70 



THE ORPINGTONS 



shank is sought after, which, to my mind, throws the bird 

 out of proportion. The Standard does not give a short- 

 shanked bird, and in the show room they are not cut 

 much on shank unless the shanks are extremely long." — 

 Col. D. N. Foster. 



"They have improved very much during the last five 

 years." — H. B. Prescott. 



2. Are the present Standard weights sufficient to 

 bring out the large blocky, or cobby, type demanded by 

 the fanciers of the present day? 



"The present Standard weights of the Orpington are 

 entirely sufficient to set off to good advantage the dis- 

 tinctive, blocky type required for the breed. In fact, I 

 believe that the two light 

 colored Orpingtons, the 

 Whites and the Ermines, 

 the latter being the new 

 Orpington with colors of 

 the Light Brahma, both 

 running a trifle lighter 

 in weight than the 

 Blacks, both show this 

 cobby, blocky type to 

 better advantage than 

 any of the other varie- 

 ties. This is probably 

 due to the very light 

 color of the birds, and 

 would seem to argue that 

 excessive weight is not 

 essential to a handsome 

 O r p i n g t o n." — A. L. 

 Goodwin. 



"The present weights 

 are all the breed can 

 stand, without losing its 

 utility qualities, and are 

 amply sufficient to main- 

 tain the present type." — 

 H. H. Kingston, Jr. 



"I think so."— C. A. 

 Moxley. 



"No. Blacks and 

 Whites could, with ad- 

 vantage, take two more 

 pounds per bird. English 

 breeders have no diffi- 

 culty in over-topping the 

 Standard we'' 

 Buffs by 50 per 

 Milton W. Brown. 



toppmg the 

 ;ights iniJ 

 3er cent." — 1| 

 rown. ' 



"I think so, and I think the cobby type is being car- 

 ried too far. Some of our best awards are going to birds 

 minus their tails." — E. A. Haring. 



"The present Standard weights are fully sufficient to 

 bring out the cobby and compact type and shape." — Paul 

 Kyle. 



"Most of the birds that are winning prizes are over- 

 weight, as called for in the Standard." — Archibald B. 

 Dalby. 



"I think they are." — Henrietta E. Hooker. 



"Yes." — C. S. Byers. 



"I believe the present Standard weights are high 

 enough." — E. B. Miller. 



"I think the Standard weights are all right for the 

 p.-esent at least." — C. E. Fisher. 



"I think so. I have had no trouble with males as to 

 weight, but if I had more weight on females I should have 

 too much fat, which would hurt the laying." — J. M. Wil- 

 liams. 



"Cannot see any reason to change weights." — W. H. 

 Gifford. 



"We think the present weights are about right. It 

 would perhaps be better if there were higher weights on 

 Buffs, and perhaps Blacks, but if the weights of these va- 

 rieties are raised, it would be difficult to bring the Whites 

 up to weight." — Goodes and Palmer. 



"The Standard weights are to my opinion sufficient to 

 bring out the large blocky type now demanded. The fan- 

 cier must not lose sight of the utilitarian qualities that all 

 breeds must have if they are to become ana stay popular. 

 Get a large fowl, and as a rule the laying qualities of your 

 birds suffer; and when you put them on the market for 

 eating they are too large for most families and the butcher 



does not like to handle them— more especially in the 

 cities."— Col. D. N. Foster. 



"I find that the Standard weights have to be exceeded 

 to bring out the large blocky birds demanded. Nearly all 

 my customers call for birds over Standard weight. — H. 

 B. Prescott. . 



3. Do not too many of our modern exhibition speci- 

 mens show too much fluff, looseness of feathering, and 

 rather too much shortness of legs? 



"An Orpington of true type ought not to have to de- 

 pend upon loose, fluffy feathering to give the desired 

 shape. The Blacks have loose feathers, which fact tends 

 to emphasize the shape. The Whites and Ermines are 



more closely feathered, 

 and yet as now perfected 

 by the best breeders 

 show the true Orpington 

 type. This shows that 

 loose feathering is not 

 necessary to give the de- 

 sired type. I have al- 

 ways favored a compara- 

 tively short leg for all 

 Orpington s." — A. L. 

 Goodwin. 



"Most emphatically, 

 yes. I have no time for 

 the Orpington that drags 

 its fluff on the ground. 

 Keep the shanks short, 

 out not extreme." — H. 

 PI. Kingston, Jr. 



"Yes." — C. A. Mox- 

 ley. 



"Yes. Any approach 

 to the Cochin means a 

 distinct deterioration, 

 and extreme shortness 

 of leg seems to go hand 

 in hand with low egg 

 production." — Milton W. 

 Brown. 



"I like a bit of fluff, 

 but of course it can be 

 overdone. I think the 

 short leg is being over- 

 done. A large bird re- 

 quires some length of 

 leg to show it off prop- 

 erly." — E. A. Haring. 

 "I have not yet no- 



BLACK EMPRESS 

 This Black Orpington hen is owned by Milton W. Brown, pro- 

 prietor of Cheviot Farms. He writes that she is the dam or grand- 

 dam of winners at Madison Square Garden, Jamestown Exposition, 

 Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Allentown and Hagerstown. 



ticed too much fluff or looseness of feathers in the Buff or 

 White classes; however, in the Black Orpington classes, 

 particularly the hens, I observe too much fluff and also 

 shortness of legs. An Orpington must be short in legs, 

 but not as low as a Dorking, nor as high as a Plymouth 

 Rock."— Paul Kyle. 



||Yes."— Archibald B. Dalby. 



"I know many have this feeling, but I have not wished 

 to get too far from the Cochin type — then we have a Buff 

 Rock, minus color of legs." — Henrietta E. Hooker 



"No."— C. S. Byers. 



"I have always thought so, and have therefore bred 

 closer feathers and longer legs. The birds seem to forage 

 better and lay better, and mine are farm-raised and bred 

 for profit and utility." — E. B. Miller. 



"I do not believe in the 'high' Orpington, and I like 

 a good fluff. To my eye a medium low Orpington, with 

 good fluff to round out shape, makes a very beautiful 

 bird." — C. E. Fisher. 



"I do not like too much fluff, and find that those of my 

 birds which are closely feathered are more profitable as a 

 commercial bird than the loose-feathered fowl. I am not 

 in favor of encouraging the shortness of the legs. If 

 feathers are not quite so fluffy, they will not look so short- 

 legged." — J. M. Williams. 



"There is not too much fluff, and when you lengthen 

 the legs and take away the loose feathering, you will bring 

 the Orpington to a type more like the Langshan. Some 

 talk of changes in shape, and that will throw the birds 

 nearer the Rocks in type " — W. H. Gifford. 



"V^^^^ }^ ^. tendency to get the Orpingtons with the 

 loose fluffy feathers, while the Standard calls for a tightly- 

 feathered bird. I like to see them with the fluffy feathers. 



