November 4. 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
91 
needs improvement here perhaps more than in any other 
I conuU-y. I allude to poultry. 
j “ The committee place at the head of this class, ‘ Dor- 
j kings’ (without saying whether ‘white’ or ‘spangled’)— 
I then follow ‘ Polands,’ and lastly ‘ Large Breed ’—what the 
j ‘ Large Breed ’ may be, it is impossible to say. Surely the 
j managers are sadly behind the age in knowledge of poultry, 
I if they are not aware, that there are many varieties of fowls 
superior to the ‘ Dorking ’ and ‘ Poland.’ The Dorking is 
no doubt a fine bird, as compared with the common, little, 
miserable objects usually sold in our markets, called 
‘ chickens,’ and possesses many good qualities—and the 
Poland has beauty of appearance, as well as fertility of 
eggs to recommend it, but into what insignificance they 
creep w'hen placed near any of the Cochin-China, or 
Shanghai varieties. There are two families from Cochin- 
China,—the ‘ Royal,’ and ‘ Imperial; ’ four, from Shanghai, 
the Black, White, Buff, and Brown, all of which are superior 
to the Dorking and Poland, in the following qualities:— 
First, size; second, quaUly of flesh ; third, number of eggs ; 
fourth, fertility of egg ; fifth, hardihood of chickens ; sixth, 
better nurses; and seventhly, value of feathers (nearly as 
valuable a,s those of geese). Add to all this, they have 
borne our winters, even better than our common fowls have 
done, and surely any person who has ever seen one of these 
magnificent birds could scarcely pass them over without 
notice. 
“I have mentioned ‘Shanghai’s’ and Cochin-China’s 
because I am more familiar with them, than other foreign 
varieties, but there are other birds which have their 
cliampions ; say ‘Brahma Pootra’ (20 lbs. tlie pair), ‘Great 
•lava,’ ‘ Pl 3 Tnouth Rock ’ (18 lbs. the pair), ‘ Black Spanish ’ 
(superior to Poland in weiglit, and lay quite as well), and 
many others which we ought to know more about, a know¬ 
ledge which can easily be obtained by a perusal of an ex¬ 
cellent work lately published at Boston, called ‘ Dixon and 
Kerr’s Omament.al and Domestic Poultiy Book’—a work as 
superior to our old-fashioned poultry books as an ‘ Imperial 
Cochin cock ’ is to a half-bred Bantam.” 
This statement is especially valuable as beainng testimony 
that the Cochins will bear even a Canadian winter “ better 
than our common fowls,” and before I quit it, I will add, 
that I shall be much obliged to any of yom’ correspondents 
wiio can give any information resxiecting the other large 
varieties of poultry mentioned in it, or who can tell me 
whether “ Dixon and Kerr’s Poultry Book ” can be had in 
this country. 
You will have observed that I have said nothing respecting 
the dift'erent varieties of Cochins; this, as you are aware, 
will appear in another form. In conclusion, I would add 
my caution to that of Mr. 'Wingfield (to whom, and to 
“ Gallus,” I feel much indebted for their contributions to 
your paper)—“ to avoid all crossing.” AJirsf. cross wiU do 
for the spit, but after that they soon degenerate into down¬ 
right mongrels.—C ochin. 
EXPENSE OF FEEDING COCHIN-CHINA 
FOWLS. 
Just as I am sending off to you the result of another 
weelv’s trial of the relative quantities of food consumed by 
! Cochin-Chinas and Spanish, I read (in The Cottaue Gar¬ 
dener of October 21st) 
“ 'fhe strain of strutting chanticleer 
Cry Cock-a-doodle-doo ! ” 
And I m.ay as well answer it with the words preceding 
these lines. Bow! wow! of which there is a good deal 
m Mr. Cock-a-doodle-doo’s paper. Let me remind him, 
I and “ Q-in-the-corner ” too, whose answer, by-the-by, is 
: raucli more (to my mind) to the purpose than poor 
j dear Cocky’s, that I have never brought into my m’gu- 
ments the words, which they both use — “in proportion 
to their size.” I have nothing to do “ with proportion to 
size.” I have been discussing Cochins, as to whether they 
are the best fowls to keep altogether, or not, taking into 
consideration their merits (to which I have never been 
blind), and their fault of “ heiny such large consumers of 
food,” which fact I can neither be written nor persuaded 
out of, for I have proved it, not only to my own satisfaction, 
but to that of every unprejudiced or uninterested person. 
As an eating fowl, a Dorking must always be its superior. 
It can be got up to the same weight (even saying nothing 
as to flavour, and “ white meat,” when cooked) at a less 
expense than the Cocliin. Surely, then, where chickens are 
in demand, it is a more paying fowl to the cottager. 
As a layer, if a Spanish fowl, at a cost of twopence a 
week, can produce, say (by way of argument) five eggs, 
weighing lUoz., against six eggs from the Cochin-China, 
weighing 12 oz., but at a cost of fourpence a week,—I leave 
it to the cottager to say which (if he wants eggs) will suit 
his pocket best. 
I have been told by Anster Bonn, and others, that Cochin- 
Chinas “did not eat more than other fowls.” Now, how¬ 
ever, the ground is changed, and “ proportion to size ” 
comes into play. I therefore presume it is beginning to be 
allowed that “ they do eat more than others and common 
sense may well (like the Iiish echo) answer, “ they do.” 
The Cochin-China supporters have injured their own cause, 
in their over eagerness, by asserting too much. It is not to 
be supposed that large fowls, coming early into maturity, 
attaining great size, and laying a great many eggs, can 
consume as little as smaller hens, who do not equal them 
in some of these respects. 
An old man, a great lover of poultry, asked leave, a few 
days ago, to see what he called “ my new-fashioned poultry.” 
His remark—“'Well, Sir, if you do gets many eggs from 
them chaps’ bodies, you mtxn put a lot of grub in their 
bellies”—is, I believe, quite true. 
Your Cochin-China correspondents seem to be ignorant 
that I am a Cochin-China fancier myself, as well as they; 
and I may assert that I am very fond of them, but I cannot 
go all their lengths, and declare there is nothing like them. 
This is the last letter I shall write to you on the suliject. 
I shall retire to my perch, satisfied that time and trial will 
prove me not very wrong; and when I hear of Cochin- 
Cliinas changing hand.s, as they are now doing—and when 
I am told, as I have been by an eminent Cochin-China 
fancier, that “ It’s time to get out of it,” and see many such 
letters as some I published in my last paper to you—I begin 
to tliink I see a “ something looming in the future,” and 
that the “old uns,” like rats (I do not mean this simile 
disrespectfully), are leaving a falling house.* 
Now, sir, for the trials, which were conducted under 
exactly the same circumstances as the others, except that 
only the cock and one hen were left in No. 1, and tliat, 
though the cock in No. 2 was the same, the hens were 
different, but about the same age. As to the accuracy of the 
account, I pledge you my word. It may be said, my feeding 
is extravagant. I can only say, I went into a farm-house 
to-day, where they pride themselves on their poultry, and 
found them mixing a large tub of meal and steamed pota¬ 
toes for some fine Minorca hens. 
You see that similar results are again obtained—the 
Cochins eating double what the Spanish (and other fowls, 
which I wiU name) have done. 
I have been told—*• Oh ! yom’ climate certainly sharpens 
yom’ fowls’ appetites; ” hut what is food for the goose is 
food for the gander, and the climate that tells on the Cochin 
will tell on the Spanish; and the fact remains the same-— 
“ That the quantity and cost of food consumed by one is 
about double that of the other.” 
A friend of mine, who keeps only Bolton Greys, who has 
been trying the experiment for me of their eating, reports 
the result to me as “ not quite twopence a week,” but he 
does not send me the quantities. A similar report of a 
Golden-spangled Hamburgh fancier is “ about twopence a 
week.” My own impression had been, that, as consumers, 
fowls might thus be classed:— 
Cochins. 
Dorkings. 
Spanish. 
And I fancied that Bolton Greys, &c., ate less than Spanish. 
This does not appear to be the case ; and a man wlio keeps 
* If “ GalluS ” alludes to the sales of part of Mr. Sturgeon’s and 
of Mr. Andrews’ stocks, we think it may prevent misunderstanding to 
state, that both those gentlemen are pursuing the exclusive breeding of 
Cochins as ardently as ever,—En. C. G. 
