1897 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



85 



glucose is valueless as a food, and Is of no use 

 in the arts, and is manufactured only for the 

 purposes of swindling, then I can not see why 

 bee keepers, in connection with the producers 

 of cane, beet, and maple sugar, can not, through 

 their Members of Congress, some time in the 

 future, have an inttrnalrevenue duty placed 

 on glucose at so high a rate that it can not be 

 used for adulterating. We may do well to 

 ponder this suggestion.— Ed.] 



SECTION SUPER WITH PATTERN- SLATS. 



THUMBSCREWS V.S. WEDGES FOE PRODUCING 

 SIDE COMPRESSION. 



By C. Davenport. 



Some time ago in Gleanings I described a 

 super that I prefer, which is a case just long 

 enough to take in four rows of sections, and 

 deep enough to take in the section and pattern- 

 slats, and yet allow a bee-space. These pat- 

 tern-slats have no end-pieces, and in your foot- 

 notes you say that, without end-pieces, the 

 pattern-slats are liable to get skewed, and then 

 the openings in some cases will not come to- 

 gether in exact alignment, which makes them, 

 " the openings," very much narrower. 



I do not believe you understood what I meant; 

 for with scalloped pattern-slats the separators 

 drop down between them; or even without 

 separators the follower and wedge will hold 

 them in place, so that it is impossible for me to 

 see how the openings can get out of exact 

 alignment. 



After a more extended trial of these supers 

 the past season I prefer them to any others. 

 They are superior to those having end-pieces 

 on the pattern-slats in every respect, so far as 

 I can see. Those thumb-screws which you 

 advertised last year for the first time are de- 

 cidedly better in every way, in my opinion, 

 than a wedge is for tightening sections in the 

 supers. I thought, when I first saw them de- 

 scribed, they would be a good thing; and after 

 using 30 supers that had them, the past season, 

 I find they work even better than I expected 

 them to. In producing section honey I regard 

 it as very important that the sections be wedged 

 up very tight sidewise; for if they are not, in 

 this locality at least, the edges of the sections 

 will be very badly stuck ud with propolis, and 

 the edges are the hardest part to clean; be- 

 sides, propolis from the edges will often, when 

 it is being removed, get into the cells of unseal- 

 ed honey next to the edge. This injures the 

 appearance of the honey, and does not improve 

 its flavor, to say the least. 



With one simple wedge it is impossible to 

 tighten the sections much. I use two wedges 

 for each super, and drive them quite tight 

 with a hammer; but this is considerable work, 

 and they are hard to remove when badly stuck 

 up with bee-glue. Thumb-screws are better, 

 and always right in place when wanted. When 



I got mine I put them into a keg of linseed oil 

 to soak. This greatly injured them. It caused 

 the threads to check and crumble off some- 

 what. I have since learned that, if I had put 

 them into hot tallow instead of oil, it would 

 have been a good thing for them. 



TALL, SECTIONS. 



I notice that you seem to be in favor of 

 changing the standard of size in sections for 

 one tall and narrower. It would cost a good 

 many— at least it would cost me — a good deal 

 of money to change or fit all my supers for 

 another size of section; and at the present low 

 price of honey for even the very finest grades, 

 I think it would be a good while indeed before 

 I could get enough more from the sale of honey 

 in tall sections than I would from that in 

 slandard-sized ones to pay me for making the 

 change. But will honey in tall narrow sections 

 sell morerefdily? Last fall I was in St. Paul 

 and Minneapolis, where I sold about 2000 lbs. 

 of honey in standard-sized sections. One day 

 in Minneapolis I was in a large retail store, 

 where I sold a large amount. They had some 

 tall narrow sections that held about a pound. 

 A man came in and wanted a few pounds. He 

 was offered some in these tall sections. He re- 

 fused them, and said there was too much comb 

 and too little honey in them to suit him, and 

 that he wanted no more of them. He took 

 some in square sections which I had just sold 

 them, and said there was more real honey in 

 one of them than there was in two of the others. 

 Of course, his was an extreme view of the case; 

 but will the general public be fooled into be- 

 lieving that there is more honey in tall thin 

 sections than there is in others of the same 

 weight that are square and wider ? 



A person who seldom buys honey, or one 

 buying a section for the first time, might do so; 

 but regular buyers or users would not long 

 think so. 



Tall sections filled would, I believe, be much 

 harder to handle without injury. It would re- 

 quire more foundation to fill them, and on this 

 account they would be more apt to have fish- 

 bone in the honey. It is claimed that bees will 

 fill and cap these tall thin sections quicker 

 than they will square ones. I have never used 

 them, but I have strong doubts of this. If a 

 swarm is hived in a shallow brood-nest con- 

 taining less space than the regular eight-frame 

 hive they may enter the supers sooner, and do 

 more section work in any kind of sections dur- 

 ing a short flow; but in that case the colony 

 will be, and can not help being, " if there is on- 

 ly one flow," short in stores and bees for winter. 

 On the other hand, if the flow is long they 

 will not do as much section work; for, not 

 having enough brood room, they decrease in 

 strength before the flow is over. I am now 

 speaking from much experience in this matter; 

 and while shallow or double brood-chamber 



