728 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Mv. li. 



corn " at last. For years we have had a protracted drouth in 

 this part of the world. Early last spring there actually was 

 nothing to feed to horses and cows, with many a poor man in 

 the city, and a great many farmers found themselves in the 

 same fi.\. Not a spear of green grass would appear after 

 sweet clover and alfalfa was up 12 to 18 inches high. Such 

 a condition of things was apt to prove the merits and demerits 

 of the plant in question. 



Well, to be short about it, I will say that the poor people 

 with their one milch cow, went onto our country roads and 

 got all the nice, green clover they wanted. Not only their 

 cows, but also horses and hogs soon learned to relish the herb, 

 and it proved to be a veritable blessing to a multitude of 

 people. 



We have an old saying, that a farmer will not eat unless 

 he knows what it is. Yes, mauy of them will refuse the 

 choicest of oysters. So with raelilot clover — 1 consider it the 

 " oyster " among the forage plants — after a taste for it has 

 been acquired by stock. For bee-keepers it is just "the 

 thing" — at least in this section of our country. 



Melilot requires considerable curing when cut for hay, 

 and salt should be used freely when it is stacked, but the hay 

 is relished by cattle in particular. 



Alfalfa, although excellent in its place, cannot compare 

 with sweet clover here as a honey-producer, since it is always 

 cut just about the time it begins to yield honey in profusion. 



Further information about melilot will be given with 

 pleasure, if desired. Grand Island, Neb., Nov. 1. 



[Yes, let us have all the information possible about sweet 

 clove, and about any and every other plant that is valuable 

 for its honey and for forage. We can't learn too much in this 

 line.— Editok.] 



Marketing Honey — Suggestion for the Union. 



BY W. D. FRENCH. 



I wish to call the attention of our bee-keeping friends to 

 the ways and methods by which apiarists of California are 

 subjected in the marketing of their crops. 



It is a fact observable in every city and hamlet of this 

 State, that there exists a combination, composed of those who 

 buy honey, who establish the price thereon, regardless of 

 what it is worth in New York, Chicago, or other Eastern 

 cities, and compel those who must have ready cash, to accept 

 one-half of its actual worth, and thus rob them of their 

 money in daylight to satisfy their avaricious greed. 



They will have the audacity to tell you that honey has 

 declined one-half, or so many cents, when they see or hear of 

 a nice lot of honey being sent in and they know it will be sold 

 on their market. 



A postal card written to me recently from a commission 

 house of San Diego, which was in reply to a letter addressed 

 to them, reads thus : 



" We offer two carloads L. A. honey at 3.90. Profit on two 

 cars 5 cents. Chance for spec. 



" This explains the honey situation to-day. 



" (Signed.) N. & Co.'' 



They presumably took me for a chump in quoting prices 

 and informing me as to the situation of the honey market. 

 This proposition works well in some cases, as a large number 

 of the bee-keepers are really not informed ou the price of 

 their product. 



Now, how are we to solve this problem by securing to the 

 producing class an adequate amount for their product? It 

 has occurred to me that the National Bee-Keepers' Union 

 could step in aud show its hand. To illustrate : 



Suppose that in each locality a number of the Union mem- 

 bers were stationed to receive all honey at a price established 

 by said Union, and paid for when sold, except iu cases where 

 people must have ready cash, and where it became necessary 

 in such cases the same to be paid from the funds of the Union. 



It would be needless to say, if such a proceeding were in 

 force, every bee-keeper in California would become a mem- 

 ber, and thus greatly enlarge its funds and membership. The 

 Union could establish a bureau, buy, ship, and sell, at a slight 

 profit — enough to cover all expenses — and thus do away with 

 all this sort of daylight robbery which prevails in this State. 



I have only outlined the method which seems quite ra- 

 tional to me, and I hope others may share iu a discussion upon 

 this subject. I would particularly ask the attention of Mr. 

 Thomas G. Newman, who, I trust, will speak as to the feasi- 

 bility of this proposition. Foster, Calif. 



The Swarming Habit— Breeding it Out. 



BY BERT LOWNES. 

 (Continued from page 712.) 



But why is it impossible to breed the swarming habit out 

 of the bees ? 



1st. Because it is contrary to the laws of Nature. 



2nd. Because of the fact that even though other things 

 were equal, it would necessitate the co-operation of all the 

 bee-keepers in a common effort to breed out the habit ; and 

 since the majority are opposed to it, that of itself would be 

 impossible. 



It is not an easy matter to breed pure Italians, and it 

 would be next to an impossibility to breed Italians, or any 

 other race exclusively — I mean for every bee-keeper on the 

 face of the globe to breed Italians only, owing to the liability 

 of the queens meeting drones of a different race, from the 

 woods. 



In the case of Italians, the queens can be tested in a com- 

 paratively short time, and, if not pure, replaced. It would 

 not be so easy to test the non-swarming bees. The test, of 

 course, would be the refusal of the bees to swarm. 



Suppose we had a young queen that we wished to test. As 

 it is the exception for a colony containing a young queen to 

 cast a swarm the first season, there would be no chance what- 

 ever of judging of her purity until the next year, and owing 

 to possible drouth, or some other drawback, our chances then 

 woulil not be great, for even if the season were as good as the 

 best, we could not be certain of her purity, even though her 

 bees did not swarm for two or three years. By that time her 

 usefulness would be about over ; before that time, however, 

 some of her drones would in all probability have met with 

 some of the other queens, and in case she was not pure, the 

 chances would be that the apiary would contain as many, or 

 more of the swarming bees than the non-swarmers. These 

 facts add, also, to the undesirability of breeding out the habit. 



One might go to some isolated spot (another undesirable 

 feature), where there are no bees whatever (?) within a hun- 

 dred miles (and like enough no honey-plants, either), and be 

 happy (?) because of the assurance that there would be no 

 trouble caused by the interference of a neighbor's drones. 

 Suppose he could ? Would the in-breeding that is sure to fol- 

 low such a procedure, be desirable ? 



"O that's easily remedied. We'd just have a few other 

 bee-keepers remove to other isolated places, and we would ex- 

 change queens, aud thereby be enabled to introduce new blood 

 into our stock, and not be obliged to in-breed." But suppose it 

 were possible to do such a thing, wouldn't it be a rather risky 

 business, to introduce other queens into your apiary, for fear 

 of their having accidentally met with a drone that still had 

 the swannlud blood in him ? 



" Yes, but we'd buy tested queens, though." 



! would you ? We will suppose you would. If an Ital- 

 ian queen that can be tested in about three weeks' time can 

 be purchased for .SI. 00, what would be the price of a tested 

 non-swarmer, that it would take three years to test ? Would 

 the price, or her age, render her undesirable? If a person 

 were working to prevent swarming, he could, if he desired, in- 

 troduce new blood each year, but in breeding out the swarm- 

 ing habit, this would not be permissible, for with each new 

 queen introduced that colony is placed at the point from where 

 you started to breed out the habit. 



Are there any other reasons for believing that breeding 

 out the swarming habit would be undesirable ? Yes. 



1st. As mentioned before, there could be no improvement 

 in the bees by changing their natures contrary to the laws of 

 Nature? 



2nd. It would be impossible to make such a great change 

 in the one hive, and leave the bees unchanged in other ways ; 

 aud the chances are as ten to one, that the other changes 

 wrought by the one great change would be undesirable ones. 



3rd. The fact that the bees of queens which are not very 

 prolific are not so much given to swarming as those of others, 

 some would be led to select such queens in their efforts to 

 breed out the habit ? 



4th. It would be undesirable to all those to whom "in- 

 crease by dividing is undesirable." 



Suppose A. had 100 colonies of bees of the non-swarming 

 kind, and during the winter he should be so unfortunate as to 

 lose 20 colonies. As his locality can support 100 colonies 

 nicely, he would naturally wish to bring his apiary up to its 

 former number, even though he should not wish to have 20 

 hives lying idly about. Being non-swarmers, of course he 

 cannot allow a sufficient number to swarm to make up the 

 loss, and although he is not exceptionally fond of "dividing," 



