94; Retrospective Criticism. 



Ing. " There is a Mr. Main, who pubUshes a list of British forest trees, 

 among which he includes Quercus virens and Phellos, two American species, 

 o'f which the former is unknown as a forest tree, and never can become so, 

 on account of its tenderness, and the latter is hardly more common. The 

 same author, who writes specially on forest trees, tells us that our durmast 

 oak is Quercus pubescens, a species only known in a wild state in the South 

 of Eui'ope ; and he includes in his list of elms the Continental i!7'lmus effusa, 

 of which he cannot point out a single specimen in the country, unless in some 

 botanic garden." (Ibid.) From the manner in which this passage follows the 

 former, the reader would naturally suppose that the list of forest trees referred 

 to is in the Gardener'' s Magazine, and that the error is one of " the astound- 

 ing blunders " unnoticed by the editor of that periodical. But this is not 

 the case. The list referred to is published at the end of The Forest Philter's 

 nndPruner's Assistant, &c., by Mr. Main, published in 1839, and reviewed by us 

 in the Gardener's Magazine for that year, p. 467. Mr. Main's work was 

 also reviewed in the Athenceum, and that review of it was noticed by Mr. Main 

 in an article in the Gardener's Magazine for 1840, p. 317. — Cond. 



Calling of the Queen Bee. — In a former communication on the queen 

 bee that leaves the hive with the first swarm (Vol. for 1839, p. 605.), I 

 noticed some remarks by Dr. Dunbar on my previous paper on the Calling 

 of the Queen Bee (Vol. for 1839, p. 150.) ; which, I find, has elicited some 

 observations from that gentleman in your Number for last March. He there 

 kindly offers to set me right where he considers that I am mistaken ; and 

 points out some errors which had crept into my communication. I should 

 have noticed Dr. Dunbar's last article earlier, but that I thought it desirable 

 to wait till the swarming season had passed, that I might acquire more expe- 

 rimental knowledge on the subject. The result is, that I find what I advanced 

 correct, namely, that after-swarming does not take place till more than one 

 queen has come forth ; of which the proof will appear as I proceed. 



The first thing I have to notice is a statement by Dr. Dunbar, that I take 

 credit for the discovery of a fact which even Huber had overlooked, the 

 reason why there is no calling of the queen bees before the first swarm. Whe- 

 ther I can claim such credit or not, is not for me to determine. I will merely 

 repeat what I said on that curious point at p. 605., Number for November 

 1839, and what Dr. Dunbar says upon it at p. 151., Number for March 1839, 

 and leave the reader to judge which account is more satisfactory. The follow- 

 ing were my words : — 



" I stated my inability to account for their silence before the first swarm, 

 except upon the supposition that the old queen went off with it eight or ten 

 minutes (minutes is an error in printing; in the manuscript it read days) before 

 her successors left their cells. This having been ascertained to be the case, 

 the silence is so easily accounted for, that it appears strange that the inference 

 should haye been overlooked by the most able apiarians, especially Huber, 

 who was well acquainted with the train of facts that led to it. It is clear that 

 the old queen is impelled by instinct to quit the hive with the first swarm, a 

 few days before the young queens are hatched; and consequently before any 

 rival appears in the field to dispute her sovereignty. This is not the case with 

 her successors : the first who is hatched, and from whom the stronger sound 

 of ' peep, peep,' proceeds, makes her appearance before her rivals, who are 

 still in their cells, nevertheless sufficiently forced to utter the weaker call of 

 « off, off,' " &c. 



Dr. Dunbar says : — " Were I asked how it happens that the piping is not 

 heard before the first swarm, I should be at a loss to give a satisfactory reason. 

 There are many facts in the natural history of the bee, as in that of other 

 animals, which we can attest the existence of, without being able to give the 

 ratio quare. This, perhaps, is one of them ; and we are just cutting the 

 knot which we cannot untie, by saying that Nature hiis so willed it ; but of 

 the secret means she employs to induce the old queen to leave her abode, 

 without having recourse to the same violence towards her successors, as 



