THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



103 



have a decided preference for the former. 

 In some cases I have goue so far as to cutout 

 the sheets already in the sections to be re- 

 placed hy the Given. 



But it was not my purpose when 1 began 

 this article to compare the different kinds of 

 foundation but to give my reasons for pre- 

 fering the kind I use. 



First, the most of my work is performed 

 by myself without hiring outside help and 1 

 can work the press with little help to better 

 advantage than a mill. 



The assertion that the Given foundation is 

 softer than that made between rolls (which 

 some say is only a theory; I believe to be a 

 fact for the reason that, in my experience, 

 the bees accep . it more readily than other 

 kinds and work it out faster preparatory to 

 storing honey. 



The third reason, which to my mind is 

 more conclusive and outweighs all others, is 

 that the comb made from the Given is the 

 nearest to the natural comb of any I have 

 ever yet seen. Some swarms will work out 

 a thinner comb from the same foundation 

 than others, but taken as a whole, one season 

 with another, for ten years, it ha~> become an 

 established fact, to my mind at least, that 

 we get the least weight of comb from the 

 Given foundation. 



Dr. C. C. Miller, on page 8 of the Review, 

 expresses my mind exactly when he says " I 

 doubt if as nice looking foundation can ever 

 come from a Given press as from a mill. 

 But if the bees will take to it and work it 

 more readily, making the thick as thin as de- 

 sired then we may forego the matter of looks 

 before it is made into comb." 



A word in regard to why the Given press 

 has not come into more general use. To my 

 mind the press in its present form is too 

 roughly made and too cumbersome. I admit 

 that to indent a sheet of wax as large as the 

 L. frame require.i a tremendous pressure 

 and the parts must necessarily be heavy and 

 very strong. I could point out many defects 

 in the press I use but it will suffice here to 

 say that it is like all new inventions when 

 they are yet in a crude state, and lack the 

 fine adjustment of perts and adaptation to 

 what is required which will be improved by 

 the suggestions which come to us in trial and 

 practical use. To illustrate, compare the 

 latest roller mill with those first made. 



Those who have dipped wax well know that 

 it is practically impossible to make the light- 

 est sheets of uniform thickness, and then 



when the press is so imperfectly made that 

 the pressure is not evenly distributed over 

 the entire surface the foundation will have 

 the " cloudy " appearance which is so much 

 objected to. The press as formerly made is 

 subject to constant wear in sliding the form 

 in and out of the machine, and in my own 

 case I have been obliged to make new wood 

 parts several times, and each time it requires 

 much patience and perseverance to wedge up 

 with single thicknesses of paper here, or take 

 one out there, to remedy the imperfection of 

 the machine and make the foundation as 

 even in appearance as possible. All this re- 

 quires more patience than even bee-keepers 

 or foundation manufacturers always possess 

 and I believe many have condemned the 

 Given press on this very account. But until 

 there is some method devised of dipping 

 sheets of wax as light as 10 ft., or there- 

 abouts, to the lb., of uniform thickness, there 

 will be no foundation made on a press, equal 

 in appearance to that from a mill ; but to 

 again quote Dr. Miller, " we may forego the 

 matter of looks," etc., provided the comb 

 " gets there " a little ahead. 



I was pleased to learn that the "Roots" 

 were considering the matter of manufactur- 

 ing the Given press. I really hope the mat- 

 ter will not "down" until they give it a 

 thorough test. I believe if they will put the 

 same energy and persistency into this trial 

 as into other departments of their work, they 

 will make it a practical success. 



Shoeeham, Vt. Feb. 26, 1894. 



Bee-Keepers' Review. 



PUBLISHED MONTHLY. 



W. z. HDTCHISON, Editor and Proprietor. 



Terms : — $1.00 a year in advance. Two copies 

 11.90 ; three for $2.70 ; five for $4.00 ; ten or more. 

 70 cents each. If it is desired to have the Review 

 stopped at the expiration of the time paid for, 

 please say so when subscribing, otherwise it 

 will be continued. 



FLINT, MICHIGAN. APRIL 10. 1894. 



Protection for bees in the spring must be 

 tried several years before any definite con- 

 clusions can be drawn. My experience has 

 been that in one year it is a great advantage, 

 and in another but little, if any advantage 

 can be seen, all depending upon the season. 

 It never results in harm and has no objection 

 except its cost, which may be slight. 



