THE COTTAGE GARDENER AND COUNTRY GENTLEMAN’S COMPANION.— October 28,1856. 
G9 
pectations of success such as are necessarily connected with 
the terra “ domestication,” which implies a very different 
state of existence.—W. 
THE BLACK SPANISH FOWLS. 
I have two hens and a cock, Black Spanish (from prize 
birds), that were hatched May 2Gth, 1855. One of the 
hens began to lay the 9th of January, 1850 ; the other on 
the 2Gth of the same month. The first hen lays eggs 2f oz. 
each, some a very little 
under, but all above 
2| oz. The 
number of eggs laid per month by this hen are 
as follows:— 
January. 
February .. .. 
. 21 
1> 
March . 
29 
n 
April .. 
. 21 
)> 
May . 
02 
11 
June .. 
. 52 
91 
July. 
. 23 
11 
August . 
11 
September ..., 
91 
185 
Eggs- 
This wonderful hen 
still continues to lay 
2£ oz. eggs. 
She has not missed laying two days in succession since she 
began last January. Her sister, which began to lay on the 
26tli of January, continued to lay (her eggs were a little 
smaller than the above) until the 28th of August, when she 
began to moult. T may remark, that neither of these 
remarkable hens has at any time shown a disposition to 
sit for a single day. 
My stock of fowls consists of different kinds, but the 
Black Spanish are decidedly my favourites, their eggs being 
large, of good shape, and a beautiful clear white colour.— 
G. U. T., Middlesex. 
COCHIN-CHINA CHICKENS OF THE PRESENT 
AND FORMER YEARS. 
Turning over some old note-books of 1854 and 1855, with 
a view to compare the weights of my present Cochin chickens 
with those of past years, I was so struck with the disparity 
which I found, that I determined to send the register to you, 
in the hope that it may interest some of the readers of the 
Poultry Chronicle. 
I must preface my statement by saying that the chickens 
were, in all three cases, of exactly the same age (twenty- 
two weeks); were Cochins of the Lemon Buff variety; were 
of the same strain, and were weighed each year in the 
second week of October. All were bred by myself, weighed 
by myself, and the dates of hatching and the list of weights 
carefully noted by myself at the time, to avoid the possibility 
of mistake. 
In each case there were more than three birds of a sex 
weighed, but 1 have chosen the three heaviest birds of a 
year to compare together. 
1854. 
1855. 
185G. 
lbs. 
OZ. 
lbs. oz. 
lbs. oz. 
Cockerel .. 
5 
12 . 
7 8 .. .. , 
.. 8 14 
Ditto... 
6 
0 . 
7 19 .. .. , 
.. 8 5 
Di ft.n... 
5 
8 . 
7 12 ...., 
.. 8 8 
Total of 3 birds 
17 
4 
22 14 
25 9 
Average of cockerels 
5 
12 . 
7 10 . 
,.8 9 
Pullets, No. 1. 
4 
11 . 
G G . 
,. 7 3 
Ditto, No. 2... 
4 
4 . 
G 1 . 
Ditto, No. 3. 
4 
3 . 
5 12 . 
G 8 
Total of 3 birds .. 
13 
2 
18 3 
20 7 
Average of pullets 
4 
6 
6 1 
G 13 
In no one instance had the cockerels commenced 
crowing, 
or the pullets laying. 
j In all three years the birds have had the same attendant; 
a person of exceeding cleanliness, punctuality, and care, 
j In 1854 the fowls were mainly fed on boiled rice and barley - 
| meal; in 1855 and 1856 on a cheaper diet, consisting of 
barleymeal, coarse pollard, and boiled potatoes (diseased 
ones), in equal proportions. 
I did not, however, propose to call attention to the man¬ 
agement of my poultry; another motive urges me to write. 
I do not think there is any greater source of heart¬ 
burning and discontent at Poultry Shows than the vexed 
question of the age of chickens. A very fine pen is ex¬ 
hibited, and the age stated. “ Impossible ! ’’ cries one 
competitor. “ A mistake, of course,” says the second; and 
the chorus swells, until “cheating” and “swindling” are 
the mildest terms employed. 
Had any one in 1854 put before me chickens weighing 
about half as much again as my own did then, which 1 
knew had enjoyed every advantage of run, food, and attend¬ 
ance, and told me that his birds and mine were of exactly 
the same age, I must confess I should have been strongly 
tempted in my heart to set down my opponent as an im¬ 
postor. Yet my experience of 185G would have proved that 
he might be speaking the literal truth. In our little 
world, as ip the greater one of Art and Science, the im¬ 
possibilities of yesterday are the common-places of to-day. 
If I can oply pppsuade one exhibitor to look with a little 
more generosity grid candour on his neighbour’s statements 
in the comipg Shows I shall not have employed this last 
half hour, or trespassed pn your patience, in vain. 
As 1 do pot wish to he suspected of making these ob¬ 
servations by way either pf defence or of advertisement, I 
subscribe mysplr with the impenetrable signature—0. 0. 
BUFF-COLOURED GEESE. 
At the Sowerby Bridge Poultry Show some of these were 
exhibited by a gentleman who gave the name of “ Mr. 
John Rawson, of Brockwell;” but, although letters have 
been written to that direction, they have been returned with 
“no such person” endorsed upon them. Among others who 
wrote was the Rev. W. Mousley, of Ashby Rectory, near 
Welford, in Northamptonshire, and we endeavoured to find 
for him the direction of the owners of the Geese. In this 
we have failed, but some of the information we elicited 
deserves publication. Mr. Hewitt, says, “I know several 
parties who have now kept Buff coloured Geese for two or 
three years. I have not any doubt, upon inquiry, they 
might easily be obtained, as they breed twice annually, are 
perfectly hardy to rear, and mostly raise considerable 
numbers in each brood. 
“A strange peculiarity was proved by the party who first 
introduced them into Denbighshire. They will breed freely 
with any of our common varieties of Geese, and the offspring 
are large, unwieldy, awkward-looking birds, of a dirty dun 
colour if the cross is with the Embden Goose ; if with the 
Toulouse, they are then the ‘ saddle-backed,’ grizzly-grey 
and white, however, being the colour of the patches. The 
flavour of these cross breeds is somewhat indifferent, and 
nature, as though insulted by the intermixture, gives a 
hybrid for the trouble bestowed. On the contrary, the 
crosses of any other descriptions of Geese with which I am 
myself acquainted are as prolific as any truly bred ones. 
“ The hybrids are continually fighting, very troublesome, 
and never lay.” 
This reply led to the following from the Rev. Mr. 
Mousley:— 
“ I take the present opportunity of saying that, in my 
opinion, it would be better at the Poultry Exhibitions, 
especially at the more important ones, to have the classes 
for Geese to correspond with those generally adopted for 
Ducks, and, perhaps, to give an additional class in each 
case where weight and excellence for the table are alone 
considered; these would generally be found among the 
cross breeds. The classes w'ould then stand thus:— 
1. White Aylesbury Ducks. 
2. Rouen Duck.?. 
3. Ducks of any other distinct 
variety, as East Indian, 
Call, &c. 
4. Cross-bred or any kind 
whatever when weight 
alone is considered. 
1. White Embden Geese. 
2. Toulouse Geese. 
3. Geese of any otherdistinct 
variety, as the Canada, 
Buff, &c. 
4. Cross-bred, mottled, or 
any other kind what¬ 
ever when weight alone 
is considered. 
