THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW, 



233 



Again using the single-liasket extractor, 

 using bits of comb from transferring, 

 large sheets of drone brood that had been 

 thrown out while transferring, and some 

 bad, old combs, I made another test as 

 follows: Steamed out, 17 lbs., flooded out 

 1 '2 ounces; pressed out six and one-half 

 ounces. In this test I had too much 

 confidence in the flooding, as I let it 

 boil only 10 moments when I set it from 

 the stove. 



How Mr. Genunill could get the results 

 he has given is beyond my comprehen- 

 sion. I could not by any process I ever 

 tried. I thank him very much for the 

 experiment, as it has shown that al- 

 though no wax can be st't'^i after flooding, 

 pressure will demonstrate there is some 

 left; and the agitation has led me to fur- 

 ther improve my extractors; and I hope 

 the tests this fall from Mr. Elwood and 

 .Mr. Hetherington will demmon.strate 

 that I have in no way exaggerated this 

 statement; and that I have the only steam 

 wa.x extractor in the world that will ex- 

 tract a// the wax from old combs rapidly 

 by steam. 



In conclusion I will say that the refuse 

 from these experiments shows no traces 

 of wax. The sample .sent me by Mr. 

 (remiulil showed wax plainly; hence I 

 maintain that the press that I have did 

 its work as well, if not better, than the 

 one used by friend Genunill. 



So. CoLrMBi.\, X. v., June 28, 1899. 



I'KKVENTIO.N OK I.NCREASE. 



\ \<v\>\\ lo Mr. Taylor's Ci ilicism of ilie 

 Miller IM.in. 



AKTMIR C. .MIIJ.ER. 



'ICS, .Mr. Taylor, my plan for the avoid- 

 'i anceof the swarming troubles, is, like 

 all rules, subject to exceptions; but the 

 only exception, the one to which I re- 

 ferred, is the rare one in which a colony 



swarms a/ler the bees are apparently set- 

 tled under the new order. I presume 

 they do it for the same reason that prime 

 swarms .sometimes abscond after being a 

 week in their new quarters. Can you tell 

 me what that is ? I do not know. 



As for ventilation, I did not mention it, 

 as I presume experts, for whom I was 

 writing, would not need to be told. Re- 

 garding water, very few bees remain 

 above after the first twelve hours; and I 

 have seen no evidence of the need of water. 

 The loss of brood is very slight, and is 

 more than offset by the gain in honey by the 

 new colony. I mean that the full force, 

 having little brood to feed — none for 

 three days — puts all the honey in the 

 boxes. Brood in the middle of the har- 

 vest is not worth its feed, unless it is 

 needed for workers for a fall flow. I did 

 a lot of estimating as to the loss and gain 

 along that line, and decided that I gained 

 rather than lost. I say "estimating" be- 

 cause it was not subject to exact demon- 

 stration. 



If only one in three of your colonies 

 swarm, I judge that you are exceptionally 

 favored. How about the fellows who 

 have two and even three swarms from the 

 same parent stock, not to mention swarms 

 from swarms? Just try my way before 

 you condemn it. And, by the way, my 

 apiary is in an apple orchard, in a breezy 

 spot, and I almost always make the 

 changes in the afternoon. The combs 

 removed, as you will see by referring to 

 my article, are cared for by the bees. 

 Not until after the flow is over do I have 

 to use them, and then they are used to 

 complete the number required by the 

 treated colonies. ( I use "Iv" frames, 

 nine in a ten frame hive — with a "follow- 

 er." ) This treatment gives me a chance 

 to cull out poor combs and yields quite a 

 lot of wax. When cutting combs from 

 the frames, half of the top rows of cells 

 are left adhering to the top bars, and form 

 the "starters" on which the treated col- 

 onies are put. I have abundant use for 

 this wax and it is worth more that k 

 costs. 



