1883 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTUKE. 



77 



and praying too, for the money it required. 

 About paying tithes : While I entirely agree 

 with you, that something is due to God from 

 every one, I am not yet sure it is the best 

 way to set apart a hive of bees, or several 

 hives. In many cases it would make extra 

 expense and trouble to keep the yield from 

 them separate ; and then, too, these special 

 hives might yield nothing in the hands of 

 some, or during a bad season. Would it not 

 look a little like bargaining with God, that, 

 if he would give you so much you would give 

 him so much V There are some who promise 

 to give the Lord a tenth of all they make 

 during the year, and this may be a very 

 good way, if one doesn't get to making 

 even that a sort of bargain, and then 

 accuse God of not having prospered him, 

 when it was all owing to his own im- 

 providence that he did not succeed. I would 

 rather put it this way : We all owe God the 

 Father a debt, and I would strive to pay 

 this debt (remember, it maybe only the wid- 

 ow's mite) first and foremost ; and I would 

 make it a point to give God something every 

 year, any way. Now, besides this, if he has 

 prospered you, and you have made a clear 

 gain of some money during the year, by all 

 means give at least a tenth of it to the 

 spread of the gospel. 



HALF-POUND SECTIONS. 



WILL THEY PAY? 



^N page 17, Jan. No., C. C. Miller says he doesn't 

 know but he can get as much honey in 1-lb. 

 sections as in 3-lb., but he has never tried the 

 latter; but he thinks he could get more in the 3-lb. 

 sections. Now, I am in just that same fix: I don't 

 know either. I use the 2-lb. sections, and have nev- 

 er used the 1-lb. box. I am of the opinion, that bees 

 will store honey faster in 3-lb. boxes than they will 

 in smaller ones. Will some one who has tried both 

 please stand up and tell Mr. Miller and me, and oth- 

 ers who don't know, what the difference is? If all 

 producers of honey should adopt the ;4-lb. box, 

 which is now being talked of by some, who would be 

 benefited by the change, the honey-producers, the 

 supply-dealers, or the consumers of honey? I think 

 the supply-dealers would be the ones who would be 

 benefited. Why ? Because, first, it would increase 

 their business in cutting and furnishing sections, 

 etc., as many more would be required to serve the 

 same purpose that a less number would of the 2-lb. 

 boxes. And, as has been already stated on p. 10, Jan. 

 No., in reply to Mr. Osborne, the work on them will 

 be nearly the same, and the amount of material will 

 make but little difference; so, then, if the price per 

 1000 will be nearly the same for the ^-Ib. sections 

 that it is for the one and two pound, then it will not 

 be for the interest of the bee-keepers to adopt the 

 ■^-Ib. section. And, also, if you should make the H- 

 Ib. section as narrow as Mr. Osborne suggests, it 

 would necessitate the use of more fdn., and for sup- 

 ply-dealers to furnish which, would add much to 

 their profits, provided the supply of wax would hold 

 out. You see, if you make your sections so narrow 

 as to have combs worked as thin as natural comb, 

 bee-keepers have got to use more fdn.; and it is 

 more labor to handle more and put more in; and in 

 view of a short supply of wax, and advancing prices 



for comb, the V^-lb. section will increaie the cost of 

 honey for the producer; and if our honey will not 

 sell for as much more as it costs to produce it (and 

 it will surely not), then it will not be beneficial for 

 producers of honey to use the J4-lb. box. 



There is another reason why bee-keepers should 

 not adopt the !4-lb. box, as suggested. The bees 

 have got to thin out more fdn., as more has to be 

 used, and the bees have got to produce and use more 

 wax, with an increase of labor, to seal over so many 

 more thin combs; and lastly, the consumers of hon- 

 ey will not be benefited by eating the extra amount 

 of indigestible wax that will be required in the 

 make-up, and to inclose that ;4-lb. package of hon- 

 ey, for which it is said there is more demand than 

 supply; and who has created this demand, the hon- 

 ey-prcducer or the supply-dealer? 



G. J. Flansburo. 



Bethlehem Center, N. Y., Jan., 1883. 



While I agree with you in the main, friend 

 F., and do not yet see how -J-lb. sections can 

 well be an advantage, yet I feel a little trou- 

 bled to see the energy with which you and 

 some of the rest of the brethren oppose it. It 

 "reminds me of the recent war on cheap 

 queens. Then again, it striks me there is 

 an air of uncharitableness, not quite becom- 

 ing us as a people. Our consuming brethren 

 are good people, and disposed to do right, I 

 think, and I also think the supply-dealers 

 are not altogether selfish, if you will excuse 

 the remark coming from one in my position. 

 As a rule, we are all of us working for the 

 best general good, are we not? Tne great- 

 est objection I have to any more kinds of 

 sections (or any thing else, in fact), is, that 

 it multiplies and confuses, until one can 

 hardly see the end of what we have got to 

 keep in stock, and got to furnish. 



THAT HOUSE. 



FKIENl) MELLEN OFFERS SOME SUGGESTIONS. 



Hj^HE great inquiry just now seems to be, What 

 and how shall I build my honey-house, bee- 

 house, etc.? Some years ago there was quite 

 a fever on the subject, as many will recollect. 

 Among others, I had it bad myself. Editor of 

 Gleanings had it just like common men, only a 

 little worse, if I remember aright. A good deal of 

 ink was shed, pro and con, and discussions, more or 

 less, in most of the bee-journals ; but after a time 

 the subject seemed to be dropped, as by mutual 

 consent, and for some years but little interest has 

 been manifested in the matter. I presume it has 

 been with others as with myself — the fever, after 

 all, never quite left me, and the chances of its 

 breaking out anew with me, are imminent ; I never 

 felt quite satisfied to let the matter go by default, 

 unsolved, where it was left. But now it looks as 

 though it were coming to the front once more. It is 

 a subject worth our consideration. At first in sit- 

 ting down to write on the subject, one might not 

 think it a difficult one; but it has as many paths, 

 perhaps, as the frame question; hope it will come 

 to as close a focus at the end. 



We see, by the answer to calls from large apia- 

 rists for plans, estimates, etc., for such a house, that 

 it is bringing out quite elaborate ones, as well as 

 quite large and expensive estimates, which is all 



