300 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



t October 16, 1873. 



their first experiment would teach them that bad birds stand 

 no more chance, even with such a rule, than they did before. 

 The only difference would be, that whereas before A and B 

 divided the prizes, now A would be first, B second, C third, 

 and D, E, F, & Co. would be, as before, ** left out in the cold." 



Again, would it answer to have separate classes in poultry 

 shows for " dealers " and '* amateurs ?" In my judgment, No. 

 The great majority of exhibitors are not " dealers " in the com- 

 mon acceptation of the term, but " amateurs." There are com- 

 paratively very few who have the temerity to attempt to gain a 

 living by breeding and exhibiting fancy poultry. It is a marvel 

 to me how any who do attempt it manage to succeed, consider- 

 ing the competition they meet with from the immense number 

 of amateurs, who, grudging neither time nor money so that 

 they may ride their hobby well, can ride, moreover, with a 

 heart free from care and anxiety, seeing that even if they fail 

 they have little to lose. I should say, therefore, that it is not 

 the " amateur " who competes at a disadvantage, but the 

 "dealer;" and I would always back any experienced amateur 

 who devotes himself entirely "to one or two breeds {not more) to 

 beat auy number of dealers who have to devote attention to 

 every breed indiscriminately. 



But some have said, " Why should this distinction be made 

 at flower shows and not at poultry shows?" The cases are 

 widely different. I have said before that those who gain a 

 living entirely by breeding fancy poultry and Pigeons are very 

 few — too few by far to make it worth while for committees to 

 offer special prizes for them. On the other hand, the name of 

 those who cultivate flowers and plants for sale as a means of 

 livelihood is legion, and consequently nurserymen's classes are 

 always well filled. The poultry amateur also widely differs 

 from the amateur horticulturist ; for whereas the one is, as a 

 role, willing to sell his stock, and, moreover, is only too glad to 

 make a profit by it if he can, the other exhibits his productions 

 without any view to sale, and usually only for the pleasure and 

 honour of the thing. There is thus not the slightest difficulty 

 in drawing the line between nurserymen and amateurs, but to 

 attempt to do so between poultry-dealers and poultry-amateurs 

 would be far more difficult, and would inevitably lead to endless 

 squabbles and displays of ill-feeling. 



Again, would separate classes for champion birds, and for 

 birds tbat have never won a prize, as suggested by " T. W. D.," 

 answer? I think not. The object of a poultry show is not to 

 encourage the breeding of bad birds, but good, and it would be 

 a waste of money, and a perversion of the object for which such 

 shows were instituted, to make it a recognised possibility for a 

 bad bird to obtain the recommendation of a first prize. Many 

 speak and write as though the object of a poultry-show com- 

 mittee, in arranging their prize list, ought to be to distribute as 

 evenly as possible among exhibitors the amount of cups and 

 money they offer for prizes. Such people invariably feel ag- 

 grieved if a portion of the spoil does not fall to their share. 

 They abuse the judges, they abuse the prize list, they abuse the 

 committee, they abuse the successful exhibitors, and blame, in 

 short, everybody and everything excej^t those who are really to 

 blame — viz., themselves. The heading of my paper expresses 

 the doubt which exists in my mind as to whether this unreason- 

 able disposition is not incurable in many cases. I trust, how- 

 ever, that others are erring from want of thought, and if my 

 words help to dispel their illusions I shall be more than satis- 

 fied. In conclusion, I would add that I have written the above 

 in no unfriendly spirit towards those whose communications 

 show that they differ from the foregoing opinions. If they can 

 say anything that will conclusively prove me to be mistaken, I 

 shall willinf<ly acknowledge my error ; meanwhile I cordially 

 hope that my friends (if they will allow me to call them so) 

 D, E , and F will cease to grumble, and say with me, with a hearty 

 good shake of the hand, Let the best birds win. — K. W. Beachey, 



I QUITE agree with " T. "W. D." that it would be difficult and 

 unwise to prevent dealers exhibiting. IE tht^y possess first-rate 

 birds, and can win first prizes, why shouldn't they? If they 

 have bred the birds, so much to their credit; and if they have 

 bought them, caunot amateurs also buy such for the same 

 money ? I think it would be a good plan to have a separate 

 class for young birds , especially in some of the Pigeon classes, 

 at the larger shows, and then all would have a good chance ; but 

 when there is only one class, and a dealer shows the best bird, 

 and consequently gets the first prize, let the disappointed 

 amateur say to himself, " Well, the bird deserves it ; let me try 

 aud breed such." — Almond Tumbleh. 



[We think this subject has been sufficiently discussed. — Eds.] 



Aylesbury Ducks. Would it be right for me to borrow them 

 and esliibit them along with mine in my own name ? — Cr.ug. 



[It would be an untruth, and if the birds, not your own, 

 gained a prize that would give your poultry-yard a good re- 

 putation it did not deserve. Why not exhibit them in the 

 names of the rightful owners, you taking the risk and the profit 

 if any? — Eds.] 



THE CRYSTAL PALACE SHOW. 



I WAS just thinMng, as I sat waiting for the postman bringing 

 the Journal with the Crystal Palace list, what a gi'eat advantage 

 exhibitors had who could go with their fowls to a show a long 

 distance off. The first thing that took my attention lately on 

 the Journal's arrival was Mr. Maynard's letter. Now, my birds 

 will have to leave home early on Saturday morning, travel up- 

 wards of two hundred miles, including I do not know how many 

 changes, and will have to be taken across the city in a van. Of 

 course, the Committee will attend to them ou arrival ; but what 

 chance will they have if it come to something like a point ol 

 equal merit between my birds aud the birds of an exhibitor whose 

 man has been allowed in, we will say, early ou Monday morning 

 before the Judges commence, just to attend to his birds, to wash 

 their heads, and rub them down to make them look fresh ? My 

 birds having had that done on Saturday morning would look 

 dull compared with his, consequently I should lose. 



I thiuk, after they are delivered up to the Committee, no 

 exhibitor or his man ought to be allowed to enter the place of 

 exbibition until after the judging is over. 



There is another small matter I hope the Committee will re- 

 consider — namely, compelling exhibitors to send their birds in 

 separate hampers. I shall show two hens iu one class, not for 

 sale: how much better it would be if I could seud them in one 

 hamper divided in the middle with canvas. It would save 

 carriage, and encourage exhibitors to make above one entry when 

 it is on the single-bird system. To a person who understands 

 his work it would be no detriment to pen and hamper them, and 

 I should think the Committee will have none but competent 

 persons at a show like that at the Crystal Palace. — F. M. A. 



EXHIBITING ANOTHER OWNER'S POULTRY. 



I HAVE Rouen Ducks, Spanish, and Brahmas, which I intend 

 exhibiting at a show which will take place at the end of the 

 month. Two friends of mine, one who has ceased exhibiting 

 altogether, and another who does not like the bother of exhibit- 

 ing, have, the first one some splendid Game, and the other 



In reply to Mr. Maynard's letter, the Committee purposes 

 strictly carrying out the rules of the Show, and no person will 

 be admitted to the building except those engaged by the Com- 

 mittee, before the Palace is open to the public. 



With regard to persons obtaining admission under the pre- 

 tence suggested by Mr. Mayuard, we gave no authority to the 

 policeman who had charge of the door to pass them, and if they 

 prevailed iipon him to allow them to enter, they must have con- 

 cealed themselves in the building, as no one was seen by us, and 

 we are sure no one approached the Judges until the pubhc were 

 admitted. We much regret Mr. Maynard did not call attention 

 to this subject at an earlier period, as it would have enabled us 

 to trace the matter, for the Committee would not knowingly 

 allow any breach of the rules to pass unnoticed, they being of 

 opinion that the only way to treat exhibitors fairly is to place 

 all on an equality, and that can only be done by faithfully carry- 

 ing out their "rules and regulations." — C. How.uid and W. I. 

 Nichols, Hon. Sees. 



FARNWORTH POULTRY SHOW. 



This Show was held on the '2ad inst., and it may be necessary 

 to add for some of our readers that the town is near Warrington, 

 in Lancashire. The pens were nearly one hundred more in 

 number than last year. 



G\-iiE.— Black-breasted Re<ls.—1. T. P. Lyon, Liverpool. 2. J. Fletcher. Stone- 

 clough. 3, J. Piatt, Winaford. Bioirn-hreastcd Jitd.-<.—l aad 2. J. Piatt. 3, T. 

 P. Lyon. Any other varicti/.—l, J. Fletcher. 2, J. E. Andrews, Worcester. 8, E. 

 Bell, Barton-on-Trent. Cock.— Any colour.~l and Cup, C. W. Brierley, Middle- 

 ton. 2. J. Chestera. NantwicU. 3, J. Cock, Worcester. 



Dorkings.— 1 and Cup, Rev. E. Bartrum, Bcrkhampstead. 2, Miss Davies, 

 Cheater. 3, J. Robinson, Garstang. 



ypANisii. — 1 RTid Cnp, J. Leeminff, Preston. 2, H. Wilkinson, Earby. S, J. 

 Walker. ^fjin.I.f.-rd- 



CociHN'^ —Ciuiiavion or Bnff—1 ,ind 2, W. A. Taylor. Mnncbester. S, W. A 

 Bnrnell, Southwell. Any oiltcr variety.— 1, W. A. Taylor. 2 and 8, W. A 

 Burneli. 



Hamborghs. — Gold-i)ejicilled. — 1, J. Ro>iin8on. 2, W. Speakman, Nantwiob. 

 S, A. F. Faulkner, Thrapston. Silver-pencilled.— 1 and 2, J. Ruhinson. 8, M. M. 

 Cdshm >re. Sheepahed. Golii-span(ilca.—\., J. Robinson. 2, T. Walker. Denton. 

 3, N. M irlor, Denton Silver-spangled.— 1 and Cup. N. Marlor. 2, J. Robinson. 

 », J. K Pardy. Newton. 

 PoLANDs.— 1, J. Fearnley, Lowton. 2, J. Robinson. 3. W. A. Taylor. 

 Brauma Pootrai.— 1 and Cup, J. H. Pickles, Birkdale. 2. T. F. Ansdell, 

 St. Helens. 3, P. Unsworth, Lowton. 



Bantams.— CTawu'.—l. 2. and Cup. W. F. Addie, Preston. 3, G. Maples, jun., 

 Wavertree. Any varirty except Game.—l, W. A. Taylor. 2, H. B. Smith, Pres- 

 ton. 3, E. Walton, Horneliffe. 

 GATdm.—Cock.—l and 2, W. F. Addie. 3. G. Maples, jun. 



Any othpr Variety. — 1, T. F. Anadell {Dark Brahmas). 2, R. B. Wood. 

 Uttoxeter (Creve-Coeurti). 3, N. Marlor. 

 Seli-ino Class.— C/HC/ccn*.— I, T. P. Lyon. 2,W. A. Darnell. 3. T. F. Anadell. 

 DvcKB. — Houen —\. .L Walker, Rochdale 2 and 8. W Evan^. Wliiaton. 

 Ayleehuru — l. 2, and H, J. Walker. Any otker variety.— 1, M. Leao, Dunstable. 

 2, E. L. Wipan. 3, It Gladstone, jun. 

 Gkese— 1 and -,;, J. Walker 8, J. Storrv, Stokesl'^y. 

 Tl-rubys.— 1, J. Brookwell, Wigan. 2, Kcv. N. J. Ridley, Newbury. 



I The Judges were Mr. R. Teebay, Fulwood, Preston; aud Mr. 



