48 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



than that drawn from some case of which 

 nothing is known concerning the care or 

 skill used ? In conclusion, referring to 

 Mr. Buchanan's report, he says "This 

 article, it seems to me, ought to be scat- 

 tered far and wide, for it is high time we 

 were unlearning some of our old knowl- 

 edge on the question of foul brood." 

 With all kindness, and Christain spirit, 

 and in the interest of truth, I must say 

 that all this does not seem to me to be 

 either science or sound sense. How dif- 

 ferent is the scientific attitude, as shown 

 in the American Bee Journal, page iS, 

 where Prof. A. J. Cook says " I referred 

 above to certain acorn-infesting larvae 

 that secrete nectar. I have never seen 

 them, but have often heard of such — 

 pnncipally from Missouri — so often that I 

 think they may be more than a myth. 

 Yet, I am free to say that I should feel 

 more certain if I actually saw them. I 

 can see how oak-tree plant-lice, which 

 are by no means rare, might lead to an 

 erroneous conclusion. ' ' 



But, to return to Mr. Buchanan. When, 

 as we have seen, several of the leading 

 scientific men of Europe deceived them- 

 selves in the matter of spontaneous gen- 

 eration, by lack of care in their experi- 

 ments, what is there about Mr. Buchanan's 

 report that we shall accept his conclusion 

 in the matter with such utter credulity; 

 seeing also that his supposed experience 

 is directU' opposed to the experience of 

 all others who have dealt with foul-broody 

 honey in connection with bees ? ll'ifit of 

 care could not have broug/it the experience 

 of the latter; but it easily might have 

 caused that of Mr. Buchanan. These are 

 some of the ways in w'hich a person 

 might fail in such a case: Allowing the 

 honey when poured into the vessel over 

 the fire to spatter up on the sides above 

 where the boiling honey would reach; al- 

 lowing scum or froth to gather and remain 

 above that point; using a stick or dipper 

 at the first in the liquid and then laying it 

 out and using it again after the boiling; 

 or rinsing out the cans, which had con- 

 tained the honey, with the liquid at or 



near the time when the boiling had ceased. 

 Then he sa3S the colonies fed were ''soon 

 ro/Zd';/ with foul brood." So much foul 

 brood, so soon, is so diametrically op- 

 posed to all other experience in such 

 matters, that I cannot do otherwise 

 than pronounce it utterly incredible 

 that due care was taken in the boiling. 



As I said, the editor leans, for partial • 

 support, upon Dr. Miller's allusions to 

 the results obtained by certain scientists 

 with their foul brood cultures. The doc- 

 tor has said many things about these re- 

 sults, but he has no where suggested any 

 reasons going to show that the effect on 

 foul brood germs boiled in honey ought 

 to be the same as that resulting from 

 boiling them in a culture in a vial. To 

 me it has always seemed that the results 

 ought to be quite different. Honey re- 

 tains its heat a long time after it ceases 

 to boil. It is itself a disinfectant. I do 

 not know the exact temperature at which 

 honey boils, but I take it that it requires 

 a considerably higher temperature than 

 does water. Water boils at about 212°, 

 at the level of the sea. At so moderate 

 an elevation as this here at my house, 

 pure, free ( /. e. , unconfined ) water can 

 never be brought to the temperature of 

 212°. This is so because the pressure of 

 the atmosphere is less here than at the 

 sea level. But it appears that the pres- 

 sure may be in the weight of the liquid 

 as well as in the atmosphere; for, if salt 

 is added to the water, and allowed to 

 dissolve, the specific gravity of the liquid 

 is increased and a higher temperature is 

 required to make it boil. The addition 

 of sugar or honey would no doubt pro- 

 duce the same effect. The specific gravi- 

 ty of honey is much greater than that of 

 water. A table I have consulted puts it 

 at 1.456. If I am correct, then a nmch 

 higher temperature is required to cause 

 boiling in honey than in water. With 

 my present light, these reasons appear to 

 me an abundant warrant for saying that 

 the experiments of the seientists are not 

 applicable. I know there is no certain 

 relation between specific gravity and the 



