THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



The + Bee-Keepers' + Review, 



PUBLISHED MONTHLY. 



W. Z. HUTOHINSON, Editor & Proprietor. 



TERMS:— 50 cents a year in advance, two 

 copies for 95 cents; three for $1.35; five for $2.00; 

 ten or more, 35 cents each; all to be sent to one 

 POST OFFICE. In clubs to different post offices, 

 KOT LESS than 45 cents each. 



FLINT, MICHIGAN, JANUARY 10, 1889. 



OBOWDED OUT. 



That is what has happened to several ex- 

 cellent articles. The review that we hoped 

 to begin, in this number, of Mr. Jones' se- 

 ries of articles on " Practical Bee-Keeping," 

 will have to wait until next month. This 

 subject of bee-hives is a large one, as, with 

 all the space that has been given to its dis- 

 cussion, but little more has been done than 

 the shedding of sufficient light to enable us 

 to see in which direction the apicultural 

 hive-finger is pointing. But that is some- 

 thing. 



SECTION SUPEBS AT THE MICHIGAN STATE 

 CONVENTION. 



Section cases were well represented at the 

 last Michigan State Bee-Keepers' Meeting. 

 There was the side-opening case of Frank A. 

 Eaton. H. D. Cutting exhibited his side- 

 opening case. There was a case from Dr. 

 Tinker. W. D. Soper showed a T. super in 

 which the wood separators were about % inch 

 thick. This places the sections so far apart 

 that they may be of the same width all the 

 way round. Our friend Cobb of Grand 

 Rapids was present with his case which may 

 be adjusted to any size, inverted by the case 

 or by the single frame, or the outside rows 

 changed to the inside. 



VENTILATION — COST OF QUEENS — CONTEACTION 

 — THE POLLEN THEOBY. 



We have again to thank Bro. Hill of the 

 Guide for his interest in the Review and its 

 topics of discussion. 



First, friend Barnum, of N. Y., sums up, 

 in a very fair and sprightly manner, the 

 views of our correspondents upon "Ventila- 

 tion." Then the editor remarks that, as the 

 result of theorizing, bee-keepers went too far 

 a few years ago in the matter of ventilation — 

 gave too much — and now there has come a 



re-action, and there is danger of their going 

 too far in the opposite direction. We agree 

 with Bro. Hill in thinking that too much ven- 

 tilation was given in the past, but differ in 

 thinking that the views expressed in the 

 October Review are the result of a re-action. 

 They are conclusions resulting from actual 

 practice, instead of from theorizing, and, as 

 such, will stand the test of time. 



The editor of the Guide objects to our sug- 

 gestions in regard to preventing the accumu- 

 lation of pollen in the brood-nest in the fall. 

 He says queens cost so much that we can't 

 afiford to have no old ones; and that contrac- 

 tion of the brood-nest is an objectionable 

 feature. Queens are not so very expensive 

 when reared in the home-apiary and fertil- 

 ized in the colonies of which they are to be- 

 come sovereigns. Some of our best bee- 

 keepers advocate keeping only young queens, 

 and this upon other grounds than the one 

 under discussion. ''Contraction" is a debat- 

 able subject, but, as we expect to make it 

 the special topic of an early number of the 

 Review, we will postpone all discussion 

 upon this point until then. 



Mr. Hill also has a few words to say about 

 the "Pollen Theory;" but he does neither it 

 nor its author justice when he intimates that 

 Mr. Heddon's bees, fed on sugar, died of 

 dysentery. Mr. Heddon lost sugar-fed bees, 

 in an old cellar, from cold ; but there were 

 no signs of dysentery whatevei: 



mistakes in bee-keeping. 

 It is pleasant to tell of success. Mistakes 

 are mentioned with reluctance. Yet, these 

 acts may be of equal value for imparting in- 

 formation. Mr. J. M. Smith, of Wis., is noted 

 as a horticulturist. The crops of berries and 

 cabbages that he raises are something won- 

 derful. His contributions to the press are val- 

 uable; but we never read one containing more 

 information than the one in which he recoun- 

 ted the mistakes of his horticialtural life. 

 We can easily imagine with what pleasure 

 and profit we could read similar "confes- 

 sions" from our most successful apiarists. 

 We believe that our readers are of the same 

 mind, and we request that each bee-keeper 

 who reads this will look back over his api- 

 cultural life, re-calling the mistakes, and if 

 any are found, the publication of which 

 would lead others to avoid them, let him send 

 us an account of the matter, and we will 

 gather together these accounts, and publish 



