March 26, 1868. ] 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



249 



larly nnfortunate for llr. Ure, and affords but another corro- 

 boration of ray viewB. Whatever use Almond-fanciers may be 

 making of Kites, Duns, and Grizzles, it is more than certain 

 that Almonds jast now are at a standstill in regard to feather, 

 if not actually declining ; while the notoriously favourite pro- 

 perties of head, eye, and beak alone progress. The defects so 

 noticeable in the Pouter are no less observable in the Almond 

 Tumbler, and arise from similar causes — viz., one-sided selec- 

 tion at the will or taste of the fancier. 



It will be seen, then, that my late article advances neither 

 theory nor novelty, but merely claims a more rigid and more 

 effective application of a principle which is the very creed of 

 fanciers. 



Whether your correspondents disagree or not with my re- 

 marks is of small moment, while they supply such excellent 

 illustration in my favour. When we are asked to believe that 

 Pouting Horsemen were the progenitors of our present grand 

 race of Pouters, wo can only do so by giving credit for a most 

 persevering amount of selection for symmetry and size. We 

 are not asked, however, to endorse a similar or proportionate 

 development in colour, for even if we admit that " Blacks, 

 Blues, and Yellows are all as good as they have ever been," the 

 admission by no means involves either progression or present 

 excellence, while it leads us not unreasonably to inquire why 

 colour, like size and form, is not better than it has ever been, 

 especially as its improvability and amenability to control is 

 undisputed. In the main, colour is bad now whatever it may 

 have been before, and its improvement by any possible means 

 should be the aim of every artistic fancier. 



But what better principle, or what better application of it do 

 these gentlemen advance? In the lamented absence of a 

 " printed guide," the "young fancier" is told by your corre- 

 spondents to use Mealies, Chequers, and Grizzles in their 

 " proper places," to use " the right sort of Splash," to 

 " properly match " their birds, as " it all depends upon this." 

 What is this but selection? and supposing the "young 

 fancier " aspires to sound colour, as well as other properties, 

 how is he to discover the "proper places," and the "right 

 sort " on which it " all depends." He will iind but little to 

 help him in your correspondent's remarks — little, indeed, which 

 will relieve him from his "awkward position." To some 

 extent he has been told what may be done, but what really 

 should be done is, for all your correspondents have affirmed, as 

 much in the dark as ever. T<fhe told " that the Chequer bred 

 from Blacks should be crossed with Blacks only " is very good 

 advice indeed so far as the Chequer is concerned, and simply 

 amounts to improving Chequers by careful selection, and the 

 importation of sounder colour. But before it is put forward 

 as advice to be followed for producing " Blacks of raven 

 brilliancy," it may be well to consider the kind of colour from 

 which the Chequer has been bred, the kind of Black to which 

 it is to be mated, and how much Chequer or other diluting 

 blood the said birds akeady contain. These and kindred 

 questions are surely not immaterial if improvement of colour 

 is really in question, and call loudly for answer before further 

 dilution is advocated, for our present Blacks are very im- 

 poverished in tone, and so far from pretending to raven 

 brilliancy are too frequently of a bluish, ashy, slatey, and 

 almost dappled appearance. The question at issue is not the 

 improvement of our Chequers or Mealies, but the establishment 

 of sound standard colour. 



While scorning theory, it would scarcely seem consistent to 

 withhold practice, and so Mr. Stuart goes a step farther, and gives 

 Bs the actual method employed by the experienced breeders of 

 Scotland, who, he says. " to the best of their judgment select 

 snch birds as they think suitable for producing the most perfect 

 colours, at the same time keeping in view size and form." 

 Perfect colour is therefore the primary consideration, while size 

 and form are secondary. But, what of the results, and of the 

 evidence of his brother fanciers? For notwithstanding that 

 colour is very unsatisfactory ; that the successes have all been in 

 the departments of size and form ; that Mr. Ure claims no 

 development of colour ; that Mr. Huie, writing on the colour 

 question, says, on January 30th, " These facts show how 

 colours have been mixed, but we have been working for size 

 and shape ; these being attained, we shall by-and-by arrive at 

 the desired colour " — notwithstanding this, and much more to 

 the same effect, we are now to understand that " the most 

 perfect colour " is the antecedent feature of Scotch selection ; 

 while size and form are treated as subsidiary — simply "kept 

 in view." 



At last, then, the' young fancier is extricated from all his, 



difficulties. Henceforth to produce great results in size and 

 shape, he will match fur "perfect colour," and if he is 

 venturous he will to obtain perfect colour match for size and 

 shape. Simple-minded fanciers, who have been in the habit of 

 connecting cause and effect may bo somewhat staggered at this 

 revelation, but what of that ? " Practical experience is safer 

 than theory." At least, so Mr. Stuart finds it. 



Good a judge as my friend, Mr. Stuart, undoubtedly is of a 

 Pouter, and thoroughly acquainted as he may be with Scotch 

 fanciers, I hesitate to accept this version of their method. 

 Either he has inverted his meaning, or a failure most signal 

 must be confessed, for despite of all this judgment and selection 

 for colour, it is only form that progresses. 



It is pleasing to find, however, that my article has not been 

 wholly misunderstood, and that an acceptance and confirmation 

 of its views may be found in a late number by that earnest 

 and successful fancier, Mr. Boyd, of Edinburgh, who is of 

 opinion that my suggestions fully meet the case. Although I 

 have much more to say, I must not occupy more cf your space 

 this week, but in an early article I propose further to examine 

 the statements of my friends, and to push on a stage the subject 

 of defective-plumaged Pouters, for the whole question of im- 

 proved colour and markings hinges on the use, abuse, or disuse 

 of such birds. — W. Volckman, London. 



Fuu-l 



NEW BOOK. 



A Plain and Familiar Treatise on Breeding, Exhibiting, 

 &c. By John Bailt. Seventh edition. 

 That this little volume has reached a seventh edition of 

 part, and a fifth edition of the other part, is a sufficient evi- 

 dence of what the public think of it. We can testify to the 

 truth of this sentence in the preface — " it is all practical." 



LIZARD CANAEIES. 



I WILL endeavour to answer Mr. Hawman's questions, and I 

 hope satisfactorily. 



No. 1. A high colour is not quite so much an object in a 

 Lizard as in a Norwich Canary, but certainly to be desired ; 

 and in a Silver class a bird whose ground colour is a good 

 mealy ought always to beat a bird whose ground colour is buff, 

 supposing they are equal in other respects. 



No. 2. Certainly not. It ought never to be shown anywhere, 

 or, if shown, ought to be disqualified. 



No. 3. Silver-spangleJ class. 



No. 4. A decided fault. A good Lizard ought to have the 

 following properties : — Large oval cap, sqnare at the back. 

 Beak, legs, and feet very dark. Head flat, large, and wide. 

 Neck and back well and evenly spangled. Tail and wings 

 black. The cap is the most important part in a Lizard ; and 

 one with a broken cap ought in my opinion to be at once dis- 

 qualified by the Judges, no matter how good he may be every- 

 where else. — HowAP.TH Aehton, PoUfidd Hall, Lancashire. 



LIFE OF A TAME HAWK. 



Petland has many inhabitants. They vary in appearance. 

 Some have four feet, others two ; some are clad with hair, 

 others with fur, others, again, with feathers ; but as a rule 

 they must be pctites to be fit to be pets, the latter word coming 

 from the former, and I should scarcely think a whale, or an 

 elephant, or a giantess was ever made a pet. 



There is another rule, another pet-canon — a pet must be 

 domestic, must be tame, in order to give much pleasure. A 

 wild bird may be admired, but its wildness prevents its being 

 petted. Thus the kind clever dog, the wise quiet cat, the saucy 

 yet tame Bantam, the Pigeon that feeds from your hand (speci- 

 ally the Pouter, playing and blowing to his master's " hna, 

 hua "j, the Bullfinch that kisses his fair mistress — all these, 

 and such as these, make superlatively excellent pets, because 

 of their exceeding tameness. 



The tamer a pet is the more pleasure it gives, and, another 

 great point, the happier it is in itself ; and who is there that 

 can take delight in that which is unhappy ? However, there 

 are some birds classed as wild which may be tamed so far as to 

 become very interesting pets, and their hfe may be made very 

 tolerably happy. I have written this because I have been a 

 daily witness for many months of the semi-captive, interesting, 

 and I think happy Ufe of a Windhover or Kestrel Hawk. 



