I 
04 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER AND COUNTRY GENTLEMAN’S COMPANION, May 12, 1857 k 
assigned them. In all cases of “upper and lower tiers” of 
coops such disputed degrees of superiority must frequently 
occur, as a good and an indifferent light must ever affect 
general resemblance, more especially when it is recollected 
that Poultry Judges, from the extreme shortness of time 
allowed them, must in the majority of cases determine by 
“ first appearances,” and by such only, as the period for 
public admission cannot under any circumstances be delayed. 
There maybe individuals who will advance, “ The arbitra- 
! tors have the manifest advantage of talcing any poultry out of 
j the pens and examining them in the hand if they choose.” 
; Admittedly it is so, and not unfrequently, entirely from so 
doing, they arrive at the very opposite conclusions they would 
| have done had they not taken advantage of such opportunity. 
: “ Handling,” as it is termed, at once told that even their long- 
j practised eye had been previously imposed upon, that failings 
I existed which sight unaided could not detect by the most 
; prying scrutiny, and, consequently, to “find fault with the 
1 decision’’ at length arrived at is confessedly the natural 
' sequence of relying on eyesight alone. No doubt exists in 
i our mind that not a few instances could readily be adduced 
where complaints originated exclusively from this very 
occurrence. 
This brings us at once to the subject of “protests ” against 
the awards of Poultry Judges, and whether Committees act 
! advisedly in either encouraging them or allowing them. AVe 
ourselves do not recollect even a single instance where the j 
j entertaining such “ protests ” ended satisfactorily. It 
would, indeed, be unnatural to suppose it would be so where 
arbitrators were first, after mature consideration, appointed, 
and afterwards any disputant could thus question their award. 
Quarrelsome debate must conclude with still farther sever¬ 
ance of friendship and good feeling, for it is almost impos¬ 
sible, however desirous even the antagonists of opinion them- 
; selves may be to disabuse their minds of angry feeling, not 
| eventually to relapse into the very sentiments they at the 
[ onset scrupulously disowned. A retrospect of the past will 
i bring the truth of this statement somewhat forcibly to the | 
recollection of most of our readers. Let, then, in all cases, i 
the decisions of the Judges be final. If the officials have 
i really and in truth given awards that are unjustifiable, 
j “ the press,” that most powerful of all appliances to rectify 
, real abuses of power or appointment, will undoubtedly 
I correct the error already committed, and equally prevent its 
recurrence on future occasions. The final result of un- 
| seemly controversy during the time the show remains open 
to all who choose to visit it must be patent to every Com¬ 
mittee who unhappily have been subjected to the annoyance. 
•It actually ruins future prospects altogether, and conse- 
j quently, if from prudence alone, ought by all available 
means to be avoided. But, like many other failings, even 
j this objection, if advisedly treated, will undoubtedly very 
speedily effect its own cure. If any gentlemen acting as 
arbitrators have really given unjustifiable awards, Poultry 
j Committees will effect the quickest remedy by not again 
engaging their services; if, on the contrary, these gentlemen 
j are unjustly assailed, the false accusers will gain no enviable 
| prominence in public estimation by urging impeachments 
I they cannot sustain. All the angry recrimination consequent 
on such outbursts in the show will be avoided, and the 
i popularity of the meeting will be unimpaired. 
We offer these hints to the consideration of Poultry Com- 
j mittees, whose interests and comforts are alike enlisted, to 
I establish on some settled basis one undeviating regulation 
that will permanently prohibit the recurrence of misunder- 
i standings, which it is well known invariably, when once 
permitted to attain “full play,” tend to both present 
acrimony and uproar equally with future pecuniary dis¬ 
advantage.—Quis. 
CHARACTERISTICS OF SPANGLED POLANDS. 
It seems to be almost universally admitted that Poland 
fowls should be without combs or wattles, and as bearded as 
possible; next that they should be as accurately spangled as 
can be, and that the tails should be clear, having a well- 
I defined spangle at the end of each feather. At the same 
j time beardless birds are admissible, and may compete with 
success if they are superior to their opponents in other 
points. A question has been mooted which is, likely to swell 
into importance, viz., How tar is lacing tolerable in these 
birds ? It seems that in judging these, if there were several 
pens approaching to perfection, and it was hard to dis¬ 
tinguish between them, then if the prize is offered for Span¬ 
gled Polands, Laced birds would lose the prize. It has been 
argued, and Avith some force, that when the prize is simply 
offered for Gold or Silver Polands, Laced birds are eligible ; 
but we think if, as is mostly the case, Spangled birds are 
mentioned, then lacing should be a disqualification. 
There has been great progress made in the Spangled 
Polands and Hamburghs, and we hope it will continue. 
Amateurs of the former must now try for Avell-laced top- 
knots without Avhite feathers, well-spangled breasts, and 
Avell-marked hackles and saddles. 
There is one point which calls for the greatest attention, 
and that is to avoid all crooked birds as breeding stock. We 
know at one of our great show's there Avas scarcely a pen, 
except in the Silvers, that had not a crooked bird in it. 
A PLEA FOR HAMBURGHS. 
In The Cottage Gardener the last few weeks the 
Game and Poland fanciers have been Avriting in favour of 
their pets. Now, please allow a Hamburgh fancier a small 
space in your columns. Why should they not have as high 
a standing in the opinion of the public as the pugnacious 
Game or dormant Polands ? Some may say, avIio do not like 
them, they will not sit. What of that ? It is easy to obtain 
a foster-mother, and 1 am sure they much more than make 
up for not sitting in the quantity of eggs they produce. 
Mr. Baily truly says, in his valuable little work, that Silver- 
pencilled Hamburgh fowls produce as many eggs again as 
any other breed. I have a hen of that breed iioav in my 
possession Avhich has laid ever since Christmas, and I 
think I may say Avith safety she has not missed laying tAVO 
days following since that time. 
No one Avill deny, I should think, that they are as profit¬ 
able, if not more so, than any other breed, as they are but 
small eaters, and where there is space get a great proportion 
of their living themselves. 
Another objection some bring forward is, they are so small, 
not Avortli eating. I deny this, but emphatically say they 
are Avorth eating. Who Avill say but that they Avould rather 
have a small, nice-fiavoured fowl than a large, coarse-eating 
Cochin ? I think no one, but that ail would prefer the 
small, delicate one. 
Again, some say, “You do not kill them.” Some do not, 
and Avhy ? They have seldom been tried, and therefore 
people do not knoAV what they are. You must know anything 
to appreciate it. Let any person Avho keeps Hamburgh 
fowls, and has a couple of chickens not good enough for 
show or stock, kill them and eat them, and on the folloAving 
day try a couple of good large Cochin chickens, and see 
which of the two dinners he enjoyed most. In my opinion 
the only thing Cochins are good for are for their eggs, and 
as mothers I think that they excel all others. 
Whilst speaking of Hamburghs I think I may say that I 
prefer the Silver-pencilled Hamburghs, as I think they are 
more prolific of eggs and more beautiful. I also think they 
are better foragers, and therefore do not require so much 
feeding. 
Now, as to the showing of Hamburghs, I think they 
labour under many disadvantages, that is to say, more than 
most fowls, for Avhat is considered a mere trifle in some 
breeds would disqualify a Hamburgh; for instance, in the 
Pencilled Hamburgh the least spot on the hackle, or if at all a 
cloudy plumage. Nevertbeless, isit righttliat the Judges should 
i withhold prizes from them more than from other breeds ? 
1 They surely do so, for I knew one or two instances last year 
and the year previous, at different Shoivs, where prizes were 
Avithlield from the Hamburgh class, and not in any other; but 
of course that is left to the Judges as long as that rule is 
specified in the list of rules. But, after all, is it right that 
prizes should be Avithlield? They promise the first and 
i second prizes to the best two pens in each class. Then 
after that let a bird be ever so true or good elsewhere, 
