572 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ December 24, 1885. 
it reproduced itself soonest, which proved that heat was more 
favourable towards its development than cold, especially when 
there was much moisture present in the hive. After these 
discoveries I made a radical alteration in all my hives by 
giving more ventilation and more room; and taking the hint 
given by “ E. S.,” a Dumfriesshire clergyman, about carbolic 
acid being a quieter and disinfectant, 1 am glad to say that 
ever since my apiary has had an almost entire immunity 
from the disease. That foul brood is not common and 
natural to a hive, but accidental, I firmly believe ; if it were 
the former it would be contrary to all nature, and bees would 
consequently very soon become extinct, because they could 
not rid themselves of it. There is nothing in nature but has 
been provided with some means of self-preservation against 
common enemies. 
Notwithstanding all that has been written on the subject 
the cause of the disease is still problematical. Some say it 
is in the honey, others the pollen, while others point directly 
to the germ theory, which I believe to be the effect rather 
than the cause. I am also of the opinion that its origin must 
be sought for in the two first-named ingredients, and take for 
proof that I am correct in that in the hundreds of hives that 
have been cured by the “purgatorial” process described by 
“ A Eenfrewshire Bee-keeper.” Although it was my opinion 
at one time that foul brood might be communicated by a 
queen whose organs were infested by germs in a state of 
development suitable for rapid reproduction, I do not enter¬ 
tain that opinion now, because a queen whose organs are 
diseased cannot survive long, owing to the rapid waste of 
animal tissue brought about by the presence of bacilli. Eggs 
would cease to be laid, and the hive would either perish or 
a young queen would have either to be supplied by the bee 
master or bees, after which the disease would go on unabated. 
What is, then, the cause of foul brood ? It is a change that 
is undergone in the food of the larvas, depriving it of the power 
of sustaining life. How these changes so destructive to life 
are brought about are best explained in the following example. 
Aheap of fresh grass i3 laid before a cow in good health 
and in milk. She eats it, and in a few hours it is digested, 
and part of it secreted as milk and blood, which nourishes 
the body, sustaining life and giving heat to the animal. If 
the cow is allowed to suckle her calf it will not only live but 
grow rapidly on Nature’s food when taken in a natural way ; 
but if a portion of the same cow’s milk be drawn from her 
and set aside for a time under certain states of the atmo¬ 
sphere, a change takes place, and if that milk be given to 
another calf, instead of it acting as food will act as a poison, 
and the calf will die. That is a fact, and we see the same 
occurring often amongst the human family when meat in an 
unwholesome state has been taken—wholesome to-day but 
poison to-morrow. A similar change in the food of the larvte 
is, I believe, the cause of foul brood. The food of the larvse 
is composed of honey, pollen, and water, which singly may 
be wholesome, but when mingled through some previous 
transition from overheating or other cause prejudicial to the 
contents of the hive, bacilli of some form become active, 
and the mischief is done. 
There is one thing of importance in connection with the 
queen and economy of the hive which I think will help to 
solve the question of foul brood. In all my experience I 
never knew eggs prevented from hatching through the pre¬ 
sence of disease, owing to so many eggs being deposited by a 
queen or queens, and which are never hatched. Some people 
may differ from me, but I have satisfied myself on that 
point. If eggs contained bacilli I think many of them 
would never hatch. In fact, it has been observed that queens 
in hives affected with foul brood are liable to deposit not 
only healtliy-looking eggs, but many of them, which brings 
me to a point to consider the whole question of egg-laying. 
Until the fertilisation of a young queen she is not attended to 
much by the workers, but is allowed to feed herself. Imme¬ 
diately after fertilisation she receives much attention, and 
is lavishly fed by the bees. Now, what is this food composed 
of ? Not of honey alone, I should think, but similar to that 
required for the lame. I do not think a queen could pro¬ 
duce eggs at all, nor the great number required, besides 
keeping up the tear and wear of the body, on honey alone. 
We often hear people speaking of feeding bees to promote 
breeding, but without pollen it has no effect, though some 
deny this. The queen has always to be fed, but where pollen 
is absent no eggs are laid, nor does she show signs of a 
desire to lay; but when fed by the bees she cannot prevent 
it, and in that state drops many eggs, showing she cannot 
control it. This control belongs entirely to the bees, and 
illustrates well how they economise the eggs by feeding 
sparingly early in the season, increasing the feeding as the 
year advances, and withholding it altogether in the fall. If 
queens could voluntarily bring on laying without extra pre¬ 
pared food they would never cease laying until they were 
entirely exhausted. When bees are fed at an untimely 
season it hastens the death of the queen. When a queen is 
fed with pap made from the contents of a diseased hive it 
may account for the presence of bacilli in her body. 
I think the whole question of foul brood lies in a nutshell. 
It is brought about by some change in the nature of both 
honey and pollen, or in the pap if placed too early in the cell; 
but when a hive is once affected the disease may be commu¬ 
nicated by touch. It may either be acute or chronic, and 
when in the latter state may exist for years in a hive 
unfavourable to its development before it breaks out with 
virulence. But in either case the bee-keeper will study his 
own interest best, as well as that of his neighbour, if he 
stamps out the disease by destroying the contents of the 
hive and subjecting the bees and queen to a rigid purgatorial 
process, allowing sufficient time to elapse so that both bees 
and queen will have exhausted the contents of their stomachs 
before putting them into their permanent hive. When this 
treatment was properly performed I never knew a single case 
of failure. 
The boiling of honey taken from an infected hive does 
not prevent it communicating the disease afresh. I have 
expressed my candid opinion on the cause of the disease, but 
I shall be glad if anyone will bring forward evidence to prove 
or refute my arguments. 
Ekfatum.— At page 505, first column, last line but one, 
“than a dozen ” should be “than half a dozen.”— Lanark¬ 
shire Bee-keeper. 
TRADE CATALOGUES RECEIVED. 
James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, London.— Catalogues of Garden and 
Flower Seeds, Roses, Fruit Trees, and Chrysanthemums. 
B. S. Williams, Upper Holloway, London, N. —Catalogue of Flower and 
Vegetable Seeds. 
William Etherington, Swanscombe, Kent. —List of Chrysanthemums. 
Lawson Seed ancl Nur?ery Company (Limited) Edinburgh .—Catalogue 
of Forest and Ornamental Trees, Shrubs, ifc. 
Chr. Lorenz, Erfurt. — Catalogue of Flower and Vegetable Seeds 
( illustrated). 
Webb & Sons, Wordsley, Stourbridge. —Spring Catalogue for 1888 
(illustrated with coloured plates). 
H. ifc F. Sharpe, Wisbech. —Wholesale Catalogue of Garden and Agri¬ 
cultural Seeds. 
%* All correspondence should be directed either to “The Editor” 
or to “ The Publisher.” Letters addressed to Dr. Hogg or 
members of the staff often remain unopened unavoidably. We 
request that no one will write privately to any of our correspon¬ 
dents, as doing so subjects them to unjustifiable trouble and 
expense. 
Correspondents should not mix up on the same sheet questions relat- 
