THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
88 
Ink for Zinc Labels (W, C.).— We have published this three or 
four times. Vou will find it in No. 287, which you can have from the 
office, if you enclose four postage stamps with your direction. You can 
have No.' 363 in the same way. You can grow Cucumbers very well in 
your greenhouse. 
Names of Ferns (E. M. I .).—Your Ferns arc as follows:—No. 1. 
Aspidium filix-mas. 2. Blechnum boreale . 3. Is too imperfect to be 
certainly recognized. We judge it to be a fragment of Asplenium bulbi - 
ferum. It much resembles that plant in a small state. (A Constant 
Reader of The Cottage Gardener).— Yours is the common Polopody 
(Rolppodium vulgar e), one of the most ornamental of our British Ferns. 
It will flourish in almost any soil or situation, but delights in a soil 
composed of two-thirds peat and one-third loam. In this it can soon be 
established anywhere, either as a pot plant, or the greenhouse; the 
rockery, or in the common border. 
Fruit Dealer (A Constant Reader , Exeter)*— Messrs. Webber and 
Co., Coveut Garden, London. 
Works on Gardening ( ChicJcweed ).—Buy The Cottage Gardeners' 
Dictionary , now publishing in weekly numbers and monthly parts ; and 
buy the Manuals for the Many as they appear. You will then have all 
the information you mention. Greenhouses for the Many, in that scries 
of Manuals, will exactly meet one of your wants. 
Strawberries (An Old Subscriber). —Keen’s Seedling, Hooper’s 
Seedling, Count de Paris, British Queen, and Elton, are all excellent, 
and give succcssional crops. 
THE POULTRY ®WB®8TOL£. 
POULTRY SHOWS. 
Agricultural Society (Royal). At Chelmsford, July 14th to 19th. 
Sec. J. Hudson, Esq., 12, Hanover Square, London. Entries close 
June 1st. 
Anerley. July 29th, 30th, 31st, and August 1st. 
Bath and West of England. June 4th, 5th, and 6th. Sec. Mr. J, 
Kingsbury, 10, Haramet Street, Taunton. Entries close April 30th. 
Bristol. June 23th and 26th. Sec. Robert Hillhouse Bush, Litfield 
House, Clifton, Bristol. Entries close 26th of May. 
Essex. At Colchester, 8th, 9th, and 10th of January, 1857- Secs. 
G. E. Attwood, and W. A. Warwick. 
Exeter. At Exeter, May 29th and 30th. Sec. Mr. T. William Gray. 
Hull and East Hiding. At Hull, June 25th. Sec. t B. L. Wells, 
Esq., 23, Bishop Lane, Hull. Entries close June 18th. 
Leominster. Thursday, October 16. 
Manchester and Liverpool Agricultural Society. At Wigan, 
Thursday, August 7th. Secs, for poultry, J. H. Peck, and J. S, 
Marshall, Esqrs. Entries close July 24th. 
Norwich. June 20th. (Norfolk Agricultural, for Subscribers only.) 
Sec., Mr. E. C. Bailey, Little Oxford Street, Norwich. Entries close 
May 31st. 
Nottinghamshire. At Southwell, December 17th and 18th, 1856. 
Sec., Richard Hawksley, jun. Entries close November 19th. 
Paris. May 23rd to June 7th. Sec., M. M. E. Rouber, Division de 
l’Agriculture, rue de Varennes, No. 7® bis, Paris. 
Prescot. July 3rd. Sec., Mr. J. F. Ollard, Prescot. Entries close 
June 21st. 
Windsor Poultry Exhibition. At Windsor, 4th, 5th, and 6th of 
June. Secs. Thos. Chamberlain, and Henry Thompson. Entries 
will close May 10th. 
Yorkshire Agricultural Society. At Rotherham, Wednesday 
and Thursday, August 6th and 7th. Sec., J. Hannam, Esq., Kirk 
Deighton, Wetherhy. 
N.B .—Secretaries vnll oblige us by sending early copies of their lists. 
TRIMMING. 
Although to some of the readers of our periodical it 
may be necessary, at the onset, to define what is actually 
meant by the very expressive word that heads our present 
essay, the poultry amateur of anything like extended 
experience will at once recognise the signification of this 
commonly used appellation. “ Trimming ” is an admittedly 
very curt, but at the same time unusually descriptive, 
designation of instances where objectionable feathers on 
poultry designed for exhibition have been carefully re- 
moved—either in part or altogether—prior to sending them 
for competition. This is done in the hope of obtaining a 
j better position among their rivals than would have been 
the case had they been forwarded without their plumage 
being thus tampered with, by surreptitiously removing 
objectionable feathers to prevent them being an eyesore in 
the way of obtaining the favour of the judges who have to 
j award the premiums of the exhibition. Nothing connected 
with our poultry shows lias caused more acrimonious 
feelings among exhibitors, or given more trouble to both 
judges and committees, than the unjust practice we have 
alluded to; we, therefore, trust the consideration of this 
j subject will possibly tend to render it less universal in its 
j operation on the one baud, or more directly punishable on 
I the oilier. We are perfectly aware of the many difficulties 
Apkil 29. 
that occur when the question is proposed—What is to be 
considered “trimming;” how far is it to he tolerated; and 
what the punishment with which it is to he visited ? 
None but those parties who make it a point to attend the 
generality of our poultry meetings can possibly appreciate 
the truly grievous extent to whicli this unfair practice is 
adopted; scarcely a single show being without numerous 
instances of the most glaring character, easily recognisable 
at the first glance; whilst an even increased number abound 
when an adept has endeavoured to deceive the arbitrators 
by less-extended and far more carefully-devised manipula¬ 
tions. The difficulty in this latter case is proportionally 
increased as the crafty proprietor endeavours, by all the 
means at his disposal, to place himself in a position where 
(if discovered) he can attribute the loss of any particular 
portion of the plumage exclusively to the result of accident, 
and as not produced by any design to deceive, either on his 
own part, or that of any individual connected with him, 
over whom it may be presumed he has exercised his 
authority. Hence, it is not unfrequently the case, that if 
properly “disqualified,” a most recriminative and personally 
hostile feeling is evinced towards the judges who may 
have dared to expose the deception, clouds of exculpatory 
witnesses being produced. 
We once knew a very extreme case, where three witnesses 
vouched to a fact of which they knew nothing, being 
actually suborned to give this false evidence, and (after 
imbibing the fruits of their service at a neighbouring ale¬ 
house) acknowledging “ in their cups ” their perfect willing¬ 
ness to repeat the same help “ for any one ” placed in the 
like dilemma, always providing a similar amount of intoxi 
eating beverage should prove the affixed reward of their 
base culpability. It will bo generally found, that parties so 
debased to all feelings consistent with honour and honesty 
as thus to attempt to defraud, do not hesitate not only to 
adopt any available means to avoid exposure, but also com¬ 
monly view the party by whom the imposture was detected 
in the light of a personal enemy. They hesitate not to add 
to their criminality individual insult, and the vindictiveness 
(a previous conviction of complete security sometimes 
produces when the revulsion takes place) cannot be appre¬ 
ciated except by those who have frequently witnessed it. 
From these combined causes, to expose “ trimming ” is, by 
FAR, THE MOST THANKLESS TORTION OF THE DUTIES OF A 
POULTRY JUDGE. 
The judges must found the accusation exclusively on the 
fact of incomplete plumage; the exhibitor almost invariably 
insists the complaint emanates from circumstances beyond 
his control, and it will he evident, to prove wilfulness against 
the accused is generally beyond the bounds of possibility. 
It ends in a positive wrangle, the dispute generally “settling 
down” as to whether the want of feathers arose from 
accident or design. The diverse opinions expressed by the 
by-standers only renders the matter still more undetermined; 
the dispute assumes the nature of clanship ; the exhibitor, 
perchance, asserts himself an unjustly accused individual, 
whilst the arbitrator determines, in “ his own mind," never 
to rush into “hot-water” again, but let any “trimming" 
remain unexposed. There have been cases, no doubt, in 
which a servant has, altogether, without the connivance or 
guilty knowledge of his employer, been the only blnmeabla 
party in the transaction, and also that (when thus detected 
unexpectedly) has protested his individual innocence, lest, 
by admission, he might incur summary proofs of his master’s 
displeasure. There is a contingency still more deplorable, 
but one that, nevertheless, fails to render the deception 
less objectionable, as, in this latter case, the annoyance only 
proves the greater from the implicit reliance previously 
placed on the word and general conduct of the domestic. 
Perchance it may be advisable to point out, very briefly, 
a few of the most generally practised instances of “ trim¬ 
ming ” that are at the present time adopted. 
In the Black Poland class a very forcible “ illustration" is 
almost universally prevalent. The anterior feathers of the 
crests are removed to prevent a prominency of black 
feathers at the front of the top-knot. If the suspected 
fowls are taken in hand, and carefully examined, a bare 
space will be discovered midway between the base of the 
hill and the commencement of the white feathers of the 
crest. In the more artfully-devised instances of Poland 
