292 SOME MORE NOTES ON MR. NUTT'S BOOK ON BEES. the silver boxe wherein the wafer gods used to lye, and finding one of them there, being loth, belike, that hee should lye abroad all night, did not cast him away, but laid him under a hive: whom the bees acknowledging, advanced him to an high roome in the hive, and there in stead of his silver boxe, made him another of the whitest waxe: and when they had so done, in worship of him, at set houres they sung most sweetly beyond all measure about it: yea, the owner tooke them at it at midnight, with a light and all. Wherewith the bishop being made acquainted, came thither with many others; and lifting up the hive, hee saw there neere the top a most fine boxe, wherein the host was laid, and the quires of bees singing about it, and keeping watch in the night, as monkes doe in their cloisters. The bishop, therefore, taking the host, carried it with the greatest honour into the church: whither many resorting, were cured of innumerable diseases." The conclusion which the author necessarily inferreth thereupon is better than all the rest:-"Ex his necesse dicamus in eucharistia verum Christi corpus esse." This "blessed hive," Mr. Nutt observes, at first sight, may probably appear a piece of complicated machinery." But what at second sight? I will venture to answer for every person who has read or may read Mr. Nutt's description "just as complicated as before!" I have read the description of every steamengine which has appeared in the Mechanics' Magazine ever since its first publication, and, with the assistance of the accompanying plates, could always understand the machine described as well as a person not being a professed or scientific mechanic could be expected to do; but although I have read the description of the "observatory hive" ten times over, I am still as much in the dark as to what constitutes its peculiar excellence, as I was before I possessed Mr. Nutt's book. I am almost tempted to believe Mr. Nutt did not intend that the reader should understand his description; it has certainly as much the air of a deliberate piece of mystification as any thing I ever met with. I must, however, return my thanks to Mr. Nutt for one piece of information he has given of great importance, which is, that in writing the description of this "grand," this "blessed" hive, he did not consume the midnight oil, but used "a tallow candle of his own making, stuck in a telescope candlestick, with a square foot!" The directions for stocking with bees this observatory hive are too diffuse to remark on; but I cannot avoid noticing the pertinacity with which Mr. Nutt maintains his assertion, that two hives of bees will quietly unite on being put together, and become as one family. The observatory hive, in summer, consists of two distinct families-one inhabiting the topsy-turvy part, and the other what is properly the observatory or part to peep into. A piece of mechanism resembling the telescope candlestick, used by Mr. Nutt when writing the description of it, keeps the two families completely separated during the summer; but on a slide being withdrawn in the autumn, the bees in the observatory part are said to quit their summer residence and join their topsyturvy neighbours, who, strange to tell, quietly unite with them: the united bodies continuing henceforward, according to Mr. Nutt, to labour as one family. I have before observed, and again repeat, that they will do no such thing without fighting. Their combats, in such cases, are carried on with all the animosity of two hostile tribes of Indians-a fact well known to every person who is the least acquainted with the habits of bees. The only farther notice I shall take of Mr. Nutt's" grand" or "blessed" hive, is to mention that the thermometer, which he had previously taught us to believe was an indispensable instrument in the humane management of the honey bee, is dispensed with in this as well as in the topsy-turvy hive. Are we to infer from this that it is a matter of no consideration whether the bees in either of these hives are treated humanely or not? I am now come to the chapter on fu migation, which appeared in the Mechanics' Magazine, by which I was enabled, previously to possessing Mr. Nutt's book, completely to demolish every pretension he could possibly have to call himself the discoverer of that process, although he arrogates to himself all the merit of it. I refer to my letter inserted in the Mechanics' Magazine of the 11th Jan. last, in which I proved that he had copied the whole of his directions how to perform the operation, verbatim, from the work of Mr. Thorley, which no other SOME MORE NOTES ON MR. NUTT'S BOOK ON BEES. person, to use the language of the learned lord," save Mr. Nutt," would have done, without mentioning the source from whence he obtained the information. But this is not all. I am now able to prove that fumigating bees was a common custom 150 years before even Mr. Thorley wrote his book. I possess an elaborate work, written by that profound scholar and learned physician, Dr. John Gerard, called his "Herbal," my edition of which was printed in 1597, and I shall extract from it what is said respecting the very fungus Mr. Nutt uses for his newly discovered process of fumigation. From this it will appear that Mr. Nutt and his apiarian pupils, both patrician and clerical, have been using a very dangerous article. The doctor's words are:-" It is called fungus orbicularis, or lupi crepitus; some do call it fungus lucernarum, in English fusse balls, pucke fusse, and bull fists, which in some places of England they use, being set on fire to kill or smolder their bees when they would drive the hives, and bereave the poor bees of their meat houses and lives, for which purpose it fitly serveth. In form they are very round, sticking and cleaving unto the ground, without any stalks, at first white, but afterwards of a duskish colour, having no hole or breach in them whereby a man may see into them, but being trodden upon do breake forth a most thin and fine powder, like unto smoke, very noisome to the eies, causing a kind of blindnesse, which is called poore blinde or sand blinde; for it has been often seen that divers have been blinde ever after, when a small quantity hath been blown into their eies." Mr. Nutt, at the commencement of his 14th chapter, admits that, in the previous one, he had been to sea without a pilot the meaning of which nautical phrase, if I understand it, is that he had been writing on a subject of which he was entirely ignorant; an admission which he might have made with equal propriety at the commencement of every chapter in his book. The opinion which he entertains, that the old queen bee leaves her hive with the first swarm, I do not myself entertain, although Dr. Bevan does; but as the doctor, in his work on bees, makes no mention of having made any experiment himself to as 293 certain the fact, I do not feel bound to pay much attention to the doctor's dictum, although I entertain a high respect for him. Mr. Nutt has evidently borrowed the idea from Huber, whose work on bees was translated into English so long ago as 1808; and although he has positively asserted that he never obtained any knowledge of bees from books, many persons like myself will be incredulous, knowing he could avail himself of the discoveries of Huber twentyfour years before his own book was published. My incredulity is increased. by the praise he lavishes on the discovery of Shirach, which he tells the learned lord he had proved satisfactorily to his own mind, although, from his ignorance of every thing respecting the true economy of bees, I believe him incapable of performing such an experiment. I was convinced he had read Huber when I first addressed you; and when I knew nothing of his book but through the medium of the Mechanics' Magazine, by his using the following expression-"how is the queen bee impregnated?" which is copied from Huber. Mr. Nutt describes the queen's leaving the hive as follows: "She leaves the royal cradle impregnated with the royal larvæ, and withdraws from the hive, unwillingly, no doubt." If there be such a degree of unwillingness on the part of the old lady to withdraw from the hive, why does she not wait a few days, when, if I understand Mr. Nutt's expression, the impregnation of the royal cradle would have arrived at that stage which, by accoucheurs, is called parturition, which would have obviated the necessity of the journey? The laborious experiments of Huber, to ascertain whether the old queen departed from the hive with the first swarm, were undertaken at the suggestion of the French naturalist, Bonnet, to whom all Huber's letters detailing the result of them are addressed. Bonnet, in a very long letter which he wrote Huber at the time, urged him in the strongest language never to mutilate the queen, but to mark her on the thorax conspicuously, with a varnish that would resist humidity, and produce no injurious effects. This advice Huber, however, pertinaciously rejected; for, in every experiment he gives an account of, he invariably deprived the queen of one of her antennæ. Now, Bonnet, in giving such advice to Huber, 294 SOME MORE NOTES ON MR. NUTT'S BOOK ON BEES. must have been well aware that by mutilation the habits of the insect would be altered; indeed it is so, if a creature is only deprived of a limb-how much more, then, when deprived of such an important organ as the antennæ, which he allows are either the organs of feeling or smelling. He admits, also, that depriving a queen of both antennæ was productive of most singular effects. From the moment of its being done, there was a very great alteration in her conduct; she was sometimes quite motionless, at others she traversed the combs with great rapidity, and if she wanted food from the working bees, she directed her trunk for the purpose of receiving it with an uncertain kind of feeling, sometimes towards the bees, and sometimes against the combs; and if her trunk did reach the mouths of the bees it was by chance. She also appeared tormented with a desire to leave her habitation, and he found it impossible to keep her in the hive: neither would the bees follow her in this mutilated state-indeed, they appeared perfectly indifferent what became of her. If this be the consequence of amputating both the antennæ, why then persist in mutilating the insect at all, particularly when in direct opposition to the advice of the person for whose satisfaction the experiments were undertaken? If such effects were produced by depriving the insect of both antennæ, is it not natural to suppose that the amputation of even one must produce some great alteration likewise in the insect's conduct, such as being tormented with a desire to leave the hive? I am convinced it does create this desire, and that it is carried into execution the first moment she can induce a swarm to accompany her. My opinion is strengthened by what Huber says, that his bees always swarmed when he had no expectation of their doing so; for it always happened after his secretary and himself had been engaged in experiments with them, and had gone away. I never shall be of Huber's opinion, until I hear of a series of experiments conducted in the manner suggested by Bonnet, and attended with similar results to those recorded by him. He admits that when in a perfect state, the bees will never allow, for any length of time, more than one queen to remain in a hive, in consequence of the mutual animosity that exists between them; although when deprived of one antennæ each, they will permit two, and the queens cease to retain their usual enmity to each other. It is absolutely astonishing with what facility Mr. Nutt, according to his own account, has been induced to adopt the idea of the old queen leaving her hive with the first swarm, for the following is an account of the whole of his researches on the subject:-He has, he says, sometimes on the evening a hive has swarmed-sometimes on the second, at other times on the third evening afterwards-fumigated the hive, dissected and examined the combs and queen cells minutely, and whenever he has found a queen it has always invariably been a young one; but in general he has only found a royal cell, just ready as it were to give birth to a successor to that which had left the hive. In this easy and expeditious way does Mr. Nutt solve a problem, which occupied the indefatigable Huber and his equally indefatigable secretary many years. Even in this experiment, as it is called, trifling as it is, he is incorrect. He says, the queen withdraws from the hive, leaving the royal cradle only impregnated. I once had a swarm that settled on a post, and in hiving it the queen was killed; the bees in consequence returned to the hive. The same evening the usual noise, which is made before a second swarin, was made, and I distinctly heard it from different parts of the hive at the same time a proof, that instead of the royal cradle only being impregnated, there were two queens actually then in existence; the hive swarmed early the next morning. Reaumur, who studied the habits of bees many years, and is called, from the great knowledge he acquired of the insect, the historian of bees, did not believe the old queen left the hive; and Huber admits he never in any other instance found him inaccurate. An ancient author, named Publius Virgilius Maro, has recorded his opinion against Mr. Nutt very decidedly in the following words, as rendered by Dryden: :-- "The youthful prince, with proud alarm, Leads out the vent'rous colony to swarm." The same author informs us, that the evil of bees swarming, which Mr. Nutt now so feelingly deplores, existed in his time, and recommends, when such a distressing event occurs, to mix with tink SOME MORE NOTES ON MR. NUTT'S WORK ON BEES. ling brass "the cymbals droning sound;" and as I am resolved such a laudable practice shall not fall into desuetude through any neglect of mine, and not possessing any cymbals, I use an instrument, probably unknown to my ancient author, ycleped a warming-pan, which I find, from experience, answers the purpose equally well. Butler, whose work, the "Feminine Monarchie," was translated into Latin in 1671, believed a young queen led the first swarm. John Geddie, Wildman, Bonnor, Mr. John Hunter, and many other authors, were of the same opinion. I do not possess the works of Aristotle or the Elder Pliny, and therefore cannot avail myself of those great authorities. It very frequently happens, when a swarm issues from a hive it returns almost immediately. This is occasioned by the queen falling to the ground, or being unable to fly. On being missed by the bees they return, and in general she can easily be found on the ground with a small cluster of bees surrounding her; and if examined, she will be found to be a young one unable to fly. The circumstance is noticed by many authors-I know even of instances that have occurred this year. Mr. Nutt appears to be of opinion that the queen is an amalgamation of both sexes. He doubts whether there is any male bee, and says the fact is the queen is both virgin and mother; although, according to his own book, the queen carries on the business of procreation in what he calls the Pavilion! Afterwards he says there is no copulation. If I understand any thing of my own language, both words have the same meaning. When the learned lord asks him how generation was brought about, he finds himself at such a nonplus as to be incapable of an answer, but turns the discourse, and says he is confident neither drones nor working bees lay eggs. No person supposes the drone does; but Huber is of opinion that there are fertile working bees. Mr. Nutt says that even the indefatigable Huber never discovered the precise way in which the queen bee was impregnated, but imagined it took place in the air, and that he MODESTLY acknowledged he never witnessed the act of copulation. Mr. Nutt should have omitted applying the term modest to such a man as Huber, for there may be persons who will draw a comparison be 295 tween the modesty of Huber and himself, and I will not say he would benefit by the comparison. Huber not only supposed the act of coition took place in the air, but that the drone died immediately after it was effected. I believe his ideas are correct. It is well known what takes place in the air with the common housefly; the same thing takes place with the white butterfly and the common mayfly. The male of the latter dies shortly after coition, as Huber conjectures is the case with the drone; for the effect is the same as when a bee uses its sting, death being the consequence. Mr. Nutt makes strange assertions; he says the royal larvæ are always in existence. In another place he states that if it were not for the great heat caused by the drones, that are never seen but from May until the end of August, the young larvæ of all the bees would undoubtedly perish. But how do the drones themselves come into existence? In the very next page he asserts, that the bees of a well populated hive will always bring to perfection the queen's eggs that have been deposited in the cells after the total destruction of the drones. Shortly afterwards a new light opens on Mr. Nutt, and he now doubts the accuracy of his opinion, so positively expressed in his conversation with the earned lord, that the queen bee was both virgin and mother. In short, he says, "I now see no objection to Huber's theory, although there is no direct proof of the copulation of the queen with the drone." All apiarians agree-indeed it is impossible to denythat there are male and female in a hive of bees. Mr. Nutt very shrewdly observes, that although no person has ever observed the act of coition, it is, no doubt, performed in a way consistent with the law of nature-a very candid admission. It was my intention to have made some remarks on Mr. Nutt's pretensions to entomological knowledge, but find, on a careful perusal of his book, that he is absolutely ignorant of every part of the science. I now close my remarks on his book, requesting your acceptance of my grateful acknowledgments for the insertion of them in your very useful Magazine. I am, Sir, yours, &c. June 24, 1834. J. P. T. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW PORTABLE BLOWPIPE. For the more elaborate operations of chemistry and mineralogy, the gas blowpipes of Dr. Clarke and others are, doubtless, from the intense heat they are capable of affording, the best in existence; but as these instruments are highly dangerous in the hands of any but scientific and experienced practitioners, they are totally inapplicable to the use of working artisans. For their purposes, moreover, so powerful a heat is neither necessary nor desirable. The common blowpipe, of which the blast is usually raised by a stream of air from the lungs, is that chiefly in use among artificers. Some, however, in consequence of the fatigue and injurious effects necessarily arising from frequent and lengthened manipulation of this instrument, have followed the example of the glass-blowers, and adopted the use of bellows. That the use of the common blowpipe is fatiguing and pernicious, especially in long operations, must be perfectly clear, although persons well skilled in it may not experience sensible injury. Speaking of the hydropneumatic blowpipe, Dr. Clarke states one of its advantages to be " the relief which it afforded from that fatigue and possibility of injury to the lungs, incident to protracted restraint on their free action, to which persons using the common mouth blowpipe were liable." Mr. Griffin, another writer on the blowpipe, tells us that the glass-blowers' table is resorted to "when it is required to continue the use of the blowpipe so long as would be fatiguing if the breath merely were employed." This point is indeed sufficiently attested by the numerous contrivances already brought forward for modifying, diminishing, or entirely superseding the labour of the lungs. Berzelius, the great champion of the mouth blowpipe, has, however, taken up a sweeping objection against every thing of the kind. "By these pretended improvements," says he, "motions more or less troublesome have |