188 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ March 1, 1883. 
grass to be fed by sheep, or by bullocks, or by horses, or by all 
three ? Is it for a special purpose, or for general purposes ? 
“ The finer Fescues, which form the turf of the Susses Downs, 
would be wasted if largely used to form pastures for fatting 
bullocks. A large proportion of Cocksfoot, so valuable for these 
latter, would in turn be the ruin of pastures to be mown for hay 
which is intended for use in hunting and military stables. The 
strong-growing vigorous Grasses necessary to overcome couch, 
and thrive on poor hungry land, would be thrown away and be 
taking up the place of more valuable varieties if sown on good 
land, clean and in high condition. 
“ If a pasture is generally to be mown for hay, then varieties 
of Grasses should be chosen which come to their greatest perfection 
at the haymaking season. If, on the other hand, the field is to be 
generally grazed, a selection should be made which will insure 
a continuation of feed throughout the whole year. Pastures for 
sheep should be formed of finer close-growing varieties than 
those to be fed by cattle, and bullock pastures may contain many 
varieties which it would be useless to sow on a trainer’s paddock.” 
A NEW POULTRY PAPER. 
We had intended this week to present the readers of the 
Journal of Horticulture with a large supplement devoted to 
Poultry, Pigeons, Cage Birds, and Rabbits. In preparing for this 
work such a hearty response was made by our friends, that it 
was ultimately determined to issue this supplement also as a 
distinct publication at a very low price. At the last moment we 
find the postal arrangements preclude our enclosing the new paper 
in the Journal; but we will readily send a copy, post free, to 
anyone sending their address. The new paper, “ Poultry,” will 
be published every Friday, price One Penny, and may be had 
from newsvendors, at the railway bookstalls, or direct from this 
office. 
ENGLISH AND FRENCH POULTRY KEEPERS. 
There are in France hardly any large egg-producing establish¬ 
ments. The greater proportion, if not the whole, of the eggs 
imported into this country are the produce of a large number of 
raisers, collected from week to week by a middleman, who receives 
a small commission from central houses, who export to this country 
the result of the different collections. The districts in France from 
which large numbers of eggs are collected and exported to England 
are Normandy, Picardy, Artois, and Brittany. In each of these 
districts a different system of production and of collection is in 
force; but in all the districts the same attention to egg-producing 
is paid by the farmer or cottager, the same care is taken to obtain 
the largest quantity of eggs at the smallest cost, and the result is 
attained—viz., a profitable poultry-yard, he it large or small. In 
Normandy and part of Brittany, where small holdings of a few 
acres are to be found in great numbers, the small farmers and 
cottagers are every one of them raisers of poultry, and derive a fair 
profit from their yard. Near every small farmyard, or adjoining it, 
is a small enclosed orchard, to which the poultry have access, the 
roosting-place being generally close to a cow-shed, or to the stables, 
for the sake of warmth in winter. The fowls are fed twice a day, 
close to their roosting-place, so that they may always be induced 
to come hack to lay there, although a careful search is always made 
in out-of-the-way corners. 
In every village in Normandy, and in the southern part of Picardy 
bordering the former, every man has a poultry-yard, large or small, 
according to his means or in proportion to his plot of land, and the 
great reason of the success of these people is to he found in the fact 
that they work for themselves and neglect nothing to obtain a 
satisfactory result. The farmers and graziers of Normandy, while 
paying due attention to their cattle and horses, and farming their 
land to the best of their ability, do not neglect their poultry-yard, as 
they well know that with proper care and attention it is as profitable 
a branch of farming as any, that under their supervision, and with¬ 
out any extra labour, their cowman or the dairymaid can attend to 
the poultry department, and that they are ultimately well repaid for 
their outlay of food by the price of the eggs sold. Their fowls, how¬ 
ever, are fed with regularity, with neither too much nor too little, 
and are not, as in the English farmyard, left to pick up their food as 
best they can. 
The great contrast between this state of things and that existing 
in England deserves to engage the attention of the British farmer. 
Advanced agriculturists have long ago seen the necessity for the 
British farmer to consider his poultry-yard as a part of his farming 
business that can and ought to be made a paying one. The late Mr. 
Mechi pointed out one of the causes, perhaps the chief, of the failure 
of poultry-farming in this country. “ Farmers will not,” he said, 
“ systematically feed their fowls, and, instead of careful superin¬ 
tendence, just leave them to themselves, like gutter children.” He 
very pertinently added: “A farmer will readily turn a large flock 
of sheep to trample on, drag down, and devour a fine field of clover 
or grass, hut he would be annoyed to see half an acre eaten by his 
wife’s poultry. He will give his pigs barley and beans by the sack, 
but objects to the poultry helping themselves to kernels. A farmer 
never grudges barley by the load for his pigs, and cake and corn 
for his other stock: why should he regret feeding his poultry ? 
In some cases that I know of one of the farm hands receives a pint 
of beer when the governor is at market, to carry in a sack of barley 
on the sly for the poultry, so as not to shock the farmer’s excessive 
and unreasonable prejudices.” Mr. Mechi went on to show that 
properly managed poultry cost less to produce, weight for weight, 
than beef or mutton, while selling for considerably more, hut, he 
added, “ a poultry-breeder must understand the business as much as 
the breeder of other farm creatures.” 
We have here the whole matter in a nutshell. In France large or 
small farmers and cottagers understand the business, take an interest 
in it, work for themselves, and neglect nothing to obtain a satis¬ 
factory result. In England the farmers’ wives even hardly ever do 
this, while their husbands look upon the poultry-yard with contempt. 
Were the breeding and feeding of cattle, sheep, and pigs left to 
chance, and without the supervision and direction of the master, 
were half the milk lost or stolen, were the lambs left to themselves 
to seek for the roots that are not given to them, or the calves left to 
graze on the scantiest of herbage, neither of them would pay. Is it, 
then, surprising that poultry, being left to breed indiscriminately, 
being fed in the way we have mentioned, and the hens being 
allowed to lay away where one-third of the eggs are lost and another 
third stolen, are found not to pay; and, being so found, have all 
kind of food begrudged to them, while simply as scavengers and 
worm and slug destroyers they are such useful friends to the farmer ? 
We again quote Mr. Mechi’s words a I’appui :—“It is a well- 
admitted fact by all my labourers that my best and thickest crops 
are in immediate proximity to the fowl-house, commencing at only 
ten yards’ distance. No doubt there are times when you ought to 
protect your shallow-sown seeds, and, in my case, I sometimes 
employ a boy for a fortnight immediately after drilling close to the 
fowl-house; hut, even if 1 have not done so, I have rarely been 
inconvenienced if the grain was properly deposited by the drill. 
There is no surer sign of imperfect tillage than when you hear of 
birds or game getting out the seed.” Poultry graze equally as do 
sheep or cattle, and it is essential that a piece of pasture should be 
near the fowl-house, otherwise they will naturally appropriate young 
Cabbage, Turnip, or Mangold plants. — (The British Trade 
Journal .) 
METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS. 
Camden Square, London. 
Lat. 51° 32' 40" N.; Long. 0° 8' 0" W.; Altitude, 111 feet. 
date. 
9 A.M. 
IN THE DAY. 
1 Rain. 
1883. 
February. 
Barome¬ 
ter at 328 
and Sea 
Level 
Hygrome¬ 
ter. 
Direction 
of Wind. 
| Temp, of 
Soil at 
1 foot. 
Shade Tem¬ 
perature. 
Radiation 
Temperature. 
Dry. 
Wet. 
Max. 
Min. 
In 
sun. 
On 
grass. 
Inches. 
deg. 
deg. 
deg. 
deg 
deg. 
deg 
deg. 
In. 
Sun. 18 
29.977 
41.0 
40.2 
S.E. 
40.2 
46.8 
38.8 
73.4 
36.6 
0.058 
Mon. 19 
30.113 
35.7 
34.7 
N.N.W. 
39.8 
42.9 
31.7 
52.0 
27.9 
• - 
Tues. 20 
30.283 
41.0 
39.8 
s.w. 
39.7 
48.2 
34.8 
51.9 
30.5 
0.074 
Wed. 21 
30.160 
46.8 
45.7 
w. 
41.0 
53.3 
34.8 
61.4 
39.3 
— 
Thurs. 22 
30.417 
50.5 
49.3 
w. 
42.8 
55.4 
46.3 
76.1 
43.6 
— 
Friday 23 
30.854 
39.0 
37.0 
N. 
42.8 
51.8 
33.3 
87.0 
29.3 
— 
Satur. 24 
30.708 
38.4 
38.0 
w. 
41.3 
52.5 
33.2 
79.6 
•28.8 
— 
30.402 
41.8 
40.7 
41.1 
50.1 
86.1 
68.8 
33.7 
0.132 
REMARKS, 
18th.—Rain at first; afterwards fine. 
19th.—Fine throughout; moonlight night. 
20th.—Dull, with cold rain. 
21st.—Rather dull, but fair throughout. 
22nd.—Fine spring-like day ; bright moonlight night. 
23rd.—Fine and bright sunshine. 
24th.—Fine. 
A fine week, temperature still considerably above the average, and during 
the latter part of the week very high barometric pressure. Very little rain.— 
G. J. Symons. 
