56 
FANCIERS’ JOURNAL AND POULTRY EXCHANGE. 


Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1878, by JosppH M. 
WADE, in the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 
‘ Cw 
Sons J OURNAL AND 4) OULTRY (GFxonanes, 
JOSEPH M. WADE, Editor and Proprietor. 

Published Weekly at 39 North Ninth Street, Philadelphia. 
SUBSCRIPTION. 
EPOX CA TINUIN pre ecsorescectssccc= ence + incnciokatteeeeeneerntereesa $2 50 
Six Copies; ONGLy Cal... -<-.cco:+----.aketomashesseveletercs 12 00 
Specimen Copies, by mail,......cccccseeeerceseseses 10 
ADVERTISEMENTS 
From reliable parties, on any subjects interesting to Fanciers, will be 
inserted at 10 cents per line, set solid; if displayed, 15 cents per line of 
space will be charged; about 12 words make a line, and 12 lines make an 
inch of space. 
1 inch of space, set solid............-..+6 $1 20, displayed............ $1 80 
1 column, about 108 lines, set solid.....10 80, Soin enacceeen 16 20 
1 page, 216 lines, SOlid...............cc00e+21 60, See scoesseteane 32 40 
Advertisements from unknown parties must be paid for in advance. 


SHERMAN & Co., PRINTERS, PHILADELPHIA. 


THE BUFFALO CONVENTION OF FANCIERS. 
Epiror Fanciers’ JouRNAL: I hope that the gentlemen 
about to meet at Buffalo, to establish an ‘¢‘ American Stand- 
ard of Excellence”’ for poultry, will apply themselves to this 
work with earnestness, casting aside all personal crotchets, 
and produce something in the practical, the true, and the 
beautiful—creditable to American taste and genius. I also 
hope they will show their good sense in abolishing the pres- 
ent scale of points. Neither judges nor any other class of 
persons will feel inclined to study a table of logarithms, to 
get at the beauty or usefulness of a cock or hen. We 
should rather simplify than complicate. We should en- 
deavor to lessen, rather than to increase labor. If the 
number 5 will express as much as the number 10 or 20, why 
not use the lesser number? I can see no more advantage in 
using the number 100 than the number 50, and if the number 
100 expresses the highest limit in the scale, what sense is 
there in using plus 100? I really cannot see that a scale is 
any more “ flexible’? by using large numbers than by using 
small numbers, since the small number designates the same 
degree of excellence. I cannot see that 100 is any more 
flexible than 50; if so, then 200 would be better than 100, 
and 500 better than 200, and so on ad infinitum. If “ Pis- 
cator’s’’ rod is so limber that it will bend double with a fish 
of two pounds, he had better use a cord, since its flexibility 
is lost in its limberness. A slight attention to the degrees 
of comparison in the English language, will aid very much 
in judging of the relative quality of fowls, since quality is 
only relative, and perfection only comparative. What 
Lewis Wright means by 100 plus, or best plus, or perfection 
plus, is more than I can understand. I can comprehend 
minus good or minus perfection, but not minus bad or worse 
than bad. Nor do I agree with those persons who believe 
that judging really is a question more of defects than excel- 
lencies. You have got to have some idea of perfection be- 
fore you can arrive at what is imperfection. You have got 
to study the normal condition of an animal before you are 


able to get at its abnormal condition. Science teaches us to 
judge of the ill health of a subject by studying it first in its 
healthy condition. You can form no idea of a perfect thing 
by its imperfections. I would suggest a‘ word to some of 
our light Brahma fanciers, especially to those wise men of 
the East, that admire a cock of this variety with a neck as 
long us a crane’s, a breast as flat as a shingle, and a body of 
the size of a large pigeon. Such an animal has no beauty 
in my eye, and less of usefulness. Such a bird always re- 
minds me of those fowls of the air that boys call “kite 
pokes.” 
Horace, one of the most celebrated of ancient critics, in 
his ‘“‘ Ars Poetica,’’ says that beauty and utility are insepa- 
rable, and tersely expresses it in his elegant Latin, ‘‘ Utile 
cum dulce ;’”’ the ornamental must be accompanied with the 
useful. What is a game fowl, with all its perfection of 
plumage, without its game qualities? What merit is there 
in a Brahma cock, when from its head to its feet it is shaped 
like an inclined plane? Of what advantage is it to a Leg- 
horn cock to carry a comb on its head of the size of a porter- 
house steak? It does not contribute any beauty to the bird, 
but it is a decided inconvenience. A medium-sized comb, 
nicely arched over the head, and evenly serrated, is to my 
taste. Why should we keep up the Dorking toe in the Hou- 
dan, when it is such an incumbrance to the bird, and so 
mars the beauty of its legs? The Roman epicures always 
gave a preference to the fowls of five toes, believing their 
flesh to be the best; but our modern epicures do not need an 
extra toe to recommend the meat of a Houdan. And let us — 
abolish the whimsical idea of calling black-breasted red 
game fowls, with flesh-colored legs, Derbys. 
There is not a game fowl of the present day that partakes 
of any of the genuine characteristics of the ancient Derby, 
except in the color of its legs; and since this class of fowl 
and the flesh-colored legs are entirely repudiated in Eng- 
land, where they know it best, let us drop this foolish notion, 
and call them by their right names and breed them willow- 
olive or yellow legs. 
There are seventeen varieties of game fowl that can be 
bred true to their kind, and let us have a standard for them 
all, viz. : 
1. Brown-breasted Reds. 10. Staffordshire Piles (gin- 
2. Brown Reds. ger and white). 
3. Ginger Reds. 11. Salmon Piles. 
4, Silver Duckwings. 12. Blue Piles. 
5. Golden Duckwings. 13. Spangles. 
6. Berchin Duckwings. 14. Cuckoos. 
7. White Game. 15. The Furnaces. 
8. Black Game. 16. Polecats. 
9. 
Cheshire Piles (red and] 17. 
white). 
Brass Backs. 
Isaac VAN WINKLE. 
GREENVILLE, N. J. 

Soe 

(For Fanciers’ Journal.) 
PETS FOR CHILDREN. 
Get pets for the little folks. One of the first elements of 
success in home government, and it is a question of vital 
interest to all of us who are so fortunate as to be surrounded 
with growing families, is that of making home pleasant, a 
place which shall be more enticing to the little ones than 
the street-corners of the present or the club-rooms of the 
future ever can be. The child wants something that it may 
call its own. What shall it be? Shall it be a gaudy toy, 
which in a short time loses its novelty, or shall it be a pet 
