THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



21 



In opening queen-cells I have never 

 found the queens standing in any 

 otlier position than " on their heads." 

 If queen-cells were alvpays built in 

 such a position that inversion would 

 destroy the inmates, no queens could 

 be reared if tlie combs were inverted 

 about once a week. If inverson pre- 

 vents swarming, I think it is rather 

 by awaking new determinations 

 among the bees, than by killing em- 

 bryo queens.— W. Z. Hutchinson. 



Inverting is impracticable, in my 

 opinion, and the trouble stated in the 

 query is the least connected with the 

 method. If an intimation was given 

 as to whether it is desired to rear 

 queens or not, the question might be 

 answered by some one who had made 

 a test in that particular direction. I 

 should say, do not invert at all.— J. E. 

 Pond. 



I suppose the person who wrote that 

 " queens cannot be reared standing 

 on their heads," was aiming to be 

 witty, but he spoke the truth not- 

 withstanding. A majority of queens 

 are reared with their heads down, but 

 not " standing on their heads." Re- 

 versing the hive will not destroy 

 young queens unless they are handled 

 so roughly that the young queens are 

 dislodged from their natural position 

 in the cells while in the larval or 

 chrysalis state. Eeversing cannot be 

 depended upon to prevent swarming. 

 I mean that the plan is not practica- 

 ble, and perhaps no other plan is. We 

 must prevent increase, not swarming. 

 — G. W. Demaree. 



While I do not claim to have made 

 special and thorough testa of invert- 

 ing, as applied to the destruction of 

 queen pupa or nymph, from what I 

 have observed while largely experi- 

 menting with inverting for other 

 purposes, I have concluded that it 

 will not result in a practical method 

 of controlling swarming. — Jajies 

 Heddon. 



Queens are not reared ''standing on 

 their heads." Though the head points 

 downwards, their bodies are upheld by 

 fine silken cords, and protected by 

 elaborately-constructed net-work. — 

 The Editor. 



OTovrcspotxdeixcc* 



Preminin Wortli Having.— The New 



York World and the American Bee Jour- 

 nal (both weekly) will be sent for one year 

 toany address in North America tor $2.00. 

 And in addition PRESENT to every such 

 CLUB SUBSCRIBER a " History of the United 

 States," containing .320 pages and 22 fine en- 

 gravings, bound in leather and gilt. 



This " History " will be sent FREE by ex- 

 press at the subscriber's expense ; or will 

 be mailed for 10 cents extra to any place in 

 the United States or Canada. 



It is arranged chronologically by years, 

 from 1492 to 1885. Every event is narrated 

 in the order of its date. These are not con- 

 fined, as in other works, to political matters, 

 but embrace every branch of human action. 



This premium is worth the whole of the 

 money sent for both periodicals, and should 

 Induce thousands to subscribe, and thus get 

 two unrivalled weeklies for nothinfr. 



Explanatory.— The Ugures before the 

 names indicate the number of years that the 

 person has kept bees. Those after, show 

 the number of colonies the writer had in the 

 previous spring and fall, or fall and spring, 

 as the time of the year may require. 



This mark © indicates that the apiarist is 

 located near tne center of the State named ; 

 5 northof the center; 9 south; O* east; 

 K) west; and thisd northeast; ^northwest: 

 o> southeast; and P southwest of the center 

 of the State mentioned. 



For the Amencan Bee Journal. 



Apicnltural LeEislation. 



J. F. LATHAM. 



When viewed from a strictly prac- 

 tical stand-point, it seems that the 

 pursuit of bee- keeping, as an indus- 

 trial vocation, presents but very lim- 

 ited requirements that demand special 

 legislation ; surely not to the extent 

 called for by other agragrian pursuits. 

 While foraging, the bee is beyond the 

 control of its master— a free rover, 

 free in its flight, from artificially pre- 

 scribed limits. The food of the bee, 

 when derived from the floral adorn- 

 ments of Nature, is but a spontaneous 

 effusion, the bounty of the One Cause, 

 a wonder working demonstration of 

 occult power, over which the " lords 

 of creation " can exercise no control, 

 and who ought to exercise sufficient 

 rationality to deter a desire to control. 



Within the bounds of the apiary the 

 bee is a possession of the proprietor, 

 and directly or indirectly under his 

 control. When needed, the bee- 

 keeper should possess suflicient en- 

 dowments to constitute " legislative " 

 function commensurate to the sur- 

 roundings—the direct exigencies of 

 the bee-yard. If an apiary be located 

 sufficiently near the property or place 

 of legitimate employment of another 

 as to actually endanger the lives or 

 well-being of the occupants, it seems 

 that a remedy exists in the application 

 of " common law," by which such 

 irregularities may be adjusted, as 

 ofen called for in other pursuits. Mr. 

 A possesses no legal or moral right 

 to keep bees on his own land in the 

 shadow of the fence separating them 

 from Mr. B's barn-yard, which is in 

 constant use for yarding his domestic 

 animals ; or sufficiently near his dwell- 

 ing-house and its surroundings to be 

 a constant annoyance to the occu- 

 pants, even if he (A) is entitled to the 

 nominal credit of " priority of loca- 

 tion," as referring to homestead 

 rights. Neither has B the right to 

 establish a stock-yard by the side of 

 A's apiary. The conveniences of 

 public travel are entitled to a like 

 consideration. No one is obliged to 

 turn from the highway, while pur- 

 suing a legitimate calling, to avoid a 

 nuisance existing on private property, 

 whether such a nuisance be consti- 

 tuted in a colony of bees, a mad bull, 

 or any other endangering obstacle. 



As to the feasibility of legislation, 

 granting and securing to a single 

 apiarist exclusive territorial rights 

 beyond his private possessions, but 

 little need be said or written. Special 

 law-making is at best but too often 

 the result of preconceived aggres- 

 sions; an attempt to reduce to ser- 

 vility the surplus energy of vigorous 

 industry, for the maintenance of in- 

 dolence, imbecility, and the gratifica- 

 tion of a depraved thirst for notoriety. 

 " The earth, and the fullness thereof" 

 are not, and can never be made the 

 specific possessions of any single in- 

 dividual, class or association of indi- 

 viduals. The laborer is worthy of the 

 meat which the Eternal edict impera- 

 tively demands that he shall eat by 

 the sweat of his brow, minus restric- 

 tions by Divine legislation. Feudal 

 attributes have not as yet become re- 

 quisites of modern bee-keeping. Every 

 yeoman has a right to keep bees on 

 his possessions, if he chooses so to 

 do ; certainly not beyond. 



In a radical aspect, it seems that if 

 an apiarist possessing but an acre of 

 land could be legislated into the con- 

 trol of all the bee-pasturage within 

 the circumscribed limits of the flight 

 of his bees, the tenor of the same 

 legislation would give him control of 

 all the vegetation that might pro- 

 duce nectar within the same limits ; 

 even depriving a neighbor, a mile dis- 

 tant, the right to cut basswood lum- 

 ber, or destroy the nectar-producing 

 shrubs and weeds that were over- 

 growing his grazing land. A person 

 not characteristically qualified to 

 make a success of bee-keeping, as a 

 matter of course must succumb to the 

 " inevitable," leaving the blank of his 

 departure to be tilled by the fittest 

 survival. From the above fact it is 

 quite certain that the genuine api- 

 arist will never lack room in which 

 to exercise his talents ; and that, too, 

 without the need of a " special legis- 

 lation." 



Cumberland, 9 Me. 



For the American Bee JoumaL 



The Honey-Protocers' Association. 



EUGENE SECOR. 



On page 774 of the American Bee 

 Journal for 1886, Mr. M. M. Bald- 

 ridge discusses the above subject in 

 connection with several others along 

 the same line. While an association 

 of that character might do some good, 

 it would not, in my judgment, be a 

 panacea for all our ills. It seems to 

 me that the commission men come in 

 for more than their share of criticism. 

 I do not believe them all to be angels, 

 by any means, but perhaps on a closer 

 acquaintance we might be able to 

 discover where wings ought to be. 

 They do not fix the price of honey— or 

 if they do, it is the producer's fault 

 in not confining them to a selling 

 price. If I send a consignment of 

 honey to a commission house, and 

 write them to hold it for a certain 

 price, or await further orders, I think 

 they would follow instructions if they 

 were a reputable firm- and none 

 others should be trusted. If they did 



