172 



JOURNAL OF HOETICULTDEE AND COTTAGE GABDBNER. 



[ February 2;, 1875. 



month, eyes, and nostrils should be sponged out daily with a 

 strong Eolution of Condy's iluid, to correct the fetor of the dis- 

 charge and to promote more healthy action. I have not known 

 the above remedies to fail, and may claim some little experience, 

 as last autumn I bought ten old farmyard fowls purposely to 

 experiment on. I shut them up in an old wood house at a 

 cottager's with a bird in the most advanced state of roup, her 

 eyes being nearly closed, and the discharge from her nostrils 

 most offensive. They had no water to drink, but moist meal 

 twice a-day, and on the fourth day eight out of the ten had a 

 running at the nose, and the others soon followed, and several 

 of them rapidlybecame worse. Icommenced the treatment above 

 recommended on the eighth day, and before a week was over 

 the whole were cured, including the hen which introduced the 

 disease. The shed where these birds were confined was thatched 

 at top but open at the sides, and consequently the foul air blew 

 away. I think this a better plan than shutting the birds up in a 

 close stutfy pen. 



Shell-less Eggs with Dorkings are invariably caused by the 

 hens being too fat. Starve the birds for a dny, and then feed 

 them principally on vegetable food to reduce the system. 



For all slight indispositions I give a large table-spoonful of 

 castor oil. Fowls will stand as large a dose of aperient medicine 

 as a human being, and the reason why medicine is not generally 

 effective with them is that sufficient is not given. 



Zinc ointment is very useful for wounds or cuts. 



CUPS AT THE OXFORD SHOW. 



An article in this Journal (page 128) signed "An Exhiditor 

 Misled " is calculated to mislead your readers as to the quality 

 and value of the cups awarded at the late Oxford Show. 



The cup in question and one other in the Game classes were 

 presented by two of the patrons of the Show, and were advertised 

 in the schedule and reprinted iu the catalogue, with the other 

 cups, as a silver cup value three guineas. The w.'ek following 

 the close of the Show I gave a list of the successful exhibitors 

 ior the presentation cups to the silversmith, who informed me 

 that the donor of the cup for fancy Ducks had personally chosen 

 a handsome silver-plated jug value £3 1.5s. (twelve shillings iu 

 excess of the prize offered), and had ordered it be engraved. 

 It will be seen from this that we had no choice in the matter — 

 to use a homely phrase, " we could not look a gift horse in the 

 mouth." On the 30th of last month I received a note from the 

 exhibitor requesting the name and address of the silversmith 

 who supplied the jug, as he was informed it was a plated article. 

 I gave him the information, at the same time describing to him 

 why his prize was not silver. 



In answer to what course " An Exhibitor Misled " should 

 adopt, I think it would have been best to have written to mo 

 agaiu, stating his requirement; and as we were unintentionally 

 in error iu piiblishiug that this cup was silver, I have no doubt 

 we should have settled tho matter to his satisfaction. With the 

 above exceptions all other cups were silver, and for which we 

 paid full value. The bill I beg to enclose for your inspection. — 

 Joseph King, Uoji. Sec. 



[The silversmith's receipts are for silver cups. — Ens.] 



EEPORTS ON POULTRY. 



As I am myself an exhibitor, though not of long standing, 

 possibly some may say that I am merely anxious to appear in 

 print, and am not sufficiently acquaiuted with my suhject to 

 authorise me in venturing an opinion upon it. In answer to 

 this objection I can only say that all I would aim at is to have 

 justice shown to each and every poultry exhibitor, and this, I 

 think, can scarcely be looked for so long as a reporter be at the 

 same time an exhibitor. 



I have no wish to be offensive or personal in my remarks to 

 any single reporter, believing as I most sincerely do that thev 

 try to do their duty and give an unbiased opinion, but what I 

 think is that too much is asked of them — of human nature. I 

 would say. Is not the old proverb, " Every mother considers 

 her own crow the blackest," fairly applicable to reporters who 

 are at the same time exhibitors ? for are they not naturally dis- 

 posed to consider their own birds superior to those of anyone 

 else ? and feeling in their own hearts convinced of this fact, 

 they report accord inuly. How often in the report of a poultry 

 show does one read, " We consider the judging very indifferent ;" 

 " We cannot understand how such and such a bird came to be 

 placed first ;" " AVe think the prize ought to have fallen to this 

 one or that one;" "We think pen ;iU (Smith) ought to have 

 had first prize ;" " We could not help admiring pen 3015 (Smith), 

 and pen 23 (Smith) we consider as good as any in the show, the 

 bird superb," &c., ad infinitum. The outside public or those 

 who are not behind the scenes, and others who cannot afford to 

 go to many shows, but who strive hard to add a little to limited 

 "income through rearing poultry, are obliged to depend upon the 

 reports upon the different shows which they read in the papers, 

 and are not, of course, aware that the reporter is very possibly 



the owner of the very bird he praises and brings to the fore, 

 while other good birds are passed by without comment. Now, 

 if poultry shows are to flourish, and people are to continue either 

 for profit or pleasure to exhibit poultry, they must have con- 

 fidence in those whose duty it is to report on their birds. And 

 it is also my belief that editors have a great deal of power in 

 their hands, and exhibitors would experience ten times the 

 pleasure and confidence in exhibiting which they do were they 

 convinced that unfair and partial judgments and deceptions of 

 all kinds were exposed in the columns of that paper. If I might 

 be allowed I would suggest that reporters should either be — 



First, Gentlemen who had once been poultry fanciers, but no 

 longer exhibitors. 



Second, That the judge himself should write the reports. 

 Could this be managed fanciers would be better able to know 

 what style or class of bird the judges preferred. 



Third, Gentlemen who are still exhibitors, provided they do 

 not exhibit at the same show they report on, or if they do their 

 names should be attached to the report. 



Before closing this letter I should like to draw your attention 

 to the annoyance caused to secretaries and exhibitors by the 

 want of some good practical method of fastening on the labels 

 and fastening the hampers. We occasionally hear of birds 

 being removed from hampers altogether, or taken out for the 

 purpose of disfiguring them by plucking their tails or removing 

 their leg-feathering. It would be a great boon to both secre- 

 taries and fanciers could some simple method be invented to 

 prevent the possibility of these unpleasantnesses occurring. I 

 am now working out a simple plan which, if it prove feasible, 

 will put a stop to rascalities of the above-mentioned kind. — 

 GER.iLD F. T.vluot. 



THE POULTRY-KEEPER.— No. 31. 



PLUMAGE OF CUCKOO FOWLS. 

 The Cuckoo feather is so called on account of the resemblance 

 in the colouring and arrangement of the tints to those which 



Fig. 41.— Hen's Feather. 



cover tho bird of this name. The feathers are bluish black, 

 more or less dark, softening by half tints on a white ground, and 

 coming again at little intervals nearly equal, and because of the 

 length of the feathers from the down, which is of a clear greyish 

 blue as far as their ends. 



RAILWAY LIABILITY FOR NON-DELIVERY OF 

 FOWLS FOR EXHIBITION. 



W.4RMINSTER CouNTY CouRT, Febru.uiy 1.5th. — Joseph Binion 

 V. Great Western Hailwaij Cotnpany. — This was an adjourned 

 case from the last Court. The plaintiff claimed for damage 

 sustained through defendauts not conveying two cases of poultry 

 in time for the Monmouth Poultry Show in Octol)er last. 

 Plaintiff's claim consisted of entrance fees (Gs.), railway carriage 

 (H.V.), and damage or deterioration of fowls, making up a total of 

 X'l. Mr. George Ashpole of Monmouth proved the non-delivery 

 of the birds, and also said he jndged the Polish class. There 

 were only three pens. He opened the plaintiff's baskets, and 

 examined the Polands. They would have taken first prize 

 easily, and must have run close for the prize for tho beet pen in 

 the Show. 



The Company admitted that they received the fowls in time 

 for the 10 18 a,:\i. train on 13th October, but contended that they 

 could not have delivered them earlier than they did — viz., half- 

 past twelve on tho following day. Three points in defence were 

 — Ist, that it ought to have been stated the time Mr. Hinton 



