1898. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAiU 



675 



harmful for food. It reminds me of the gum that comes off 

 of the peach-tree ; it is rich, and perhaps to a certain extent 

 nutritious. The way the factories are run now there is no 

 method of producing a low-priced glucose that is fit for food. 

 It is a cheat and a swindle, and a danger to human health and 

 human life. Prof. Cook once said there was no legitimate use 

 for the product of the glucose factory — that it was only used 

 to swindle. 



Mr. Stilson — I would like to say one word in regard to the 

 tests. I saw a test made at our State University a couple of 

 years ago upon some samples that I took there for analysis. 

 The professor took a glass and poured the glucose into it and 

 then mixt it with alcohol. Whether he mixt anything else 

 with it I can't say. He stirred it up for about half its depth 

 until it became milky, leaving the lower part without stirring, 

 and then poured more alcohol on top, and in a few minutes it 

 began to turn as if there was a cyclone in it. When it began 

 to settle and clear that milky part didn't settle. It simply 

 showed a fermentation. Whether there was anything else 

 mixt with the alcohol or not I have forgotten. 



E. R. Root — Pure alcohol will do that. Alcohol won't 

 touch pure honey at all. 



Mr. Danzenbaker — There is a good deal of glucose sold as 

 "Silver Drip." I noticed in a family where I was once that 

 the children preferred Porto Rico molasses ; when they wanted 

 molasses they would ask for black molasses. Any one who 

 would eat that " Silver Drip " for a week would have his taste 

 for honey destroyed ; I don't believe he would ever want any 

 honey. The greatest harm that comes to the honey-pro- 

 ducer from it is that it weans people away from pure honey. 

 They think they have been using honey, and never want to 

 buy any more of It. 



T. R. DeLong (Nebr.) — I would like to give au experience 

 that I had about 20 years ago with glucose. I live in the 

 southwestern part of this State, and I think it. was the first 

 glucose brought into that part of the country. I bought a 

 jug of it and took it home and kept it a few days when it 

 turned thick. I thought it was equal to about two gallons of 

 fine molasses, and that I would just reduce it and make about 

 two gallons of it. In a few minutes, oh, my ! what a smell 

 there was there ! A horrible smell. It turned everything 

 black. I couldn't eat it at all. I am naturally a honey-eater, 

 so It never destroyed the taste of honey for me. I have tried 

 glucose in tea, and coffee, and water, and it will spoil anything 

 you put it into. It Is no trouble to test glucose in water, or 

 tea, or coffee. 



Dr. Mason — I move that a committee of three be appointed 

 to test the samples that have been produced, and report upon 

 them and upon all exhibits, to the convention as soon as 

 possible. 



The motion was seconded and carried. Messrs. Stilson, 

 Secor and Whitcomb were named as the members of said com- 

 mittee. 



TOOL FOR MOVING FRAMES, SUPERS, ETC. 

 " What ia the best tool for moving frames, raising supers, etc. ?" 



Mr. Whitcomb — Dynamite. [Laughter.] 



Dr. Mason — This tool that I have here (exhibiting an im- 

 plement of steel made somewhat in the form of a stovelid- 

 lifter, but with a broad, chisel-like blade in front) I have had 

 for 30 years. I can raise the corner of a house with it — if the 

 house is uot too heavy. It is also good for cleaning the frames 

 and supers of burr-combs. 



Dr. Miller — One point — or rather two points — against that 

 tool are the two sharp corners in front. When you are thrust- 

 ing it in to raise a super, the two sharp corners will cut into 

 the wood. If the corners were rounding they would not ci:t 

 Into the wood at all. I am inclined to believe that the best 

 tool for raising a super is not the best tool for moving the 

 frames; because the tool for raising the super should be 

 rather sharp, while the tool for raising the frame should not 

 be sharp. I would like an implement with a blade something 

 like this of the Doctor's at one end, and the other end ar- 

 ranged with a tool for moving the frames. I don't know what 

 that will be. I believe that is a thing that bee-keepers should 

 talk over. I have been using a screw-driver, but I believe It 

 is a very poor tool. When we have used a real good tool we 

 will wonder that we were satisfied so long with using a screw- 

 driver. Mr. E. R. Root has been getting several sample tools, 

 and Mr. York has had one or two samples. Perhaps out of 

 the lot we may strike something that will be all right. 



Dr. Mason — I do not want an instrument with a tool at 

 each end. You can't work with It satisfactorily, having to 

 use one end and then the other, taking hold of the soiled and 

 sticky end when it is reverst. Nor do I like the corners 

 round. I made one of the corners round and then I unmade it. 



Dr. Miller — I find difficulty with sharp corners marring 



the wood. But let us be careful not try to get one tool to 

 do too much. I doubt whether one tool can do all those things, 

 but by using opposite ends of the tool we may get one that 

 will work all right. In using a tool with sharp corners for 

 moving frames, the sharp corners will sometimes mar the 

 wood. 



E. R. Root — I have been experimenting with a number of 

 different tools, mostly of this character, but there was no 

 crook or bend in the handle. I see a very good reason for 

 that crook now ; when cleaning frames it would be very handy. 

 For my purpose I wanted a tool with rounded corners ; the 

 square edge left a mark on the supers. Then I think I would 

 want a double-ended tool. One end may be used in prying 

 apart the frames. Sometimes in pulling out a frame you will 

 pull out the division-board. Having started the frame once you 

 can reach down and pull it out. That tool strikes me as being 

 very nearly all right, except that I would have rounded cor- 

 ners, and on the other end a little hook. That seems to be as 

 nearly perfect as anything. 



Dr. Mason — When I cannot get hold of the frames readily 

 I just drop that tool under the end of the frame, and then I 

 can get hold of it without any trouble. I would not take all 

 the tools I have seen for this one. 



Mr. Danzenbaker — I have used a steel scraper, such as 

 paper-hangers use, for cleaning frames. I have a mason's 

 plastering-trowel, squared at both ends. The metal protects 

 the hands. It is a good cleaning tool. I use a screw-driver 

 for separating the frames and pushing them up. 



Dr. Miller — The best tool I ever found for raising frames 

 I sent to Mr. Root ; it is nothing more nor less than a common 

 stove-lifter. It has a curve in it, and when it is put under the 

 frames for prying the end will come against the side of the 

 top-bar. In using it the curved part stays against the part 

 of the frame that you use as a fulcrum, and it will move the 

 frame easily. It has a round edge about one-eighth of an 

 inch thick at the end, perfectly round, so it will not mar the 

 wood. It would be of no use for separating or raising the 

 supers, or anything of that kind ; it has no sharp edge to it. 

 With the same motion of the hand it will move the frame 

 much farther away from its neighbor than a straight tool 

 would. If you will get a tool with that stove-lifter at one 

 end and the chisel-blade at the other end, I think you will 

 have a pretty good tool. There are others who have used a 

 screw-driver; but I would a great deal rather have that tool 

 because I'have used one and know that it is a great deal better. 



Dr. Mason — I do not bruise the wood with this. Being 

 square-cornered It gives more surface to pry with. I would 

 not have a tool with an implement at both ends ; it is too 

 hard on the hands. 



The convention then adjourned until 7:30 p.m. 

 IContlnued next week.1 



Advice About Adopting New Inventions. 



Br C. r. DAD ANT. 



I have several times been askt for advice regarding new 

 methods, new inventions, which are, from time to time, rec- 

 ommended by a number of leading men, and which sometimes 

 necessitate, for the bee-keeper who wishes to follow them quite 

 a change in his apiary outfit, hives, supers, frames, etc. 



I would strongly urge the novice to be very cautious in 

 accepting and putting in practice new things, even if they 

 have been put forward by men of merit. In the work of 

 progress steps are very often taken in the wrong direction, 

 which appear at first to have been properly guided. 



A very notable instance of how men of ability may be 

 drawn to things that are of but little practical value simply 

 because they look inviting at the outset and appear with out- 

 ward advantages, was to be seen In the inventions concerning 

 Inverting bee-hives and frames, which were the rage some 12 

 or 13 years ago, and for a year or two bid fair to overthrow 

 all other styles of hives. 



When a hive of bees Is inverted, that is, turned bottom 

 side up, and allowed to remain In that condition for some 

 time the bees find themselves compelled to change the place 

 of their honey, which they always keep above their brood and 

 as far from the entrance as possible. If this is done at the 



