34 



JOURNAIi OF HOETICCLTUBE AND COTTAGE GABDENEK. 



[ Janaar; 14, 1869, 



follow and support them, if they will allow us. We do not wish 

 to act rashly, to oppose them, or to obtrude ourselves offensively 

 upon tbem in any way ; only as the last resort would we act for 

 ourselves, our sole wish being to put competition upon a fair 

 and honourable footing. Notwithstanding, I still request that 

 any who are willing, in case of necessity, to act with me will 

 kindly send me their names, as any suspicion of personality is 

 most of all to be avoided, which can best be done by associating 

 various parties in any action that may be necessary. 



Mr. Eadclyfie's remarks appear to call for a few special 

 observations. His desire is manifestly to smooth matters for 

 a better state of things, but I do not think his suggestions 

 practicable. With regard to "withdrawing the word fraudulent, 

 and giving a year's grace " — who is to do it ? The decision 

 does not rest with me ; I wish it did. I would give any 

 "grace" — wait any reasonable time — were the thing then to 

 cease ; but I am only one individual, of no name or influence, 

 I cannot say what shall be done. Then, as to terming these 

 things " undesirable," they will be what they are, whatever we 

 may call them, and Mr. Radcljffe himself quotes a judge who 

 Bays they make showing " as bad as horseracing !" 



Then, again, with regard to consulting Messrs. Hewitt and 

 Teebay, Mr. Radclyffe has scarcely a right to assume I have 

 not done so. In fact I have written to both gentlemen, with 

 what result I ought not, perhaps, to state. I appealed publicly 

 to Mr. Hewitt in the very first letter I wrote on the subject in 

 these columns. Such appeals, however, rarely lead to any- 

 thing, and this opens a large field for difference of opinion. 

 Judges seem to think it inconsistent with their dignity to 

 express their opinions and intentions on any subject whatever. 

 However appealed to, they remain mute. This may be right, 

 but I think, myself, that it would be more consistent with the 

 real dignity of their position, and greatly benefit the fancy, did 

 more frankness prevail, and did they give us, as authority to 

 be followed, their deliberate judgment on any points of general 

 interest from time to time brought forward. We should know 

 ■what to do, and what to think. And since Mr. Eadclyffe has 

 named them specially, I, in this public manner, again respect- 

 fully and earnestly ask Messrs. Hewitt and Teebay to give ns, 

 in these columns, their opinion on the question of trimming, 

 and to state in general terms what they are prepared to do in 

 the case. It they think "a year's grace" best before active 

 steps be taken, I am quite content, provided steps ht' taken 

 then. Or if they think all trimming should be recognised and 

 allowed — that the evil cannot be checked, and should therefore 

 be admitted, and trimming allowed to all — even then I am 

 content, for I only want all to be on the same footing. In the 

 best interests of the fancy I ask them to speak, and am willing 

 to bow to their decision, if they will only let us know what that 

 decision is. 



But, meanwhile, it is not quite as Mr. Badclyffe supposes. 

 Trimming is not recognised, even by its perpetrators. In 

 Spanish and Game it is — no one ever objects to a Spanish pen 

 for being trimmed, or to a Game cock for being dubbed ; but 

 at the Birmingham Show of 1807 a poultry-man, who had won a 

 first prize for his own employer with birds whose hocks were 

 trimmed, but so artfully (I think the feathers left must have 

 been dressed with curling-irons, so artistically were they 

 arranged) as almost to defy detection, objected, in my hearing, to 

 another first-prize bird on the ground that he was trimmed ! 

 If he thought the practice recognised, why was this ? Now I 

 simply want to have one thing or the other plainly understood, 

 and I think I may with no want of charity say, that any com- 

 mittees which in their next schedules shall omit to insert a 

 " trimming clause," will pretty plainly indicate on which side 

 their sympathies lie. 



There are some other matters that need ventilating, but this 

 seems to me the most pressing at present. Moreover, after 

 thinking much over these matters, I have come to the conclu- 

 sion that the fancy generally requires some much more perma- 

 nent and definite organisation than it now has. It is now 

 a recognised pursuit, and the competent breeder is capable of 

 rendering essential service to his country. When all " mania " 

 has vanished, and still first-class breeding birds can be con- 

 tinuously sold for £20 each, it must surely be granted that 

 there are very important interests involved. Mr. Crowley's 

 suggestion of adding breeders' names to catalogues shows the 

 growing feeling there is of this, and in some way it will have 

 to be met. The " Poultry Club '" was another proof, and, I 

 think, chiefly failed because its scope and aim were too narrow. 

 Much of its action was avowedly against one particular judge ; 

 it began, in fact, by attempting to commit murder, and it was, 



therefore, little wonder that it should end by committing 

 suicide. But still the want remains. It is a question whether 

 in some cases the "no appeal" from judges' decisions works 

 well, and whether some central autboritativo body, which 

 should be acknowledged as ultimate referee in disputed points, 

 would not be an advantage — something which might be what 

 the .Jockey Club is to horseracing, or the Marylebone Club is to 

 cricketing — something which should combine our best breeders 

 together, and should associate them and our best judges them- 

 selves into a responsible and final tribunal. The question is a 

 large one, and may be profitably studied, but I do not wish to 

 obtrude my own ideas regarding it. I will only say that I 

 think any scheme will fail which does not take as its basis the 

 meeting at the great Birmingham Show, and regard the real 

 interests of all as identical, and not conflicting. 



But I am far away from trimming, and close (lest they over- 

 look it), with the repeated request that our two most eminent 

 judges will give us their j udgment upon the practice, even if only 

 asked by — Nemo. 



P.S.— In regard to dubbing Game, this matter cannot be 

 confounded with trimming, and a change can never be effected 

 by such arguments as those of Mr. Eadclyffe or " Y. B. A. Z." 

 Those who wish it should offer prizes at Birmingham for an 

 undubbed Game class, or induce the Council to do so. I believe 

 it would pay, for I can count some half-dozen people who would 

 show Game, but for having to dub them. Once practically 

 started in this way, the question of dubbing would by degrees 

 settle itself one way or the other. 



[We have been requested to add the following names to the 

 protest against trimming : — ■ 



Herbert Dowsett, Pleshey. Chelmsford. 



W. Lawson, Eaglesfield, Yarm. 



Loftus H. Eicketts, Banwell, Somerset.] 



In my opinion some of the letters on trimming which have 

 recently appeared in your columns go a little too far — no one 

 can be more anxious to punish any attempt at deception than 

 myself, tut if we are to carry out these suggestions strictly, 

 I do not see where we shall stop. I am very glad to say that 

 at present the exhibitor who can show his birds in the best 

 condition will always stand the best chance of a prize ; and in 

 the case of Spanish and Game a certain amount of trimming — 

 as the shaving or plucking of the small hair-like feathers on 

 the face, and the cutting off the ridge of small feathers from the 

 sides of the comb of a Game cock — has always been considered 

 allowable. As to the question of dubbing, I am quite sure that 

 no one who can fairly be called a Game fancier has ever 

 advocated its discontinuance ; to me half the pleasure of ex- 

 hibiting Game fowls is not only to have a good bird, but to be 

 able to show him in the very best possible condition — artificial, 

 of course, and therefore just as objectionable to those who 

 cannot show their birds with this advantage, and who are, I 

 suspect, the chief promoters of this new regulation, as the 

 trimming I have mentioned. What I would do is this — sup- 

 press as severely as possible all attempts at fraud or deception, 

 such as splicing feathers, blackleading Silver Hamburghs' 

 hackles, pulling vulture hocks, &c., and efficiently show up 

 such cases by affixing a notice to the pen of the cause for which 

 it is disqualified, and request your reporter to publish the 

 name of the offender, but let birds shown in first-rate condition 

 have a letter chance than others equally good, but not con- 

 ditioned, and allow the present recognised trimming of Spanish 

 and Game. If we are to carry out the new regulation in its 

 entirety, we must send our birds to exhibitions straight off their 

 walks in whatever state they happen to be at the time. 



I am not a large exhibitor, but know that my views on this 

 matter will be confirmed by all our leading exhibitors of Game, 

 and hope that some of them will assist to ventilate the question. 

 If our friends really want a grievance, let them see to the en- 

 forcement of the rule excluding diseased birds from exhibitions. 

 I never go to a poultry show without seeing roupy birds. — 

 Brown Red. 



THE BIRMINGHAM RESOLUTIONS- 

 REGULATIONS OF POULTRY EXHIBITIONS. 



I SHOULD be glad to sign the above, which have appeared 

 in your advertising columns, if the framers would give any 

 satisfactory reason why professional dealers are to be ex- 

 cluded from the office of judge. I suppose that amateur dealers 

 may be open to the same objection, whatever it maybe. Again, 



