1905 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



31 



onies so cleaned would be a fair day's work. 

 Eight pounds of wax obtained would have a 

 cash value of $2.00. It would fui'ther rep- 

 resent 160 lbs. of choice honey used in mak- 

 ing it, worth 10 cts. per lb., or $16.00. Now 

 add this $16.00 and the $2.00 together, and 

 the result is, the incompetent help cost the 

 man who employed him $18.00 per day. and 

 spent 48 days in getting wax out of the 

 hive and off from the frames, so as to be 

 able to use said hives and the frames that 

 would stay unless so cleaned every spring. 

 It may be a comfort to realize that the wax 

 in the hives pays for the work in cleaning 

 the hives, and that the hives are in order 

 for the busy season, even though it cost 

 $96.00 to do it; but the estimated consump- 

 tion of 20 lbs. of choice honey to produce 1 

 lb. of wax calls us back to figures again. 



The whole amount of wax from the 1200 

 hives would be 384 lbs., which, multiplied by 

 20, the number of pounds of nicest honey 

 (as this extra, which had to be cut out, was 

 stored in the section-honey run) would rep- 

 resent 7680 lbs. While the wax would have 

 been worth $96.00 at 25 cts. per lb., the 

 honey would, at 10 cts. per lb., have been 

 worth $768. Now add the $96.00 that the 

 labor of cleaning represents, and we have 

 $864 net loss for the privilege and pleasure 

 of using a loose or hanging frame, on the 

 outside of which bees, as Mr. Hyde states, 

 store honey. No bee-keeper who has used 

 hanging frames of the Hoffman or other 

 makes will for a moment question Mr. H.'s 

 statements. They are incontrovertible. 



In the years between 1862 and 1865 your 

 correspondent had the pleasure and experi- 

 ence of handling about 300 colonies of Ital- 

 ian bees in the original Langstroth hives. 

 Italian bees were worse about building up 

 into the sections or boxes then than now. 

 The extractor had not become generally 

 known, neither comb foundation; and Ital- 

 ian bees, true to their instincts, persisted in 

 doing just what Mr. Hyde vividly portrays. 



This not remarkable instinct of bees led 

 your correspondent to construct a hive in 

 1865 securing the practical advantages of 

 movable combs, and at the same time secur- 

 ing all the honey and combs within the 

 frames and sections, instead of part of it on 

 the outside. 



Farwell, Mich. 



[The amount of honey to make a pound of 

 wax used to be estimated at 20 lbs. ; but 

 later and more reliable experiments where 

 bees have access to the open air show that 

 this figure is altogether too high. Between 

 4 and 7 lbs. were the figures that were se- 

 cured, if I remember correctly, so that your 

 estimate ought to be one- fourth as large for 

 the actual amount of honey. Even then you 

 apparently have the best of the argument, 

 providing that Mr. Hyde does not show that 

 your system of shallow frames requiring 

 extra handling of combs piles up the cost in 

 his favor. I do not quite see how your top- 

 bars should be cleaner than those on the 

 thick top-bar of the regular Hoffman frame. 



But Mr. Hyde uses a thin top-bar to all his 

 Hoffmans— the very kind of bar that invites 

 all kinds of burr-combs. If he used the 

 regular top-bar he would have far less of 

 wax and scraping. — Ed.] 



FOOD COMMISSIONERS AND ADULTERAT- 

 ED HONEY. 



How the Innocent May Suffer for the Guilty. 



BY L. L. TRAVIS. 



It appears to me that Wm. A. Selser strikes 

 a note of timely warning to bee-keepers on 

 page 1063, Nov. 15. According to his theory, 

 and I am of the opinion that he is right in 

 every particular, both honey producers and 

 dealers are running considerable risk in la- 

 beling honey "pure." I produce extracted 

 honey exclusively, and have sold tons to the 

 grocery trade in pails and cans, and this fall 

 have put up some in bags. Every package 

 ever sold by me has been labeled "pure," 

 and my warrant was back of it. I have al- 

 ways had the faith to believe that, as long 

 as I put out honey just as it came from the 

 bees, of good body and quality, I was doing 

 an honorable and safe business; but Bro. 

 Selser's article sets me to wondering where 

 I am at. Is it not possible that I have in- 

 nocently made myself liable to a fine, and 

 also endangered my friends the grocers? 



I cite you to a clipping from my county 

 paper to show how the pure-food laws are 

 working in this section: 



The firm of Colt & McNamara is among the many hun- 

 dreds of dealers who have been caught between the dis- 

 honest manufactures and the pure-food agent. Some 

 time ago an agent of the pure-food commission was here 

 and purchased some maple syrup of this firm, and, after 

 an analysis, they sent notice that the maple syrup 

 was not all maple, and that there was a fine of $50. Mr. 

 McNamara was at Tunkhannock Tuesday, and settled 

 the matter by paying the fine. While this may be a good 

 law it is a rank injustice to Messrs. Colt & McNamara 

 who conduct their store by honest dealing and good 

 goods, and who were assured by the manufacturer that 

 the syrup was the best on the market. There should be 

 some means whereby the maker should suffer instead of 

 the retailer, for impure product. 



Now, I believe Messrs Colt & McNamara 

 to be innocent of knowingly selling adulter- 

 ated goods; but you can see what happened 

 to them. I have always believed that I was 

 putting out pure honey; but since reading 

 Bro. Selser's article there is a question in 

 my mind whether I have or not. Although 

 my honey may seem, both to myself and the 

 consumer, to be all right, is there not a pos- 

 sibility (and I might say a probability) that 

 the bees have put in enough honey-dew or 

 the juice of fruit to condemn it in the eyes 

 of the pure-food officers, and put my cus- 

 tomers in the same predicament that Messrs. 

 Colt & McNamara are in? 



I dislike to offer any thing for sale thati 

 dare not warrant as strictly pure; but this 

 is a danger that we ordinary bee-keepers 

 can ill afford to assume; and as we are not 

 all of us chemist enough to analyze honey, 

 what shall we do— go to the expense of hav- 



