280 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



the court house and were photographed. 

 The brick of different colors with which the 

 street in front was paved furnished a neat 

 foreground, while the fluted columns and 

 ornamental front of the court house formed 

 a pleasing back ground. I spent at least 

 an hour one morning in looking for just this 

 spot. A local photographer made the ex- 

 posure and 1 brought home the plates and 

 developed them. For so large a group the 

 faces are unusually good. There is not a 

 person present that would not be instantly 

 recognized by his friends. That little num- 

 bering scheme of Secretary Benton's came 

 in very nicely here, as nearly all of the num- 

 bers show, and I have had a list of the mem- 

 bers with the corresponding numbers print- 

 ed and attached to the picture which enables 

 even a stranger to decide in regard to the 

 identity of each person. The size of the 

 picture is 8x10 inches— twice the size of 

 those taken last year at the World's Fair 

 convention. 



The journey home was uneventful ; simply 

 one long, swift, continuous ride of 800 miles 

 broken only by a change of cars at Chicago. 

 I reached home in the evening just as baby 

 Fern was dropping off to sleep, but when she 

 heard my voice she roused Up with : " Papa, 

 did 'oo dit my 'ittle pictou boot (book) ?" 



EXTRACT EO. 



Rolled vs. Given Pressed Foundation ; Flat- 

 Bottomed Foundation ; Heavy Cell- 

 Walls and Fat Combs. 



We cannot have too much light on the sub- 

 ject of comb foundation, hence I am glad to 

 reproduce here the editorial comments in 

 Gleanings regarding the experiment that 

 Mr. Taylor reported in last Review. 



"Reference is made in Bicycle Notes, in 

 another column, to the experiment of R. L. 

 Taylor, as reported and illustrated in the 

 Bee-Keepees' Review for September. We 

 have been experimenting a little with differ- 

 ent weights of foundation during the past 

 summer, and perhaps I can throw a little 

 light on some of the results. Well, these re- 

 sults show that the ' fattest ' combs, if I may 

 use the expression, were built from Given 

 foundation ; that the next fattest were from 

 wax sheets sheeted for roller mills, but actu- 

 ally embossed or worked on the Given press. 

 The next in order seems to be the Hunt foun- 

 dation made on a Root mill. The rest of 

 the results I have been unable to compare. 



any more than to state that the Van Deusen 

 shows the * leanest ' combs, to carry out the 

 analogy, of all the foundations used. Mr. 

 Taylor, concluding, says, first, that the qual- 

 ity of the wax in its original characteristics, 

 or in the method of its manipulation, cuts a 

 considerable figure ; and, secondly, that 

 either the kind of machine used in making 

 foundation greatly affects its value ; or, 

 thirdly, that heavy foundation has a decided 

 advantage over light. Mr. Taylor's third 

 and last supposition, I think, is nearer the 

 truth than the second, as I shall presently try 

 to show. 



Now, the various foundations above men- 

 tioned vary quite a little in the number of 

 feet per pound. The Van Deusen (and this 

 gives the leanest combs) was a trifle the 

 lightest, being 14.22 feet per pound. The 

 Dadant stood 14.21 feet per lb. ; the Root 

 13.7.5 ; the Given, only 9.91 ; while the Given- 

 Hunt — Hunt sheets worked on a Given press 

 —was 9.37. Now, if you will look again over 

 the figures you will see that the Given and 

 Given-Hunt, both made on the Given press, 

 were quite a little the heaviest foundation 

 used ; and it was these sheets that gave the 

 fattest combs. The fatness of the comb in 

 the case of the other makes of foundation, 

 in like manner, seems to vary somewhat ac- 

 cording to the weights ; that is, the lighter 

 the foundation the leaner the comb^ and 

 vice versa. The figures do not show this to 

 be strictly so, but strongly enough to show 

 which way the wind blows. 



A few months ago reports were given 

 showing that the Given foundation seemed 

 to be more readily accepted by the bees — in 

 fact, very largely substantiating the facts 

 above given ; but it should be understood 

 that the Given foundation, made between 

 two flat plates, was a heavier grade — not 

 heavier foundation septa, or bases, but far 

 heavier foundation walls. I did not realize 

 there was so great a difference between the 

 cell-walls of the Given press foundation and 

 that made on the rolls until a Given press 

 was sent us for experimental purposes. In 

 fact, the walls were so heavy that the foun- 

 dation looked more like sheets of wax with 

 small hexagonal holes dented in equally dis- 

 tant from each other. It then occurred to 

 me for the first time that it was not so much 

 the method of embossing the sheets as it was 

 the kind of dies, or punches, used in making 

 the cell-walls. 



I took a sample of the Given press founda- 

 tion to our Mr. Washburn, and asked him to 

 make punches that would make roller foun- 

 dation like the sample, or very near it. He 

 did so, and the foundation in every respect 

 seemed to be as soft as that made on the 

 Given. A test in the hive also seemed to 

 show that bees regarded it in like manner. 

 Of course, the foundation with heavy side- 

 walls, with the same bases, or septa, will be 

 heavier ; and, also, the wax in these walls, 

 not having been subjected to the same pres- 

 sure as the wax in thinner walls, will be soft- 

 er ; therefore it follows that it will be worked 

 by the bees the quickest ; and such combs, 

 being started first, will maintain their ad- 

 vantage, and be fattest in the end. 



