Any two Class A.

Any three Class A.

Any four Class A.

.$1.65 2.30 2.95 Any one Class A, one Class C.. 1.35 Any one Class A, two Class C.. 1.70 Any two Class A, one Class C.. 2.00 Any two Class A, two Class C. 2.35 Any two Class A, one Class B. 3.00 Any one Class A, one Class 3.. 1.75 Any one Class A, two Class 3.. 2.50 Any two Class A, one Class 3.. 2.40 Any two Class A, two Class 3.. 3.15 Any one Class A, one Class 4.. 2.00 Any one Class A, two Class 4.. 3.00 Any two Class A, one Class 4.. 2.65 Any two Class A, two Class 4.. 3.65 Any one Class A, one Class 5.. 2.25 Any one Class A, two Class 5.. 3.50 Any two Class A, one Class 5.. 2.90

Any two Class A, two Class 5.. 4.15 Any two Class A, one Class 7.. 3.40 Any two Class A, two Class 7.. 5.15 Any one Class A, one Class S.. 3.00 Any two Class A, one Class S.. 3.65 Any two Class A, two Class 8.. 5.65 Any two Class 3.. 1.85 Any three Class 3.

Any one Class 3, one Class C.. Any one Class 3, one Class A.. 1.75 Any one Class 3, one Class 4.. 2.10 Any one Class 3, one Class 5.. 2.35 Any two Class 3, one Class B.. 3.20 Any two Class 4. 2.35 Any three Class 4 3.35 Any four Class 4. 4.35

Any one Class 4, one Class C.. 1.70 Any one Class 4, one Class A.. 2.00 Any one Class 4, one Class 5.. 2.60

Any one A. Any one B. Any one 4.

2.60

1.45

Any three Class B. Any four Class B.

3.05 4.40 5.75

Any two Class B, two Class A. 4
Any two Class B, one Class 3.. 3
Any two Class B, two Class 4.. 5
Any two Class B, one Class 4.. 4.
Any two Class B, two Class 4.. 5
Any two Class B, one Class 5
Any two Class B, two Class 5
Any two Class B, one Class 7 4.
Any two Class B, two Class 7.. 6
Any two Class B, one Class S.. 5
Any two Class B, two Class S.. 7
Any two Class 7.
Any three Class 7
Any two Class S.
Any three Class 8.

bar

fine

5

3.3

Act

Effect of the Pure Food Law

When we were in the honey-bottling business, a few years ago, we sold to a number of the wholesale grocers. Recently we received the following letter from one of them:

GEORGE W. YORK & Co.

Gentlemen:-The Pure Food Law enacted by Congress, taking effect Jan. 1, 1907, provides severe penalties for dealers who handle articles of food or drugs adulterated or misbranded.

In accordance with the provisions of the law, which exempts from prosecution those who procure a proper guaranty, we are requiring all from whom we purchase articles of food or drugs to execute a proper guaranty, and enclose herewith our regular form. It is essential that all blank spaces be properly filled in, and that the signature be in accordance with the directions on the form. Please duly execute and return promptly to us. Very truly yours, ROCKWOOD BROS. CO.

1. Must be signed with full name of individual. 2. If a firm, sign the firm name followed by name of partner executing document.

If a corporation, must be signed by proper officer, and corporation seal attached.

It seems that wholesale grocers do not mean to take any chances in the matter of handling any adulterated or misbranded goods hereafter. They know the Pure Food Law has teeth in it that are sharp, and that the Law will be enforced to the letter.

A new day for pure honey is apparently dawning. We look for a greatly increased demand for it hereafter, and believe that the prices will soon be advancing. What beekeepers should do now is to let the people know the special food values of honey through the newspapers and magazines. To many, such information would be "news," indeed.

We are expecting, in the very near futuresay 2 or 3 years-to see such a demand for honey that it will take every pound produced, within 6 months after the close of the honey harvest each year. Bee-keeping is not overdone. But general consumption of pure honey has been "underdone" for years, on account of adulteration and misbranding.

Let the National Pure Food Law have its chance, and then the producers of pure honey will have their chance, for which they have been waiting so long.

Love in the heart is better than honey in the mouth.-Proverb.

Vol. XLVII-No. 1

Irish Bee Journal and Age of Queens

Exception was taken in these columns to the teaching of the Irish Bee Journal in favor of "having every season, a young queen of the previous year's rearing, to head each colony," as that was understood to mean that the right thing would be to replace every queen when a year old; and it seemed an unsolvable puzzle to understand why the Irish Bee Journal should attempt to fortify its position by quoting authorities which plainly advocated that a queen was good for 2 years' work. The solution of the puzzle is now at hand. Our Irish contemporary says in the December number:

The question between us is, What is meant by a queen of the previous year's rearing?" Let us see. Take the case of a queen born on May 1, 1906. On April 30, 1907, she will be a year old. Does Mr. Maguire teach that she must then be killed? By no means. Let us go farther. On Sept. 30, 1907, she will be 1 year and 5 months old. Must she then be killed? No. She is still "a queen of the previous year's rearing." On April 30, 1908, she will be 2 years old, but still " a queen of the previous year's rearing.' " Her year began not on Jan. 1, 1906, but on May 1, 1906. She is safe from the headsman, so far. Even if we allow that her year began on Jan. 1, 1906, 4 months before her birth, she will answer Mr. Maguire's requirements up to Dec. 31, 1907, when she will be 1 year and 8 months old. We, therefore, claim for our contributor that, at the very least, he is free of the charge of having taught that "each queen when it becomes a year old should be destroyed," and is, thus far, in strict agreement with the authorities.

It makes one the least bit dizzy to understand how a queen 2 years old can be a "queen of the previous year's rearing," for in this locality the phrase "a queen of the previous year's rearing " is generally equivalent to "a last year's queen;" and until the foregoing quotation appeared it never occurred to us that there was any question between us as to the meaning of the phrase.

This, however, is a very small matter, and it is a real pleasure to know that there is no greater difference between us than a different understanding of the meaning of a few words. Not knowing before this that there was any different understanding as to the meaning of words, of course no exception was taken in that direction. The Irish Bee Journal may charge us with thick-headedness in not understanding correctly the English language

but when it understands that we were honestly of the opinion that it was advocating that no queen should ever be allowed to live until 2 years old, it may possibly absolve us from the charge of hypercriticism in objecting to such advocacy. It is a thing to be desired to be in accord so far as possible with our bright contemporary.

Shipping Comb Honey

It

We were recently requested to call and examine a shipment of about 160 cases of comb honey that was received from a Wyoming bee-keeper by a Chicago honey-dealer. was fine alfalfa honey, put up in the usual 24pound shipping-cases, and then two of the cases were fastened together by light strips at the corners, thus making each package between 50 and 60 pounds. That was all the preparation made to ship that honey perhaps 1500 miles.

Well, it arrived just as any experienced shipper of comb honey would expect-fully half of the combs broken out of the sections.

We do not find that particular shipper's name among the readers of the American Bee Journal, or he would have known better than to ship comb honey in the way he did. Doubtless he doesn't read any bee-paper. But he probably has lost enough on that one shipment of honey to pay his subscription to all the bee-papers in this country for the next 25 years.

We have so often published explicit directions for preparing comb honey for shipment that it would seem hardly necessary to tell it again, but we find that on account of the many new readers that are constantly being added to our list, it is well to repeat important directions that, if heeded, may mean the

Some San Antonio Pictures, taken by Mr. Fred W. Muth, of Cincinnati, Ohio, appear on the first page. The upper one is a view of San Antonio, taken from Market Hall where the National convention was held. The lower picture represents 5 weary beekeepers who were resting at the side of a clump of banana bushes. We only wish we could show the beautiful, broad, green leaves as they really appear. We had never seen bananas growing before, but there are plenty of them around San Antonio.

San Antonio is a Spanish-American city of some 70,000 population. It has many things of great historic interest. Several very ancient missions are located within a few miles, and The Alamo, right in the heart of the city, is a spot that few visitors fail to see. Within

its walls it was, during the war with Mexico, that less than 200 United States patriots held at bay some 4000 soldiers under Santa Ana, and although a mere handful in The Alamo, they slew about 1500 of Santa Ana's men before they were overcome and every one of their number killed.

Several of the Northern bee-keepers had their kodaks with them, and "took" many objects of interest in and around old San Antonio, which pictures will no doubt be greatly prized by their owners, as it was a trip and visit long to be remembered.

An Announcement has been received at this office of the marriage at Medina, Ohio, on Dec. 26, 1906, of Miss Carrie B. Root, youngest daughter of A. I. Root, and Mr. L. W. Boyden, manager of the A. I. Root Company's New York City branch office. This is the second "combination" of the kind, another daughter of A. I. Root having married Mr. A. L. Boyden, an older brother of "L. W.'s," some years ago. "A. L." is secretary of the A. I. Root Co.

Our sincerest congratulations are hereby extended to Mr. and Mrs. L. W. Boyden, and wishes for a long and happy voyage through life together.

How Many Colonies to Be-come Well-to-Do?

BY C. P. DADANT.

On page 880, (1906), Mr. Doolittle asks,. "How many colonies should we keep to become well-to-do?" and requests an answer from Dr. Miller, Hutchinson, myself, or others. On page 964, (1906), H. H. Moe reminds us of this question, and gives his views.

It is quite a long time since I "sparred" with Mr. Doolittle. I am not one of the "sparring" kind, unless I can see some gross error to redress, and the present subject is too indefinite to give any one a fair chance for discussion.

Perhaps the best thing I can do to answer the question is to cite my own experience. Mr. Moe says that each of us has what he calls a "prop" in addition to the bees, to keep us going. In the early '70's I had no such prop. It is true, we were rearing queens, and selling a few. But is not this legitimate bee-keeping? Must the bee-keeper sell only honey? Is not the sale of colonies or queens a legitimate part of beeculture? For a number of years, I had nothing else. I can remember several seasons when we harvested from 40,000 to 50,000 pounds of honey. How many colonies did we keep? From 150 to 600. The manufacture and sale of comb foundation was just an accident-a result of conditions. We had bought a mill to make up our own wax, and it turned out that we could work our neighbors' wax and give them better satisfaction than any other, and so the business was built. But bee-keeping as a business was my principal ooccupation for some 15 years, and as I have already said, in the American Bee Journal, there was a time, when, if any one else had been entrusted with the care of any of our apiaries, I would have expected those bees to be entirely ruined, I got bravely over this notion quite a while ago.

How many colonies must we keep to become well-to-do? Why, it depends upon the apiarist, on the location, on the methods followed, on our greater or less ability to manage our affairs, etc. It takes a less number of colonies, when running for comb honey, than when producing extracted honey; but those colonies require more care. It takes less bees in a good locality than in a poor one, and yet the bee-keeper is more likely to keep many bees in a good locality than in a poor one. Locality is certainly a very important matter in securing a well-to-do occupation. In the alfalfa plains of Colorado, among the

mesquite brush of Texas, in the sagecovered hills of California, the bee-keeper will keep just as many colonies as he can care for, and will become wellto-do, if he exercises judgment. But how many colonies can he keep? That depends entirely upon his skill, his ambition, his wit, his health.

I have seen bee-keepers who would spend two hours in overhauling half a dozen colonies, and I have seen others who could tell you the condition of 25 hives in the same length of time. Yet the slow man might succeed as well as the quick man, if his needs were no greater than his speed. Let two men start in bee-keeping in this State. Let one of them be located among the cornfields, the wheat and timothy fields, and let the other be in close proximity to a large dairy farm with a hundred acres of pasture in which clover abounds. Do you not see that the latter will have a much better opportunity, all other things being equal, to become well-to-do, than his less fortunate brother?

But take two men in similar locations. Let one of them watch his 100 colonies daily, supply their needs as soon as discovered, replace worthless queens, keep out worthless drones, attend to all details minutely; and let the other keep three times as many bees, and pay but little attention to them, and the latter is as likely as the former to succeedprobably more likely.

I think I have said enough to show that it is impossible to give a stated number of colonies of bees as either required or sufficient to render their owner well-to-do. So I throw the question back for Mr. Doolittle to answer, though I feel certain that his reply will be very similar to mine.

But should we encourage or discourage bee-culture? I do not think we have the choice. We are writing for bee-papers. The readers are keepers of bees, and they are entitled to know from those who endeavor to teach them, their very best thoughts, their most experienced recommendations. I have read complaints from people who think there are too many bee-keepers, and who would make it a crime for any one to encourage beginners. Those persons would make a failure in any avocation. If we were to believe them, there are too many doctors, too many lawyers, too many mechanics, too many farmers. But this is not true. There are not too many farmers as long as there is an acre of land that remains uncultivated. There are not too many bee-keepers as long as honey is wasting for want of harvesting bees. There are drawbacks, bad seasons, in every pursuit, but wheth

er we

are farming, or keeping bees,

Good Season-Methods of Making Increase

BY F. L. DAY.

The season of 1906 was a fairly good one in this locality in spite of the fact that basswood, which is usually our chief source of surplus, was almost a total failure. A late frost appeared to kill most of the buds so that only a few trees blossomed. White clover, on the other hand, was unusually abundant and yielded well.

My 28 colonies were increased to 43 full ones, besides 4 queen-rearing nuclei. I secured 2,600 pounds of honey, all but 80 pounds being extracted. For the nuclei, I used regular 10-frame hives with a partition in the middle, thus leaving room for 4 frames on one side and 5 on the other. My idea was to take one frame of brood with adhering bees and the queen from each of these nuclei and put in any colony where needed. This was the theory, but in practice I got only a very few laying queens from these nuclei during the whole season; but by placing choice queen-cells in West cell-protectors, with the spiral cage attached, and then hanging these between the frames of the 4 nuclei, I secured plenty of fine virgin queens. These were then introduced wherever needed, with fair success.

In making my increase of 15 colonies, I used both the nucleus and Alexander plans. From 5 colonies using the nucleus plan I secured II new colonies and 515 pounds of honey. Four colonies run by the Alexander plan gave me 4 new colonies and 475 pounds of honey. The nucleus plan gave me 220 per cent increase and 103 pounds of honey per colony. The Alexander plan gave only 100 per cent increase and 118 pounds of honey per colony.

The 4 queen-rearing nuclei were made from one of the 5 colonies used for increase. They would probably have produced enough honey if used for that purpose, to have made the 5 original colonies produce as high an average as the 4 worked on the Alexander plan. This makes the two plans about equal for honey-production, with the nucleus plan giving over double the increase that the Alexander plan did. Had we had our usual amount of basswood honey, the nucleus plan would have been far ahead in honey-production as well as increase, just as it was last year.

The Alexander plan undoubtedly has merit, but in this locality the lower story left on the old stand almost always becomes a most persistent swarmer, even though the upper story be removed 5 or 6 days after the preparations of the

colony. What we want to know about these matters is the truth without favor to any man's plan or hobby. Because one man's way is good for him in his own locality, it does not necessarily follow that every bee-keeper in all our broad land should be considered ignorant or stupid because he does not have so good success with the plan in question.

I notice that Dr. Miller's bees were cellared on Nov. 19; mine were put in on the 20th. Last year we both put them in the same day, that is, on Nov. 29. I am sorry he could not have had so good a crop in proportion to his large number of colonies as I did from my small number. I always enjoy his writings in the American Bee Journal and Gleanings, and hope they may be continued many years. I also have his book. I hope we may all have a prosperous season next year. Detroit, Minn.

Best Size of the PoundSection

BY L. V. RICKETTS.

Having read with great interest the article by Mr. T. K. Massie, page 783 (1906), on the subject of "Best Size of Honey-Section," I will again attempt to write on the same subject. Mr. Massie and I, as well as some others, have for some time been advocating the use of a section large enough so that when fairly well filled with separatored honey will weigh an average of 16 ounces. The one now in most general use the 44x44x1% bee-way section-weighs an average of only 14 2-3 ounces when filled as above stated.

Mr. Massie rather favors a plain section, to be used with some form of separator furnishing the bee-way. From the experience that I have had with both bee-way and plain sections, I prefer the former. The fence-separator costs more than the slotted wood, and as Mr. Massie says, "Some of them are very flimsily made, and do not last long."

However, it is results that we want, and in this case a heavier section of honey is the result that we are after, and it matters but little whether we use a bee-way or a plain section in obtaining it. The size, weight, and thickness of the comb in the sections are the main things to be considered.

After having very carefully considered the matter, I have concluded that a comb 138 to 11⁄2 inches thick is the best for section honey. With a bee-way section 17% inches thick, used with slotted wood separators, we will get combs of the above thickness. As stated by me in previous articles, and as proven by experiments made during the season just past, I have come to the conclusion that the 44x48x1% bee-way section (all things considered) is the best size of honey-section, and will come as near to giving us an average of 16 ounces of separatored honey as we are likely to get

When writing on this subject of the weight of sections and selling honey by the piece or pound, page 633 (1906) among other things, Editor. York says,

"Every little while, some one to whom the question is new appears on the scene with what he thinks is a satisfactory solution of the troublesome problem, and says, The whole thing is easy; just adopt that size of section which shall weigh an exact pound, and then it will make no difference whether the section is sold by the piece or pound." To this Mr. York says, "But when he attempts to produce a ton of honey with 2000 sections, each weighing an exact pound, he finds himself running against a snag." Our goood Editor concludes by saying that the present object was only to show "that to find a section of such size that it shall always weigh an exact pound is one of the things that may be dreamed of, but never attained in actual practice.' My only objection to the above is that it appears to convey the idea that those who are advocating the use of a section larger than the ones now in general use, are expecting to get a section in which the bees will always store an exact pound of honey. This, however, is not the case. Here are the facts:

The sections now in most general use, when fairly well filled with separatored honey — sections

that would grade No. 1, as to filling-do not average more than 14 2-3 ounces. Now the question is, Would it not be better for both the producer and consumer, if beekeepers in general would adopt a section which when filled as above would average about 16 ounces each, or 2000 such sections to weigh a ton, or a very few pounds more or less, instead of being 150 to 200 pounds short in weight, as is the case with the sections now in general use? There is no use to say it can't be done, for it can. The question is, Would it be best to make such a change? If best, then what size of section should we adopt?

After having very carefully considered the matter from many standpoints, I have come to the conclusion that there is no better size of section than the 44x48x1% bee-way section; or for those who prefer a plain section and fence separator, the 44x4%x11⁄2 plain section will give the same results. Either of the last-named sizes of sections should give us a comb 13% to 11⁄2 inches thick, which, as before stated, is as near the right thickness for section honey as we could desire.

Pullman, Wash.

First Things for the BeeKeeping Novice

BY G. M. DOOLITTLE.

"I am a beginner in bee-keeping and have been persuaded to take the American Bee Journal, and in it I see that you sometimes answer questions if they are sent you. I wish you would tell us through the Journal's columns what you consider the prime thing a novice or a beginner in bee-keeping should know first.

What is the main thing in beekeeping necessary to know?" - COR

RESPONDENT.

There are very many things in beekeeping which are considered of first importance, and the novice should un

derstand all of these, if he or she would be successful.

66

Perhaps the first thing that should be done by any beginner would be the reading of some one of the many good books on bee-keeping, such as "Langstroth on the Honey - Bee," Root's "A B C of Bee-Culture," Cook's Bee - Keepers' Guide," Quinby's "Practical Bee-Keeping," etc. Having procured one of these books, carefully read it two or three times till the whole is as familiar to you as a nursery rhyme, from beginning to end, when you are ready to subscribe for, and read intelligently, one or more of the several good bee-papers published in America. Now, don't think that this is unnecessary to success, for it is necessary that you have some knowledge of the first principles of bee-keeping before you start out with the bees, if you are to take first rank as an apiarist.

Having gotten so far, I will tell you one of the many other things you will need to know, for on this hangs very much of that which will bring prosperity. In nearly all localities where bees can be kept there are certain plants and trees which give a yield of surplus honey at a certain time of year, while, aside from this, there is little more honey obtained by the bees than is needed to supply their daily wants. Some localities give a surplus at three stated periods, others at two, while the majority give only one such yield. Hence it must be apparent to even the novice, that if such a yield (or yields) pass by without any surplus, none can be obtained during the season. From this it will be seen that, in order to be a successful apiarist, a person must have a knowledge of his locality, and also know how

to

secure the laborers (bees) in the right time, so they can be on hand when the honey harvest is at its best. Failing to do this, there is little or no profit in apiculture, and my main reason for writing on this subject is that those who read may obtain the best results from their bees.

Practically, first, then, we must have a thorough knowledge of the first principles of bee-keeping; and, second, we have the location.

Here in Central New York our honey crop comes mainly from basswood, which blooms about July 3d to 12th, and lasts from 10 days to 3 weeks, according to the weather while it is in bloom. In other localities in this State white clover is the main crop, coming in bloom June 15th to 20th; and again in others, buckwheat, yielding nectar the last of August, while a few apiarists are blessed with a yield from all three. But as a larger part of those living in the Northern States have a yield of honey from basswood, I will speak of that as the harvest in illustrating what I wish to do. Bear in mind, however, that it devolves on the reader of this to ascertain by careful investigation just when and what is the source of nectar from which his surplus honey comes, so as to work accordingly.

After having determined from what and when we may expect our harvest of honey, the next step is to secure the bees in just the right time for that harvest. If you have a field of grain to cut, you hire the laborers just when the