March, 1920 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



corning in to make feeding unnecessary. 

 These bees furnished about 50 pounds of 

 surplus per eolony. 



We gave the feed in a shallow pan on 

 top of the frames. An extra %-inch strip 

 ■was nailed all around on the inner cover, 

 raising it just a bee-space above the pan. 

 Enough coarse dry grass was placed in the 

 ]iaii to prevent the bees from drowning and 

 the feed given every day or about as fast 

 as the bees would take it. Around the pan 

 were placed little blocks of wood for the 

 bees to crawl up on. This arrangement kept 

 the heat down close to the cluster and seem- 

 ed better than feeding in an empty super. 



As to whether or not it pays to give 

 brood to these bees at the time of hiving, 

 there is much to be considered. If the pack- 

 age contains much less than two pounds of 



live bees( which will be the case if they 

 do not come thru in good condition), a 

 frame of sealed and hatching brood will be 

 a great help and, in some cases, an absolute 

 necessity; but great care should be exercised 

 in handling brood in early spring. Choose a 

 warm day and the warm part of the day. 

 Tt is not required, in case the weather is un- 

 favorable, that the brood be given directly 

 when the bees are hived, but it may be 

 given on the first pleasant day. A full two 

 pounds of hardy young bees invariably does 

 well for me without being helped in this 

 way. If started early and they have a good 

 queen, there will be a large force of young 

 bees in the colony ready for the clover flow, 

 and in this locality we get a very little sur- 

 plus before that. R. R. Banta. 

 Oquawka, 111. 



A NEW HONEY-EXTRACTOR 



The History of the 'De-velopment 

 of the Honey-extractor Having Cen- 

 trally 'Pivoted T'ockets 



By H. H, Root 



Now that ex- 

 t r a c t e d 

 honey is 

 more than ever 

 to the front, per- 

 haps a brief his- 

 tory of the de- 

 velopment of a 

 new extractor, 

 that can be re- 

 versed repeatedly at full speed, may be of gen- 

 eral interest. Strange as it may seem, the idea 

 of such an extractor having the principle of 

 a centrally pivoted comb-pocket — that is, one 

 reversing on an axis running thru the center 

 of it — is just as old as if not older than the 

 side-pivoted or hinged pocket of the ma- 

 chines generally in use. The use of the 

 central-axis principle of reversing, theoreti- 

 cally, would be much easier on the combs, 

 and in practice it is. E. F. Holtermann of 

 Ontario, after trying out this principle in 

 the Markle machine (mentioned further on^, 

 speaks very emphatically on this point. It 

 does faster work, and is far easier on the 

 combs, he says. A history of some of the 

 early inventions leading up to the perfected 

 machine, shown in Figs. 2 and 3, will not 

 come amiss. 



The first patent covering the centrally 

 pivoted reversing idea was by J. K. Rud- 

 yard, as early as Aug. 22, 1882. This was a 

 scheme for reversing thru a series of gears, 

 and is quite similar to some late inventions 

 supposed to be new. A later patent cover 

 ing the same principle, reversing by a series 

 of gears, was issued to A. J. Lawson, July 

 14, 1891. See Fig. 1, which is a photogra])li 

 of the original machine. On March 28, 189.S, 

 a patent was granted to O. M. Hill covering 

 the center-axis reversing-pocket extractor, 

 the means for reversing being accomplished 

 thru the use of ropes and pulleys instead of 

 gears. This extractor is likewise very much 

 like some other lat-er inventions supposed 

 to be new. On Nov. 22, J892, a patent was 



issued to C. W. 

 Metcalf, cover- 

 ing the use of 

 chain and 

 sprockets for re- 

 versing. 



It will be no- 

 ticed from the 

 dates given thus 

 far that all the 

 patents have expired, and for the last 10 or 

 20 years the basic principle of a center-axis 

 rcversing-sprocket extractor has been free 

 to the public. 



Why did not this idea come into use? 

 Simply because there were mechanical dif- 

 ficulties, some of which we shall point out. 

 In later years, T. W. Livingston, evident- 

 ly without the knowledge of the patents 

 just cited, illustrated and described this 

 same principle for reversing. See the 

 American Bee Journal for 1909, page 96. 

 He says he has used this ever since. Cuts 

 of this extractor are again shown in the 

 December issue of the same journal for 1919, 

 page 418. Mr. Livingston overcame one of 

 the mechanical difiiculties of preventing the 

 pockets from flying out, but at too great a 

 cost — a cost in a commercial way that would 

 be prohibitive. 



Some five or six years ago the Weaver 

 brothers of Kentucky built in our machine 

 shop a centrally pivoted reversing extract- 

 or, but employed the scheme of tilting pock- 

 ets for the purpose of removing the combs. 

 This machine, while not mechanically per- 

 fect, demonstrated to us at the time, beyond 

 any question, that the plan of a central- 

 axis reversing-pocket extractor was correct. 

 Ever since that, we became convinced that 

 this was the coming way to reverse combs, 

 for large power-driven extractors at least; 

 but we did not exactly like the tilting pock- 

 ets, because this feature introduced another 

 moving part. 



Some three years ago G. W. Markle of 



