1905 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



727 



[And perhaps you could do it quicker. 

 Twenty-three a minute is not slow work. — 

 Ed.] 



the danger of giving young worker 

 brood to a colony having a virgin 



QUEEN. 



On p. 543 I notice that Mr. Doolittle says, 

 in speaking of queenless colonies, "If 

 queen-cells are started, procure a queen for 

 them from some source, or give a frame of 

 brood from some other colony every week 

 until a young queen from one of the cells 

 built becomes fertile." Now, I think this, 

 especially coming from Mr. DooHttle, is apt 

 to cause trouble for those who try it, as my 

 experience for years past is that, if you 

 give to a colony with a virgin queen a frame 

 of brood containing eggs, nine times out of 

 ten they will kill their queen and start cells 

 again. Give them all the brood you like be- 

 fore the virgin hatches, and after she begins 

 laying, but never before she is fertile. 



Sometimes when honey is coming in rap- 

 idly they will not kill their virgin if given 

 brood, but in most cases they do. 



Montgomery, Ala. D. R. Keyes. 



HOW THE COMB-HONEY LIE IS DEEPLY ROOT- 

 ED IN THE POPULAR MIND. 



Last week I had a nephew from Portland, 

 Oregon, visit me. We had honey on the 

 table. He said he enjoyed it very much 

 because he thought it was pure, not manu- 

 factured. We told him it could not be man- 

 ufactured; but he insisted it was, because 

 the frames it was in were spotlessly clean, 

 and he was sure it was. He is a grocer, 

 and runs three delivery wagons; but we 

 insisted it could not be manufactured, and 

 told him of the reward offered for a fair 

 sample of manufactered honey. He said, 

 "Why, I am so glad to know this!" He 

 said he could sell much more honey if it 

 would come to him not cleaned. He said he 

 could sell double the quantity. He added, 

 "Tell people not to clean honey if they 

 want to sell it." Since we quit cleaning 

 ours we can sell it all near home, and no one 

 accuses us of making it. 



Mrs. L. C. Axtell. 



Roseville, Ills., May 23. 



QUEENS SENT BY MAIL DYING WHEN LEFT 



IN METAL LETTER-BOXES EXPOSED TO 



THE sun's RAYS. 



To have queens placed in the usual metal 

 letter-box exposed, as it usually is. to the 

 direct rays of the sun, and with little or no 

 ventilation, means death to the queens in a 

 short time. Where may I get an "approv- 

 ed" letter-box suitable for the reception of 

 queens? or what provision is made by the 

 PostofRce Department in such cases? I need 

 a large well-made box provided with slot 

 and arrangement for lock. 



Westminster, Md. Lew W. Haines. 



[We are not able to advise you with re- 

 gard to the approved form of letter-box; 



but if we understand the matter correctly 

 you could put a wooden box in its place that 

 would be perfectly acceptable to the govern- 

 ment. The present box, if painted white, 

 would help somewhat. You had better ar- 

 range with your mail-carrier to deliver the 

 queens direct to the house rather than put 

 them jnside the box where they will be sub- 

 jected to the sun's heat. — Ed.] 



experience with the ALEXANDER PLAN 



OF increase; an answer TO W. H. 



CRAWFORD'S QUESTION, PAGE f^OG. 



On May 5 I put a queen in a new hive 

 with a frame of brood, and set the old hive 

 on top, as directed by Mr. Alexander. May 

 16 I took the old hive off and placed it on the 

 new stand. May 17 I put the cage with the 

 laying queen in the new hive. May 20 the 

 queen was released about noon. May 21 the 

 queen was killed by the bees after being in 

 the hive 24 hours. May 22 I gave them a 

 comb of brood and eggs. I did not look into 

 them again until June 1, and found no queen- 

 cell had been built. I closed up the hive 

 without looking at any more frames, but 

 next day I opened up and found brood and 

 eggs. Some of the brood was sealed. The 

 queen had evidently hatched out while the 

 hive was on top of the new one, and was 

 ready to mate when it was taken off. I had 

 noticed several queen-cells while looking for 

 the old queen, but thought the bees would 

 tear them down as soon as they decided not 

 to swarm. I think this answers in part, at 

 least, the question of Mr. W. H. Crawford, 

 of Roswell, N. M. This queen would, no 

 doubt, have mated through an auger-hole if 

 she had had one, as she lost no time about it 

 when the hive was taken off. 



My object in writing this is to warn begin- 

 ners like myself from giving valuable queens 

 to these new colonies without first making a 

 thorough examination and removing all 

 queen-cells. I ordered a tested queen from 

 an adjoining State; and as it was my first 

 attempt at introducing I felt pretty bad 

 when I found my fine queen "stark and 

 stiff" in front of the hive. Final results, 

 however, impress me more than ever with 

 the great value of this method to bee-keep- 

 ers. J. D. Rowan. 



Chesterville, Miss., June 9. 



A REPORT FROM THE ALEXANDER METHOD 

 OF INCREASE. 



As I have been a reader of Gleanings for 

 some time, I will send you my report of the 

 Alexander method of swarming which I have 

 been trying without success. 



On May 24 I took a frame of brood on 

 which was the queen, also adhering bees, 

 and placed them in a hive filled with empty 

 combs, then put this hive on the old stand, 

 next placing the old colony on top with a 

 queen-excluder between. On June 1 they 

 swarmed as any other colony would. My 

 excluder was made of three pieces of per- 

 forated zinc (size about 3x6 in.), on a board 

 the size of the hive. Perhaps there should 



