
FANCIERS’ 
JOURNAL 
AND 
Peeve ee tee OA EN Gray 


Vou. I. 7 

bt PHILADELPHIA, MAY 21, 1874. 
Nope, 


(For Fanciers’ Journal.) 
SUGGESTIONS ABOUT THE “STANDARD.” 
BY GEORGE PR. BURNHAM. 
THE Secretary of the ‘“‘“American Poultry Association,”’ 
EK. 8. Ralph, Esq., of Buffalo, invites suggestions for im- 
proving or eorrecting our new “Standard of Excellence.” 
I have always had my opinion upon this rather intricate and 
complex question, but I have hitherto said little upon the 
subject, because the views of fanciers, breeders, and writers, 
have been so widely at variance among us, and have been 
found, thus far, so difficult to harmonize. In response to 
Mr. Ralph’s public invitation, however, I submit the follow- 
ing as some of my ideas upon this vexed and vexing subject: 
I think, imprimis, that it is by no means an effective way 
to finally adjust and establish a practical numerical scale of 
points in excellence, simply through the expression of the 
opinions and notions of a few gentlemen, the majority of 
whom may be novices; or, at the best, but indifferently 
experienced breeders, partial students in chickenology, or 
only casual observers of the finer characteristics in varieties 
of poultry; and therefore I deem it of the first importance, 
with a view to readjusting our American standard, that a 
general meeting should be convened, where all our fanciers 
can be present who desire to be heard; for, ‘‘among many 
councilors, there is wisdom ”’ ordinarily, more or less. 
How many times, in the past dozen years or more, both 
in this country and in England, has the attempt been made 
by limited gatherings of poultry men to ‘‘revise”’ the stan- 
dard? In every case there has resulted naught but failure 
to give satisfaction. At one time, one coterie; at another, 
another set of men; ata third, a different clique—all well 
meaning, and desirous to do good to the cause and them- 
selves; but, with all their toil and earnestness, none ever 
afforded us a criterion which would work to the general wel- 
fare, convenience, and advancement of the object apparently 
aimed at, and so ardently desired by fanciers in this country. 
To arrive at conclusions, nevertheless, we must have an 
expression of the opinions of poultry men as a basis to begin 
upon. We have few experts in America; very few men 
who are thoroughly posted as arbiters when you come down 
to the ‘fine points’ of excellence in our numerous varieties 
of fowls. Butin the aggregate (if we can get all our leading 
breeders once in council together), we can find one man, or 
one set of men, who have made themselves conversant, 
through studious application and practical experiment, with 
one class of birds; another man or men who know the good 
points in another class; and a third, fourth, or fifth who 
have had experience with other varieties, to the end of the 
chapter. And from all these heads and minds, in each 
instance, some share of good sense and sound suggestion may 
be contributed to the general good; and, after full discus- 
sion, the results may be incorporated, in part or in whole, 
in the text that goes to make up a complete and reliable 
standard. 


A great many vagaries and useless hints will crop out in 
such a convention naturally, and the ears of the elders will 
inevitably be shocked at the ideas advanced by some ambi- 
tious tyros. Yet all these advisors mean well, and their very 
inexperience leads to healthy discussion and beneficial con- 
clusions in the end. Thus, I say, let us hear all sides, and 
adopt the best advice we can glean from such a general 
expression of opinion. 
Theoretical rules for judging the merits of fowls are 
invariably defective. No more theory can be applied, uni- 
versally, in pronouncing upon the fine points of any breed 
whatever. What is much safer, fairer, and more reason- 
able is good, sound, unbiased, sensible, competent judging. 
Such judging is not readily attainable, I know, in this country 
—nor has it yet been reached, save to a limited extent, in 
England—for the reason I have already given, namely, that 
we have few qualified experts in America who can or will 
give their attention to this business professionally, and who 
are not interested, directly or indirectly, in certain ‘‘strains,”’ 
or importations of poultry stock. 
Now, the most faultless ‘‘ scales ’’ ever yet devised or pro- 
mulgated have failed, so far, by themselves, to prove satis- 
factory or practicable. The ‘‘scales’’ have been continually 
the object of tinkering, year after year, and have been so 
changed, from time to time, as to be at last quite unrecog- 
nizable to most of us. And for this reason (if I had no 
other) I earnestly advocate the immediate abrogation of the 
‘instructions to judges ”’ that so disfigures our latest attempt 
to revise the American standard, to which formula no inde- 
pendent, really qualified judges can ever subscribe. 
To arrive at any conclusive, good form of standard, must 
be the work of study, time, thought, and long experience. 
Through such channels only can a reliable, serviceable stan- 
dard be afforded. No mere voting, speechifying, and acqui- 
escing in the multifarious, crude views of a dozen or a score 
of men (led by one or two or half a dozen among them who 
do know something of poultry points), can ever give us a 
proper, just, equitable Standard of Excellence. I repeat it, 
time must be devoted to its construction, correspondence 
invited, the interchange of practical opinions duly con- 
sidered; and all this advice and study must be generally 
contributed to the main effort by all parties interested, then 
fairly weighed, and sifted, and examined, pro and con, 
before the finality shall be tabulated and put forth as our 
criterion to breed up to and judge by. 
As to the maximum of the numerical scale, I think 50 
points quite as good and as serviceable as 100 or 1000 could 
be. Since the present standard has been fixed at 100 points 
in perfection, however, it is just as well perhaps to leave it 
there. 
I would make symmetry jirst in the list in Games, in 
Brahmas, in Cochins, in Black Spanish, &c.; condition 
second, in all classes, especially the layer varieties; color 
and markings third; weight and size fourth in the China 
