718 



GIvEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Oct. 1. 



Editor Hutchinson is right when he says: 

 ' ' Language that is pure and perfect is cer- 

 tainly to be admired. A journal, the columns 

 of which are plentifully sprinkled with slang, 

 can not, of course, receive the respect of one 

 that uses choice language. At the same time, 

 let us not forget that criticisms on this sub- 

 ject ma}' become hypercritical." It's a pleas- 

 ure to know that no leading bee-journal is 

 plentifully sprinkled with slang, and it is to 

 be hoped that Editor Hutchinson will, abate 

 the " hyper " in his critic. 



"Dr. Dubini expresses surprise that so 

 common and cheap a material as turf is never 

 spoken of for smoker-fuel in North America. 

 So far as I know, that substance does not ex- 

 ist here." — F. L. Thompson, in Review. I 

 think turf is the same as peat. I've had it by 

 the wagonload, and at one time A. I. Root 

 sold it as smoker-fuel. [Yes, we sold peat for 

 a number of years as smoker-fuel. I think 

 we have a little of it left, but so far as I know 

 there is no call for it now. Planer-shavings 

 or hive-cuttings or rotten wood seem general- 

 ly to have the preference among bee-keepers, 

 largely because of the availability of the arti- 

 cles mentioned. — Ed.] 



The editor beats me in clearly seeing in 

 his own mind W. K. Morrison's hive, p. 685. 

 It seems the sections ought to be spaced apart 

 to let the bees up; but the way Mr. M. speaks 

 of % comb in \% sections looks just a little 

 as though they were crowded together. I'm 

 also mystified by his saying that only full 

 sheets of foundation must be used, and then 

 saying he puts two small triangles of founda- 

 tion in each section. [The reference to Vi 

 comb in IX sections rather led me at first 

 thought to believe that in your mind's eye 

 you saw more clearly than I the construction 

 of Mr. Morrison 's hive. But how could bees get 

 in and out of plain sections when crowded up 

 tight together? Methinks my mental per- 

 spective of the Morrison hive may not be in- 

 correct, after all.— Ed.] 



"It stands to reason that the fence 

 gives better ventilation," quoth ye editor, p. 

 691. Are you sure about that? Freer com- 

 munication, surely, but how better ventilation? 

 The air can pass only up, down, or sidewise in 

 the plane of the face of the comb, so how can 

 an opening allowing communication trans- 

 versely help ventilation ? [Surely, better com- 

 munication as well as better ventilation. Sup- 

 pose, for instance, that the several rooms of a 

 house had communication with each other by 

 means of one door each. There would be a 

 certain amount of ventilation — that is, change 

 of air from one room to another. Now, sup- 

 pose again that there were several doors to 

 each room. Would not the ventilation be 

 freer as well as the communication ? A few 

 reports so far seem to indicate that, with plain 

 sections and fences, there is more rapid ripen- 

 ing of the honey and sealing of the combs. — 

 Ed.] 



Bro. DootiTTLE, page 694, gives a story to 

 show that I ought not to back down for his 

 stern "No." Well, notwithstanding some 

 shakiness of the knees, I'll try. Among those 



who say five days for the larval state stands 

 Dubini. T. W. Cowan, in the 14th edition of 

 "British Bee-keepers' Guide-book," page 10, 

 gives " Time of feeding the larvae " as 5 days 

 for queen and worker, and 6 for drone. Years 

 ago 17 to 18 days was considered the time for 

 development of queen. Nowadays it is brought 

 down to 15. [If I make no mistake, Mr. 

 Doolittle conducted two experiments, in both 

 of which the results favored six days. Now, 

 perhaps if he had tested the matter a hundred 

 different times, the average might have been 

 nearer five than six. I am under the impres- 

 sion that Mr. Cowan, in drawing his conclu- 

 sions, did so only after a large number of tests, 

 and from these he drew a general average. 

 A careful and accurate scientist will not usu- 

 ally make a basis of calculation on two ex- 

 periments. He learns by experience that such 

 a course, while perhaps leading to an approxi- 

 mately correct result, would not lead to what 

 is called scientific accuracy. I know that 

 good authorities disagree ; and, really, I do 

 not know which figure is correct. — Ed.] 



HOW WE CAME TO USE LARGE HIVES. 



More Honey from the Large than the Small Hives, 



BY C. p. DADANT. 



One correction is needed to the former arti- 

 cle, p. 683, at top of page. It reads : 



' ' It would seem that the size of the hive has 

 something to do with the prolificness of the 

 queen, R. L. Taylor to the contrary notwith- 

 standing ; for as Mr. Taylor, in one of his late 

 articles, asserts, not one queen in a hundred 

 will lay 2500 eggs daily, continuously, for a 

 certain period In the same manner, L'Abbe 

 Colin, who used still smaller hives, says in his 

 book," etc. 



This is what I meant to say : 



"It would seem that the size of hive has 

 something to do with the prolificness of the 

 queen, R. L. Taylor to the contrary notwith- 

 standing ; for as Mr. Taylor, in one of his late 

 articles, asserts that not one queen in a hun- 

 dred will lay 2500 eggs daily, continuously, 

 for a certain period, in the same manner 

 L'Abbe Colin, who used still smaller hives, 

 says in his book : ' We can not estimate at 

 more than 600,' " etc. 



I promised you, in my last, to give an ac- 

 count of how we came to use large hives. 

 This is not needed as a practical argument, 

 but it will illustrate the necessity of making 

 many trials before coming to correct ideas and 

 practical methods on any subject. 



Although my father had kept bees for years 

 in France, he was still in the dark on many 

 points of bee culture that are to-day clear to 

 every bee-keeper. Bee-keeping was conduct- 

 ed under great difficulties. Movable-frame 



