44 THE BEE keeper's MANUAL. 



It appears to me that these facts constitute all the links in 

 a perfect chain, and demonstrate beyond the possibility of 

 doubt, that unfecundated queens are not only capable of lay- 

 ing eggs, (this would be no more remarkable than the 

 same occurrence in a hen,) but that these eggs are possessed 

 of sufficient vitality to produce drones. Aristotle, who 

 flourished before the Christian era, had noticed that there 

 was no difference in appearance, between the eggs produ- 

 cing drones and those producing workers ; and he states 

 that drones only are produced in hives which have no queen ; 

 of course the eggs producing them, were laid by fertile 

 workers. Having now the aid of powerful microscopes, 

 we are still unable to detect the slightest difference in size 

 or appearance in the eggs, and this is precisely what we 

 should expect if the same egg will produce either a worker 

 or a drone, according as it is or is not impregnated. The 

 theory which I propose, will, I think, perfectly harmonize 

 with all the observed facts on this subject. 



I believe that after fecundation has been delayed for 

 about three weeks, the mouth of the spermatheca becomes 

 permanently closed, so that impregnation can no longer be 

 effected ; just as the parts of a flower, after a certain time, 

 wither and shut up, and the plant is incapable of fructifica- 

 tion. The fertile drone-laying workers, are in my opin- 

 ion, physically incapable of being impregnated. However 

 strange it may appear, or even improbable, that an unim- 

 pregnated egg can give- birth to a living being, or that the 

 sex can be dependent on impregnation, we are not at 

 liberty to reject facts, because we cannot comprehend the 

 reasons of them. He who allows himself to be guilty of 

 such folly, if he seeks to maintain his consistency, will be 

 plunged, sooner or later, into the dreary gulf of atheism. 

 Common sense, philosophy and religion alike teach us to re- 



