242 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



market was held in the city of Friesach, 

 in Kaernten. For weeks before, the oc- 

 casion was advertised in the local news- 

 papers of the district. The city was dec- 

 orated on that day, and about 500 strang- 

 ers, outside of the townspeo])le, came to 

 be entertained. The market was held in 

 the afternoon, in ten large tents, decora- 

 ted with branches of fir, containing long 

 tables spread with white cloth on which 

 the honey was arranged, mostly in glass. 

 In some of the tents, exhibitions were 

 given by sixteen boys and girls of the 

 public school in uncapping and extracting 

 honey, making foundation, and nailing 

 frames. The costs were reimbursed by 

 the sale of souvenirs, such as scarf-pins 

 representing bees, etc., by young women 

 in country costumes. The sale of honey 

 was a success, although the prices were 

 pretty stiff in comparison with the custo- 

 mary ones, and many orders were taken 

 to be filled later. The day was closed by 

 a bee-keeper's convention, at which it 

 was resolved to hold another market the 

 next year at another town. 



Montrose, Col., July 18, 1899. 



Department of 



riticism 



CONDUCTED BY R. L. TAYLOR. 



The best critics are tliey 

 Who, with what they gainsay. 

 Offer another and better way. 



PUTTING SWARMS WITH NUCLEI WITH- 

 OUT THEIR QUARREUNG. 



In the Ameiican Bee Journal, 371, 

 Doolittle criticises Dr. Miller sharply on 

 account of his treatment of questions re- 

 lating to the hiving of sv\'arms with nu- 

 clei. The doctor responds later in a calm 

 and dignified way that is quite refreshing, 

 putting the whole matter into a proposi- 

 tion which, if accepted, must speedily 

 give such results as will leave nothing 



more to be said. If his course in this in- 

 stance were generally emulated, much of 

 the loose discussion, and the contending 

 for more space, would be avoided. But 

 there is one point in Uoolittle's discus- 

 sion which the doctor does not notice, 

 and that is the method of hiving swarms 

 with nuclei. Doolittle says "there is 

 only one way which I know of without 

 having many bees killed and making a 

 general 'muss' of it all around." The 

 method given is, in . brief, having first 

 smoked the nucleus and removed the 

 queen from the swarm, to shake the bees 

 of the nucleus out on the ground and let 

 them run back into the hive with the 

 swarm. I was much surprised at Doo- 

 little's position on this matter; foi, dur- 

 ing swarming time, I have never found 

 it necessary to use any such care. More- 

 over, I have just been having consider- 

 able experience on the point. I recently 

 formed a number of nuclei with virgin 

 queens to get a lot of imperfect combs 

 repaired, and for other purposes, and, 

 the hope of surplus having passed, and 

 bees in the shape of swarms being super- 

 abundant, I have dumped many in front 

 of these small colonies, without ceremony, 

 and let them run in. In no case was 

 there any quarreling. In all my experi- 

 ence in such cases I have only deemed it 

 necessary that the invading bees should 

 be in considerable numbers and without 

 a queen; and if of a prime swarm, that 

 the queen of the nucleus should be fertile. 

 I have been inclined to make light of the 

 talk about "locality" in such cases, but 

 may be there is more in it than I think. 



VIRGIN OURENS AND DRONE COMB. 



C. P. Dadant, in the American Bee 

 Journal, 403, in discussing Increase by 

 Division, says of the hives having virgin 

 queens "their bees will build nothing but 

 drone-comb until the young queen is 

 laying which will require from 6 to 15 

 days." This being entirely contrary to 

 my experience so arrested my attention 

 that I went and examined the small col- 

 onies referred to in the preceding para- 



