The OaUup frame. 131 



afterward the Langstroth (Fig. 43). The advantage claimed 

 for large frames is that there are less to handle, and time is 

 saved ; yet may not smaller frames be handled so much more 

 dexterously, especially if they are to be handled through all 

 the long day, as to compensate, in part at least, for the num- 

 ber ? The advantage of the^hallow frame is, as claimed, that 

 the bees will go into boxes more readily ; yet they are not con- 

 sidered so safeTor out-door wintering. This is the style recom- 

 mended and used by Mr. Langstroth, which fact may account 

 for its popularity in the United States. Another frame in 

 common use, is one about one foot square. I use one eleven 

 and one-fourth inches square. The reasons that I prefer this 

 form are, that the comb seldom breaks from the frame,- the 

 frames are convenient for nuclei and save the expense of con- 

 structing extra nucleus hives, and these frames permit the 

 most compact arrangement for winter and spring, and thus 

 enable us to economize heat. By use of a division board, we 

 can, by using eight of these frames, occupy just a cubic foot 

 of space in spring, and by repeated experiments I have found 

 that a hive so constructed that the bees always cover the combs 

 during the early cold weather, always gives the best results. 

 Dr. Tinker, of Ohio, showed by ample statistics, that in the severe 

 winter of 1882-3 the Gallup frame did prove by far the best. 

 As the honey season comes on more can be added, till we have 

 reached twelve, as many, I think, as wiU ever be needed for 

 brood. This was the size of frame preferred by Mr. Gallup, 

 and is the one used by Messrs. Davis and Doolittle, Dr. 

 Tinker, and many others of our most successful apiarists. 

 That this size is imperative is, of course, not true; that it 

 combines as many desirable points as any other, I think is 

 true. For apiarists who are not very strong, especially for 

 ladies, it is beyond question superior to all others. 



That we shall ever have a uniform frame used by all 

 apiarists, though exceedingly desirable, is too much to expect 

 or even hope. I do not think that there is sufficient advantage 

 in any form to warrant us to hold to it, if by yielding we could 

 secure this uniformity. As will be seen in the British Bee 

 Journal, 1882, p. 243, our British brothers are striving for 

 this, and have adopted a frame eight and one-half by fourteen 

 inches. Our North American Association might move in the 

 same direction. Nor do I think the form and size so material 



