G8 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
October 27. 
selves. We intend feeding them with loaf-sugar and honey, 
as recommended in The Cottage Gardener of October the 
13th. In the spring we fed them with moist-sugar and ale, 
and by so doing kept them alive; while a great many in 
this neighbourhood who neglected to do so lost their stocks. 
John Sillett. 
GREY SHANGHAES. 
C. II. B’s remarks, in the last number of The Cottage 
Gardener, “in explanation” of his wholesale condemna¬ 
tion of Grey Shanghacs in his previous communication, are, 
as I conceive, so unfair, and, whether intended or not, so 
calculated to mislead, that, however unwilling to intrude 
this much-vexed question unnecessarily on your attention, 
I must beg to be allowed to make one or two comments on 
the want of candour—as it appears to me—betrayed in his 
mode of treating the subject. In his first communication, 
! which professed to give the History of Brahmas , after pro- 
| nouncing these birds to be “ a very coarse variety of the 
ugliest of Shanghaes, and very deficient in the beauties we 
are accustomed to look for in Bull's, and other colours,” lie 
! attempts to confound with them another and quite distinct 
I strain of Grey Shanghaes, known in this country long 
j previous to the introduction of the Brahmas; and, without 
saying one word about the history of the latter, proceeds to 
give a partial account of the origin of Mr. Stainton’s Greys 
only. 
In his present letter, written “in explanation” of the 
above tirade against Brahmas, he still persists in including 
“ all the Greys he has seen ” under one and the same dis¬ 
paraging criticism ; and, by admitting no distinction between 
one strain and another, wishes, apparently, to have it believed 
that all strains of Grey Shanghae, because similar in colour, 
are therefore of equal merit, or, as he would have it, de¬ 
merit. Now, Sir, I would protest against this indiscriminate 
blending of two totally distinct strains, of dilferent origin, 
and each possessing distinctive characters. With about 
equal truth and justice, might I, in describing the charac¬ 
teristics of an inferior strain of Buffs I once possessed, and 
of which, indeed, I was not a little proud when I first kept 
Cochin-Chinas, include in the enumeration all the most 
prominent beauties of Mr. Sturgeon’s superlative strain of 
the same period, between which and mine, there, neverthe¬ 
less, was about the same relative difference as between an 
Irish hunter and one of Barclay and Co.’s incomparable 
dray horses. But further, I protest, as far as the Brahma 
strain of Greys is concerned, against the untruthfulness of 
the picture C. H. B. has here given of them, and believe 
your readers generally will reprobate the injustice here done 
of pitting tbe worst features of very inferior specimens of 
Greys against the highly-developed qualities of unusually 
good specimens of Buff. The disingenuousness of this 
method of dealing with the question has left on my mind 
no other conclusion than that C. II. B., while professing to 
“know the subject well,” has either never seen or taken the 
trouble to look for, and examine, even moderately favourable 
examples of the birds he has, under pretence of being a 
j good authority’, so unhesitatingly condemned; or that, having 
! really seen some of the best specimens of the Brahma 
strain of Greys that this country affords, he has wittingly 
sought to depreciate that strain in your columns by taking 
his estimate of their qualities from the worst samples of 
Greys to be met with, and unequally matching them against 
! similar qualities in the best Buffs. Let him choose which 
horn of the dilemma he pleases—impaled on either, I leave 
him to the judgment of those of your readers who are in a 
position to form a correct estimate of the case; or, should 
he think it necessary to dispute one or the other, then, 
J without wasting more words with one from whom I confess 
I do not feel sanguine of being met with fair argument, I 
call on C. H. B. to accede to the following propositions, by 
way of coming to a fair and speedy conclusion in the 
matter. And you, Mr. Editor, will not refuse your arbitra¬ 
tion in a dispute, which, by its settlement, will, at least, 
admit of your reclaiming a portion of your valuable 
space from less genial topics, to occupy it with others 
better suited to the tastes of the majority of your sub¬ 
scribers. My first proposal is, that I send, to be sub¬ 
mitted to your inspection, one or two pair of my Grey 
Shanghaes; that is, the most forward chickens of the 
variety I possess, for my old birds being in full moult, I 
cannot, or I would willingly, send them. If you (or along 
with yourself any other impartial judges of the breed you 
may think well to call to your aid) are of opinion that the 
general tenor of tbe criticism on, and the description of, the 
breed contained in C. H. B.’s letters, give in any degree, a 
fair, or, I will say, do not convey a most unfair, portraiture of 
the variety, as represented by those birds, then I will most 
humbly cry Pecavi, and, as some reparation for C. H. B.’s 
aspersed candour, will contribute T10 to any charity or 
philanthropic society he may choose to name. G. H. B. 
doing the same, by my nomination of a similar society, 
should the decision be in my favour. The second proposal 
I have to make has reference to C. II. B.’s assertion, as to 
the perfect identity, in point of merit, of the Brahma, and 
Mr. Stainton’s strain of Grey Shanghae; as a test for which, 
I challange C. H. B. to send one or two couple of the latter, 
which, in your opinion, shall be equally meritorious, or will 
stand a fair comparison with the Brahma chickens, to be 
sent in accordance with my first proposition. This C. H. B. 
will, perhaps, say is hardly fair, as, of course, he does not 
keep these “ugly birds;” but having “ known these Grey 
Shanghae for years,” he will, doubtless, know where to find 
the least objectionable specimens. And to give him every 
facility for vindicating the truth of his assertion, he shall be 
at liberty to search the kingdom through for any specimens 
he can beg, borrow, or bring; the only stipulation I shall 
require, being satisfactory proof that the birds produced nre 
not directly or indirectly of the Brahma, or the American 
strain known under that name. C. H. B. will scarcely refuse 
to avail himself of these easy conditions, to vindicate his 
credit for impartiality, particularly, accompanied as it is, 
with the pleasurable prospect of, in the event of success 
(for I propose to attach the same penalty to defeat, in this, 
as in the first ease), bestowing Tit) on some cherished 
object of his philanthropic regards.—W. C. G. 
Weights of Brahma Podtra Chickens. 
June 
July 
Sept. 
Oct. 
26 
3 
17 
22 
26 
6 
13 
lbs. 
lbs. 
lbs. 
lbs. 
lbs. 
lbs. 
lbs. 
No. 1 Cockerel- - 
11 
2 
3 
6 
Gj 
c§ 
7 j 
„ 2 ditto - - - 
li 
2 
03. 
~T 
51 
6 
(>i 
Gf 
„ 3 Pullet - - 
— 
— 
3 j 
4 
4 
4j 
„ 4 ditto - - - 
— 
— 
— 
31 
4 
4 
„ 5 ditto - - - 
— 
— 
3* 
4 
The Cockerels were, I believe, hatched about the first 
week in May ; the Pullets about the second week in June. 
I have a very fine Buff Cockerel, bred by Mr. Fox, hatched 
in March, which weighs, this day, 7jibs., and he is a very 
fine bird. The Brahmas were, from July 17 to Sept. 20, 
running indiscriminately with about forty other fowls, and 
not at all highly fed; neither are they now.—P. Jones, Jun. 
PEARS IN 1853. 
It may be worth while, now the season is past, the fruit 
gathered and housed, and whilst we stand, as it were, 
almost on the last foothold of the waning year, to look into 
the l’ear question, and, if agreeable to our readers, to com¬ 
pare notes. I think no apology is needed for this, as the 
Pear certainly occupies as important a place in the dessert 
of thousands as any fruit we possess. The Apple may be 
said to be the fruit of the million, not because everybody 
prefers an Apple to a Pear, but because thousands can get 
at an Apple when they cannot procure a mellow Pear. I 
have before observed, in these columns, that there exists no 
possible reason why the Pear should not he the fruit of the 
million as well as the Apple. And why is it not ? We all 
remember its being said by somebody:—- 
“He who plants pears, 
Plants for his heirs! ** &c. 
But this doctrine is now entirely set at nought; it will not 
