An Australian.
_London, 12th August, 1864._
P.S. I have never had an opportunity of keeping bees in England. I
shall look for your promised manual, as I hope some day I may be
able to have some of my favourites to care for. I may add, my father
procured our original stock from Tasmania, in the common straw hive,
a bit of pierced tin fastened over the entrance. One system I do not
see alluded to, which we found answer very well, when we wished, for
any cause, to take the old comb and start the bees afresh. We used in
the early dawn to place the full hive over an empty one, covering all
with a large cloth, and then beat the top hive steadily, not roughly,
with a stick. Very soon the queen would take refuge in the lower box,
when a board was slipped between, and the upper old hive removed. The
bees (the few that loitered behind the queen) soon left the honey to
join their friends: at night the new hive was carried to the site of
the old one, and turned up upon its own board. We always had cross
bars of wood on the hives, upon which the swarm at first clung.
Taylor's and Wood's "Manuals of Bee-keeping" are exceedingly good.
Richardson's is very full. Lardner's Treatise in the "Museum of Science
and Art" well deserves the attention of the reader.
I do not profess to have struck out any original methods of constructing
hives or treating bees. To the science of apiculture I have contributed
nothing. All I profess to do is to give plain, practical directions
for the successful management of bees, chiefly from observation and
experience.
I am persuaded there has been much useful and instructive matter in my
letters, because I have received a few very ill-natured communications.
One of them (not the worst) I insert, as a specimen of the reception my
little work is doomed to expect. But perhaps the writers may repent of
their intentions, and recover the sweet temper they seem to have lost.
August 15.
Sir,--I have read very attentively the letters in _The Times_ about
bees, and am convinced that the American gentleman is _right_,
and that much of what _you_ say is mere old woman's twaddle. Your
nonsensical rant about loyalty to the queen-bee (in _these_ days, when
loyalty to _kings_ and _queens_ is utterly and very properly extinct),
and your raving against radical reform (so much wanted in _all_
matters), both give evidence of anility and failing intellect.
I shall act on my conviction by ordering the _American_ book on bees
for myself and friends, and I shall use all my literary influence
(which is _considerable_) in preventing the circulation of _your_
poor trumpery twopenny-halfpenny bee-papers.
A Non-believer in the "Bee-master"
of Tunbridge Wells.
P.S. I am no American, but I sympathise with Messrs. Bright and
Cobden. I rejoice at the downfall of the Danish monarchy; and I would
not fight, _under any circumstances_, either for king, queen, princes,
or peoples--not foreign peoples at least, I look on _loyalty_ as rank
humbug. Kings must behave better before we can respect or love them!
In this work I have purposely left out all notice of a variety of hives
as ingenious as they are disliked by bees. Some apiarians have expended
all their talent in making tortuous entrances, worrying homes, and elegant
residences for the queen and her subjects. They seem to estimate their
success by the extent of their departure from simplicity. They merge
the useful and convenient in the elegant and complex. But the less the
bees are plagued by intricate and arduous arrangements in the interior
of their residences, the more comfortable and contented they feel, and
the more efficiently they work. It is on this account I have written
so favourably of the Ayrshire hive. It is simple in structure, and the
parallel openings in the roof of the stock hive introductory to the super
are far more liked by the bees than a round central hole, while the
facility of removing a super in the honey harvest is perfectly charming.
The comb in the super is never or rarely connected with the comb in
the stock hive, and, therefore, needs no cutting with zinc plates. A
screw-driver gently introduced loosens the propolis, or a table-knife
may be employed to cut it all round the lower edge of the super, and the
proprietor has only to lift it off and carry it away on a deal board.
I can easily see that had I praised several ingenious contrivances for
the residence of bees, I should have provoked fewer charges of ignorance
of modern apiculture. I repeat, I have read much on the subject; but my
recommendations are not the results of theory or imagination, but of
practical knowledge and of careful watching.
The best hop-garden is that which grows the most and best hops; the best
mill is that which grinds most corn; and the best hives are those in which
is deposited the largest amount of the best honey.
By all means let us have observatory hives for scientific investigations;
but what the cottager requires is plenty of produce, with the least tax
on his toil and pocket. Hence this work is drawn up, not for scientific
apiarians, but for all who wish to enjoy a pleasant and profitable
employment.
I must tender my best thanks to Messrs. Neighbour, of Regent-street,
London, and to Mr. Pettitt, of Snargate, Dover, for their permission to
copy such of their woodcuts as I thought it useful to describe or to
suggest amendments on.
I may also add, that in using the name, "_The Times_ Bee-master," I avail
myself merely of the title given me by the countless correspondents who
did me the honour to write me either directly or indirectly through the
editor of _The Times_.
In reprinting my letters to _The Times_, I must here notice an alteration
I think expedient. I felt it right to reply to a very injudicious and
extreme letter which appeared in that paper. I did so playfully, and with
kindly feeling. But the correspondent I thus replied to seems to have
viewed it as a personal attack. Under the inspiration of very irritated
feelings he wrote another letter to the Editor of _The Times_, which
was very properly refused admission. But he was kind enough to send
it to several papers, in which he published it, prefacing it in one
with controversial remarks so far removed from the courtesies of fair
correspondence, that it ceased to be possible to hold any further argument
with him. I am really very sorry that a gentleman I never saw, and do not
yet know whether he is a clergyman or layman, should have so passionately
interpreted remarks made by me in perfect good-humour. I offer him every
apology that is due for being misunderstood. In order to avoid any such
contingency again, I have omitted his name, and have substituted "Your
Correspondent."
I may also add, that when I sent my letters to _The Times_ I had not
the remotest idea of composing a book on the subject. Having other and
absorbing work to attend to, I have been able to devote spare hours only
to a very pleasant work, undertaken at the request of many, and dedicated
to the service of all.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]