Likewise, the region in which the Heddon hives had come into general use experienced a series of surprisingly poor seasons. Michigan, where these hives had been most widely sold, reported near failures, and Hutchinson expressed his inability to understand why the change from good seasons to poor ones had not been more gradual. Both Heddon and Hutchinson had to admit small crops, the latter with twenty pounds as his largest average in five years.

The Danzenbaker hive, first offered in 1895, had a large sale for a few years.

With so much demand for small hives, the other manufacturers could hardly sit still and permit Heddon to supply all the trade. Just when the eight-frame Langstroth was first offered is not clear. Lewis & Parks were advertising an eight-frame hive as early as 1879, complete with cap ready to nail at fifty cents each, or nailed and finished complete for seventy-five cents each.

A. I. Root commented in Gleanings that is was the best he had seen for the money, and that the price was lower than he could make, but he thought it better to pay ten cents more and get the ten-frame size.

Ten years later, in March, 1889, E. R. Root announced in Gleanings an eight-frame Langstroth hive with dovetailed corners. Dovetailed corners had been used in Australia and to some extent in this country, so were not entirely new. Root stated that they had paid Heddon $100 for the privilege of using any features of his eight-frame Heddon-Langstroth hive, which it will be remembered Heddon used at the time he first announced his contraction system. The Root Company was an aggressive merchant and soon turned out far more hives of this pattern than other factories had done. Since 1889 this company has continued the sale of both eight- and ten-frame hives in large volume.

Edward Kretchmer, prominent Iowa bee supply manufacturer, made and sold the Massie hive.

Previous to this time, the Roots had pushed the ten-frame Langstroth hive with details of their own which they called "Simplicity" hive. In launching the new eight-frame style they credited Doctor Miller with having assisted in its design through consultation. It is significant that the Doctor adopted this style of hive and used it to the end of his life.

In 1895 F. Danzenbaker offered a small hive with closed end frames supported at the center of the ends. This made them easily reversible. The hive proper consisted of two stories used as a brood chamber. It was the purpose to alternate the bodies for the purpose of placing the brood close to the super to stimulate storing in the sections.

This led to an argument with Heddon concerning the relative rights of the two men, under their separate patents, to the divisible brood chamber hive. It was discussed at length in Gleanings, May, 1895, and it appeared that both claims were based on minor features and that the divided brood chamber was an old idea.

The Modified Dadant hive (left) retained the deep frame and wider spacing of combs of the old Dadant hive, while adopting the length of the Langstroth (right).

At first the hive was made for Danzenbaker in the Root factory, but finding a good demand the Root Company took it over and pushed its sale as a comb honey hive until about 1915. Several other small hives were also on the market, notably the Massie hive manufactured by the Kretchmer Company of Council Bluffs, Iowa.

By this time the effect of the Demaree plan of swarm control was beginning to be seen. The argument over hives did not subside, but the change in management had come about so gradually that the small hive advocates hardly realized how completely they had changed their system of management. When they added a second story to make use of the Demaree swarm control, they had doubled their brood chamber capacity and began to find themselves harvesting good crops again.

In 1899 A. N. Draper, of Upper Alton, Illinois, saw the advantage of combining the Dadant and Langstroth hives in such a way as to retain the advantages of both. He accordingly wrote to the editor of Gleanings a proposal to make frames of the length of the standard Langstroth but two and one-half inches deeper and proposed that if the editor would try thirty or forty hives built on this plan, he (Draper) would pay the expense of the change if after three years they did not prove more satisfactory.

The Quinby hive contained eight deep combs.

This challenge was published in the May 1 issue of Gleanings with the editor's statement that he had that day ordered the hives.

This resulted in the Jumbo hive which was of the same dimensions as the ten-frame Langstroth except that it was deeper.

Doctor Miller dubbed them "barns, " and they soon came to be known as "Draper's Barns. " Later the Root Company offered them for sale under the name "Jumbo" and as "Jumbo" they have continued to be known.

In the meantime the Da-dants had carried on with the big hives which they had found so satisfactory in the early years of their experiments. About 1913 the author first met C. P. Dadant at a beekeepers' convention. Being a strong advocate of the Langstroth hive which he used in two stories, he had an animated discussion with Dadant over the hive question. Dadant had fought too many battles over this question to be aggressive. He stated his preference and the reasons therefor and refused to argue with the newcomer. The result was a new examination of his methods on the part of this writer. Finally becoming interested in the large brood chamber, but disliking some features of the old style Dadant hive, a special order was made for seventy-five hives the length of the Langstroth hive but with the deep frame and the one and one-half inch spacing which the

Dadants used. The result was so pleasing that another convert was made, and so much enthusiasm was manifested that the Dadants decided to modify their old hive and offer it for sale. Thus, in 1920, the Modified Dadant hive was offered to the public. While making concessions to the later developments in the way of minor details, it still retained the principles for which the family had fought for three generations. (By this time the grandsons of Charles Dadant were in charge of the business. )

The final result of more than half a century of trial and error, of argument and experiment over the size of hives, is that three hives are left in common use. The Langstroth hive in both the eight- and ten-frame sizes has remained popular, but two brood chambers, where formerly one was used, have made them big hives in fact. Thus, the heirs of the small hive advocates have adopted the principle of the large-hive men as correct, but have adapted their standard equipment to its use. Various modifications of practice are in use, including a small super called a food chamber as a source of reserve food supply. The Modified Dadant hive has replaced the various kinds of equipment used by the large-hive men of old.

While the Dadants have given much credit to Quinby as the originator of the deep comb, there was little else in common between the Quinby and Dadant hives. Dadant adopted a frame of the same size, but he used eleven combs instead of eight as Quinby had done. Dadant used the hanging frame supported in the same manner as Langstroth's, instead of the standing frame used by Quinby. As has been pointed out by E. M. Cole, Dadant was, in fact, the original advocate of the large hive, and he and his descendants remained its consistent defenders.

A volume would be required to tell of the different kinds of hives which attained some local repute. Few of them had any claim to originality. A man of greater or less prominence would offer a hive of different dimensions than others, and gain some following. In hundreds of cases the distribution was very limited. The Harbison hive attained general acceptance in California for many years, and the American hive fostered by the Kings was widely used in the East, but both have nearly disappeared in recent years.