A treatise on the history and management of ornamental and domestic poultry

Front matter

AGRICULTURE

The person charging this material is responsible for its return to the library from which it was withdrawn on or before the Latest Date stamped below.

Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from the University.

Preface

several kinds of Shanghaes,* Guelderland, and other varieties, not therein specifically noticed. In addition to this, there were wanting some remarks on the history and method of making Capons, a practice which Mr. Dixon seems, without sufficient reasons, inclined to condemn. There have been omitted, also, certain portions, not deemed necessary or interesting to the American Fancier.

In order that the reader may know how deeply Mr. Dixon is interested in the prosecution of this and kindred branches of Natural History, and how far his views and statements may consequently be relied on, I take the liberty of extracting the following from a letter I received from him twelve months ago. He says, “ I beg to thank you very sincerely for your friendly offers of assistance,

and shall not hesitate to avail myself of them

As soon as the second edition of my book is finished, which will be much enlarged, [ the second is the one used in preparing this ,] I propose setting about a second volume on Domesticated and Captive Birds, to comprise the Fancy Pigeons, Guans, Curassows, Gold and Silver

* The Editor is quite confident that the Fowl described in English Treatises on Poultry, as the Cochin China, is, when pure, identical with our thorough-bred Shanghaes. — He avails himself of this occasion to say, that though, in the main, he accords with the views and statements of his kind and valued correspondents, herein recorded, yet he would not be understood as agreeing with them in every particular.

/f , i

f / I f ' ?

I *

PREFACE.

Pheasants, etc., respecting which, any particulars of their condition and cultivation in the New World may be useful to me. I am daily expecting to receive from a nobleman, a present of Passenger, Senegal, and other

Pigeons, to observe their habits in confinement

We have here Fowls nearly, if not quite answering to all those you describe. At the great Birmingham Show, last December, (1849,) at which I had the honour to act as one of the judges, there were several such. I presume that you have good Cattle and Poultry Shows in the United States. ”

Mr. Dixon is, from local circumstances, a man of more leisure than the Established Clergy usually are; and his position, taste, and learning, afford him every means of cultivating those branches of Natural History to which his inclination has led him. We have, therefore, in the present treatise, so far as he is concerned, all that can be expected, on such a subject, from a man of learning, taste, and experience. As for myself, I have little to say, farther than that mine has been a congenial and pleasing task ; the subject is one to which, from early association and inclination, my attention has been long directed. I have had my boyish experiments, and the more mature trials of my manhood, on many of the systems which I have since seen detailed in the writings of the learned ; and it is to the result of what I have found best in each of these, that I, in

PREFACE.

the following pages, would wish to direct the attention of those who now have, or desire to have a Poultry-house. I have consulted with many eminent and experienced individuals on the subject, and have freely added to the work whatever I thought adapted to render it more valuable as a practical guide in the selection, breeding, and management of Domestic and Ornamental Poultry.

Of those to whom I am chiefly indebted, I would gratefully mention Mr. Nolan, of Dublin ; Dr. Bennett, of Plymouth ; Mr. Brown, of New York ; David Taggart, Esq., of Northumberland, Pa.; Geo. P. Burnham, Esq., Dr. E. Wight, H. L. Devereux, Esq., and Mr. Morse, of Boston ; Mr. Blake, of Mass. ; and Mr. E. R. Cope, of Philadelphia.

The portraits were drawn, chiefly from nature, and, for the most part, under my own supervision, by Mr. Croome, of Philadelphia, whose excellence as an artist, is too well known to require a word of commendation.

J. J. Kerr.

Philadelphia , February 18 th} 1851.

The Editor avails himself of this opportunity to inform his friends and correspondents, that on and after the first day of March ensuing, he will make the city of New York his residence, where he hopes often to hear from them, and especially from those who take pleasure in the cultivation and observation of “Ornamental and Domestic Poultry.”

MR. DIXON’S PREFACE

TO THE FIRST EDITION.

(CONDENSED.)

The history of the present volume is very simple, and, it may he, runs parallel with that of many other works on higher subjects. The author, with his wife (now removed from worldly trouble) and his child, were living in a small suburban house, that had a little backgarden attached to it. As a harmless amusement, they procured a few Fowls to keep, although totally ignorant of their ways and doings. In aid of this ignorance, books were procured — to little purpose. The difficulty of obtaining instruction from others led to closer observation on our own part, and a more eager grasp at the required knowledge. By degrees, a few water-fowl were added to the collection ; but the only watering-places on the spot were tubs and milk-pans. A neighbour, however, obligingly permitted the flock of strange Fowl to be driven to a small pond a few score yards off. They throve and duly increased ; but still, little help was to be had from books. Encyclopaedias, though in them the Natural History department is almost always well executed, were little satisfactory. “Anser, see Goose,’’ “ G.oose, see Anser,” is scarcely an exaggeration of what often fell out. Several current Poultry-books were pur-

PREFACE TO chased, which proved to be compilations of matter, valuable, indeed, in the hands of an editor practically acquainted with his subject ; but these works are full of errors, grossly evident even to learners, and of contradictions that must strike any attentive reader, even though he had never seen a feathered creature in his life.

But a student is sometimes the best teacher of any branch of knowledge, as far as he has himself advanced in it, because he has a fresh recollection of the questions which gave him the most trouble to solve ; and therefore notes were made, mentally, and on paper, from time to time. It was afterwards encouragingly suggested that the publication of them might be ventured upon, as being possibly acceptable to people requiring such information. They were offered to the editor of the Gardener's Chronicle , readily accepted, favourably received by the readers of that valuable paper — a class of persons wThose good opinion I must think it an honour to have obtained — and the reader now holds in his hands the entire results of my present experience in that department of Natural History, in addition to what has been already published in the Agricultural Q-azette . It is hoped that the need of some attempt of the kind, from some quarter, will conciliate a lenient criticism of the many errors and deficiencies with which the author may doubtless be chargeable, whatever pains he may have taken to guard against them.

Poultry has been too much undervalued as a means of study and a field of observation. Insignificant, and, to us, valueless wild animals, brought from a distance, about whose history and habits we can learn little or nothing, are received with respectful attention by men of education and ability, are embalmed in spirits, treasured

THE FIRST EDITION.

in museums, and portrayed by artists ; but a class of creatures inferior to few on the face of the earth in beauty — useful, companionable, of great value in an economical point of view — are disregarded and disdained. It is possible that any one claiming to be considered as an educated gentleman, may be thought to have done a bold thing in publishing a book on Poultry, and giving his real name on the title page. Moubray, who has written, perhaps, the best modern treatise on the subject, only ventured to meet the public criticism under the shelter of an assumed title.

But some very important speculations respecting organic life, and the history of the animated races now inhabiting this planet, are closely connected with the creatures we retain in domestication, and can scarcely be studied so well in any other field. Poultry, living under our very roof, and, by the rapid succession of their generations, affording a sufficient number of instances for even the short life of man to give time to take some cognisance of their progressive succession, — poultry afford the best possible subjects for observing the transmission or interruption of hereditary forms and instincts.

I shall, no doubt, at the first glance, be pronounced rash, as soon as I am perceived to quit the plain task of observing, for the more adventurous one of speculating upon what I have observed. I can only say that the conclusion to which I have arrived respecting what is called the “ origin ” of our domestic races, has been, to my own mind, irresistible, having begun the investigation with a bias towards what I must call the wild theory , although so fashionable of late, that our tame breeds or varieties are the result of cross-breeding between undomesticated animals, fertile inter se. It will be found, I

PREFACE TO imagine, on strict inquiry, that the most careful breeding will only fix and make prominent certain peculiar features, or points, that are observed in certain families of the same aboriginal species, or sub-species — no more : and that the whole world might be challenged to bring evidence (such as would be admitted in an English court of justice) that any permanent intermediate variety of bird or animal , that would continue to reproduce offspring like itself and not reverting to either original type , have been originated by the crossing of any two wild species . Very numerous instances of the failure of such experimental attempts might be adduced. The difficulty under which science labours in pursuing this inquiry, is much increased by the mystery in which almost all breeders have involved their proceedings, even if they have not purposely misled those who have endeavoured to trace the means employed.

As to the great question of the Immutability of Species, so closely allied to the investigation of the different varieties of poultry, as far as my own limited researches have gone— and they have been confined almost entirely to birds under the influence of man — they have led me to the conclusion that even sub-species and varieties are much more permanent, independent, and ancient, than is currently believed at the present day. This result has been to me unavoidable, as well as unexpected ; for, as above mentioned, I started with a great idea of the powerful transmuting influence of time, changed climate, and increased food. My present conviction is, that the diversities which we see in even the most nearly allied species of birds, are not produced by any such influences, nor by hybridisation ; but that each distinct species, however nearly resembling any other, has been pro-

THE FIRST EDITION.

duced by a Creative Power. I am even disposed to adopt this view towards many forms that are usually considered as mere varieties. Half of the mongrels that one sees are only transition-forms, passing back to the type of one or other original progenitor. At least, my own eye can detect such to be frequently the apparent fact in the case of Domestic Fowls.

The reader will perceive that a description has been given, in most cases, of the newly-hatched chicks of each species of poultry. The idea of doing this was suggested by an inquiry, which had for its object to ascertain the amount of differences in the very young of our supposed domestic races, compared with the difference of the mature animals, in relation to the general belief that, in youth, species differ very little from each other ; it being really the fact, that the embryos of even distinct orders are closely and fundamentally alike each other. But if these embryotic similarities between birds and any other class of creatures be sought for, the time of the exclusion of the chick from the egg is far too late in its existence to look for them. Observant persons, who have themselves been practically engaged in the rearing of poultry, will immediately recognise the newly-hatched chick of each variety with which they are acquainted. Nay, when an egg has been accidentally broken, after a fortnight’s incubation, I have myself been able to decide of what breed it would have been, had it survived. I believe that a comparison of the newly-hatched young of all wild birds, would lead to the like result. The only chance of finding any such analogies, or rather confusion, would be obtained by examining the embryos of birds, reptiles, and fishes, two or three days after the hatching of the ovum had commenced.

2*

18 PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.

But the reader has listened long enough to this praeludium ; we will strike the final chords, which sound harmoniously to our own ears. Thanks are the burden of our closing song. Without great help, this volume, though small, could not have been written at all ; without great encouragement the writer would certainly not have ventured to send it forth. It is scarcely possible to mention by name all the persons to whom he is indebted for hints, and answers to inquiries. The addition of initials to many paragraphs is an attempt to avoid some part of the reproach of strutting in borrowed plumes ; they will also perhaps serve as props to sustain his own otherwise tottering edifice : but it would be an ungrateful omission not to mention specially the obligations under which the author feels himself bound to the Editors of The Gardeners’ Chronicle , and the Agricultural Gazette.

Cringleford Hall, Norwich,

October , 1848.

MR. DIXON’S PREFACE

TO THE SECOND EDITION.

(CONDENSED.)

The Prefaces to the First and Second edition of any book are written under very different feelings and circumstances. In the one case, an author is on the eve of submitting his labours to the tribunal of criticism, not always good-natured or impartial ; in the other, he has passed the ordeal, surviving the several cuts and burns that may have been inflicted upon him ; that best censor of the press, the British Public, has stamped the approving Imprimatur upon his fly-leaf ; he may then be allowed to rejoice and congratulate himself, if he do but cherish, as he ought, due gratitude to those who held out a helping hand while the success of his venture was yet uncertain ; for he may at length calculate upon the votes of those who wait to hear what opinion others shall pronounce, as well as of those who have the courage and intelligence to think for themselves.

Exclusive of the fact that a large impression has already been disposed of, this edition, it may be hoped, will meet with a favourable reception from having been carefully revised throughout, and enlarged with additional matter to the full extent that the space allowed by the publisher would permit. The opportunity of attending the great Birmingham Show of cattle, sheep, swine, and poultry, at which the author had the honour

20 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

to be selected to act as one of the judges, enabled him to make a careful inspection and comparison of those breeds of fowls whose nomenclature and arrangement wTere most confused ; and by the kind and able assistance, both previously and since, rendered by the gentlemen connected with the management of that important meeting, it may be said, without vain boasting, that a fuller account is given of the Domestic Fowl, as at present kept in England, than is to be found in any other treatise on poultry.

Cringleford,

February , 1851.

Chapter I. The Domestic Fowl

Preliminary to a description of the different breeds and varieties of fowls, some general account of them, and their management, will be appropriate; and I know of nothing better than the following, which I quote from Mr. Dixon. He says, in answer to the question, What is the earliest date of poultry keeping ? Nobody knows. My own belief is, that it is coeval with the keeping of sheep by Abel, and the tilling of the ground by Cain — a supposition which cannot be far from probability if there is any foundation for the legend that Gomer, the eldest son of Japhet^ took a surname from the Cock. Indeed, it would be to him that Western Europe stands indebted for a stock of Fowls from the Ark itself. For, it is supposed by the erudite, and shown by at least probable arguments, that the descendants of Gomer settled in the northern parts of Asia Minor, and then spread into the Cimmerian Bosphorus and the adjacent regions, and that from them the numerous tribes of the Gauls, Germans, Celts, and Cimbrians descended. It is true that there is no mention of Fowls by name in the Old

3 25

THE DOMESTIC FOWL.

Testament, except a doubtful allusion in the Yulgate translation of the book of Proverbs (xxx. 31), which is lost in the authorized version; the Hebrew word translated “gallus” in one place being rendered “ greyhound” in the other : “ G-allus succinctus lumbos ; et aries : nec est rex, qui resistat ei :” “ a greyhound ;” (some think the ivar-horse was meant), u an hegoat also ; and a king, against whom there is no rising up.” It will be seen that the Latin and the English by no means run parallel to each other. There is another equally disputable passage in Ecclesiastes xii. 4 : “ And the doors shall be shut in the streets, when the sound of the grinding is low, and he shall rise up at the voice of the bird (i. e. at Cock-crowing), and all the daughters of music shall be brought low.” Both passages are quoted by the Rev. Mr. Pegg in his curious paper on Cock-fighting, in the Archaeologia, vol. iii. A still less certain reference occurs in the book of Job, xxxviii. 36 : u Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts ? or, who hath given understanding to the heart ?” running thus in the Latin : “ Quis posuit in visceribus sapientiam, vel quis dedit gallo intelligentiam ?” which is commented on by St. Gregory, and the word “ gallus” spiritually interpreted as having reference to those earnest preachers who rouse men from the slumber of sin, and cry aloud that the night is far spent, the day is at hand.

In our English version, “ fowls” as articles of provision are mentioned at 1 Kings, iv. 23, and again at Nehemiah, v. 18. Unfortunately, even Hebrew scholars often find a difficulty in fixing upon the animals intended by certain Hebrew words. On referring to the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament into Greek, I find that, in the passage in Kings, the words rendered in our version u fatted fowl” are literally u birds, select fatted ones from the select.” But in Nehemiah, instead of the “ fowls” of our translation, the Septuagint reads, “ a goat.” So that, though we do not doubt that Cocks and Hens were domesticated in those early ages, and before them, still the

THE DOMESTIC FOWL.

special mention of them by name in the Old Testament may he considered as doubtful. It is curious that several creatures with which we may believe that the ancient Egyptians must have been acquainted, are quite omitted from their paintings and sculptures. Thus, there seems to be no representation of Pigeons or of Camels in their tombs or temples: whereas other things, which we should have less expected to find, as a flock of Domestic Geese, are depicted with great accuracy. I have been anxious to find portraits of some of the Fancy Pigeons upon ancient monuments, but cannot, though I have found mention of several in ancient literature.

The apparent omission of the name of the Domestic Fowl from the Old Testament may possibly have arisen from this cause, namely : that tending them would be the occupation of women, whose domestic employments are less prominently brought forward by Oriental writers than the active enterprises of men ; and also, that the birds specially named there are the unclean birds, which are to be avoided, whereas those which may be eaten are classed in a lump as “clean.” See Leviticus, xi. 13, and Deuteronomy, xiv. 11. “Of all clean birds ye shall eat. But these are they which ye shall not eat; the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the osprey,” &c. Turtle-doves and young pigeons are only mentioned as objects of sacrifice, not as articles of food.

Aristotle, who wrote about 350 years before Christ, speaks of them as familiarly as a natural historian of the present day would. It is unnecessary more than to allude to the beautiful comparisons taken from them in the New Testament. The Homan authors of the commencement of the Christian era recorded that they were classed into such a number of distinct varieties as could only have been the result of long cultivation. Whether we suppose that different breeds were collected and imported from different native stations, or assume that the differences of those breeds were the artificial result of domestica-

THE DOMESTIC FOWL.

tion, — whichever case we take, Domestic Fowls must have been held in familiar esteem for many, many ages before we have any clear record of them. Either supposition attaches to them a highly interesting and quite mysterious degree of antiquity. Even in our own country they appear to have existed at a time and in a state of society when we should least have expected to find them. “The inland parts of Britain are inhabited by those whom fame reports to be natives of the soil. They think it unlawful to feed upon hares, pullets , or geese ; yet they breed them up for their diversion and pleasure.” Caesar de Bello Galileo , lib. v. cap. xii., Duncan’s Translation.

Dr. Kidd, in his Bridgewater Treatise, doubts whether the Camel ever existed in a wild and independent state. We do not go quite so far as that in scepticism in the case of Fowls, but still believe that those who, at this epoch, hunt for Cocks and Hens of the same species as our tame ones, either on the Continent of Asia, or throughout the whole inhabited vast Indian Archipelago, will have undertaken but a fruitless search. For certain writers have been at great pains for some years past, with but little success, except in their own conceit, to pitch upon the wild origin of our Domestic Fowls. The first decided attempts appear to have been made by Sonnerat, and to have been followed up by succeeding French writers, whose errors are glaring, and in whose praise little can be said. Beaumer, whose writings are really philosophical and valuable, devoted his inquiries to more practical objects, but Sonnerat was merely a blind leader of the blind, if there is justice in the criticism of Mr. Swainson, who pronounces that “ Sonnerat' s works (Paris, 1776 and 1778), although often cited by the French authors, are very poor; the descriptions vague, and the figures, particularly of the birds, below mediocrity.” Buffon, who did not die till 1788, had therefore an opportunity of adopting Sonnerat' s Jungle Fowl as the parent of Cocks and Hens, and his vivid imagination made him very likely to have

THE DOMESTIC FOWL.

adopted so apparently clear an account, ready telegraphed for his reception. But instead of that, he speaks hesitatingly and doubtfully of the derivation of our Domestic Fowls from Wild Cocks, and seems to despair of indicating their origin. He says, u Amidst the immense number of different breeds of the gallinaceous tribe, how shall we determine the original stock? So many circumstances have operated, so many accidents have concurred : the attention, and even the whim of man have so much multiplied the varieties, that it appears extremely difficult to trace them to their source.”

Those authors who, by a pleasant legerdemain, so easily transform one of the wild Indian Galli into a Barndoor Fowl — who put the Jungle Cock, the Bankiva Cock, or the Gigantic St. Jago (?)* bird under a bushel, hocus pocus a little, lift up the cover, and then exhibit a veritable Chanticleer — write as if they had only to catch a wild-bird in the woods, turn it into a courtyard for a week or two, and make it straightway become

* St. Jago, one of the Cape de Yerd islands, may furnish wild Guinea Fowl, but scarcely wild Cocks. The “ Gallus Giganteus,” the great “ St. Jago Fowl,” is the offspring of an absurd misquotation from Marsden, which has run the round of most compilations. Jago , the native Sumatran or Malay word for a particular breed, has been mistaken for “St. Jago,” the name for an island. Marsden was well acquainted with his subject, and there is nothing like referring to an original authority.

“ There are in Sumatra the domestic Hen ( ay am ), some with black bones, and some of the sort we call Freezeland or Negro Fowls ; Hen of the woods {ay am baroogo) ; the Jago breed of fowls, which abound in the southern end of Sumatra, and western of Java, are remarkably large ; I have seen a Cock peck off a common dining table : when fatigued, they sit down on the first joint of the leg, and are then taller than the common fowls. It is strange if the same country, Bantam, produces likewise the diminutive breed that goes by that name.” —

Marsden’ s History of Sumatra, p. 98.

3*

CO

THE DOMESTIC FOWL.

as tame as a spaniel.* On such a notion comment is now supererogatory. For a difficulty which speaks volumes, is, that those birds which have been pointed out as the most probable ancestors of the Domestic Fowl, do hot appear to be more tameable than the Partridge or the Golden Pheasant; moreover, so remarkable an appendage as the horny expansion of the featherstem, as seen in Sonnerat's Cock, would, according to what is generally supposed to take place, be increased rather than diminished and obliterated by domestication ; and even if got rid of by any course of breeding for a few generations, would be sure, ultimately, to reappear. Now, in some races of Fowls known only to the moderns, or at least not recorded, we observe feathered crests showing an affinity with the Lophophori, the Pea Fowl, and perhaps distantly with the Curassows; in others, certain Bantams, for instance, we find the feet and legs covered with feathers, indicating some approach to Ptarmigan and Grouse; the Silky Fowl has a plumage akin to that of the Apteryx and the Cassowary ; but in none do we see any thing like the bony plates in the plumage of Sonnerat’s Cock. A bird with this peculiarity, either in the hackle, or in the wing, after the fashion of the Bohemian Chatterer, would be the greatest curiosity that a London dealer could produce.

* The Mute Swan is thus made to be descended from the Hooper.

“It has always had more attention paid it than its fellow subjects ; it has never been kept captive (?) ; it has been destined to adorn the pieces of water in our gardens, and there permitted to enjoy all the sweets of liberty. The abundance and the choice of food have augmented the bulk of the Tame Swan ; but its form has lost none of its elegance ; it has preserved the same graces and the same freedom in all its motions ; its maj estic port is ever admired : I doubt even whether all these qualities are found to equal extent in the wild bird” M. Bail- Ion , quoted by Buffon. Just so we may manufacture Donkeys from Wild Asses, Pigs from Peccaries, Dunghill Cocks from Jungle Fowl, nay, why not Men from Monkeys ? See the “ VestigeSvOf Creation.’*

THE DOMESTIC FOWL.

Still, our own Cocks and Hens must have had some progenitors, and if I may venture to offer an opinion, it is this; that the wild race, that which once ranged the primaeval woods and jungles, unsubdued by man, is now extinct, forever gone, with the Dodos and the Deinornithes. Such an idea quite agrees with what we now see going on in the world. At no very distantly future time, the Turkey will be in exactly the same position in which I am supposing our Cocks and Hens to be now placed. The race will continue to survive, only from having submitted itself to the dominion of man. Wild Turkeys are becoming every year more and more scarce in America, and as population increases, and penetrates deeper into the wilds, till the whole face of the country is overspread, occupied, and cultivated, the Turkey in the New World must share the fate of the Bustard in England, and where shall we find it then, except under the same circumstances as we now see our Domestic Fowls?

How long existing literature will endure it is impossible to speculate; but should it be swept clean away by any social convulsion, our descendants, two thousand years hence, will have as much difficulty in determining the origin of the Turkey, as we have in deciding upon that of the Cocks and Hens. At a later point of time than that predestined for the disappearance of the wild Turkey, but one equally inevitable, the last surviving specimens of the Emeu and the Kangaroo will be such as shall be reared in cajffivity, for the gratification of the wealthy or the scientific. Man has the power of trampling underfoot, and sweeping every living thing before him in his progress; but in some cases, at least, he is likely, for his own sake, to rescue the most valuable part of the spoil from destruction, if it will only submit to be rescued, and not refuse to accept a continued existence on such conditions. A family of savages would soon consume and destroy a wholq, province full of wild Cocks and Hens, were it ever so well stocked ; but