THE LEGllUKXS 



record at all. I just fed them well. I know I could do 

 much better now. During this past January I wanted 

 some eggs and in seven days made them increase their 

 yield nearly live hundred per cent. Later three pullets 

 from one sitting laid 726 eggs in 365 days, or one year — 

 an average of 242 eggs a year. Since that, or two years 

 ago, a pullet laid seven eggs in eight days, another four- 

 teen eggs in sixteen days, still another twenty-one eggs in 

 twenty-two days. These records were all made in mid- 

 winter, during very cold weather. Many persons are 

 using them for egg farms, as they lay large eggs. I have 

 had five hens laying eggs 

 from twenty-nine to thirty- 

 four ounces to the dozen — 

 too large to use for setting. 



Last summer I -had a 

 pen of twenty-one Rose 

 Comb hens running with a 

 few pullets. In the next 

 house were thirteen Barred 

 Rock pullets. I found that 

 the thirteen Rocks required 

 almost the same amount of 

 food the twenty-one Leg- 

 horns did, and in a ten-days' 

 count the Leghorns laid five 

 more than twice as many 

 eggs as did the Rocks, and 

 my Rocks were good layers, 

 too. To sell eggs at the 

 price I do I must have good 

 layers. We see by the above 

 test that a Leghorn egg 

 costs less than one-half as 

 much as a Rock egg. This 

 was in June. In April the 

 Rocks would have laid more. 

 When you come down trj 

 facts it seems to be as Mr. 

 C. E. Howell says: ".A Leg- 

 horn is so profitable as a 

 layer that you can af?3rd to 

 give or throw away the 

 body." But the Leghorns are 



increasing in weight, and when the hens dress four pounds 

 each the market value of the carcass will be no mean 

 part of the Leghorn as a utility fowl. 



One thing I feel sure of, and that is, the larger the 

 bird, the more it will eat and the more each egg will cost. 

 The period from egg to maturity will also be lengthened. 

 It cannot be otherwise. I favor and try to breed so that 

 cockerel-, when developed, will weigh five pounds and the 

 pullets three and one-half pounds each. I have several 

 five-pound Rose Comb cockerels and four-pound pullets, 

 and they are large, making a fine appearance. To get 

 these weights you must pay attention to width of back. 

 Part of the weight must be in width. I have seen many 

 Single Comb Brown Leghorns that were tall enough to 

 weigh five pounds, but they had only the width of a three- 

 pound cockerel. A Leghorn pullet weighing three pounds 

 is a fair-sized bird. If below three pounds when they 

 are developed, I should call them small. A three-pound 

 pullet will at two years make a four-pound hen. 



I think that in the Brown Leghorn we have combined 

 grace, beauty and usefulness to a higher degree than in 

 any other breed. I am well aware that all breeds are 

 beautiful when bred close to perfection. I cannot look 

 at the fine specimens shown at Xew York without want- 



ing to breed them all, but in the Browns we l.ave so much 

 in so little. 



The Rose Comb Browns may not be quite so showy 

 as the Single Comb Browns because of their low combs, 

 but the advantage of the low, fleshy comb has made them 

 popular in the northern states, although they are also 

 bred in the south perhaps to as great an extent propor- 

 tionately as in the north, considering all breeds north and 

 south. My sales of eggs from Rose Combs have been 

 greater than from Single Comb Browns up to the last two 

 years. Now they are about the same. The entries of 

 Rose Comb Browns are 

 steadily increasing at the 

 shows. The New York Show 

 contains large classes each 

 year. For some years fe- 

 males have been shown equal 

 to Single Comb Browns in 

 color, and males also, for 

 Cyrus 1st was cut only one- 

 half point on color at Cleve- 

 land, Ohio, and Cyrus 2nd 

 scored 93i/ after being cut 

 one and one-half for a little 

 gray in one wing, caused by 

 clipping the wing, then pull- 

 ing it to get it into the show. 

 One thing that has dis- 

 couraged breeders has been 

 the rose comb. The stock 

 ('uring the first ten years 

 after being admitted to the 

 Standard (which was in 1883, 

 I believe) bred combs too 

 large and too far away from 

 the head. They would soon 

 topple over, but that fault is 

 pretty well remedied, al- 

 though some combs still 

 grow to be too large. I have 

 been measuring a few combs 

 that I think nearly right. I 

 find a cock's comb that fits, 

 closely to the head and 

 seems about the right size for looks is one and seven- 

 eights inches wide in front, two and one-half inches long. 

 The comb should taper to where the spike starts. The 

 spike should be a long one, and extend straight out on a 

 level with the top of the comb. A rose comb should be 

 covered with small points on the top. A smooth comb is 

 a defect. The cock having the comb here described weighs 

 about five pounds and was behind a "blue" at New York. 

 To reproduce it I want his mate to have a comb flat on top, 

 seven-eighths of an inch wide and one and one half inches 

 to spike, with a straight spike three-fourths of an inch long. 

 I should like to have shown a cut of this cock, but 

 after trying l\ve exposures, some at home and two in a 

 photograph gallery, I gave it up. I find it very hard to 

 get a good, true likeness of any Leghorn, and this cock 

 is the most nervous chap I ever tried to photograph. In 

 the pen he is quiet, but will not stand for his picture. In 

 mating for good combs, or in fact any section, I would 

 rather have a female first-class than the male, if I could 

 have only one first-class, for I find the chicks follow the 

 mother in almost seventy-five per cent, of the progeny. I 

 think here is where good resvilts are often lost. A first- 

 class male is selected, but not enough attention is paid to 

 his mate or mates. - 



ROSE COMB BROWN LEGHORN COCK 

 The above picture reproduced from a photograph of 

 one of W. W. Kulp's noted Rose Comb Brown Leghorn 

 males, fails to show the rich color and striping of the 

 hackle and saddle feathers; the shape also is not suc- 

 cessfully portrayed owing to improper posing of the 

 specimen. The fine head points, hovvever, are well re- 

 produced by the camera. 



