CHAPTER XX.. Calendar and Axioms.

CALENDAR AND AXIOMS.

WORK FOR DIFFERENT MONTHS.

Though every live apiarist will take one, at least, of the three excellent journals relating to this art, printed in our country, in which the necessary work of each month will be detailed, yet it may be well to give some brief hints in this place.

JANUARY.

During this month the bees will need little attention.--Should the bees in the cellar or depository become uneasy, which will not happen if the requisite precautions are taken, and there come a warm day, it were well to set them on their summer stands, that they may enjoy a purifying flight. At night when all are again quiet return them to the cellar.--While out I would clean the bottom-boards, especially if there are many dead bees. This is the time, too, to read, visit, study and plan for the ensuing season's work.

FEBRUARY.

No advice is necessary further than that given for January, though if the bees have a good fly in January, they will scarcely need attention in this month. The presence of snow on the ground need not deter the apiarist from giving his bees a flight, providing the day is warm and still. It is better to let them alone if they are quiet.

MARCH.

Bees should still be kept housed, and those outside still retain about them the packing of straw, shavings, &c. Frequent flights do no good, and wear out the bees. Colonies that are uneasy, and besmear their hives should be set out, and allowed a good flight and then returned.

The colony or colonies from which we desire to rear queens and drones should now be fed, to stimulate breeding. By careful pruning, too, we may and should prevent the rearing of drones in any but the best colonies. If from lack of care the previous autumn, any of our stocks are short of stores, now is when it will be felt. In such cases feed either honey, sugar, syrup, or place candy on top of the frames beneath the quilt.

APRIL.

Early in this month the bees may all be set out. It will be best to feed all, and give all access to flour, when they will work at it, though usually they can get pollen as soon as they can fly out to advantage. Keep the brood chamber contracted so that the frames will all be covered, and cover well above the bees to economize heat.

MAY.

Prepare nuclei to start extra queens. Feed sparingly till bloom appears. Give room for storing. Extract if necessary, and keep close watch, that you may anticipate and forestall any attempt to swarm. Now, too, is the best time to transfer.

JUNE.

Keep all colonies supplied with vigorous, prolific queens. Divide the colonies, as may be desired, especially enough to prevent attempts at swarming. Extract if necessary or best; adjust frames or sections, if comb honey is desired, and be sure to keep all the white clover honey, in whatever form taken, separate from all other. Now is the best time to Italianize.

JULY.

The work this month is about the same as that of June.--Supersede all poor and feeble queens. Keep the basswood honey by itself, and remove boxes or frames as soon as full. Be sure that queens and workers have plenty of room to do their best, and suffer not the hot sun to strike the hives.

AUGUST.

Do not fail to supersede impotent queens. Between basswood and fall bloom it may pay to feed sparingly. Give plenty of room for queen and workers as fall storing commences.

SEPTEMBER.

Remove all surplus boxes and frames as soon as storing ceases, which usually occurs about the middle of this month; feed sparingly till the first of October. If robbing occurs, contract the entrance of the hive robbed. If it is desired to feed honey or sugar for winter, it should be done the last of this month.

OCTOBER.

Prepare colonies for winter. See that all have at least thirty pounds, by weight, of good, capped honey, and that all are strong in bees. Contract the chamber, by using division board, and cover well with the quilt. Be sure that one or two central frames of comb contain many empty cells, and that all have a central hole through which the bees can pass.

NOVEMBER.

Before the cold days come, remove the bees to the cellar or depository, or pack about those left out on the summer stands.

DECEMBER.

Now is the time to make hives, honey-boxes, &c., for the coming year. Also labels for hives. These may just contain the name of the colony, in which case the full record will be kept in a book; or the label may be made to contain a full register as to time of formation, age of queen, &c., &c. Slates are also used for the same purpose.

I know from experience that any who heed all of the above may succeed in bee-keeping,--may win a double success:--Receive pleasure and make money. I feel sure that many experienced apiarists will find advice that it may pay to follow. It is probable that errors abound, and certain that much remains unsaid, for of all apiarists it is true that what they do not know is greatly in excess of what they do know.

AXIOMS.

The following axioms, given by Mr. Langstroth, are just as true to-day as they were when written by that noted author:

There are a few first principles in bee-keeping which ought to be as familiar to the Apiarist as the letters of the alphabet.

First. Bees gorged with honey never volunteer an attack.

Second. Bees may always be made peaceable by inducing them to accept of liquid sweets.

Third. Bees, when frightened by smoke or by drumming on their hives, fill themselves with honey and lose all disposition to sting, unless they are hurt.

Fourth. Bees dislike any quick movements about their hives, especially any motion which jars their combs.

Fifth. In districts where forage is abundant only for a short period, the largest yield of honey will be secured by a very moderate increase of stocks.

Sixth. A moderate increase of colonies in any one season, will, in the long run, prove to be the easiest, safest, and cheapest mode of managing bees.

Seventh. Queenless colonies, unless supplied with a queen, will inevitably dwindle away, or be destroyed by the bee-moth, or by robber-bees.

Eighth. The formation of new colonies should ordinarily be confined to the season when bees are accumulating honey; and if this, or any other operation, must be performed when forage is scarce, the greatest precautions should be used to prevent robbing.

The essence of all profitable bee-keeping is contained in Oettl's Golden Rule: KEEP YOUR STOCKS STRONG. If you cannot succeed in doing this, the more money you invest in bees, the heavier will be your losses; while, if your stocks are strong, you will show that you are a bee-master, as well as & bee-keeper, and may safely calculate on generous returns from your industrious subjects.

"Keep all colonies strong."

APPENDIX.

HISTORY OF MOVABLE FRAMES.

Movable frames have revolutionized bee-keeping, and so out-rank the reaper and mower, and equal the cotton-gin. Few inventions have exerted so powerful an influence upon the art which they serve. Their history will ever be a subject of exceeding interest to bee-keepers, and their inventor worthy the highest regard as the greatest benefactor of our art. In writing their history, I have no personal interest or bias, and am only impelled by a love of truth and justice. I am the more eager to write this history, as some of our apiarists, and they among the best informed and most influential (American Bee Journal, vol. 14, p. 380), are misinformed in the premises. In obtaining the data for this account, I am under many obligations to our great American master in apiculture. Rev. L. L. Langstroth, whose thorough knowledge and extensive library have been wholly at my command.

We are informed by George Wheeler, in his "Journey into Greece," published in 1682, page 411, that the Greeks had partial control of the combs. "The tops" of the willow hives "are covered with broad flat sticks. Along each of these sticks the bees fasten their combs; so that a comb may be taken out whole."

Swammerdam had no control of the comb, nor had Réaumur. The latter used narrow hives, which contained but two combs; but these were stationary. Huber was the first to construct a hive which gave him control of the combs and access to the interior of the hive. In August, 1879, Huber wrote to Bonnet as follows: "I took several small fir boxes, a foot square and fifteen lines wide, and joined them together by hinges, so that they could be opened and shut like the leaves of a book. When using a hive of this description, we took care to fix a comb in each frame, and then introduced all the bees."--(Edinburgh edition of Huber, p. 4). Although Morlot and others attempted to improve this hive, it never gained favor with practical apiarists.

The first person to adjust frames in a case appears to have been Mr. W. Augustus Munn, of England. I have in my possession a letter from Mr. Munn, dated November 9th, 1863, in which he states that the hive "had been in use since 1834." The first printed description of any of his hives appeared in the "Gardener's Chronicle" for 1843. This article was written by a lady, and signed "E. M. W." Its premature publication made it impossible for Mr. Munn to secure a patent in Great Britain. In 1843 he secured a patent in France. The hive patented is fully described in his "Description of the Bar and Frame Hive," published in London, in 1844. There is also a figure (Fig. 111). I copy from the work which is before me, pp. 7 and 8: "An oblong box is formed, about thirty inches long, sixteen inches high, and twelve inches broad. One of the long sides is constructed to open with hinges, and to hang on a level with the bottom. As many grooves half an inch broad, half an inch deep, and about 9½ inches long, are formed 1⅛ inches apart on the inside of the bottom of the box, as its length will admit. At the top are corresponding grooves to those made in the bottom of the box. The bee-frames are made of half inch mahogany, being 12 inches high, 9 inches long, and not more than half an inch broad, sliding into the fifteen grooves formed on the bottom, and kept securely in their places by the upper grooves," and by propolis, the author might well have added. American apiarists need not be told that such a hive would be wholly impracticable. Without bees in it, the changes of weather would make the sliding of the frames very difficult; with the bees inside, the removal of the frames would be practically impossible.

In 1851 Mr. Munn issued a second edition of his book, in the preface of which I find the following: "Having materially simplified the bar-frame hive, by forming the 'oblong bar-frames' into 'triangular frames,' and making them lift out of the top, instead of the back of the bee-box, I have republished the pamphlet." The triangular hive (Fig. 112) is described and figured, and is the same as found illustrated in Munn's "Bevan on the Honey Bee." This hive, although a possible improvement on the other, is costly, intricate, and still very impracticable. In the price-list of J. Pettitt, Dover, England, 1864, I find this hive priced at £3 3s., or about $15.00. From the figure we learn that there were some wide spaces about the frames. These would of course be filled with comb, and render the hives entirely unsuitable for common use. That this hive lacked the essential requisites to success is evident from words penned by the inventor in 1863: "The hive matters little if the pasturage is good." And it is easy to see from the complex arrangement of the frames, and the wide spaces about them, that as Mr. Munn said, referring to his hive, "When left to themselves the bees shut up the shop." Had invention stopped with Major Munn's hive, we should to-day be using the old box hive, and sighing in vain for a better. Neighbour well says (3d edition, p. 129): "Probably the reason of the invention's failure was the expensiveness of the Major's fittings, which make the hive appear more like some astronomical instrument, than a box for bees. Be this as it may, there was no such thing as a frame hive in use in England till 1860."

It would seem strange, that after going so far Major Munn should have failed to give bee-keepers a hive of value. Yet with his view that smoke injured the bees and brood (2d edition, p. 21), we can readily see, that with his hive and black bees, a man would need the skin of a rhinoceros, and nerves of brass, to do much by way of actual manipulation for practical purposes. It has been truly said that "The Huber hive can be used with far greater ease and safety, by a novice, than can Munn's."

It will be seen by reference to "Bee Culture with Movable Frames," published by Pastor George Kleine, Hanover, Germany, in 1853, p. 5, that a druggist by the name of Schmidt, in a work which he published in Freiburg, in 1851, entitled, "The New Bee Homes," describes a hive with the Huber leaves having prolonged tops which hung on rabbets, much as do our frames. These Huber leaves were close-fitting, and so not practical. Kleine regarded this as inferior to the Huber hive, in that the combs must be taken out from above. With a side opening he thinks it would be a material improvement. It is evident from Kleine's work, that he knew nothing either of Munn or his hive.

In 1847, Jacob Shaw, Jr., then of Hinckley, Ohio, published in the Scientific American, March 5th, 1847, p. 187, the description of a hive devised by him. A person who has seen the hive tells me that as described and first used, this hive had close-fitting frames, which rested in a double-walled tin box. By turning hot water into the chamber, the frames would be loosened. We do not wonder that, as Mr. Shaw deposed, he only made one hive, and that he could only persuade one colony of the several which he tried, to accept the situation, and that this one soon perished. He got no surplus, and wisely set the hive aside.

In 1847, the well known agricultural writer, Solon Robinson, suggested in an article published in the Albany Cultivator; a tin hive made up of unicomb apartments which should set close side by side, and be connected by inter-communicating holes. Of course, such a hive would only succeed in the imagination.

M. Debeauvoys published, in 1847, the 2d edition of "Guide de l'Apiculteur," at Angers, France, in which he described a movable comb hive, to meet the practical wants of French bee-keepers. This hive was not only no improvement on that of Huber, but even less easy of manipulation. The top-bar and uprights of the frames were close-fitting to the top and sides of the hive. Says M. Hamet, editor of the French bee paper, in his work, "Cours Pratique D'Apiculture," 1859 edition: "The removal of the frames is more difficult than from the Huber hive, and it has never been accepted by the practical bee-keepers of France." Mr. Chas. Dadant describes this hive, which he once made and used, in the American Bee Journal, vol. 7, p. 197. He says of it: "The hive worked well when new and empty; but after the bees had glued the frames, it was difficult to remove them without breaking the combs. It would have been entirely impossible to remove them at all, without separating the ends of the hive from the frames with a chisel. This hive, which had gained 2,500 proselytes in France, was very soon abandoned by all, and the disciples of Debeauvoys returned to the old-fashioned straw hive." He adds, further, that these hives were disastrous to French bee culture. Once misled by movable frames, they ever afterwards refused them even for trial. Of course Mr. S. S. Fisher, once commissioner of patents, and an expert, could see nothing in this hive, or any of the inventor's modifications of it, to invalidate the Langstroth patent. How grateful all American apiarists should be, that Mr. Langstroth's invention was of a different type.

As already stated, bars were used centuries ago in Greece. Della Rocca, in a work published in 1790, also describes bars as used by him. Schirach used slats across the top of a box with rear-opening doors, as early as 1771. In Key's work, "Ancient Bee Master's Farewell," London, 1796, p. 42, such hives are described, and beautifully illustrated, plate 1, figs. 2 and 3. Bevan, London, 1838, describes on p. 82 a similar hive, with the bars set in rabbets, which is figured on p. 83.

In 1835, Dzierzon, who has been to Germany what Langstroth has to America, commenced bee-culture. Three years later he adopted the bar hive, and although these bar hives were previously of little value to practical apiculture, in his hands they became a most valuable instrument. To remove the combs, the great German master had to cut them loose from the sides of the hives. Yet from his great skill in handling them, his studious habits, and invaluable researches, which gave to the world the knowledge of parthenogenesis among bees, his hive and system marked a new era in German apiculture.

In 1851, our own Langstroth, without any knowledge of what foreign apiarian inventors had done, save what he could find in Huber, and edition 1838 of Bevan, invented the hive now in common use among the advanced apiarists of America. It is this hive, the greatest apiarian invention ever made, that has placed American apiculture in advance of that of all other countries. What practical bee-keeper of America could say with H. Hamet, edition 1861, p. 166, that the improved hives were without value except to the amateur, and inferior for practical purposes? Our apiarists not native to our shores, like the late Adam Grimm and Mr. Chas. Dadant, always conceded that Mr. Langstroth was the inventor of this hive, and always proclaimed its usefulness. Well did the late Mr. S. Wagner, the honest, fearless, scholarly and truth-loving editor of the early volumes of the American Bee Journal, himself of German origin, say: "When Mr. Langstroth took up this subject, he well knew what Huber had done, and saw wherein he had failed--failing, possibly, only because he aimed at nothing more than constructing an observing hive, suitable for his purposes. Mr. Langstroth's object was other and higher. He aimed at making frames movable, interchangeable, and practically serviceable in bee culture." And how true what follows: "Nobody before Mr. Langstroth ever succeeded in devising a mode of making and using a movable frame that was of any practical value in bee culture." No man in the world, beside Mr. Langstroth, was so conversant with this whole subject as was Mr. Wagner. His extensive library and thorough knowledge made him a competent judge. Now that the invention is public property, men will cease to falsify and even perjure themselves, to rob an old man, whose words, writings, and whole life, shine with untarnished ingenuousness. And very soon all will unite with the great majority of intelligent American apiarists of to-day, in rendering to this benefactor of our art, the credit; though he has been hopelessly deprived of the pecuniary benefits of his great invention.

Mr. Langstroth, though he knew of no previous invention of frames contained in a case, when he made his invention, in 1851, does not profess to have been the first to have invented them. Every page of his book shows his transparent honesty, and desire to give all due credit to other writers and inventors. He does claim, and very justly, to have invented the first practical frame hive, the one described in his patent, applied for in January, 1851, and in all three editions of his book.

While the name of the late Baron Von Berlepsch will always stand in the front rank of apiarists, he never gave the world any description of a movable frame hive, until Mr. Langstroth had applied for a patent, and not until the Langstroth hive was largely in use.

It has been claimed that Mr. Andrew Harbison invented and used in his father's apiary, previous to 1851, the Langstroth hive. In the Dollar Newspaper for January 21, 1857, a brother, Mr. W. C. Harbison, who also lived with his father at the time the invention is said to have been made, says: "I will venture the prediction that both Quinby's hive and mine will ere long be cast aside, to give place to a hive constructed in such a manner that the apiarian can have access to every part of the hive at pleasure, without injury to the colony. In this particular both Mr. Quinby and myself have singly failed. The invention of such a hive was reserved for Mr. Langstroth." It is significant that J. S. Harbison, another brother, who was also with his father at the time, in his "Bee Culture," San Francisco, 1861, speaks of the Langstroth hive, p. 149, but not of that of his brother. It has also been claimed that W. A. Flanders, Martin Metcalf, and Edward Townley, each invented this hive prior to Mr! Langstroth's invention. Yet, each of these gentlemen wrote a book, in which no mention is made of such an invention. Well might Mr. Langstroth say, "I can well understand what Job meant when he said, 'O! that my enemy had written a book.'" It is also stated that Mr. A. F. Moon was a prior inventor of this hive. Mr. Moon's own testimony, that he not only abandoned his invention, being unable to secure straight combs, but even forgot all about it, till it was discovered in an old rubbish pile, shows that he did nothing that would, in court, overthrow Mr. Langstroth's claims, or that in the least conferred any benefit upon bee-keepers. Mr. Maxwell, of Mansfield, Ohio, was another who is said to have anticipated Mr. Langstroth. Yet Mr. Maxwell's own son swears that he helped his father make all his hives, and that his father never used a movable frame till after 1851. Solon Robinson thought his brother. Dr. Robinson, of Jamaica Plains, near Boston, made and used movable frame hives prior to 1852. The wife of Dr. Robinson testified that her husband bought a right to use the Langstroth hive, and with it made his first movable frames.

Every claim, both at home and abroad, to the invention of a practical movable frame hive, prior to that of Mr. Langstroth, when examined, is found to have no substantial foundation. All previous hives were plainly inferior to the improved Huber hive as described in Bevan, p. 106. It is a sad blot upon American apiculture, that he who raised it to the proud height which it occupies to-day, should have been shamefully defrauded of the just reward for his great invention. But it gives me the greatest pleasure to state, that by no possible word could I gather that Mr. Langstroth feels any bitterness towards those who seem wilfully to have stolen his invention, while with a mantle of charity, great as is his noble heart, he covers the thousands who either thought he had no valid claim, or else that the purchase of a right from others, entitled them to his invention. As an inventor and writer on apiculture, Mr. Langstroth will ever be held in grateful memory. How earnestly will American apiarists desire that he may be spared to us until he completes his autobiography, that we may learn how he arrived at his great discovery, and may study the methods by which he gleaned so many rich and valuable truths.

* * * * *

LECANIUM TULIPIFERÆ--Cook.

In the summer of 1870, this louse, which, so far as I know, has never yet been described, and for which I propose the above very appropriate name, tulipiferæ--the Lecanium of the tulip tree--was very common on the tulip trees about the College lawns. So destructive were they that some of the trees were killed outright, others were much injured, and had not the lice for some unknown reason ceased to thrive, we should soon have missed from our grounds one of our most attractive trees.

Since the date above given, I have received these insects, through the several editors of our excellent bee papers, from many of the States, especially those bordering the Ohio River. In Tennessee they seem very common, as they are often noticed in abundance on the fine stately tulip trees of that goodly State--in the South this tulip tree is called the poplar, which is very incorrect, as it is in no way related to the latter. The poplar belongs to the willow family; the tulip to the magnolia, which families are wide apart. In Pennsylvania the louse has been noticed on the cucumber tree--Magnolia acuminata.

Wherever the tulip-tree lice have been observed sucking the sap and vitality from the trees, there the bees have also been seen, lapping up a sweet juicy exudation, which is secreted by the lice. In 1870 I observed that our tulip trees were alive with bees and wasps, even as late as August, though the trees are in blossom only in June. Examination showed that the exuding sweets from these lice were what attracted the bees. This was observed with some anxiety, as the secretion gives off a very nauseating odor.

The oozing secretions from this and other lice, not only of the bark-louse family (Coccidæ), but of the plant-louse family (Aphidæ), are often referred to as honey-dew. Would it not be better to speak of these as insect secretions, and reserve the name honey-dew for sweet secretions from plants, other than those which come from the flowers?

NATURAL HISTORY OF THE LECANIUM TULIPIFERÆ.

The fully developed insect, like all bark lice, is in the form of a scale (Fig. 113, 1), closely applied to the limb or twig on which it works. This insect, like most of its genus, is brown, very convex above, (Fig. 113, 1), and concave beneath, (Fig. 113, 2). On the under side is a cotton-like secretion, which serves to enfold the eggs. Underneath the species in question are two transverse parallel lines of this white down, (Fig. 113, 2). One of them, probably the anterior, is nearly marginal, and is interrupted in the middle; while the other is nearly central, and in place of the interruption at the middle, it has a V-shaped projection back or away from the other line. The form of the scale is quadrangular, and not unlike that of a turtle, (Fig. 113, 1). When fully developed it is a little more than 3-16 of an inch long, and a little more than ⅔ as wide.

Here at Lansing, the small, yellow, oval eggs appear late in August. In Tennessee they would be found under the scales in their cotton wrappings many days earlier. The eggs are 1-40 of an inch long, and 1-65 of an inch wide. These eggs, which are very numerous, hatch in the locality of their development, and the young or larval lice, quite in contrast with their dried, inert, motionless parents, are spry and active. They are oval, (Figs. 113, 3 and 4), yellow; and 1-23 of an inch long, and 1-40 of an inch wide. The eyes, antenna (Fig. 113, 5), and legs, (Fig. 113, 6), are plainly visible when magnified 30 or 40 diameters. The 9-jointed abdomen is deeply emarginate, or cut into posteriorly, (Fig. 113, 3), and on each side of this slit is a projecting stylet or hair, (Figs. 113, 3 and 4), while from between the eyes, on the under side of the head, extends the long recurved beak, (Fig. 113, 4). The larvæ soon leave the scales, crawl about the tree, and finally fasten by inserting their long slender beaks, when they so pump up the sap that they grow with surprising rapidity. In a few weeks their legs and antennæ seem to disappear as they become relatively so small, and the scale-like form is assumed. In the following summer the scale is full-formed and the eggs are developed. Soon the scale, which is but the carcass of the once active louse, drops from the tree, and the work of destruction is left to the young lice, a responsibility which they seem quite ready to assume.

In my observations I have detected no males. Judging from others of the bark-lice, these must possess wings, and will never assume the scale form, though Prof. P. K Uhler writes me that the males of some bark lice are apterous.

REMEDIES.

If valued shade or honey trees are attacked by these insatiate destroyers, they could probably be saved by discreet pruning--cutting off the affected branches before serious injury was done, or by syringing the trees with a solution of whale oil, soap--or even common soft soap would do--just as the young lice are leaving the scales. It would be still better to have the solution hot. Whitman's Fountain Pump is admirable for making such applications.

Fig. 1 is slightly magnified; the others are largely magnified.

* * * * *

MOTHERWORT AS A HONEY PLANT.

(Leonurus cardiaca L.)

Perhaps none of our common herbs promises better, as a honey plant, than the one in question. It is a very hardy perennial, and once introduced in waste places, it is sure to hold its own, until it becomes desirable to extirpate it, when, at man's bidding, it quickly lets go its hold, so that it is not a dangerous plant to introduce. The blossoms appear at this place about June 25th, and persist for a full month, and during the entire time are crowded with bees, whatever may be the character of the weather, whether wet or dry, warm or cool, whether the plant is in the midst of honey plants or isolated. We are thus assured that the plant is constantly secreting nectar, and is also a favorite with bees. Rape, mustards and borage seem indifferent to the weather, but are not favorites with the bees. Motherwort, then, has three admirable qualities: It is long in bloom, the flowers afford fine honey at all times, and it is a favorite with the bees. If it could be made to bloom about three weeks later, coming in just after basswood, it would have nearly all the desired qualities. I think that we might bring this about by mowing the plants in May. I am led to this opinion from the fact that some plants which we set back by transplanting in May, are still in bloom this August 10th, and are now alive with, bees, dividing their attention with the beautiful cleome, which, is now in full bloom, and fairly noisy with bees.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANT.

The stalk is square (Fig. 114), branching, and when cultivated, attains a height of some four feet; though, as it grows in waste places, it is seldom more than three feet. The branches, and also the leaves, are opposite (Figs. 114 and 115), and in the axiles of the latter are whorls of blossoms (Figs. 115 and 116), which succeed each other from below to the top of the branching stems. The corolla is like that of all the mints, while the calyx has five teeth, which are sharp and spine-like in the nutlets as they appear at the base of the leaves (Fig. 115). As they near the top, the whorls of blossoms and succeeding seeds are successively nearer together, and finally become very crowded at the apex (Fig. 116). The leaves are long and palmately lobed (Fig. 115). The small blossom is purple.

THE SOUR-WOOD TREE.

The sorrel tree (Oxydendrum arboreum) (Fig. 117), so called because of the acidity of the leaves, is a native of the South, but has been grown even as far north as New York. It often attains no mean dimensions in its native home along the Alleghanies, often reaching upward more than fifty feet, and acquiring a diameter of twelve or fifteen inches.

The flowers are arranged in racemes, are more drooping than represented in the figure, are white, and with the beautiful foliage make an ornamental tree of high rank. The bark is rough, and the wood so soft as to be worthless, either as fuel or for use in the arts. As a honey tree, it is very highly esteemed; in fact, it is the linden of the South.

THE JAPAN MEDLAR.

I have received from J. M. Putnam, of New Orleans, La., flowers of the Mespilus Japonica, or Japan plum. He states that it bears a most delicious fruit, blooms from August till January, unless cut off by a severe frost, and is proof against ordinary frosts. He states that it furnishes abundance of delicious honey, and that, too, when his bees were gathering from no other source.

The Mespilus Germanica grows in England, and is much praised for its fruit. From Mr. Putnam's account, the M. Japonica is unprecedented in its length of bloom. We think two months a long time. We pay high tribute to mignonette, cleome and borage, when we tell of four months of bloom; but this is mild praise when compared with this Japan plum, which flowers from August first till January.

The flowers are in a dense panicle, and were still fragrant after their long journey. The leaf is lanceolate, and very thick, some like the wax plant. I should say it was an evergreen. The apiarists of the South are to be congratulated on this valuable acquisition to their bee forage. I hope it will thrive North as well as South.

* * * * *

THE STINGING-BUG.--Phymata Erosa, Fabr.

This insect is very widely distributed throughout the United States. I have received it from Maryland to Missouri on the South, and from Michigan to Minnesota on the North. The insect will lie concealed among the flowers, and upon occasion will grasp a bee, hold it off at arm's length, and suck out its blood and life.

This is a Hemipteran, or true bug, and belongs to the family Phymatidæ Uhr. It is the Phymata Erosa, Fabr., the specific name erosa referring to its jagged appearance. It is also called the "stinging bug," in reference to its habit of repelling intrusion by a painful thrust with its sharp, strong; beak.

The "stinging bug" (Fig. 118) is somewhat jagged in appearance, about three-eighths of an inch long, and generally of a yellow color; though this latter seems quite variable. Frequently there is a distinct greenish hue. Beneath the abdomen, and on the back of the head, thorax and abdomen, it is more or less specked with brown; while across the dorsal aspect of the broadened abdomen is a marked stripe of brown (Fig. 119 d, d). Sometimes this stripe is almost wanting, sometimes a mere patch, while rarely the whole abdomen, is very slightly marked, and as often we find it almost wholly brown above and below. The legs (Fig. 119, 6), beak and antennæ (Fig. 119, a) are greenish yellow. The beak (Fig. 120) has three joints (Fig. 120, a, b, c) and a sharp point (Fig. 120, d).

This beak is not only the great weapon of offense, but also the organ through which the food is sucked. By the use of this, the insect has gained the soubriquet of stinging bug. This compact jointed beak is peculiar to all true bugs, and by observing it alone, we are able to distinguish all the very varied forms of this group. The antenna (Fig. 121) is; four-jointed. The first joint (Fig. 121, a) is short, the second and third (Fig. 121, b and c) are long and slim, while the terminal one (Fig. 121, d) is much enlarged. This enlarged joint is one of the characteristics of the genus Phymata, as described by Latreille. But the most curious structural peculiarity of this insect, and the chief character of the genus Phymata, is the enlarged anterior legs (Figs. 122, 123 and 124). These, were they only to aid in locomotion, would seem like awkward, clumsy organs, but when we learn that they are used to grasp and hold their prey, then we can but appreciate and admire their modified form. The femur (Fig. 122, b) and the tarsus (Fig. 122, a) are toothed, while the latter is greatly enlarged. From the interior lower aspect of the femur (Fig. 123) is the small tibia, while on the lower edge of the tarsus (Fig. 123, d) is a cavity in which rests the single claw. The other four legs (Fig. 125) are much as usual.

This insect, as already intimated, is very predaceous, lying in wait, often almost concealed, among flowers, ready to capture and destroy unwary plant-lice, caterpillars, beetles, butterflies, moths, and even bees and wasps. We have already noticed how well prepared it is for this work by its jaw-like anterior legs, and its sharp, strong, sword-like beak.

It is often caught on the golden rod. This plant, from its very color, tends to conceal the hug, and from the very character of the plant--being attractive as a honey plant to bees--the slow bug is enabled to catch the spry and active honey-bee.

As Prof. Uhler well says of the "stinging-bug": "It is very useful in destroying caterpillars and other vegetable-feeding insects, but is not very discriminating in its tastes, and would as soon seize the useful honey-bee as the pernicious saw-fly." And he might have added that it is equally indifferent to the virtues of our friendly insects like the parasitic and predaceous species.

We note, then, that this bug is not wholly evil, and as its destruction would be well-nigh impossible, for it is as widely scattered as are the flowers in which it lurks, we may well rest its case, at least until its destructiveness becomes more serious than at present.

* * * * *

THE SOUTHERN BEE-KILLERS.

Mallophora orcina and Mallophora bomboides.

I have received from several of our enterprising bee-keepers of the South--Tennessee, Georgia and Florida--the above insects, with the information that they dart forth from some convenient perch, and with swift and sure aim, grasp a bee, bear it to some bush, when they leisurely suck out all but the mere crust, and cast away the remains. The bee which is thus victimized, is readily known by the small hole in the back, through which the juices were pumped out.

The insects plainly belong to the family Asilidæ, the same that includes the Missouri bee-killer, Asilus Missouriensis, the Nebraska bee-killer, Promachus bastardi, and other predatory insects, several of which, I regret to say, have the same evil habit of killing and devouring our friends of the hive.

The characters of this family, as given by Loew, one of the greatest authorities on Diptera, or two-winged flies, are prolonged basal cells of the wings, third longitudinal vein bifurcate, third joint of antenna simple, under lip forming a horny sheath, empodium, a projection below and beneath the claws (Fig. 131, c), a horny bristle.

The insects in question belong to Loew's third group, Asilina, as the antennæ end in a bristle (Fig. 128), while the second longitudinal vein of the wing (Fig. 129, b) runs into the first (Fig. 129, a).

The genus is Mallophora. The venation of the wings much resembles that of the genus Promachus, the same that contains the Nebraska bee-killer, though the form of these insects is very different. The Nebraska bee-killer is long and slim like the Asilus Missouriensis (see Fig. 108), while the one in question is much like the neuter bumble-bee in form.

In Mallophora and Promachus, the venation is as represented in Fig. 129, where, as will be seen, the second vein (Fig. 129, b) forks, while in the genus Asilus (Fig. 130) the third vein is forked, though in all three genera the third joint of the antennæ (Fig. 128) ends in a prolonged bristle.

One of the most common of these pests, which I am informed by Dr. Hagen, is Mallophora orcina, Wied, (Fig. 126) is one inch long, and expands one and three-fourths inches (Fig. 127). The head (Fig. 128) is broad, the eyes black and prominent, the antennæ three-jointed, the last joint terminating in a bristle, while the beak is very large, strong, and like the eyes and antennæ, coal black. This is mostly concealed by the light yellow hairs, which are crowded thick about the mouth and between the eyes.

The thorax is prominent and thickly set with light yellow hairs. The abdomen is narrow, tapering, and covered with yellow hairs except the tip, which is black. Beneath, the insect is clear black, though there are scattering hairs of a grayish yellow color on the black legs. The pulvilli, or feet pads (Fig. 131, b) are two in number, bright yellow in color, surmounted by strong black claws (Fig. 131, a), while below and between is the sharp spine (Fig, 131, c), technically known as the empodium.

I cannot give the distinctions which mark the sexes, nor can I throw any light upon the larval condition of the insect.

The habits of the flies are interesting, if not to our liking. Their flight is like the wind, and perched near the hive, they rush upon the unwary bee returning to the hive with its full load of nectar, and grasping it with their hard strong legs, they bear it to some perch near by, when they pierce the crust, suck out the juices, and drop the carcass, and are then ready to repeat the operation. A hole in the bee shows the cause of its sudden taking off. The eviscerated bee is not always killed at once by this rude onslaught, but often can crawl some distance away from where it falls, before it expires.

Another insect nearly as common is the Mallophora bomboides, Wied. This fly might be called a larger edition of the one just described, as in form, habits and appearance, it closely resembles the other. It belongs to the same genus, possessing all the generic characters already pointed out. It is very difficult to capture them, as they are so quick and active.

This fly is one and five-sixteenths inches long, and expands two and a half inches. The head and thorax are much as in the other species. The wings are very long and strong, and, as in the other species, are of a smoky brown color. The abdomen is short, pointed, concave from side to side on the tinder surface, while the grayish yellow hairs are abundant on the legs and whole under portion of the body. The color is a lighter yellow than in the other species. These insects are powerfully built, and if they become numerous, must prove a formidable enemy to the bees.

Another insect very common and destructive in Georgia, though it closely resembles the two just described, is of a different genus. It is the Laphria thoracica of Fabricius. In this genus the third vein is forked, and the third joint of the antenna is without the bristle, though it is elongated and tapering. The insect is black, with yellow hair covering the upper surface of the thorax. The abdomen is wholly black both above and below, though the legs have yellow hairs on the femurs and tibia. This insect belongs to the same family as the others, and has the same habits. It is found North as well as South.

HONEY-COMB CORAL.

A very common fossil found in many parts of the Eastern and Northern United States, is, from its appearance, often called petrified honey-comb. We have many such specimens in our museum. In some cases the cells are hardly larger than a pin-head; in others a quarter of an inch in diameter.

These (Fig. 132) are not fossil honey-comb as many are led to believe, though the resemblance is so striking that no wonder that the public generally are deceived. These specimens are fossil coral, which the paleontologist places in the genus Favosites; favosus being a common species in our State. They are very abundant in the lime rock in northern Michigan, and are very properly denominated honey-stone coral. The animals of which these were once the skeletons, so to speak, are not insects at all, though often called so by men of considerable information. It would be no greater blunder to call an oyster or a clam an insect.

The species of the genus Favosites first appeared in the Upper Silurian rocks, culminated in the Devonian, and disappeared in the early Carboniferous. No insects appeared till the Devonian age, and no Hymenoptera--bees, wasps, etc.--till after the Carboniferous. So the old-time Favosites reared its limestone columns and helped to build islands and continents untold ages--millions upon millions of years--before any flower bloomed, or any bee sipped the precious nectar. In some specimens of this honey-stone coral (Fig. 133), there are to be seen banks of cells, much resembling the paper cells of some of our wasps. This might be called wasp-stone coral, except that both styles were wrought by the self-same animals.

GENERAL INDEX.

PAGE

A B C of Bee Culture 22 Abdomen of Insects 48 Air Tubes 28 Albino Bees 43 Alighting-Board 127 separate from bottom-board 127 Alsike Clover--see clover 228 American Bee Journal 19 Amateurs 11 Anatomy and Physiology 48 of bees 71 of insects 48 internal 56 Antenna 51 Ants 271 remedies for 271 function 51 Apiary, where to locate 120 grounds 152 house--see house apiary 255 position of 152 Apiary Grounds 152 arrangement of 152 improvement of 153 screens for 152 shade for 153 Apiculture, adaptation to women 15 as an avocation 15 fascination of 12 for amateurs 11, 15 for specialists 11 inducements to 12 adaptation to women 15 excellence for amateurs 15 improves the mind 17 recreation 12 yields delicious food 17 profits of 13 requisites to 18 conventions 19 enthusiasm 24 experience 18 mental effort 18 persistence 24 prompt attention 23 publications 19 study and thought 18 visits to other apiarists 18 work 11 unsuited to whom 12 Apidæ Family 34 animals of 35 instincts of 34 Apis Genus 38 animals of 40 characters of 38 Apis Mellifica 41 Aristotle 44 Articulate Branch 27 animals of 27 Artificial Colonies 177 advantages of 177 how made 177 one from one 177 one from several 178 Axioms 277

Barberry 225 figure 226 Barnes' Saw 151 Basswood 237 figure of 237 Bees, as fertilizers 220 burying 254 how to procure 118 injuring fruit 220 kind to purchase 119 kinds in each colony 71 place in the animal kingdom 27 quieted 197 by jarring 198 by smoking 198 value of 120 when to purchase 119 who may keep 11 why keep 12 Bee-Bread--see pollen 111 Bee Dress for Ladies 197 Bee Enemies 262 ants 271 bee-hawk 269 bee-killer 267 bee-louse 268 bee-moth 262 king-bird 272 mice 272 spiders 271 tachina fly 270 toads 272 wasps 271 Bee Gloves 197 Bee Glue--see propolis 112 Bee Hawk 269 remedy for 270 Bee-Keepers' Axioms 277 Bee-Keepers' Magazine 21 Bee-Killer 267 figure of 268 remedies for 268 Bee-Louse 268 figure of 268 remedy for 269 Bee-Moth 262 cocoons of 264 figure of 264 eggs of 263 figure of 264, 265 larva of 263 figure of 264 remedies 266 silk tube of 263 figure of 262, 263 Bee Plants--see plants 220 necessary to success 218 list of 221 Bee Veil 196 figure of 196 Bees Angered 195, 201 by quick movements 195, 201 by sweat 201 Bees Subdued 197 Beeswax 106 from what 106 how separated 211 Beggar-Ticks 244 Bergamot 238 Bevan on the Honey-Bee 22 Bevel-Gauge 126 figure of 126 Bevel Joints 126 Bibliography 44, 113 Bingham Hive 140 figure of 140 Bingham Smoker 199 figure of 199 Black Bees--see German bees 41 Blackberries 236 Blood of Insects 57 Body of Insects 48 parts of 48 Bombus 35 Boneset 288 figure of 241 Bonnet 45 Books for the Apiarist 21 A B C of Bee Culture 22 Bevan's Honey-Bee 22, 113 foreign 22 Gray's Botany 244 Huber 113 Hunter's Manual 23 King's Text-Book 52 Langstroth on the Honey-Bee 21 Neighbour's Apiary 23, 118 Quinby's Mysteries 22 Books for the Entomologist 47, 113 Duncan's Transformations of Insects 113 Kirby & Spence 47 Packard 47, 113 Westwood 47 Reports 47 Fitch 47 Harris 47 Riley 47 Borage 231 figure of 230 Bottom-board 127 figure of 128 immovable 129 Box Hives 122 Boxes 142 Barker & Dicer 143 crate for 144 figure of 142, 143 Harbison 142 figure of 143 Isham 142 figure of 143 position of 144 Russell 142 special support for 142 use 142 Box Honey 142 when to secure 215 where to keep 216 Branch 27 articulata 27 of the honey-bee 27 Breathing of Insects 59 Breathing-mouths 59 Buckwheat 242 figure of 242 Button-ball 238 figure of 240

Cages for introducing queen 184 for shipping queen 186 figure of 187 Calendar 274 Carpenter Bees 36 Catnip 232, 240 Chaff Hives 251 Chrysalids 69 Circulatory System 57 Class 28 insecta 28 of the honey-bee 28 Cleome--see Rocky M't'n bee plant 238 Clover 228 Alsike 228 figure of 229 sweet 228 figure of 230 white 228 figure of 228 Clustering Outside the Hive 153 cause of 153 how prevented 153 adding room 176 extracting 188 shading 153 Cocoons 69 of bees 98 College Course 118 Colonies, always strong 119 how moved 187 Columella 44 Comb 108 cells in 110 worker 110 drone 110 figure of 109 for guide 208 how fastened 157, 158 how made 108, 110 transparency of 110 use of 110 what determines kind 110 Comb Foundation 203 American 204 figure of 203 history of 203 how cut 207 how fastened 209 how made 206 use of 207 Comb Foundation Machine 205 figure of 205 inventor of 205 Comb Honey 215 apparatus to secure 141 care of 216 in boxes 142 in frames 144 in what form 144, 215 marketing 215 when to secure 215 Conventions 19 Corn 235 Cotton 236 figure of 236 Cover for Frames 129 Cover for Hives 129 figure of 130, 131 Crates,