2S4 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
Januahy li>. 
slioit rliiy of eight hours they cannot be fed too often, and 
let tliem liave some milk to drink. 
Teed yonr hen as you do the chickens ; give them the 
scraps and crumbs of the bread from your table, and in cold 
and wet weatlier soak them in ale or wine. Recollect, as a 
golden rule, no warmth is so beneficial as that engendered 
by generou.s, but proper, feeding. 
Tlrese things are more tedious to I’ead than to carry out, 
and it is by follow ing these rules you may hope to begin your 
season as a prize-taker in early Dorking chickens.— Sussex. 
THE LAST CHIRP. | 
TuotJOR I know' that readers always get tired of any | 
prolonged discussion, I must, for the sake of truth, and for j 
the honour of the Anglo-Saxon, expose the drift by which j 
my acute opponent, Mr. Tegetmeier, tries to make me ac- I 
company him when lie says, “ Doth are in error.” Tt is 
this—I affirmed, and do affirm, on the authority of every 
Anglo-Saxon Grammar, that in the Aiiglo-S'axoit tongue, no 
plurals are formed by eii. He then quotes some “ Early 
English ” w'ords {unclen and hishopen) to show how “ utterly 
incoiTect ” I am! Surely, he knows that Anplo-Saxon is not 
Early English ! 
As Mr. Tegetmeier forsakes his colours (and tlie true 
colours, by-the-by, that is, the Anglo-Saxon), and takes 
reluge in the Early Englisli, I have no objection; although 
I mvrch question the good taste of any man retrograding a 
few centuries in his speech. Besides, it would puzzle one 
to read of chiclchonsen, of Eight Reverend Bishopen; nay, 
one should not recognize one’s own unclen. 
“ What a clever woman Mrs. A— must be,” -writes the 
Rev. Sydney Smith; “ slie says, thereto; but, I suppose, 
she wears high lieeled shoes, and patches.” But I entreat 
that this hint of “ dressing to character” may not befall you, 
dear Mr. Editor, oj- you wall behold some of your -n’riting 
staff—“Fine old English gentlemen, of the olden time”— 
enter your office in top-boots and leathers, hag-wigs and 
hairpow'der! Nay, worse, some fair ones in hooped petti¬ 
coats and farthingales ! Save you from yonv ancient friends, j 
truly!—F. R. IIounek. 1 
WHJAT ARE HAMBURGH POLANDS? ' 
In your Number for December 4th your correspondent “ B.,” | 
in defending my description of the Spangled Hamburghs, 
says as follows, in reply to “D:” “ The mischief comes 
from those wdio have formed their opinion from the Ham- 
BUEGH Polands, ’ Ac. “ Lacing w'ith them, is the exception, 
either in the body or the crest: the latter is mostly white, or j 
having entire dark feathers intermixed, not laced ones, ' 
hanging down on one side of the head, and obstructing the ; 
sight; in fact, exactly like the engraving in Richardson’s | 
“ Poultry Book,” which he calls the Hamburgh Fowl;” and 
w’hich I call so still, believing it the correct name, and known I 
as such tor a century in these countries prior to 1848. Tlie 1 
birds which Mr. Richardson described, I believe were mine, | 
as he lived in my neighbourliood, and had daily opportunity 
of examitiing them, although, for reasons best known to 
himselt, another's name was ])refeiTed as the owner. 
I have given a long attention to this breed, and as “ B.” is 
evidently an amateur of experience and long standing, he 
will confer a favour by stating more explicitly what he 
means by Hamburgh Bolands. Is he aware of any breed 
having been at any time brought from Poland?—R, P. 
Williams. 
DUBLIN SOCIETY’S PROPOSED BASIS FOR 
POULTRY JUDGING. 
I WAS, perhaps, premature in sending a letter of complaint 
against the spirit in which your correspondent, “ D.,” criti¬ 
cized the “ Proposed Basis ” put forward by me, esjiecially 
as that gentleman compliments me “ on the research and 
talent of the paper, although lie cannot agree to the rules; ” 
but I have one thing to feel pleased at, viz., that it has in- 
duced discussion; as I find,in your Number for December4th, 
another of your corrrepondents, “B.,” who shows himself an 
amateur of standing, does not agree with “ D.;” thus clearly 
showing, that a general basis of judgment (such as has long 
obtained in florists’ flowers) is a desideratum. I have, how¬ 
ever, a still greater source of satisfaction, namely, that in 
the Report of the Birmingham Show, by the Midland Coun¬ 
ties Hercdd, the distinctive markings insisted on in my basis 
are dwelt on as being defective, viz., in speaking of the 
Golden-crested Fowl .—“ Nor could any inattentive observer 
fail to perceive that the size and form of the spangles, in 
both the Gold and Silver sorts, have become sadly deterio¬ 
rated, the feathers, in the great majority of instances, being 
only laced at the end, instead of having the broad, boldly- 
defined, crescent-shaped mark which should be met with,” 
Ac. Again, on the Silver Pheasant Lancashire Moonies, or, 
by the nomenclature of 1848, Silver Spangled Hamburgh, 
the Editor remarks, “ We hold to the belief that aivant of 
taste obtains as to what are the properties" of these very 
beautiful and useful occupants of our poultry-yards, breeders 
not being content, in their efforts to obtain them of a very 
light colour, to dispense with those lacings on the wings and 
other ornamental distinctions, which, in our estimation, 
greatly enhance the appearance of both cocks and hens.” 
In the Dorking Class, he says, “ Every variety of colour, 
with both double and single combs, was very efficiently re¬ 
presented in quality, as well as numericallj', the bulk of 
them comprising closeness of feather and unifoemity of 
PLUMAGE, with large size;" from which it would appear the 
English public are opening their eyes, and find that Dor¬ 
kings (true Dorkings) have a colour, and can be bred true 
to feather, ivith size, the majority agreeing with the descrip¬ 
tion in my basis, although “ D.” found fault with it; but a 
reference to “The Poultry Book” would have shown him 
the hen with a falling comb, (not such as the Spanish) and 
the cock a black-breasted grey, and described as of no mean 
weight. 
In concluding this letter, I would only say to your corre¬ 
spondent “ D.,” who recommends me to visit Birmingham, 
that I have been to four of the Shows, and was a competitor 
last year tl854); but the December sea-voyage and dis¬ 
tance, I fear, prevent a second attempt, though allured by 
the tempting jirizes and the spirit of rivalry. I can only as¬ 
sure him, tliat how greatly soever I admired and wondered 
at the number brought together, I saw much to regret in 
the want of perfection in marking of several of the breeds, 
as alluded to by the Midland' Counties Herald, as well as 
want of purity in the feather of the Dorkings. In the Dutch 
Pencilled Fowl, the two black bars that ought to cross the 
wings were, in few instances, but barely traceable.—R. P. 
WiLIJAMS. 
PRICE OF DORKINGS. 
In your report, headed, “ Poultry progress of the past 
year,” you state a cock was recently sold for TT5, It will be 
only fair to say, that at the late Birmingham Show, the first 
prize cock, in pen No. S“4, belonging to Lady Chesterfield, 
was claimed at Tlo ; Dir. Robert Loders, 'I'lie Beeches, third 
prize cockerel, in pen .'fill, for the same price; and the 
highly commended cock, the property of Mr. Henry Smith, 
The Grove, Cropwell Butler, in pen 88(i, for 15 guineas. 
By inserting the above you will oblige.—A Lookee-on. 
THE MERITS OF GAME FOWLS. 
I WAS at the Colchester Show last Saturday, and could not 
help observing tbe Spanish fowls. There certainly was 
plenty of white in the face of almost every specimen, but it 
appeared to me to be so very coarse, and, in some cases, the 
eye of the bird was nearly closed by it. Is this essential in 
a Spanish fowl ? 
The Game classes were very numerous and beautiful. I 
think the most inditlereiit could but admire the beautiful 
cocks in this class. Game fowls are now more numerous 
than any other fowl at our exhibitions, and I think Com¬ 
mittees of Shows ought, in fairness to exhibitors, to offer 
additional prizes for these beautiful birds; for, in addition 
to their great beauty, they are excellent layers and table 
t 
