The queen possesses a sting (Fig. 11, _d_) which is longer than that of the workers, and resembles that of the bumble-bees in being curved, and that of bumble-bees and wasps in having few and short barbs--the little projections which point back like the barb of a fish-hook, and which, in case of the workers, prevent the withdrawing of the instrument, when once fairly inserted. While there are seven quite prominent barbs on each shaft of the worker's sting, there are only three on those of the queen, and these are very short, and, as in a worker's sting, they are successively shorter as we recede from the point of the weapon. Aristotle says that the queen will seldom use her sting, which I have found true. I have often tried to provoke a queen's anger, but never with any evidence of success. Neighbour (page 14, note) gives three cases where queens used their stings, in one of which cases she was disabled from farther egg-laying. She stings with slight effect. [Illustration: Fig. 16. _Part of Leg of Queen, magnified._ _t_--Tibia. _p_--Broadened tibia and basal tarsus. _t s_--Tarsal joints. ] The queen, like the neuters, is developed from an impregnated egg, which, of course, could only come from a queen that had previously mated. These eggs are not placed in a horizontal cell, but in one specially prepared for their reception (Fig. 26, _i_). These queen cells are usually built on the edge of the comb, or around an opening in it, which is necessitated from their size and form, as usually the combs are too close together to permit their location elsewhere. These cells extend either vertically or diagonally downward, are composed of was mixed with pollen, and in size and form much resemble a pea-nut. The eggs must be placed in these cells, either by the queen or workers. Huber, who though blind had wondrous eyes, also witnessed the act. I have frequently seen eggs in these cells, and without exception in the exact position in which the queen always places her eggs in the other cells. John Hall, in the old work already referred to, whose descriptions, though penned so long ago, are wonderfully accurate, and indicate great care, candor, and conscientious truthfulness, asserts that the queen is five times as long laying a royal egg as she is the others. From the character of his work, and its early publication, I can but think that he had witnessed this rare sight. Some candid apiarists of our own time and country--E. Gallup among the rest--claim to have witnessed the act. The eggs are so well glued, and are so delicate, that, with Neighbour, I doubt the possibility of a removal. The opponents to this view base their belief on a supposed discord between the queen and neuters. This antagonism is inferred, and I have but little faith in the inference, or the argument from it. I know that when royal cells are to be torn down, and inchoate queens destroyed, the workers aid the queen in this destruction. I have also