The Wild Turkey. 
5 [ 3 
which is so stupid that the French here always say, 1 HPbPtP comme une dinde' (‘As stupid as a 
Turkey’), the wild turkeys are wonderfully intelligent. One mode, however, in which they showed 
their intelligence to me was rather unprofitable. I gave to one of the hens a sitting of Light 
Brahma eggs, and she sat upon them faithfully; but when the first unfortunate chick made its 
appearance, recognising it was none of hers, she straightway carried it out of the nest and put it 
to death, and so with the second and third ; then, apparently despairing of the rest, she destroyed 
her nest and left it in disgust. A common Turkey sitting near her raised with the greatest 
complacency a brood of Aylesbury ducks. 
“ That it would be difficult to begin the domestication of these birds in places situated near 
the haunts of the wild ones I have no doubt ; but that it can be done in other localities, and has 
been done in many places in Canada, is certain.” 
This, we believe, was the first published correction of the singular error in question ; but 
shortly afterwards Colonel F. C. Hassard, an enthusiastic poultry and pigeon amateur, for some 
time stationed in Canada, returned to England, and furnished Mr. Tegetmeier himself with a very 
similar contradiction, which that gentleman frankly quotes in the last edition of his work, at the 
same time altogether cancelling the expression of his former opinion. The testimony quoted by 
us from Mr. Simpson is alone amply sufficient ; and it may now be regarded as conclusively 
settled that the wild Turkey both can be and constantly has been domesticated, and that it is, as 
was all along generally supposed, except by naturalists , the progenitor of the domestic race. 
Mr. Darwin* practically throws the weight of his opinion into the same scale, showing that, as the 
Turkey degenerates in India, it cannot have been originally a tropical bird, and thus inferentially 
arguing that it originated in a colder clime. He also, with regard to the alleged absence of white 
as a specific mark in the wild bird, quotes from Dr. Bachman, who states t “that he has seen 
turkeys raised from the eggs of the wild species lose their metallic tints, and become spotted with 
white in the third generation and as the absence of white has always been considered the most 
distinguishing characteristic of the wild species, this remark is of peculiar significance, removing 
indeed the sole objection to the common theory regarding the ancestry of the domestic bird. 
We have in other portions of this work quoted some rather queer guesses at the supposed 
origin of the names of fowls ; but in endeavouring to account for an American bird being called 
a Turkey , ingenious speculators have surpassed themselves. Some have thought that as the 
name of “ Turk” is bestowed upon any one remarkable for domineering or pompous manners, the 
“bumptiousness” of the turkey-cock procured him the same title; others, that it is a corruption of 
Turquoise cock, in allusion to the blue wrinkles about the head ; and yet others, that the name 
arose from the supposed resemblance to the old Turkish military uniform of a red fez coming down 
to the ears, with a dark flowing robe ! For ourselves — we give it up altogether. 
No one has given a better account of the habits of the wild Turkey than Audubon ; who, with 
Waterton and Agassiz, form a triumvirate who have never been surpassed for the enthusiastic 
ardour with which they patiently observed the facts which they recorded, rather than compiled 
them from the reports of others. Accordingly, it will be seen that Audubon never fell into the 
error of stating that the bird could not be domesticated ; but affirms the contrary, even mentioning 
a bird of his own which he had tamed. From his account we extract the following : — 
“ The unsettled parts of the States of Kentucky, Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana, an immense 
extent of country to the north-west of those districts upon the Mississippi and Missouri, and the 
* “Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication,” Vol. I., p. 292. 
+ “ Examination of the Characteristics of Genera and Species,” Charleston, 1855, P- 14. 
