struction of the drones, which generally takes place in August, and sometimes in the latter end of July. These later eggs are hatched, and brought to a state of perfection by the population of the hive at that period : for a sufficient number of common Bees, that is--a well-populated hive, will always bring to perfection the Queen's eggs that have been deposited in the cells, after the destruction of the drones. This seems to prove, that there is some truth in Huber's opinion respecting the agency of the drones in the procreation of Bees, by their sexual union with the Queen. Though I was once inclined to differ in opinion with Huber on this subject, and even went so far as to venture to say with Huish, and in Huish's own words--that the Queen knows not coition, and that she is both virgin and mother," from what I have seen in my observatory-hive since that was said, I am led to doubt the accuracy of the remark, and am disposed to lean to Huber's doctrine, and to think, that there _may be_ more truth in his experiments than has hitherto been awarded to them : in short, I see no objection to Huber's theory, although there is no direct proof of the population of the drones with the Queens. All apiarians allow that there are males and females in a hive or stock of Bees;--all admit--indeed, it is impossible to deny--that Bees _do increase and multiply_ at a prodigious rate, and so fulfil the Divine injunction; the only question to be solved is this--_How_ is the Queen-Bee impregnated: This secret in nature--if those matters, or natural operations whichwe cannot clearly explain, which, though in themselves sensible and gross, may, nevertheless, be too subtile, too refined, for our obtuse understandings to comprehend, and for our dull faculties to investigate,--if these may be called secrets in nature, there is a secret of this description respecting the sexual union of Queen and drone Bees, or, at any rate, respecting the manner of the impregnation of the Queen-Bee. I condemn no man who differs from me on this nice subject, as I have no direct proof, either that Huber is right, or that Huish is wrong, in their surmises relative to this disputable matter. Individually they are men deserving the highest respect; their labours and perseverance to throw light upon this mystic branch of apiarian science deserve the utmost
praise ; as also do the labours of Dr. Bevan, whose treatise on Bees I have read with pleasure ; and have occasionally referred to, and shall again make use of it, in this my humble attempt. We have all exerted our best abilities to become the favourites of our patrons and friends. How much each of us deserves the honours conferred on us, is best known to those who have been most benefited by our unceasing endeavours to improve and extend apiarian science. My great object is--not to dispute with the naturalist, the philosopher, or with the apiarian, _how_ the Queen-Bee becomes impregnated : because, be that as it may, it is, no doubt, consistent with the law of nature,--it is, no doubt, a part of that all-prevailing law ; and though hitherto undiscovered,--hitherto "one of nature's gambols with the human mind," I do cherish strong hopes that the observatory-hive I have constructed, will on some auspicious, future day, disclose such facts as will set the matter at rest for ever : my great object at present is--to endeavour to improve the culture of HoneyBecs, and to lay before my readers _practical_ instructions for the more humane, and more profitable management of those interesting, little insects.