The poultry book: a treatise on breeding and general management of domestic fowls; with numerous original descriptions, and portraits from life

Front matter

ALBERT R. MANN LIBRARY

AT

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

Preface

This work owes its origin to the request or advice of some of tte most distinguislied Poultry Breeders and Fanciers in this country. Among these may be mentioned, John Giles, Esq., of Providence, for many years a judge of the American Institute, and widely known as an importer and breeder of Fowls ; James Pedder, Esq., editor of the Boston Cultivator, distinguished in Europe and America as authority in all matters of Rural Economy ; Wm. Buckminster, Esq., and Wm. J. Buckmiuster, Esq., editors of the Massachusetts Ploughman, names of celebrity in the same department ; and Edward P. Roberts, Esq., the popular editor of the American Farmer, of Baltimore.

The object wliich has been kept in view, in this publication, has been to furnish a full, authentic, and reliable work, adapted to meet the demand growing out of the interest recently manifested on the subject of Poultry. With the exception of the American Poulterer's Companion, it is believed that no other book, claiming authority, has appeared in this country. Mr Bement deserves, a respectful mention of his labors, for they have been the means of diffusing much information and effecting desirable results. Until his book appeared, those interested in rearing domestic fowls were, of necessity, compelled to resort to the works of such foreign authors as might be accessible to them. Among them, Dickson and Richardson have been the most prominent, with the exception, perhaps, of ""Mowbray. These writers have done valuable service, and to them all their successors must be more or less indebted. '' Tbey have amassed stores of information, collected from all availabfe'?'sBffl;^es, and augmented by their original investigations. But, ^feWl, a poultry-book adapted to our climate, and the present state of intelligence, is a desideratum.

To supply this deficiency has been attempted by the author ; how successfully, remains to be seen. Every pains has been taken to collect important facts, and to digest in these pages whatever information could be obtained. AH accessible authorities have been consulted, and such use has been made of available materials as would best subserve the purpose designed to be accomplished. To mention all the books which have been laid under contribution, would be only a pedantic display ; but if any failure is discoverable in giving the requisite credit, it is undesigned. A vast mass of correspondence has furnished many original observations, which are of great value, and are not elsewhere to be found.

Special attention has been given to the description of the varieties of Fowls, and it will appear, on examination, that great labor has been expended on this department; and the author flatters himself that a remarkable degree of accuracy has been attained. A peculiar feature of this volume, also, is, the presentation of the portraits from life, which have been faithfully delineated, and engraved by eminent artists, and which possess an importance and value which will be readily appreciated. These have been produced with great care, and at a large expense, and will add to the fame of F. A. Durivage, Esq., from whose drawings they are taken, and are creditable to the burin of Messrs. Hartwell and Marsh, by whom they have been engraved.

In aU matters pertaining to the Breeding and Management of Poultry, this book is designed to be a vade mecum, and the endeavor has been to present to the reader all that is necessary to be knowA)n these subjects. In no other work, it is believed, can similar information be found.

In addition to the counsel and aid furnished by the distinguished gentlemen already mentioned, I gratefully avail myself of the opportunity of acknowledging my obligations to J. N.

VIII PKEFACE.

Bates, M. D., of Barre ; W. S. Sanders, M. D., of Sturbridge ; S. E. Strong, M. D., of North Andorer; H. L. Deyereux, Esq., George E. White, Esq., and Mr. James M. Parker, of Boston. To George P. Bumham, Esq., the popular editor of the American Union, my particular acknowledgments are due, for many favors and valuable aid; and to J. J. Kerr, M. D., of Kensington, I am likewise greatly indebted for his acceptable correspondence and useful suggestions. To Rev. Robert B. Hall, of Plymouth, for valuable suggestions and assistance in arranging and perfecting the work, my acknowledgments are especially due. To Winslow "Warren, M. D., Francis B. Brewer, M. D., William H. Spear, Esq., Dr. Frank A. Fuller, and Mr. George H. Jackson, all of Plymouth, I am also indebted for repeated favors, which have facilitated the progress of the work.

It is hoped that, prepared with such advantages, this book will serve to diflfuse, more widely, reliable intelligence in respect to the very important subject of which it treats, and wUl prove a welcome acquisition to the libraries of practical men. It is not pretended that it is free from defects ; but its imperfections, such as they are, must be attributed to other causes than negligence, or the absence of an honest design to furnish a manual of present interest and permanent utility.

Contents

Page

CHAPTER I. — INTRODUCTORY 13 CHAP, n. — ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC FOWL 19

CHAP. HI. — VARIETIES OF DOMESTIC FOWL.

Chittagong Fowl 26

Shanghae Fowl 31

White Shanghae Fowl 37

Cochin China Fowl 39

Cochin China Hen 40

Boyal Cochin China Fowl 45

Gochin Chinas of the Baylies' Importation - 48

Great Malay Fowl 51

Great Malay Hen 52

ShEikebag Fowl 54

Common Malay Fowl 57

Great Java Fowl 58

Game Fowl — General Description 60

Wild Indian Game 63

Spanish Game Fowl 66

Yankee Game Fowl 67

English Raven Fowl 68

Dorking Fowl — General Description ~. . 71

Fawn-colored Dorking 73

Plymouth Bock Fowl 77

Guelderland Fowl 81

Spanish Fowl 83

Spanish Hen 84

Blake' aiSpanish Fowl '. 86

Bavarian Fowl 88

PoUsh Fowl 89

Spangled Hamburgh Fowl . 94

Silver Pheasant 96

X CONTENTS.

Page

Bolton Grays, or Creole Fowl 97

Frizzled Fowl 98

Dominique Fowl IQO

Bantam Fowl 101

African Bantam • 104

CHAP. IV.— THE TURKEY.

Origin of the Turkey 105

Wild Turkey 107

Domestic Turkey 112

Guinea Fowl, or Pintado 124

CHAP. V. —THE GOOSE.

General Description 126

African Goose 129

Indian Mountain Goose 131

Poland Goose 133

Chinese Goose 134

Toulouse Goose 135

Bremen Goose 137

CHAP. VI.— DUCKS.

Domestic Duck 139

Aylesbury Duck 141

Rouen Duck 142

Poland Duck 143

Muscovy Duck 145

CHAP. VII. — PIGEONS.

General Description 145

Carrier Pigeons 148

CHAP. Vin.— FOOD OF POULTRY.

General Remarks 150

Varieties of Food . • 152

Different Sorts of Food 161

Methods of Feeding Fowls 171

CHAP. IX — FATTENING OF FOWLS.

General Remarks ." . . . 176

Mascall's Mode of Fattening 177

Markham's Mode of Fattening 179

Bradley's Mode of Fattening 179

Modem English Methods of Fattening 179

CONTENTS. II

CHAP. X— SELECTION OF STOCK AND PAIRING. Page

General Remarks 185

Selections of a Good Cock 186

Choice of a Hen 191

CHAP. XI. — ON BREEDING FOWLS 193

CHAP. Xn.— LAYING 206

Preservation of Eggs 211

Weight and Value of Eggs 215

CHAP. Xni.— INCUBATION 218

First and Last Stages of Incubation 222

Exclusion of the Chick 223

Position of the Chick immediately before Hatching, and of the Situation of the BUI in the Act of Chipping the

Egg 224

Food of the Chick 227

CHAP. XIT. — CAPGNIZING 233

CHAP. XT. — POULTRY-HOUSES 239

The Royal Poultry-house 242

Lord Penrhyn's Poultry-house 243

Mr. England's Poultry-house 244

Mr. Wakefield's Poultry-house 244

Col. Perkins' Poultry-house 245

Common Poultry-house 248

CHAP. XVI.— DISEASES OF POULTRY 251

I. Diseases op. the Digestive OkctANS.

1. The Pip, or Gapes 254

2. Indigestion 257

3. Costiveness 258

4. Diarrhoea 258

II. Diseases of the Respiratoky Oksans.

1. Obstructions of the Nostril 260

2. Asthma 260

4. Consumption 263

III. Diseases oi' the CiRCtTLATion.

1. Fever 265

2. Inflammation 266

3. Rheumatism 266

Xn CONTENTS.

IVrDlSEASES OF THE BrAIN ■P^e

1. Apoplexy 267

2. Melancholy and Moping 269

V. Diseases of the Skik.

1. Moulting 269

2. Loss of Feathers 270

3. Vermin 271

VI. External Disokdeks.

1. Disease of the Rump Gland 272

2. Fractures and Dislocations 272

3. Wounds and Sores 273

4. Vermin in Poultry-houses 273

Appendix

Exhibition of Poultry in the Public Garden, Nov. 15th and 16th, 1849 275

Constitution of the New England Society for the Improyement of Domestic Poultry 296

Letter from the Committee of Supervision of the Poultry Exhibition at the Public Garden, to Dr. Bennett ,- . . 303

Cochin Chinas and Shanghaes 304

Chittagong Fowl 305

THE POULTEY-BOOK.

CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTORY.

It is only within a few years that attention has been turned to the subject of Poultry ip a scientific or economical point of view. While all over the world poultry has ever been considered a delicate and favorite article of food, and in this country is universally esteemed a luxury, it seems surprising that information concerning the different breeds, the mode of rearing them, and other matters pertaining to the subject, should not have attracted greater notice.

In France, Egypt, and some other countries, poultry is used as a common and necessary article of food. The various sorts are raised around the dwellings of almost every peasant. It is said, on good authority, that in France a greater quantity of food is supplied for the tables of the wealthy from the poultry-yard than from the shambles, and it is well known that, in Egypt, artificial means are commonly used for hatching and rearing chickens in vast numbers for common consumption. It is probable that in all warm countries poultry may be more readily raised than among us, and that it furnishes a sort of food best adapted to the inhabitants of more genial climes.

In England, of late years, there has been a growing disposition to investigate more thoroughly the nature and varieties of Domestic Fowls, in order to determine the economical import- 3

14 THE POtJLTET-BOOK.

ance of promoting their multiplication, and by the enconrag-ement of the best sorts to add to the agricultural wealth of the country. A vast amount of scientific information has been accumulated, statistics have been accurately obtained, and such facts have been amassed in respect to the best methods of feeding and treatment, that poultry raising has been reduced to a system, precise in its details and efficient in its operation. The same spirit has recently been awakened in this country, and the labors of those who have become interested in this subject liave brought to light many astonishing facts, and have given an impetus to further investigation which promises the best results. It is no longer universally true that fowls are raised without care, or with a perfect indiflference as to their kind. The old notion, that fowls are an unprofitable stock to the farmer, is exploded, by force of the demonstrations which have been given that they may be made productive. The agricultural census has proved that the raising of poultry ranks high in value, as a branch of rural economy, and the astonishme^t created by its results has been succeeded by a more careful attention to the matter, as one in which the interests of a large class of men are involved. It is now generally acknowledged that, in proportion to the capital invested, the poultry-yard will, if -properly managed, contribute its full quota to 4,he aggregate profits of the farm.

The statistics on this subject are doubtless imperfect, but enough is known not only to excite wonder in the minds of those who have given no attention to it, but to prove beyond doubt that the value of poultry stock in the United States is a very important item of the national wealth. The table below exhibits the total valuation of poultry in the various states and territories of the Union in 1840, but it is probable that since that time this valuation has nearly doubled. It is fair, at least, to estimate that, at the present time, the value of this stock, in

Introduction

the V nitEd States, is twraity millions of dollars, for 1840 are as follows :

The statistics

States. Vdlue in dollars.

Maine, 123, in

New Hampshire, .... 97,862

Vermont, 1Y6,437

Massachusetts, 640,295

Rhode Island, 61,492

Connecticut, 176,659

New Jersey, 412,487

Maryland 219,159

Virginia, 752,467

North Carolina 544,125

South Carolina, 590,594

Total,

States. Value in dollars.

Kentucky 536,439

Tennessee 681,631

Louisiana S73,3I4

Mississippi 369,481

Missouri, 230,283

Illinois 330,968

Michigan, 82,730

Arkansas, 93,649

Florida, 61,007

Wisconsin, 16.167

From this table it appears that the -value of poultry in the single state of New York was $3,373,029 ; which, on comparison "with oliier tables procured by the same census, shows that <Jiis sum exceeds the value of the sheep raised in the same state, the entire value of her neat cattle, and is nearly five times the value of horses and mules raised within her borders.

It is estimated, from satisfactory returns, that the city of New York alone expends nearly a million and a half of dollars per annum in the purchase of eggs. A half million of eggs are consumed monthly, and the Astor House is said to require a supply of one thousand per day during five days in the week, and on Saturdays twenty-five hundred.

The amount of sales of eggs, in and around the Quincy Marr ket, for 1948, was 1,139,735 dozen, which, at 18 cents per dozen, (the lowest price paid Hi cents, and the highest 30 cents per dozen, as proved by the average purchases of one of the largest dealer's books,) makes the amount paid for eggs to be $303,353 30. And from information already obtained from other egg merchants in the same city, the whole amount of sales will not fall much, if any, short of a million of dollars, for 1848. The average consumption of eggs at three of the hotels was more than 200 dozen each day, for the year 1848.

The value of eggs brought from the Penobscot and Kennebec rivers, during the rmming season of the steamboats plying between Boston and those two rivers, wag more than $350,000 for that season.

In one day, from Cincinnati, Ohio, it is stated in one of the public journals, there were shipped 500 barrels, containing 47,000 dozen of eggs. One dealer in the egg trade, at Philadelphia, sends to the New York market, daily, nearly 100 barrels of eggs.

It is stated in a Providence paper, that one small vessel has been employed for twenty-three years in the egg business between Westport, Mass., and that place ; that her trips were about twenty-five annually ; and the number of eggs brought in each trip averaged 400 dozen. The grand total brought from that port, by this single vessel, in the term mentioned, was 3,450,000, and the value of them was $35,500.

These facts will serve to show the great value of one article of the produce of the poultry-yard, in our own markets. In England and France, however, the value of eggs is immense, as the following statistics vrill show ; and it is to be regretted that here an approximate value only can be ascertained, on account of the difficulty of procuring statistics of later date, which, no doubt, would show a more astonishing array of figures.

The number of eggs imported into England, from various parts of the continent, in 1839, was 83,745,723, and the gross amount of duty received for the same was £29,111.

The importation of eggs from Ireland, in 1837, to Liverpool and Bristol alone, amounted in value to over $1,850,000. "It appears," says McCuUoch, "from official statements,

INTRODUCTION. 17

that eggs imported from France into England amount to about 60,000,000 a year." These are sold to the consumer for a sum not less than $1,065,000.

" When we look," says McQueen, " at the immense number of eggs brovight from Ireland, (50 tons of eggs, and 10 tons of live and dead poultry, having been shipped from Dublin alone in one day,) and 66,000,000 eggs imported from Prance to London alone, and this immense number a trifle certainly to what are produced in this country, (England,) we shall cease to wonder at the large capital (£8,000,000) invested in poultry of all lands. The quantity of eggs imported into Liverpool from Ireland, in 1833, was 4097 crates, value £81,940 sterling ; which, at sixpence per dozen, gives 3,297,600 dozens of eggs, and the number 39,331,200. In 1833, the import had increased to 7,851 crates, or upwards of 70,000,000. The number imported into Glasgow from Ireland, in 1835, by the custom-house entries, was 19,321 crates, which, at nine eggs to the pound, gives the number 17,459,568."

" The quantity of eggs used annually in France exceeds," says one of the late journals, " 7,250,000,000, of which enormous number Paris uses about 120,000,000."

In Bixio's Journal of Practical Agriculture and Gardening, for April, 1848, it is estimated that the whole valuation of eggs consumed and exported in France will amount to $57,000,000. The value of eggs shipped from Dublin to Liverpool and London was more than $5,000,000, for the year 1848.

Our convenience to the London market, by the aid of steamers weekly, enables the farmer, through the egg merchant, to make sale of his surplus eggs in that quarter.

In the sale of poultry itself, it seems that large sums are also realized. The amount of sales of poultry at the Quincy Market, Boston, for the year 1848, was $674,423. The average sales of one dealer alone amounted to $1200 per week, for the 2*

■whole year. The amount of sales for the whole city of Boston, for the same year, (so far as obtained,) was over $1,000,000.

No statement concerning the sales of poultry in the markets of New York, Philadelphia, and other large cities, has fallen Hnder our observation ; yet it is reasonable to suppose that the sales in these places have been in proportion to their wealth and population. If this is so, then we must estimate the amount paid for this article of food by millions, and when compared with other articles of consumption its importance will be seen.

In England and France, according to the few statistics subjoined, it appears that the amount of poultry consumed is immense, and of course the proceeds are very considerable.

The annual consumption of poultry and small game in the rity of Paris usually amounts to 22,000,000 pounds ; and, according to Count Chasol, it is divided thus: — 931,000 pigeons, 1,289,000 chickens, 549,000 turkeys, 238,000 geese, 131,000 partridges, 177,000 rabbits, and 174,000 ducks.

So long ago as December, 1793, the number of turkeys sent to London, by the stage-coaches from Norwich alone, amounted to upwards of 2500, weighing nearly 14 tons.

The week preceding Michaelmas day, 1830, 40 tons of poultry were sent from Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, to London, — 30 of which were geese ; and 16 tons of the latter were the property of Messrs. Flatt & Walton, poulterers of Yostock and Repworth. Mr. Clarke, of Boston, transmitted to London, in December, 1833, the following quantity of poultry: — 2400 geese and 800 turkeys ; Mr. Harris, poultry-man of Spalding, also killed and forwarded to Leadenhall market, 1150 geese, 500 turkeys, 200 ducks, and 30 dozen of fowls. — Mowbray.

France, in 1835, had $73,000,000 invested in poultry.

England, in 1840, had $50,000,000 invested in poultry.

United States, in 1840, had $15,000,000 invested in poultry.

Since that time, the numbers have, of course, largelyincreased.

ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC FOWL. 19

In all these calculations, we have spoken only of poultry proper, of the gallinaceous order, though custom and convenience have extended the term so as to embrace the pigeon, the duck, the goose, the guinea-hen, and the pea-fowl.

Chapter II. Origin Of The Domestic Fowl

In former times, naturalists, in treating of the domestic fowl, classed the cock species and the pheasant together, under the general head of Gallinaceous Fowls. The result of later researches has been, the discovery of sufficient reasons to determine the propriety of distinguishing them as distinct classes.

The cock tribe is used as a generic term, to include the whole family of domestic fowls ; the name of the male, in this instance, furnishing an appellation sufficiently comprehensive and well recognized. The popular use is followed by zoologists, who have adopted the word " Gallinae," from the Latin gallus, a cock, as the scientific designation of the race.

This genus of birds is characterized by having the -crown of the head usually naked, and the skin raised in a fleshy protuberance, called a corni. This differs in form and size in the several varieties. The base of the lower mandible, or beak, is likewise furnished with fleshy, lobular appendages, called wattles. The tail is carried erect, and is composed of two planes folded together at acute angles. In the male, there is an elongation of the middle feathers of the tail, which causes them to fall gracefully over the others. The plumage of the male bird is characterized by considerable brilliancy and beauty, and that oi the female is more modest, and comparatively dull.

The tail-feathers of pheasants are noticeably different. They are long and vaulted, and the intermediate ones are longer than those of the side,.and the cheeks are overspread virith a multitude of very short feathers, exceedingly soft to the touch, and in appearance like velvet. The constitution of these birds seems to be delicate, and it is only by great care and caution that they can be induced to breed when domesticated. The cock tribe, on the contrary, is exceedingly hardy, and they endure changes of temperature and climate with comparative impunity. This fact appears by their existence in almost all the world, whether tropical, temperate, or frigid.

The Domestic Cock seems to have been known to man from a very early period. Of his real origin there is little definitely known, and even the time and manner of his introduction into Greece, or southern Europe, is invested with obscurity. But the cock has never been undistinguished among birds. In the days when Greece and Rome were in their glory, he occupied a conspicuous place in those public shows which amused the masses of the people. His praises have been sung in immortal verse by poets whose names, even now, are familiar to us as household words. His effigy was engraved, and is extant on various ancient medals and coins. He was dedicated to the service of the Deities, and was connected with the worship of Apollo, Mercury, Mars, and particularly .iEsculapius. To this god Socrates directed a cock to be sacrificed in those melancholy hours which immediately preceded his frightful death.

As a delicacy, the flesh of this bird was highly esteemed in ancient times, and figured conspicuously at the Roman banquets. Great care was used in the rearing and fattening of poultry for this purpose. From Rhodes and Delos the finest birds were procured, and a brisk traffic was kept up between these islands, and the purveyors for Roman epicureanism.

It is remarkable that a practice so barbarous as that of cock-

ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC FOWL. 21

fighting should have originated in classic times, and among the most polished and civilized people of antiquity. This practice is said to have been introduced into Britain by the Caesars, and to it we owe our introduction to the domestic fowl. In England, cock-fighting, for a long period, was considered peculiarly a royal pastime, and was exhibited as such in public assemblies on a scale of considerable grandeur and expense, until about a century since. A hundred years ago, it was a regular amusement at what is called Shrovetide, and was even allowed and promoted at the public schools ; the master himself furnishing the boys, at his own expense, with the birds necessary for their brutal pleasure.

But the cock has not been called to suffering alone, in order to establish his consequence and respectability. To him was given the privilege of reclaiming St. Peter when he denied -his Master. From time immemorial, his " shrill clarion" has " ushered in the morn," and in every farm-house he has served the purpose of time-keeper in the " witching hours of night." By popular superstition, he has been invested with the fearful power of dismissing the ghosts of the churchyard to their prison in the tombs. The ghost of Hamlet's father, about to make an important disclosure to his son, suddenly hears the crowing of the cock, on which he announces no less abruptly that he " snufis the morning air," and vanishes to his dreary home. As Shakspeare so beautifully writes too, the office of cock-crowing is likewise at a certain season rendered stiU more important : —

" Some say that over against that season comes, Wherein-our Saviour's birth is celebrated. The bird of dawning singeth all night long j And then they say, no spirit walks abroad. The nights are wholesome — then, no planets strike, No feiry takes, nor witch has power to harm, So hallowed and so gracious is the time."

It is, perhaps, impossible to pronounce with certainty as to the precise origin of the domestic cock. It is impossible positively to say to what species of the wild cock, known at present, we are to look for the primitive type. The date of the original domestication of the fowl is so remote that the most curious antiquary must despair of gratification, if he seeks to fix it. It is necessary, therefore, to turn attention to those races of poultry which manifest a truly feral type, and in them seek for the evidence of originality, and rest content in such approximate knowledge as we may obtain.

Many authors of respectability and learning have made the attempt to show that all the varieties of the domestic fowl, of which we now have knowledge, are derived from a single primitive stock. This is, perhaps, the general opinion ; and it is not surprising that it should obtain currency, when fortified by the support of so many distinguished names. In fact, naturalists, in their desire for generalization, have always endeavored to refer all races of animals to the fewest possible primitive types. But there are facts in regard to poultry which seem to render such a course in relation to them impracticable. Dampier saw wild hens at Pulonoondar, Timor, and St. Jago. Sonnini-desoribes wild cocks which he saw in the forests of South America. M. Temminck procured wild cocks from Java, Sumatra, and Ceylon. All these birds are affirmed to differ essentially, in character and appearance, from those found by Sonnerat in the Indies, from each other, and from all the then known domestic races. More recent investigations, based on a comparison of large collections of facts, are said to confirm these statements.

It has been confidently asserted that the domestic cock owes his origin to the Jungle fowl of India, but there seems to be but little evidence to justify this supposition. The difference between them is too great to allow their common descent. The

ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC FOWL. 23

Jungle fowl is less in size than the common dunghill cock ; the comb and wattles are similar, but the naked parts of the head and neck are more considerable. The feathers differ in structure and aspect, and are longest on the lowest parts. The Jungle hen has the throat entirely covered with feathers, and is without either comb or wattles, which is a remarkable distinction from our domestic hens. And there is a peculiarity also in the feathers of the Jungle Cock, which is irreconcilable with the idea of this variety being the original type of the race.

The most probable supposition is, that the varieties known to us may be referred to a few of the more remarkable fowls, as the progenitors of their several species. However great *the analogies which exist in any case, we must remember that domestication has produced great effects as to the form of the body' and its appendages. The constant and frequently careless crossing of one bird with another, and the promiscuous intercourse which takes place, changes of climate and variety of food and treatment, must greatly multiply the difficulties which exist in referring modem individuals to their primitive stock.

It may be safe to recognize the Gallus giganteus of zoologists, the great fowl of St. Jago and Sumatra, as the type of some of the larger varieties, such as the Spanish and the Paduan fowls, and those resembling them. To tlie Bankiva cock, probably, on the other hand, belong the smaller varieties, such as Bantams, the Turkish fowl, cind the like.

In the opinion of Richardson, the reasons for supposing these birds to be the true originals of our domestic poultry are, —

"In the first place, the close resemblance subsisting between therr females and our domestic hens.

2. The size of our domestic cock being intermediate between the two, and alternating in degree, sometimes inclining towards the one, and sometimes towards the other.

3. From the nature of their feathers and their general aspect, the fimn and distribution of their barbs being the same as our domestic fowls.

4.^ In these two birds do we alone find the females provided with a crest and small wattles, characteristics not to be met with in any other wild species.

To the more diminutive Bankiva cock we are, on the other hand, indebted for the smaller varieties, improperly designated Bantams, and the so-called Turkish fowl. By crossing, peculiarities of climate, management, &c.,have been produced from these —

1. The cock with small crest and wattles, furnished also with a tuft of feathers, which some writers have supposed to be produced by the juices that ordinarily go to furnish nourishment for the comb taking another form, and developing themselves in the production of the tuft. These approximate' most nearly to the original Sumatra stock, and we may recognize their domestic representative in the Hamburgh and Polish breeds.