Ui 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



[ August 21, 1873. 



the episode is uo improvement upon the EDglishraan's record 

 of results. The occurrence vouched for by Mr. Wade, exhibited 

 an instance of arrested incubation for about the same number 

 of hours that the eggs were exposed to the cold, as on the 

 twenty-third day (no hour given, but about two days — probably 

 less — behind time) eight out of ten hatched. Mr. Wade did 

 not pretend to set forth with any precision when the eggs were 

 sat, at what hour they were hatched, nor how many hours they 

 were deserted. I conclude, therefore, that they were as many 

 houi-s late as they were hours neglected, for my long and studied 

 experience of just such a riuestiou has led me to believe in the 

 exactness of the rule that twenty hours of abandonment does 

 not check even the growth of the chick, provided always that 

 they have native stamina of race, and that the weather is not 

 80 killing as to retard vegetation. This may appear a strong 

 and cm'ious assertion to make, but I am fortified by almost a 

 life-long, personal, experimental, and critical experience. Mr. L. 

 Wright, in his " Illustrated Book of Poultry," page 49, relates 

 an incident where the eggs became stone-cold, but fails to observe 

 the time lost, although by treating them with water at 105° they 

 "eventually hatched;" how long after maturity, not stated! 



When these circumstances attracted my attention, I would 

 fain have added what knowledge I possessed of the subject, but 

 I preferred to hold my peace — never having preserved the exact 

 details of any of the abundant examples which I have met — 

 until an opportunity should appear of sufficient interest to 

 scrutinise carefully and register with accuracy; for I deem 

 auch a (juestion as the one involved devoid of all usefiUness if 

 deprived of the minutest particulars of facts. Recently, au 

 event in my yard has afforded me the opportunity, which I need 

 not say I seized, aud after this long preamble I will, with your 

 permission, proceed to explain it. 



On Saturday, 19th April, 1873, 1 set a hen at 6 p.5i. ; the eggs 

 were, therefore, due to hatch on Saturday, May 10th, at 6 p.m., 

 according to ordinary received impression of the period of incu- 

 bation, which I hokl to be more or less inaccurate. On Satur- 

 day, 2Gth April, at 8 p.m., in the dark, she left her nest (having 

 sat just a full week), and could not be found. No hen was pro- 

 curable that night, and the next day being Sunday nothing was 

 done; but on Monday, 28th April, at 8 p.m., another hen was 

 borrowed, which took to the eggs readily. Having to borrow a 

 hen, the charge of them was not confided to her until darkness 

 had set in. Here then was a loss of forty-eight hours ! The 

 second hen sat steadily until Wednesday, 7th May, when, being 

 attacked with diarrhoea, her illness caused her to forsake her 

 nest at G a.m. At this time no further endeavour was made to 

 save the eggs, and they remained in the nest until Friday, 

 9th May, at 3 p.ji. (a lapse of fifty-seven hours), when, having 

 two hens come off, I doubled-up the broods, and gave the re- 

 jected batch of ten eggs — having discarded three that were 

 addled — to one of the two hens, to see what sort of business she 

 coiUd make of the trial. Bear in mind that the sum of the time 

 during which the eggs were uncovered, uncared for, and un- 

 treated to any application of heat, was 105 hom-s I Now let one 

 take from that, twenty hours, as the time in which I think chicks 

 suffer no loss in growth, and I obtain eighty-five hours as the 

 period to be made up by extra incubation ; and that this estimate 

 was not incorrect the result shows, as on Tuesday, 13th May, 

 at 6 A.M., eighty-four hours after due, all the eggs with one ex- 

 ception hatched out strong and healthy chickens. Here was an 

 arrest of incubation of eighty-four hours, although the eggs had 

 been unprotected during 105 hours. This may appear incredible, 

 but to prove the calculation, and to render it more extraordinary 

 still, let me allude to the fact that twenty-one days or 504 horn's 

 are usually allowed for incubation, whilst in the case now in- 

 stanced the eggs were only under the hen 460 hours I leav- 

 ing forty-four hours to be accounted for between 504 hoiirs the 

 stereotyped quantum for incubation, and 460 hours in which 

 these neglected eggs were delivered of full-grown chicks. I 

 think this proves both of my ideas (1st) that a chick will grow 

 for twenty hours or so after being deserted in the shell, and 

 (2nd) that the natural and sufficient period for incubation is 

 twenty days. For add twenty hours of gx'owth to 460 hours (the 

 time when the eggs were actually under the hens), and there 

 are 480 hours in all. Now take twenty-four hours from 504 

 (being twenty days instead of twenty-one), and there is the 

 proof — 480 hours. If I am asked why this should be, that eggs 

 can pass through so many shocks aud chills, I can only say I 

 know not any reason for it. But this I know, that out of thir- 

 teen eggs I received ten lively chicks, which it took three hens 

 to hatch, and that the three only sat altogether 460 hours, or 

 twenty hours less than twenty days. If it proves anything at 

 all, it is that close sitting kills ; that a chick will grow twenty 

 hours after it is left alone, and that twenty days are sufficient to 

 hatch chickens if the mother hen is not too ardent an incubator. 

 Upon general principles, then, I would recommend that every 

 chance should be given before a clutch of valuable eggs be 

 abandoned. If by the feel it is ascertained th.at there are chicks 

 within, wait until the discoloration of the shell annoimces the 

 fact of decomposition having begun. 



^ I may add that the egg I said was not hatched had within it a 

 live chick, in whose behalf I performed a Ciesarean operation, 

 by taking it out of the shell. At first it showed great weakness, 

 but soon came round under the influence of a spirit lamp and 

 cotton batting, and it, and aU the others of the belated brood, 

 are as thriving and active as any in my possession, and I am apt 

 to fancy that they are more vigorous, which may be only par- 

 tiality. Up to this time not one has died. — R., Tarrytown-on- 

 Hudson. — (Amcricayi Pet-stock Bulletin.) 



BEAHMAS' COMBS. 



The forward position of Brahmaa' combs, noticed by Mr. J. E. 

 Croker, is not peculiar to them alone, as the combs of pure- 

 bred Malays are placed similarly, which, together with "the fact 

 that a cross between the Malay and a single-combed breed of 

 fowl produces triple combs (a matter that I have never seen 

 mentioned, but of which I have much experience), warrants the 

 supposition that Brahmas are a weU-estabUshed cross between 

 Malays and Cochins. — O. P. H. Z. 



Has Mr. Croker compared the comb of the Brahma with that 

 of the Malay ? I am inclined to think that he will find the 

 " distinctive feature " he points out in the Malay. The Brahma 

 is a good useful fowl, but I feel sure it is a mongrel having 

 Malay blood in it. 



More than twenty years ago I produced the pea comb by 

 crossing a Malay hen with a Dorking cock. Three chickens out 

 of nine had the pea comb, and one w.is combed like a Light 

 Brahma. Besides, in some American book on poultry, I think 

 Bennett's, the history of the production of the Brahma is given, 

 showing that it was produced in America by certain crosses made 

 there.— R. B. P. 



PUBLISHING JUDGES' NAMES. 



I FULLY endorse all that has been said by Mr. Wren in last 

 week's Joiu-nal. It ought to be imperative on every Committee 

 to publish in the schedule the names of the judges. My ex- 

 perience as an exhibitor and breeder of some years' standing, 

 teaches me that it is only fair to all to publish the names of the 

 judges. As you say, the secretary's name, and the names of the 

 patrons, president, and committee are published, why not the 

 name of the judge ? He is the most important officer in the 

 show. It is easy to see in many cases why it happens thus 

 — the judge may have only a very meagre knowledge of fowls, 

 and yet because he is a friend of some of the gentlemen belong- 

 ing to the show, or because he has been judging at some other 

 show, they invite him. 



An objection raised to this mode of procedure is, that if the 

 name of the judge is known good exhibitors will not show 

 when a man is judging whom they may think incapable of 

 judging, and very right too. Would any man who understands 

 what are good birds send his best specimens to what he may term 

 a lottery ? for sending them to be estimated by some judges is 

 nothing more. I and other exhibitors have decided not to show 

 if the names of the judges be not pubhshed. Would it not be 

 much better for a society to engage a thoroughly competent 

 judge ? and if financial difficulties did present themselves, I am 

 sure no exhibitor would object to paying Gd. extra for the en- 

 trance fee. If they would do this they would find it advantageous. 

 Shows are often ruined on this account, especiaUy local shows, 

 for a local show antl a local judge are a farce. How often do we 

 see a class limited to two entries because a local judge knows all 

 all the birds in the district.— G. H. Pickekino, Middle Street, 

 Driffield. 



HETTON POULTBY, PIGEON, and BABBIT SHOW. 



The above-named Show was held on Tuesday the 12th inst. 

 in the Hetton HaU grounds, than which a more suitable or more 

 attractive place could not be found. The poultry were arranged 

 in the old-fashioned box pens in double tier in the lower portion 

 of the meadow, and for the amount given in prizes the entries 

 were very good, but in the absence of a catalogue we are nob 

 able to give a correct list of the winners. 



In most of the adult classes there were very good birds, the 

 Spa7iish being a fair lot, and the Dorkings very good. The 

 Cochins were poor, but Brahmas very good, and all the Ham- 

 hwrghs noteworthy. The winners in the above classes were 

 mostly Messrs. Buglass, Clarke, Proud, Whitfield, and Moor. 

 In large Game Messrs. Robson had it jdmost to themselves with 

 good birds; while in Game Bantams Mr. Hunter stood well 

 with some stylish birds, Mr. Laing, of Sunderland, taking the 

 chief prizes in Ducks. In chickens the Brahmas were forward 

 aud good, and the Red Game chickens exceeding fine in all par- 

 ticirlars, while the Game Bantam chickens of that colour were 

 the best class in the Show. The principal prizes in^ this were 

 won by Messrs. Robson and Hunter. The winners in Polands 

 were Golden, and very forward and promising birds. 



Pigeons were poor, with the exception of English Owls, but. 



