1014. 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
1437 
A 286-EGG HEN 
Record Made at the Thorndale, Pa., Contest. 
T HE picture at Fig. 625 shows a remarkable hen 
known as Columbian Queen. This hen, a 
Columbian Plymouth Rock, had a record at 
the last Thorndale egg contest of 286 eggs in one 
year. There is no question about this, and we re¬ 
produce at Fig. 626 an engraving of the record 
which shows just when each egg was laid. This 
is a form sent out by the managers of the egg-laying 
contest, and from it the date of each egg laid during 
the year can be noted. A study of this record will 
show what a remarkable performance this Colum¬ 
bian Queen gave. Surely there were very few lazy 
days, but she shelled out the eggs consistently. 
Those who are interested in such matters may figure 
out the income from this hen. It would he fair to 
say that in a near-by high-class market, eggs laid 
from November 1 to February 1 average 50 cents 
per dozen. From February 1 to May 1, it would be 
fair to make an average of 36 cents per dozen, and 
our readers will agree that 30 cents per dozen for the 
remaining months would have been a very conserva¬ 
tive estimate. On this basis Columbian Queen pro¬ 
duced eggs which, if sold for eating purposes on the 
regular market, would have brought .$8.72. Surely 
this hen had a remarkable earning capacity, but she 
is worth very much more for breeding purposes. 
This record was in no respect an accident. Mr. J. 
M. Jones of Monmouth County, New Jersey, who 
bred this bird, says that the mother of Columbian 
Queen was a hen that laid 225 or 220 eggs in one 
year. He had three hens; one of them laid 225 
eggs and the other two each 220. These three birds 
were bred from a cockerel of the same 
strain, but his mother had no certified 
egg record, although she was a good 
bird. Two of the brothers of Colum¬ 
bian Queen have won first prize at 
poultry shows, and so it will be seen 
that this family is full of eggs, and 
from the breeding of this bird, about 
all she would be expected to do when 
given plenty of food would be to shell 
out eggs. In fact the record of this 
hen was backed up so thoroughly by 
pedigree that Mr. Jones was offered 
$500 for the hen. This shows what 
is surely coming in the pedigree hen 
business. After a few generations of 
selecting and careful testing there will 
be a demand for these worker hens 
corresponding to that for cattle with 
sure performance in their pedigree. 
Of course there are those who still 
contests. Let them 
the utility pedigree hen is 
That, as the hoys say, is “some 
This the city-man farmer may pay at a loss, but it 
is what he must pay for his own inability or lack of 
opportunity to fill the job himself. 
Now, after the manager has had the chance to 
“learn" the farm—state of cultivation of the farm, 
COLUMBIAN 
QUEEN, 286 EGGS 
Fn;. 625. 
IN ONE YEAR. 
what the cows and other stock are good for. the va¬ 
rieties in and condition of the orchard, the labor sit¬ 
uation, and above all, after he has learned his 
The Philadelphia “North American” Third Egg Laying Competition 
THORNDALE. PENNA. 
__ November 1. 1913- October 3t. 1914 _ 
ness lias been heavily emphasized. Perhaps pure¬ 
bred stock has been held onto because of blood rather 
than milking qualities. These and many other prob¬ 
abilities may confront a willingness at first thought 
to share the responsibilities of too big a financial 
burden. 
True, no sound business man buys as an investment 
pure and simple at present-day prices, a well-situated 
productive farm which must be managed by some 
one other than himself, for there are innumerable 
opportunities for investment not so dependent on the 
caprices of Nature for their return. So it is either 
ignorance of the realities of farming, the satisfac¬ 
tion of a hobby, or the natural desire to own a farm, 
that makes it necessary for the city-man farmer to 
consider the services of a manager at all. Why, then, 
should not the city-man farmer take full conse¬ 
quences he they at a profit or a loss? He still holds 
the option of keeping or firing his manager. Why 
isn’t a good salesman, or a floor manager or an editor 
asked to “risk” his value in another man’s proprie¬ 
torship? Why ask a farm manager who has double 
the uncertainties of any other business to contend 
with—why ask him to take chances by guaranteeing 
that he can make wages and a profit from another 
man's business plant? Let the city-man farmer get 
and pay for ability as elsewhere. If his farm plant 
won’t, for elemental reasons, pay for responsibility 
and work done by a manager, and a profit for him¬ 
self, the alternatives are sell out or pay the fiddler! 
Massachusetts. allen b. doggett, jr. 
R. N.-Y.—Both parties in a farm working propo- 
sition must “give and take” until the job settles 
down to a fair basis of equality. It is a bad thing 
for either partner to have the best of the bargain 
as this makes disatisfaction all around. 
“W 1 
EGG CONTEST 
RECORD OF COLUMBIAN QUEEN. Fig. 626 
keep on sneering 
as sure as fate. 
“boss,” whether he 
must be humored, a 
be a man with a hobby who 
man decided in his own views 
sure 
THE FARM MANAGER QUESTION. 
Y OUR bringing up of the owner-manager prob¬ 
lem in the editorial columns on page 1344 leads 
me to give some ideas on the question derived 
from personal experience. First of 
all. it is presumed that the city man 
farmer is in possession of the record 
and experience of the prospective 
“manager” as well as his own esti¬ 
mate of the latter’s latent ability. If 
satisfied thus far he should he willing 
to pay to begin with just what he 
would to a superintendent or manager 
of any non-agricultural business, i. e., 
compensation on the basis of work 
done in the same or relative capacity 
elsewhere. In agricultural work this 
would certainly mean at the local rate 
of hired man’s wages plus comfortable 
home quarters and products of the 
farm for home use in return for the 
responsibility assumed. If the pros¬ 
pective manager has been especially 
successful elsewhere, or brings excep¬ 
tional experience with his personality, 
he is entitled to additional compensa¬ 
tion to be agreed upon, as in any other 
business where proved ability is 
bought and sold. 
It is right that the city-man farm¬ 
er should take all the first year's 
“risks,” as no new superintendent is respon¬ 
sible for work done or undone by a predecessor: 
such as condition of orchards, amount and condi¬ 
tion of grass lands, area in Winter grain, etc., 
upon which success for the succeeding year so largely 
depends. Thus it would seem fair to assure the pros¬ 
pective manager of a living wage plus a bonus for 
proved ability for his first year’s endeavors at least. 
about farming it, whether the women members of 
his household are critically observant of operations 
and conditions they know little of—then, after this 
experience, he may in fairness be asked about tak¬ 
ing any “risk” with the owner. The city-man far¬ 
mer has. meanwhile, had the chance to let his man 
K -■ 
i 
i iifefi-iri 
L v. Z 3k : . ’A. & 
.• : 
- 
% 
yir * p 
COLUMBIAN PLYMOUTH ROCKS AT THORNDALE EGG LAYING 
CONTEST. Fig. 627. 
go to some other job if the work did not please him. 
If, at this time, the matter of “sharing the risks” 
be brought up the question of expenses to be charged 
against gross profit is always a nut to crack. Per¬ 
haps the farm is capitalized beyond its agricultural 
value, and interest on an investment no professional 
farmer would have made must be deducted. Per¬ 
haps the show part of the city-man farmer's busi- 
SEEDSMAN RESPONSIBLE. 
HAT should the seedsman 
do? Get behind his non¬ 
warranty clause or pay fair 
damages?” The R. N.-Y. asks, after 
citing an instance where, under pecu¬ 
liarly exasperating circumstances, a 
seedsman was found to have supplied 
Alsike and clover seed instead of Al¬ 
falfa seed, causing damage and loss to 
the purchaser by the substitution. 
I have been the victim of misplaced 
confidence in nurserymen in the mat¬ 
ter of trees, but have never had any 
serious disappointments with seeds— 
nothing of great moment. If I should, 
however, have such experience as was 
related in The R. N.-Y. and to which 
I have referred. I would expect the 
seedsman to make good, and I believe in such a case 
I would be justified in insisting on it. Arbitrarily 
laying down a non-warranty condition does not cover 
the matter of substitution, and cannot equitably do 
so. A seedsman might not properly be held account¬ 
able for crop failure, because there are so many fac¬ 
tors and contingencies. It would not be just to 
place the burden for failure in that respect upon 
him. But in the matter of substitution, 
the responsibility rests upon him. irre¬ 
spective of whether the substitution is 
by accident or design. We may char¬ 
itably assume that it is wholly acci¬ 
dental, without altering the equity in 
the matter at all. 
Making a hypothetical application of 
the same principle elsewhere we shall 
he able to see this clearly enough. 
Suppose, for instance, this seedsman 
should conclude to go into the busi¬ 
ness of canning pumpkin. Suppose he 
should buy from the near-by farmers 
several carloads of what were sup¬ 
posed to be and were represented to 
be and were sold for pumpkins, and 
he should go on with his canning op¬ 
erations only to find that his factory 
had had worthless gourds furnished it 
instead of pumpkins, as agreed and 
paid for, and his product was worth¬ 
less. Clearly, he would have a per¬ 
fectly just case for damages against 
those who had made the substitution 
of gourds for pumpkins, irrespective of 
whether the substitution was by ac¬ 
cident or design. The customary business theeory of 
“caveat emptor”—let the buyer beware—would 
not. I think, or should not hold. Doubtless 
any court or jury, in awarding damages, would he 
favorably influenced to some degree in the defend¬ 
ant's favor if it could be clearly shown that the sub¬ 
stitution was accidental, but as a simple matter of 
justice, whatever the legal aspect might be, I cer- 
