808 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



Dec. 19, 



But didn't I make a mess of it when I took off the sections and 

 super ! it looked as if you knocked a man's hat over his eyes 

 and ears — only a little sweeter. I decided I would not use 

 those frames again that way. 



Then I tried them again by making the brood-frames flush 

 with the top of the hive, and nailing a Jj-inch strip on the in- 

 side, flush with the bottom of the super, letting the slats rest 

 on them, and still giving a ,'4 -inch bee-space ; but I have dis- 

 carded that also, for the reason that the bees have it all glued 

 together, which makes it difficult to remove the sections and 

 slats. 



But I now use the T super because it is easier to put in 

 and remove the sections, and not so many traps. The way I 

 make the T super is this : 



I drive in the staples for the T tins to rest on, except the 

 outside ones, which I nail fast to the two end-pieces by leaving 

 half of the T tins lap over on the bottom of the super. On the 

 one side I drive three 6-penny wire nails ; on the other side I 

 take two one-inch screws for each end, and fasten it together, 

 put in the sections, put three T tins between the sections on 

 top, and they will not be any more diamond shape than in the 

 slats. When full, I take it off the hive, take out the four 

 screws and T tins from the top, spread the ends a little, when, 

 presto I there you are ; your sectiong are all out in a jiffy. 



Some other time I will also give the reasons why I discard- 

 ed the flat hive-cover, and how I make my own. 



Lemont, III. 



Marketiag the Honey Crop. 



BY W. D. FRENCH. 



Bee-keepers of California are waking up to their sense of 

 duty, in the matter of marketing their honey. Nearly every 

 person is becoming convinced that something must be done, in 

 order that their cherished pursuit may not fall beneath the 

 feet of those who have sought its eternal ruin. 



The marketing of honey, to me, seems easily adjusted. 

 The point which we desire to make, is, that our product be de- 

 livered direct to the retailer by the operation of a direct trans- 

 action. It IS a conceded fact, that the production and distribu- 

 tion of our honey has never succeeded in its equilibrium. To 

 illustrate: There are several carloads of honey shipped from 

 Salt Lake City to Chicago, when at the the same time it should 

 have gone to Helena, Montana. Many carloads that are 

 shipped from various other points to Chicago, should have 

 gone to points in Idaho; train loads from California to Chica- 

 go, that should have gone to the Dakotas, or some other place; 

 and so on. 



Therefore, it will readily be seen that many of our good 

 points for marketing our product have been utterly ignored, 

 while some other place has been over stocked. 



The over-stocking of one principal point, like Chicago, or 

 New York, has its demoralizing effect upon all other markets. 

 Therefore it will be plainly seen that to have an organized 

 system of distribution, prompted by a General Manager, who 

 should be located in Chicago, would secure for the producers a 

 quick and better price for their product. It cannot be doubt- 

 ed that it will also render the same profit to our Eastern 

 brothers, as to those who are located in California. 



As I have before urged, I feel confident that it would be 

 best to enlarge upon the premises of the Bee-Keeper's Union, 

 and through its instrumentality adjust all of this disturbance, 

 which is so vital to our interests as bee-keepers, throughout 

 the United States, and restore our product to its equilibrium, 

 as does the blood from the heart of a human being. 



I am now informed that the price of honey in San Diego 

 has declined, and they are paying '1}4 cents per pound in 60 

 pound cans, cased. The reason of the recent decline, as 

 stated, was because a certain apiarist had started for town 

 with his load. 



An ever watchful eye 



Is kept by those who buy : 



So when a '* soup " is sighted. 



They all are much delighted— 



Because they're " in the swim." 



Foster, Calif. 



^ 



Non-Swarming Bees vs. Non-Sitting Hens. 



BY BERT LOWNES. 



Mr. Norton (see page 663) believes that since man has 

 eradicated the sitting instinct in several of the different 

 breeds of fowls, and has produced practically seedless fruits 

 of a few varieties, that the swarming habit in bees may in 

 time be bred out, or at least lessened to a very great degree. 



I will admit that we have some seedless fruits, and a few so- 

 called non-sitting breeds of fowls — non-sitting in fact, 

 although, as I shall explain, the desire to sit has not been 

 bred out. 



In regard to fruits, and in fact all plants, I will say that 

 they are more under man's control than bees or other ani- 

 mals. They have no will to be subdued, hence, can be more 

 easily managed. 



Place a plant in a can of earth, and as long as the condi- 

 tions are favorable enough to sustain life, even though other 

 soil, climate, surroundings, etc., would better meet its require- 

 ments, it will remain there. 



We may put a swarm of bees into a hive, but unless it 

 meets with the approval of the bees, we are not so sure of 

 their remaining. It is not instinct or nature that makes this 

 difference, but hriiiti which a bee has and plants have not. 

 Man may remove the necessity of seeding in certain fruits, 

 and the fruits may in time become seedless, but it does not 

 follow (necessarily) that by removing the necessity of swarm- 

 ing in bees, they will have no desire to swarm, or, I may say, 

 hens have no desire to sit, because artificial incubation re- 

 moves the necessity of their doing so. 



As I said before, plants have no will — they do not care 

 whether their species are duplicated or not, hence by remov- 

 ing the necessity one may, or may not, remove the seeding of 

 certain varieties of fruits, etc. 



With bees and animals it is different. Bees do not swarm, 

 or hens sit, for the good of their posterity, at least they do 

 not have the well-fare of their future generations at heart, 

 but they reproduce their kind for the love of it. Hence, a per- 

 son may remove the necessity of swarming in bees, and sit- 

 ting in hens, and still not succeed in breeding out the desire 

 of the one to swarm or the other to sit. 



Man does not get to himself a family for (the) fear that 

 the earth would become depopulated if he remained single. 



I have heard from good authority that fruits of different 

 species may be grafted together with good results ; then why 

 cannot we make a cross of the honey-bee on the bumble-bee ? 

 It is because man cannot control animal life to the extent that 

 he can plant life. 



Then comes the non-sitting hens. I will admit that the 

 Leghorns, Houdans, Hamburgs, and a few other breeds are 

 non-sitting breeds, and have become so by domestication ; 

 but surely Mr. Norton does not mean to say that artificial in- 

 cubation has, by removing the responsibility from the hens, 

 made them so ! If it has, why hasn't it made all breeds uon- 

 sitting? For that to be true, it would be necessary for the 

 hen to be able to exercise reason ; then we might expect a 

 hen to exclaim (in her own language, of course), on seeing her 

 owner "set" the incubator: "Well, sisters, there's John set- 

 ting the incubator; we needn't bother about rearing a brood 

 this season, for there will be plenty without." 



Further more, if Mr. Norton should go to the jungle and 

 get, we will say, two dozen Leghorns, and on returning should 

 present me (?) with half of them, and under our care they 

 should become domesticated, and Mr. N. should use an incu- 

 bator, thereby removing the necessity of his hens to sit, and I 

 should leave the responsibility of reproduction on my hens, in 

 order to substantiate Mr. Norton's statement his hens should 

 become non-sitting, while mine should remain as they were in 

 the jungle. The fact is, though, that both lots of chickens 

 would become non-sitting. 



Artificial incubation has not removed the desire of any 

 hen to sit, or made any hen a non-sitter. All the non-sitting 

 breeds were in existence (not all, either, but enough to make 

 the logic of this statement good) before artificial incubation 

 came into general use. 



Look at all the different breeds of non-sitting fowls, and 

 see if they do not all have a wild, timid nature. Man can 

 hardly approach them — a 12-foot fence cannot imprison them. 

 This, and this only, has made them non-sitting breeds. 



Domesticate a Leghorn, and in due time she will become 

 broody, but as soon as the chicken-house door is opened, she 

 is off the nest ; and after this is repeated a few times she gives 

 up the notion for the time being. 



Ask any poultry fancier who rears non-sitting breeds, and 

 see if he does not tell you that quite often one of his Leg- 

 horns or Hamburghs, as the case may be, becomes broody, but 

 is scared out of the notion. When Leghorns are kept on a 

 farm where they have an unlimited range, it is not infre- 

 quently that a hen will "steal her nest," and if left unmo- 

 lested, will, in due time, appear with a brood of chicks, and I 

 believe that if a flock of Leghorns, or any other non-sitting 

 breed, were left to themselves, and not molested, the entire 

 flock would sooner or later take to "rearing their own 

 chickens." 



These are absolute facts, and go to prove that the desire 



