Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1888-05-04


b in 1874, with one in the 2 80 list who
lde his record i'm 1856, also sire of Ber-
2 1929, with three in the list last year.
ack Bird was an Iowa bred horse that
Is taken to California, where he made
record in 1874. What his opportuni-
s have been in the stud, or whether he
been in the stud at all since then, do
t know. As a trotting sire he was not
ell bred, and notwithstanding his fast
cord, he would to-day hardly be placed
the head of stud. How do you like
Forge Wilkes and Jay Gould as speci-
EN- failures, Mr.. Hamlin? VIII you
IL persist in having it "printed in let
RS of red that sires with records of ~
better have up to this time proved fail
es in the stud?'
OF the horses that achieved success in
e stud and were then trained and cam
aigned to low record, we recall only
ree-Wedgewood, Nutwood and Jay
ould. Wedgewood was in the stud at
oodburn. where he achieved a large
egree of success, but his colts did not
me to their speed early. He then went
BON the turf for two or three years,
AIDE record of 2 10 in 1880, and was
turned to the stud in New England in
kSl, where he remained until the spring
i 1887, when he was purchased and ia
I'm to Tennessee. In New England he
Yet with the average New England mare,
hich falls far short of being the Wood
urn mare, and besides New England is
bit place where they have trained and
eveloped their colts. His oldest New
ngland colts. therefore, were only five
ears old last year, and none of his
oodburn colts made a 2: 80 record at
hat age. Would you expect his New
ngland colts to come to their speed ear
Ter than his WOODBURY. colts? What
bet or circumstance can you produce
rowing or tending to prove that Wedge
God was injured as sire in obtaining
is record? Does any intelligent man
bubt that he is destined to have great
areer in the stud.
Nutwood achieved success before 60
~ upon the turf, and was then trained
md campaigned to a record of 2:lSl III
SO, returned to the stud in 1850, and got
Dawn. who made a record of 2:l93 in his
ve-year-old form. He also got Nut
eaker, , PA as four-ycar-old, and lr-
IA. the fastest two-year-old PAGER that
as yet been produced. According to
IT, Styker he also produced several 9th
rs, sired since he made his record.
Jay Gould got King Phillip. 2:2l, then
has trained to record of 2:204 and has
ince 1875 produced ten, think. in the
| 80 list
On appealing to the facts, therefore.
ve find that they not only fail to support
FOUR assertion, but completely and abso-
.utely overthrow it. People in discus
ing this question forget that stations
Eith fast records are of but recent date.
II, T.,1l hnx
asst records acquired such records since
$50. Prior to 1850 we had. all told, but
| 6 stations with records of = ID or better
md of these not single one has yet
proved failure in the stud. On the con-
|rary, more than four out of five of them
give the strongest possible assurance of
achieving great success as sires. y care
full examination of the records warrants
! he Statement that you cannot point to
kingle stallion. well bred in trotting lines,
having a record of 2 % or better, that
has ever failed in the stud. To establish
your proposition you would have to
|Doint to many, while | assert that you
tannot point to single one. Breeders
who prefer as sire stallion with fast
record are supported in that preference
by the experience of a hundred years in
England in breeding the thoroughbred
horse. For the last 80 years the value of
b sire in England has been raised accord
Ing to his performance upon the turf.
Great performers there 60 directly from
The turf to the stud, where they command
IA service fee of from $500 to 500 before
They have ever produced performer.
while horse not a performer and untried
= II the stud would not as rule command
IA service fee of $50. Why should Il rule
that has proved so successful in England
lin improving the speed of the thorough
bred horse prove failure in America
when applied to the trotting horse? In
mature there can be no reason for any
such difference, and our experience here
lis proving that no such difference exists.
There is not the slightest reason TO doubt
THAT the rule which has proved success
|fu in the one case will prove equally sue
|cessful in the other. The reason of this
lis to be found in the laws of nature. No
animal, whether man or brute, can trans
nit characteristics or qualities which he
|dOes not himself possess. "Like pro-
|duces like, or the likeness of some ances-
tor" This is the universal law of hered-
lily. 1t is born with us and we cannot
get rid of it. We must transmit to our
children our weaknesses as well as our
strength. The consumptive plants with
in the body of his child the seeds of early
decay and death, and the insane transmits
to his offspring a tendency to insanity OF
idiocy. This tendency NAV lie dormant
in one generation to reappear in the see
Ond or third; but the predispostion is
there, and it will appear unless it is met
by counter-current from the other pa
rent, strong enough to overcome and sup
press it. Now great performer on the
turf demonstrates that he possesses the
very qualities we would have him trans
nit TO his colts, and having them, the
chances are he will transmit them. Bu
the degree of uniformity with which HI
will transmit them depends upon tn,
strength of his inheritance-for this W,
must look to his pedigree.
With due respect, | must say that
think your idea that horse with recort
of 2 80 is a better horse to breed to thai
one with record of 2 :l5 is the very acm,
of absurdity. Your idea seems to be tina
the mark which horse obtains correctl,
measures the degree of exhaustion which
the animal must have undergone in OBJ
tanning it. If this be true, what useC
hnrcn Manl - ha hn,