I8y8. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNA«U 



451 



1S83 appears the original article describing solar wax ex- 

 tractors, which article was the starting-point of all the ex- 

 tractors now In nse, east of the Rocky Mountains, at least. 

 Attention was especially called to this point, of the advan- 

 tages of these extractors for the purifying of wax. I was at 

 first tuuch puzzled lo understand how such an able, practical 

 man as Mr. Dadant could have overlookt this feature of the 

 sun extractor, until I thought of the fact that his estab- 

 lishnaent Is equipt with as good a steam purifying apparatus 

 as exists, and It Is much easier for hloi to use this than to fuss 

 any other way with small lots. To the ordinary bee-keepers, 

 however, who are the real users of these extractors, my 

 method of using them will, I think, be much the best. 



Dade Co., Fla. 



[Accompanying the foregoing article by Mr. Poppleton, 

 was the request that a proof of it be forwarded to Mr. Dadant 

 before publication, so that Mr. D.'s comments might appear 

 in the same number with it. Here Is what Mr. Didant has to 

 say further: — Editor.1 



This article of Mr. Poppleton's is excellent, and I can add 

 nothing to it except the advice to those who use solar extract- 

 ors to follow the Instructions he gives. 



1 will say, however, that In rendering up residues, as we 

 do here, where the beeswax rendered has been water-damaged, 

 and has carried with it the very lightest of the impurities, it 

 is necessary to still purify It with water, as the water becomes 

 loaded with much of the coloring-matter which would other- 

 wise remain in the wax, and we ean obtain a better result 

 than from the sun melting alone. 



Allow me here, if I have not done It before, to criticise 

 our manufacturers of sun extractors who use iroji pmis. The 

 iron discolors a great deal of beeswax before it becomes suffi- 

 ciently coated with it to cease damaging it. We have been 

 several times enabled to test this to our entire satisfaction. 

 The rust darkens the wax, and no amount of sun melting 

 would remove this stain. Water alone can help It. 



C. P. Dadant. 



Do Italian Bees Produce Better Honey ? 



BY A. W. HART. 



Will you permit me to briefly review Mr. Bevlns' " an- 

 swer " (page 322) to ray question on page 269 ? It seems to 

 me only an unfair, unjust crliicism, and no answer at all. I 

 prefer to appear fairly before the bee-keepers on whom he is 

 pleased to intimate I am "putting up a job." He says he 

 hesitated considerable about answering, etc. He need have 

 had no hesitation, trepidation, perturbation, or any other 

 'ation, from his own admission. My Question, clearly, was not 

 intended (or him, and was " confined " to no one, but for those 

 who were wise and could answer, and he said he was not one 

 of these. He said he was not writing for distinction, etc., yet 

 he must have been, for he said he was not one of the " wise " 

 — did not answer my question, and at the last left it to others. 



He does " not know how extensive Mr. Hart's reading has 

 been." Of course he doesn't. Isn't expected to, and I pre- 

 sume the limit of a short bee-article Is rather poor data from 

 which to find out ; but is there not a sort of covert intimation 

 that he does not think it very extensive, or at least not so 

 much so as his? for he proceeds to say: "This Is the first 

 time I have knowu any bee-keeper to intimate that the quality 

 of the honey produced by the Italian bees was any way supe- 

 rior to that produced by other bees." 



Again, he says : " I have never seen an opinion that the 

 quality of the honey produced by any one race of bees was 

 superior to that produced by the other races," etc. Now, I 

 have seen jusi that opinion, and so have hundreds of the Bee 

 Journal readers. He says : " Mr. Hart thinks the difference, 

 etc., if there is any." Mr. Hart does not think there Is a dif- 

 ference, did not intimate it, only intimated the only way he 

 could account for it, and is a skeptic In that theory ; hence 

 the " question." Had Mr. B.'s reading been a little more ex- 

 tensive he would have " hesitated " a little longer before he 

 called in question, criticised, and disparaged mine, for have I 

 ever held the Idea that bees make honey ? It seems to me any 

 fair, candid, careful reader could have seen my sentiments all 

 the way through my " piece." I askt the question in good 

 faith, because some do hold those Ideas. 



Mr. B. says : " He is giving undue deference to the opin- 

 ions of some who do not know much about bees, yet can do 

 considerable talking." Well, that's good. I wonder if some 

 of the Bee Journal readers with whom I have compared notes 

 will feel complimented when they are Informed by Mr. B. 



that they can do considerable talking, but know little of bees. 

 The only ones I have ever consulted with have been old, ex- 

 perienced, practical bee-keepers — some older than I am (and 

 I have almost reacht " the allotted age of man ") — clergymen, 

 doctors, professors, scientific farmers, etc. I wonder If they 

 will smile, for some of tbem read the Bee Journal. 



He says I " came at them with another if which is en- 

 titled to no more consideration than the other," plainly Imply- 

 ing that neither was entitled to any. Why, then, did Mr. B. 

 go to the trouble, after so much hesitation, to notice either of 

 the ifs, if it was not for distinction? 



" Who is able to say the honey from red clover is any bet- 

 ter than that from white," etc. Has any one compared ? Now 

 on this point there may be opinions and Intimations Mr. B. 

 has not read, tho they may be from men who can "do talking 

 but know little about bees." As to his reference about the 

 " ignorant " and " ought to be ashamed," etc., I will pass by — 

 there is no point. 



It was from the opinions and statements exprest on pages 

 133 and 13i that I was led to ask my question. May be my 

 question was entitled to no consideration, but the same ques- 

 tion it seems came up in open convention, and was discust by 

 men perhaps of extensive reading, experience and wisdom, 

 and whose opinions Mr. B. has never seen. 



I submit to the bee-keepers if my question was fair and 

 legitimate, and with no thought of putting up a job on them. 



Stephenson Co., 111. 



Comb Foundation— Is Its Use Profitable ? 



BY E. 8. L0VE8Y. 



After reading what Messrs. Deacon and "Sage-Brush" 

 had to say on this subject (see pages 599 and 708. 1897). I 

 send a little of my own and other bee-keepers' experience. 

 There are considerable sound, practical comments, and some 

 reasonable conclusions drawn by Mr. Deacon, and while I 

 agree with him to a considerable extent, my experience in this 

 matter is such that some of my conclusions differ from his, 

 and my object in this article will be to show wherein and why 

 my experience does not agree with his. 



He admits that there is an advantage in the use of foun- 

 dation in excluding an excessive amount of drone cells, but 

 there Is one point I might name here in favor of foundation, 

 which neither Mr. D. nor "Sage-Brush" mentions, namely, 

 that a plentiful use of foundation In the brood-chamber will 

 Insure not only nice, straight worker-combs, but it gives the 

 queen ample laying-room, which in turn gives strong colonies, 

 and without strong colonies no one can succeed in the bee- 

 industry. 



I might give considerable of my personal experience. The 

 season of 1897, in the spring and early summer, our bees did 

 not gather much honey, as a rule. There were a few excep- 

 tions, but soon after the middle of July, in many localities, a 

 heavy honey-flow set in, and in many instances the bees 

 brought the honey In so rapidly that as fast as the brood 

 hatcht the bees filled every possible space with honey, thus 

 crowding the queen out of laying space. In traveling through 

 this county I found hundreds in this condition, some with a 

 few cells of brood, some with none, and some that were weak 

 from this cause. But In every instance where the bees 

 were not weakened down too much by taklngout three or four 

 combs of honey, and by replacing with sheets of foundation, 

 the bees went to work drawing out tho combs Immediately, 

 and In a few days the queen had these pew combs full of eggs, 

 even by the time the combs were half drawn out, keeping the 

 bees busy finishing the combs and sealing the brood. Under 

 those conditions the foundation was more preferable than to 

 extract those combs and replace them, because in that case 

 the bees, instead of cleaning out the cells for the queen to lay, 

 would have filled them with honey again, but by using the 

 foundation, and by extracting those combs and putting on 

 another story with more foundation, the bees build up fast 

 both in honey and numbers ; but many of those not so treated 

 proved a flat failure. 



I also found hundreds of strong colonies with empty boxes, 

 or boxes with empty frames, and bees would not work in them, 

 but they would hang on the outside of the hive, while new 

 colonies with frames of comb and foundation, with less than 

 half the number of bees, filled their hives full of honey, gath- 

 ering five or more pounds per day. 



In the saving of time, by the use of foundation, Mr. D. 

 asks, " Is this as great as is generally assumed?" He says : 

 " Take two exactly strong colonies at the commencement of a 

 good honey-flow, give to the one '4 inch starters, and to the 

 other full sheets of foundation. Would there be any appre- 

 ciable difference In the time the hives would be furnlsht with 



