INTRODUCING 
543 
t.ilized, is most difficult. Such queens can 
be introduced to a strong colony by using 
the Miller smoke method or the Smith- 
Chantry plan. Better give them a cell or 
a virgin just hatched, thus saving time and 
vexation; for even should the old virgin be 
accepted, she may be deprived of a leg, or 
be so deformed from rough treatment as to 
become in a large measure impaired for 
usefulness. Under head of Queen-rearing 
are described “baby nuclei;” and, as al¬ 
ready stated, it is much easier to introduce 
any queen, either virgin or laying, to a 
nucleus or weak force of bees than to a 
strong, vigorous colony; so if one would 
attempt to introduce four or five day-old 
virgins, give them to nuclei—the smaller 
and weaker the better. 
INVENTIONS RELATING TO BEE 
CULTURE. —It would be quite impossible 
in the limits of an article in this work to 
record all the inventions relating to bee 
culture; but it is perfectly feasible to in¬ 
clude those that have been adopted, and 
which are in use more or less by the pro¬ 
gressive beekeepers of the country. 
There are four inventions that revolu¬ 
tionized the methods of work with bees, 
and which really form the basis of all mod¬ 
ern methods of management today. First 
and foremost was the invention of movable 
frames by L. L. Langstroth in 1851. No 
one today, either in Europe or this coun¬ 
try, questions Mr. Langstroth’s right to 
the honor of this great invention, for prac¬ 
tically all hives and frames in use today are 
Langstroth. See Frames, Hives and Hive¬ 
making. 
Next followed the invention of comb 
foundation by J. Mehring in 1857. But 
the foundation he made had no side walls, 
and so it remained for Samuel Wagner, 
A. I. Root, and A. Washburn to develop 
the product that is now used with side 
walls. 
The next was the invention of the honey- 
extractor, by Major Francisco Hruschka, 
in 1865. The fourth was the invention of 
a bellows bee-smoker by Moses Quinby. 
There have been a large number of im¬ 
provements that have made the inventions 
of Langstroth, Mehring, Hruschka, and 
Quinby much more workable than they 
were originally. However, it is but fair to 
say that Langstroth came very near mak¬ 
ing his hive and frame almost perfect at 
the very, start; and there are possibly a 
few of the readers of this who would con¬ 
sider the later improvements made in the 
Langstroth frame and hive of doubtful 
value. It is, nevertheless, a fact that the 
old movable frame, as first made by Mr. 
Langstroth, both as regards dimensions and 
style, is still in use all over the world. 
For extracting purposes some of the large 
honey producers will have no other. They 
regard anything in the way of a self¬ 
spacing attachment, as part either of the 
hive or frame, as unnecessary, and a back¬ 
ward step. See Frames, Self-spacing. 
The original comb foundation by Mehr¬ 
ing was a very crude product; and it may 
be questioned whether or not Wagner 
should not share equal honor in the inven¬ 
tion. The great improvements that were 
made in this article had more to do with 
the machinery for making the product than 
the thing itself. A. I. Root did more to 
perfect comb foundation than perhaps any 
other man unless it was his colaborer and 
mechanic, Alva Washburn. He certainly 
introduced it to the beekeeping public. The 
first foundation was turned out on plates, 
and was, therefore, a very crude article; 
but A. I. Root conceived the idea of having 
it made by means of a pair of rolls. This 
suggestion came to him when noticing the 
wet clothes as they came out from a com¬ 
mon wringer in his own home. After con¬ 
sulting his friend and mechanic, Mr. Wash¬ 
burn, a pair of rolls were made, the prod¬ 
uct of which was nearly the equal of any 
comb foundation made on modem ma¬ 
chines. To Mr. Washburn belongs the 
credit of making perfect foundation on 
rolls that were mechanically correct. The 
only improvement made on the Washburn 
mills was in the method of making them, 
by which they could be duplicated, and 
manufactured not by hand but by ma¬ 
chinery, in such a way that every roll is 
perfect. Later improvements were made 
by E. B. Weed, H. B. Blanchard, and H. 
H. Root. 
As regards the invention of Hruschka, 
several machines were made and put on the 
market. The one made by J. L. Peabody 
consisted of a can that revolved without 
gearing. The limitations of this were such 
