Golden-Spangled Hamburghs. 
373 
very likely good show cockerels may be produced ; but the mode of breeding recommended by 
Mr. Beldon is preferable in many ways, and will very speedily be the only method practicable. 
From feathers kindly supplied by the same authority we add representations which will make 
clear the difference in the strains, and especially in the marking of the hen-feathered Mooney cocks. 
None of these feathers, or any others in this work, are in the least idealised, but faithfully drawn 
just as they appear upon the birds.* The clear spots on the hackles of the hen-feathered cocks 
will be noticed, and also the substitution of round black spangles on the shoulders and back, 
instead of the pointed character of the plumage in the full-feathered cocks. We also include 
amongst the hen-feathers a figure of the old pheasant marking, which, on account of its crescentic 
character, is now carefully avoided by all good breeders. 
GOLDEN-SPANGLED HAMBURGHS. — “In the early part of the poultry-showing era,” 
continues Mr. Beldon, “ as in the case of the Silver Spangles, there were two varieties also of 
the Golden-Spangled Hamburgh, the one most common at the poultry-shows being however in this 
case the Yorkshire breed, known as the Golden Pheasant. These were fine large birds, and the 
cocks as a rule hen-feathered ; in fact, at this time the hen-feathered birds were all the fashion, so 
that, although there did not lack full-plumaged birds of the same variety, only the hen-feathered 
were retained. This Yorkshire Pheasant breed generally produced capital layers. The spangling 
was bold and of a glossy green black, but the ground-colour was of a light dull bay, and generally 
there was a good deal of what I may call pepperiness in the ground-colour, so that the spangling 
was often not clear and sharp-looking, especially in the tail-coverts. As a rule this variety had 
whitish ear-lobes — not of course so white as we have since bred them by judicious crossing, but 
still whitish, and besides being, as already stated, a good layer, was a pretty hardy breed. 
“In Lancashire there was another variety, cultivated chiefly by the weavers and colliers. 
This was called the Golden Mooney ; it was a much smaller bird, but for colour and marking 
threw the Yorkshire Pheasant entirely into the shade. I shall never forget my feeling of pleasure 
on first seeing the Golden Mooney hen : she struck me as something wonderful. The ground- 
colour of the plumage in these fowls is of the very richest bay, the spangling very bold and clear, 
and of a green satin-looking black ; in fact, the plumage was so rich and glossy that the full beauty 
of it could not be seen except in the sunshine, but when it was seen formed a picture never to be 
forgotten. I am here speaking of the hen. The cocks’ plumage was also of the very richest 
description ; but their great drawback was their red ear-lobes and black breasts — in fact, they had 
no ear-lobes at all to speak of, but merely a bit of red skin like a Game cock. These cocks were 
never shown, but merely kept for breeding purposes. Shows were held in many of the village public- 
houses in Lancashire, the competitors being mostly colliers and weavers of the district, to whom 
is entirely due the credit of bringing the celebrated Mooney marking to such perfection. At these 
shows hens only were shown, of both Golden and Silver Mooneys and Black Pheasants, but far the 
most usually it would be one of the Mooney breeds. The birds were judged by a Scale of Points 
brought out by members of these village clubs, and the points were so well understood by all that 
any disagreement about the judging scarcely ever took place. These village shows are now things 
of the past, the poultry-shows held in almost every town in Lancashire making them unnecessary ; 
but they did work it is very difficult to estimate now. One of the foremost men at these village 
clubs was old Jack Andrews, or, as they call him in Lancashire, ‘ The Ould Poo’t,’ meaning ‘ The Old 
* We make this remark because letters have reached us complaining that some of the figures of feathers wo have given repre- 
sent an unattainable standard. Such is not the case ; in no instance have we permitted the least exaggeration. 
2 G 
