not be in haste to decide they are rascals, 

 even if they do happen to be lawyers. 



Now, dear friends, had we not best let this 

 matter drop right here? 1 admit that I am not 

 posted, and that I am unable to handle politics 

 and finance: but I do feel that it is in my 

 province to say that these troubles, like all 

 others that threaten our land of liberty, are to 

 be remedied in the line of the text, "Not by 

 might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the 

 Lord of hosts."] 



THE REASON WHY. 



A PLKA FOR THE CROSSAVISE L. FRAME; A 

 GOOD-NATURED SCORING OF SUPPIA- 

 DEALERS; Vi^ANT CLOSED- 

 END FRAMES. 



Mr. Editor: — While the hive and frame ques- 

 tion is one main topic at present in Glp:anings, 

 and everybody is talking, will you allow me to 

 say my piece, as I see you sometimes allow con- 

 trary people to talk? AVhy is it. that, when 

 you were getting up a new hive (the Dovetail- 

 ed), you didn't embrace one more change, and 

 thus make it a perfect hive — that is. a change 

 in the frame, and make it to run crosswise of 

 the ten-frame hive, instead of lengthwise? 

 Aft(>r testing almost all of the sizes and styles 

 of frames in use, and for many years, I am ful- 

 ly persuaded that the regular ten-frame Lang- 

 stroth hive, with the frames ci'osswise, has 

 more good features than any other hiv(^ I know 

 of. I know, too, that many will "kick" at this 

 idea. Why? Because they are not the stand- 

 ard frame. But, hold! Why is the Langstroth 

 the standard frame? Because it started first; 

 and after the patent expired, supply-dealers 

 and hive-makers went to making and selling 

 them, and each dealer began adveitising and 

 puffing their superiority over other makes. 

 Editors of bee-joiu'nals puffed them. Why? 

 Because they were supply-dealers, and it was 

 to their interest to do so. Bee-keepers fell into 

 line, and began buying and using them. Why? 

 Because the bee-journals say they are the best. 

 Soon the bee-keepers who had never used any 

 other frame began writing for the journals on 

 the superiority of the Langstroth frame over 

 all others; then, when a standard frame is 

 talked of, it must be the Langstroth. Why? 

 Because there is most of that kind in use, and 

 all the fixtures, such as supers, foundation, sec- 

 tions, etc., are for that sized hive. Why, bless 

 you, nothing would have to be changed but the 

 trame, in length, that's all: and the many con- 

 veniences gained would repay for doing that. 

 Some of the points gained would be, no sagging, 

 no wiring needed, combs not so liable to break 

 in handling oi' extracting: straight combs; 

 easier to contract by a division-boai'd for weak 

 colonies in spring. With a division-boaixi in 

 the center, it is in the best shape possible for 

 two nuch^i in a hive. Combs will not break in 

 hauling to and from out-apiaries: aie much 

 nicer and easier for lady be<'-keepers to handle; 

 much better for stalling nuclei with few bees. 

 While the capacity for bees, brood, sections, 

 and comb surface will be exactly the same as in 

 the ten-frame Langstroth. I use wide frames 

 for sections, and a frame this size holds just six 

 4i4x4?4 sections: or. by putting two brood- 

 frames together, I have a wide frame, and it is 

 much easier to get sections out than if it were 

 one solid wide frame; then, when it is empty. I 

 can use them for combs. But now I am mak- 

 ing my frames closed-end, and they will not do 

 for sections. 



Mr. Editor. I was a little amused when read- 

 ing your foot-note in answer to friend E.J. 

 Baird's question on this subject, page 453, 1890; 



