'jcmm jsMERicMH MMW j&wmwm%(. 



805 



■.*^*^^^->^-.*.*- ^ *^*^^-^-^j-:^^^^^-*-^^^^*-^-*^^^^^*^^^*^*^*^*^* ^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^^^^ 



MREARY ^VI.^XKR. 



Alas ! nil aowerless are the vales ; 

 We feel the brealb i)f Arctic gaies. 



AI! silent are the linney-bees. 



And gaunt and leafless are the trees. 



The daisies to the zephyrs nod 

 So more— deal is the golden-rod. 



No Are flies in the alders g'eam ; 



No more the swallows skim the stream. 



The gras^ Is withered on the lawn ; 



No more the sonK-bird greets the dawn. 



The merry crickets chirp no more ; 

 The weather-strips are on the door. 



Now come bleak winds with drizzline showers, 

 And 'neath the eaves the sparrow cowers. 



The elory of the autumn's past. 

 And dreary winter's coming fast. 



The dreary winter with its snow. 

 And days uf '* eight and ten belo ff." 



mRiES f Ri 



Placing the Seclioii-Casc for 

 Comb Honey. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 



Query 596.— When comb honey is desired, 

 can any more honey be obtained by placing 

 the section-caso crosswise over the frames, 

 than by usini; it lenfrthwise ; that is, running 

 with the frames, or from front to rear ?— New 

 York. 



No. — C. C. Miller. 



No. — Mrs. L. H.'^.rrison. 



I think not. — J. M. Hambaugh. 



I think not. — M. Mahin. 



No, certainly not. — R. L. Taylor. 



No. No more, and no less. — Eugene 

 Secor. 



No. What kind of a hive do you 

 have ? — Will M. Barnum. 



No ; and there are serious olsjections 

 to such a practice. — James Heddon. 



I can see no difi"erence in favor of 

 either plan. — G. M. Doolittle. 



We do not think that it makes any 

 dift'erence as to quantity. — Dadant & 

 Son. 



Having never tried them crosswise, 

 I do not know. — A. B. Mason. 



I prefer tliem to run crosswise, hut 

 practically I do not think it makes 

 any ditfcrence. — J. P. H. Brown. 



I think not. 1 have them both waj-s, 

 and I sec no diflerence in the amount 

 of hone}- secured. — A. J. Cook. 



I do not think that there can be, and 

 I see no good reason wliv it sliould. — 

 J. E. Pond. 



I can see no dift'erence as far as 

 honey is concerned. I prefer the sec- 

 tions to run with the frames. — H. D. 

 Cutting. 



No, never. Besides it is wrong any- 

 waj'. Run sections the same as the 

 frames, and the hive need be level or 



true one way. Run the sections cross- 

 wise, and the hivt must be level both 

 ways. Double trouble without a sin- 

 gle advantage. — J. M. Shuck. 



I do not think that it makes much 

 dift'erence, but putting the sections 

 lengthwise is generally preferred. — P. 



L. VlALLON. 



It makes no dift'erence, but as hives 

 are generally tilted forward to shed 

 water, it is best to place the sections 

 running from front to rear. The hives 

 must be kept plumb sidewise, when 

 comb either in brood-frames or sec- 

 tions is being built. — C. H. Dibbern. 



I have used cases largely in both 

 waj's, and as to quantity of honey I 

 have failed to see any dift'erence in 

 favor of either way. I make my cases 

 so that the sections run with the 

 brood-frames, in order that the hives 

 may be " tipped" forward .slightly so 

 as to drain the alighting-board of any 

 water that may get there. — G. W. 

 Demaree. 



Oh. no ! No good reason is pre- 

 sented why it should make any dift'er- 

 ence in the quantity of honey obtained, 

 so far as we can discover. There are 

 reasons for having the combs parallel 

 with the brood-frames, other than a 

 quantity of honey. — The Editor. 



Separate Section-Cases, or Wide 

 Frames ? 



Written for the Amcruxin Bee Journal 



ftuery 597.— Can more honey be obtained 

 by using separate cases (that is, those with 

 sections) than by using wide frames with sec- 

 tions y— E. 



No, I think not. — R. L. Taylor. 



No more honey, but less work. — C. 

 C. Miller. 



I never use wide frames. Place all 

 sections in cases. — J. P. H. Brown. 



I think not, but it is more conven- 

 ient to use separate cases. — A. B. 

 Mason. 



Not according to my experience. — 



P. L. VlALLON. 



I think so, and in better shape 

 usually. — Mrs. L. Harrison. 



There is no dift'erence as to quantity; 

 it is only a matter of convenience to 

 the bee-keeper. — C. H. Dibbern. 



I have never made a practical test, 

 but I believe the dift'erence would not 

 be very marked. — J. M. Hambaugh. 



The wide-frame plan will give as 

 much honey as any plan so far known. 

 — G. M. Doolittle. 



I do not know as I understand j-our 

 question fairlj'. But I am satislied 



section-case than with wide frames. — 

 Will M. Barnom. 



I see no reason whj-. It is simply 

 for convenience that we use crates or 

 cases, in lieu of wide frames. — A. J. 

 Cook. 



It depends upon circumstances. 

 There are advocates of both plans. 

 Probably but little dift'erence will be 

 found. — J. E. Pond. 



I use separate cases, also sections in 

 wide frames, and I can see no dift'er- 

 ence with the same race of bees and 

 colonies of the same strength. — H. D. 

 Cutting. 



One plan will secure just as much 

 honey as the other, other things being 

 equal. It is altogether a question of 

 cheapness and convenience. I began 

 with wide frames, but I have discarded 

 them. — M. Mahin. 



Perhaps not, but the latter method 

 would involve the most work, I think. 

 In a large apiary the question is not 

 simply quantity, but maximum quan- 

 tity with minimum labor. — Eugene 

 Secor. 



Cases for surplus honey of half- 

 depth ott'cr advantages that those of 

 full-depth do not ; for the reason that 

 a small amount of storage-room is of- 

 fered at one time, and heat is econo- 

 mized. The "case" system has al- 

 most superseded the wide-frame sys- 

 tem, and will eventually " push it to 

 the wall." Very much of this popu- 

 larity is due to the old Heddon case. — 

 J. M. Shuck. 



I have tried both the wide-frame and 

 the case system, and I conclude that if 

 the apiarist is possessed of genius, and 

 is inditt'erent to what is by some peo- 

 ple called "fuss" in the bee-business, 

 there need be but little dift'erence in 

 the quantity of comb honey realized. 

 But for my part I am not fond enough 

 of "fuss" to be found fussing with 

 such impracticable traps as wide 

 frames.— G. W. Demaree. 



In all probability the dift'erence in 

 quantity is very little, if any. Con- 

 venience and economy of labor and 

 material are the only things which are 

 claimed for section-cases for surplus 

 honey, which arc now superseding 

 the wide frames very rapidly. — The 

 Editor. 



'rii«'! Xini«! for Reading' has cume, 

 with the long winter evenings. We have a 

 large stock of bee-books, and would like to 

 fill orders for them. To read and post up is 

 the way to succeed in any pursuit— in none 

 is it more important than in bee-keeping. 



'iTf" The anniml meetinp of the Northwestern 



lUlnoia Htitl Southwestern Wisconsin Bee-Keepers' 



Asaot-iation wiU be held in the Supervisors Uooin of 



.-, . T J u -.1 *i the Court House at Uuckford. Mis., on .Tan. ir, and 



that I can get more honey with the \e_{^i,. d. a. fuller. Sec. 



