VARIETIES OF DOMESTIC FOWL. 101 



it ; I should rather incline to the opinion that they took their 

 name from having been " tenants at will " of some feudal sov- 

 ereignty; at all events, they are very "lordly" fowls, and 

 among the best races for profit or for looks, " for fashion or for 

 fight." Why it is that so perfect bloods should have escaped 

 description by poulterers, I am unable to divine. It is true 

 they are rather small, and that is the worst thing that can be 

 said of the Dominiques. They were introduced into this coun- 

 try by the French, and I think them a French, and not a Dutch 

 fowl, as some suppose. 



Mr. George C. Peirce, of Danvers, a breeder of merit, says, 

 in a letter concerning these fowls, as follows : 



" Taken all in all, I believe them to be one of the very best 

 breeds of fowls we have, and I do not know of any breed that 

 alters so little by in and in breeding ; they are first rate layers, 

 and although they do not come in to laying so young as the Span- 

 ish, I think them far better sitters and nursers. I thought the 

 best information I could give you, with regard to their laying 

 qualities, would be the statement of Mr. Philip S. Osborn, of 

 Danvers, who has a very fine stock of this breed. His state- 

 ment is a correct account of the cost of keeping thirty-eight 

 fowls, and the number of eggs obtained from them, during the 

 months of December, 1848, and January, February, and March, 

 1849, and is as follows : 



Dec. 1848, 234 eggs, sold for . . . $4.87 

 Jan. 1849, 298 " " " . 7.35 



Feb. 1849, 450 " " " . . . 9.37 

 Mar. 1849, 684 " " " . 9.57 



11 bushels manure sold for . . . 3.67 



34.83 

 The whole expense of keeping 38 fowls four 



winter months, . . . . .10.00 



9* $24.83, profits. 



