82 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL-. 



wintered in Simplicity frames, or any of 

 the shallow frames? 



I had the fortune to find a bee-tree a 

 few years ago. I let it stand until 

 spring, and cut it out and save the bees. 

 The limb formed an elbow at right an- 

 gles. The bees went in at the top or 

 upper side of the limb at the elbow, and 

 I supposed I would find the bees in the 

 horizontal part of the limb, but I was 

 disappointed. The hole was large 

 enough for a man to put his fist in, and 

 the bees had their stores directly below 

 the hole, yet were in good condition. 

 Now, if bees will live through winter in 

 such places, why so much fussing and 

 trouble to get good, warm quarters for 

 them ? I believe that bees should be 

 well ventilated below, and closed on top 

 almost air-tight ; but I will listen to 

 others. 



My neighbors lost from 33 to 50 per 

 cent, of their bees. One man had 4 col- 

 onies, and lost 3. The past was an ex- 

 tremely hard winter on bees in this 

 section. 



Slippery Rock, Pa. 



Can Virgin Queens Get Tlirougli 



Smaller Holes than Laying 



Ones? 



Written for the American Bee Journal 



BY DR. C. C. MILLER. 



On page 760, John McKeon acknowl- 

 edges his mistake in such a manly way 

 that my sympathies are with him. But 

 on the same page he incidentally admits 

 something that may be open to question 

 when he speaks of a virgin queen as 

 being so much smaller than a laying 

 queen that she may get through the per- 

 forations of an excluder. Now I don't 

 pretend to know about it, but I have a 

 right to doubt, and if any one has posi- 

 tive proof that a virgin queen can get 

 through a smaller hole while a virgin 

 than she can after she commences to lay, 

 I hereby challenge hira to trot out his 

 proof. 



I have had virgin queens that could 

 get through excluder zinc, but I've had 

 laying queens go through the same per- 

 forations, not because the queens were 

 remarkably small, but because the per- 

 forations were too large. That a laying 

 queen refrains from going through a 

 place through which a virgin readily 

 passes, is not conclusive proof. The 

 question is not whether she ivili, but 

 whether she can go through as small a 

 perforation as when a virgin, I've had 



plenty of cases in which queens never 

 went up through a honey-board into a 

 super, but that doesn't prove that a 

 queen can't go through a ?^-inch crack. 

 It only proves that they didn't try to go 

 up. 



I know very well that a queen in the 

 full vigor of laying looks very much 

 larger than a virgin, but it is the abdo- 

 men, I think, that is larger, and not the 

 thorax. To-day I saw an old queen that 

 had just swarmed, and she looked 

 smaller, and I think she was smaller 

 than an average virgin. But I do not 

 remember that any one ever claimed 

 that such a queen could get through any 

 smaller hole than she could when laying 

 her best. I have seen it asserted that 

 the size of the abdomen was what pre- 

 vented a queen from going through an 

 excluder, but I think the one who made 

 such an assertion never carefully 

 watched a queen going through. Did 

 you ever watch one ? Did you ever see 

 the thorax go through and then the ab- 

 domen stick? No, she doesn't go 

 through that way. She keeps trying the 

 perforations, and the instant she gets 

 the thorax through, the abdomen goes 

 through like a streak. Squeeze the 

 thorax between the thumb and finger, 

 and you will find it hard and unresisting, 

 while the abdomen readily yields to the 

 pressure. 



As I said, I don't pretend to know, but 

 until I have some proof to the contrary, 

 I am inclined to the opinion that the 

 thorax of a queen is no larger after she 

 commences to lay than before ; and that 

 if she makes the same effort, she can get 

 through a hole of the same size. 



Marengo, 111. 



'^ Langstrotli " on Inversion, 

 Contraction, Etc. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 

 BY C. W. DAYTON. 



Partially replying to Mr. Thompson's 

 question in regard to contraction, inver- 

 sion, etc., on page 533, I would say, in 

 getting information on these subjects, 

 do not look to non-contractionists or 

 non-inversionists, because nine times 

 out of ten the reason a man is against a 

 system or plan of management is be- 

 cause he does not practice it enough to 

 realize its advantages. 



A locomotive engine usually goes 

 straight ahead, but it is a very good 

 thing sometimes that they are also able 

 to run backward. When a contraction- 



