May 20, 1875. 1 



JOURNAL Oe HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



399 



much patience. The beak and wattle of the Carrier, for instance, 

 ia theproduct of many years, the greater part of which was lost, 

 by gropings in the dark ; and I think from what I know that 

 fanciers of the present day could develope by selection and 

 matching from ordinary wattled birds two distinct strains. 

 Long-faced and Short-faced Barbs, that in a moderate period of 

 time could rank with cither the Carriers or Barbs that have 

 been the products of the last century. At the time Moore wrote 

 the beak of the Carrier was good atli inch. The haphazard 

 Belectiou of fanciers has increased it, and birds with 2-inch 

 beaks are at present the standard. Now, it was much harder to 

 add that last half inch than to produce all the other distinctions 

 of the head as they existed in Moore's time, and the last sixteenth 

 of an inch was more difficult to produce than any half inch nearer 

 the skull; yet all this has been done almost in our day, and 

 proves by analogy what a scientific fancier guided by the ligh*, 

 thrown by the development of species can do. The beak of 

 the Barb is not much shorter than that of the ordinary Carrier 

 of Moore's time. Many of the coarse birds we see will measure 

 from 1 inch to 1{ inch, yet they are called Barbs because of the 

 down face, all the other conformations belonging to and being 

 identical with the Carrier. Desirous of satisfying myself with 

 regard to the possibility of developing the Carrier and the Barb 

 from the same forefathers, I once instituted a series of experi- 

 ments. The increase of the Carrier's beak from the common's 

 beak of 1 inch to the high fancy beak of 2 inches is a problem, 

 to prove one part of which necesbitates the acceptance of the 

 whole, and so of the diminution and change of outline of the 

 Barbs. Wishing to simplify my labour I bought a pair of ordi- 

 nary barbed birds, the beak of the cock being 1} inch, and that 

 of the hen a little less in length. 



From the young of these I selected three lots, the largest 

 best-wattled for a strain of Carriers, the smallest for Barbs, the 

 others to breed back to commons ; the last were allowed to fly, 

 bat not to mingle with commons or others. My experiment 

 was interfered with by circumstances over which I had no 

 control, but not befors I had obtained the following results : the 

 average length of beak in the first lot was increased a full eighth. 

 I bred a great number of this lot, and crossed as far apart as I 

 could, knowing it was the hardest part of the problem. The 

 second lot was interbred as closely as could be, and a refined- 

 looking wattled bird with small beak was the result, a much 

 better appearing Barb than most of those we see. The flying lot 

 became Dragoons (on the road to commons), as all wattled birds 

 do when allowed to care for themselves. Here were three lots 

 of birds springing from the same parents, presenting at the end 

 of a few years distinctions enough to entitle them to be marked 

 under three different names, and these changes caused by the 

 selection and matching of specimens possessing certain properties. 



I was perfectly satisfied with my experiment, and accepted 

 the result as the solution of the question. Were Barbs and 

 Carriers offspring of the same ancestors ? Anyone desirous of 

 satisfying himself with regard to the system of philosophy now 

 paramount in the realm of thought would do well to institute 

 some such experiments as here detailed. Do not take for granted 

 all that is said for or against the theory that variation and selec- 

 tion are the origin of varieties, and through them to species ; but 

 test some part of the hypothesis for yourself, and judge calmly 

 and decidedly of the evidence. Words are of little use for or 

 against, and philosophers may wrangle or fanatics fulminate, 

 as Nature, regardless of their word-wisdom, lays at their feet 

 proof after proof of their blindness. 



A pleasant experiment of what may be done by selection 

 would be the improvement of Barbs. In the first place deter- 

 mine the points to be bred for, then select the strains approach- 

 ing nearest, and give yourself up to the full enjoyment of a 

 partnership with nature. The points are, short, broad, and 

 down beak, broad head, well wattled eye, slender neck, and small 

 size (see August number of BuUeiin). You have a pair of well- 

 wattled Barbs. Should you breed in-and-in or not? Suppose 

 we say no, and take, in preference to in-and-in breeding, the 

 liberty of crossing with Tumblers. There is a variety of small 

 yellow Tumblers that is not a long remove from the Barb which 

 can be used ; but the best crosses are with coarse specimens of 

 the Short- faced Tumblers, that variety having the slender neck, 

 broad head, and small body which is desired in the Barb. Match 

 the cock Barb with the Tumbler hen, and vice versa. From the 

 young of these two pairs select those which show the most Barb 

 characteristics attached to the smallest bodies, breed some of 

 them together, and then match a pair of the smallest most 

 Barb-like young (grandchildren) with the old Barbs if necessary, 

 to increase the wattle, which may be partially lost. Or, if you 

 have a good strain of Barbs, you can introduce one Tumbler, 

 and cross its progeny with the rest of the Barbs, and after a year 

 or two repeat, until the size is obtained without any material 

 loss of wattle or time. 



Hundreds of experiments can be suggested whereby one, so 

 aspiring, can improve one's knowledge ; but, as nature is an 

 open book, of which life teaches us the vocabulary, we suspect 

 fanciers will soon read its columns more intently, and look at 



the pictures less, thereby flndiug elements for their own experi- 

 ments.— Dr. W. P. MoiioAN, Baltimore, Md.—[The Pet-Stocic 

 Bulletin.) 



[This is a very high-class article of Dr. Morgan's, and raises 

 the fancy into more scientific atmosphere than usual. I am 

 glad to find that Dr. Morgan accepts the scriptural account of 

 Pigeons being descended from one original pair. In this he is 

 also confirmed by Darwin, whose experiments went to prove 

 this true. Recently I saw two stuffed specimens of Barbs, 

 which were at least forty years old. They were the property of 

 a very aged fancier now deceased. Being under glass they were 

 in a good state of preservation, and are wonderfully long in fac9 

 —quite as long as the Barb represented in Girton's "Pigeon 

 Fancyer." On seeing them I could not help thinking that the 

 Carrier and Barb are nearer cousins than many imagine. One 

 of the two stuffed specimens had a tuft at the back of the head, 

 as was usual some years ago, and gave the bird a jaunty look, 

 which was to my eye pleasing, though detrimental to the effect 

 of the peculiar shape of head required in the Barb.— Wiltshike 

 Kectob.] 



LONDON FANCY CANARIES.— No. 3. 

 As I have before mentioned, " London Fancy " birds much 

 resemble "Lizard " birds in their nestling feathers, and possess 

 in the like manner either perfect or broken caps. If a " Lizard " 

 bird has a broken cap that defect cannot be obviated by the 

 moult ; the blemish will be apparent during life. It a " London 

 Fancy " bird possesses a broken cap in its nest feathers, it is no 

 bar to its being exhibited when having passed through the 

 moulting process. AU appearance of defective cap is lost when 

 the body feathers become clean or light. This marked difference 

 has ever led me to believe that the " London Fancy " is a dis- 

 tinct variety, and is not a made-up bird through crossing-in 

 with "Lizard" and "Norwich," as many fanciers suppose and 

 have asserted the same to me. I know well what the crosses 

 are betwixt either breed. The young certainly make handsome 

 cage birds, but to breed pure " Fancies " or " Lizards," pure 

 stock must be bred from. 



Fig. 97. — Moulthjg-cage. 



When yonng " Fancy " birds have attained the ages of six or 

 seven weeks they should be caged-off separately in the box 

 monlting-cages, in which they will remain until they have en- 

 tirely finished moulting. If the birds are not moulted singly 

 they will very likely pluck each other, and the feathers will 

 grow-up dark or ticked, which are considered blemishes in ex- 

 hibition specimens. 



Each moulting-cage should be furnished with water and seed- 

 fountains, with a couple of perches inside the cage, one across 

 the centre of the cage, and the other in the same direction, only 

 lower down near the front of the cage where the bird partakes 

 of food. Be sure the perches do not cross each other. A couple 

 of slide-tins for the food should likewise be provided, and should 

 be inserted in apertures in front of the cage. In these tins are 

 to be daOy provided a continuous supply of egg and savoy cako 

 (finger-biscuits), during the whole of the moulting period. Use 

 only the yolk of the egg with the cake, which can be prepared 



