102 THE AUSTRALIAN 
the old Barossa diggings, there are several 
persons who have large stocks of bees. Most 
of the hives used are the old box hives. I 
believe they yield well, and all are healthy. 
There are other parties, however, who think 
that the new system of bar-framed hives is best, 
and are going in largely for the improved (?) 
article, but, unfortunately, foul brood has got 
into these new apiaries to such an extent that 
it has nearly destroyed several establishments. 
I have only about 20 hives, but these are fine 
strong swarms, with not a particle of foul 
brood. All mine are of the old style box hives, 
and 1 believe that the bar frames are a great 
mistake. True, in a good gum-tree flower 
season, a very large quantity of honey is 
obtained, but, I fancy, at tlic expense of the 
stocks, and the reason I submit is this ; — It is 
not natural ; the bees are allowed no rest. In 
a state of nature the working bees have a spell 
when the hive is full and live longer, but if 
forced to work constantly (and they will work 
so long as their is a comb empty) they arc very 
short-lived. .An unnatural strain then falls 
upon the queen to keep up the population of 
the hive, and the consequence is that the eggs 
have not the full healthy vitality that the 
usual supply would have. A large proportion 
of the grubs have not strength to develop, and 
so die. Foul brood, or the weakly egg and 
sickly grub, are unable to throw off the 
necessary moist exudation as they grow, this 
accumulates, ferments, and rots, and thus 
perish the young bees. Too much haste to be 
rich against nature generally results in 
disaster. 1 have examined into the matter 
pretty closely, and speak from personal ex- 
perience. By the way, I observe in a recent 
issue of the Chronicle, a statement made that 
a party found foul brood in a swarm that had 
settled in the hollow branch of a tree, I 
would like to know how this was ascertained, 
and how they made the necessary manipula- 
tions in such a situation. Whilst on this sub- 
ject, I may mention that their seems to be a 
diversity of opinion as to the quality of tlie 
bar-frame honey. Some say it is very fine, 
but others say that it is much inferior to the 
older honey, that is ripened in the comb ill a 
natural way, and that cannot be acquired in 
any other manner. Then, again, as to the 
keeping properties of bar-frame honey. I saw' 
some hives opened a few days since, and the 
contents appeared like a very thin syrup, and 
the honey in some other tins opened in a dif- 
ferent locality had all become a thick candy.” 
The fact is, the writers in common, we are 
afraid, with a maj ority of beekeepers in Aus- 
tralia, know very little or next to nothing of 
the disease, and probably have never seen it; 
hence the authoritative and dogmatic tone of 
their letters. It is beekeepers of this class 
who make advance in Apiculture so slow, and 
who, if they were listened to, would soon make 
it an industry of the past by encouraging 
pestilence and bad management. In the ■ 
EKEEPERS’ JOURNAL. 
South Australian Register of a late date appears 
the following from the Parliamentary news ■— I 
FOUL BROOD AMONC1 BEES BILL. 
(Third Reading.) 
The Hon. H. E. Bright moved that the Bill I] 
be re-committed, and would read from a note I 
which he had received from Mr. J. Warren, of 
Mount Crawford : — “ I take tlie liberty’ of 9 
pointing out some grave objections to the 
above Bill, and suggest an amendment. The 
1st and 2nd sections make it punishable to 
have hives affected with foul brood after a 
week s notice. Under this every beekeeper 
will be liable to be fined whether his bees are 
suffering from disease or not. Foul brood is 
being constantly produced in beehives ; it is 
simply the young bee dying in its cell before 
coming to maturity, just as young birds die 
in the egg or the young of animals died before 
parturition. ^ The real disease, according to 
the best authorities quoted by the advocates 
of tlie Bill, is a fungus generated in the decay 
of the young bees, or otherwise when the 
quantity is so great as to cause a stench, and 
is beyond the power of the workers to remove, 
just as typhoid fever or other disease germs 
are generated in unclean closets or accumula- 
tions of filth. Who would advocate the aboli- 
tion of closets ? Who can prevent addled eggs 
or death before parturition ? The bees will 
keep their hives clean unless the workers are 
so weakened by death, starvation, cold, &c., 
that they are not strong enough to do the 
work. One of my neighbors placed a frame 
with a lot of foul brood in it in a hive, on 
looking at it three days after the cells were 
cleaned out and not a vestige of foul brood 
could be seen. He took the|putrid matter from 
a fou' brood cell, and put it in cells of virgin 
comb, and in two hours the matter could not 
be found, Mr. Tarlton in his speech says — 
‘ Mr. Cheshire established very clearly his 
position that foul brood was a misnomer. He 
said the name foul brood given in ignorance of 
the nature and scope of the malady is 
manifestly utterly inappropriate ; to say a 
queen bee was suffering from foul broo d 
would be as illogical and ridiculous as talking 
of toothache in the liver. I therefore have 
proposed the name of Bacillus alvei, which 
has at once been accepted in England and 
America,’ May I suggest that Bacillus 
alvei be substituted for foul brood in the 
Bill, and make provision for punishing people 
who persist in keeping hives in such a dirty 
state as likely to breed bncille. If this is done 
I feel sure few would object to it. It is said 
there are hives in an unclean state near Mount 
Barker. If so the Act may be a benefit, but 
if passed us at present every beekeeper will be 
liable to be fined, because they cannot control 
the laws of nature. It will give a handle to 
inspectors who are not always just, and cannot 
fail to check the industry, and will meet with 
the most determined resistance.” He only 
wanted to have the Bill re-committed to carry 
