446 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



June; 1. 



sort of private note, which will explain it- 

 self : 



Dear Ernest: — I don't know how it is at Medina, but 

 in getting queen-cells accepted without giving royal 

 jelly, the small bottomed cell-cups are away ahead. 

 Indeed, I haven't succeeded in getting the large-bot- 

 tomed cells accepted at all; but with the cocoons set 

 in the small-bottomed cups there is no trouble. I used 

 both kinds on the same stick, and had the nine with 

 cocoons promptly accepted and the other nine prompt- 

 ly cleaned out. Out of about 50 of the large kind 

 given, not one has been accepted. Of course, if royal 

 jelly were used the case would be different; but that 

 would be more trouble than to use cocoons. 



C. C. Miller. 



I would explain that the cell-forming sticks 

 with reduced ends were made after the pat- 

 tern, I believe, first suggested by Willie Atch- 

 ley, of Beeville, Texas, and now used by W. H. 

 Pridgen, of Creek, N. C. We last season used 

 cell-cups with large bottoms the same as rec- 

 ommended in Doolittle's book. These ap- 

 pear to answer every requirement ; but Mr. 

 Pridgen and Willie Atchley both claim that it 

 is an advantage to use cups with reduced bot- 

 toms, so that the ordinary cocoons from work- 

 er-cells, after the comb has been sliced down, 

 can be lifted out with its larva, and inserted 

 in the bottom of the cell-cup. This will make 

 plain what the doctor means when he speaks 

 about the cocoons being promptly accepted. 



I referred this matter to Mr. Wardell, who 

 still prefers to use cell-cups with large bot- 

 toms ; and when he uses royal jelly he gets a 

 larger percentage of accepted cells of the 

 large-bottom class ; so that I do not know 

 that Dr. Miller's experience is diametrically 

 opposite to Mr. Wardell's. 



THE HAKES-HEDDON ADULTERATION CASE. 



In the Review for May, Mr. Hutchinson 

 gives a summary of the Hakes-Heddon adul- 

 teration case, a report of which was published 

 in our last issue. In this connection Mr. 

 Hutchinson says a sample of a lot of honey 

 which he sold to Hakes, and which he (Mr. 

 Hutchinson) says he bought of us, was also 

 pronounced by the chemist to be adulterated. 

 This matter was brought to our attention ; 

 but from the best information we could then 

 get hold of, the matter seemed to be very 

 much mixed. Further investigation shows 

 that the sample came from a shelf on which 

 there were also bottles of Hakes-Heddon hon- 

 ey—all of the packages " having the same la- 

 bels, " and right here would be a big chance 

 for a mistake as to the source. In any ca.se 

 the sample is reported to have been " adulter- 

 ated the same as the Hakes-Heddon honey." 



We want the truth, no matter where it hits. 

 If the honey came originally from us, it is 

 some we sold to Mr. Hutchinson some three 

 years ago. This he used for exhibition pur- 

 poses, and afterward, as he says, sold it to Mr. 

 Hakes. Mr. Hutchinson believed it to be 

 pure, and so did we, and we think so yet. 

 Even if the honey came from Mr. Hutchinson 

 it is not altogether clear that it came from us. 

 Referring to the lot of honey that Hutchinson 

 sent him, Hakes writes that Hutchinson 

 wrote him that some of it xn\^t have come 

 from The A. I. Root Co.. This would indi- 

 cate that Hakes had some honey from Hutch- 



inson that did not come from us. In my talk 

 with Dr. Mason I took it that he (Mason) 

 gathered the same impression from corres- 

 pondence he had had with Hutchinson. Here 

 again there may be a mistake. I don't know. 

 But however this may be, it is of small conse- 

 quence, as Mr. Hutchinson would no more 

 adulterate, or knowingly sell adulterated 

 goods, than we. We understand also that the 

 food commissioner visited Hutchinson, in- 

 spected his honey, and pronounced it all 

 right. 



The sample of the so-called Hutchinson- 

 Hakes honey was not purchased by the food 

 inspector as were the other samples referred 

 to in Secretary Mason's report, and as a con- 

 sequence no regular records were made as 

 would be required from the inspectors. The 

 sample was simply bought by Mr. Soper and 

 sent to the chemist after the food commission- 

 ers had bought the Hakes-Heddon honey. 

 This is the reason why the matter did not 

 appear in the Michigan Dairy and Food Bul- 

 letin No. 50. 



It is our rule to buy of reputable producers ; 

 and, so far as we know, we have never sold an 

 ounce of adulterated honey. As soon as we 

 can get together further facts we will place 

 them before our readers. 



MORE ABOUT BEI.GIAN HARES. 



Since preparing the footnote to Fr. Grei- 

 ner's article in this issue I have run across an 

 article in The Fariner, of St. Paul, Minn., on 

 the subject of raising Belgian hares. The ar- 

 ticle was very interesting, and from it I make 

 a few extracts that our readers may perhaps 

 peruse with pleasure as well as profit: 



The Belgian-hare fever is at once the beginning of 

 a craze and the inauguration of an industry. All 

 sorts of places will do for a rabbitry. A dry-goods 

 box on the rear porch is sufficient, if the progeny are 

 quickly disposed of. From this cheap and common 

 method to the rearing of hares in gilded palaces of 

 netting and hardwood, is a wide range ; but the fever 

 attacks the poor as well as the rich. . . . But fads 

 do not take a strong hold of the American unless 

 there proves to be mouey in them in a practical way ; 

 and it may not be a waste of time and space to set 

 forth in type some of the claims made for this propos- 

 ed new industry, by its friends. Twenty cents' worth 

 of hay when hay is SlO a ton will feed a pair of Bel- 

 gian hares for one month. ... In the markets of 

 Belgium the hare is the common meat foot. . . . 

 The flesh of the Belgian hare lacks the heavy oily sub- 

 stances found in ducks, chickens, and turkeys. There 

 is none of the strong gamey flavor found in the wild 

 rabbit. . . . For fecundity its like does not exist 

 in any species of the animal kingdom which supplies 

 man with food. The Belgian hare will dress one 

 pound for every month of its age up to six or .seven 

 months. He is good for food when ten weeks old, but 

 the greatest profit in supplying the market is derived 

 by waiting until he is five months old. The Belgian 

 hare brings in the world's markets the same price as 

 turkey. The bones of the hare are small and the food 

 loss is practically nothing. If caponizing is resorted 

 to when the male is three months old a larger animal 

 weighing as high as twelve pounds can be produced. 

 I<arge numbers can be kept in a single room without 

 damaging each other, thus reducing materially the 

 cost of production. 



Does it pay to raise Belgian hares? 



Twenty dollars is sufficient capital for any one to 

 start in the business. But the natural increase will 

 force an additional expenditure in two months. 



Unless one is familiar with the matter of 

 raising Belgian hares he had better go very 

 cautiously. 



