THE AMERICAN APICULTURIST. 



101 



Do the facts show that those 

 persons who go on proclaiming 

 from 3'ear to year that they liave 

 Invented the best hive, and that 

 their last hive is always the best 

 one, are the persons who succeed 

 as practical honey producers? 1 

 think not ; I am sure that there is 

 no convincing evidence that they 

 excel as honey producers. Some 

 of them have made money ; but 

 if they had been dependent on 

 the honey crop produced in their 

 own apiaries they would look no 

 sleeker nor fatter than some others 

 do. 



The purpose of this article is to 

 inquire into these matters a little 

 and see if we cannot help the be- 

 ginners in bee culture to avoid the 

 snares and delusions so temptingly 

 laid betbre them. Facts are stub- 

 born things and will stand lirmly in 

 the face of any amount of delusion 

 if they can be seen plainly. 



Who are the successful beekeep- 

 ers known through the bee peri- 

 odicals ? I can call to mind a few 

 of them. Dadant & Son, Plether- 

 ington, Oatman, Doolittie, L. C. 

 Root, Manum, Poppleton, Hall, 

 Bingham, Forncrook, John T. 

 Connley and a host of others which 

 I do not name, having selected the 

 above because they use hives- dif- 

 fering from each other as much as 

 modern frame hives can well differ 

 in nearly every respect. And the 

 bees employed by them diff"er as 

 much as our bees mixed and pure 

 can well differ, and yet all these 

 men have made bee culture a suc- 

 cess. Do not these facts show 

 that the hive alone does not bring 

 success? 



The same rule will apply to 

 winter management of bees. The 

 facts show tliat those beekeepers 

 who try to write learnedly about 

 the "causes of winter losses" and 

 blow about pollen and sugar syrup 

 have been the greatest failures 

 heretofore. 



I conclude then, that those bee- 

 keepers who always have the "best 

 hive," though they make radical 

 changes every year or two, who 

 are continually " solving the win- 

 ter problem," but changing the 

 "problem" every year or two, who 

 must have bees with a " slight 

 dash" of something, though they 

 stick to that only as long as it 

 will win, who throw away old bee 

 implements with weary disgust and 

 anon resurrect them from the rub- 

 bish heap and claim them as a 

 " new invention," these are not 

 the men who get the big honey 

 crops. The facts show that they 

 are not the men who succeed in 

 bee culture. 



I would like to impress the mind 

 of the inexperienced beekeeper 

 with the fact that " tools" do not 

 make the mechanic. Knowing what 

 I now know from long experience, 

 I have no hesitation in saying that 

 the plain, uncomplicated standard 

 hives now in use will never be ex- 

 celled by any new invention, so 

 far as simplicity and handiness 

 are concerned when learning the 

 first lessons in beekeeping. 



Better, "all purpose" hives may 

 be invented in the future, but such a 

 hive will not be so simple and eas- 

 ily understood as are the standard 

 hives of the present day. Some 

 persons have remonstrated with 

 me for writing what they call 

 "sweeping charges" against patent 

 hives. I am not opposed to patents 

 if they cover new and valuable 

 features in hives and apiarian im- 

 plements. Let the inventors of 

 the patent hives show us by prac- 

 tical tests that the new patent hives 

 give a larger yield of honey than 

 do the old standard hives, that 

 they are nanipulated with less cost 

 of time and labor, that they are 

 cheaper as to first cost ; in short, 

 that they are enough. better in ev- 

 ery respect to give fair returns for 

 royalty demanded for the right to 



