THE COTTAGE GARDENER AND COUNTRY GENTLEMAN, March 5, 1861. 
341 
then called Lord Hill’s colour. Since then, not only Lord Hill, 
but Lady Desvceux, the Hon. W. W. Vernon, Capt. Hornby, 
Mr. Wakefield, Mr. Cargey, and others have bred and exhibited 
them successfully. If their numbers are not greater, it is not 
because they are so difficult to breed, but because they are neither 
so large nor so much in request as the common Greys. With 
regard to the chestnut patch, we have not heard that it was a 
disqualification; but we think where birds can be produced as 
some are, pure in colour and without the patch, they are pre¬ 
ferable. Years ago this same question was agitated about Silver- 
pencilled Hamburghs. Almost all the imported cocks had a 
chestnut patch on the wing, and many of our best judges 
thought such birds threw the best-coloured chickens. We 
went to the fountain head—to the most successful breeder we 
ever had—Mr. Archer, and asked him whether this patch had 
not to do with the colour of his birds ; he laughingly said, 
“ Just as much as blowing down a popgun, before putting in the 
pellet, has to do with the report.” He never used one of these 
birds. We think the question of necessary points is fully under¬ 
stood, and the increase in the entries proves it. We agree with 
our correspondent that any white feathers are wrong, and we 
will add one necessary point which he does not mention—-the 
silver hackle of the hens. This was lamentably deficient in 
many of the pens at Liverpool, where, instead of being black and 
te/wfe-striped, they were black and brown.] 
DISEASES CAUSED BY ERGOT IN GRASSES. 
We too often neglect things which are to us of the greatest 
importance. How few agriculturists are there who have ever 
seen a specimen of ergot, although it is rather too common in 
some damp pastures ; and I fear there are few veterinary surgeons 
who can detect disease in cattle occasioned by their eating ergot 
along with their pasture grasses. In one of my railway rides 
I accidentally met a person who has written a work on grasses ; 
and he assured me that he had never collected a specimen or 
seen ergoted grasses. I pointed out some damp meadows, and 
told him that a careful examination of the grasses growing near 
the hedge-rows would enable him to discover more ergot than he 
might imagine. 
It is probable that ergot is the cause of much greater suffering 
to cattle than agriculturists are aware of. That it is one of the 
causes of barrenness I am certain. I know a pasture-field where, 
for the last ten years, two-thirds of all cattle pastured in it have 
been barren. Last year the occupier removed his cows the 
beginning of August into another field, and at the beginning of 
winter all were in calf. In this field, heifers which ran out in 
winter were subject to abortions, caused by ergot which remained 
in the chaff-scales and were eaten along with the pasture-grasses. 
This winter I found in the snow, during Christmas week, Lolium 
perenne tenuo—slender perennial rye grass, more infected with 
ergot than I remember ever seeing it. Cattle which graze in 
pastures infected with ergot are generally in poor condition, and 
when sold fetch little money. Graziers who purchase cattle 
for feeding cannot be too careful in not purchasing cattle which 
have been pastured in meadows where ergot is to be found. 
Those persons who have the misfortune to do so will find that 
they will have to keep them a long time before any change takes 
place in their condition : they then fat slowly, and rarely in a 
satisfactory manner. It is said that draining is the chief pre¬ 
ventive of ergot. In a strong clay subsoil I have found it 
growing on the top of a good stone drain.— Rustic Robin. 
[We are glad of the opportunity this communication offers to 
reply to various inquiries which have reached us recently relative 
to very extraordinary phenomena occurring in certain districts. 
In two localities—one in England and the other in Ireland— 
cattle pastured in certain fields lose their hair and their hoofs; 
in another district we hear that poultry (Dorkings), having an 
extensive grass run last autumn all laid shell-lees eggs, and this 
year the pullets are evidently over-excited in their egg-organs, 
the eggs are distorted, and addled eggs almost without exception 
characterise every sitting. 
We have been asked to detect the cause of these afllictions and 
failures, and we have but one reply to make to all—we believe 
the seeds of the grasses in all these districts are affected with 
ergot. It may be necessary to explain to some of our readers 
that ergot is a fungoid substance, which completely changes the 
composition of the grass seed which it attacks. It is known 
scientifically as Sjoermcedia clavus, and occurs most commonly 
in damp, low-lying soils, and in years characterised by wet 
seasons. It was first observed in the seed of rye ; and bread 
made from such seed has caused many fatal epidemics in the 
north of Europe. Cattle fed upon ergoted grass or com seeds 
are liable to paralysed legs and extreme debility. In South 
America hogs and mules fed upon ergoted maize lose their 
hoofs and hair. Hens having ergoted rye lay shell-less eggs 
(Christison on Poisons , p. 788; Edinburgh Med. and Surg. 
Journal , vol. liii). Perrault relates that persons who ate bread 
made of corn thus diseased lost their fingers, noses, and even 
hands by a peculiar gangrene. In Columbia, Roulin relates 
that people eating ergoted maize lose their hair and teeth, but 
are never attacked by gangrene. 
When the ergot 1ms attacked the seeds of a grass it appears 
on them in the form of very small, purplish, pin-shaped bodies. 
They have been observed upon the sides of the seeds of rye¬ 
grass, cocksfoot, and foxtail grasses, besides on those of the more 
reed-like genera, and on those of wheat and barley as well as 
Rye. There is no doubt that seeds so affected, eaten extensively 
by cows, ewes, or mares, would cause them to abort; and 
poultry eating them would lay imperfect eggs.— Eds. C. G.] 
- PIGEONS. 
Mr position in the centre of a large town excludes me from 
any great amount of practical interest in the greatest portion of 
your admirable periodical. Even the poultry department is to 
me a sealed book; but even here there is the never-failing 
resource of all who wish for a trace of country life and animated 
nature, far away from green fields and quiet lanes—viz., keeping 
Pigeons. I can hardly aspire to the dignity of a thorough-bred 
“ fancierbut I have kept Pigeons for some years, and have 
found them a constant source of pleasure and amusement. 
For the last year I have subscribed to your paper, exclusively 
for the information I might meet with in its columns respecting 
my favourite “ hobbybut the other day I was struck with 
the idea, that for some time past this information had been both 
uninteresting and scanty. At the same time another idea struck 
me, and that was, that if such of your readers as were in the 
“ fancy ” would use your paper as the medium of communicating 
their experience to each other, a large fund of useful and practical 
information would be thrown open, and would be highly appre¬ 
ciated by all who, like myself, wish to keep only good birds, 
but require the assistance of those of greater experience in their 
selection and management. I feel sure my suggestion will meet 
with your approval, and that you will, either by the insertion of 
this letter or otherwise, introduce the subject to your readers, 
and ascertain whether a sufficient number take such an interest 
in it as to warrant you in devoting a certain space weekly to 
“ Pigeons.” 
As I find great difference in the prize birds at various Shows, 
I am puzzled to know what are the main points kept in view in 
deciding on the merits of different birds. For instance: At the 
Preston Show last year, the first prize to Turbits was given to 
a small pair with smooth heads ; the latter being apparently 
the main point, as they were inferior in every other respect except 
size. At the Show here, last week, the prize was awarded to a 
pair with turned crowns. Which is right ? Should Turbits, 
Frillbacks, and Barbs, be looked on as improved or injured by 
turned crowns ?— Codumbarian. 
[The turn crown in Pigeons is a feature introduced by those 
amateurs that prefer novelty to purity—that is to say, in such 
birds as have properties m the head, as, for instance, the Carrier, 
Tumbler, Barb, Turbit, and Owl: in these I should regard a 
turn crown as a disadvantage. Fantails and Powters are, as a 
rule, smooth-headed, and 1 do not regard a turn crown as an 
improvement to either of these birds ; yet the Germans breed 
them mostly with turned crowns, as well as Carriers, Barbs, 
Turbits, Owls, and even occasionally Tumblers. 
The turn crown belongs to the Trumpeter and the Jacobin— 
they must not be without it. The Frillback is the better for it, 
and the inferior Toys, as Nuns, Swallows, Schwabs, Priests, &c., 
are improved by any extra embellishment in that way ; because, 
as their only property is feather, they have nothing to lose by 
the adoption. The Turbit has its chief property in the head, 
flat, broad, angular, and the orbit of the eyes much raised. 
Indeed, the head should be shaped like a frog’s. The nearer 
the resemblance in shape the more valuable the Turbit. Tuibits 
have been so much neglected of late years, that this property 
