FAKING AND TRIMMING. 



233 



also reported amongst the council's proceedings 

 in the poultry press. 



Such is the machinery actually in existence 

 in England at the present time for the suppres- 

 sion of fraud. And it is anything but a dead 

 letter. Month after month cases 

 Effects of sre reported of exhibitors being 



Poultry Club's suspended from exhibiting at shows 

 Legislation. held under Poultry Club rules 

 (a large number now) for periods 

 of one to three years, and several unusually gross 

 cases have been disqualified for life. We specially 

 recollect one remarkable case in which a very 

 prominent Cochin exhibitor of that particular 

 time — a woman, by the way — was disqualified 

 permanently for her birds being "fluffed" in 

 the manner presently described, with suspicion 

 of other matters. Her Cochins were then shown 

 by a female relative, who was also shortly dis- 

 qualified ; and finally a third family connection 

 earned the same distinction. It took' time ; but 

 the whole guilty circle were ultimately, to all 

 intents, driven out of exhibition. Many exhibi- 

 tors seem still unaware of the completeness and 

 efficiency of this machinery, and we trust that 

 the short statement here given may spread the 

 knowledge of it, and increase its efficiency still 

 more. For honest exhibitors should do tlieir 

 part by entering " protest " against obvious 

 fraud, and by the vigilant use of the keen eyes 

 with which Nature has endowed them. During 

 the few most recent years, happily, they have 

 done so more and more, and this has partly led 

 to the idea that such practices are increasing ; 

 whereas it is quite the other way so far as the 

 best shows are concerned. 



That a great deal of fraud still goes on, at 

 more out of the way shows especially, is true 

 enough ; and whereas formerly, as we have seen, 

 when the judges had done their duty commit- 

 tees often deliberately refused to do theirs, we 

 regret to say that much of the blame now rests 

 with the judges at such shows. That there is a 

 class of these who " work in " with exhibitors, 

 and who judge many shows gratis because they 

 have other ways of making money by it, is true 

 beyond doubt, though difficult of proof. Men 

 of this stamp wink at frauds they see plainly 

 enough ; and give prizes to birds which they 

 know are fraudulently dealt with. The fact is that 

 there is much which really cannot be detected, 

 or pronounced actual fraud with certainty ; and 

 some judges take shelter under that. The 

 danger is real, and it is better for three guilty 

 ones to escape for a doubt, than for one innocent 

 one to be falsely condemned. There are those 

 who have suggested that since the card 

 "Disqualified," though in itself most proper as 



a mere statement of fact, has come by usage 

 to be regarded as a charge of fraud, another 

 card should be introduced, simply denoting 



that a bird was " passed " for some 

 " Passed " alleged reason stated. Thus, sup- 

 Cards, posing a Partridge Cochin cock 



which apparently is otherwise in full 

 feather, has scarcely any tail. It may be that 

 the tail really has not grown yet — we have 

 known such cases ; or it may be that there was 

 much white in it, and it was plucked. No one 

 can absolutely prove which it is ; but the card 

 would simply denote that the bird was " passed " 

 for deficient tail, for the matter of fact which all 

 could see for themselves. The exhibitor would 

 have no direct charge made against him, and 

 could not complain, since it may be very strongly 

 held that no one has a right to win with a bird 

 that really looks suspicions in regard to honesty, 

 however honest the exhibitor may privately 

 know it to be. The same holds good about 

 ages ; a pullet may have moulted out a second 

 time, so as to look like a hen. The exhibitor 

 may know that she is a pullet ; but for a bird 

 to win in such a class that looks in every point 

 a hen is unfair, because it places the judge, and 

 the show, and every other exhibitor, in a false 

 position. Thus even mere appearances have 

 much to do with right in such matters, and we 

 point this out because it does not seem to be 

 recognised as it should. If the introduction of 

 such a card would really induce judges gener- 

 ally to mark suspicious pens, and refuse prizes 

 for the reason stated, their use would be 

 valuable ; and we repeat distinctly that, what- 

 ever it may be in the knowledge of the owner, 

 a bird that does not look honest should not be 

 exhibited, and if it is, should not be awarded 

 any mention beyond that of a " Passed " card. 



The upright judge must therefore be con- 

 stantly on the watch against attempts at 

 deceiving him by artificial faking. All he cannot 

 detect, and he is not called upon to go ruffling 

 through the plumage of all the birds to see what 

 he can find. That would seriously damage the 

 birds themselves, besides the question of time. 

 And a good judge may, especially at first, be too 

 "innocent" to discover what others can find 

 A case occurs to us as we write these lines. 

 wherein a judge who had disqualified one or two 

 faked combs, and presumably " meant business," 

 passed without discovery three Buff Orpingtons 

 which were most beautifully dyed ! It is easy to 

 scoff at such an oversight; but the judge might 

 veiy well reply that he was not " up " yet to all 

 the tricks of the Buff Orpington men, and could 

 only learn them by degrees. He can but do his 

 best, and bring an open mind to any evidence 



