42 
THE niVE AND IIONEY-BEE. 
Aristotle noticed, more than 2,000 years ago, that the 
eggs which produce drones are like the worker-eggs. 
With the aid of powerful microscopes we are still unable 
to detect any dift'erence in the size or appearance of the 
eggs of the queen. 
These facts taken in connection, appear to constitute a 
perfect demonstration that unfecundated queens are not 
only able to lay eggs, but that their eggs have sufficient 
vitality to produce drones. 
It seems to me probable, that after fecundation has 
been delayed for about three weeks, the organs of the 
queen-bee are in such a condition that it can no longer be 
effected ; just as the parts of a flower, after a certain 
time, wither and shut up, and the plant becomes incapa- 
ble of fructification. Perhaps, after a certain time, the 
queen loses all desire to go in search of the male. The 
fertile drone-laying workers would seem to be physically 
incapable of impregnation. 
There is something analogous to these wonders in the 
“ aphides ” or green lice, which infest plants. We have 
undoubted evidence that a fecundated female gives birth 
to other females, and they in turn to others, all of which 
without impregnation are able to bring forth young; 
until, after a number of generations, perfect males and 
females are produced, and the series starts anew 1 
However improbable it may appear that an unimpreg- 
nated egg can give birth to a living being, or that sex can 
depend on impregnation, we are not at liberty to reject 
facts because we cannot comprehend the reasons of them. 
He who allows himself to be guilty of such folly, if he 
aims to be consistent, must eventually be plunged into 
the dreary gulf of atheism. Common sense, philosophy, 
of droncB, and given to bees which have neither queon nor brood of any kind, 1 
believe that queens, workers, and drones, may bo raisod from them. 
