90 



JOUBNAL OP HORTIOULTUEB AND COTTAGE GARDENEB, 



[ January 22, 1874. 



very dirty, bnfc that could not conceal her fine points. She is 

 Buch another as No. 3'Ji. No. 398 (G. Ure), highly commended, 

 might have been more honoured and there would have been no 

 complaints. Her crop was large for a hen and finely marked, 

 ■with great length of feather and thin waist; the only fault she 

 showed was foul thighs. No. 399 (R. Pulton), second prize. 

 Looked at in front this hen was too heavy and wide, and, in our 

 opinion, although a good bird not in the same list as either 397 

 or 398. No. 400 (G. Ure), first prize, was a grand hen in every 

 respect, except a little too white on the crop. In shape and 

 general appearance she was certainly the best in the class. 

 This class was a very fine one on the whole. 



Black hens, any age, were eleven pens. No. 405 (T. Rule), 

 second prize, was a well-marked and glossy-colonred bird. 

 No. 408 (A. H. Stewart), was unnoticed but worthy of a prize. 

 We are quite surprised at the Judges overlooking her entirely ; 

 a bigger and handsomer hen could scarcely be, but she looked as 

 if she had been kept in a coal cellar. Her almost only fault was 

 beiug rather smoky in colour, but this should not have con- 

 demned her, being otherwise so good. She is one of Mr. Ure's 

 breeding. No. 409 (F. M'Crae), was commended, a heavy bird 

 but well marked. No. 411 (G. Ure), first prize, a particularly 

 handsome raven black hen, about perfect in marking, worthy 

 of her position. No. 414 (G. Ure), third prize, also good in 

 cdIoux and marking. 



Eight old Red hens came next, and the first of them. No. 415. 

 J. C. Lyell), highly commended, was a very long fair-coloured 

 hen of correct marking. No. 416 (W. Ridley), first prize and 

 cup. We recognised this one as first at Glasgow for the last two 

 years. She is fair-coloured, very long in feather and limb, well 

 marked, but dues not show much crop, in the pen at least. 

 No. 418 (R. Fulton), commended, was also mentioned at the late 

 Glasgow Show. She is a bird of better colour than the two 

 preceding ones, but much smaller, although a tidy, nicely-shaped 

 hen. No. 419 (J. C. Lyell), was the bestshaped hen of the lot, but 

 failed in colour and marking, beiug too gay. The length, shape, 

 and feathering of her legs were not to be beaten by any hen 

 m the Show. No. 421 (A.. Frame), third prize, was a good coloured 

 and well-shaped but rough-legged bird. No. 422 (John M. D. 

 Brown), second prize, was an utter mistake, being only good in 

 colour and marking on the crop. In other respects she was 

 certainly the worst hen in the class. 



Old Yellow hens were eight pens. No. 424 (A. H. Stewart), 

 third prize, was of a faint colour but a long thin bird and fairly 

 niarked. No. 420 (R. Fulton), first prize. It was curious to 

 observe how the Judges stickled for colour in one class, as in the 

 second-prize Red hen, while in the next thev awarded first prize 

 to the worst-coloured Yellow in the class, abird of a pale straw 

 colour and chequered. She was a bird of good marking and 

 style of legs, but drooped her shoulders too much. No. 427 (J. 

 White), was very good in colour and marking, and was highly 

 commended. She looked short-legged, however. We should 

 have preferred No. 428 (G. Ure), the second-prize bird to the first, 

 as she was of better colour and equally good in other respects. 

 No. 429 (G. Ure), commended, was capital in style and rich in 

 colour, but not so correctly marked. 



The prizes for old White hens (eight entries) seemed to give 

 satisfaction, and were gained as foUows :— No. 430 (W. Ridley), 

 first prize, a fine hen but she has seen better days. She is 

 getting heavy in appearance. No. 430 (R. Fulton), second prize, 

 a handsome thin-girthed bird, and No. 439 (W. Stiles) third 

 prize. 



Seven hens of Any other colour came next, and comprised 



No. 440 (J. C. Lyell), commended, a long stylish Blue-chequer. 

 No 441 (W. Hendry), highly commended, a White with a blue 

 tail, which ought to have had a thii-d prize instead of No. 443 

 (J. E. Spence), also a White with blue tail and hog-backed. 

 No. 444 (G. Ure), third prize, a beautiful atyUah sandy. No. 447 

 (J. Mitchell), first prize, a very fine Mealy, rightly placed at the 

 op of the list. 



The classes for young hen Pouters, birds bred in 1873, were 

 all well filled and contained many first-rate in quality. The 

 Blues were fourteen pens, the first prize going to No. 450 (G. 

 Wallace), the winner also at Glasgow. She may be described as 

 perfect m style, and the only fault she has is being slightly 

 deficient in bib. Her breeder deserves credit for turning out 

 Buch a beautiful bird. A. H. Stewart's highly commended pen. 

 No. 451, was very handsome but not perfect in marking, wanting 

 pinion on one wing and a better-cut moon. No. 453 (G. Ure), 

 was unnoticed, but of a grand shape. In marking she showed a 

 good moon but had slightly rough and foul limbs. No. 455 (G. 

 Ure), second prize, was a very similar bird to the first-prize 

 winner, but not so nicely marked, having one side with too 

 much white. There were other very good hens in this class, as 

 No. 448(M'Gill Skinner), third prize, 452 (F. M'Crae), of a fine 

 style, and 456 (A. Frame). 



There were uine young Black hens, and Mr. Ure took all three 

 prizes. Between the first and second-prize birds there was 

 little to choose, both were good in colour, marking, and shape, 

 and both finely-cropped birds. The third-prize one was, perhaps, 



a more stylish bird than either, but did not show nearly so well. 

 Mr. Fulton's bird (No. 464), was of a good colour and nicely 

 marked on the crop, but without pinions. She has fine long 

 flights and well-shaped and feathered legs. 



Young Red hens (eight entries) were better than the young 

 Red cocks. No. 470 (J. C. Lyell), the best-coloured one in the 

 class, was perfectly marked with clean stocking legs. She is 

 within very little of the correct colour. No. 475 (R. Fulton), 

 third prize, well marked, fair colour, and very showy, but 

 imperfect in shape of limbs and wanting in long toe feathers. 

 No. 476 (J. S. & H. Robb), first prize, was the biggest one in the 

 class, but not fine in colour, though fairly marked. 



Young Yellow heus (six entries) contained some very good 

 birds. No. 478 (J. Grant), a long good-coloured bird, which we 

 preferred to No. 479 (W.Thomson), the third prize bird, short 

 in feather and too rough-legged. No. 480 (G. Ure), was first 

 prize and winner of the cup for young hens. She is a good- 

 coloured bird of good proportions, well marked except that she 

 wanted pinions on her wings. No. 432 (G. Ure), second prize, 

 was finely shaped but faint in colour and too gay on crop. 



The ten young White hens contained some fair birds, and the 

 first and third prizes went to J. Grant, Edinburgh, the second 

 to G. Schaschke, Aberdeen. 



There is no doubt there is an immense improvement in 

 Pouters during the last few years. Anyone who remembers 

 the first Glasgow Shows, about fourteen years ago, cannot fail 

 to be struck with the altered style of the birds. The finely 

 girthed and stocking-legged Pouters of the present day compare 

 favourably with the rough-legged runtish style so much in vogue 

 before. In marking also there is a great cliange, and fine btbs> 

 moons, and pinions are more the rule than the exception. Foul 

 thighs are still rather prevalent and difficult to breed out. Gay 

 birds are generally clean-legged, but when otherwise perfect in 

 marks Pouters generally retain some foul feathers about the 

 limbs. It seems the acknowledged practice, however, and to be 

 tacitly understood, that these as well as snips on the forehead 

 may be extracted as far as practicable, and if the Judges were 

 to disqualify birds that had been so operated on they would have 

 enough to do, for it was palpably plain that some dozens of them 

 had been more or less plucked. The same may be said of the 

 late Glasgow Show, It is well known that dressing goes on, and 

 the Judges must just pretend not to see bare places at the roots 

 of beaks, &c. — [We totally dissent from this opinion. — Ens.] 

 We wish all success to the Northern Poultry and Pigeon Club 

 of Aberdeen. Its Show has suddenly sprung-up from the 

 position of second class to the very front rank, a position which 

 we hope it will long retain. 



We are indebted to a correspondent for the following account 

 of the rest of the Pigeons. 



In old Carrier cocks the prize birds were all excellent Blacks. 

 Old Carrier hens were a small class but first-rate in quality. 

 The first-prize winner, a magnificent hen, well deserved the cup 

 she took as the best Carrier in the Show ; the second-prize one 

 was fit to be first in many competitions. Young Carriers were 

 very good, the first and second splendid birds, showing quality 

 all over. 



Short-faced Tumblers were a very fine class, first going to au 

 .Almond cock, grand in colour and head ; second, also an Almond, 

 good in head but not so rich in feather ; third a good Yellow. 



Barbs were not numerous but of good quality. First an ex- 

 ceedingly fine Black, which took the cup for the best Barb or 

 Short-faced Tumbler. Second, third, and highly commended 

 fair birds. 



In Fantails all the prizes went to real Scotch birds with a 

 good tail and a small body, characteristic of those birds. Being 

 always in motion they completely put the large coarse English 

 birds into the shade, the latter always standing in the pen like 

 stuffed birds, devoid of nervous action. First, second, and third 

 were all good birds of the real Dundee breed. Pen 545, the 

 Crystal Palace winner, did not draw the Judges' attention, being 

 out of condition, apparently from over-showing. 



In Jacobins the first prize went to a Red hen, good in colour, 

 hood, and chain, but yellow-eyed. As this class, however, was 

 judged by gas-light the Judges cannot be held responsible for 

 not noticing it ; we prefer, on the whole, the second bird, as 

 being rather longer in feather and better in head. Third, a 

 Y'ellow, a fair bird. The class was large and on the whole good. 



Trumpeters coraxnisei anumber of excellent birds, there being 

 little to choose between the prize-winners, which were all of the 

 new type. 



E uglish Owls were numerous and good. The first and SQpond 

 seemed to us, however, to have a strong cross of the Foreign; 

 and as there is only one standard for both varieties, and fanciers 

 will cross them, it seems useless to divide them. No. 591 (J. 

 Chadwick), was the best of the lot, but came too late for judging. 

 In Foreign Owls a splendid White, good in all points, was first; 

 second a good Blue ; third a White. 



Turbits were a large class but contained nothing very striking. 

 First a fair Yellow ; second same colour, well frilled but deficient 

 in peak. 



