2ns 
THE COTTAGE GAEDENER. 
Jakuaky 8. 
' The Judges on Poultry nere—W. H. Clarice, Escj., Larch Hall, Rath- 
i farnham ; J. M. Dolier, Esq., Collegnes, Booterstown; Thomas Uuther- 
' ford. Esq., Mooretown House, Ardee. 
, The Judges on Pigeons were—Arthur E. Gayer, Esq., LL.D., Upper 
Mount-street; F. Smith, Esq., Leicester-road, Rathmines; J. E. Harley, 
I Esq., 14, Upper Leesoa-street. 
SUGGESTIONS TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE 
BIRMINGHAM POULTRY SHOW. 
Birminuha:.!, flint Leviathan of onr numerons Poultry 
Shows, has just closed, and, as a whole, the exhihition of 
I 18.55 has inttnitely sui'itassed tlie anticipations of the most 
I sanguine, and “ congratulations are the universal order of 
j the day.” 
I After such a statement, many will rest assured that alter¬ 
ations are unnecessary, and that, if attempted, a doubtful 
' issue would be the infallible lesult. Still, reflection natu- 
I rally suggests to us, “ let us look for any weak points exjie- 
I rience di'velopes, and,if jiossilile,counteract their intluences.” 
j Urged by this impulse, the following suggestions are mooted 
j for the consideration of the Birmingham council fur the 
1 poultry department, in the hope, at least, of calling the at- 
i tention of the gentlemen who cotnpose that body, to their 
j importance, and the necessity of regulations which admit 
; neither of donhlc significations, nor such as arc readily and 
openly evaded. 
First, then, as to the regulations which enforces—“ the 
ages of the chickens must be uecamtehj stated.” It is (piiie 
notorious to every one at all intimately acquainted witli 
poultry lore, more especially “ breeders,” that thh rule is 
far more frequently disregarded than obeyed. Let any really, 
praeticaL person take in his hand the printed catalogue, of 
almost any poultry meeting, visit each pen consecutively, 
form his own conclusions before reference to the particulars 
enunciated in its images, ami, from after comparison, we feel 
assured he will not disown any previously expressed conclu¬ 
sion, or feel otherwise than astounded at the variety of erro¬ 
neous statements that i)revail. 
There are maiiy, no doubt, to whom a false statement of 
the ages of chickens would be abhorrent, and who puncti¬ 
liously obey the directions of the society; but, on the other 
hand, it is deplorable to observe the many shades of decep¬ 
tion wilfully practised by the less scrupulous. Some deduct 
only a few weeks from the aclnal ages of their chickens; 
others, still more lax, subtract, ]»erchance, a couple or ewm 
three months ; whilst the most daring exhibitors will some¬ 
times unblushingly assert, “ hatched in Aiajurl,'’ well knowing 
the self imposed care they bestowed upon those youngsters 
during the bleak and searching trials of the preceding 
March! The writer of these remarks can vividly call to 
mind some half-dozen instances of even tlie laal occurrence, 
which, when discovered and exposed, produced either an un¬ 
willing avowal of their culpability, “because so many did 
the same;” an admission “that not having reared the 
chickens, the date was affixed at hazard,” or a downright 
stubborn adhesion to their previous wilful misstatement; 
even though after inquiries instituted expressly for this pur¬ 
pose provetl, beyond the possibility of doubt, to all the com¬ 
mittee, that the error had not crept in accidentally. Surely, 
it will never he contended that a irreniium held out to 
j deceptiveness is either a prudent course, or one at all calcu- 
! lated to support the permunencij of our poultry exhibitions. 
I These false statements have equally the effect of breaking 
I down the spirits of the well-disposed amateur at the com- 
I mencement of his career, as they also undoubtedly produce 
feelings of distrust and contempt in those long-practised in 
breeding poultry. Weri; the rule sinrjrl.y confined “/a 
j chiefeens of the present year," leaving the judges to deteimine 
1 their excellence jtroportionubly to their apparent age, the ad¬ 
vantages hoj)ed for from misrepresentation would be alto¬ 
gether expunged, consequently, practices so really reprehen¬ 
sible would cease to be adopted, 
i Of cottager’s’ poultry i need say but very little. It is every- 
I where admitted, that most of such prizes are eventually 
secured Iry the fowls of well-known exhibitors, mei’ely lent 
1 for this especial purpose. It is, indeed, much to be deplored 
j that the kind efforts of poultry comnnttees should be thus 
defeated: or that the really necessitous cottager should 
find his long-cherished hopes laid prostrate by the com¬ 
I 
I 
1 
I 
billed acts of parties not iinfrequently bearing the intimate 
position of employer and employed. Yet so it is ; and oft- i 
times the self-same successful birds resume their original | 
jiosition in some other exhibition, even in the space of a 
few weeks only ; are again the favoured orres on the prize j 
list, but have suddenly affixed to them the rrames of parties, j 
who, if taxed with the imposture, strive to jirstify its com- ; 
mission, by explaining “ they were lent to our man, to do j 
him a good tui’ii.” That such unforeseen ill-usage should 
raise feelings of resentment in the poor man who honestly 
did exhibit his “own fowls” (and was thus defeated), is 
but the natural impulse commoir to all human nature; 
more particularly irrepressible by those individuals in ■ 
society whose early years passed by, most probably, devoirl 
of that moral and religious culture which, at the present 
moment, is happily within the reach of most parties, how¬ 
ever straightened their position. 
The antidote I propose is, to either withhold the cottagers’ 
premiums altogether, or- eitl'orce, riyidly, a rule confrrting 
conrpetition to the porrltry “ actually their own properly,” 
withoirt colhrsion with any one. 
'The clause of “two months prior ownership,” by amateurs 
exhibiting, is “ only a form,” says some. If so considered 
by a nirnierons class of contributors, why not only sim])ly 
enjoin, “ the poultry competing must be the bona fide jiro- 
perty of the exhibitor'.’” It would prevent the great amount 
of en’oneous statements now constantly adopted by the in- 
difllerent on such mailers. 
On the restriction of “ competition for prizes being con¬ 
fined strictly to aniatenrs," I will say no more than that it is 
constantly broken ; and the diihculty of assigning the real 
line of demarcation between a dealer and an amateur is so | 
universally acknowledged, that perchance, even an attemjjt 
at arrangement, in this particular instance, would not event¬ 
ually be productive of improvement; wdiilst the less dariny 
may possibly feel some little restiaint at traugressing this 
regulation among those dealers wdio hesitate not to openly 
avow their daily avocation. 
Of the rule limiting exhibitors to the entry oi four pens 
only, little need be here said. The listof subscribers will best 
tell its own tale ; the principal of a family, his wife, a whole 
batch of little ones of the same name (or if these latter 
are wanting), sisters, nephews, nieces, any relations, are 
“ temporarily called in ” to assume the proprietorship for the 
time being; combined with the additional infraction of 
“ signing a certiticate,” that the fowls have for two }nonths 
prior to exhibition been their own individual propci ty. No 
doubt the originators of this regulation adopted it to pre¬ 
vent a “ wholesale sweep ” of the prize list by one single 
exhibitor; or, as inferreil by the restriction of admitting 
hut two pens in the same class, to prevent the same result 
in regard to any particular variety. But the scrutiny pro¬ 
posed will fidly prove the oiien evasion practised and allowed. | 
The suggestion then naturally i)i’esents itself to the mind, that 
even open defiance of all rules is thus tolerated, if attended 
with a proportionate increase of subscription. Certainly it 
would not limit, or increase, the amount of entries (nume¬ 
rically considered), if, after a first subscription, an exhibitor 
of four pens for one sovereign were permitted farther en 
tries for sums ju’eviously deteiniined. It might possibly 
prevent the fre([uent admission of numbers of pens of the 
same variety of lamltry liom one yard, in a single class; 
and certainly would obviate tbe conchtsion now proverbial, 
“that a broken law, if well gilded, still remains entire.” | 
The number of yratnitons admission cards allotted to each 
subscriber, by present arrangement, w'ould, consequently, be 
lessened very materially by the rule lu’opo.sed, and the coli'ers 
of the society benelited in exact proportion. 
'The above cui’sory remarks liave been indited by one who 
has had most extended experience in witnessing the “ work¬ 
ing-out ” of a great variety of regulations connected with 
poultry exhibitions, and who has ever felt desirous to pro- | 
mote their permanency and success. 'That it is a subject of j 
vital importance to all our minor meetings for the “ Bir¬ 
mingham rules” to be as nearly perfect as possible, will not 
be open to dispute (as these regulations are followed wholly ; 
or in part by most of them), nor will it be denied the wel- j 
fare of even “ the Triton of our poultry exhibitions,” may be | 
enhanced by a due revision of each and all of them, as ex- | 
peiience may necessitate, or unforseen difficulties may occur. 
