Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-03-01

mouth Rocks, together, of course, will
the turkeys, ducks and geese-are the
larger fowls, and that all Others
shall be classed among, the smaller
varieties. According to this division
(not counting entries for the four special
premiums, amounting to $25, $50 of which
was taken by small fowls) there were 65
entries Of large fowls, paying entry fees of
32.5O, and carrying off premiums amount
ing to s31. Asopposed to this, there were IA!
entries of the smaller varieties, paying
entry fees of $5S. 80, and receiving premiums
of $S6.5O That is each entry of large
fowls paid to the exhibition so cents and
received from it Az cents nearly,a gain fol
the association of p cents on each entry,
while in the smaller varieties each entry
gave to the exhibition Al Is cents,
and received from it an average of G1 cents
the exhibition losing Oh each entry 10 As cts
The average loss on each pigeon entry
was 25 cents, canaries, so cents; Polish,
S3ss cents. Except Dorkings and turkeys
where the so cents entry fee was all gain,
they having received no premiums, the
largest average gain was in Plymouth
Rocks, 80 cents.
Omitting pigeons, canaries and the par
rot from this calculation, we have 20 varie-
ties of smaller fowls, giving s40.50 and
taking 5000, making an average loss of
IA 81 cents on each entry.
Excluding special cash premiums above
mentioned and the entries therefore, the
average loss throughout on each entry was
IL 4-5 cents including them, 1S cents.
1t was stated before the exhibition that
the entry fees would pay the premiums,
and as no one objected to this | suppose
every one considered that to be about
right. The sequel shows that they lacked
$40 of doing this, and as the entries were
even greater in number than was expect
ed, this deficiency can only be accounted
for on the hypothesis that entirely too
many premiums were given to the smaller
fowls.
This has been blamed on the pigeons,
but the loss on them is only about half of
the total loss.
What is the object in raising poultry?
To obtain flesh, eggs ard feathers. Then
the poultry most needed is that which best
answer this purpose-furnish good flesh
and eggs for the table, and lay and propa-
gate most rapidly. Are Bantams, Games
and Polish on the one hand, or Brahmas,
Cochins, Plymouth Rocks and Leghorns
on the other, best fitted for this? Most
emphatically the latter. | doubt whether
there is man in Lancaster county chOOs-
ing from the standpoint of usefulness, who
would not take the Plymouth Rock ex-
hibit in preference to the whole batch #
pigeons, although the former took but S3
in premiums to the latter s $3.50.
1t may be held that we should cultivate
fowls for beauty, as well as for utility, but
should not those which are e-eminently
both of these receive more consideration at
the hands of an association of poultry
raisers than varieties which are purely Or
namental? And what fowls on exhibition
were more beautiful than some of the
Brahmas and COchins?
1t is also an acknowledged fact that it is
easier to get bantams that will count a
high score than larger fowls.
Taking all these into consideration, |
not only believe that the fowls received
too few premiums ut the Lancaster county
exhibition, but that they do at nearly all
similar exhibitions throughout the coun-
try. Your secretary will tell you that out
of 500 lost on premiums in thirteen ex-
hibitionS from which he has recently
heard, only $9l was lost on Asiatics, Ply
mouth Rock, and Spanish and about $3.50
on Games, IIamburgs, Bantams, Polish and
Pigeons.
From away "dOwn East" the secretary
of the Southern Massachusetts, poultry
association sends his laments. He thinks
there should be some revision respecting
the pigeon department., and suggests that
throughout, no premiums should be paid
when there is no competition. This would
of course make the list of premiums much
smaller and would pecuniarily benefit the
association, but yet would not equalize
matters sufficiently to give the larger fowls
a chance.
When competition is between large and
small fowls, a discount of ) per cent might
be made on the scores of the smaller ones.
which might put them more nearly on an
equal footing.
Less bantams weigh higher points-that
is the less valuable they are as market
table, the higher will they score.
Chas. Lippold did not agree with the cs-
sayist. Fancy pigeons were more valuable
than large fowls. The former not infre-
quently sold for $50, while the highest
priced fowls never reached that figure.
Mr.. Evans agreed with much that the
essayist had read, but he objected to the
games being cassed with the smaller va
rieties. AS table bird they are superior
to all others, and as layers they are not
much behind the Lcghorns or Hamburgs.
Mr.. Lichty stated that he had written to
the secretaries of a number of poultry So
cieties and had received answers from six
teen of them. The uniform answer he re
ceived from all of them was that while the
entry fees of Asiatics, Ply mouth Rocks,
and other standard varieties of fowls,
more than paid the prem iums
awarded them, and always nearly paid
them, there was great loss ON bantams
pigeons and other pets-pigeons being the
hole in which the bulk of the profits was
swamped.
Mr.. Charles E. Long spoke at some
length, defending the action of the judges
at the late fair. The small birds had re-
ceive0 no more prizes than they were fair
ly entitled to by the premium list. If the
list was not properly arranged the fault
lay with the executive committee, and t
could be corrected before the next fair.
He was not sure, however, that it would
be wise to exclude small birds from the
premium list or even materially reduce
,he premiums. He knew there were many
ladies and children who |
Visited the fair mainly to see the bantam S |
md pigeons.
Mr.. Stober held that the object of a |
poultry show should be to improve the |
,reed of fowls. He had bred Asiatics, but |