THE AMERICAIT BEE JOURNAL. 



309 



lateral direction ail over the upper 

 portion of the hive, and that bees in 

 search of food, in cold weatlier, move 

 in a lateral direction between the 

 combs just as readily as they do in an 

 upward direction, and much more 

 readily between combs than they will 

 pass from comb to comb. If any one 

 thinks differently, let him, near the 

 close of tlie honey season, raise tlie 

 baclt end of his Langstroth hive until 

 the hive stands at an angle of 65 ', 

 when by the time that cold weather 

 comes, the bees will practically be in a 

 tall hive witlr their stores above them. 

 Two years ago, just after the close of 

 a very disastrous winter for bees, the 

 editor of the American Bee Jourt 

 NAL requested his readers to send in 

 reports of how their bees were pre- 

 pared for winter — whether tliey were 

 wintered in tlie cellars, or out-of- 

 doors ; the kind of hives used, etc , — 

 and liow the bees wintered. From 

 these reports a statistical table was 

 prepared, and one of the facts brought 

 out, was that bees vs'intered witli the 

 least loss in Langstroth hive'i. Among 

 other remarks the editor made the 

 following : 



"Those who have contended that 

 that the Langstroth hive is too shal- 

 low for winteriijg, will be surprised to 

 learn that the figures compare very 

 favorably for it. Thus the percentage 

 of losses in all kinds of frame hives is 

 46; exclusive of the Langstroth hive 

 It is 51, leaving only 43 for the Langs- 

 troth, being 8 per cent, in its favor. 

 Again, this report records the results 

 of wintering in -521,830 hives ; 211,732 

 of which were in box hives, leaving 

 309,598 for all kinds of frame hives. 

 Of the latter, 195,957 areLangstrotli— 

 i. e., shallow frames— and 113,561 of 

 all others combined. We really think 

 these figures settle the matter of ' the 

 coming frame.' Had the deep frames 

 been shown to have the advantage, 

 the Bee Journal would have been 

 ready to advocate their universal 

 adoption, for it has no desire to favor 

 any but the most successful methods, 

 hives or implements." 



The reason that a shallow frame is 

 better adapted to the production of 

 comb honey, is that the capacity for 

 top-storing is so increased, tliat the 

 troublesome and vexatiousside-storing 

 is avoided, and the honey boxes are 

 brought near the center of the brood 

 nest, which induces the bees to enter 

 more readily. Now, as a shallow 

 frame is best for obtaining comb 

 honey, and equally as good as any for 

 extracted honey, and, as the Langs- 

 troth is a shallow frame, and is cer- 

 tainly as good a frame as any upon 

 which to winter bees, and Is now 

 largely in the majority, I shall adopt 

 it and do all that I can towards making 

 it the standard fra»e. 



There is some dispute as to the ex- 

 act dimensions of the Langstroth 

 frame, but tlie majority of the frames 

 in use are 9}i inches deep and 17^8 

 inches long. The largest manufact- 

 urers of hives, and the greatest num- 

 ber of them, have adopted this size, as 

 have the editors of all of the principal 

 bee periodicals. In Mr. Langstroth's 

 book published 20 years ago. the 

 length of the frames was given as 



\7% instead of \7%, but the introduc- 

 tion, several years ago, of the one- 

 pound section, which is i}4^'^H inches 

 square, eight of which just till a 

 Langstroth frame when made 17,^8 

 inches in length, outside measure- 

 ment, is a good reason for making 

 them of that length, and Mr. Langs- 

 troth, long ago, publicly indorsed tlie 

 change to 17^-8. 

 Rogersville, Mich. 



For the American Bee Journal 



Size of Frame— Bees for Business. 



.lAlLES HEDDON. 



In reply to Mr. Alves, let me say : 

 1. Tlie large majority of frame hives 

 used in this country «,re "made' by 

 the users. 



2. Mr. Langstroth has never, to my 

 knowledge, pronounced 17^8 the stan- 

 dard, and if his fiat will make a stan- 

 dard at any time, I will write to him 

 and possibly induce him to call it 



nysx9%. 



3. I did not object to the mongrel 

 being well adapted to taking the oiie- 

 pound sections. I only objected to 

 that fact being used as an argument 

 in its favor, asserting that the true 

 standard size 17% would do the same, 

 and that the two-story broad frame 

 system was fast falling into disrepute. 



4. I maintain that when a man lays 

 down a system in a book, and gives 

 dimensions of all the parts of his hive 

 connected with that system, together 

 with good and valid reasons for such 

 measurements, spreads that book far 

 and wide, which results in thousands 

 copying after his directions, that such 

 established standard is not to be al- 

 tered by wrenching from him his as- 

 sent to a fractional change that can 

 serve no purpose for the better, only 

 annoying bee-keepers with the dis- 

 astrous results of odd sizes of hives 

 and frames. 



5. What Mr. L. says on page 331, 

 has reference solely to princiisles with- 

 in the realm of the adaptability of 

 the hive to the instincts of the bees, 

 and not to the convenience of bee 

 masters. 1 am not willing to cover 

 the fame of this greatest of apicul- 

 tural inventors with the veil of ignor- 

 ance that would be thrown over him 

 to suppose that he saw no inconven- 

 ience in the size of 40 and 9 different 

 forms and sizes of hives and frames. 

 lie wished to impress the minds of 

 the ignorant, that his inventions and 

 patents did cover frames of various 

 sizes. 



6. I am in the habit of calling 

 things by their right names, and will 

 call the 17% Langstroth the "obso- 

 lete " Langstroth frame when it be- 

 comes so. Please do not count the 

 chickens until the eggs hatch. 



On one point Mr. Alves and I agree, 

 and that is that we both fajl to see 

 that he makes his case any stronger 

 than he did in his tirst attempt. I 

 thank Mr. A. for his enlogestic words 

 in his closing i):vratrraph, and hope 

 my views on this subject may in the 

 end serve to strengthen his former 

 good opinions. 



QUALITIES IN BEES. 



In reply to the published questions 

 of Mr. Ilutehiusou, 1 little thought of 

 arousing my old antagonist, Mr. 

 Demaree. It seems to me that Mr. 

 D., in his article on page 284, merely 

 repeats the arguments of his former 

 article. This effort strikes the ear 

 like a wail from the tomb of Gui- 

 teau : "Not guilty." 



Bee-keepers are turning attention 

 to the new system of breeding bees 

 for their qualities, regardless of color 

 or the number of tlieir rings. Mr. 

 Hutchinson sees the point; Mr. Alley 

 says, " that's so ;" neighbor Shirley, 

 a breeder of close observation, feels 

 almost out of patience with me that I • 

 slKuild have erroneously inferred that 

 he places any special value upon " the 

 gold rings;" he says that he "has 

 been through the mill," and is a tirm 

 believer in bees for business ; quali- 

 ties which are not necessarily insep- 

 arable from any special number of 

 bands. Such old and excellent breed- 

 ers as E. A. Thomas, are advertising 

 a strain tested for qualities ; and my 

 orders for hybrid queens bid fair to 

 go beyond my ability to supply. And 

 right or wrong, the decision of bee- 

 keepers of to-day is. " Give us bees 

 tested for qualities." It is no wonder 

 that Mr. Demaree considers it higk 

 time to " protest against the pre.sent 

 tendency " of breeding for qualities, 

 viewing the matter as lie does. 



I hardly thought after the late edi- 

 torial scolding, that Mr. D. would 

 again try to blacken the character of 

 those who honestly differ from him, 

 by using such a term as " mercenary 

 tendency." Such statements, as well 

 as the whole article, seem to me en- 

 tirely uncalled for ; and as before 

 stated, I had no idea of again calling 

 out the unchangeable opinions of Mr. 

 Demaree. 



" t had supposed the shattered string 

 Would prove, by now, a silent thing; 

 But. touch it liphtly as ye will. 

 It drives a mournful echo, still." 



Now, let US look at the mistakes in 

 Mr. D.'s argument. The mule argu- 

 ment, to begin with. Let me quote 

 from that comic philosopher. Josh 

 Billings. He says: "The mule is half 

 horse and half donkey, and then comes 

 a full stop ; nature evidently having 

 discovered her mistake." Again, " I 

 have known the mule to behave tirst 

 rate all the week for the sake of get- • 

 ting a good fair crack at the driver 

 Saturday night." Again," The best 

 way to make a mule stay in pasture, 

 is to turn him into an adjoining lot, 

 and let him jump out." This animal 

 ranks as he does because of his un- 

 changeableness. Let us have no mule 

 bees. 



I take it that Mr. Demaree, in his 

 experience with hybrids, has never 

 gone beyond the first cross, or if so, 

 merely in a hap-hazard way. The 

 after-crosses judiciously directed by a 

 skilled master, is where we develop as 

 well as retain nianv superior traits of 

 the character of both races, at the 

 same time doing away with vicious 

 qualities. Three of my present stu- 

 dents are bee-keepers of some years 

 exi)erience with Italians. I propose 

 they be consulted upon the points 



