336 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



Department of 



riticism 



CONDUCTED BY R. L. TAYI.OR. 



The best critics are they 

 Who, with what they gainsay, 

 Offer another and better way. 



VIRGIN QUEENS AND THE BUII.DING OF 

 DRONE-COMB. COMPROMISE- 

 DECISIONS NOT DE- 

 SI RABI^E. 



Hasty (American Beejotirnal, 663), re- 

 ferrinfj to my questioning the correctness 

 of Dadant's assertion that swarms with 

 virgin queens do not buikl worker comlj 

 until the queens begin to lay, dignifies 

 the matter by calling it that puzzle of Dr. 

 Dadant vs. Dr. Taylor, and says he would 

 solve it thus: "If the bees merely spare 

 the virgin queen, but in their hearts do 

 not accept her, then they will build 

 drone-comb or none. If she is heartily 

 accepted they will build no drone-comb 

 unless they want some for other reasotis." 

 The solution is not satisfactory. The 

 swarms are supposed to have their own 

 queens, and they are seldom dissatisfied 

 with them; so seldom that the proposed 

 solution does not meet tlie case. The 

 solution looks to me like a sample of that 

 sort or writing of which we see so much 

 in one or two of our journals, evincing a 

 disposition to prevent the decision of a 

 question from having any decided fea- 

 tures — to so manipulate it that neither 

 side will appear to be in the wrong and 

 no one's dignity lowered. This is most 

 pernicious. Truth is everything; the in- 

 dividual nothing. Over the latter the 

 waves of time will soon close with not a 

 ripple to mark the place where he disap- 

 peared, but truth, though crushed to 

 earth, remains immortal; and one can 

 have no higher duty than to assist it to 

 its feet and to dispel the mists that hang 

 about it. 



[While I believe that comrade Hasty 

 was honest in his view of the matter, and 

 had no disposition to try and patch up 

 the matter so that both would appear to 

 be right, I agree with our Critic as to the 

 folly of trying to smooth things over and 

 make it appear that both parties to a con- 

 troversy are correct — unless thej^ are. 

 We must not forget the old story of the 

 shield, one side of which was red and 

 the other blue. — Bd.] 



WORKER-CELIy JELLV VS. ROYAL JELLY. 

 Dr. Miller and Editor Root are incubat- 

 ing the fact that worker-cell jelly and 

 royal jelly for a certain time are the 

 same; and the editor is worrying because 

 Doolittle and others recommend royal 

 jelly for artificial queen-cells in prefer- 

 ence toother food; and wonders if it is 

 because "Doolittle and the others have 

 not yet discovered that the food of three- 

 days-old larva' is the same as that for the 

 larvae of queens." (Gleanings, 638). 

 Doolittle has good reasons, no dotxbt, for 

 his preference, without suspecting him 

 of ignorance of the facts. One reason 

 that is aU-prevailing with me is that with 

 a little foresight the royal jelly can be 

 had in so nuich more generous quantities 

 and convenient form. 



OUTWARD SIGNS OF QUEKNLESSNESS. 



F. W. H. ( Gleanings, 724 ), having 

 found a queen in one of 15 supers remov- 

 ed, wants to learn how one can best find 

 out from which colony the (jueen came. 

 The editor suggests no better way than 

 to go over the colonies till it can be de- 

 termined which one begins the building 

 of queen-cells. This may sometimes be 

 necessary, but, as a rule, if the removal 

 of the queen is known within a day or 

 two, the bereft colonv may be discovered 

 by taking a look at the bees at the fronts 

 of the hives. On the loss of a queen a 

 few of the bees — perhaps I should sa\' a 

 veiy few — at the entrance show the 

 greatest concern, which appears from the 

 rapid racing of individual bees. One 

 runs across the bottom board and looks 

 around the corner of the hive; then others 



