JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
August 31, 1882.] 
— 
209 
m 
m la 
HE BEE-KEEPER. I 
THE SOUTH KENSINGTON BEE AND HONEY 
SHOW. 
In reference to this Show, and the list of awards which we pub¬ 
lished last week, we commence our remarks at Class 24—“ for the 
largest and best collection of hives and bee furniture applicable to 
modern bee keeping, no two articles to be alike ”—since, generally 
speaking, it is the one most important to bee-keepers. Messrs. Neigh¬ 
bour & Son of Regent Street obtained here the highest honours. In 
their collection we noticed amongst a large number of other hives 
a pretty specimen termed the Crystal Case Hive, with sections at side 
and space also for chaff-packing or other warm material in winter. 
Root’s American Chaff Hive also appeared to obtain a full share of 
notice ; and Novice’s Extractor, another American production, seemed 
to be generally approved. The bronze medal was obtained by Mr. 
T. B. Blow of Welwyn, Herts, for an excellent collection of modern 
bee appliances. The hives we thought especially worthy of notice, 
well put together, of good sound material, and involving the right 
principles of simplicity, ease of manipulation, and variety of use.. The 
improved feeding-bottle on this bench, which obtained a prize in 
another class, appeared to leave nothing further to be desired in this 
all-important branch of apiarianism—slow or stimulative and copious 
feeding. Mr. Rusbridge, whose various exhibits and apparatus, so 
well known to modern and scientific bee-keepers, need no description 
at our hands. Messrs. Tait and Wooldridge, who rank, we believe, 
as apiarians of note, also worthily competed in this class. 
Having briefly noticed this most important department of the Exhi¬ 
bition, we return now to the classes in numerical order, 
the first three of which are devoted to bees of the several 
different varieties, Messis. Neighbour taking first in 
Class 1 with a finely marked stock of our old friends 
the Italians. This race appears to have undergone some 
change of late years, in appearance at least, since those 
we remember as being introduced by Mr. Woodbury 
some twenty years ago were certainly of lighter colour 
and smaller in size than the modern variety. We be¬ 
lieve, however, this larger darker race is unsurpassed 
in the most desirable traits of honey-gathering, fecun¬ 
dity, and gentleness of disposition. Messrs. Blow and 
G. Bertoli of Varallo-sesia, Italy, well deserved their 
positions (second and third) for their bright specimens 
of this beautiful insect. 
Class 2 was for English bees only, which, like the old 
English rat, is, we fear, doomed ere long to extinction, 
so difficult is it even now, owing to the introduction of 
the foreign varieties, to obtain a stock of the pure old 
English black bee. There were only two competitors 
here—Messrs. Blow and Neighbour, first and second, 
and whose exhibits to our eyes were of that brownish 
tint which speaks of foreign blood notwithstanding 
their uniformity of colour. 
In Class 3, for any other variety than Italian or 
English, Mr. Blow was again champion (first and se¬ 
cond) with fine stocks of the too-little known Carnio- 
lians and Cyprians, the former a large black bee with 
white hairy bands around the abdomen, and said to be 
extremely prolific and an excellent worker ; the latter 
one of the most beautiful, if not the best, of all varieties, 
but at present considered by many the most irritable 
and revengeful of all, and utterly heedless of smoke. 
It may be that it requires to be “ educated ” to English 
notions and manipulation, when assuredly it will be¬ 
come the “ bee of the futufe,” and this we say advisedly. 
Another beautiful stock of Carniolians secured for their 
owners, Messrs. Neighbour, third place. These bees 
were all exhibited with their queens in observatory hives. 
Next on the list are the hive classes, of which there were six. 
First, Observatory (Class 4), there being seven entries, and nothing 
requiring special notice except Messrs. Neighbour’s first-prize hive, 
embracing both novelty and a new principle, of which we give an 
engraving (fig. 34). The hive proper consists of a mahogany box 
about 2 feet long, and of the usual width for frames. These frames 
slide on metal runners, and can be moved backwards and forwards 
with the hands at the openings along the sides. Across the centre 
is an open oblong space about 2 inches wide, surmounted by a glass 
case to allow of the ascension of one frame of comb. Any one of the 
frames separately can be brought under this glass case. Two rods 
are then lowered, and catch two hooks with which each frame is pro¬ 
vided. By turning the windlass above, the frame of comb with bees 
adhering is slowly raised for observation and as quietly lowered and 
passed to the other side of the centre, thus providing space for the 
examination of the next comb in a similar manner. The queen may 
thus be readily li interviewed ” and the bees remain in a perfectly 
natural state. 
The glass case revolves, in order that the light may be caused to 
fall upon the object desired. The bees may be kept in this hive all 
the year round, since a division-board is used for contracting space 
during the winter months, and in summer frames containing sections 
are placed near the brood nest. 
The remaining hives in this class demand no special notice, as 
involving any new principle or novelty of construction. The second 
and third-prize hives, and Messrs. Abbott’s highly commended one 
were rightly placed. We regret that the same remark will not apply 
to Class 5, “ Moveable-comb Hives, with facilities for harvesting 
honey, and arrangements for winter use, price unlimited.” We have 
always imagined that utility was the object to be kept in view in the 
selection of a hive for general use, and that the prizes should go to 
those hives best calculated to advance apiculture and to create an 
impetus in its favour ; but upon what principle the first-prize hive in 
this class was awarded the silver medal we are at a loss to conceive. 
For ourselves we should have placed it last in the class of seventeen 
entries. First, its principle was that of the old and exploded Giotto 
system with its closed frame ends, so well calculated for receiving 
propolis and cruelly crushing its inmates, a principle which has long 
been discarded on the continent of America and in other countries— 
wherever, indeed, bee culture has advanced beyond the state of in¬ 
fancy. Placed upon a lofty iron stand—while advanced bee-keepers 
place their hives, if not upon the ground, as near to it as possible— 
most complicated in all its parts, with no price attached, we were 
not surprised on inquiry at the Secretary’s office on the last day of 
the Show at being unable to learn either the price at which or the 
maker of whom we could procure a specimen, and at being informed 
that no previous inquiries had been made as to price or maker. May 
we suggest to the Committee the desirability of an increased staff of 
Judges on future occasions? It was evidently impossible for two 
gentlemen to do full justice to eleven classes, six of them being large 
hive classes, in the time assigned to them. The second-prize hive was 
remarkable for its simplicity of construction. Mr. Hooker's third- 
prize hive deserved a higher place; and Messrs. Blake, Blow, and 
Dines by no means obtained their deserts, as we considered the hives 
shown by these exhibitors to be second to none in their general 
utility, ease of manipulation, moderation in price, and solidity of 
material and workmanship. We regret that want of space forbids 
our entering more into detail as regards these excellent specimens of 
W 7 hat a modern hive should be. 
In Class 6, “ For Frame Hives, price limited to 15s.,” Messrs. Dines 
were facile princeps with their double-walled hive, affording every 
facility for harvesting comb honey in side sections and upper racks, 
their hive being remarkably cheap at 15s. Messrs. Best and Blow also 
well earned their position of second and third with hives of similar 
construction. We thought this an excellent class, there being t wenty- 
one entries all of superior workmanship; indeed, for such hives a 
few years ago we must have paid from 30s. to £2 each, so good a 
work has the Bristol Association effected in the supply of really good 
hives at moderate prices during the few years of its existence. Mr. 
Blake obtained here a commendation, and several others might well 
have shared his good fortune, especially Messrs. Neighbour, Baldwin, 
and Green, the latter for a hive on the doubling principle for obtain- 
Fig. 34.—Neighbours’ Prize Observatory Hive. 
