1898 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



145 



season we adopted what had proved to be sat- 

 isfactory — the Danzenbaker reversible bottom- 

 board for our own hive, affording a ^sinch 

 entrance one way ard "s the other. So much 

 in favor of the deep entrances, and now for 

 the other side. 



G. M. DooHttle and O. P Miller, in the 

 Proi^irssii'C Bee-keeper, do not agree that there 

 are advantages in the use of a deep entrance 

 for summer use. The latter says when there 

 is more than a bee-space under the frames the 

 bees will build knots of bee-glue up so they 

 can reach them ; and while admitting that 

 such entrances will to some extent do away 

 with swarming, it will not do so absolutely. 

 Mr. DooHttle quotes J. L. Hubbard, in Glean- 

 ings, who says that bees, instead of cluster- 

 ing out in front of the hive, will cluster in the 

 deep spaces under the frames; and then he adds 

 that this was his experience — that bees do not 

 cluster out in front, simply because they have 

 a more convenient place inside; and that the 

 idea that swarming can be overcome by rais- 

 ing the hive up from the bottom-board is a 

 mvth. He believes that a 3^ space under the 

 brood-frames, with a properly shaded entrance, 

 is all-sufficient, and then winds up by stating 

 that hehim.self uses a reversible bottom-board; 

 but the deep space is used only for winter, and 

 not for summer. 



There, now, friends, I have tried to give you 

 both sides of the whole matter, without fear 

 or prejudice. So far as we are concerned, it 

 does not make the difference of a picayvme, 

 because the b ^ttom-board that we have adopt- 

 ed for this season is reversible, and may be 

 used either side up. If one believes, for in- 

 stance, that a deep space under the frames is a 

 good thing, he can trv it to his heart's con- 

 tent. If lie does not believe it, then he can 

 use the entrance the other side up. 



HONEY IN PLAIN SECTIONS ; IS IT ARTLSTIC ? 



OBJECTIONS TO THE PLAIN SECTION AND 



FENCE. 



Mr. T. F. Bingham, for whose opinion as a 

 bee-keeper, inventor, and mechanic I have 

 great respect, is opposed to the plain sections. 

 Besides requiring new separators, he thinks 

 that the merchants and clerks will have to be 

 taught how to handle the honey ; that even 

 the shipping-cases will have to be more per- 

 fect or the one-piece section abandoned ; and 

 then he adds: 



There is also a touch of art in the matter. Any one 

 familiar with architecture knows the beauty of pro- 

 jectinnf edges and borders. Do the advocates of this 

 formle.ss "'chunk honey " realize how thin, meager, 

 and lean it will look ? Take away the projecting edge 

 from a section of honej', and we .see sweetness with- 

 out ornament. 



The last point is best answered by the en- 

 graving which we have reproduced from the 

 Bee-keepers" Revie7v, and which appeared in 

 the same nurhber with Mr. Bingham's article. 

 If he had seen that photo of Mr. Hutchinson's 

 I do not believe he would have written the 

 paragraph which I have given above, to the 

 effect that honey in the plain sections is a fail- 

 ure from an artistic standpoint. Why ! it 

 seems to me the honey in the bottom row of 

 sections, shown on p. 128, is much prettier — 



certainly more artistic — than the hone}' in the 

 top rows. It is not the section, with or with- 

 out its projecting edges, that should command 

 attention, but it is the well filled and well- 

 sealed honey. In a word, it is not what zve 

 think looks best, but what sells best. Mr. 

 Aspinwall says the honey in the bottom row 

 brings a higher price. 



In answer to the other points, it is true that 

 plain sections do require new separators ; but 

 //'these fences result in having sections better 

 filled out, better sealed — in short, better sell- 

 ers — the slight additional expense can be well 

 afforded, especially as the fence or cleated 

 separator would last for j-ears. 



With regard to merchants and clerks in gro- 

 ceries, where the two kinds of sections have 

 been sold, the plain and old-stj-le, I never 

 heard any complaint on that score, and they 

 have been sold for years. 



As to shipping-cases, I think the plain sec- 

 tion will in time render it possible to simplify 

 their construction. We know it will take less 

 lumber to make them, and certainly there is 

 right here a savirg in pocket to the bee- 

 keeper, for shipping-cases are something one 

 will have to buy every season. 



In relation to this same subject, Bro. Leahy, 

 in the Progressive Bee-keeper, says : 



I do not like the fence separator — don't believe they 

 are durable enough: too many sharp corners to beget- 

 ting knocked off: and if you should accidentally get 



them wet ? There is also danger of bees fastening 



their cappings to the separator cleats. Now, I said I 

 did not like them ; b\it 1 may after I tr>' them, and I 

 hope they will be a success, as " no bee-way " sections 

 can be sold cheaper, because they take less material 

 and less work to make them. But I do not think, like 

 some, that honey will look any better in them. They 

 will look too much like something with its ears cut off. 

 Neither do I think that the bees will fill them any 

 evener than they do the old section. Why should they, 

 when the cleat on the .separator makes the construc- 

 tion of the separator and section practically the .same 

 as heretofore ? 



As to the glued fence getting wet, of course 

 that is possible ; but in all the 3'ears that Mr. 

 Miles Morton has used them I do not think he 

 has had any particular trouble on that score ; 

 but let it be understood that the right kind of 

 glue should be used ; and to get good results, 

 glue must be " cooked " right. 



As to the sharp corners being knocked off, 

 that is not so bad in reality as it seems ; and 

 as to the other point, whether honej- in plain 

 sections looks better than that in old style, I 

 need only refer to the illustration taken from 

 the Revieiv. 



I believe friends Bingham and Leahy are 

 both open to conviction ; and I await with in- 

 terest the results of their experience the com- 

 ing season. 



In this connection let me say that I desire 

 to have Gleanings set forth fairly and hon- 

 estly the arguments against the fence and 

 plain section as well as those for it ; and if 

 some good friend, or some fellow not so good 

 a friend of mine as might be, thinks it has not 

 done it, I wish he would write us a legular 

 scorcher of an article. If he is only honest 

 and fair about it I will publish it. Before any 

 criticism can have much weight it should 

 come from one who has actually tried the 

 thing condemned and found it wanting. 



