Januaby 15. 
COUNTEY GENTLEMAN’S COMPANION 
285 
fowls. 'Many persons complain that they cannot keep Game 
fowls because of tlieir pugnacious qualities. Have their 
little battles they will. I have, however, kept these fowls 
some time, and have been constantly in attendance on be- 
tn'een fifty and sixty chickens this year, and have not 
observed a single death from fighting.— One of voun 
Eeadeus. 
PRODUOTIVRNESS OF A COCPIIN-CHINA HEN. 
I HAVE a ratridge-coloured Cochin China hen that has 
reared four broods tliis season, amounting to forty chickens. 
She commenced sitting on tlie li)th of .January; on the 9th 
of February she brought out eleven chickens. The weather 
at that time being very cold she only reared seven. On the 
10th of March she commenced laying the second time; 
after laying thirty eggs in thirty-three days, on the 12th day 
of Api’il I again sat lier on seventeen eggs. Up to this time 
slie continued to run almutw’ith her chickens, and roost with 
them by night, just ns she did when they were only a week 
old. After sitting the usual time, she brought forth fifteen 
chickens, and reared fourteen of them. On the 20th day 
after slie again began to lay; after laying twenty days suc¬ 
cessively, three days after I sat her the third time on fifteen 
eggs. At the end of three wrecks she hatched out twelve 
chickens. This brood liaving the gapes, she only reai’ed 
nine. On the IGth of August she began to lay again—laying 
twenty-seven eggs in thirty-one days. Four days after she 
had done laying, I agaiu sat her on fifteen eggs; twenty-two 
days after sitting she brought out twelve chickens, and reared 
ten. On the lytli of November she again began to lay for 
the fifth time. After laying twenty-five eggs in twenty-eight 
days, I again sat her on the 17th of December. On the 7th 
of January I expect another brood. 
I suppose some will say this is too much for one season. 
All I can say is, she is looking as Avell as any other hen I 
have, in upwards of fourscore. I have kept her in a shed 
at the back of a greenhouse, where she has access to a 
north border when the weather is fine. She is thoroughly 
domesticated ; I can take her up at any time without flutter¬ 
ing her. She. has been kept alone all the season (except her 
chickens), so I have not sat her on any of her own eggs. 
I have been often asked why I kept Cochins, having so 
many other good sorts. The above account, I think, will 
suffice for an answer. I have tried many other sorts sepa¬ 
rately, but the Cochin has beatthem all, having, in less than 
twelvemonths, laid 128 eggs, and reared forty chickens; 
I have reared upwards of 200 cliickens this season; 
not for my own profit, but for my employer's consumption. 
Some of my neighbours often say they wonder I take so 
much trouble about the poultry. My answer to such 
remarks is, I do not not take it as trouble; it is trouble only 
to those who take no delight in poultry, or in the feathered 
tribe. I tliink those are to be pitied who cannot spend a 
half-hour with profit amongst poultry. If we look at the 
diversity of colour, such as painters can but partially imi¬ 
tate, symmetry of form, such as Nature can only produce, 
and study their characters, w'e have a pleasure and good w'ork 
of time only to be accomplished by a contemplative mind. 
I do not know of anything that can give us more pleasm-e. 
If we look on poultry as ornamental, or as adding to our 
comforts, we have it in abundance of eggs, in multitudes of 
feathers, and in the flesh of the fowl itself. I think, for coffi 
tagers, Cochin-Chinas would be found most profitable, as 
they are good layers, good sitters, the beat of mothers, and 
can be kept in a less run than any other sort, and are not 
to be despised at the table.—E. C. 
THE PIGEON PRIZES AT THE BIRMINGHAM 
SHO^Y. 
After reading the remarks of “ Tristram Shandy ” in 
your .Journal of the 1st instant, I should be wanting in 
courtesy did I remain silent. I, for one, tliank him for his 
remarks, as it may, perhaps, teach Pigeon .Judges their 
duty when they do not know it. I cannot say anything as 
regards the prizes taken by G. Adkins, Esqr.’s, birds, but 
can speak for my own. 
My Almonds and Mottles were tw'O pairs of the birds to 
whom the cup was awarded at tlie Anerley Show' last year. 
My Pouters took the second prize at our Columbarian Show, 
lield here in October last. My Carriers w'ere from the same 
breeders who took both first and second prize here at our 
last show, and they considered my pair equal to any they 
had themselves, and they have also taken prizes. 
So far am I from being satisfied with the award, that I 
w'ill show' my same four pairs of birds against Mr. H. JVeir’s, 
wliich he exhibited here, for the amount of the cup, or double 
or treble the amount, to be decided by three or five judges 
of the fancy, separately. Their aw'ards to be made in 
writing, and sealed, until the birds have been forwarded to 
all for their examination.— Edw'. JI. Lingard. 
JUDGING OF PIGEONS, 
'Uhis subject ajtpears to be producing some excitement 
among tlie Ihgeon fancy. Mr. Jones Percivall, some time 
back, complained of the judgment at Anerley; now Dr. Horner 
complains of that at Eirmingliam. Jt is my opinion that, 
to a certain extent, both gentlemen have some reasoning on 
their sides; but each, J tliink, errs by running into violent 
extremes. Mr. Percivall is a red republican in the Pigeon 
fancy,—a complete leveller; wdiile Dr. Horner shows himself 
as a rank Tory aristocrat, so tightly bound to antiquated 
routine by fancy red tape, that he will not admit of any 
worth in anything but an aristocrat. 
J am well aw'ai’e of the tenacity with w'hich true fanciers 
adhere to those varieties of Pigeons which they particularly 
cultivate, and no others are valuable in their estimation. 
So bigotted are they (for I cannot find a milder term) to the 
varieties they prize, that they denominate all others as Toys, 
—mere rubbish,—and wilt not allow them any properties, 
or even admit that they are capable of any improvement. 
Jt was to this prejudice I alluded, in my an.swer to Mr. I^er- 
civ.all’s letter, when I mentioned that the less highly-bred 
varieties could not be expected to compete with the high 
fancy breeds ; and although I acknowledge the superiority of 
these varieties, I am fully convinced that there are many 
other varieties capable of competing with them if properly 
bred. Still, we must not be too lavish of our favours, nor 
too bigotted in our awards. 
Jn reply to Dr. Horner, J beg to say, the fourth crack sort 
he-cannot find are the Runts, rvhich have never been classed 
as Toys, not even by Mr. John Moore (17:35), and his 
copyists ; for of the three authorities named by the Doctor, 
tw'o are copies of the first. 
But why, may I ask, are we to he hound in one unpro- 
gressEe lump by the red tape of the old fanciers ? All 
honour and respect is due to them for their indefatigable 
endeavoiu’s to improve the sorts they liked; but are no 
others, also, capable of improvement-* Have none of the 
other sorts of I*igeons iiroperties that can be worked upon 
to bring them up to a high standard and proportionate 
value? 
I admit, that in some localities certain varieties are 
plentiful; but Dr. Horner sadly commits himself when he 
runs into extremes. First-class birds are not as plentiful 
as blackberries, nor are they easily obtained; nor is there 
less trouble or care required to breed a Jack, a Turbit, or a 
Barb, to perfection. Take a standard of merit for any one 
of these varieties, and compare the number of birds that 
would approach it, and the numher of short-faced I'umhlers 
that -vrould answer to their own standard, and I have no 
hesitation in saying, that good Tumblers will be found 
much more plentiful than really good birds of any other 
variety. 
I do not believe there is now a really good short-faced 
Jacobin in England ; but are we not to encourage the breed 
of Jacobins by acknowledging the best that can be shown, 
in hopes of improving them ? And is not the endeavour of 
that fancier as worthy of a cup, who improves a Jacobin, or 
a Fantail, as he who dwarfs a Tumbler, coaxes the beak of a 
Carrier, or the toe-nail of a Poa/crinto an unnatural pro¬ 
longation of horn ? Must we all control our fancies to the 
ideas of a few' crochety fanciers, and believe that nothing is 
beautiful but a short beak, a narrow head, or a large crop. 
