*37 
CHAPTER IX. 
THE ALMOND TUMBLER AND ITS SUB-VARIETIES. 
This pigeon has always been looked upon by most fanciers as the best and chief of all the varieties 
of the “Short-faced” Tumblers. At one time, indeed, it was almost looked upon as //^“high- 
class ” pigeon of all, ranking even before the Carrier and the Pouter, but this we cannot agree with 
for several reasons, the chief being that the best Almond will only remain what it should be for at 
most two seasons, while a Carrier, if a good specimen, looks well from infancy to the very day of 
its death. A Pouter also, with care, will retain its standard qualities during its lifetime ; but the 
Almond, as we have seen, not only requires a certain time to bring it to perfection, but after a very 
moderate further time becomes again unfit for exhibition. 
Even amongst the short-faces we do not ourselves regard the Almond as ranking first. Though 
we appreciate it as much as any — having, indeed, good cause to do so, even from a business 
point of view — still, for somewhat similar reasons to those just advanced, we regard another 
variety — the Black Mottle — as standing above it. We do so because, while quite as difficult to 
breed to points and feather (this may be questioned, but we shall make our words good in the 
proper place) as the Almond, if not, indeed, more so, as we consider it is, the Black Mottle retains 
its beauty, like the Carrier, from the nest-pan to the end of its days, while even more attractive in 
appearance both to the fancier and non-fancier, and at the same time less delicate and difficult to 
rear. We therefore would rank the Black Mottle first in order, and the Almond as fourth in rank 
of the high-class pigeons ; but still, as its admirers are more than those of all the other varieties of 
short-faces together, we must adhere to the fashion, and take it and its varieties first. 
What has always struck us as being very remarkable concerning this pigeon is the fact, that 
while its admirers and breeders are so numerous and enthusiastic, we have never yet known — let us 
say six — even of the best fanciers and breeders, who could agree as to what was the correct standard 
of the bird regarding its colour. All the old breeders, and most of the younger generation also, 
will, it is true, if asked, state that the ground-colour of the bird “ should resemble that of the 
Almond,” from which it is said to derive its name. Without questioning one assertion or the 
other, we say that very little is to be gathered from such an answer, and have often thought it a 
great pity that young and inexperienced fanciers should use so little of even their own limited 
judgment, and swallow so readily all that is told them by their older brethren, many of whom seem 
to take some sort of mysterious delight in telling their neophytes a great deal of nonsense. 
Especially we would beware of a man who began by telling us there were no birds to be now seen 
equal to those he had when he was young in the fancy. But to return to our point : Ask such an 
old “chip” what the ground-colour of an Almond Tumbler should be like, and ten to one the 
answer will be, “ The same colour as the shell of the almond.” Hundreds of times have we heard 
this reply given ; and it is to all intents and purposes useless, for the simple reason that there are 
many shades of colour to this “ shell of the almond.” Some, to be more definite, will say that the 
ground-colour should be that of the inside of this shell of the almond, and we have even heard it 
13 
