672 



Gleanings in Bee Culture 



continued for over a couple of weeks. Taking the 

 record as a whole, no regularity Is noted. 



Then, again, "Does the laying hen keep up her 

 period of making an egg every so many hours as 

 long as she lives?" The answer to the former 

 question answers this one as well. She did not do 

 it during her first year, neither does she her second 

 year. 



I wish to correct a mistaken idea in the footnote 

 on p. 23, Oct. 15, concerning our 31-egg hen of 1910. 

 Instead of laying once a week, as stated, she laid 

 March 24 and 31. Then she laid seven eggs between 

 April 2 and 22 Inclusive. None of these eggs were 

 laid on consecutive days. May 1 to 10 she laid sev- 

 en eggs. In one case during this time she laid on 

 three consecvitive days, and again on two consecu- 

 tive days. She rested .jS days, then laid six eggs 

 between July 3 and 13, two of these being laid on 

 consecutive days After a rest of 53 days she laid 

 nine eggs between Sept. 5 and 18, three times hav- 

 ing laid on two consecutive days. She rested 153 

 days during moulting time, and then laid as high 

 as ten eggs on consecutive days. This hen does not 

 follow either of the rules outlined by the discoverer 

 of the method of telling the laying hen. 



Any way of forecasting the egg-laying ability of a 

 hen would certainly be a great help to poultrymen. 

 However, as I understand it, the inventor bases 

 this method on two points which do not accord 

 with trap-nest records. Ko.s.s M. Sherwood, 



Assistant in Poultry Husbandry. 

 Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, 

 Wooster, O., Oct. 24, 1911. 



THE SIMPLICITY INCUBATOR, ETC. ; SEE PAGE 

 740, DEC. 1, 1909. 



Perhaps a good part of our readers have 

 forgotten about my " Simplicity" incubator. 

 I think about the last mention I made of it 

 was on page 239, April, 1910. I confess it 

 was with great reluctance that I let it drop 

 and ceased experimenting with "contact 

 heat," especially so since I had been pray- 

 ing quite a good deal over this very inven- 

 tion (as I have told you) ; and all through 

 this busy life of mine, the things I have 

 praye;l over earnestly, and at the same time 

 worked over faithfully, have usually, sooner 

 or later, developed something of value to 

 the world; and I confess I have been expect- 

 ine all along that, even if I did not succeed 

 with this form of incubator, somebody else 

 would; therefore it is with much interest 

 that I read the following letter from one who 

 is not a subscriber to Gleanings: 



Through the kindness of a friend, most of the 1909 

 numbers of Gleanings have fallen into my hands. 

 We are not at all interested in bees, but we are in 

 poultry, and we surely enjoyed your articles in that 

 department. Did you ever jierfect your incubator? 

 and have you put it on the market? We .shall be on 

 the market for an incubator in August or Septem- 

 ber, and know from our experience with the Dixie 

 Auto Hatch this year that yours is the correct prin- 

 ciple. We are nist starting in the day-old-chick 

 business. We did all that we had capacity for this 

 season, without advertising. We live on the car 

 line to Gulfport, and I painted a sign to put up: but 

 before I could get it dry and ready we had all we 

 could do, and I finally rolled it up and put it away 

 for next fall. 



St. Petersburg, Fla., May 15, 1911. W. E. Smith. 



You will gather from the above that the 

 writer has been worj<ing with an incubator 

 on the principle of the one he found describ- 

 ed in this old journal; and I think I shall 

 have to tell you now that I, too, have been, 

 during the past winter, experimenting with 

 a fifty-egg " Dixie " incubator. This incu- 

 bator is the only one of any sort ever manu- 

 factured and sold in Florida; but at the pres- 

 ent time it is sent out in a rather crude con- 



dition. I returned mine in order to have it 

 improved, and may perhaps try it again 

 later. These incubators are made on a small 

 scale at St. Augustine, Fla. I at once asked 

 the writer of the letter to give me full par- 

 ticulars in regard to this hatcher, and receiv- 

 ed the following: 



Mr. A. I. Root: — Regarding our experience with 

 the Dixie, we have had all kinds. Last February 

 we purchased a 150-egg machine. When it arrived 

 we had 95 eggs ready, out of which we diO not hatch 

 a single chirk. We commenced filling at the bot- 

 tom, and filled as far as they would go. We broke 

 nearly all the eggs to see how they were. We were 

 entirely new at the incubator business, never hav- 

 ing run a machine of an.y make, nor ever tested an 

 egg before; but a year ago I took the Poultry Hus- 

 bandry correspondence course with the State Agri- 

 cultural Department. We found chicks dead at all 

 stages, from a few days to a few hours of hatching. 

 The first five lower rings did not carry one beyond 

 the seventh or eighth day. Higher up they did 

 gradually better. We put on the top ring some 

 that had been under a hen two weeks, and hatched 

 every one that did not test out. We kept putting 

 in as we had them, and kept it nearly full until the 

 end of the first three weeks. Then we wrote the 

 Dixie people, and told them, as well as we could, 

 what we had done, and that we had tried to keep 

 the temperature at 104 to 105°. They wrote us that 

 our trouble was too low heat, and told us to put the 

 eggs in at the top and work them down, and to do 

 all hatching on the lower rings. We later aban- 

 doned using the lowest hatching-ring entirely — no 

 ■' luck " on that one — too cold, I judge. We did the 

 most of our work by putting the eggs under the 

 hen for two weeks, and testing out dead and unfer- 

 tile ones, and then placing them as low down as 

 we had room for them in the incubator. We had 

 fine luck that way, sometimes getting 100 per cent, 

 and an average as good as 88. "\\'e carried one lot 

 of six clear through in the machine, with a result 

 of 100 per cent, and some others with nearly equal 

 success. 



From my experience so far I should judge that 

 the 50 and 100 egg machines are too short; and I 

 think, too, that the :^00-egg one that they put out 

 would be too tall. The water varies in heat from 

 bottom to top, and we take the temiierature with a 

 thermometer hanging in the water at the top. We 

 try to keep it up to 108°, and do not worry if it goes 

 to 110°; but we change it promiitly when it gets up 

 to 112. as the eggs then get hotter than they do un- 

 der a hen. We are satisfied that, for onr work, it is 

 decidedly the best we know about. It is very han- 

 dy when a hen leaves her ne.st or has to be removed 

 for any reason. 



We had mites so bad earlier in the season that we 

 did not let the hens sit over two weeks. 



I knew of your wintering at Bradentown, and I 

 should be glad if we could find time to visit you 

 there, and assure you that we shall be more than 

 glad to have you visit us on Tangerine Ave. We 

 go north for the summer. 



St. Petersburg, P'la., May 25. W. E. Smith. 



Now, the principal reason why I have 

 given the above letter is that it brings out 

 strongly a point that has not been sufficient- 

 ly dwelt on and discussed by our poultry- 

 journals; namely, that there is no incubator 

 in the world — at least good authority has so 

 stated — that will do as good a job from start 

 to finish as a sitting hen. It may be true, 

 however, as I have stated, that the Buckeye 

 incubator (and may be several others) will, 

 as a rule, hatch every fertile egg. But now 

 just hold on a minute. How do we usually 

 decide what eggs are fertile and what are 

 not? Why, with an uwubafor of course. 

 But now comes the particular special and 

 important point: The sitting hen will al- 

 ways give a larger percentage of fertile eggs 

 ^ than any incubator. If I am mistaken in 

 this, give me the proof. There is something 

 that a sitting hen does to give the egg a 



