168 

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1873, by Jos—EPpH M. 
WADE, in the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 
: Oa 
FacnsJ OURNAL AND 4 JOULTRY (Fxonans, 
JOSEPH M. WADE, Editor and Proprietor. 

Published Weekly at 39 North Ninth Street, Philadelphia. 
SUBSCRIPTION. 
POL ANN WM, a iiesesccettes -cescuwersoes beeduteereesverstausls sess $2 50 
Six Copies, One! year,,...<..0.<2....tasseses-wescssos Be ecase 12 00 
Specimen Copies, by m@il,...........ccccessesseseese 10 
ADVERTISEMENTS 
From reliable parties, on any subject 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 
ineh of space. 
1 inch of space, set solid..............00 $1 20, displayed............$1 80 
1 column, about 108 lines, set solid.....10 80, Saas 16 20 
1 page, 216 lines, SOlId............000e0000-21 60, COMM sees sss 32 40 
Advertisements from unknown parties must be paid for in advance. 


SHERMAN & Co., PRINTERS, PHILADELPHIA. 

(For Fanciers’ Journal.) 
JUDGING BY A STANDARD. 
Mr. Epiror: 
I am very glad if my note to you (which you are aware 
was not intended for the public eye) has been the means of 
bringing out a fuller expression of Mr. Wright’s views 
on the subject of a ‘‘standard for judging birds,’’ because he 
has said what ought to have been said, and what ought to’ 
be read and very thoughtfully considered by all our poultry 
fanciers in America, and because he has said it so much 
better than any one else*could have done, and given his 
words the weight of his own large experience and thorough 
investigation of the subject. 
I do not think I have misunderstood his meaning, as he 
is led to suppose, for I have very carefully read all he has 
written on the subject. In my note to you I only expressed 
my views in relation to the numeral values as now used in 
our American standard, and not in relation to the values as 
applied by him in his plan. I think there is a very great 
difference between sitting in convention making a standard 
giving “ fixed ’’ or definite values to the scales for the pur- 
pose of bringing all the judging at our shows to such a 
standard, and making a standard giving such values for the 
purpose of bringing the standard to the most accurate and 
consistent judging. This is what I understand Mr. Wright 
to have done, and we have his own testimony, as well as 
the testimony of others, that its workings are in the main 
satisfactory. I most heartily agree with him in what he 
says about judging by theoretical standards, because I have 
seen the workings of such standards, and because his idea 
tallies exactly with my own. The truth is—and it cannot 
be too often or too plainly spoken—that while it is easy to 
make a standard in a convention, it is not easy to find the 
judges, as you and I very well know, who will be bound by 
such a standard in their arbitrations. Another thing should 
be borne in mind: the English judges are gentlemen of 

FANCIERS’ JOURNAL AND POULTRY EXCHANGE. 

large experience as poultry breeders, thoroughly trained to 
the work of judging, and their decisions at the different 
shows would naturally be consistent, and would constitute 
a sort of standard by which fowls could safely be bred ; but 
in America we have as yet no trained judges, and must de- 
pend upon the best experts we can obtain, which is no easy 
matter, for most of our experts are large breeders and large 
exhibitors at most of our principal shows. Nor is it at all 
probable that the judges who officiate at one show can be 
obtained for another; consequently we cannot have the 
same consistency in our awards which they have in Eng- 
land. I am no hero-worshiper, nor do I intentionally 
flatter any man, but it is my conviction that there is no per- 
son living who has given so much time and thought to this 
subject, or who has given us his views so clearly and attrac- 
tively, as Mr. Wright, and therefore what he says should 
carry with it proportionate weight. Having been a careful 
student of all Mr. Wright has written upon poultry matters 
for several years, I think he is entitled to a careful reading 
by all who are interested in the subject and to our gratitude 
for what he has done as well as for what he has suggested. 
H. WoopwArp. 
WORCESTER, Mass., February 26, 1874. ~ 

(For Fanciers’ Journal.) 
CHICKENS IN A CARRIAGE-SHOP. 
As early chickens are, as yet, raised but little in this 
vicinity, we conceived a great desire for some. Our poul- 
try-house not being warm enough, we could think of no 
way to attain our desire. A few are raised near us in shoe- 
makers’ shops, and we wondered whether a carriage-shop 
would not do as well. After thinking upon it a week or 
two, we at length concluded to try it. Fanciers told us it 
was of no use, as there was so much noise not an egg would 
hatch; but, as we had a quiet Partridge Cochin pullet that 
seemed determined to act upon her maternal instincts, and 
our eggs did not cost us four or five dollars a dozen, as they 
did last year, we made her a nest and tried her. Finding 
she would sit amidst the noise as unconcerned as though she 
was in the farthest corner of the hay-mow, we placed 
under her thirteen eggs—three Dark Brahma, three Light 
Brahma, three Partridge Cochin, and four Brown Leghorn. 
She continued to sit, coming off nearly every day to eat, 
drink, and stretch herself, but remaining only a few mo- 
ments. Last Monday (February 16th) she came off with 
eight chicks, all bright and strong. She is in the body- 
making room. Sawing, filing, planing, grinding tools, and 
hammering are the noises she hears, but they do not disturb 
her equanimity in the least. She trudges around the floor, 
calling her chicks, dusts herself in the sawdust under the 
shavings, lies down upon the floor in the sun, cuddles the 
chicks around her, and seems perfectly at home, unless 
strangers come in to see her, when she makes a sharp 
‘eluck,”’ and hovers her brood immediately. It is a curious 
sight, to go from the cold, piercing wind that is blowing 
tremendously out of doors, into the warm shop, and find 
those tender, peeping bits of chickens so bright and happy. 
We can see no reason why they should not live; neverthe- 
less, they may not. Our success with them has emboldened 
us, and we have allowed three more pullets to try their luck 
at early chickens. Sees. 
Essex Co., Mass. 
