20 



ADOPTION OF A STANDARD HIVE 

 FOR NEW ZEALAND. 



We, in New Zealand, in fact, I may- 

 include Australia, were very fortunate 

 in adopting a standard hive right from 

 the start of our career in modern com- 

 mercial beekeeping. It has saved us no 

 end of confusion and expense. Practic- 

 ally the ten-frame Langstroth hive be- 

 came the standard in New Zealand and 

 Australia as soon as I introduced it. 

 made it known through the Press, and 

 manufactured it for sale. Two years 

 after its introduction, that is, in 1880, 

 there were a gottdly number of Lang- 

 stroth hives in use in New Zealand, and 

 early in 1881, quite a number were sent 

 to Australia. 



As several newcomers from England 

 wanted to introduce the British hive 

 they had been used to in the Old Coun- 

 try, and realising that if we did not 

 formally adopt a standard hive at once, 

 and fight against the introduction of 

 others, there would soon be trouble, I 

 broached the subject in the " New Zea- 

 land and Australian Bee Journal " for 

 August, 1883. I pointed out the difficul- 

 ties the English and American beekeep- 

 ers were in through having many sizes 

 of hives in use, and that we ought form- 

 ally declare and adopt some hive as 

 the standard one for New Zealand. Of 

 course, it was a, foregone conclusion that 

 the 10-frame Langstroth would be chosen 

 and it has been the standard hive ever 



STANDARD HIVES IN AUSTRALIA. 

 Very shortly after our formal adop- 

 tion of a standard hive, the question ot 

 following our example cropped up in 

 Australia. I, of course, urged the adop- 

 tion of the Langstroth hive, and wrote 

 strongly in favour of it. Mr. W. Abram, 

 the well-known beekeeper of Parramatta, 

 who had not then been long out from 

 Germany, opposed my suggestion, and 

 advocated the Berlepseh hire, which he 

 had used in Germany. A controversy 

 between us on the comparative merits of 

 each hive took place in the "Sydney 

 Town and Country Journal," lasting six 

 montlis. The result was the "N^iotorian 

 Beekeepers' Association (the only one 

 then in Australia) declared at one of its 

 meetings in favour of the ten-frame 

 Langstroth as the standard liive for Vic- 

 toria, which practically meant for Aus- 

 tralia. 



PATENT HIVE MEN IN AUSTRALIA. 



One of the most impudent attempts to 

 claim a monopoly in the manufacture of 

 movable-frame hives and some other 

 apiary appliances by securing letters 

 patent on them, although they had been 

 invented and in use many years before 

 the patents were issued, occurred in 

 Victoria, Australia. 



In November, 1884, I received a letter 

 from a gentleman residing in Melbourne, 

 directing my attention to certain patents 

 which had been granted on November 

 29, 1882, to one C. J. Lee and S. L. 

 Chapman, also to a prior patent granted 

 to C. J. Lee and James Baker in July 

 of the same year. My correspondent also 

 forwarded a copy of a letter of his which 

 appeared in "The Leader" (Melbourne) 

 of July 26, 1884, pointing out that the 

 articles patented had been in use long 

 before the dates such patents were 

 granted. 



Taking the patents according to 

 priority, the one granted to G. J. Lee 

 and J. Baker in July, 1882, was for per- 

 forated zinc plates to prevent the 

 queens rising into the supers (queen 

 excluders). There were four claims in 

 the patents granted to C. J. Lee and 

 S. L. Chapman in November, 1882, viz., 

 surplus honey frames in movable com- 

 partments (movable frames, containing 

 lib sections), metallic ends to frames 

 (metal ends), metallic plates for the 

 frames to rest on (tin rabbets), and 

 removable bottom boards. 



As the correspondent to "The Leader" 

 pointed out, the movable-comb hive, with 

 frames, sections and other appliances, 

 had been explained, and most of them 

 illustrated in the first edition of Hopkins' 

 "Bee ilanual," published and circulating 

 in Australia in 1881. I think there can 

 be little doubt about the description of 

 the patented appliances having been 

 taken from my manual. 



I published the whole of the corre- 

 spondence, and also the dates and par- 

 ticulars of the invention of each article 

 re-patented, to Jlessrs. Lee, Chapman 

 and Baker in the "New Zealand and 

 Australian Bee Journal" for December, 

 1884. 



A few months later Mr. Herman 

 Naveau, of Hamilton, Victoria, who had 

 purchased his hives from Bagnall Bros, 

 and Co., received the following notice: — 

 "The Australian Apiary and Bee 

 Ranchers Company, Limited.—^Caution to 

 the Public, — As 1 have been informed 



