1NBRLLDING AND PRACTICAL QUALITIES. 7 



lor himself, and as a result of repeated experiments arrived at the conclusion that the opposi- 

 tion to inbreeding had little real support either in fact or reason, I make the statement 

 deliberately, for I question whether there is any other important matter upon which poultry- 

 men take opposite views, where the side having the greatest numerical support the popular 

 side can muster so slight a support in facts and logic. 



To the general argument that the stocks of fancy fowls said to be inbred are often lacking iu 

 .stamina and practical qualities as a result of inbreeding, the reply is that though so often 

 assumed as the cause of deterioration, no one to my knowledge has ever even attempted to 

 .show it to prove it in any case. The reasoning in this connection invariably is that if inbreed- 

 ing has been practiced that is all that is necessary to account for deterioration. Everything 

 wrong is charged to inbreeding, and no effort made to connect a trouble with any other cause, 

 though there may be other and more probable causes obtruding themselves upon the attention 

 of anyone making even a most cursory study of the case. The statement already made about 

 experiences in inbreeding applies with equal force to the general argument about lack of vital- 

 ity in inbred stocks. Such lack of vitality and the loss of practical qualities which often goes 

 with it are not the peculiar and inevitable results of inbreeding, but are the common results of 

 breeding from poorly developed specimens that are good in some superficial point prized by 

 fanciers, and are just as likely to be found in the progeny of birds that are no kin as in the 

 offspring of those that are near akin. 



The use of flocks in which indiscriminate breeding is the rule to illustrate an argument against 

 inbreeding furnishes no substantial support to such an argument, for it is just as appropriate to 

 assign degeneracy in such flocks to violation of principles of breeding about which there is no 

 dispute. 



The truth is that the case against inbreeding does not rest upon trustworthy evidence, but 

 derives most of its strength from the prejudice against it which poultry breeders almost with- 

 out exception bring with them to their first efforts in breeding fowls. Before a breeder is in a 

 position to begin to breed intelligently, and to put in practice the principles of breeding, he 

 must divest himself of all prejudice in the matter, and consider it at least possible that inbreed- 

 ing is a safe as well as a sure way of arriving at certain results. In the statement of the case 

 for inbreeding which follows, I will try to make the reasons which justify it as clear as the 

 facts which disprove the general argument against it will be to anyone who gives it a full and 

 fair test. To those who will not be convinced by argument and statement of facts I can onlv 

 recommend a practical test. 



Inbreeding and Practical Qualities. 



That " like begets like," is the fundamental principle iu breeding for definite purposes. 

 Every theory, rule, principle, law, method, and system of successful production of live stock- 

 depends more or less on this fundamental fact, and must take account of it. 



An interpretation of facts which fails to consider it, a rule which excludes it, advjce opposed 

 to it, is theoretically unsound, and practically defective. 



The idea that inbreeding is useful or necessary to develop " fancy " points, but detrimental 

 and destructive in other respects involves two absurd assumptions: 



(!) That in the progeny of a union of fowls (or animals) near akin the universal 

 law that " like produces like," is operative in regard to one class of character- 

 istics, but inoperative with respect to another. 



(2). That in the progeny of a union of fowls (or animals) not near akin, the law 

 " like produces like," operates as to the qualities in which in rnatings of related 

 fowls (or animals) it is not operative. 



Such contradictions in the facts bearing upon the operation of a supposed law or principle 

 would, if they actually existed, make the practical application of that law or principle so 

 unreliable and uncertain that it could not be made a fundamental principle. 



But there Is no such contradiction in the facts. It has repeatedly been shown that "like 

 produces like" in practical or substantial, as well as in fancy or superficial qualities, both when 

 the individuals used in the mating are near akin and when they are no kin. 



This does not mean that the progeny of a mating are exact duplicates of their parents, or 



