122 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Feb. 1 



different from the foul brood which we had 

 years ago here in Medina. 



It appears that Mr. Moore and Mr. White 

 have gone over their work again this year, 

 examining many more specimens sent in by 

 inspectors, with the view of confirming the 

 conclusions reached in their inquiries of the 

 year preceding; namely, that the prevail- 

 ing disease of the State which was so de- 

 structive was the foul brood of Cheshire and 

 Cheyne. They also conducted various ex- 

 periments to determine the value of the new 

 treatment with formalin for foul brood, and 

 at the same time investigated other diseases, 

 such as pickled brood and bee paralysis. 



In the report for this year, which, through 

 the courtesy of the Department, has been 

 submitted to us in manuscript before its 

 publication in book form, the conclusions of 

 last year have been confirmed. A large 

 number of samples of black brood have been 

 examined, and in every case Bacillus alvei 

 has been found. Specimens were received 

 from Columbia, Albany, Schoharie, Mont- 

 gomery, and Greene Counties. The bacte- 

 riological findings in every case were Ba- 

 cillus alvei but no Bacillus milii of Dr. 

 Howard; the conclusion is that the so call- 

 ed black brood that has made such fearful 

 havoc in New York is nothing more nor less 

 than the old foul brood of Cheshire and 

 Cheyne. 



TWO DISTINCT BROOD DISE\55ES IN NEW YORK. 



They do find, hovpever, the specimens of 

 brood which the inspectors have diagnosed 

 as Joul brood differ from the specimens 

 designated as black brood; that the foul 

 brood which the N w York inspectors had 

 diagnosed as such was the same as the foul 

 brood of Wisconsin, Canada, and Ohio. If 

 this is true, then we never had foul brood 

 here, but had a milder form of disease, but 

 almost as destructive and contagious. 



One fact is clearly brought out; namely, 

 that there are two very distinct diseases in 

 New York, both of which are destructive, 

 one more so than the other. From the very 

 first I have been satisfied that the disease 

 we have called black brood was quite differ- 

 ent from what we have had here at Medina. 



Mr. Moore and Mr. White both appear to 

 discredit the work of Dr. Howard; for, be- 

 sides 7wt finding Bacillus milii, they were 

 not able to discover the bacillus of pickled 

 brood, designated by Dr. Howard as As- 

 pergillus pollinus. 



THE FORMALIN TREATMENT. 



The new drug treatment with formalde- 

 hyde was tested in various ways, but found 

 to be not entirely effective. Their conclu- 

 sion seems to be that, if the fumes of it are 

 applied long enough inside of an inclosure 

 that is hermetically sealed, it will kill all 

 the living germs. Two or three hours of 

 fumigation is not deemed by them sufficient, 

 nor even 24 hours, in a hive no tighter than 

 an ordinary bee-hive. Combs should be in- 

 closed in an air tight apartment, and then 

 subjected to the action of fumes for a period 

 of two days. The affected matter when so 



treated was then examined and found to be 

 free from any live germs. 



The formaldehyde gas, it is shown, is a 

 good disinfectant for certain diseases; but 

 it penetrates very slowly, and 24 hours of 

 application of the gas on combs in the man- 

 ner usually employed is not sufficient to kill 

 all the spores in the decayed larvse. 



THE ORIGIN OF THE BLACK OR FOUL BROOD 

 IN NEW YORK. 



It appears that the disease, whatever it 

 is, came from the South. "From the history 

 of the disease in New York State," so state 

 the authors, "we find that it was probably 

 introduced into the State about eight or nine 

 years ago by the importation of some dis- 

 eased colonies from Tennessee. These colo- 

 nies were shipped to Sloanville, N. Y. , and 

 from this center the disease seems to have 

 spread." 



This report, as a whole, is interesting 

 and valuable. The ordinary layman for 

 the time being, until more evidence has been 

 furnished by scientific men generally, will 

 be somewhat at sea as to whether foul 

 brood exists or has existed in some portions 

 of the country, or whether there is any such 

 thing as real black brood. Perhaps Dr. 

 Howard may be able to offer some solution 

 of this matter. 



SAMUEL WAGNER, THE ORIGINATOR AND 



FIRST EDITOR OF THE AMERICAN BEE 



journal; WHAT I KNOW ABOUT 



HIM. 



In the introduction to the A B C of Bee 

 Culture I have told about getting acquaint- 

 ed with Mr. Wagner through L. L. Lang- 

 stroth. About as soon as I had looked over 

 the literature of that day, and found what 

 had been done with the honey-bee, I learn- 

 ed from my good friend Langstroth that an 

 American bee-journal had been started, 

 and that Samuel Wagner kept it going one 

 year, and then, through lack of encourage- 

 ment, together with the breaking out of the 

 American rebellion, it was discontinued. 

 I at once wrote to Mr. Wagner, and a very 

 pleasant correspondence ensued. A copy 

 of the first volume, started in January, 

 1861, and kept up till December, was se- 

 cured from him, and was read over and 

 over again. More especially was that part 

 of it read and re-read pertaining to the 

 Dzierzon theory. I urged Mr. Wagner to 

 re-commence the journal, which he did in 

 July, 1866, and I with others very soon be- 

 came a regular contributor to its pages. I 

 am pleased to notice that one of the adver- 

 tising sheets has been preserved in our 

 bound volume; and among the advertisers I 

 see H. A. King & Co., Nevada, O. ; C. P. 

 Bigelow, Perkinsville. Vt. ; Adam Grimm, 

 Jefferson, Wis.; A. Gray, Royal, Butler 

 Co , O., and W. A. Flanders, of Shelby, O. 



Very soon I began to talk about comb 

 foundation made of wax; and my good 

 friend Samuel Wagner was enabled to send 

 me a piece of foundation, or "artificial 

 comb," as we called it then, made of black 



