Decsmber 29, 1863. ] JOUENAL OF HORTICULTUEE AND COTTAGE GAEDENEE. 



519 



fairly. The Brahmas scai-cely return their amount. They 

 are not treated as they should be, and accordingly the cata- 

 logue does not contain the names of several successful 

 breeders — Messrs. Priest, Wrif;ht, Hinton, and Pigeon, for 

 instance, are absent. Possibly they feel as I do, that the 

 Brahmas do not receive sufficient encouragement. Taking 

 1863 as my guide, they pay Birmingham vastly better than 

 Spanish, yet they have only two prizes in each class. The 

 two varieties compete together, so that the light bh-ds are 

 almost excluded from the prize list. They might be allowed 

 a "two hens or pullets" class, or a "cock and one hen," 

 and the Committee, I firmly believe, would be the gainers. 

 The amount offered to Polands is greatly beyond their 

 retui'us. One of the prizes in each class might be saved. 



What shall I say of Malays ? The returns are pitiful, and 

 yet who would wish them excluded ? Would the Show be 

 perfect without them ? I would suggest dividing the 

 amount into three prizes instead of two; the fact being, 

 that theso prizes are gained chiefly either by Mr. Ballance 

 or Mr. Sykes, whose birds are most decidedly of very different 

 strains, and their relative positions dependant on the Judges 

 selected. Possibly, then, others might also notice this noble 

 breed. 



The Creve Coeur makes a still more piteous appearance 

 than the Malays. My slight experience of them is not in 

 their favoui-, and one breeder who had been tolerably suc- 

 cessful with them has parted with his, or was anxious to do 

 so. I repeat that they do not appear to me likely to take 

 much hold on English breeders. Time will show. Mean- 

 while, then- entries at Worcester and Birmingham prove 

 they do not at present merit a class to themselves. 



I hope to forward you my analysis of Darlington in the 

 course of a few days. — ^Y. B. A. Z. 



P.S. — I thought experience had proved that it was un- 

 wise to show two "Game ladies" together. Heuce shows 

 adopted "cock and one hen" classes. Then why classes 

 for two hens or pullets ? 



CAPTAIN" HEATON, ME. HINDSO:^, AND THE 

 BIEMINGHAM SHOW. 



With reference to certain letters which have appeared in 

 The Jouenal of Hoeticultube, stating that Captain 

 Heaton and others wore admitted into the poultry bay at 

 Bingley HaU dm-ing the time the Judges were making then- 

 awards, v/e are informed by the Secretary that such was not 

 the case, no person whatever being admitted to this part of 

 the building until after the Judges had completed their 

 duties. Captain Heaton did not enter Bingley Hall, until 

 some time after the Judges had given in their awards in the 

 Cochin classes. 



[The above has been sent to us by the Council of the 

 Birmingham Cattle and Poultry Show; and Mr. Lythall, the 

 Secretary, adds, that Mr. J. H. Williams, in whose name Mr. 

 Hindson's Game fowls were exhibited, is the Mayor of Welsh- 

 pool. We never suspected Capt. Heaton of influencing the 

 Judges in their decisions ; but tlic complaint made is, that 

 he and others were admitted into the j^oultry depai-tment in 

 direct violation of the Society's rule 17, and especially of 

 that ijart which precludes the public from being present 

 whilst any part of the judging is proceeding. 



With regard to the Mayor of Welshpool, he appears to be 

 the guilty party in exhibiting falsely another person's Game 

 fowls as his own ; and, if so, we agree with Mr. Hindson in 

 thinking that " his situation in life should have made him 

 above such a scandalous action."] 



I HAD quite made up my mind not to reply to any more 

 anonymous correspondence ; for I have but a poor opinion 

 of a man who attacks another under the protection of an 

 assumed name ; but I think the letter of Mr. Manning 

 requu-es an answer from me — first, because he tills me in a 

 straightforward manner that he considers I have committed 

 an error ; and, secondly, because he imagines that I wilfully 

 broke one of the regulations of the Bii-mingham Show. To 

 justify my conduct with the pubUc, and to prove that the 

 Birmingham Committee never attempted to show any favour 

 towards me, I beg to state the circumstaoces under which 

 I viewed the poultry on the Saturday evening exactly as 



they happened ; and I trust, by so doing, I shall convince 

 your readers that I am not the dreadful culprit that some 

 would have them believe. 



I was one of those who paid 10s. to see the cattle judged. 

 About six o'clock (the Judges having completed their 

 awards), whilst I was talking to one of the Committee, I 

 heard him give an order to the poHceman in charge of the 

 entrance to the poultry department to admit all who wished 

 to look at the fowls. I saw numbers enter the room ; and, 

 having heard a distinct order given from one in authority, 

 I did not consider (nor do I now), that I was breaking any 

 rule, or taking an unfair advantage of others in following 

 those who had gone before me. The ord^^r from the Com- 

 mittee did not emanate from any request of mine. It is 

 not my intention to reply to the remarks of my poetical 

 friend " Small Fey ;" for, were I to do so, 1 should widen 

 the breach rather than heal it. I must now leave you and 

 your readers to decide if I am guilty of the faults laid to 

 my chai'ge. — Henet Heaton. 



I AM obliged for the insertion of my letter, and also Mr. 

 Smith's, refuting the charge insinuated in a previous article 

 on the Birmingham Show. Unfortunately, however, your 

 c including commentary would seem to imply that there 

 was coUuslon of some nature ; and from this 1 can scarcely 

 think you have given either of the letters inserted an at- 

 tentive perusal. Tou say, "It is unfortunate Mr. Hind- 

 son did not announce his discovery untU after one of the 

 public had detected the fact." This is met by the assertion 

 in my letter that I was the first to make, as well as the 

 first to announce, the discovery that the birds were my own 

 and exhibited without my knowledge or consent, and this 

 assertion is corroborated by Mr. Smith in his letter. Surely 

 such a satisfactory statement, so respectably and empha- 

 tically verified, should have protected me from any implied 

 aspersion ? As to who Mr. WiUiams is, I can only give you 

 hearsay information, as I am unacquainted with this person, 

 and have no desire to cultivate an intuuacy with him ; but 

 I am told he either now holds, or has held, the position of 

 Maror of Welshpool. I trust this rejoinder wiU clear all 

 doubts upon the subject.— Joseph Hindson, Barton House, 

 near Llcerpool. 



That the awards to three of the pens of Game fowls at 

 Bumingham this year have caused more astonishment and 

 animadversion than all the others put together will be ac- 

 knowled"-ed by those amateurs present at Bingley Hall on 

 November 30th, and probably by hearsay from many others 

 who had not the opportunity of then seeing them. One 

 fact connected with this case seems now quite overlooked, 

 but at the time it was not only a most prominent one, but 

 such also as in the opinion of those present thi-ew a strong 

 light on the subject. It, however, still remains unexplained 

 —all three of these Game cocks in the afterwards " dis- 

 qualified " pens were marked alike in the nostiils, and, after 

 the most caa-eful examination by a host of amateurs of every 

 other pen containing a Game cock thi-oughout the whole 

 Show, there proved not a single cock among the others 

 similarly marked. It seems, at least, on the fii'st blush of 

 the thiniT, as somewhat remarkable that a fact so obvious 

 to strangers in these three fowls, should be quite passed 

 over without instant detection by Mr. Hindson their owner. 

 Perhaps, therefore, that gentleman mil explam this for the 

 benefit of a poultry amateur who never yet exhibited a— 

 Game Cock. 



In the last Number of your Journal you say it is to be 

 regretted that Mr. Hindson did not declare the birds to be 

 his before the fact was discovered by one of the public. 1 

 should readilv admit the force of this remark if it were 

 true. But is" it true ? You do not say when the discovery 

 you refer to was made ; but unless it was previous to the 

 openino- of the Show on the Monday morning, it was not 

 before Mr. Hindson had supplied the information upon 

 which these pens were disqu.alified. It is true some little 

 delay occun-ed before there was a public announcement that 

 the prizes had been canceUed ; but as this delay was not 

 occasioned by any hesitation or reluctance on the part ot 



