25 



altogether birds from showing, simply because it has one bad property, viz.— it may be 

 a broken eye, or a crooked beak, or an odd Feather, for the bird might take three pro» 

 perties out of the other four, therefore, the winner, by taking three properties out of 

 the five, a proof it was the better bird. If too much of this nonsense is allowed of 

 disqualifying birds there is no knowing where it will end, and what advantages may 

 be taken of the young and inexperienced Fancier, who are not able to contend with 

 more experienced Fanciers ; there is a line to be drawn, for example, if two Fanciers 

 agree to show two black-pied Pouters, the one showing a blue-pied Pouter, thinking he 

 might be allowed to lose on Feather, disqualify the bird at once, for it is not a black- 

 pied Pouter, and give the prize to the other bird provided it is a black-pied Pouter. On 

 the contrary, if two black-pied are shewn, and there should be a kitish Feather about 

 it, do not disqualify this bird, provided the other is better in Feaither, by all means let 

 it take this property (Feather), and proceed on the other four properties. It is equally 

 apphcable to black, red, yellow mottles, and all other Pigeons, therefore let the judges 

 act with integrity, uprightness, and truth, as the breath of their soul; if they know they 

 are incompetent to award the prizes of Pigeons, let them give it up and give place to 

 more competent men, otherwise they will be branded with infamy ; although not inten- 

 tional, only simply from a want of knowledge of the five properties, A few evenings 

 ago at a Pigeon show, a gentleman, who is acknowledged by the Fancy to be a good 

 Fancier, although having very strange crotchets in head, he would not admit as a pair 

 of Tumblers, if one Tumbler had a beautiful pair of pearl eyes and the other a broken, 

 gravel, or bull eye, as it is termed by Fanciers, but he would admit them as a pair of 

 Tumblers provided the pair were both gravel eyed. Now I simply appeal to Fanciers, 

 is it not better to have one bad property than four in the eyes of a pair of Tumblers, for 

 should the cock have extroardinary good eyes, although his hen a broken or bad eye, 

 he may make a tie with the other pair shown against them, that is one, and one as re- 

 gards the properties of the eyes ; 'tis startling, to think of putting in a, pair (a queer 

 pair) of tumblers with gravel eyes, which would most assuredly lose by their eyes two 

 properties out of 10, and must they not be a rare pair of tumblers, to take six properties 

 out of the other eight to win. I did not approve of this gentleman's logic, while 

 listening a thought flashed across my mind, if two gentlemen were walking together, 

 one gentleman with a wooden leg, the other without a wooden leg, he would not 

 acknowledge them a pair of gentlemen ; but if any one would break the leg of the 

 other gentleman, and put him on a wooden leg, then he would admit them as a pair of 

 gentlemen, I simply appeal to your experience whether it is not better to have one bad 

 property than two. There is a little joking going at the present time, a gentleman 

 having made a wager, that a white Pouter ought to have an orange eye ; there is not 

 any property laid down in the head of the Pouter — the head, beak, eye, or wattle. 

 The eye of the Pouter is generally a gravel eye ; for a white Pouter the Fanciers are 

 more pleased with a black or bull eye, the term used by Fanciers. 



(Eaton.) — With regard to Pigeons, Fanciers consider worthy of a standard; namely, 

 the Tumbler, Carrier, and English Pouter : for instance, if the Tumbler possessed shape 

 and feather, two grand properties ; if another Tumbler is shewn against it, possess- 

 ing the properties of head, beak, and eye, the bird taking three properties out of the 

 five, according to the standard laid down by the Gentlemen of the Fancy, must of 

 necessity be awarded the prize. Again, if a Carrier possessed length and thinness of 

 neck, length of body, and great width of chest, which is, after all, only one property 

 (shape), also the head ; if another Carrier is shewn against it, possessing the properties 

 of beak, wattle, and eye, the bird taking three properties out of the five, according to 

 the standard laid down, must be awarded the prize. Again, if an English Pouter 

 possessed the properties— shape, and beauty in feather ; if another English Pouter is 

 shewn against it, possessing the properties of length of body, length of legs, crop, 

 the bird taking three properties out of the five, according to the standard laid down by 

 Fanciers, must be awarded the prize, notwithstanding the general appearance of the 

 bird possessing shape and feather, which, as I said before, is truly beautiful. 



(Eaton.) — Having a standard laid down to test the birds, creates harmony, and re- 

 moves unpleasantness. If two Gentlemen of the Fancy agree to shew two Almond 

 Tumblers for a bottle of wine, bowl of punch, or a rump and dozen ; if they are two 

 true, honest, good Fanciers, and their hearts in the right place, they do not require the 

 judges to tell them, which has lost or won, knowing that one bird has taken three, 

 , sfioair, or the five properties, although the bird that lost, the owner would not take ten 



