364 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



May 1. 



believes that, while Gleanings has pushed 

 new things too hard, both the Progressive and 

 the Canadian Bee Journal have gone to the 

 other extreme in condemning them — so much 

 so that no one would even ^ive them a trial. 

 He further believes that an editor ought to be 

 very careful how he allows his journal to 

 boom a new thing — yes, or condemn it till re- 

 peated tests under varying conditions have 

 fully determined its value. In general, this is 

 good doctrine. I have preached it myself, and 

 I try to practice it, as I shall show. He then 

 says : 



I am willing to admit, and have admitted, my belief 

 that the use of plain sections and fence separators 

 leads to a more perfect filling of the sections. I think 

 that any one who is not prejudiced will admit this up- 

 on seeing a crop of honey thus produced. If this is a 

 fact some may ask, what is the objection to " boom- 

 ing" them? I think that there ought to he some fur- 

 ther attempt to discover exactly what it is that causes 

 the more perfect fillii g. The fact that the section is 

 the same width all around can not possibly have any 

 bearing upon the subject. It can make no difference 

 whether the side-pieces of the sections extend out and 

 meet the separators, or pieces on the separators extend 

 out and meet the sections. One is exactly equal to the 

 other. It seems as though the freer communication 

 afforded by the open separators was the only point 

 left. In opposition to this view, Mr. Daggitt recently 

 called attention to the fact that sections filled without 

 the use of any separators whatever were no better fill- 

 ed, if as well, than those where separators were used. 



Both Mr. Doolittle and Mr. Hutchinson 

 have, without knowing all the facts, taken a 

 natural view ; and if I were in their shoes I 

 would doultless think and write as they do, 

 and if they had been in our shoes they would 

 have done as we have done. But there are 

 some things that they have either lost sight of 

 or else have not fully considered. 



In the first place, Mr. Dool.tile speaks of 

 the new fence and pla:n sections as a "craze," 

 and as if they were new things, and would 

 probably be abandoned like reversible frames. 

 If they had not been used for a period of some- 

 thing like ten years by three or four prom- 

 inent bee-keepers, in more or less modified 

 forms, the statement might be correct ; but 

 fence separators are an old thing. I do not 

 in any sense regard them as an experiment. 

 Plain sections have been used by Mr. Aspin- 

 wall for about ten years. Fence separators 

 have been used by Miles Morton for about 

 the same length of time. The same general 

 scheme was advocated years ago by that prac- 

 tical bee-keeper, Mr. B. Taylor, by Walter S. 

 Pouder, and by others. The same goods as 

 we make them were tested last season by a 

 good many ; and out of all the hundreds and 

 hundreds who have begun to adopt them, 

 there are only three or four, possibly more, 

 who are not entirely satisfied. This is remark- 

 able when we consider the many favorable re- 

 ports that have come in. 



It will be remembered that thick top-bars 

 were an old thing, and had been used for 

 years by J. B. Hall and others, long before Dr. 

 Miller and I began to push them into promi- 

 nence ; and even Doolittle,* at that time, op- 

 posed them, although he is now a user and 

 advocate of them. What is more, they are 



* Perhaps the pushing of tall sections, another new 

 old thing, might be called a craze. If so, I got my in- 

 spiration from Doolittle, Capt. Hetheriugtoii, Danzen- 

 baker, and others. 



used and recommended by nearly all of the 

 bee-keepers. 



Self-spacing Hoffman frames were another 

 new old thing. They had been used some 

 twelve years previously, and now there are 

 hundreds of bee-keepers who will swear by 

 them. I do not and never did recommend 

 them for every one; but there are many who 

 would never use any thing else. 



It was Gleanings that began to champion 

 the dovetailed (or, more correctly speaking, 

 the lock) corner in hives, another old device; 

 and now hives having that feature are sold al- 

 most exclusively by us and very largely by 

 our competitors. In hot climates they stand 

 the test. 



I believe I have seldom helped push into 

 prominence, or tried to do so, something that 

 had not been previously tested by practical 

 bee-keepers years before; and in going on that 

 rule Gleanings has made very lew mistakes, 

 comparatively. Nearly every thing she has 

 advocated has come to stay, or it appears that 

 way. I do not say this with any boasting 

 spirit, but because I believe it is the truth. 



Drawn foundation is referred to as having 

 been advocated by myself, and finally having 

 been designated as a failure in one way, and 

 perhaps it was. It was Doolittle, as well as 

 myself, who helped push this forward, and 

 Doolittle was all right, even if it was a craze. 

 It cost Mr. Weed and us something like §2000 

 to make the necessary experiments and the 

 necessary dies. We disposed of, all told, per- 

 haps 200 lbs. of the product. Certainly this 

 small amount, much of which was given away, 

 distributed among a few bee-keepers, could 

 have cost them little or nothing. So long as 

 the supply-manufacturer and inventor in this 

 case, were the loser, I can not see how bee- 

 keepers lost by this venture. On the other 

 hand, they gained a lot of valuable informa- 

 tion, and we certainly feel that we have; for 

 out of it will come and has come the develop- 

 ment of the new thin-base foundation. 



The reversing idea has been abandoned, it 

 is true; but I believe there is a good deal in it 

 yet. We sold very few reversible frames, yet 

 many who tried them are very much pleased 

 with them. I remember particularly the case 

 of Mr. Chalon Fowls, who, I believe, is still 

 using them. But suppose that this is a device 

 that was abandoned. In order to make prog- 

 ress in any branch of industry, some things 

 have to be tried and discarded. In the api- 

 cultural world it would be strange if some- 

 thing did not have to be thrown overboard. 



Automatic swarming-devices not mentioned 

 by Messrs. Hutchinson and Doolittle, were a 

 good deal talked about at one time; but no 

 one really pushed them; and after perhaps 

 two or three dozen had been sold they simply 

 dropped out of sight. The Simplicity hive 

 was abandoned as another example; but it 

 had a run of about fifteen years, and those 

 laves are still good where used. If we have 

 something a good deal better it would have 

 been folly to continue making new hives with 

 beveled edges, because there are new genera- 

 tions of bee-keepers coming up, who, of 

 course, want the better things. 



