760 



TM® rnvmrnmi^MM mmM jO'^PMifMi-r. 



that to my home customers I sell 5 

 pounds of bucWvheat honey to 1 pound 

 of clover or basswood extracted hone)'. 

 Buckwheat began to bloom about 

 Aug. 3, this year, and it made, livelj' 

 times for the bees during the following 

 ten days. I had up to this time ex- 

 tracted 50 pounds per colonj', on an 

 average, through my entire apiary, 

 wliile my best colony stored in ten 

 days (from Aug. 3 to Aug. 13) 78 

 pounds of extracted honey ; the second 

 best, 74 pounds, and the third 71 

 IJounds; please remember that this was 

 all surplus, and not one drop taken 

 from the brood-chambers. This honey 

 was well ripened and very nice. 



At the above time I had grand hopes 

 of a large crop from this source, and 

 boasted that I would extract over 100 

 pounds per colonj- of choice buckwheat 

 honey. But, alas, a cold rain set in, 

 and has kept at it pretty much ever 

 since. Yet my best colony succeeded 

 in storing 109 pounds ; second best, 

 107 pounds ; third best, 103 pounds of 

 buckwheat extracted honey. But my 

 entire apiary averaged only t)5 pounds, 

 after seeing that all that had been run 

 for extracted honey had enough to carrj^ 

 them until another season. • 



The above will show that buckwheat 

 is not such a bad honey-plant in some 

 sections, at least in a poor season. 



The following report tells how it has 

 done as compared with otlier honey- 

 plants during the last three years : 



In 188(j : Extracted white clover, 20 

 pounds ; basswood, 76 pounds ; buck- 

 wheat, t)9 pounds. Of comb honej% 

 no complete sections of white clover ; 

 basswood, 52 sections ; buckwheat, 48 

 sections. 



In 1887 : Extracted white clover, 

 none ; ba.sswood, 82 pounds ; buck- 

 wheat, 68 pounds. Of comb honey, 

 no white clover ; basswood, 61 pounds; 

 buckwheat, 50 pounds. 



In 1888 : Extracted white clover, 

 25 pounds ; basswood, 20 pounds ; 

 buckwheat, 65 pounds. Of comb 

 honey, no complete sections ; bass- 

 wood, 20 sections ; buckwheat, 50 sec- 

 tions. In the case of comb honey, the 

 number of complete sections are 

 counted. 



I keep a careful record of each col- 

 ony on a small slate, and when I ex- 

 tract, the date of extracting is put 

 down with number of pounds ex- 

 ti-acted, and the quality of the honej'. 

 While with comb honey, an account 

 is kept of the number of complete sec- 

 tions taken o&, with the quality of the 

 honey stated. 



In the fall I go carefully over the 

 entire apiary, and see that each colony 

 has a goodly supply of winter stores. 

 If one should be found short of stores, 

 it is immediately fed, and the amount 

 deducted from its year's record on the 



slate. For instance, colony No. 26 

 was worked for extracted honey, and 

 the record on the slate is as follows : 

 "Extracted honey, 20 pounds of white 

 clover, 50 pounds of basswood, and 89 

 pounds of buckwheat — total 159 

 pounds. I was obliged to feed 10 

 pounds back for winter stores, leaving 

 a total of 149 pounds as the record for 

 the season." 



Now during the month of September, 

 the little slates are all gathered in, and 

 their records with the number of the 

 hive is carefully recorded in a large 

 book for the purpose ; and the next 

 spring, .should I want a choice breed- 

 ing queen, I go to the book and select 

 the best colony there indicated, whicli 

 does not take long. 



By the above plan it will be seen 

 that my record is taken after the bees 

 have been given a sufficient supply on 

 which to winter. My bees are all 

 wintered on natural stores. I never 

 have fed a pound of anything else. I 

 positively think that if all the bee- 

 keepers would follow my plan in this 

 respect, we would have less honey to 

 clog our large markets, and get a bet- 

 ter price for the honey. • 



Jefferson, N. Y., Nov. 5, 1888. 



COOK'S BOOK. 



Criticism of the New Edition ol 

 Jooii.'^ Manual. 



Review from the British Dec Journal 



BY THE EDITOR. 



We are pleased to welcome this the 

 thirteenth edition and fifteenth thou- 

 sand of Prof. Cook's Manual, which 

 first made its appearance as a modest 

 pamphlet in 1876. So much was this 

 at that time appreciated that it sold 

 rapidly, and Prof. Cook has from time 

 to time enlarged it, until it has grown 

 to contain nearly 450 pages. In the 

 present edition there are 110 added 

 pages, and 31 illustrations ; and it has 

 been in a great measure re-written, to 

 bring it up to the knowledge of the 

 present day. 



Not only has the practical part been 

 brought up to the present time, but 

 also the first part — treating of the 

 natural history of the honey-bee — has 

 had full justice done to it ; for the 

 works of Schiemenz, Schonfeld and 

 others, have been mentioned, and the 

 reader is made acquainted not only 

 witli the progress made in the science 

 connected with bees, but also with the 

 names of those to whom we are in- 

 debted for the discoveries. 



Just fancy any one writing about 

 Parthenogenesis, and not mentioning 

 that to Dzierzon we owe its discovery 

 in connection with bees, made in 1835, 



and published by him in 1842 ; yet 

 hard as it is possible to believe it, an 

 author has recently done so, and onlj' 

 mentions Dzierzon casually in con- 

 nection with the introduction of the 

 Italian bee in 1853, which enabled 

 him to prove his discovery to be true, 

 j-et never once is he mentioned as the 

 discoverer. This is the way many 

 books are made ! So conscientious is 

 Prof. Cook in acknowledging where he 

 gets his information, and giving due 

 credit, that in the preface he even 

 mentions where every woodcut is taken 

 from ; and this is in striking contrast 

 to the ways of compilers of the pres- 

 ent day, who copy right and left with- 

 out even so much as alluding to those 

 from whose works they copy 



In Chapter II. the anatomy and 

 phj'siologj' of insects, and the honey- 

 bee in particular, are treated. Here 

 we find many new illustrations, and 

 much fresh matter. Describing the 

 antennas, he agrees with those who, 

 like Leydig, Erichson, Hauser, and 

 others, consider these the organs of 

 smell, and tell us that " while Erichson 

 first discovered the pits in the anten- 

 na;, Burraeister discovered the sensi- 

 tive nerve-ending hairs at their bot- 

 tom, and Leydig the perforated pegs 

 or tooth-like hairs. 



Further, he says, "We may state, 

 then, that the antennal organ of smell 

 consists of a free or sunken hair-like 

 bod)', which oj)ens by a pore or canal 

 to a many-nucleated ganglionic nerve. 

 We thus understand how the bee finds 

 the nectar, the fly the meat, and the 

 drone and other male insects their 

 mates." 



That the antenna; are organs of 

 smell are generally admitted, but some 

 have from time to time endeavored 

 to sliow that they also contain the 

 organs of hearing. Taking this view, 

 we find Dr. Braxton Hicks, Graber, 

 and Mayer, but the evidence they bring 

 forward is not sufficient to satisfy 

 scientists that these depressions are 

 really organs of audition. This also 

 is our view, and is the one taken by 

 Prof. Cook, for he says, "Mr. Cheshire 

 speaks of small pits in the antenna;, 

 which lie regards as organs of hear- 

 ing. He gi.xes, however, no proof of 

 this, and the pits that he describes are 

 not at all ear-like in their structure. 

 Dr. Packard says that there is no 

 proof that any insects except crickets 

 and locusts have i-eal organs of hear- 

 ing. He here refers to the ear-like 

 organs situated on the sides of the 

 body of these insects. Dr. C. S. Minot, 

 in reviewing Graber's work, says that 

 it has not been demonstrated that even 

 these tympanal organs are auditory, 

 and adds that all attempts to demon- 

 strate tlie existence of an auditory or- 

 gan in insects have failed. That in- 



