PRACTICAL VALUE OF FANCY POINTS. 1 15 



special circnmslanees, iinil that in a great many cases, if not generally, they were immaterial. 

 And that would he a correct conclusion. But, to a very great extent, profitable modern 

 poultry culture consists in the development and use of special features for special purposes, 

 a proposition which brings us back again to the relations of " fancy" and " economic" quali- 

 ties of "beauty" and "utility,'' and the possibility and advisability of producing from the 

 Slime stock individual fowls to satisfy more than one special demand. The practical question, 

 then, in each instance is uiiether the features the breeder would like to cpml>ine are compat- 

 ible or necessarily antagonistic. 



The Logical Fallacy. 



In considering the possibility of producing for different purposes from the same stock, a 

 great many fall into an error which apparently has its origin in the fact that most of us are 

 by nature partisans, inclined to take extreme positions, and to regard those who will not go 

 willi us to. our extreme as, therefore, at the opposite extreme, and the things which do not 

 suit our purpose as, therefore, adapted to their needs, or produced by their methods. There 

 is a very general disposition also to regard everything especially prized for some purpose we 

 do not appreciate as on that account olijectionable for purposes we seek, and this is responsible 

 for no small part of the idiocies that enter Into most discussions of the ifttitude of fanciers to 

 practical poultrymen, and vice versa. 



Such a statement as the al)ove, when put in the form of a general proposition, always 

 seems to overstate the case, but if the reader will note the literature of the never ending 

 debate, and the frequent incidental references to points in controversy, I think he will soon 

 au'ree that the application of a little simple logic to the situation would often show one the 

 error of his ideas more forcibly than reams of argument in opposition. 



When we prove a proposition false we do not necessarily therel)y prove a contrary propo- 

 sition true. Oftener we prove only that the point is immaterial, but that "only" may mean 

 a great deal, may, in fact, be of greater importance than to have proved what was desired, 

 for the more immaterial points we can establish the easier it becomes to cater to demands 

 based upon such immaterial points, while still maintaining those points which we consider 

 of first importance, and for our purposes essential. 



Practical Value of Fancy Points. 



Before taking up the detailed consideration of the points enumerateii, let us consider 

 briefly the practical value, the economic or cash value of fowls valuable for "fancy points." 

 As we shall see as our investigation proceeds, some "fancy points" are of very substantial 

 value, and fanciers are to be blamed not for preserving them, tiut for not giving more atten- 

 tion to them. Bat, in considering his own attitude toward points of no importance to him 

 which the fanciers prize, the so-called practical |ioultrynian should look at these points, not 

 merely with reference to their value to his trade. He should consider their selling value to 

 whoever appreciates them and wants to buy them. 



While it is true, as often stated, that only n very small part of the poultry produced is or 

 can be of the kind that commands high prices for fancy purposes, it does not therefore follow 

 that it is better for a variety or l)reed of fowls, or better for inost poultry keepers, or for 

 the industry as a whole, that the regulation of standards and types should follow the ideas of 

 the class containing the greatest number. The reasonaliie position to take in a matter of this 

 kind is that, provided the qualities the nia-s of poultry keepers want are maintained, every 

 point for which they care nothing that can be added is so much prospective gain, for it opens 

 up possibilities of i)rofit lieyond what is possible in the class of fowls which suits tiie average 

 keejier. 



It is after we have reached this point that we come to the parting of the ways l)etween 

 " fancv " and " practical " ideas. It may, and often does happen, that a fowl, or the fowls of 

 a certain stock generally possess certain characteristics or an all round high quality from the 

 fancier's point of view, but have faults which make them far from desirable for economic 

 purposes. Now asj long a^ these are not faults which in time.will also affect their "fancy" 

 quality, the breeder who can sell them ill at fancy prices can continue to be Indifferent to 



