(Journal continued from 5 pages forward. This and following page skipped)
August 1st, 1864. In spring of 1860 had Dr. J. Leidy measure bees from a stock
[inserted: about] 20 years old and bees from a colony of the previous year, no difference in size in favor
of the younger colony. I notice [inserted: 1st] that young bees just hatched are much smaller than when a few
days old, 2nd, that they are much smaller than the cells they are bred in, 3rd, that if a
cell is too small for the perfect development of a worker, it must be too small to allow the
queen to insert her abdomen for laying an egg, 4th, the dwarf bees referred to some days ago
had shallower cells. This, however, will go to show that cells might be in such a state
that the bee has not its proper development. Those dwarf bees have grown very considerably,
far more it seems to me in proportion than workers of normal size. 2nd. Yesterday
we had a sprinkle splendid showers passing all around us. At 6 AM we had a
nice little shower, thank God. Sent off a queen by mail. Shall confine
with two nails on either side the cylinder of honey, and put up about
half a dozen bees only with the queen. Like much the plan of putting a
small section of brood comb on top of one of the frames when hive may be queenless
found nine queen cells on such a section this AM. Am increasingly pleased
with putting small pieces of comb with eggs, etc. , in the corners or sides of frames. Can
get such without damaging large combs by cutting about half an inch from their
bottoms, and need not keep queens for hatching in nuclei after height of the season is
over. Find many cells made on small pieces of comb. Noticed this PM that
my outdoor queen nursery was almost deserted by the bees. (The cages have been usually covered
with such masses of bees as to be hidden from sight) The unimpregnated queens as usual all
starved, the others living, these cages lay on the piece of joist on which the back legs
of the hive rest, back of the ventilator and [inserted: a little] under the hive. Yesterday suspecting that the
colony was queenless I gave them brood, and find today a number of queen cells well advanced. 
This the reason of their almost deserting the caged queens. Found 40 (forty) sealed queens
and some five or six unsealed larvae had perished, on one comb. Good stock of pure
Italians had been deprived of its queen. Young one from queen cell left them, removed before
she became fertile, and frame of brood from another stock given. Never had so many before,
even when queen cells on many combs. (3rd) Dew last night, (cooler) the 1st for several weeks. 
In putting queen cells on the top of frames after caging or removing queen often find them destroyed
by the bees, much oftener it has seemed to me than when put in cages or other
places inside the hive on the frames. May it not be that the bees feel that a queen cell
ought not to be without the frames. Shall notice results taken say ten or more each
way. A fertile queen from an impure mother very dark and exceedingly large, its
motions also seemed to me to be much swifter than those of queens usually are. Her colony
had Dzierzon queen cell given but began others, these were destroyed. Later a few more were
made, queen killed in one by just hatched queen, was al so enormously large. Shall take
a [inserted: large] colony deprived of queen cells, give small corner pieces of comb with few eggs to see