248 



JOURNAL OF HOKTICUIiTUEE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



[ March 2G, 1868. 



and at the same time act as a stimulus to fanciers in breeding, 

 and possibly cause some to join other columbarian societies. 



First, The report states a part of the Society's business 

 shall be to form authoritative standards for most varieties of 

 Pigeons. I am very thankful to see this subject under con- 

 sideration, and by asking every other columbarian society 

 to forward papers containing what are considered the proper 

 points of the birds its members breed, then we should obtain 

 a standard of excellence for every variety of Pigeons, which 

 ■would be invaluable to a young beginner, many varieties not 

 having their points stated in any of our leading works. 



Second, As regards the classification of prize lists, and the 

 judging of birds, both subjects are being sadly neglected by 

 the committees of poultry and Pigeon shows, simply because 

 you can seldom find a Pigeon-fancier on their committee, and 

 gentlemen are appointed as judges that have never been 

 breeders or fanciers, and, therefore, not thoroughly competent 

 to judge. 



At most of our leading shows a cup or piece of plate is 

 offered as an extra prize to the winner of the greatest number 

 of points. In my opinion it is not a fair way of giving an 

 extra prize, because it only brings the dealers into competition 

 with fanciers having only a few pairs of birds, and what chance 

 have they against the dealer who can show in every class ? or 

 else it causes two or more fanciers to unite and endeavour 

 to obtain that which they have no chance of obtaining if they 

 exhibit their birds separately. Such has been the case at some 

 of our principal shows. The practice ought to be stopped. If 

 committees intend to give an extra prize, by all means give it 

 to the best pair of birds in the show, and then every one will 

 have a fair chance of gaining the extra prize by honest com- 

 petition. — A Young Fanciee. 



[Arrangements are making for carrying out some of our 

 correspondent's suggestions.— Eds." 



DEPECTn^E-PLUMAGED POUTERS : THEIR 

 USE. ABUSE. VND DISUSE. 



I HOPE, without incurring a further accusation of undue haste, 

 I may be permitted at once to compliment my friends, Messrs. 

 Ure and Stuart, on the five weeks' deliberation they have 

 bestowed upon my late article, although their commendable 

 caution has resulted in considerable misrepresentation and 

 some misquotation of its contents. 



Both of these gentlemen have mistaken the premises of my 

 argument, and, therefore, have advanced a criticism which 

 does not apply. They mainly assume that I have advocated 

 the entire disuse of defective-plumnged crosses, whereas I have 

 simply regretted their abuse, and have pleaded their more 

 temperate employment for strictly present purposes, nor have 

 I hesitated to suggest a suspension of their use " for a time," 

 and for reasons fully stated. By implication it is clear that I 

 have not recommended fanciers to " dispense with " or ■' throw 

 aside " these crosses altogether, and therefore I beg to doubt 

 the " carefulness " with which my article has been read. 



So far, indeed, from shaking my views, your correspondents 

 supply me with many welcome corroborations, and I repeat 

 that " the question for the breeders of to-day is not so much 

 what may be done in crossing, but what really should be done 

 under the present aspect and conditions of Pouters as a class." 



Let me, before analysing the remarks of your correspondents, 

 briefly re-state the facts of the case, and the deductions made 

 from those facts. My article, then, was founded upon my ob- 

 servation of the last two annual shows at Glasgow. The birds 

 exhibited on these occasions showed great progress in size, 

 symmetry, and length of feather, and in all such matters did 

 infinite credit to the judgment, taste, and perseverance of the 

 Scotch breeders ; but in the departments of colour, markings, 

 and proportionate limb, there was much, very much, of unde- 

 velopment, if not of deterioration, to criticise and deplore. 



These results I attributed to one-sided breeding, to a too- 

 partial " selection " for size and form, by the too-frequent 

 matching to birds of defective plumage, such matching clearly 

 implying an indifference to, or neglect of, colour and markings. 



As a remedy, and as a means of future progress, it was sug- 

 gested to import " into the department of colour those pro- 

 cesses of selection which had proved so effectual in the domains 

 of size, contour, and vigour," to discard" for a time " rigorously 

 any elements of dilution or infusion calculated to impoverish 

 the hue, and to cross instead with the " soundest colour 

 obtainable." 



I further pointed out that this could be done " without im- 

 pairing the Pouter in size or symmetry; for in every colour 

 there are many families of grand birds sufficiently unrelated to 

 supply crosses for some time to come," and it was urged upon 

 the sound fancier as the real triumph of his art to superadd 

 to the advantage already acquired, and which existed in pro- 

 fusion, those properties hitherto neglected and deficient. 



In these common-sense suggestions, as " an old fancier," one 

 of your correspondents cannot agree, while in the opinion 

 of the other, my " theory" (as he is pleased to term it), should 

 not be adopted, helping, as it does, to place the " young fan- 

 cier" in an " awkward position." 



It is encouraging, however, to find that the facts of the 

 Glasgow shows are not really denied, and I thank Mr. Ure for 

 his timely advocacy of reform in the markings ; and although 

 he does not go so far as myself in regard to the deterioration of 

 colour, there is, in his remarks, a tacit admission that colour 

 at any rate is at a standstill. 



While, however, my friends cannot accept the principle of 

 " careful selection," as a remedy for the evils indicated, it is 

 astonishing to notice the number of illustrations they supply 

 in its favour. Surely, if there is one principle which more than 

 another is cardinal, and universally admitted amongst fanciers, 

 it is that of " selection," no matter what the property in ques- 

 tion. Hence such phrases as "breeding true," "breeding for 

 feather," "breeding for limb," "breeding for wattle," "breeding 

 for head and beak," &c. And so firmly rooted is this principle, 

 that no fancier of any experience hesitates to account for the 

 appearance of any unexpected excellence or defect, but in- 

 variably attributes it to some ascertained or probable reversion 

 to a previous cross ; and, if in Pouters the instances of reversion 

 are more than usually numerous in the department of colour 

 and markings, it is owing, without a question, to that partial and 

 one-sided selection which has had for its principal object size 

 and contour. 



I am reminded by Mr. Ure, "that many of the finest birds 

 that have been bred in Scotland have been from Mealy, 

 Chequer, or Sandy birds matched with birds of the standard 

 colours. Kow, where has this been denied ? Surely my 

 article was based on this very fact, together with the addi- 

 tional fact that the successes attending this method of "se- 

 lection" for size and form, have like most successes been 

 abused, and that so lavishly as to lead to baneful results in the 

 department of "colour" (which is the actual question raised 

 in this discussion, and not merely the mating of Mealies and 

 Yellows, as your correspondent will find, when he refers to 

 page C2 of this Journal, for January 10th). 



It is also asserted by Mr. Ure, that the present grand 

 properties of contour, size, vigour, &c., have all been developed 

 from birds " little better than Pouting Horsemen." How has 

 this been managed, except by "careful selection?" Again, 

 " Yellows, for instance, bred together, soon become pale and 

 faded-looking; but a well-seleeted Bed improves the colour at 

 once." What is this but careful " selection ?" and if Yellows 

 can be thus intensified and preserved from dilution, why not 

 the other colours ? 



Once again. The improvement of the markings will be "easily 

 managed," but to lengthen the limb will require both " time 

 and skill." But by what method, if not by " selection ?" 



Mr. Stuart follows Mr. Ure, and further corroborates me by 

 saying that " any good fancier who has tried the experiment 

 of crossing a Blue Pouter and a Red, or a Mealy and a Yellow, 

 will not repeat it in a hurry." This is a negative process of 

 selection. And again he says, " The best method is to select 

 two birds that with both their points combined come nearest to 

 perfection. When we do this we do all that we are able, and it 

 is not absurd to expect a happy result." With a belief so con- 

 fiding in the virtues of selection, will it be too absurd to hope 

 that at least some of the grand birds of Scotland may be " com- 

 bined " for happier " results " in colour and markings ? 



Mr. Stuart is not, however, without a rival remedy to incul- 

 cate (which, perhaps, will help the " young fancier" out of the 

 "awkward position" in which I have so unwittingly placed 

 him), he " destroys " his mismarked birds in the nest. But 

 what is this even but " selection ?" for, clearly, if all the bad 

 birds are selected for destruction, none but good ones will 

 remain to perpetuate the strains ; thus the reversion to bad 

 markings will be controlled, if not ultimately prevented. This 

 method (pardon the irreverence), might be termed " Pigeon-pie 

 selection," suggested, as it is, by so distinguished a conservator 

 of well-pied Pigeons. 



The illustration drawn from Almond Tumblers is partica" 



