96 
The Illustrated Book of Poultry. 
to a knowledge of facts upon particular estates. The most remarkable variation appeared, however, 
in two leplies hom Tunbridge Wells, both from gentlemen who have given some attention to the 
subject gencially, and even taken high rank as poultry fanciers. One writes: “ I am happy to say 
there is no tendency towards smaller holdings, which are the curse both of landlords and tenants/’ 
and his negative is corroborated by two others. But another — a clergyman — writes that “smaller 
holdings are gradually gaining ground — they are much appreciated here.” Some clue to the wide 
diveigence may be found in a reply from Guildford in Surrey, not so very far off, and in many 
respects similarly situated, to the effect that “ small holdings are much sought after : many want 
them, but meet with little encouragement as yet.’’ Several replies, as in one from Warrington 
which are in the negative as to small holdings extending , remark that the land already is as a rule in 
small holdings, such as ioo acres and under ; and one or two remark that the smaller holdings, as a 
rule, rear most poultry, which is credible enough. Cornwall reports generally small holdings — 
probably on the average smaller than any other county in England ; and it is one of the few places 
which seem to export eggs to other localities, and occasionally to London. It is also noticeable 
that one or two of the negative replies to this question, also report that the large farms are at the 
date of reply (1887) “very largely now in the hands of owners.” 
9. This and the two following questions were the most generally answered of any (many 
individual queries in some of the returns were left blank or answered indefinitely, which accounts 
for the differences in total replies that will be observed). There were 42 distinct negatives and 
only 22 affirmatives, the greater part of these being more or less qualified, as all in which any 
estimate of heads per acre was stated are here treated as affirmatives. Three of them estimated 
“ one per acre ; ” five, “one to every two acres two of them (in districts of smallish holdings both) 
“ two per acre ; ” and one, about one to every three acres. 
10. There was the same strong negative preponderance in regard to this question, 44 dis- 
tinct negatives being received, and only 16 partial affirmatives. Five of these knew of one case 
in their neighbourhood, one of “two,” and another of “a few,” while another referred to 140 head 
on a farm of 400 acres. One or two references to so-called “ pouitry-farms ” are not included 
in either class of replies. 
11. As to any tendency to increase per acre, there were 42 negatives and 20 affirmatives, 
besides one reply to the effect that there had been amongst the cottagers, but not the farmers. 
The most positive tones of affirmation came from the Midland and Northern districts, and from 
Lincoln a “very great ” increase was reported. What affirmative replies there were, were more 
distinct than to some of the questions ; but several are included in which a “ slight ” increase is 
reported. 
12. This question appears to have been not sufficiently definite, for at least a dozen replies 
proved that it was entirely misunderstood, and it is possible that it may have been so in other cases 
also. There were only 4 unconditional affirmatives to it, proving that what was intended is 
known as a fact to at least some ; and 3 other replies were to the effect that it was known 
to some, but not generally. The negatives were 51, and among these n expressed personal dis- 
belief in the suggested fact. But this was, in all but two cases, on grounds which showed that the 
meaning was not at all understood. In several cases it was pointed out that the number possible 
was limited far below that mentioned by the “ number of separate premises ” available ; which is 
perfectly true, but which showed that the question was understood to refer to keeping at a profit 
ten to fifteen per acre for the whole farm, as a general question: whereas the sole meaning was, 
whether farmers knew that ten to fifteen fowls ranging over an acre (as in any one particular field, 
for instance) dui not foul the ground for grazing or hay purposes, and interfere in this particular 
