2 
ON BREEDING. 
incestuously; whilst the third, without considering- that the 
same beauties or the same defects may appear under quite a 
different aspect in one place to what they do in another, like 
the charlatan , before whose solitary nostrum all diseases must 
give way (“ Remedium efficax et universum”) indiscriminately, 
and dogmatically condemns every other system but that of 
breeding from different races, so as to supply the faults or de¬ 
fects of the one by the merits or perfections of the other. The 
difficulty of removing deep-rooted prejudices, and the inefficacy 
of reason and argument, when opposed to habitual opinions, es¬ 
tablished on general approbation, are fully apprehended; but 
as the truth is our only object in the present investigation, 
which like “ a native rustic beauty, is most lovely when un¬ 
adorned, and seen in the open light of day,” we shall proceed 
to state the subject fairly, without heeding' the fine spun hy¬ 
pothesis and specious theories on either side. Error alone needs 
artificial support; truth can stand by itself, like the Cornish 
wrestler, who only requires “ a ring and fair play.” 
The argument adduced in favour of the in and in system 
of breeding is, that there can only be one best breedand 
as perfection admits of no addition, if there be a cross, it must 
necessarily be with an inferior kind. “ When you can no 
longer find better males than your own,” says Mr. Cully, “ then 
by all means breed from them; and on no account attempt to 
breed or cross from worse than your own, for that would be 
acting in contradiction to common sense, experience, and that 
well established rule, or which is a particular case of a more 
general rule; viz. “ that like begets like:” whilst the argument 
on the opposite side is, that though the beauty of animals so 
bred may not be diminished, yet that it tends to weaken the 
breed by producing a tender, unhealthy, and diminutive pro¬ 
geny. An example the contrary of this may be adduced in the 
breed of wild cattle in Chillingham Park, in the county of Nor¬ 
thumberland, wffiere they have existed for these last five hun¬ 
dred years without any intermixture, yet they have not de¬ 
generated , nor become less hardy from breeding in and in , 
as without doubt they have bred from the nearest affinities in 
every possible degree. 
It was the celebrated breeder, Bakewell, who first brought 
the in and in system into notice; he justly considering the 
poet’s fancied doctrine that Nature had placed both physical 
and moral laws as a barrier to prevent consanguineous inter¬ 
course as nonsense ; since, had this been the case, she would 
have placed an instinctive aversion in animals to such an union. 
This intelligent and expert breeder obtained one of the finest 
