AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



695 



the Heddon hive and system ; the preju- 

 dice against patents, combined with the 

 idea that the Heddon patent was not 

 valid, which idea was continually being 

 nursed by jealous rivals ; and a preju- 

 dice against the inventor because of his 

 out-spoken criticisms, have all worked 

 strongly against the introduction of his 

 hive. A knowledge of all these points 

 will explain why Mr. Deacon should 

 have received the replies that he did. 



So much by way of introduction, and 

 I will now proceed to enumerate what I 

 consider the advajUtages of the Heddon 

 hive. Perhaps I cannot do this better 

 than by mentioning some of the needed 

 characteristics of a hive. 



First, the hive should be capable of 

 adaptation to the size of the colony, the 

 season, etc. This is admitted by all. If 

 the combs are very deep, it is impracti- 

 cal to change the size of the brood-nest, 

 except laterally, and by the aid of 

 division-boards; but this method allows 

 a most complete control ot the degree of 

 contraction. Changing the size of the 

 brood-nest vertically is practical only 

 with shallow combs, and the shallower 

 the combs the more perfectly can this 

 method of contraction and expansion be 

 managed. 



For awhile before swarming time a 

 large brood-nest is needed — larger, at 

 least, than is needed after the main har- 

 vest has come. As top-storing and tier- 

 ing-up are now almost universally prac- 

 ticed, and, as bees work much more 

 readily over the brood, it is evident that 

 a hive allowing vertical contraction is 

 the one for "contractionists " to use. 



If contraction is not to be practiced, 

 then there arises the question of what 

 size shall be the brood-nest? Some 

 plead for generous space, that the queen 

 may not be cramped for room, as though 

 this condition of affairs were very un- 

 desirable and unprofitable. Were queens 

 expensive, this plea would, be worthy of 

 consideration ; but, as the capital is in 

 the combs, honey and hives, rather than 

 in the queen, the question as to which 

 shall be kept employed at the expense 

 of the other's idleness, needs no argu- 

 ment. If the size of the brood-nest is to 

 remain unchanged, then let it be of such 

 capacity that an ordinarily prolific 

 queen will fill it at the height of the 

 breeding season. Let the size be less 

 than this, rather than more. Eight 

 Langstroth combs, or their equivalent, 

 will be sufficient. 



Many, in arguing for large hives, 

 mention how much larger yields per 

 colony are secured. True, but do they 

 secure any more per comb ? Bee-keep- 



ing ought to be viewed in a broad light. 

 The question is something like this: Here 

 is an area of honey-producing flowers, 

 how shall we secure the nectar with the 

 least expenditure of capital and labor ? 

 Small hives enable us to secure a more 

 complete filling of the combs with brood, 

 consequently there are more workers 

 for the combs we have. Small hives 

 may cost a trifle more, in proportion to 

 their size, than large hives, but, as an 

 offset, there are the greater ease and 

 quickness with which they can be 

 handled. 



Aside from the small brood-nest, to 

 secure a more complete filling of the 

 combs with brood, or to lead to more 

 rapid work in the sections, there may be 

 mentioned the making of hives in such 

 a manner that they may be inverted. 

 Like many things, inversion was over- 

 praised, but it is far from being value- 

 less. Perhaps one reason why it has 

 not been practiced more with the Hed- 

 don hive, is because it was discovered 

 that the interchange of the two sections 

 accomplished the same results as inver- 

 sion. 



In small hives, or those that can be 

 handled by sections, and in which the 

 frames are securely fastened, the queen 

 may be found by shaking out the bees, 

 instead of going over the hives comb by 

 comb. When producing extracted honey, 

 the super, with such hives, may be freed 

 from bees in a similar manner, although 

 the bee-escape has about destroyed this 

 point of superiority. 



When contracting the brood-nest, one 

 section of the hive is removed instead of 

 taking out combs and putting in dum- 

 mies. I have used the Heddon hive in 

 large numbers for several years, and I 

 have no hesitancy in saying that it is my 

 choice. It is at once the largest or 

 smallest hive by simply removing or 

 adding sections. There is no handling 

 of dummies, division-boards, and but 

 little handling of frames. When the 

 brood-nest is contracted, the supering 

 surface remains the same. None of the 

 sections are left out in the cold, so to 

 speak, with dummies instead of brood 

 under them. The brood can be spread 

 when desirable by simply interchanging 

 the two sections of the hive. No hand- 

 ling of combs in the operation. The 

 combs can be inverted singly, or a whole 

 hive full at a time. It is a light, readily- 

 movable, single-walled hive, and its 

 closed-end frames make it particularly 

 adapted to the establishing of out-api- 

 aries, or the moving of bees to secure 

 better pasture. 

 The hive has often been recommended 



