THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
! October 24. 
Mr. Beaton had almost persuaded me to fall in with his 
request to lake a part in the criticism of last winter’s effects 
on our more tender plants at this elevated position of 1200 
feet above the level of the sea, but being doubtful whether 
sufficient materials could be collected in my limited sphere 
to render it interesting, I deemed it prudent to leave the 
task to some one of larger experience than myself.—A. L., 
Gardener to II. Shaw, Esq., Coebar Hall, Buxton. 
[We are very much obliged by this highly interesting 
communication, and shall be also for the result of A. L.’s 
observations on the results of last winter. Every similar 
contribution adds to our genuine information on the hardi¬ 
hood or tenderness of plants in different localities. It is 
important, in such communications, that the nature of the 
soil and the aspect be specified.—E d. C. G.] 
THE PROFIT AND LOSS OF POULTRY- 
KEEPING. 
An opinion that Poultry.keeping had been found profit¬ 
able where either “ many” or “ few” were kept, would, pro¬ 
bably, in a large majority of cases, be found correct. Now, 
by these expressions 11 many" or “Jew,” w r e are not to un¬ 
derstand mere numerical conditions, but a proportionate 
regard to capabilities of supplying food, and extent of ground. 
Thus, while six fowls may be ample for the cottage, sixty 
may be too few for the farm. 
The reasons that influence such a conclusion are manifest. 
The cottager has many scraps valuable for Poultry, though 
insufficient for a pig, or other live-stock. Every morsel of 
those scraps may be thus applied, and the purchased food, 
com and meal, is thus reduced to the smallest amount. We 
say nothing here of the advantages of the warm winter-roost 
in the capacious chimney of many of our rural cottages, as 
that would only come before us when the labourer and the 
farmer were rivals in their fowls. The farmer, however, 
who regulates his feathered stock in just proportion to bis 
means of feeding them and the run they arc to enjoy, may 
be also said to keep “ few,” as we oppose the meaning of 
that word to anything in excess. He considers what pro¬ 
portion of food the rick-yard may supply, and which w ould 
be otherwise lost, and also what natural food, and in what 
quantity, may be afforded them in his rick-yard and fields. 
Thus one most important element of success is present in 
both these cases: the birds are not crow'ded; they obtain 
their fair proportion of food, and they are, consequently, in 
thriving condition. Both these are cases where anything 
beyond the refuse-corn is reluctantly doled out to the 
Poultry. 
But still we cannot refuse our belief to the assertion, that 
Poultry-keeping is occasionally attended with profit where 
such proportions are far exceeded. These, however, are the 
instances we have already alluded to as where “many” are 
kept. In the ordinary farm-yard little thought is commonly 
bestowed upon this branch of agricultural economy, but 
where the advantage of good markets have been made avail 
able, the returns from the Poultry are sometimes found to 
approximate closely to those from other stock. But this 
only happens where a regular system of good management 
prevails, and all the necessary details are carefully con¬ 
ducted. If loft to inattentive attendants, the impolicy of an 
excessive flock would manifest itself here as clearly as in 
other instances, and, indeed, constant caution is ever re¬ 
quisite to avert the evils that would otherwise be sure to 
arise. The ability to provide a supply of good Poultry at all 
seasons secures a certain demand ; and the cost of food and 
management, when thus systematically arranged, should 
fall proportionably with increased numbers. Hence, the 
source of profit where a large stock— i.e., large beyond what 
the extent and capability of the farm would justify without 
j special attention to economy of management. 
Fancy prices, it will be apparent, have found no place in 
our calculations, referring simply, as we have hitherto done, 
j to a “ bona fide ” market value. There can be little doubt, 
! however, but that the selection of a good breed will pay best 
j even as dead poultry; and living birds will, therefore, be at 
hand, and, at times, find a ready sale at prices greatly in 
! excess of those obtained for their defunct companions. 
or 
During the late excited state of the fancy-poultry market 
many exceptions might, of course, be quoted to our conclu¬ 
sion, that the yard has paid best where either “many” or 
“ few”—in the sense in which those terms are here employed 
—have been kept. An overstocked yard, under ordinary 
conditions, must lead to disappointment; and, on the other 
hand, the chances; of success rise rapidly when numbers are 
duly regulated, or a superior system of management warrants 
the increase. 
Careful writers have long felt the important character of 
our present knowledge on many points essential to suc¬ 
cessful poultry-keeping, and the various circumstances 
that materially influence such calculations are the cause of 
the many apparently contradictory opinions' that are now 
broached on this subject. What answers, for instance, i 
should we get to an enquiry addressed to a given number 
of breeders in different parts of England, as to “ whether 
chicken or eggs pay best?" We should, doubtless, have 
positive assertions on each side, and the peculiar circum- | 
stances of each respondent would very probably justify bis 
reply. But unless these particulars are also stated, the 
public, in reality, learn nothing, and are, in fact, as likely to 
be thus led in the wrong as in the right direction. We may 
be permitted, however, to take an average of such opinions, 
and this would place chicken below eggs as a source of 
profit. The return, in the latter instance, is immediate, and i 
we can reckon on the cost of production with far more cer¬ 
tainty than is often attainable in the hap hazard calculations 
of rearing and feeding chicken, of which an accurate ac¬ 
count is seldom, indeed, possible; save only, perhaps, in the 
instance of such as pass their existence entirely within yards 
of limited extent, and with them the question of profit and loss 
is seldom doubtful. Where the data are trustworthy, eggs, 
certainly, seem to have usually paid belter than chicken, 
and wherever the contrary is shown to be the case, special 
opportunities of good markets for early produce have been 
met, by attention and diligence, far beyond what Poultry 
commonly meet with. It seldom happens, however, that 
the farmer knows what his Poultry has really cost him. 
Despite assurances and authorities most positively re¬ 
echoed, it is also far from a settled point what race of fowls 
is best suited to the wants of the farmer and cottager gene¬ 
rally. The “ Hamburghs,” as egg producers, have often 
been strongly recommended; but our experience, and all 
their varieties have been tested under the most favourable 
circumstances, does not give them, by any means, so favour¬ 
able a character as they have received at other hands. 
They are, moreover, very susceptible of disease, and require 
a larger proportion of food than would be imagined from 
their roaming, and, as we should have inferred, self-pro¬ 
viding habits. The large Asiatic fowls generally, however 
meritorious as layers at the most valuable time of the year, 
yield to others in their fitness for the table; and Polish are 
assuredly an aviary bird, and unsuited to a rough state of 
existence. 
Where chicken are more looked • to than eggs, the | 
“ Dorking” and the “Game Fowl” have many recommen¬ 
dations ; the former, where it thrives, probably standing first, j 
But the latter, ever in good condition, even on scanty feed- I 
ing, provided it enjoys a suitable run, is a bird whose merits 
have hardly, as yet, been duly recoguised. They are, at the 
least, as good layers as the Dorking, and are kept, at much 
less expense; and if of less weight they are of infinitely 
higher quality and flavour. 
For Geese and Ducks the ground should be adapted for 
their several habits. A village green and its pond holds 
out every prospect of the former being kept with profit, 
while every natural advantage is required to make the latter 
pay. This is a general remark; and exception might be 
here taken to the early Ducklings that are fatted at Ayles 
bury and elsewhere for the London and other high markets. 
But where any large proportion of their food has to be pro¬ 
vided out of their owners stores, Ducks, under ordinary 
conditions, rarely, we imagine, give good returns. 
“ Turkeys,” nine times out of ten, pay the poulterer better 
than the breeder; and the “ Pigeon”-house is often tenanted 
from the difficulty of getting any approximate estimate of 
the cost of production ; and thus, too, might the “ Guinea- 
fowl” bo spoken of. 
