FANCIERS' JOURNAL 



F 



481 

 F363 

 BIRD 



AND 



POULTRY EXCHANGE. 



Vol. I. 



PHILADELPHIA, APRIL 16, 1874. 



No. 16. 



(For Fanciers' Journal.) 



REMINISCENCES OF THE "HEN FEVER." 



BY GEO. P. BTJRNHAM. 



A friend sends me a copy of the new "American Standard 

 of Excellence." 



After a careful examination of the contents of this little 

 work, I am not surprised at meeting with various sharp 

 criticisms upon its merits and defects, in your columns and 

 in other leading poultry journals. 



In my judgment too much is attempted in this " standard," 

 and I clearly coincide in opinion with one of your corre- 

 spondents, "W;" first, that "there was no need of this 

 (so-called) thorough revision of the previous American 

 Standard;" secondly, that "the history of such theoretical 

 standards does not offer much encouragement to the mass of 

 .fanciers and breeders;" thirdly, that the utter ■" worth less- 

 ness of all standards made upon the false basis of controlling 

 the judges in their arbitrations," by fixed technical rules, is 

 apparent; and finally, that the new standard, being the 

 result of but three days' labor, it could not, of course, be 

 what it purports to be, namely, anything approaching "a 

 thorough revision;" or, at best, in this brief time, much of 

 an improvement upon former attempts in this direction. 



Take a single example of the additions made to the list of 

 "distinct breeds " of fowls in this standard, for which pre- 

 miums are to be awarded at American poultry exhibitions 

 hereafter, to wit: the "Plymouth Rocks," which variety 

 are, in this work, for the first time I think, recognized as a 

 breed. 



Now, no one pretends that this fowl is a distinct breed (or 

 variety), as are the Games, the Cochins, the Black Spanish, 

 &c. It is simply a cross, no doubt a very good one, but still 

 only a mixture of two or three strains of established blood, 

 which, being bred from, among themselves, must inevitably 

 go back to the original blood. While the originator of this 

 stock breeds from the parent strains, he can produce average 

 good birds, to which he may appropriately give this (or any 

 other) chosen name. But the man who purchases the pro- 

 geny of him as " Plymouth Bocks," and breeds them together 

 in the expectation that he will get chickens (beyond the first 

 generation subsequently) like the fowls he buys, is destined 

 to disappointment. And this kind of fowl is recognized in 

 our new "American Standard of Excellence" as a distinct 

 breed of poultry ! 



I have not a word of fault to find with the bird alluded 

 to. It is a good one. I have said this before in one of my 

 articles sent you. But I say now, that the recognition of 

 any known cross of fowls, as a specific variety, by such 

 authority as our American Standard ought to be, is a palpa- 

 ble error? and I apprehend that we shall very shortly learn, 

 from the other side of the water, how ridiculous such assump 



ciers in England. 



Tears ago, in the early days of the poultry mania in 

 America, after the societies and clubs in Great Britain had 

 put forth their original standard, the subject of adopting 

 this in the first New England Association was bruited. 

 Then it was tinkered, "improved upon," "revised," Ameri- 

 canized, and — went into the tomb of the Capulets. 



Dr. Bennett, Miner, Devereaux, Capt. Williams, Plaisted, 

 Colonel Jacques, Hatch, Cornish, Childs, Ad. White, Dr. 

 Wight, Alden, Buckminster, Burnham — et id omne — all had 

 breeds of fowls which they had manufactured, first or last, 

 which each insisted was better, finer, handsomer, larger, or 

 more prolific than other people's fowls, and to which each 

 owner gave an original name. 



I remember, for instance, the original "Plymouth Rocks " 

 of those days, the "Pawn-colored Dorkings," the "Chitta- 

 prats," the "Wild Indians," the "Wild Indian Games," the 

 " Hong Kongs," the" Prince Alberts," the "Burampootors," 

 and many other crosses that were in the early years turned 

 out "for a market," until their name became legion; and 

 the purposes of the standard were entirely annulled, because 

 everybody was bent upon getting the name of his mongrel 

 cross into the list as a pure breed. The consequence was that 

 the standard was ignored, and every one bred and crossed 

 and named his stock to suit his own fancy, until the first 

 decadence commenced, which resulted finally in earning for 

 the chicken trade the title of humbug for years afterward 

 prior to the war. 



Subsequently, when the interest in poultry breeding re- 

 vived (after 1865-'66), a new impetus was given to this 

 trade, and since then we have gone on improving our oppor- 

 tunity, and enhancing the value of domestic fowls in this 

 country immensely. The English standard was for a time 

 adopted again. Then it was " improved," " revised," and 

 "adopted" to our needs and requirements in this coun- 

 try. But this was only short-lived. The original issue 

 of the American work, as "W" states, " died in its infancy 

 from its own inherent weakness." The second edition 

 served but a temporary and unsatisfactory purpose, and was 

 of but small account, as we all know. And now we have 

 the new one, prefaced with a list of arbitrary instructions to 

 govern judges at our shows ; a dictum which would kill it 

 dead at sight if there were no other weighty objections to 

 much of the arrangement of this last "revision." 



Individually this subject is of little account with me. I 

 long since graduated in the show business. I put no fowls 

 into the exhibition rooms of late years. I have been there, 

 however, and my fowls have carried off the palm so often, 

 and in so satisfactory a manner, that I am now content to 

 see others enjoy the sport, and the cost of this operation. 

 But this "standard" matter is one of large interest to the 

 fancier and breeder everywhere who goes for fine points, 

 and who intends to become a competitor at our exhibitions. 



tions are in the estimation of clever breeders and, good fr"y ■ ,„ - WJf n the recent Buffalo Convention held its sessions upon 



^THSOA^ 



M 2 4 2001 | 



J,/eRARlE5 



this important subject, therefore, it was hoped and expected 



