164 
THE AUSTRALIAN BEEKEEPERS’ JOURNAL. 
nuisance became so bad that it was a 
matter of impossibility to move the frames 
except by literally tearing them out piece 
meal, and in one instance we took a full pound 
weight of propolis out of the brood chamber. 
Langstroth hives were nearly as bad, but we 
could get at our frames in this case with a 
lever. 
Our friend is hard upon syrup feeding, 
which is so much used in England and 
America by most of our large beekeepers, 
and we think his objections are not altogether 
reasonable. We quite agree that if honey is 
available, and certainly free from, all sus- 
picion of foul brood poison, it is better than 
syrup for bees, at all events, bees like it 
better ; but in the present days, when bees i 
are kept for profit, and honey can be sold at 
fid. per pound, while good syrup can be made 
for 2d., it will take a good deal of persuasion 
to induce a thrifty beekeeper to give the 
honey when feeding is necessary, especially 
when it is shown by long practice that bees will 
thrive, build comb and breed as well on 
properly made syrup as on honey. Of course, 
if, as Mr. Abram says in his facetious way, 
the beekeeper mixes up some “stuff too thin 
to eat, or too thick to drink,’’ it would be 
objectionable ; but many of even German 
beekeepers now feed on artificial foods, as 
flour-cake or candy, which is certainly “ too 
thick to drink." However, it does not do 
to dogmatize in beekeeping. Some find their 
bees do best on honey ; others say they do as 
well on properly prepared syrup, and pro- j 
bably both are right. For our own part, we 
always give frames of honeycomb when we 
have them to spare ; but we would as soon 
think of giving them arsenic as bought 
honey, the origin of which we know nothing. 
Feeding bees on syrup to keep them alive 
and strong, does not mean feeding them on 
syrup for giving surplus. 
MODERN BEE KEEPING. 
With regard to our articles under this head, 
which are a reprint from the well-known 
“ Handbook for Cottagers,” published by the 
British Beekeepers’ Association, we wish to 
call attention to the fact that for want of il- 
lustrations we are compelled in a few instan- 
ces to depart slightly from the original text. 
We wish to point out also that where the 
word “ sleep” is used, the advice will equally 
to apply to our “ box" or gin-case hives, for 
we believe very few “ skeps” or straw hives 
are used in Australia. Our readers must 
also bear in mind that where the particular 
names of months are given, they refer to an 
opposite season to that belonging to the same 
month in Australia. For instance ; our 
midsummer months are December and 
J anuary, while in England they are J une and 
July. Our swarming time commences 
generally in September, but in England it is 
in June. 
(Original Contributions. 
FERTILITY OF QUEENS. 
FACTS AND FIGURES. 
CONCLUSIONS TO BE DRAWN THEREFROM. 
Perhaps few, if any, of the readers of this 
journal have ever tried or thought of trying 
to find out to almost exact figures the num- 
ber of eggs a queen is laying or able to lay 
within a certain time. The statement, that 
it is about 2,000 per day is so vain and in- 
significant, it is as wrong as right, as mis- 
leading as m fact. A correct answer can only 
be given by taking the circumstances into 
consideration, as circumstances alone direct 
the queen to lay more than a thousand eggs 
a day at one time, less at another, and none 
at all at yet another. What, then, is the 
number of eggs a queen may lay under favor- 
able circumstances within 24 hours ? What 
may cause an increase, what a decrease, or 
its ceasing altogether ? 
Before entering into an explanation on the 
above questions, it is necessary to prove 
what number of bees is justly to be con- 
sidered for a colony most profitable to its 
owner. We find the number by weighing 
them and counting, which weighing, of 
course, is not quite satisfactory and exact on 
account of the bees having more or less 
honey in their body, the weight of which 
cannot exactly be ascertained. I found them 
varying from 4,500 to 5,000 to the pound, 
and this will prove pretty near the mark. 
Taking 5,000 bees to the pound, a swarm of 
40,000 bees would weigh 8 pounds. I 
have weighed many swarms and found the 
{ majority to weigh from 5 to 7 pounds, and 
these hav e usually done the most satisfactory 
work afterwards ; I have also had swarms of 
10 and 104 pounds, but they did not do 
double the work of a swarm of 5 pounds ; I 
I have also sometimes swarms united and 
made them even stronger than the strongest 
single swarm, and their result proved the 
same. They did not prove this course to be 
the most profitable one, and the original 
number of bees was not kept up. I therefore 
had to come to the conclusion that a swarm 
of 5 to 7 pounds was the most profitable, and 
also that the fertility of those queens can be 
taken as standard. More extensive trials 
in that direction have been made by Mr. 
Hannemann, near Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,, 
