2o 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



after the heat, worry and excitement of a 

 presidential campaign; and when he came to 

 read it over afterwards, as we sat around 

 the stove at the liotel in Jackson, the next 

 morning after the Michigan State bee-keep- 

 ers' convention, lie said: "Did I say that 

 about DoolittleV" The reply was: "You 

 certainly did: and it came pretty near being 

 thrown out." "Well," said he, "That's a 

 little too rough, isn't it?" Bro. Doolittle, 

 we beg your pardon. 



MR. WEED AND HIS ARTIFICIAL COMB. 



In answer to an inpuiry asking why sam- 

 ples of comb had not been sent, no stamps 

 returned, and no explanations made to those 

 who had sent postage for specimens of the 

 artificial comb, Mr. Weed replies as follows: 

 Detroit, Mich., Feb. 5, 1889. 



Mr. W. Z. Hutchinson: — 



Dear Sir, I have 

 just returned home and read your letter. 



I admit that letters of explanation ought 

 to have been sent to those sending stamps, 

 but it was simply a neglect, amid a great 

 press of other business. I hnd that, during 

 my absence, machinery .has been completed 

 that is, I believe, absolutely perfect: and, by 

 working late to night, I hope to send you 

 some of the product on the morning train. 



As for Newman's "dig" at the Review, I 

 should like a few lines of space in the next 

 Review for a reply. 



If you can spare a day, after we get to 

 running smoothly, I will pay the expenses of 

 a trip to Detroit, so that, in some future 

 issue of the Review, you can describe the 

 working of the machine. 



Yours Truly, E. B. Weed. 



Friend Weed, if you will send samples of 

 comb, with proper explanations, to those 

 who have sent stamps, we think no further 

 explanation or defense will be needed. The 

 proper reply to' Bro. Newman is a piece of 

 perfect comb large enough to be of practi- 

 cal use. This is the one unanswerable argu- 

 ment with which to meet all opposition. 



large hives. 

 It is impossible to notice, let alone pub- 

 lishing, all the articles on hives that have 

 been received. A. L. Leach, of D wight. 111., 

 very kindly sends an account of his experi- 

 ence with hives of different sizes. His pref- 

 erence is a large hive; and the reasons are 

 that the bees swarm less and more honey is 

 secured. That bees swarm less in large 

 hives we are ever ready to admit, and that 



more honey ^jp»' colony is often secured no 

 one doubts; but that a large hive, one with a 

 large brood-nest the year round, is the one 

 with which to secure the "greatest amount 

 of honey with the least expenditure of capi- 

 tal and labor" is not believed by many of 

 our most practical, dollar and cent bee-keep- 

 ers. The only advantage we can see in 

 large hives is their tendency to prevent 

 swarming: but, unless this tendency is suffi- 

 ciently great to practically prevent swarm- 

 ing, little is gained. If there is sufficient 

 swai'ming to require constant watching by 

 some one, there may as well be many swarms 

 as few. A slight, yes, one-half, decrease in 

 the number of swarms would not comijensate 

 for the disadvantages of large hives. 



WHICH are the best BEES ? 



This seems like an old, hackneyed subject, 

 long since worn thread-bare : but from the 

 many postals that come to this office bearing 

 the above query, it is evident that it may be 

 profitably discussed. As, in the discussion 

 upon bee-hives, it was necessary, before de- 

 ciding upon the merits of a hive, to know 

 for what purpose it was intended, so a dis- 

 cussion in regard to the merits of the differ- 

 ent varieties of bees will be of little value 

 unless the locality and the results desired 

 are considered. The Syrians are great 

 breeders. So long as there is a droi) of 

 honey in the combs they rear brood. In 

 climates blessed with winter's frosts and 

 snows this is an undesirable trait ; but in 

 sunny Cuba, where the honey flow comes in 

 the season corresponding with our winter, 

 this very characteristic proves of value in 

 securing populous colonies at the beginning 

 of the harvest. We believe it was A. W. Os- 

 born who thus reported. The Syrians also 

 till the cells so full of honey, and cap it so 

 poorly, that it gives it a peculiar, dark, watery 

 appearance. In raising extracted honey this 

 is not objectionable. The Cyprians have 

 proved so firey in disposition that they have 

 been almost universally discarded. The Sy- 

 rians have something of the same style, only 

 in a less degree, and, in their purity, are not 

 needed in our Northern states. A few cling 

 to them when crossed with some other va- 

 riety, but we fail to see why, as they have no 

 good qualities not possessed by the Italians. 

 The Review circulates chiefiy in the northern 

 part of the United States, and in Canada ; 

 so let us try and decide what bee is the best 



