1907 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



389 



card of the paints we have found the most 

 satisfactory and lasting in our experience as 

 •'paintei's," which, by the way. I have been 

 following as a side issue. Suppose yoitr 

 paint-dealer offers you two brands of paint 

 — one being a strictly pure prepared paint at 

 $1.75 per gallon, and some other at $1.35. 

 Now, the first will go much further, and 

 cover from 25 to 30 per cent more surface 

 per gallon than the cheaper brand containing 

 barytes and whiting (both objectionable in 

 good paints), l)ut much used in place of white 

 lead and zinc. Even should you ignore the 

 cheap quality of the lower-priced paint, the 

 better article will actually cost less, because 

 it takes fewer gallons to do the work. For 

 example, 2000 squai'e feet require two coats 

 of paint. Of the $1.35 article, ten gallons 

 are required, amounting to $13.50. Of the 

 other it takes only seven gallons at $1.75, 

 which amounts to $12.25, leaving a saving of 

 $1.25; besides, what is more important still, 

 you have the very best paint for your hives, 

 it should be remembered that the labor is 

 the same for either a cheap or a high-price 

 paint to be applied, except that hives paint- 

 ed with the cheaper article must be repaint- 

 ed much sooner, hencro the expense is in- 

 creased in this respect also. It is not an 

 agreeable job to have to paint hives very oft- 

 en, especially when they are once tenanted, 

 hence it is best to paint them right, which is 

 the purpose of this article. 



.^ 



THOSE CANDY-FEEUING EXPERIMENTS. 



Dr. Lyon's article and the editor's foot- 

 note, page 95, together with the editorial on 

 page 83, mixed me up quite a little. Further 

 discussions on the subject would be timely. 

 / am not certain which one of the three 

 kinds of candy should be used for best results 

 in winter feeding, and it might save others 

 much loss from feeding the wrong kind of 

 candy. "Good" candy gave best results 

 with Dr. Lyon; "hard" candy, made of su- 

 gar and water, boiled, gave good results, 

 while that made by boiling honey and sugar 

 melted in the hives and killed the bees. He 

 fed outdoors. 



At Medina, the "Good" candy gave trou- 

 ble, melting in the hives and killing the bees, 

 while the Tsest results were obtained from 

 "hard" candy made from sugar and water. 

 The feeding was done indoors. The I'esults 

 were just the reverse in the two cases, if I 

 understand the articles correctly. The ques- 

 tion now is, "What caused such different re- 

 sults ? " The editor attributes it to the dif- 

 ference between indoor and outdoor feeding. 

 There's something in this. "Good" candy 

 over a colony out of doors is not subjected 

 to as high a temperature as in the cellar. 

 Although the heat of the cluster may be the 

 same in both cases, the temperature around 

 the candy in an outdoor super would most 

 likely be hardly as warm as the other. In 

 addition to this the moisture of a cellar would 

 play a great part toward the melting of 

 "Good' candy, as it keeps best in a cool 

 dry place. But why the same results with 



the hai'd candy made of honey and sugar fed 

 outdoors by Dr. Lyon, as with that fed in- 

 doors at Medina ? One thing is true — if hon- 

 ey is boiled it will remain liquid for a time, 

 at least, if kept warm, or even after it has 

 become apparently hard, as in the candy it 

 soon becomes liquid again if subjected to 

 warm heat. In this respect it is a harder 

 matter to keep "hard sugar and honey can- 

 dy" in a warm place than "Good" candy. 

 Judging from Dr. Lyon's experience, the 

 heat from the clus.er in an outdoor colony 

 has the same effect upon such candy as when 

 fed indoors, with perhaps the difference that 

 it would melt sooner and give worse results 

 in the cellar. I am not sure but that Dr 

 Lyon would have found just as good results 

 from hard candy made of pure granulated 

 sugar and water, which gave best results at 

 Medina, as he did with the "Good" candy. 

 Unless otherwise convinced I believe the 

 best all-around results can be obtained with 

 the hard-boiled sugar-and-water candy. 

 Pure granulated sugar and water are cheap- 

 est in the first place. If honey is used, either 

 in hard or "Good " candy, it adds to its ex- 

 pense. Besides, unless it is known to an 

 absolute certainty that there is no danger, 

 diseases might be introduced by using honey 

 in feeding. Another danger with " Good " 

 candy is that one can not always be certain 

 whether he is getting inire powdered sugar 

 or not. 



\ }Wj//M 



'mmmm 



It seems to be clearly proven now that the 

 honey market in England is no great bonan- 

 za for the bee-keeper. I took pains to get 

 from England some honey quotations from 

 Travers & Sons, the largest wholesalers in 

 London. They quote amber Jamaica honey 

 at 5 cents per lb.; fine pale, 6 cents; finest 

 ci'eam white, 8 cents. Honey in glass jars, 

 etc., seems to be rated more according to 

 the package than the contents. My corre- 

 spondent say^ the reports as to the high 

 price of sorne kinds of honey in Englauil, 

 notably heather, are doubtless true, for some 

 people there want that honey, no matter 

 what the price, and actually enjoy paying a 

 fancy figure. Heather honey is national in 

 England, and John Bull eats it loyally in the 

 spirit of — 



Ohi wrap the flag around me, boys. 



It would be interesting to know the per 

 capita consun)ptiou of honey in England as 

 c(»mpared with this country. It certainly is 

 far greater there than here. From the very 

 first, English litei'ature has teemed with ref- 

 erences to the bee and honey. 



