88 
THE AUSTRALIAN BEEKEEPERS’ JOURNAL. 
swimming' about, whilst strings of them are 
frequently met with attached to one another, 
end on, presenting what is termed the lepto- 
tkrix form. These rod-like bodies are the 
bacillus alvei, or specific germ of “foul 
brood.” They are very minute, measuring 
about l-7,0001h of an inch in length, with a 
breadth of t -2 1,000th. In the course of time 
the fat globules and the blood discs become 
used up, and the germ changes in its appear- 
ance, becoming shorter and thicker, and of an 
ovoid shapes the rods all disappear, giving 
place to these spores. To the naked eye the 
grub has changed to the dark, sticky, coffee- 
colored substance known so well, unfortunately, 
as advanced ■* foul brood.” Messrs. Cheshire 
and Watson Cheyne cultivated numerous 
samples of this in gelatine and other media, 
extending the process in series ; after many 
cultivations some sterilised milk was inocu- 
lated from the last test tube, and in a short 
time developed the smell and other character- 
istics of " foul brood.” Portions of a healthy 
frame of brood were sprayed with this liquid, 
whilst other parts were protected; wherever 
it fell upon the larvae they became badly 
diseased, but those not touched by the spray 
remained quite healthy. The August number 
of the Royal Microscopical Society’s Journal for 
1886 contains a most interesting and ex- 
haustive paper by Messrs. Cheshire and Cheyne 
on the life history of this germ, and members 
will be much interested in following out the 
numerous experiments. 
The methods and remedies for dealing with 
“ foul brood ” are very numerous, but they 
may be divided into three great classes : 
1. Disinfection of hive and combs without 
destruction. 
2. Destruction of hive and contents by fire. 
3. Removal of combs and providing clean 
hive. 
1. It will be readily understood how re- 
luctant a man is to sacrifice the beautiful 
combs that he has been at such pains to secure, 
and burn up an expensive hive. We may, 
therefore, expect to find most of the remedies 
in this division. They are plentiful enough, 
and embrace such items as coffee, camphor, 
eucalyptus oil, corrosive sublimate, phenol, 
salicylic acid, and a host of others. 
The method so frequently advocated, of 
spraying combs with phenol, salicylic acid, Ac., 
cannot, in my opinion, be too strongly con- 
demned, for whilst the combs are undergoing 
the operation robber bees are carrying off the 
infected honey, and a more certain way of 
spreading the disease cannot be imagined. 
Were this process successful in the results 
attained, something might be said in its favor, 
but I doubt whether anyone has yet shown a 
permanent cure in any single instance. Phenol 
(1 in 200), salicylic acid (1 in 80), and corro- 
sive sublimate (1 in 20,000) have been used in 
this way. The disease will certainly be checked 
and may disappear, but it is to be feared only 
to break out again and run its course through 
the apiary, whilst the unfortunate beekeeper 
is lulled into a false sense of his security. The 
silk linings in the cells from which young bees 
have emerged must necessarily be difficult to 
disinfect, and I think most beekeepers will 
agree with me that it is quite impossible to 
effectually, and with any degree of certainty, 
cleanse such combs of the lurking germs of 
“ foul brood.” 
Lumps of camphor on the bottom-board have 
been t ried. The disease is said to be checked 
somewhat, but not cured, and the bees, not 
liking the strong smell, cover the substance 
with propolis. Bertrand’s fumigator merits 
passing notice for its ingenuity. In this a 
gramme of salicylic acid is gently evaporated 
over a small lamp, and the nozzle of the 
apparatus inserted in the entrance ; the 
vapour thus reaches all parts of the hive. The 
process is a failure. 
One of the earliest ideas for combating the 
disease was the removal of the queen. 
Dzierzon’s method is given in the following 
extract: — “When the malady makes its 
appearance in only two or three of the 
| colonies, and is discovered early (which may 
j readily be done in hives having moveable 
combs), it can be arrested and cured without 
damage or diminution of profit. To prevent 
the disease from spreading in a colony there 
is no more reliable and efficient process than 
to stop the production of brood , for where no 
i brood exists none can perish or putrefy. The 
disease is thus deprived both of its ailment 
I and its subjects. The healthy brood will 
emerge in due time, and the putrid matter 
remaining in a few cells will dry up, and be 
removed by the workers. All this will 
certainly result from a well-timed removal of 
the queen from such colonies.” 
In Heddon’s book a modified process is 
given : — ■" Tire first step taken was the 
immediate destruction of the queens of all 
infected colonies. Nine days afterwards all 
the queen cells were removed, and this was 
repeated six days later, shaking the bees 
from every comb to make sure that none were 
overlooked. All were now hopelessly queen- 
less. A frame of eggs and just-hatching 
larvae was given them, allowing each colony 
to rear its own queen, the object of this being 
to give the bees ample time to clean up their 
combs before the young queen began to lay. 
If any diseased larvae remained in the cells 21 
days after the destruction of the old queen I 
carefully removed it with the head of a large 
pin. By this process there was a period of 
about 35 to 40 days with no eggs being 
deposited in the combs, and developing no 
larvae to feed the disease. Of the 23 colonies 
thus treated the disease reappeared in only 
two, and the queens of these were mated with 
black drones, and I am confident some germs 
of the disease remained in these combs. A 
repetition of the above process eradicated the 
