May H, 1876. ] 



JOURNAL OP HOBTICULTORE AND COTTAGE GAEDENEK. 



379 



Cage Birds were next. In yellow Canaries there was nothing 

 atriliiug, but one very good Mealy Norwich turned up in the 

 next class. In the following class a Yellow-crested was first 

 and Green second; both good. Gjldflnches, though good and 

 well shown, were not equal to what we have seen here, but the 

 Tjinnct.s were, as usual, quite up to the mark. In the Variety 

 class lifst was a Cinnamon and second a Bullfinch. 



Two classes were provided for Uabbils. In Lops a grand 

 Tortoiseshell buck stood first, the moasurement 22i by -Ij ; se- 

 cond a Sooty Fawn buck, 22 by 4.? ; highly commended a Fawn, 

 22 by 4 J, in bad order, and would have been as well in the hutch. 

 Any other breed had sixteen entries. First a moderate Silver- 

 Grey and second a Belgian Hare, another of that variety being 

 highly commended. 



POULTRY.-GAME.-BI-tcfcdrcosfed or other Redg.— Cock —Cap and 1, W. 

 anaa.Ailams. 2, U. E. Martin, ti/ic, Sales & Bontley. Hen.— 1 and ii'ic. A. 

 Cameron. 2, E. Aykroyd. Game.— J;u/ otkrr colour.— Cock.— 1, W. & H. 

 Adama. 2. O.Travis, vkc, J. A. & H. H. Stavely. Hen.— 1. J. A. & H. H. 

 Stavely. 2, Sales &. bentley. vhc, A. Caraernn. FaEMcn Fowls.— 1. W. Cut- 

 iaok. Jan. Spanioh.— Guy and 1, J. Powell. 2, Mrs. Aldopp. Brahmas.— 1. J. 

 T. Smith, 2. W. Harvey. CooniMS.- 1, S. R. Harris. 2. Mra. Allsoup. Ham- 

 BaRoiis.— Spangled. -1, Holmes & Dostoer. 2, H. J. Wilson. Pencilled.— \, J. 

 Smith, 2. G. Aahpole. Anv otuer Vakiktv.- 1, \V. Harvey. 2, J. Kellett 

 (Black Hambarghl. vhc, .T. Chester. Any Variety except Game.— Cocfc.— 1, 

 A. i W. H. Silvester (Gidd Poland). 2, W. Hesleline (Brahma). Hen.-\. W. 

 Harvey. 2, J. Powell. I'ftc. A. .SW.H.SdvestorlGold Poland). Game Bantams. 

 -Btalk-bremted and other Reds.— Cock.— 1 and 2, A. Sugden. vhc, J. Nelson, 

 ifen.— 1. A. S. SU!{den. 2, J. Nelson. Any other colour.— Cock.— \. J.Nelson. 

 2. J. Cook. Ben.— I, Mra. E. Newbitt. 2. A. Smith, vhc, 3. P. Mansell ; E. 

 Dawson. Bantams. —Jjtj/ varletii except Game.— Cock.— C\X9 and 1, R H. 

 Abhlon. 2. W. H. Shaekleton. Heii.-l, R. H. Aahton. 2, A. Smith. 3. W. L. 

 Clark. Sellin-o Class — 1, A. i W. H.Silvester (Gold Polandsl. 2. J. Powell. 

 DvCKH.-Aiilesbury or Rouen.— 1, J. White. 2, S. R. Harria. Ann other variety. 

 —1. A. <i W. H. Silvester. 

 PIGEONS.-CARiuEUa.-Cnpand 1, J. Baker. 2. H. Yardley. Podteks.- 1, 



2, and vhc. J. B-iker. 3. L. .4 W. Watkin. Tumblers —I. W. & H. Adams. 2 

 and K/ic, J. Baker. 3, H. Yardley. Jacobins. -1. T. Holt. 2, H. Yardley. Fan- 

 tails —1 and 2, J. F. Loveraidge. 3, H.Vardlev. Tobbits.—I, J.Baker. 2 and 



3. K. Wo Ills. Maopies.— 1, J. E. Crofts. 2 iind 3. J. Baker. Barbs —1, H. 

 Yardley. 2 and 3, J. Baker. Antwbrps.- 1, J. Gardener. 2 and 8. B. Yardley. 

 DHAaooNa, — 1. Hon. W. Suffden. 2 and 3, R. Woods. Any other Variety.— 1, 

 J.Baker. 2 and ;i. W. Harvey, ji lie, J. Baker, R. Woods. Seluno Class.- 1, 

 J. E. Crofts. 2. J. Baker. 3, H. Yardley. 



CAGE BIRDS.— CANARY.-YcKoir.-l.W- Perkins. 2, J. Sanderson. Buff.— 

 l.W. Perkina. 2, T.Green. Orccn or I'lnpan/ed.-l and 2, T. Green. Gold- 

 yiNcn.-l, S. Gravill. 2, R. Pearaon. Linnet— 1, T. Kirk, vhc, S. Gravel. 

 A.NY OTHER Variety.- 1, T. Green. 2. R. Pearaon. 



RABBITS -Lop eared.-BucJ; or Doe.-l, C. King. 2, J. A. Barra. Any 

 OTHER Breed.— Bitcfc or Doe,—\, W. Lnmley. 2, W. Allison, vhc, J, G. 

 Ablard. 



Jddge. — Mr. E. Hntton, Pudsey. 



THE CARRIER. 



POWER OP WINO AND C0JIPAS3. 

 "I hear a voice yon cannot hear 

 Which bids me not to stay; 

 I see a hand yon cannot see 

 Which beckons me away." 



There has been much interesting writing on the powers of 

 the Carrier Pigeon, the length and rapidity of their flights and 

 modes of training, along with speculations as to their guide for 

 their homeward course. The latter points to the theory of this 

 bird flying by sight alone. I find that the Kev. E. S. Dixon in 

 his very interesting work, " The Dovecote and Aviary," takes 

 this same view ; and though I always hesitate to place my 

 opinion against that of snoh men of letters as Mr. Dixon, still 

 on this point (the guide of the Carrier on the wing) I beg most 

 respectfully to differ. It is pretty well known that I am not an 

 Antwerp-Carrier fancier, and do not encourage the Antwerp as 

 a bird that ought to be in the fancy for several reasons which 

 I shall not discuss at present. But Autwerps I keep for two 

 purposes : first, as feeders for my young Pouters, and second 

 for table nse. For both these purposes I find them most suitable. 

 First, then, as to the power of wing possessed by this bird. I 

 do not think this point is yet fully developed in this country ; 

 but so far as my personal experience goes I shall give it. The 

 plain narrative I think may answer the purpose best. It may 

 be interesting, and I hope will not weary readers. 



Several years ago when in Manchester I called on Mr. W. 

 Mill ward, bird dealer, from whom I had all my Belgian Canaries. 

 He had lately arrived from the Continent, and brought with 

 him a stock of Antwerp Carriers, which he then found to be 

 most unprofitable. Not having before seen such birds, which 

 I could be sure of having been imported, I purchased three 

 pairs. The stock consisted of mostly blues, some mealies, and 

 some nameless colours ; but all were self-coloured, and all show- 

 ing a cro.ss of the Owl, a slight division of the leathers on the 

 breast. Some of them had the breast feathers slightly turned, 

 indicating the frill. They were wild as newly-caught Hawks, 

 and strong enough to carry before them a pane of window 

 glass, as one of them d,id when in my possession. After much 

 care and caution I found them to be hardy birds, breeders 

 almost the year round — indeed, I am never without some few 

 young ones. During the season when early light they take 

 two flights per day, the cocks and unoccupied hens at about 

 7 A.M., the hens and unoccupied cocks about 1 p.m. The flock 

 invariably fly southward, and are away for about an hour 

 and a half each time. I have seen them fully ten miks south 



still holding in that direction. When first noticed on their 

 return they arc) always at a very great height ; but should it be 

 blowing hard (the weather seems of little consequence to them) 

 they often return from the northward, having no doubt been 

 carried to the east or west beyond their home. Three years 

 passed when a friend came on a visit from Ledbury, Hereford- 

 shire. This friend saw my Antwerps, and expressed a wish for 

 a pair or two to breed for table nse. After his leaving for home 

 I caught three pairs all bred in my loft (Antwerp loft, for with 

 them I have nothing else). They were put into a bos (not a 

 basket or cage), and addressed to a mutual friend in Manchester, 

 as they could not reach Ledbury in one day from Glasgow. 

 They reached Manchester in the evening, were rebooked for 

 Ledbury next morning, and reached their destination that 

 evening ; but until then were not taken out of the box in which 

 I had placed them. Before sending the birds away I pulled the 

 flight feathers out of the right wing of each bird, and rny in- 

 struotions were, "Keep them confined with such a netting as 

 will let them see the locality, till they have each a nest of young 

 ones, and are sitting upon their second eggs." Those instruc- 

 tions were rigidly adhered to. One night the netting was re- 

 moved according to instructions, and the birds were at liberty 

 next morning. A man was set to watch. The cocks took sundry 

 short flights, and by-and-by relieved their mates occupied in 

 incubation ; the hens came out, and at once took wing. The 

 date I cannot now give precisely— let me call it the 18th of July. 

 On the morning of the 20th I had a letter from my friend dated 

 the day before (the 19th) saying, " the birds were yesterday 

 morning let out, but two of them have not returned. I am 

 afraid they are lost." While in the act of reading my friend's 

 letter my man who attends to those birds came into my ofiice 



saying, " I think two of Mr. 's birds are back." Scarcely 



believing him I went out into the yard, and there certainly 

 were two of the hens I had sent to Ledbury. 



Now, I can tell to a mile the distance between Glasgow and 

 Ledbury, Herefordshire, by railway ; but I will let our readers 

 measure the distance as the crow flies, and decide whether or 

 not this is a very long flight. Mark first, those birds had never 

 been trained; second, they had never been in the hands of any- 

 one till caught by me when I pulled the flight feathers from 

 one wing of each bird. These birds would leave their cote at 

 Ledbury about 10 or 11 a.m. on the 18th, and as I did not know 

 what day or weels they were to be set at liberty, of course I did 

 not expect them, and at all events I certainly did not expect 

 they would at any time return to Glasgow on the wing. For all 

 I know they may have reached on the evening of the 18th or 

 during the day of the 19th. Two months after this I gave a 

 pair to a friend in Paisley — a pair of young ones. They had 

 only been two days outside the loft, and never had left it beyond 

 a hundred yards. They were taken away squeakers, and con- 

 fined with a netting in front for three weeks. When let out 

 they were at their birthplace in ten or twelve minutes. It is 

 only seven miles to Paisley by road. Those birds had never 

 been flown. — J. H. 



ITALIAN VERSUS ENGLISH BEES. 



In my former communication on this question I think I have 

 sufficiently proved on abirndaut and undoubted evidence that 

 the Italian bees have been found superior in almost every 

 respect to the common English or North-European bee, which 

 appears to be the same as that which has hitherto been the 

 honey bee of North America. It has been so proved in Switzer- 

 land, Germany, North America, and elsewhere. The only 

 country, so far as I know, in which there exists any serious 

 doubts as to its superiority is Great Britain. It is not that 

 there are wanting in England, and Scotland, and Ireland great 

 admirers of the golden-belted foreigners, for almost, it not quite, 

 as much has been said in their favour by our own bee-keepers 

 as has been said by those of other nations. Yet it must be ad- 

 mitted that on the whole we have not had the same amount of 

 evidence in their favour, or so convincing in character, as that 

 which has reached us from America and the continent of Europe ; 

 and consequently those who are still sceptical on the subject, as 

 for instance our friend Mr. Pettigrew, have considerable ground 

 for their attitude of doubt and distrust. For myself I must 

 acknowledge that I am far from satisfied that the common 

 EngHsh bee is not in every way as profitable, though it certainly 

 is not so handsome, as the Italian bee. I have now had them 

 in my apiary, either pure or mixed (hybrid as they are called), 

 for many years, and though I am very partial to them, and find 

 them altogether good and pleasant to work with without any of 

 those vices which have been attributed to them, neither can I 

 say that I have found them endued with all the magnificent 

 virtues which have been as freely allotted them. Opinions in 

 England widely differ respecting them, nor have we received, 

 so far as I know, any such evidence as that with which Germany 

 and America supply us, which obliges us to acknowledge their 

 superiority in and for those countries. Can it be that our 

 apiarians have not really bestowed that attention upon the 



