Se 
490 QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. [1 Junx, 1900. 
when such form a part of the programme of an ordinary agricultural show. 
We have little hesitation in saying that, so far as any real useful purpose 18 
served, in two respects at least, the present system of prize-giving is a waste 0 
money, if not mischievous in effect. Let us explain. In poultry shows pure 
and simple, they are displays of purely fancy articles, and the “fancies” are 
triumphant. It is their day out, and their legitimate hunting ground for prizes, 
but agricultural show committees should direct their energies and funds to the 
encouragement of the useful qualities of poultry. And we would point out 
that there are two classes of poultry, at least, that should never be encouraged 
at an agricultural show, and they are bantams and the fighting variety of the 
game breed. In the name of common sense what economic value can there be 
in bantams? As a breed they are indifferent producers even of numbers of 
eggs, and the size of the eggs is such as to place them beneath notice. Their 
presence at an agricultural show is a mistake, and to give prizes for them is a 
mistaken application of funds which should always be given with a useful 
purpose in view. Let it be clearly understood that we are not attacking 
the question of keeping such birds (they are scarcely worth the name of 
poultry) for amusement or recreation, but on the score of utility for 
such toys to have such a large recognition in an agricultural show is 
surely a mistake, as they are of very little more use than so many 
canaries or tame starlings. And as for the present day game that we see at the 
shows, they are little better than monstrosities. Of true economic value they 
have none. The four points accurately aimed at are—length of leg, length of 
neck, strength of beak, and feather-marking. [If anyone can show that any 
of these features are of true economical value, and assist in developing flesh 
or egg production, we will at once acknowledge our error, and apologise. 
These disparaging remarks do not apply to the old English game, which are 
not only fairly good layers, but are amongst the most perfect table birds in 
existence. hen there is that other common mistake which has wrought so 
much mischief, and that is the craze for mere feather-marking. It is time that 
the judges at agricultural shows were instructed to give special value to egg and 
flesh producing features, and less to mere colour and marking of feathers. 
Any judge who is worth his salt knows, by the general form and appearance of 
hens, whether they are likely to be good layers or not. Then more distinction, 
or value, should be given to wealth of flesh in the best parts and smallness of 
offal. In these respects. the French judges and breeders are ahead of us, taken 
as a body, and we should do well to adopt their methods. Coarseness of bone 
and redundance of feather, together with thickness of neck, are scouted by ~ 
them, and no mere colour or accuracy of marking will atone for the defects 
named. The celebrated Sussex fowls, which invariably fetch the highest price 
in the London market, are simply fowls that have been bred for ages with the 
view to producing a large amount of rich, juicy flesh with a small amount of 
offal. Feather-marking and colour are entirely ignored.— Scottish Farmer. 
UNFERTILE EGGS. 
A SKILLED eye can tell the difference in three or four days, but it will be 
better for you to wait until the eighth night. Go to the sitting-house when it 
is quite dark, and take with you a candle or lantern, preferably of the bull’s-eye 
type, and a fresh-laid ege. Take the latter between the forefinger and thumb, 
so that it is surrounded by a dark frame, and hold it up to the light. 1 will be 
clear and transparent, nothing dark showing behind the shell. Now take the 
eggs, whether fowls or ducks, one by one from under the hen, and examine 
them in a similar way; the unfertile will look like the fresh egg, the fertile will 
show dark patches behind the shell. The difference should be at once 
apparent; but if you are doubtful about any, it is safer to mark them and 
replace, and test again a day or two later. The unfertile should be removed an 
hard boiled for the future chicks.— Harmer and Stockbreeder. 
