FANCIERS’ JOURNAL AND POULTRY EXCHANGE 
471 
“I purchased my stock of Chamberlin, in August, 1849. 
And it is certain they never were bred till they came to 
this town, New Britain, Conn.” — (Mr. Cornish , at the close 
of his first letter in 1852.) 
“ The first pair of these fowls were brought by one Charles 
Knox to Nelson H. Chamberlin, Hartford, Conn., in 1847. 
They were first bred by Mr. Chamberlin in 1848.” — (Plais- 
ted, “ in his true history of the lirnhmas ” in June , 1874.) 
“ I imported from Shanghae, China, my first full grown 
Light Grays, in 1849, through Dr. J. J. Kerr, Phila., and 
my second lot from Shanghae, five adult birds, through 
Wm. T. Porter, New York, in 1850.” — (O. P. Burnham’s 
account from 1849 to 1874 continuously.) 
“The Light Brahmas came from India , in the year 1846. 
They were not known by name until they were exhibited at 
Boston in 1850-51.” — (I. K. Fetch, late in the year 1873 , over 
his signature.) 
“ Dr. Bennett’s fowls sent to England always bred pure, 
because they came from the pure Cornish-Chamberlin stock, 
while Burnham’s were spurious .” — (Lewis Wright , in 1873, 
in his “ Illustrated Poultry Book.”) 
“All these fowls shipped to England were bred by Dr. 
Bennett, myself, or Hatch (out of the Chamberlin stock); 
this 1 know for a certainty. These are the fowls Mr. W right 
has described as Dr. Bennett’s ‘pure bred.’ ” — (Plaisted, in 
his History, in June, 1874.) 
“In breeding these Chamberlin birds, many different 
shades of color were produced, the most objectionable being 
a pure buff!” — (Mr. Plaisted on same page of his “ Brahma 
History,” 1874.) 
“We breed only pea-comb birds. Our stock is pure — 
from Chamberlin’s — and the pea-comb is the certain indica- 
tion of its purity. We have its pedigree back to the old 
Chamberlin stock itself.” — (Mr. I. K. Fetch , in June, 1874, 
before Massachusetts Poultry Society, at Boston.) 
. So much for the origin and the accurate pedigree of this 
particular variety, to wit: “the Cornish-Chamberlin 
strain.” Let us now see what chicken history records about 
that peculiar characteristic the “pea-comb,” which some 
breeders claim is so “ infallible an evidence of their purity.” 
The “ Pea-Comb ” Hobby. 
“ Dr. Bennett states that the comb of these fowls is small 
and serrated. Frequently they have the pea-comb. The 
usual form of the comb, however, he adds (in 1853), is sin- 
gle ; but the deviation of the pea-comb is not uncommon.” — 
(Miss Watts’s “ Poultry Yard,” London, 1860-62.) 
“ The only difficult point is this variety of their combs, 
viz., the pea-comb and the single. We prefer the former, 
but do not see why both may not be pure.” — (Correspondent, 
in Miss Watts’s “ Poultry Yard,” 1862.) 
“ One authority says the pea-comb is preferable, the others 
say it should be single. This />e«-comb is a novelty with us 
in England. We had never before seen anything like this.” 
— (W. B. Tegetmeir , London “ Illustrated Poultry Book,” 
1866.) 
“ After breeding Brahmas many years, always keeping 
to families imported from America, we are confirmed that 
the ‘ pea-comb ’ is the comb for these fowls. Single-comb 
fowls never take prizes now.” — -(London “ Poultry Yard,” 
in 1862-63.) 
“All Mr. Burnham’s first fowls sent here were single- 
combed ; while the originals (the Cornish-Chamberlin’s) 
were pea-comb. The pea-combed alone is almost conclusive 
evidence of purity .”— (Lewis Wright p. 246, “ Illustrated 
Poultry Book,” 1872-73.) 
“The three fowls sent by Dr. Bennett in ’52, to Mrs. 
Hozier Williams, England, were pea-combed. Of the ten 
sent the same year to Dr. Gwynne, by Dr. Bennett, seven 
were single- combed. All were from the Cornish-Chamberlin 
stock, direct.” — (Rev. W. Wingfield’ s “ Poultry Book,” Lon- 
don Edition, 1853.) 
“ The single-comb would appear to be the usual form of 
that feature in these fowls ; though, as Dr. Bennett admits, 
the true breed do sometimes present this deviation of the pea- 
comb.” — (Same Illustrated Volume, p. 176, London, 1853.) 
“ In reference to this, I can only say that out of twenty 
chickens bred for myself, from a cock and two pullets (of 
the Chamberlin stock), got of Dr. Bennett of New York, in 
1852, I cannot detect a single 1 deviation ’ from the single 
comb of the parents!” — (Dr. Wm. Custe Gwynne, in Teget- 
meir, in 1853.) 
“ Both varieties, light and dark, should ho. precisely alike, 
in size, shape, and carriage — only differing in color. No 
pure strain ought to breed a solitary single-comb bird. We 
would not press a fancy point too far ; but, considering how 
typical the pea-comb is, we would not breed from an im- 
perfect one.” — (Lewis Wright’s new Poultry Book, page 249, 
in 1873.) 
“ This is the original, the usual American type, though 
there were till very lately some splendid yards of single- 
combed Light Brahmas in existence, which would run some 
of the present exhibitors a close pace for our prizes!” — 
(Lewis Wright’s new Illustrated Poultry Book, in 1873.) 
“ The pure-bred Chamberlin fowls Mr. Hatch selected 
with pea-combs, and bred them extensively in 1852-53. 
All the Brahmas we (he and Dr. Bennett) shipped to Eng- 
land, were of this stock. This I know for a certainty.” — 
(Mr. Plaisted in a new “ History of Brahmas ,” in 1874.) 
“ I do not believe the Dark Brahmas are derived from 
imported stock alone, but that the Partridge Cochins and 
Light Brahmas arealike entitled to the credit of their origin.” 
— (Mr. I. K. Fetch, p. 68, April “ Poultry World.”) 
“ I did notice the pea-comb on my first birds. It was not 
so with all. There was a tendency to throw dark chickens, 
but a greater tendency to become lighter, in breeding 
them.” — (Virgil Cornish’s second letter, Nov. 9th, 1869, 
Wright’s Poultry Book.) 
Now, if from the twenty odd statements by the above re- 
liable authorities, to wit, Messrs. Cornish, Tegetmeir, Rev. 
Mr. Wingfield, Messrs. Burnham, Felch, Plaisted, Lewis 
Wright, Dr. Gwynne, Dr. Bennett, Mr. Hatch, et als., whose 
several accounts, above quoted, agree so perfectly, both in 
dates and assertion (?), the fancier who studies these “ accu- 
rate ” extracts cannot make up his mind, that this so-called 
Cornish-Chamberlin pure stock came from some where, at 
some time or other, and that it is not only single-combed 
usually , but pea-combed — in its purity, sometimes, and has 
a bully pedigree to fall back on, besides — I can only con- 
clude that said fancier must be very skeptical, or densely 
obtuse, and faithless to boot. Still I may congratulate in- 
tending purchasers of such pedigree stock, on the fact that 
this is a free country yet, thank heaven ! and they can buy 
what they please, if they have the wherewithal to obtain it. 
Nobody can complain at these little “ crotchets of the poultry 
fancy.” “ You pays your money, gentlemen — and you takes 
your choice,” here — every time ! 
New York, July, 1874. 
jg@“ A gentleman at Helena, M. T., has a pair of huge 
mountain lions, or cougars, which he has raised from whelps. 
These beasts are now about two years old, and fully as large 
as a good-sized panther. They do not obtain their growth 
until four years of age. They are very ferocious, and give 
no evidence of being tractable, and an ordinary sized dog 
did not last long enough to give a yelp. The owner says 
they have already devoured some ten or twelve dogs and 
twenty or thirty cats, which have been given them to play 
with. 
