The China fowl: Shanghae, Cochin, and "Brahma,"

W IWII H l W l im i! >l li iU I W »|illi i W llWIWH!'Wt''P»'W'WMW I

'M

ft*!-

THJ^i

-M

SKftNGHUE, COCHIN, km BRIHMI "

i). I', nUBKlti^-'

WWift :f<):!et? !tW»|i?i*;t'<»fi«>«»^',«M:>S^*)'^?^|»«?<'?«?*H

Cornell IDintverstt^^

Xibrari?

IRew ^ox\\ State (Tollege of agriculture

1633

Cornell University
Library

The original of tiiis book is in
tine Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924090115233

i. m. «. Ww$% wuuxu,

Pftinie'l bj F. Wintcrhalter,

mi dt «mrt §flteit3,

IN TflE ROBES OP THE MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER.

ExoaiTED BY DEtionEU i conant, doston.

y^otograp^rti from ttje portrait in pofisfssion of ©to. p. iSurnfjam;

PRESENTED TO HIM BT ll£R MAJESTY, THE QUEEN, TN 18.VI.

THE

CHINA FOWL.

SIIANGHAE, COCHIK

Hi

B r^hm:^.

55 ', ^

By GEO. P. BURNHAM,

ATJTUOK OF
' ^'EW-E^"GLA^•D POULTRI' breeder," a HUaiOROUS " niSTORY OF THE HEX FEVER,'

"burnham's neav poultry book," etc.

til^ Jforig €\}o\tt lIUtstrHtions.

MELROSE, MASS.

1874.

T

s^h

.'> I f . , , -

Entered according: to Act of CongresB, in the year 1874, by

GEO. P. BUENHAM,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.

Frees of Rand, Avery, & Co., Boston.

P E E F A C E.

Tni9 rolume is written with two specific purposes in view : first, to give a brief and siic-
ciHct account, as far as ttie record permits, of the introduction into America of the Chinese
varieties of domestic fowls, subsequently to the apjiearanceof this notable race of poultry in
England (in 1S43--14) ; and secomUy, to correct the iinmcrous errors and false theories that
have obtained, both in this country and in Great Britain, touching the origin and catablish-
mnnt of the most noted of modern gnllinaceous breeds, first known on both sides of the At-
lantic, as the reliable records show, to wit, tlie " Geat Shanghaes ; " or, as they are latterly
denominated bv common consent, the Light and Dark '' Brahma" fowls.

That these latter-mentioned birds descend direct from the Chinese, and not from any India
race, is perfectly clear; since, as W. B. Tegetmeier, F.Z S., correctly stated in 185.3, "there
is not a particle of evidence to show that (what is now called) the Brahma fowls ever came
from India." And Mr. Tegetmeier truthfully added also at that early day, that " they
originSted not in India, but in America."

Lewis Wright of London, however, who has contributed no inconsiderable amount of inter-
esting matter to the poultry literature of modern times, most singularly and ignorantly per-
sists, in his later volumes, upon the idea that the Brahmas are of East India origin ; and that
the account given by Mr, Virgil Cornish, of an early pair of large gray fowls having been
" imported into New York from Luckipoor, up the Brahniapootra River," furnishes the correct
theory as to the origin of this variety.

This silly sailor-Cornish-Chamberlin story (which for a time was believed in by some per-
son-), upon which Lewis Wright of England bases his utterly groundless notions, was many
year- ago absolutely exploded. Mr. Cornish Jirst wrote (March 2, 1852,) that he procured his
stock of Mr. Cham.berlin of Connecticut, who w.as said through " a sailor " to have chanced
upon " a pair of large, light-gray fowls, which said Chamberjin jirsf brought into the State of

) '

8 PREFACE.

Connecticut, from somewhere, in the early part of the year 1849." Upwards of sixteen years
after this original account of Cornish had been published, this same authority, over his own
signature, in a second letter, to a Mr. We:d, just as clearly states that this very Charaberlin
" pair of gray fowls arrived at New York on board a ship from Luckipoor in India, in Sep-
tember, 1846;" of which two statements, Mr. Plaisted, in 1874, declares "there is nothing
accurate in the first, and the last one is still worse ! "

And this is all the evidence the world has ever had about th3 introduction of this remark-
able pair of Chamberlin gray birds, " imported from India," via New York, into Connecticut,
an event which, beyond cavil or dispute, never thus occurred at all ; since the fact is now
established, beyond question or refutation, that neither in the year 1849 or 1846 (according to
Cornish, Wright, ct als., or in 1847, as a later writer has it) did there arrive at New York
any ship or other vessel "from the port of Luckipoor in India;" as will be clearly demon-
strated in the succeeding pages of this work

At the same time, I shall endeavor to plainly show, herein, from the long-since-printcd
testimony and records, that the large light "Gray Shanghaes" bred by the undersigned for
many years after 1849, were from China stock; and that yrom these (imported by me in 1849-
'50 from Sljangliao) came the originals of the now famous so-called "Br.^hmas."

I am indebted to Messrs. Lee & Shepard, publishers of Boston ; to Jos. M Wade, Esq., of
"Fanciers' Journal," Philadelphia, I'cnn. ; to H. IL Stoddard, Esq., of "Poultry World,"
Hartford, Conn.; T. S. Cooper, Esq., of Coopersburg, Penn.; Philander WiUiams, Esq., of
Taunton, Mass. ; Dr. Kenegy of " Polo Argus," 111. ; T. T. Bacheller, Esq., of " N. W. Poultry
Journal," Minneapolis ; W. H. Todd, Esq., Vermillion, O. ; and other gentlemen — for some of
the fine illustrations in this work. And to these and various publicly unnamed friends, I hereby
tender my acknowledgments for hints and suggestions that are embodied in my present book,
which is now presented to the fanciers of America as a truthful and explicit account of what
the author knows regarding the origin, history, characteristics, and breeding qualities of the
China Fowl, — SJianghae, Cochin, ani. Brahma, — from 1844 to 1874 inclusive; accompanied
with corroborative authority for the statements I now make, gathered from the most reliable
data I have been able to reach or make myself acquainted with, during the thirty years I
have enjoyed so large a practical experience with all the varieties of this now universally
favorite race of Chinese fowls.

GEO. P. BURNHAM.

Melrose, Mass., September, 1874.

CONTENTS.

PART I.
THE CHINA FOWL . . ii

PART II.
THE SHAXGHAES 23

PART III.
THE COCHINS 46

PART IV.
THE •■ BRAIBIAS ■' 63

PART V.
SELECTION .A^s'D MATING 115

PART VI.
BURNHAM vs. WRIGHT 137

1-v,

THE CHINA FOAYL

.shaxgh.\:e, cochin, "Beahma.'^

UxDER this general appellation, I include all the various-colored domestic
fowls now popularly known in England and America as " Sltangliaes,''
" Cochins,'' or '• Urahi/ias ; " to wit, the white, gray, lemon, buff, cinnamon,
brown, partridge, grouse, and black, — feathered-legged or smooth-shanked.
And in this volume I shall show that all these varieties, under whatever
name during the last thirty years they may have been denominated, or at
the present time are called, have one common origin ; that no " importation " of
any one of said varieties or strains have reached this country or Great Britain
from anyplace save Chinese ])OT:ts; and especially that none of these fine
fowls have been brought, or can be authoritatively shown ever to have come,
into the two countries mentioned, either from the province of Cochin China,
originally, or more especially from India, in a single instance.

This averment at the outset, I make understandingly. Premising that I
shall not unduly urge upon the attention of the readers of this work any

12 ■ THE CHINA FOWL.

theory or standpoint of ray own, particularly, I will add that I intend, nev-
ertheless, to support this position by the production of amplo corroborative
recorded /acfo regarding the history and origin of these several different vari-
eties, giving dates, the names of the early known owners and importers of
each kind, as I find such records publicly made, — and the autliorities I
adduce herein can be consulted, as I have consulted them, upon reference
to the sources quoted, from which I have gathered the information in this
book, — set down with the view to make it so clear and plain tliat " he who
runs may read" and comprehend my present history of this much-abused
as well as greatly-lauded race of poultry.

The Malay fowl, the Java, the Calcutta, and the Chittagong — all intro-
duced into America or England, first or last, in the past forty or fi.fty years —
have long been known to old writers, and the earlier breeders ; ship-masters
having not infrequently brought home in their vessels specimens of these
birds, upon their return voyages from the " East Indies." And these
"Asiatic" samples have been confounded, in the 'iiiemories of some of these
"old salts," with the Chinese birds more recently imported, of whicli latter
onhj I propose to write in these pages. From the similarity in size, form,
and certain general characteristics common to all these Eastern varieties, this
error on the part of mariners is not to be wondered at. But I do not
intend to enlarge upon the merits or demerits of the India, Kulm, Java, Cey-
lon, Malay, Calcutta, or Chittagong varieties; and I set down this paragraph
just here, simply to advise the reader, in advance, that my present volume
will be devoted strictly to the consideration of the race comprised in tlie
leading title of this work ; namely. The China Fowl.

This bird has been found to bo single-combed and pea-combed ; it is
smooth-limbed, and feathered upon the legs ; it is short-legged and long-
shanked; it is bred of all colors, from pure white to dead black; it is found,
at times, long-bodied, stout and rangy in form, — or oftenest, compactly
built, broad-backed, full-breasted, and shapely; its proportions are massive
and commanding, and the better strains are comely, though inclining to a
heavy or clumsy exterior : yet in all, and over all, it has come to be esteemed
a general favorite everywhere, in some one or more of its different colors and
shapes. And it is safe to assert that no domestic fowl the world has ever
yet produced can excel this race in the admiration of a majority of the
breeders and fanciers of the present day.

SIIANOnAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA.

13

Upon page 10, for example, will be fouml an excellent illustration of a
pair of thorough-bred China fowls, a cock and hen of the now so-called "Par-
tridge Cochins." Tills pair of fowls are true representatives of the Chinese

:^^'.'

'-^.^^^^^i^;::^

YOUNG COCK AND PULLET; EAKLT CHINA FOWLS.

race generally ; and the artistic drawing mentioned is one of the most accu-
rate I have ever met with. Without entering at present upon the qualities
of this particular pair of birds (which are life-like representations of two

14 THE CHINA FOWL.

specimens imported by T. S. Cooper, Esq., of Coopersburg, Penn., from Eng-
land, lately), we will only say liere that we point to that portraiture as a
very perfect delineation of the naturallij4oT:m(iA. better than ordinary type of
pure Chinese poultry, whose characteristics, in their original condition, we
will now describe in detail, as our long experience with thi. race has taught
us to see the genuine Shanghae stock in America.

We write the term Shanghae here advisedly, for the simple reason that
almost all the known importations of these notable fowls came into the
United States originally from the port of Shanghae, China, and for years
were thus denominated. One or two importations have also been made,
within the last three decades, by ships arriving from Canton or Hong
Kong, which will be duly referred to hereafter.

These two last-mentioned places are Chinese ports also, Situate on the
easterly coast of the Chinese Empire, about six hundred miles south of
the city of Shanghae, which lies in latitude 31° north, upon the Yellow Sea.
Upon the opposite page we present a map of the localities we shall have
occasion to refer to in this volume. This drawing is an accurate tracing of
the outline boundaries of the countries mentioned, taken from Johnson's and
Ward's "New Illustrated Atlas," revised and published in 1865.

By consulting this map, the reader will observe that the empire of Ghina
is far distant from the territory of India, even in " a bee-line ; " while to
double the low-running peninsula of Malay, sailing vessels from the coast of
China to Calcutta have an immense distance to pass over, — say from Shang-
hae to the mouth of the Ganges, — not less, at the shortest, than rising four
thousand miles.

The cities of Shanghae, north, on the coast ; Nanking, up the Kiang River ;
Ning Po, on the coast; Hong Kong, south ; and Canton, up the Si River
(near the last place), are all Chinese ports, accessible to American and Brit-
ish commerce. But the leading ports whence sail our ships trading with the
extreme East are Slianghae, Hong Kong, and Canton, — since the close of
the Chinese war with Great Britain, in 1S43; the first of these three (Shang-
hae) being the principal point of destination and departure of vessels be-
longing to " foreign " countries, trading with the Celestials upon their sea-
coast territory.

OUTLINE MAP OF CUI.VA, COCHIN CHINA, EAST INDIA, etc.

SHANGTIAE, COCHIN, BR. {11)1 A. 17

It may be deoinetl an easy matter to "imf^-t" direct from China a few
native domestic fowls, that arc worth taking off the deck of a returning
ludiamau into an American port, after its six or eight niontlis' voyage from
Chinese seas. But tliose who liave tried to compass tliis seemingly trivial
man(euvre, in past years, have found it a very difficult feat to accomplish
satisfactorily, so far as my knowledge of this undertaking goes.

I liave individually attempted this seven or eight times, and never suc-
ceeded but once in the endeavor to get from China direct, to my own order,
a dozen Shanghae fowls ; and of these, when the consignment reached
Central Wharf, Boston (to purchase which I had placed in the ship's first
officer's hands one hundred Spanish-milled dollars, when he sailed from
Boston), there were but just three fowls, a cock and two hens, that I cared to
take home, of the fourteen birds he brought me from Shanghae ; and which
he positively assured me were all there were left alive upon coming into home
port, out of sixty-five chickens he placed on ship-board when he sailed from
Shanghae, seven months previously. The others died, he said, on the pas-
sage back. Far more likelj', no doubt, was it, that they went one after
another, when wanted, into the cook's pot for the captain's dinners, — espe-
cially the largest and most desirable.

The difficulty in consummating this sort of enterprise is principally two-
fold, thus : As can well be understood, the mass of gentlemen or business-
men who go from the West to China possess neither the taste, the knowledge,
or the inclination to concern themselves about looking vi]) poultry in that far-
away land. They do not go there for this purpose, and commonly think
they have a far more " dignified " object in their journeys thither. Secondly,
the ship-masters and sailors who go there, know little or nothing of poultry
(except to eat it wdien cooked), and care less about this subject, wdiicli home-
fanciers are, to a greater or less degree, so interested in. Thus the latter
class never trouble themselves to secure any particular style, shape, color, or
sized fowl, when they put on board their vessels a few chickens, to be used
merely as food for the captain's cabin table, usually, during a part or the
whole of their return voyage.

It occasionally happens that all the chickens thus placed on ship-board in
Shanghae, or other China ports, are not devoured or killed en route home-
ward. The remains of such shipments reach American or British ports.

SIIANGIIAE, COCJliy, BRAHMA. 19

generally speaking, in a filth}', lialf-starved, vermin-infusted, or roupy con-
dition, — ill consequence of their long confiuenient, and the neglect and hard
weather they are sulijeoted to while cooped up fur months en voyage. And
these are nine times in ten the fowls "imported from China direct " that we
get both in America and England, or read of in the poultry and other
Journals of the day. It is not always thus, however, as I will show by and
by. Eut this is the rule. The others are the exceptional cases.

Let me give a brief illustration upon this point. A near relative of my
own, the master of a fine vessel from a leading American port, has been in
command of a ship for the last twenty years, sailing between New York or
Xew Bedford, and Shanghae or Canton, and Whampoa. At least seven or
eiglit times within that period, when he has sailed from home, I have
arranged with him, personally, to bring me out from ClKna a few good fowls ;
which I supposed it would be no very ditBcult thing for him to accomplish.
Two or three times he has brought back with him six or eight or ten birds,
such as he could readily obtain while lying in port at Shanghae or Canton.
But these proved most indifferent samples, compared with what I bred my-
self by hundreds in my own yards, and were of all colors and grades excejjt
the kinds I desired to obtain. Yet he thought them iiue, and through per-
sonal friendship, in each instance, he did his level best to please me. I
wouldn't give them yard-room, — the best of them ! Yet these were really
"imported Shanghaes," direct from Chinese territory.

Thus, I repeat it, it is not so simple a performance as most of us imagine
it is, to get out from Celestial ports direct a consignment of good specimens
of genuine Chinese domestic poultry. The merchants, travellers, and busi-
ness men who go bence to that far-off country, care nothing about this
"hobby " of their friends; while the mariners and ship-masters, whose lives
are passed upon the seas only, know little or nothing of the "fine points"
of tiiese birds. So we have always been, and must continue to be, depend-
ent upon the chances that occur now and then, to replenish our Chinese
stock ; and the opportunities to do this, satisfactorily to experienced breeders,
are certainly but rare, at the best.

These chance opportunities occasionally occur, however. In my own ex-
perience two or three times, and in instances of the experience of others
whom I will presently refer to, a few small clutches of excellent fowls, of

20 THE CHINA FOWL.

the genuine type and true stamp, as events have proven, have been obtained
from China, or brought thence into America and England, of the huff, drab,
brown, light gray, and yellow ; from vrhioh have been produced most of the
finest Shanghaes (now called " Cochins " or " Brahmas ") that have ever
been seen or known in the world.

In the years of grace 1843-'44, I had in my possession a goodly quantity
of domestic fowls, five or six hundred in number (which I had bred and
gathered together during those years), upon leased premises, some few acres
in area, located at the foot of Mt. Pleasant in Eoxbury, Mass., known as
" Williams' Garden," — a fine large estate, then belonging to the late Aaron
D. Williams, now entirely covered over with handsome dwelling-houses.

I had bred fowls some years prior to this time, on a limited scale, but at
this period was engaged in the then hopeful attempt to breed poultry to
profit, within limited space, in large numbers, successfully, — an experi-
ment which, I need hardly announce at this day, proved futile and ineffectual.

In 1846-'47 I removed to more retired quarters, and, with my flocks of
poultry reduced to less than a hundred good birds, on an estate upon
which I erected a cottage house, I went on more successfully. I resided
upon Williams Street, Eoxbury (now Shawmut Avenue extension), until late
in 1849, when I purchased the place in Melrose, Mass., where I noiu live,
and early in 1850 removed my greatly improved stock of fowls to this town ;
where I have since resided, now a quarter of a century.

Prom 1848-'49 down to the present year (1874), for the most part I have
constantly had the Chinese fowls upon my premises, in large or lesser quan-
tities ; and my long experience with this race has afforded me ample oppor-
tunity to judge of their good quality, and to make myself — through almost
numberless practical experiments with them — thoroughly acquainted with
th^ir habits, their characteristics, their points, and their general qualities.
, The China fowl is a good bird; and the fanciers of this country and
Great Britain have shown their preferenc? largely in favor of this breed, in
some of its various colors, by cultivating and improving the size, and
increasing the intrinsic value of this fowl, until the modernized "Brahma"
or "Cochin," as it is at this time denominated, has come to be 'known
deservedly as the most desirable of all the poultry we have among us.

Other breeders of course have their favorites, and justly so. But the

siJAyGHAE, cocmy, braiuia.

21

majority of fanoiors prefer some of tlie varieties of the Cliinese fowl. And the
" Brahmas " or the " Cochins " — all of which come from Shanghae originally,
as we shall see — now lead the van in the estimation of the mass of
American or Eucrlish breeders.

AN EAELY-IMFOKTKD CIIIXA HEN.

The two illustrations preceding portray the shape and general forms of
an ear^y-imported cock and hen of the Chinese race. They are neither so
comely or so attractive in shape or features as are those subsequently

22 THE CHINA FOWL.

received, or which were hred from the first stock had in America. Both of
these are coarse, ungainly, and dumpy. But we give these drawings of
original birds here, for comparison with the "improved " samples of the race
to be found in these pages farther on.

From the evidence at hand, however, it is very clear, whatever may be the
theory of one or two late writers upon this subject, that all our large, fine,
so-called " Asiatic varieties " of domesticated fowls belong to but one race,
of whatever color we breed them ; and the entire testimony in modem
works on poultry goes directly to this point, as to the origin whence they
come into our hands, in every instance. And that origin is China.

I am not now speaking of any of the still coarser grades of the Malay
sjjecies, the Javas, or even the Chittagongs, about which early authors used
to write so fluently without knowing any details as to the nativity of this
style of bird, except what they casually learned from some stray sailor, who
was not to be easily disputed, perhaps, in whatever yarn he might choose to
spin regarding the birds he brought home accidentally "from the E-Stingies."
But my present pages will comprise a monograph of the Chinese fowl ;
whence I proceed to show descend all the pure "Cochins " and "Brahmas,"
of every shade we possess to-day, either in England or the United States.

In Great Britain, since the advent of the Queen's famous so-called
" Cochin Chinas," and more especially within the past twelve or fifteen
years, perhaps, the old China fowl has been manifestly improved, by careful
mating and judicious breeding, in the hands of the experienced fanciers who
have long maintained their ascendency over us in America, in a general way,
in their treatment of poultry, as we all very well understand.

The "importations" made into the United States in late years come from
this source principally; and very good fowls they send us too, as the
majority of American importations of " Cochins," &c., of all colors, which
have been since 1865-66 received thence into the United States, and which
are noiv arriving here every month, from some of the leading breeders in
England, amply demonstrate; the different classes of which we now propose
to describe in detail in the future pages of this volume, with the single
additional remark, here, that the Enghsh style of breeding the China fowl
(as evinced in the latest specimens of the Light and Dark "Brahmas" we
have received thence) is not uniformly to American taste.

THE SHANGHAES.

The ShangJiae fowl, first brought from the Chinese port of that name, and
thus called by the earlj' possessors of those birds in England or America,
usually with us upon this side of the Atlantic also, took the name of the
importer or owner of such birds, in the early days ; as, for example, in the
instances of the Bailies', the Forbes', the Marsh, the Gushing, or the Burn-
ham Shanghaes ; which exact types of fowls are, however, in accordance
with poultry society " Standard " rules at the present time, denominated
" Cochins." Of the " Cochin Chinas " we shall speak at length in another
chapter : we simply mention this " convertible term " here, in order that the
reader of this volume may not confound the two names, as we proceed.

We will describe the old Shanghae fowl first, therefore, because through
priority in date we received in America — in Salem, Mass., in Philadelphia,

24

TBE CHINA FOWL.

Penn., at New York City, and elsewhere (so it has been frequently stated) —
from Shanghae, China, the earliest consignments of this stock.

It has been said that as early as iu 1843, such birds came both into Salem

PAIR OF YELLOW SIIANOHAE3 — COCK AND PULLET. (1849.)

and Philadelphia, though I deem this announcement problematical. The
well-known stock of Messrs. Sturgeon and Moody of England was received
from China by those gentlemen in 1847, — so they inform us ; and these were

SFIANOHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 25

among the very first accredited Slianghaes we heard of. They were cer-
tainly very early birds. Mr. Sturgeon writes to Mr. Tegetmeier of London
that he got his fowls in 1847, from a ship in tlio West India doclJs. A
clerk of his chanced to go on board, who, struck by the appearance of these
extraordinary fowls, bought them, on liis own responsibility, at what Mr.
Sturgeon considered and denounced as a most extravagant price, — six or eight
shillings (less than two dollars) each ! A younger brother of Mr. Sturgeon's
unwittingly killed two of the five birds on their arrival, leaving him but a
cock and two pullets. He took little interest in them at that time ; but he
subsequently raised from these the finest bufl:" Shanghaes ever produced in
England. " All our birds," he adds, " came from Shanghae, and were feath-
ered-legged."

It is stated by those who have observed the fact in Chinese ports, that the
Shanghaes (or now so-called " Cochins ") of all colors, are seen quite as fre-
quently upon their native soil, without any feathering upon the shank below
the hocks, as with this feature. But the style in this country is, to breed
them heavily feathered upon the legs. The early importations spoken of
were all feathered-legged, some strains showing this more markedly than
others, though my own imported birds were -thus generously feathered.

The 3Iara]i Shanghaes, which comprised a dozen buff and partridge-colored
specimens, were brought from the " Celestial domain " by the Rev. Mr. Marsh
of West Eoxbury, Mass., or they were sent to him direct, as early as in 1846,
I think, or in 1847. These were a noble clutch of birds. They all had the
heav}' leg-feathering, ajid were genuine imported stock. They were not bred by
him with any special care as to mating, for the producing of particular colon's
of chickens, at that early time, however ; and Mr. Marsh, at first having but
one cock, which was a superb light red and buff, bred him to all the hens
promiscuously. The result was, that, though all the true characteristics of
the China race were in a positive degree reproduced and maintained in the
progeny, the color became uncertain and various, — from rich golden yellow
to dark brown, with the intermediate shadings and markings of partridge and
grouse-colored birds, first and last. They were large, well-formed, magnifi-
cent specimens of the China variety, nevertheless, and enjoyed for many
years a reputation whi^h subsequent importations did not interfere with, how-
ever fine they came.

The Forbes Shanghaes came into Boston, direct from Shanghae also, in

26 THE CHINA FOWL.

the year 1848, — brought home by Capt. E. B. Forbes, after whom this strain
was named. They were beautiful birds too, but of a peculiar tint in color.
The hens were a pale drab, or silvery cinnamon hue, while the cock was of
a light reddish dominique, or marbled tint ; and for years after their arrival
in America this importation bred, through generation after generation, drab
pullets and light reddish dominique cocks, almost invariably. The Forbes
fowls were frequently called " Yellow Shanghaes," in those days ; but the
color of the original birds was precisely what I have described it, and it was
quite different from what we afterwards knew as the Yellow or Buff Shanghaes,
— as in the cases of the Gushing importation at Kingston, Mass., and those of
S. A. Drake, known as the Eev. Mr. Missionary Brown's stock. They bred
the full-feathered leg uniformly, and for a long period enjoyed a deservedly
liigh reputation as first-class stock, in all respects.

The Cushing importation also came into America from Shanghae. These
were of a bright golden color, hens and cocks ; the latter being the most bril-
liant, truly "flame-colored" cast of plumage I ever met with, in my experi-
ence with the Shanghae race. They ran out shortly, however, or were crossed
with others, and were seen but for a year or two in their purity, when the old
stock disappeared altogether, as did the Palmer, and Cope strains.

A general description given in 1849, 1850, of the best Shanghae -fowls, will be
found to closely correspond with the character of the birds at the present time
universally called " Cochins," of which the drawing (page 23) is an admirable
representation, but which name, as in the instance of " Brahma," in late years
commonly given to the Gray Shanghaes, is a misnomer, as I shall show as we
proceed; albeit there is no valid objection to the establishment of both these
later cognomens, nevertheless, since it is the fashion now-a-days ; and every-
body assents to these changes from the original true title.

Their legs, in the early time, " were uniformly stout, usually of a bright
reddish yellow, sometimes nearly flesh-colored ; and, for the most part, the
limbs below the hook were very heavily feathered. Their general plumage
was of a brilliant yellow or gold-color, variegated and ' pencilled ' with black,
dark brown, or red. The tail was short and upright; body squarely formed;
wings small and tucked up high ; legs, when young, rather long for beauty ;
head full sized ; comb single, upright, and serrated ; feathers rather fine and
downy than otherwise, — and, altogether, they were a large, fine, showy
fowl, as then described by Bement, Dixon, Kerr, and Dr. Bennett."

1

STIANOHAE, COCHIN, BPiAUilA.

27

CRAY siiANGiiAE COCK; BUK>'irAM's STOCK, ISo'^. {Drawn by H, Weir.)

Tlie Brown, or Drake fowls, as tlie^y were more commonly called, came into
Massachusetts from the city of Shanghae originally, in the year 1846. The

28 THE CHINA FOWL.

Rev. Mr. Brown was a missionary to China, as was Rev. C. B. Marsh, also,
of West Roxburj, Mass. Mr. Brown resided in China some ten years, and
thought his opportunity' to select good birds was the best. He affirmed that
the natives prized those he brought to America upon his return home, above
all other varieties in that couutrjr ; and they were very choice specimens for
those days. The editor of " The Massachusetts Ploughman " wrote of these
Brown's Shanghaes in 1849, "We saw some of these fine birds sold at the first
Boston exhibition at as high as )|13.00 the pair; and we were told that a few
were sold for $18.00 a pair." At tliis early period these figures were con-
sidered enormous. Within four years from the time when this paragraph was
written, a pair of my Grai/ Shanghaes, sent to England to John Baily, Esq.,
of London, were sold at the Birmingham Exhibition, after taking first prize
there, for $500.00 ; and in that j'ear, and subsequently, one to two hundred
dollars for a pair oi good Shanghaes was not an uncommon price.

The uniformity in the size of the chickens bred in America during the first
few seasons after the introduction of the Shanghaes here, was very remarka-
ble ; and this alone established the fact tliat the stock was, beyond cavil, a
distinct race of birds. The weights of adult specimens at that time did not
average so great as has frequentl}' been since attained by American fanciers
quite generallj^ Seventeen to nineteen pounds per pair, cock and hen, at
twelve months old, was formerly very fair and quite satisfactory. Hundreds
of birds were raised wliose weight per pair did not reach these figures, though
it not infrequently happened, as time went hj, to hear reports of "a big
Shanghae cock" in the hands of Mr. A, B, C, or D, somewhere, that drew
fourteen, fifteen, sixteen pounds alone. I never saw the fowl that would take
down the steelyard at this latter weight, though others affirm — 'Lewis Wright
among these vouchers for the marvellous — that " single cocks have been bred
weighing over eighteen pounds ; but this is not a common occurrence." I
should say not !

The early Shanghaes, of all colors, were excellent layers. Hundreds of
veritable instances could be quoted from the accounts constantly being pub-
lished in the press during 1848 to 185.5, of the extraordinary fertility of these
hens. The Marsh, Forbes, and Burnham Shanghaes were notably good lay-
ers. The pullets commenced laying at sis to seven months old generally,
though manj' instances occurred of their beginning to lay at five or five and a
half months. This is the fair average with the " Cochins " of to-day ; and upon

SIIANOBAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 29

this topic, in " The Massachusetts Ploughman " of 18 19, I find an article of
mine, contributed to that journal on this subject, which I reproduce here,
that gives a verj- fair description of these fowls as I saw them more than
twenty-five years since. The reader will perceive that the " Cochins " of our
time are pretty accurately described in this extract, written by the author of
this present volume a quarter of a century ago : —

'•I am confident that the Shangliae fowls are confounded with the Cochin
Oiiiias : and I think that some persons who have the stock, call both by this
name. We have not had the Shaiighaes in America long enough yet, nor is
the distinction sufficiently well known, I imagine, to determine between the
real Shanghae and the Cochin Chinas we nowhave here, and more commonly
called by this last name, /make the distinction on the ground that my im-
ported Shanghaes (and I have now three different varieties, from different
sources) are a// heavily feathered upon the legs, while my "Cochin China
fowls, which I consider possess all the good points that any specimens classed
under that name do, have no feathers on the legs. The Shanghaes come from
the extreme north of China, fifteen hundred miles up the coast. The 'Cochin
Chinas,' now so called, it is said originated in a country of that name m a
far more southerly latitude."

(These two locations can be seen upon reference to the map, on page 15.)
The theorij we all held to at that early period was, in substance, that nature
provided for the northern fowls, where the climate was coldest, this coating
or leg-feathering as a protection to the elongated shanks of the Shanghaes;
while the "Cochin Chinas " (represented in those years bj' the Queen's stock,
thus ??u'.':named), it was said, came from this extreme southern province of
Chinese territory, and did not need this feature in their formation. But all
this was mcrehj theory, and had no basis, as we shall see anon.

The article from which I quote (and which was deemed of sufficient im-
portance at the time to be transferred entire to the pages of Dr. John C.
Bennett's " Poultry Book,'' published in 1S50-'51, by Phillips & Sampson, at
Boston,) continues thus : " There are very few, if any, bona fide Shanghae
fowls at present for sale in this region. Hundreds of so-called ' Shanghaes '
are offered every week ; but this breed is now altogether too rare, and the real
' Simon Pure ' will readily command too high a price at private sale, for these
genuine birds to be very common at present. The coming year there will be
more of them. And for the farmer, the poulterer, the breeder, or the

30 THE CHINA FOWL.

fancier, I consider this fowl, in its purity, one of the most economical and
most profitable of all the known large breeds extant."

Dr. Bennett's work, in 1850, is embellished with handsome illustrations,
drawn from life, of my Shanghae fowls, of which the drawing on p. 24 is
pretty accurate, though at that period it was difficult to find engravers who
could so artistically portray our birds as do those who succeeded the earlier
draughtsmen of domestic poultry.

From Dixon and Kerr's " Ornamental and Domestic Poultry Book," pub-
lished in Philadelphia in 1850-'51, I extract the following account of my
Shanghaes, imported in 1849, and communicated by me to that work : —

"From my own importations, last season, I have bred several very fine
specimens of pure Shanghaes, uniform in color and characteristics, remarka-
bly heavy for their ages — the cocks, at five to six months old, drawing eight
and a half to nine pounds, and pullets of same age, five and a half to six and
a half pounds each, live weight." ..." They are short-legged, heavy-bodied,
handsomely plumed, and among the best layers I have ever met with." . . .
" I have never seen their equals for laying early. The Shanghaes commence
to lay at six months old ; they are very prolific, lay large eggs, and a great
many of them." . . . "All things considered, they are certainly a very valuar
ble species of domestic fowl, and I am highly pleased with them." ..." I
have now on the way, direct from Shanghae and Canton, two fresh lots, from
which, with the stock I have now reserved, I shall breed another year. These
last fowls were ordered by me a year ago." ..." For all the purposes of a <
really good fowl, whether I speak of beautj' of model, good size, or laying
qualities, I deem the thorough-bred Shanghaes among the very best and
generally most profitable of domestic birds."

This standard poultry book of that period describes the true Slianghae fowl
imported and bred in those early j'ears, 1847, '48, '49, '50, precisely to cor-
respond in features with the so-called " Cochins" of to-day, in detail — from
" single upright, serrated comb," to " heavily feathered legs down to the tips
of toes." And the authors conclude their minute description of this fowl,
then coming into general favor everywhere, as being "fully plumed with soft
downy feathering, in size of great proportions, quiet and docile in temper,
wonderful layers, making flesh rapidly from chickenhood, and we know not
of a better. In truth, we may say of the Shanghae, as the pious Isaac Walton
was wont to say of the trout, his favorite dish: 'God certainly might have

snAxonAE, cocnix, brahma. 31

made ^ better fish, but certaiul}- he never did.' So of the pure unadulterated
Shanghae fowl."'

Upon page 13 will be seen another early engraving of these yellow Shang-
haes, which will show what the general form and appearance of this stock
was in 1S49, '50, "51. By domestication in England, as well as in this coun-
try, and through subsequent care in mating and selection, improvement in
the form, a notable development of the shape, and greatly enhanced propor-
tions in this variety, were soon realized among us. The various strains were
bred together, from time to time, thus introducing and interminsline fresh
blood among them all, and increasing their general size and desirable good
qualities, remarkably ; though for a long time none of us considered color an
important matter — so that the progeny of our increasing flocks sustained
the otherwise general characteristics of the Chinese race ; for, out of all these
earliest importations, there came every shade of yellow, red, buff, drab, light
cinnamon, brown, bronze, and almost or quite black chickens, — first or last,
— and no one then deemed this result either strange, or inappropriate. TVe
changed all that in the later years of our experience, of course.

In Eev. W. Wingfield's "London Poultry Book," a splendidly illustrated
octavo issued in 1853, and subsequently in 1867 re-issued under the editor-
ship of W. B. Tegetmeier, F.Z.S., jyppear numerous large and finely-colored
chromo likenesses of noted Chinese fowls, among other choice illustrations ;
*at that time each being designated, in the title-line below these beautiful pic-
tures, as "Uliite Shanghae, Bufi" Shanghae, Lemon Shanghae, Partridge
Shanghae. &c. In the later edition of this choice work, the same jjlates are
used to adorn it (under charge of Mr. Tegetmeier) ; but in each title, under-
neath these pictures, the word "Cochin" is substituted for the original ap-
pellation. The birds are the same, however, precisely ; and similar fine
illustrations of my original Gray Shanghaes are portrayed among the rest,
and are there denominated Light and Dark "Brahmas," to correspond with
the improved nomenclature of our time, and in conformity with the established
names for the China fowls adopted in the English and American " Standards."
Erom the Kev. !Mr. Wingfield's 1853 edition of this work, we extract the fol-
lowing information about the then called " Shanghaes." In reference to the
history and name of this variety of the China species, the author says, —

" There is a doubt, which had better be removed at the very threshold.

32

THE CHINA FOWL.

conveyed in the question, 'Are Cochin China and Shanghae fowjs the
same?' We have always entertained the opinion that they are; and since,
we have invarlahly found that fowls imported from China, feathered or plam-
legged, dark-plumed or light, came hither, directly or indirectly, either from

BURNHA:M'S first dark gray SIIANGIIAE hen, sent to ENGLAND. (1853.)

Shanghae or its immediate vicinity, we have long since concluded that
' Cochin China ' is a name altogether mwapplied to this variety. This con-
clusion amounts to conviction, since we have received a letter from Mr.
Robert Fortune, who has passed so many years in various parts of China, in
which he says, —

SHAyaiiAE, cocni2f, brauma. 33

'' 'The man wlio first gave these fowls the name of "Cochin Cliinas '' has
mnoh to answer for. I firmly believe that what are termed "Cochins''' and
'' i'h'.i II ij lines" are one and the y(7»(«. One thing is certain : the breed you
have in England now called "Cochin Chinas" are plentiful in and around
i^hanghae. They were discovered there soon after the war, and were fre-
quently brought to England by captains of trading vessels. What grounds
lias any one for supposing these fowls ever saic Cochin China? This is a
breed little known in the warmer country about Canton. In fact, the South-
ern Chinese people were as much struck with the size of this breed as Eng-
lishmen were. The '• Shanghaes " seem to be more common about Shanghae
than anywhere else in the north of China. The Southern breeds have long
been known both to shipmasters and English residents; but there is noth-
ing marked in the character of the Southern China birds.' "

At the early English poultry-show at the Zoological Gardens, London, in
1S45, prizes were oflered for " Malays and other Asiatic breeds." These offers
drew to the exhibition no Eastern variety, except the long-time known
Malays. Eev. Mr. Wingfield remarks upon this fact, that '■ at that time
the Shanghaes were unknown to the society." Xo extended published notice
of Chinese birds occurred in England until 1845 or '46, although the Queen's
fowls, sent her by the British ambassador in China soon after the close of
the war there, reached England in 1844. These remarkable fowls (called
"Cochin Chinas'') were exhibited by Her ^Majesty at Dublin first, in 1846.
Tet Dickson, the English poultry author of that time, in his noted work pub-
lished in 1847 makes no allusion even to the Queen's fine fowls. Messrs. Moody
of Droxford, and Sturgeon of Grays, were the first prominent possessors of
the Shanghaes in England, to both of whose importations we have already
referred on a.^jrevious page. From these two consignments came all tTie
earlier English birds of this species, bred for many years on the other side
of the Atlantic. Referring to the Queen's China fowls, we will add here,
that (/'the name "Cochin China" were ever appropriately applied to any
of these birds, it more piroperly belonged to that single imj)ortation than to
any other known ; since these were smooth-legged, and of a difi'erent forma-
tion entirelv, as we shall show in another place, when we come to the
" Cochin " portion of our present book.

The Chinese attach no more importance to purity of color, or to accuracy
in breeding, than do our own farmers all over this country with their barn-

34 THE CHINA FOWL.

door fowls. Indeed, it is notorious that there are no " poultry fanciers," as
ive recognize this term, at all in China. Large fowls and large eggs are what
the barbarians aim for. They are very careless in breeding poultry, alto-
gether; and to this circumstance are we indebted for the various colors of the
progeny of even the " imported birds " we get from that clime. Their fowls
are permitted to run all together, and have thus been bred for centuries.
The prevailing natural color of these birds is from pale yellow to dark brown.
The pure White and Black varieties are rarities, it is averred, upon Chinese
soil ; and the Grays are very scarce there : so our own friends inform us,
whom we have interested to make search for us more than once, when they
have left this shore for the other, with our urgent orders to bring back, if
possible, upon their return, a fresh batch of the Grays, which have become so
IJopular in the past twenty years here and in England.

And may we not just here appropriately refer to the remarkable fact
(wherever the original Light and Dark " Gi'ay Shanghaes," at present called
Brahmas, came from in the first instance), that never since 1849 and 1850,
from any country, in any ship, to any port in England or America, has a
second clutch of these beautiful Grays chanced to reach the shores of the
Western Continent ?

In all our "importations," in all our purchases, in all our chance posses-
sions of Chinese, Eastern, India, Calcutta, or Malay birds, never once since
the introduction by G. P. Burnham of the Gray Shanghaes to notice in
America, in 1849 and 1850, have we had any more of them. If this variety
were so "plentiful in India" as Lewis Wrigh't asserts they are and have
been, and if the very doubtful statement of his quoted " East Indian
officer" had any real foundation in fact, ivhy have we not had a few more
of the original " up the Brahmapootra" birds, either in England or America,
during all the long years that have elapsed since Burnham's early two
importations of Gray Shanghaes in 1849 and 1850 were shown to the public,
from which seven fowls have descended direct, in Great Britain and the
United States, the myriads of Light and Dark Brahmas (now thus called)
to-day in possession of the thousands of breeders, fanciers, and poulterers
throughout the world ?

The fallacious theory of Lewis Wright — that all the multitudes of ^^ight
and Dark Brahma fowls now in existence, and the other myriad of Brahmas

MODEL OF A "STANDARD" LIGHT BRAHMA PULLET, 15 MONTHS OLD.

A3 brel by J. M. Wade and W. E. b'lower, Penn. ; Messrs. Plaisted, Stoddard, Ca-pen(er, etc., Conn.
Messrs. S^urtevant, Willi.ams, Comey, Felch, Buzzeil, and others, Mass , 1874

SSANOHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 37

which have had their birth within the last twenty-five years, in both
America^ and England, " have been derived from the ' one pair ' introduced
into Connecticut by Mr. Chamberlin " — is too ridiculous for a moment's
serious consideration. That so many hundreds of thousands of birds, so
like each other in all their chief features of color, size, form, and commci
characteristics, coifW have been produced from a single cock and hen and
their progeny, onlij ; or that for a quarter of a century, without the slightest
deterioration in any important particular, one pair of fowls and their de-
scendants could have been bred thus in-and-in, in the hands of thousands of
difterent persons on both sides of the Atlantic, to result thus accurately in
feather, shape, proportions, and rare quality, — is simply one of the natural
impossibilities. Therefore do I claim that the union of my original pair of
Gray Shanghaes in 1849, re-enforced with the fresh, strong, native blood
of my second lot of five Grays from Shanghae direct in 1850, more clearly
and reasonably a hundred-fold demonstrates that out of those birds come
the progeny which have been the fathers and mothers of the multiplied
numbers of so-called Light and Dark " Brahmas " which have been pro-
duced within the last two decades of years, in England and America.

Now, I contend that this is a very extraordinary fact. And upon this point
well may the talented correspondent of Miss Watts's London " Poultry
Yard " exclaim, " There has, then, been no introduction of fresh blood.
Marvellous birds they are, to go on with so little appearance of degeneracy ;
and it speaks much for the purity of the breed : for, were they made up of
a cross, they would certainly throw back." There has been no need for
crossing this fowl. They were all evidently of pure Chinese extraction.
Their " pedigree " dates back clearly to 1849 and 1850, their nativity to
China; and to-day the Gray Shanghaes breed as they did in 1851, '52, '53.
and afterwards. They are marvellous, indeed ; and we have none of us ever
since imported any others of the species ! Which is quite as "marvellous" a
fact as is the other.

Like the imported Buff, the Red, the Brown, or the Partridge, already
described, the Gray Shanghaes continue to breed their like, uninterruptedly.
And in the year 1874, at the Boston, Hartford, and Buffalo exhibitions
(especially at the two first-named shows), the identical form, color, stjde,
shape, and general characteristics of this " marvellous " race were seen in
the birds there shown, as we of " ye olden time " have seen them by scores

38

THE CHINA FOWL.

and hundreds in the days when we bore away the palm over all competitors,
with our splendid adult samples of this unique variety of Shanghaes.

The White Shanghae is another variety of this fowl, which deservedly
has hosts of ardent admirers. The first of this species within our re-
membrance were in possession of Geo. E. White, Esq, of the firm of Parker

WHITE SHANGHAE (OR " COCHIN ") COCK AND HEN.

and White, Boston. These are portrayed in Dr. Bennett's work (1850), and
are there described as an exquisitely beautiful variety of Shanghaes, — pure
white in color, and formed precisely similar to the Yellow and Red varieties,
better known among fanciers at that period. Mr. T. Thorpe of Cambridge,
Mass., imported, or purchased of the importer, the first of this race we had
in those days in Boston. We present a picture of a cock and hen of this
.variety, which represents them very fairly. They partake of all the charac-

SHANQHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. ' 39

toristics of the genuine Slianghae species, in a marked degree, except the
cliango in color. They are a beautiful fowl in every respect, and have many
favorites among the fancy. At the present time, the White Shanghae is very
perfectly bred all over this country, and many strains have been vastly im-
proved in size since the early importations. Fine samples have been sent out
to us from England, also, in the past few years, — such as were never before
seen in this country, so far as the average weight and proportions of this
variety are considered. Mr. Mark Pitman, of Salem, has a superior strain.

The introduction of Wliite Shanghaes into Great Britain is traceable to the
breeds of the Dean of Worcester, and Mr. Herbert of Powick. At this
period (lS51-'52) there were but very few in England, and large prices were
paid for good specimens for breeding purposes. Now they are plentiful in
• that country, where they are bred to great perfection. They are not gen-
erally considered so hardy as are other colored Shanghaes ; and the chickens
are usually more difficult to raise than the others. Nor do they reach the
weights of either the Grays or the Buffs. Mr. Bowman of Penzance, Eng.,
has, however, succeeded in raising a good many magnificent White Shang-
haes, and his strain is very popular, as are Mr. Todd's, of Ohio, also.

The Black Shanghae is less common among us than any other variety.
In 1850, at the time we obtained through Wm. T. Porter from Shanghae
our second lot of Light Gray birds, we found 'an excellent trio (cock and two
hens) of the Black variety; which, with the five Light Grays then obtained,
and a splendid trio of Dark brown birds, we took to Melrose to breed. The
Black ones bred true to the originals, and were of the best color (for their
dusky metallic hue) that we ever saw. We did not fancy them greatly, how-
ever, and bred them only one or two seasons. We give portraits of the
Black birds here ; and it will be seen that, excepting the change of color,
a"-ain, they represent the same formed fowl, from beak to toes, — the true
Shanghae, though ebony-hued.

For several years, through the adoption of this title in England by the
poultry societies and clubs, all these different colored Shanghaes have come
to be called " Cochins ; " and under this name only are they now recognized
in the Standards on both sides of the water. This is quite as well ; though,
as Mr. Kobert Fortune insists, " this stock never saw Cochin China," and
what we all now call " Cochins," in England and America, are in reality
but the true northern Shanghae race.

40

THE CHINA FOWL.

But a correspondent in a late American poultry journal puts this point
sensibly. He says, '• For my part, I prefer to see men up with the times,
who have an ' axe to grind ' in coming to the front as breeders of to-daij, of
fowls as they are nou; not the auticpated breeds of thirty years ago."

'\IKM0£RCQQK-.C5i.W\.

BLACK SIIASOHAE (OK " COCHIN ") COCK AND HEN.

Correct ! This is good doctrine ; and to this, even we old 'uns will all
respond " Amen ; " while, at the same time, the "few varieties " of Chinese
fowls (alluded to by this writer), known in the antiquated time of 1847 to
1852, have not been increased, I notice, by the receipt of any one additional
or netv variety from that heathen land. We still have the White, the Buff,
the Drab, the Silver Cinnamon, the Gray, the Yellow, the Partridge, the

SBANOHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 41

Grouse, and the Black ; and all these gentlemen^ who are so commendably
"up with the times," are now breeding from the very identical stock in their
" modern experience '' that we ancient fogies " imported and exported and
wrote books about," in the "antiquated days of twenty or thirty years ago."
This early stock Arts been improved somewhat in the later time ; and no-
body need now object to the change in its name to suit the modern fancy,
since the Shanghae fowl itself has never yet been changed materially in its
general good qualities and characteristics, and probably never will be. It
was good enourjh originally : it is good enough now. We will now call it
" CocHix," therefore, contentedly, and herein follow, where in the " days
lang syne " we led. Still this fowl remains unchanged, although some later
writers assume that both the Brahmas and the Cochins are an entirely difi'er-
ent variety from the Shanghaes.

Mere theories, like those of Lewis Wright, may be promulgated, and these
may be rendered plausible by argument. But recorded facts cannot be
ignored ; and in connection with this point let me quote briefly from the
report of the judges of the old New-England Poultry Society, made at their
third and fourth exhibitions in Boston, Mass. This exhibition was a fine
one, and the entries were very large. The Committee of Judges say,, offi-
cially, " At this Boston show, the best and most faultless descriptions of.
Eed and Buff Shanghaes were shown by Geo. P. Burnbam, Esq., of Melrose. .
And, of the Cochin Chinas, the specimens exhibited by G. P. Burnham were
each and all notable, and worthy of public appreciation." This in May,
1852. At the last show of this Society, where I did not enter any fowls for
premium, but only on exhibition, which came off the same, year (1852) in
the fall, the judges, in their published report, call attention to the fact that
among the numerous fowls exhibited this season, as upon former occasions
(noticeably in 1850 and 1851), a very unnecessary practice seems to have
obtained in the ?»isnaming of varieties, and recommend a close adherence
hereafter to recognized titles only.

In this connection they allude to cases in point. " The largest and unques-
tionably owe of the finest varieties of fowls ever shown among us, was entered
by the owner of this variety as Chittagong.* Other coops of the very same

* These were the old Graj' Shanghae pair I sold to Dr. Bennett. Entered at this sliow
by G. "W. George of HaverhUl, to whom the Doctor sold them, after he bred them one
season. They were first sho^'^l by me, in 1849, at Boston.

42 THE CHINA FOWL.

stock were labelled Gray Cliittagongs ; * others wore called Bralinia-Poo-
tras ; f others, from the same original birds, % were Gray Sliapghaes, &c.
Your Committee are divided in opinion as to what these birds ought right-
fully be called ; though the majority of the Committee have no idea that
'Brahma-Pootra ' is their correct title. Several cages contained specimens
positively known to have come direct from Shanghae, § and none are known
to have come originally from anywhere else. Nevertheless, it is thought ,
proper to leave this question open for the present; and the Committee accept
for them the title of Gray Shanghae, Chittagong, or ' Brahma-Pootra,' as
different breeders may elect, for the present, admitting that they are really a
very superior bird, and will be found decidedly tlio most valuable among all
the large Chinese fowls, of which they are clearly a very good variety."

This, mark, in the spring and fall of 1S52, at the Boston Fowl Shows,
where I did not enter the first fowl for competition. And, farther on iu this
Committee of Judges' Report (above quoted from), the following extracts are
to the point : —

" Samples of the China stock, imported originally from SliangJiae, were
very plentiful on this occasion, and very superior fowls, bred from G. P.
]5urnham's importations, were numerous, and were sold in four or five instan-
ces at the verj^ highest prices paid for any samples disposed of." Among
the premiums awarded, as per report, at this fourth show (in 1852), were the
" first prizes for best trio, to H. H. Williams (Bundiam's stock) ; first for
best cock and hen, to Chas. Sampson (Burnham's stock) ; second and third
prizes to Williams, same (Bnrnham's stock) ; a first prize to C. C. Plaisted,
for ' Hong Kong ' fowls, then so call(5d by contributor (from J iurnham's
stock) ; to A. White, six best chickens (Burnham's stock) ; to same, for best
Cochin cock and hen, first prize (Burnham's stock) ; to Williams, West
Roxbury, best trio of Cochins, first premium (Burnham's stock) ; to A.
White, East Randolph, for best Cochin chickens, first (Burnham's stock)," &c.

* These were calleil Cornisli fowls, cnntributed by Hatcli of Coiinectic.iit; and very
jijood oiiea they were too, hut all young birds.

t Those were Dr. Bennett's first ones, bred from my old ]'hiladolpliia Grays, which I
sold him tlie previous year. Shown tlie second time.

} These were my I>ight and Dark Gray fowls, and their progeny.

§ Tliese were my oldest imported Grays, and other fowls.

SnANGHAE, COCniN, BRAHMA. 43

All this is somewhat of a personal character ; but I am now writing of the
old days, of events in chicken-history that occurred over twenty years since.
Prom the above data, it will bo seen that several months prior to the time
(December, 1852,) when I shipped the mature "Gray Shanghaes " to Her
Majesty, Queen Victoria, to wit, in the spring of 1852, I exhibited old Shang-
hae fowls, and their progeny three, two, and one year old. In the fall of the
same year, my patrons, who had bred fowls from Cochin or Shanghae chick-
ens, or eggs purchased of me in 1850, 1851, carried away all the leading pre-
miums with this young stock of the Grays, Keds, Buffs, &c. ; and not until the
year 1852 (in September) had the proper name of this fine stock been called
in question. It was rightfully " Shanghae." But from and after this show
began the contest that resulted in naming this much-maligned race " Brah-
mas " and " Cochins," of difterent colors ; though I continued to call m>j stock
" Shanghaes " for many years afterwards.

Englishmen (through the Queen's Chinese fowls) had, previously to this
time, for four or five years, been breeding what i/iey called " Cochin Chinas ; "
and this name had come to be accepted by the Society members and British
poultry clubs as " tlie thing, you know," in the course of a few years later.
Meantime, early American breeders of the Marsh, Forbes, and Burnham
Shanghaes had begun to find a very good market in England for selected
samples of these strains, and especially of the Gray Shanghaes ; and Dr. Ben-
nett, Mr. Plaisted, Capt. Williams, W. Buckminster, and myself sent hun-
dreds of pairs and trios of this Shanghae stock abroad, to the delight and
astonishment of the fanciers in Great Britain.

It has been lately stated, I observe, that in 1854 and 1857 some importa-
tions of fowls were made into England direct from Shanghae, — Partridge-
colored, I think. But the English breeders persisted in calling the Gray
Shanghaes they got from America (as they did these last-named birds from
that port) Cochins, or Brahmas. No longer Cochin Chinas as at first, never
latterly Shanghaes (what they were), but Cochins or Brahmas, they said.
And to-day "so say we all;" though I had always contended for the one true
name " Shanghaes " of different colors.

The Shanghaes have been fearfully abused and maligned — on paper — in
past years. They were called homely, gawky, ravenous, clumsy, ill-favored,
long-legged monsters ; and though everybody was at once astonished and

44 THE CHINA FOWL.

interested, in greater or less degree, at this novelty among chickens when it
appeared, but few fanciers took hold of it at first with any zeal. The breed
worked its own way, hSwever ; and after a year or two, despite the abuse and
ridicule and nicknaming heaped upon it privately and publicly, it came to
be largely sought for; and a rare furore eventually succeeded, to obtain good
samples of these Shanghaes in England, as well as all over this country.

Now, the originally imported Shanghae fowl, of different colors (not the
original Queen's Cochin Chinas), was in no particular different from the so-
denominated Cochin of to-day. The requirements of the Standards here and
in England describe the same points possessed by the early birds, almost pre-
cisely ; and old breeders, who have watched the progress in poultry "improve-
ments " here and abroad for twenty-five years, know this. But

" What's in a name? That which we call a rose,
By any other name would smell as sweet."

I notice in Mr. Wright's latest work on poultry that Mr. Cornish, under
date of a letter to Col. Weld in 1869, states (among other gross inaccuracies
in said letter) that "in 1850 the name 'Brahmapootra' was established.'"
And farther on, Mr. Wright says that " this was the stock fostered by Mr.
Cornish and Dr. Bennett." But in Dr. Bennett's own " Poultry Book," pub-
lished in Boston in 1850, the name of Brahma or Brahmapootra is not
alluded to, once ; while my original Philadelphia (Dr. J. J. Kerr) " Gray Shang-
haes," then called by Drs. Kerr and Bennett " Chittagongs " (precisely as
Cornish calls his stock, in his March 2d, 1852, letter), are both finely illus-
trated, and are fully described by Bennett, see pp. 26, 27, 28, as "perfect
samples," "remarkable for size and beauty," "the first among domestic
varieties of fowls," " the trite gallus giganteus," and they " excite astonish-
ment and admiration in all fowl fanciers who behold them," &c. At the
close of this book — last page — Dr. Bennett adds, "It will be observed that
the descriptions in this work begin with Mr. Burnham's imperial Gray Chit-
tagong," &c. Now, if (as Cornish says) this'" Brahma" name was "estab-
lished in 1850," why does not Dr. Bennett (who originated it) somewhere in
his extensive " Poultry Book " mention it ? Mr. Cornish or his fowls, of
course, were not then known to anybody ; for Bennett was the first man in
America to broach this subject of a new-fangled name for the fine Gray

SnANQIIAE, COCHIN, BRAIIMA. 45

Shfinghae birds ; ami AVriglit admits tliia. This is but another mistalte of
Cornish's, in the date of the year. And one word more upon tliis point: —

As far forward from this time as ib 1854, the judges at the National Exhi-
bition in New Yorlc, in their official report on that Show, say, " Though we
have been governed by the nomenclature in the lists, we by no means assent
to it as a proper classification. Shanghae and Cochin are convertible terms;
but Brahmapootra is a name for a sub-variety of Shanghaes, plainlj'." And
"we earnestly insist that all ridiculous, unmeaning aliases tor fowls be aban-
doned, and a simple, truthful classification in name be strictly observed in
the future,"' &c. Compare this with my quotations above from the Bo.ston
judges' report in 1852, and then let anj'body deflare, if they can truthfully,
that •' this name ' Brahma ' was estahli-shed in 1850."

This, of course, could not be. But I shall explain this point further, in my
future pages. I allude to it here, because it is the Shanghae fowl that I
have now been Yriting of, of different colors — the Gray variety among this
class — whose name the " Tichborne claimants" of 1852, 1853 (sustained
by Lewis Wright's sophistical theon/j, have for years been busy in changing
from its true title, transforming it from the original to the modern names.

Thus we maj' learn, that in spite of all the changes from time to time that
have occurred in the nomenclature of the China fowl, the bird itself remains
the same that first came into England or America from the principal port of
the Chinese Empire. For years, as I have already stated, no one could
declare with any confidence that "Shanghaes" were not "Cochins," or vice
versa. At that early period in chicken-raising in the United States, very
few persons knew any thing of the real facts about this race ; and we begun
to ape the Britons with the " Cochin China " title, as the most euphonious.
But when importation after importation arrived here, and all of these came
from Shanghae onhj, we commenced to learn to "call things by their right
names."

And this brings us to consider the so-called CocAm variety, by itself, in
another chapter.

THE COCHINS.

The " Cochin China " fowl, as it was originally known in England and in
the United States, was altogether a different bird, in shape and characteris-
tics generally, from what is denominated at the present day "Cocuin" by
societies and poultry fanciers of our time. This bird originated in China,
however; the first (and only exact) samples of which were procured at
Shanghae, and were shipped from that coast-port direct to England in a
British government vessel, soon after the close of the war in that country
(when the Chinese trading-ports were first opened to British and other
foreign commerce), by the then resident English ambassador to the Chinese
court, as a present to Pier Majesty, Queen Victoria.

SIIANOIIAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 47

As we liave already stated in these pages, these birds were really smooth-
legged Slianghao fowls. Still their precise origin is involved in mystery
not unlike that clabnedhy certain parties regarding the early history of the
" Brahmapootras," so far as anything has ever been vouchsafed to tlie public
in actual detail. Her Majesty was known to evince a lively interest in
poultry matters at the '' Homo Farm," Windsor, however, as did his Royal
Highness Albert, the late Prince-Consort, in agricultural affairs. And the
British minister in 1843 secured what lie- supposed unquestionably to be a
very choice lot of the colossal poultry of China, which he sent to London
for the Queen's world-renowned aviary.

Now, it is very clear that, whatever may have been the good quality of this
ambassador's general talents, and his profundity as a statesman, he evidently
possessed very slight knowledge of the points or excellences of what fanciers
would call good poultry ; pre-S^lpposing that this distinguished diplomatist
had an3' choke presented him in the selection of the birds he thus sent from
China to his que'an. For, as we may readily see by examining the authen-
tic illustration by Harrison Weir (in 1844), which is transferred to our
pages from "The London Illustrated News," of a trio of the "famous
Queen's Cochins " (see opposite page), these long-legged, smooth-shanked,
gawky gallinaceous representatives from the Celestial dominions were really
any thing but what would be esteemed, by the veriest amateur, a desirable
acquisition for his poultry-yard, in our day. Still the monstrous proportions
of these fowls astonished the people of England vastly ; and the English
illustrated journals were shortly occupied with pictures and accounts of these
giant chickens, which were a huge novelty to Messrs. John Bull.

They were wonderful in dimensions and carriage, extraordinary layers
(Mr. Walters, the Queen's poultry-keeper, verifying some one's curious state-
ment that "the hens laid two eggs in a day frequently, and sometimes
three"); they were hardy, flame-colored, very quiet, and altogether were a
most valuable acquisition to the poultry of the Old Country, as everybody,
on sight of them, admitted. These "Cochins" were perfectly smooth-legged;
and Harrison Weir's pictures of them in " The London Illustrated News,"
" by ro3'al permission," were very accurate portraits of this rare consignment, ,
which at that time (1844) were described as belonging to the family of the
Otis tarda, or Great Bustard, from their kindred formation and immense
size, — though this early notion was erroneous, also.

48

THE CHINA FOWL.

Ql'EEX VICTORIA'S OEKilXAL " OOCUIN CKIXAS." {Drawn hy Harrison Weir, 1844.)

SUANGBAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 49

I read these accounts, saw the engravings in the London papers, and in
18-48 sent to England for half a dozen of thoni. The Queen presented a prize
pair to Lord Heytsbur3', then lord-lieutenant of Ireland ; and he sent them
to J. Joseph Nolan of Bachelor's Walk, Dublin, to breed. I communicated
with Mr. Nolan, and finally purchased two cocks and four pullets of this
Queen Victoria "Cochin China" stock, which were the first Cochins im-
ported into America b}- a citizen of the United States, by at least two years
in point of time. I bred these smooth-legged fowls, with others that I re-
ceived subsequently from Canton, for several years, and disposed of hundreds
of fine birds from this stock ; though I never thought them equal to the Gray
Slianghaes (or Brahmas) by a long mark, from after experience.

These were the original "Cochins," however. They were so called by the
English breeders, and this name, for the Queen's stock, was never changed.
Tr7(y thej' were denominated "Cochin Chinas," no one has ^ver yet been
able to determine. Certainly they never saw Cochin China ; and nobody in
that Southern Chinese province ever saw any such fowls there. Mr. For-
tune, who was for a long time a resident and traveller in the East, says that
" whoever thus named these birds has much to answer for, since denizens of
Cochin China said of these fowls, when subsequently seen by them, that
they astonished those people quite as much as the sight had exercised Eng-
lishmen." Still these were the first known "Cochin Chinas," — of which, as
I have stated, I imported the first of their progeny into Massachusetts.

The Cochins of to-day are heavily feathered upon the legs, as we all know.
I received from China, fifteen or twenty years ago, three or four different lots
of variously-colored fowls, most of which were thus feathered to the toes.
In the case of my Cochins, I called them " Royal Cochin Chinas," to dis-
tinguish them from the others, — which I denominated White, Bufl^, Brown, or
Gray Slianghaes, because the latter (with the exception of one lot I imported
from Canton) all came direct from Shanghae.

In course of time other parties imported fowls from Engltod or China ; and
the poultry societies in Great Britain decided upon calling the Chinese fowls
" Cochins." The American associations followed this lead ; the " standards
of excellence" discarded the name of Shanghae altogether from their lists;
and, adopting Dr. Bennett's name for the Grays, and the English style for
the other colors, we now have only the " Cochins " and " Brahmas" for this
Chinese stock, which is quite as well, since everybody agrees to it.

50 THE CHINA FOWL.

The o;-?'yi«,«Z "Cochin Chinas" imported into Enghmd, and first hrod in
this country in my yards, were quite unlike tlie present fowls bearing this
name, as I have briefly stated. The modern "Cochin" is a far better bird
in all respects. At that early day, however (near thirty years since), the
first comers were deemed very extraordinary fowls ; and I sent samples of
these cliickens all over this country, for years afterwards. They have quite
run out now. I have not seen a smooth-legged " Koyal Cochin " for many
a day, though for a long period they were popular.

This /zV.si importation of "Cochins" thus came from SliangJiac. As the
■ original illustration indicates, they were long-neokcd, unfeathered-legged,
big-tailed, long-shanked, rangy-formed, ill-favored sjjccimens, but of "mon-
strous proportions " as compared with any fowls previously seen in England.
They laid huge buflf-colored eggs, and a great many of them. The cocks
crowed sonorously in " unearthly tones ; " the hens were quiet, indolent, and
dumpy; and royalty was the first possessor of these outlandish-looking
birds, which the English public naturally considered a big thing in its way.

And so it was. This consignment created a wondrous furore among the
lovers of poultry; and the royal "Cochin Chinas" were the town talk for
months after their arrival upon British soil. Other Chinese samples followed
tills importation. Three or four mercliants received clutches of these fowls
from China subsequently, and these all came with heavily-feathered legs.
The form of these latter birds was of a more compact description. They
came shorter in the leg, heavier in the breast, thicker in the thigh, squarer
in body, broader-backed, and shorter-tailed, while the general (yellow or
brownish) mlor was similar. The commoners sensibly called thidr fowls
"Shangliaes" for a time. And then arose the discussion in Ejigland about
the proper name by which they should be distinguished. Some called them
" Cochins " (or Cochin Chinas) : others adliored to the more appropriate and
natural title, — since they came from that port, — " Shanghacs." Thus a
contest occurred in the newspapers about the proper title for these birds, too,
which eventuated, after years of talk and argument, pro and con, in agreeing
upon " Cochin" for the Chinese birds of all colors, as we have it established
to-day.

Eeferring to the early poultry work of Dr. J. C. Bennett, published in
March, 1850 (written in 1849), I extract from pages 45, 46, 47, the annexed

SriANGTIAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 51

description of my " Royal Cocliins," the first imported into America, which '
were bred in Ireland from tlie Queen's original stock, — of which Dr. Bennett
publishes an original full-page picture from life, which he thus alludes to: —

" It is with peculiar satisfaction that I am able to adorn this book with
the beautiful original portraits which are here presented, of G. P. Burnham's
importation of Cochin Chinas. They are drawn from life by Mr. Durivage,
and are engraved by Mr. Marsh, — artists of acknowledged ability and accu-
rac}'. This representation of Mr. Burnham's fowls is believed to be the only
correct delineation of tiiis species (then) extant, and I flatter myself will
henceforth be deemed the standard of comparison. Mr. Burnham's importa-
tions are the best of any of the Cochin China race that have been brought to
this country. They are from Mr. Nolan's (of Dublin) stock, and took the
premium at a late fair in England, while standing at the side of Her
Majesty's original imported fowls."

This importation consisted of six fowls, two cocks and four pullets. They
were raised by J. Joseph Nolan of Dublin, to whom the lord-lieutenant of
Ireland sent, to breed, the original pair. presented to that dignitary by Her
Majesty. Out of that stock (the Queen's birds), my Cochins came direct to
me, into Massachusetts, in 1849 ; and the following description of these birds
appears in Dr. Bennett's work : —

" The cocks are very promising in size. The color of one is brown and red,
the other red and black. The plumage is beautiful, both in the roosters and
the pullets. The color of three of the latter is generally a yellowish brown "
(what we should nowadays call partridge-colored) "with black-tipped or
marked feathering ; the fourth pullet is of a deeper brown. The legs are
free from feathers, except a slight show on the cocks, and vary in color from
a reddisli yellow to dark brown. The form of the pullets is unlike any fowls
I have ever seen ; though there is some general resemblance to the pure
Dorking. They stand higher in the leg, however. The bodies are symmet-
rical, but long. The tail is also longer than that of the Shanghae, and is
very thin and tapering from the rump outwards. The head of these fowls
is quite small, the combs very small, and there are but slight signs of wat-
tles, as yet, on the pullets. The neck is long and serpent-like, the eye ex-
tremely large and brilliant, the chest is full, and the breadth of back is very
great. The frames of these fowls are ample, and the plumage lays closely to
the body. They weighed, on the average, at starting from Ireland, about
eight pounds each, the cocks about nine pounds. ... A reference to the

62 THE CHINA FOWL.

original picture in ' The Illustrated London News ' shows a strong resem-
blance ; indeed, the figure in the foreground is a fair portrait of Mr. Burn-
ham's birds," &c.

Why this fowl was called " Cochin China " at the outset, no one has ever
yet explained. It is beyond question the fact that no such birds were ever
produced in that southern province of the Chinese eniiiire, which State, by
reference to our map again, the reader will perceive is located hundreds of
miles below the ports where our ships trade. And it is positively known that
no such large fowls have ever been known there, as the inhabitants of Cochin
China territory voluntarily avouch. When the real Shanghae fowls were first
seen by these people, they exclaimed at their monstrous proportions ; and, as
Mr. Robert Fortune stated in 1853, " they were as greatly astonished at.
sight of these enormous birds, as were the British, when they met with
them."

We have yet to learn that there existed between the northern and south-
ern extremities of the Chinese coast, prior to the opening of the ports there
to foreign trade, any commercial communications that would warrant the
supposition that tlie large Shanghae fowls would be likely to be transported
thence to Cochin China. It is proved, on the contrary, by abundant declara-
tions on the part of the few English travellers and naturalists who have vis-
ited both portions of the empire, that this stalwart representative of the
gallus giganteus at any rate is not indigenous to Cochin China. This fowl
is not known at all in that part of China. And Mr. Fortune, who has resided
in and travelled extensively over the interior, at both extremes of the coast
borders, declares emphatically that this class of domestic bird is not only
unknown there, but that the fowls of Cochin China territory are by no means
of a marked character in any respect.

We conclude, therefore, that this misnomer for the Queen's fowls was
invented, as was the casein the instance of " Brahma" for another mis-
called variety, — the former being coined by some British sailor, who was
ambitious to get up a little sensational nonsense in the way of a name for
these foreign birds, such as would be more high-sounding and grandiloquent,
perhaps, in his estimation, -than the common-sense appellation they should
have been called by from the beginning, to wit, plain Shanghaes.

SHANGHAE, COCHIN, BRAUMA. 53

It surely will not be argued by any sensible person, tliat the English ambas-
sador, whoso official headquarters were at Canton, Shanghao, or Pekin, in the
north, woukl be likely to go down to Cochin China, ten or twelve hundred
miles south, to procure the birds, when these fowls were to be had at Shanghae
(which has been proved to be their home in a hundred instances since then)
so readily. And, moreover, is the fact clearly established that Her Majesty's
fowls came not from Cochin China, when we remember (as in the " Brahma-
pootra " case) that no shipment from that same Cochin China country to
England or America has ever since been heard of; while we have ample
authority for the fact that " no such large fowls were ever known in tliat
region by the natives of Cochin China."

Still Messrs. Bull are a stubborn race, and in their likes and dislikes they
adhere to habit with wonderful tenacity. Her Majesty's fowls were originally
dubbed '• Cochin Chinas ; " and, had they subsequently been proved to have
come from Norway, her faithful subjects would have insisted upon calling
them Cochin China, at any hazard. As in the case of the " Brahmapoo-
tras,'" they shortened that title to " Brahmas," however, so, in the other in-
stance, they dropped the second syllables of the original name, and estab-
lished " Coch in " for the Chinese varieties. There is no objection to either
name, now : both are expressive and sufficiently brief But we have never
yet been able to determine why the name of the fowls whose rightful cogno-
men we are now considering should have become established in this stj'le;
since it is beyond doubt, th^t these birds never saw the country of Cochin
China (as Mr. Fortune avers), any more than did the splendid Gray Shang-
haes ever revel upon the banks of the Brahmapootra.

The reader is here requested to turn over to page 55, to examine the fine
illustration there given of " Buff China Fowls." This drawing is furnished
us by Jos. M. Wade, Esq., of Philadelphia, among others, and admirably
represents a fine pair of adult birds of the now called " Bufi' Cochins " of
modern days. These fowls were drawn from life by J. W. Ludlow of Bir-
mingham, Eng., from a trio of " Buff Cochins " selected by Mr. Wade
of the Oak Lane Poultry Yards, during a late trip to England for that pur-
pose, the artist and breeder agreeing that they were the finest trio of
" Cochins " they had seen : the cock being the same that was used for the
English " Illustrated Book of Poultry," by Lewis Wright. The original
stock, whence these birds come, had its birth in Shanghae.

54 THE CEINA FOWL.

The Shanghae fowls of all the different colors, from white to black, as we
have described them in a previous portion of this work, are now called " Co-
chins," therefore. The English nor the American standards set down
among their " recognized breeds " any of these " old-fashioned titles." We
all go for improvements nowadays ; and it is just as well to fall in with the
large majority who have established these names, and which the present
generation of poultry-breeders and fanciers have come to be accustomed to.
Yet it is also as well that the younger portion of our fraternity inform them-
selves as to the original title of this now Americanized and Englishized .
nomenclature for fowls, and learn where the old stock first came from ; since
it is not impossible, sooner or later, that some of our younger fanciers in
America may chance to find themselves in China, hereafter, — upon a pleasure-
trip, perhaps, which may be extended even to the limits of Cochin China
proper ; and those who may read these lines may then remember our asser-
tions, and profit by the hints contained in this little volume, upon this
subject.

The Cochin is minutely described by a leading authority, in terms precisely
like those used to designate the original " Shanghae " fowl we have already
noticed at length. He must have a stout beak, round head, fine quality of
upright single comb. The eye should be red and full, for beauty and for use :
it gives a nice, brisk look to a sufficiently quiet bird, harmonizes better with
the general color, denotes more constitution, and is less liable to disease. The
neck not too long ; the body long, deep, and broad ; the shank and tail short.
The true carriage of the body, both in the cook and hen, should be upright
forward, with the hinder parts comparatively raised. A great depth from the
base of the neck above, to the point of the breast-bone with its weight of
flesh, tends to produce this form, and to show to advantage the flufl^ and
feathers peculiar to this fowl. The length of the breast-bone is to be desired
and looked to. With this form all will appreciate the neat head, full neck,
and broadness of the back, continued from across the wings to the tail ; and
that redundant supply of feathers immediately before the tail, that gives the
broad, square look that distinguishes the high-caste birds, and which makes
their tails apparently so short. The small, compact wing will accompany
these qualities, and with that a peculiar bunch of feathers. On the back,
before the tail, will be found a profusion of feathers, and that fluflfiness about

r.lKF CHINA C0( K AND HEX. Iiiiiiorteil liy Jos M. Wa.lo, riiiUulolpliia, Pii.

SHANQHAE, COGIIIN, BRAHMA. 57

the thighs, and about and under the tail and the hinder lower portions of the
body, that forms, with the feathered legs, one of the chief characteristics of the
race. Too much importance cannot be attached to straight, well-boned,
shortish shanks ; and, if you want appearance, weight, and constitution, they
m}ist be wide apart.

In neither cock nor hen do we like to see the tail sticking straight up, but
forming a nice, agreeable line with the back, or slightly elevated ; and termi-
nating in nice, soft, but somewhat longer and drooping feathers in the cock ;
the whole in the hen, from the feathers around it, wearing a much shorter ap-
pearance. A tinge of red on the back of yellow legs, stout and short, suits
us best. In forming a standard for them, we ought to insist on those points
that are pcculiai-hj theirs, and to discountenance those that in any way
imply the possibility of an admixture with another breed.

They are the most domestic, amiable, quiet, and peaceable of all the varie-
ties of poultry. They are exceeded by none in their attachment to their own
houses or ^-ards, from which they never wander far, even when their liberty
is unrestricted ; and in quietness they are unequalled. They are good layers,
and careful sitters and mothers ; and, what is very important, the chickens
are hardy, easy to raise, and less liable to be affected by disease than those
of many other breeds. In short, as layers they are unequalled ; laying when
quite young, and in the coldest days of winter, as well as the finest days of
spring.

This breed, it is supposed, have been propagated by the Chinese for a
special purpose, and are the result of long and persevering efforts on their
part, in the same way and by the same means that choice breeds of cattle
have been obtained with a particular end in view, — some for taking on pre-
cocious fat, others for milk, &c. The object the Chinese had in view in
■ rearing this description of fowl, was for caponizing. His mammoth height
and lank proportions are just what are required for making a capon weighing,
when fifteen or sixteen months old, a dozen pounds or over. Yet, so far as
we are generally informed, the instances where such care in multiplying
fowls in China is practised, are but few, since the majority of the natives
raise immense numbers of chickens, only ; and do not look so interestedly
after especial excellence in any particular strain or variety of poultry, when
they can so much more easily produce thousands of the medium cpalities,
which answer their purpose, ordiharily.

58

THE CBINA FOWL.

The latest variety of the now so-called Cochins is "a grand little fowl"
recently minutely described by Henry Beldon, a noted English breeder. This
is known as the Cochin Bantam. The originals of this small breed are said
to have been taken from the garden of the imperial summer-palace at Pekin,
when that royal establishment was sacked in the late Chinese rebellion.
Here, again (though we have little faith in this story by itself), we observe
the positive characteristic of the Briton, when once his mind is fixed upon
an idea, — in the persistence exhibited to prolong this " Cochin " misno-
mer for a Chinese bird avowedly admitted to have come from the imperial
garden at Pelcin, distant many hundred miles north of the province of Co- '
chin China. Our own opinion is, that these birds are akin to the old-style
Chinese Bantams we have had in America many years.

COCK A2fD HE>' OF THE " COCHIK BASTAM VAEIETT.

This diminutive bird was first brought to public notice in England, as late
as at the Crystal Palace poultry-exhibition of 1862. They were shown by Mr.
Kerrich of Dorking, who has retained and bred them in their purity, con-
stantly ; who, it is said, rears them with great success, which is accounted
for by the fact that the County of Surrey is warmer than other English dis-
tricts, according to this authority.

Mr. Beldon says of these " Cochin Bantams," that, " as they spring from
a single pair, it is no wonder that the chicks are difficult to rear. Of course
I am aware that by crossing with other breeds a stronger bird is" produced ;

SHANOHAE, COCniN, BRAUMA. 59

but the breed b3' crossing loses iiiuoh of its beauty, the jiroduco having longer
shanks and tail, and often spotted hackles. In fact, they are not to be com-
pared to the true breed. The real Peklii is a first-class Cochin China in
miniature. I have had them of such excellence that no large Cochin could
excel them ; and, what is somewhat remarkable, the chickens from the pure
breed are always good, and they breed as true as sparrows. The chicks are difS-
cult to rear, and are a bird of the sunshine; and, when chicks, require to be
fed often. Hard-boiled eggs, chopped up with bread-crumbs, I have found
answer well in the earlier stages of their life, then mixed up with oatmeal,
and so on to oatmeal made up into a stiff paste, and oatmeal and thirds, and
then, with a little grain mixed in; in fact, they require to be pampered
somewhat. The chicks feather very rapidly at eight to ten weeks old, being
as pretty as paint; it is well known that, until the second j'ear, when the
cocks get fully furnished in their feathering, the first j'ear they are somewhat
scanty in their plumage. . This does not apply to the hens. For breeding
purposes, I prefer the one-year-old cocks. I find they breed much better than
the two-year-old birds. The points of the breed are as follows: smallness
in size, — cocks weigh from sixteen to eighteen oz., hens fourteen to sixteen
oz. ; shape exactly like the large Cochin ; legs sliort and well feathered, and
may be either willow or yellow color, or even buff throughout ; comb of course
single, and as the large Cochins."

In a late discussion held by the Massachusetts Poultry Society in Boston,
veteran breeders of the Cochin and Brahma varieties held that it is quite
time that a correct standard in shape, and appropriate characteristics of the
China varieties should be fixedly determined on in this country, in order that
fanciers may know and realize y^hat form and points it is advisable and en
regie to aim to breed to, nowadays. If the best type of the true original
Shanghae fowl, imported from that city five and twenty years ago, were strictly
adhered to, admirable portraitures of which bird, in its genuine truthfulness
of delineation, is given in this volume of Mr. T. S. Cooper's stock (on page
10), and if these were taken as a model, — in our own opinion, breeders
could not fail to approach perfection rapidly in producing birds of this type
of the now-called " Cochins."

On page 61 we give portraits of the original cock and hen (as illus-
trated in Kerr and Dixon) ; and, on page 62, portraits of a trio of six months'
old Cochins (of the Queen's variety) from the same work. These are like-

60

TriE CHINA FOWL.

SHANOHAE, COCniN, BRAHMA.

61

nesses of my early Cochin China stock, smooth limbed, taken from the birds
in my j'ards at Roxbury, Mass., in 1849 ; from which illustrations it will be
seen how much these tlien called '' Cochins" are lilie (or unlike) the so-called

O. p. BURSHAM'S OEIGINAL "COCHIN CHINAS" (1849).

62

THE vniNA FOWL.

Cocliins of our time. The figures are presented for purposes of comparison
■(vith other drawings of fowls in this volume, with the reminder that these
delineations represent the Cochin stock first had in America, and otherwise
portrayed in Weir's picture (in 1844) of these smooth-legged birds on page
48, representing the Queen's Cochins.

SIX MOSTHS' OLD COCKEREL AJJD PULLETS. BUUNHAM'S EARLY "COCHINS" (1850).

The name of " Cochin" was afterwards generally adopted in Great Britain
for all the different colored Chinese fowls ; and fine samples were bred there
of tlie Buff, the Cinnamon, and the Partridge especially, which were sent
out to this country, and which are now being imported thence continually,
by American breeders and fanciers, to replenish and keep up the character of
the " Cochin " stock now in this country.

THE "BEAHMAS."

It is vay purpDse, in tliis part of my present rolume, to place upon record
as accurately as may be, the actual fa^ts pertaining to the variety of fowls
mentioned in the above caption; believing that a clear statement regarding
this breed will prove, even at the present day, more or less interesting to the
poulrry-breeders and fanciers of the United States, set down in concise
form, with data accompanying this account, to verify the statements in
relation to the true modern history of these Chixese fowls imported into
and bred in America, originally known among us as '• Gray Shanghaes," and
latterly as '' Brahmas."

Early in 1849 I learned that a few Light-Gray fowls of extraordinary propor-
tions and remarkable qualities had been imported from China into Pennsyl-
vania. I had, previously to this time, sent to England for a clutch of the

64 ^ THE CHINA FOWL.

Queen's " Cochin China " fowls, which, as I have stated, had been also greatly-
lauded through the English press ; and which stock had been s'ent to Her
Majesty by the British ambassador in China, upon the opening of Chinese
ports to foreign commerce after the war there.

But some Gray fowls had reached Pennsylvania, which my friend Dr. J. J.
Kerr of Philadelphia (then known in poultry circles by his norm de plume
"Asa Eugg") thus wrote me about: "This remarkable variety must, in my
opinion, stand at the head of the races of poultry, having the largest blood
in them of any breed of fowls with which I am acquainted. They come here
from Shanghae, China. They are light gray or streaked white ; and at seven
months old I have one pair that weigh over nineteen pounds."

J)r. John C. Bennett's book contains portraits* of the two birds mentioned,
after I got them, which are drawn from life, and engraved by S. E. Brown of
Boston, which the author thus describes (in 1850), though this picture was
taken and this description was written in 1849, when the fowls were young,
and while that work was in course of preparation. Dr. Bennett says, "This
breed of fowl has been imported into Pennsylvania within the last two years,
and ranks at the head of the list in that region for all the good qualities
desirable in a domestic bird. The color is a light streaked Gray, rather than
otherwise ; and the portraits given below are those of fine samples of this
great stock. They are designated ' Gray Chittagongs.' "

These were my first Gray fowls, portraits of which, from the original draw-
ings (still in my possession), taken when the fowls were quite undeveloped in
form, appear in this present book, and which for years I called " Gray Shang-
haes," although Dr. Bennett called them at first " Chittagongs," as we all did.

In describing the Chinese fowls, to which class of birds this brief work is
exclusively devoted, I thus make mention of my light " Gray Shanghaes "
here because the date at which I first obtained this breed was during the
same year that I received the Queen's "Cochin Chinas " from England ; and
because, moreover (although for some little time neither of these choice
varieties were greatly appreciated), these " Gray Shanghaes," as they were
called by me, for the reason that they came from Shanghae into Pennsylvania,
have turned out to be first in the estimation of all the admirers of good China
stock ; and, in my judgment, to-day, as Dr. Kerr writes me about the old pair
in 1849, " they stand at the head of the races of poultry " in the world.

LIGHT URAHMA COCK AND flEN. { Prize Birds. From Pliotograpbs.)
Owned and bred by W. IJ. Todd, Vermillion, Ohio.

SUANOHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 67

In 1S50, in New York City, on board ship direct from Shanghae, in com-
pany with Wm. T. Porter, Esq., then editor of the New-York "Spirit of the
Times " (who informed me of the arrival of these fowls from China), I procured
five lighter colored Gray fowls, nicely marked, and very even in pencilled
plumage, which I paid $100 for, and took to Massachusetts ; and afterwards
bred ivith the old pair, and their first progeny. These I called Gray Shang-
haes still, because they all came from that port. And, though the poultry-
books denominated the original pair for o)ie season " Chittagongs," /had no

THE OKIGDfAL " GKAY SHANGHAE" (DK. KEKR) COCK, AT EIGHT MONTHS OLD.

name for this fine variety other than " Gray Shanghaes-" for several years.
Knowing that all of them came from China, in vessels from the then newly-
opened port of Shanghae, I could see no reason for calling these birds after
the name of a state or province in India, — to wit, Chittagong. And, knowing
also as I did afterwards, when, where, and bj' whom the name " Bramapootra"
was created (as I will shortly show), I would not assent to misnaming so
grand a fowl. And so, as I have said before, I shortly named them " Gray
Shanghaes," which I deemed their appropriate cognomen, since they all

68 THE CHINA FOWL.

came to this country from the Chinese port of Shanghae, and were simply
gray in color — instead of being buff, white, partridge, or black.

Fanciers immediately discovered, when I had my latest Light Grays
housed at home in their roomy quarters, that "they were too white; " they
" were too indistinct in color ; " they " were too light." But I bred them
steadily that year, and very satisfactorily. I sold a great many eggs, mean-
time. In the summer and fall I sent away several young chickens ; and in
1851, I exhibited at the Boston shows the old and some young stock,
though but little was said about them, except that they were showy fowls,
and very large.

After breeding the Philadelphia birds a year, I sold my first pair of Grays
to Dr. Bennett, who then had a fine stock of sundry varieties at Plymouth,
Mass. Here the doctor first put forth the famous original " Plymouth
Rocks," which he thus described: "I produced this fine breed from a Cochin
China cock with a hen crossed between a Fawn-colored Dorking, Malay, and
Wild Indian." *

The clever, talented doctor was noted for his enterprise and zeal in the
poultry business. He bred a great many fine fowls, and was a personal friend
of mine from as far back as in 1835, when I first met him in the western
country. He bought my two first Grays ; and from them and a pale silver
Cinnamon or drab Shanghae hen (of the Forbes' importation from China)
he produced a clutch or two of very nice Light-Gray chickens, some of which
he exhibited at the fowl-shows in Boston in 1851 and 1852, portraits of
which " Burampootras," taken from the birds and accurately engraved by
Fox in 1851, will be found on next page.

These fi)-sf Gray chickens, thus produced by Dr. Bennett, had a small top-
knot or slight tuft of feathers at the back of the head ; all of them, as will
be noticed in this picture of them, on a small scale, published in 1852. Where
this feature came from, I never knew ; but I had no such " disqualification "
upon any of my own fowls, first or last ; and upon this first lot of Grays oiili/,
of the doctor's, did I ever see this peculiarity.

* This is not the " Plymouth Kock " of the present day, 1870-74. That is quite a different
fowl, and altogether better. This bird is recognized in the new American Standard as a variety,
or breed. It is a cross, however, between the Dominique and the Black Java, originating a few
years since in Connecticut and Massachusetts, and is an excellent fowl.

SHANOnAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA.

C9

Dr. Bonnott continued to breed the Graj's, thereafter, very successfully. I
furnished him with several other specimens of birds out of tlie progeny of my
tirst and second lots, which I bred together; and ho sent a few of these to
England in 1852 " on speculation," to London.

In 1851, l>r. Bennett, Mr. Hatch of Connecticut, and myself all showed
the Light-Gray stock in small quantities ; and the doctor had for some time
been exercising his busy brain to coin "a good name" for those fowls. lie

nr. PEXNICTT'S OHUUNAL TRIO OF " BUBAMrOOTRAS." PKAWN FROM LIFE IN 1S51.

consulted me regarding this proposition; and I always contended for what /
considered to be their correct cognomen, namely, '' Gray Shanghae," for the
very good reason already given.

But this title was not suiUciently liigli-sounding to suit the doctor's views.
And so I will here repeat, as I have already communicated it through another
channel, precisely what occurred regarding this name for the splendid Gray

70 THE CHINA FOWL.

Shangliaes, — as it took place in my house. I quote from an article I contrib-
uted to Wade's Philadelphia " Fancier's Journal," in March, 1874.

"Dr. John C. Bennett of Plymouth, Mass., in those days a shrewd and
enthusiastic breeder of all kinds of fancy fowls, made me a fabulous offer for
my pair of " Gray Chittagongs " (the Dr. Kerr Philadelphia birds), and took
them away. He bred them with a very light drab or buff Shanghae hen he
had, of the Forbes' importation, and produced a clutch of fine, showy chickens,
■which he exhibited at the second or third Boston fowl-show, to which he desired
to give a specific name.

" In those long-ago days, a good name for fowls was ' a big thing ' towards
success, among fanciers, in disposing of the stock they produced. The doctor
first consulted me on this point, and in my own library he took down an atlas.
Turning to the Eastern countries, he pored over China, Cochin-China, Hindos-
tan, &c., and his eye lighted upon the Burrampootra River in India.

" ' Eureka ! ' cried the amiable doctor, ' I have found it I Here it is, and
it's a stunner ! '

"And he pointed to that unpronounceable word "Burrampootra" upon the
map.

" ' What is it ? ' I quietly asked.

" ' The name for my birds. Do you see ? Grand, expressive, stylish, capital ! '
he continued.

" Thus it began. He shortly varied it to 'Brahmah-pootra,' the first por-
tion of this term being the name of the chief deity of the Hindoos. But this
compound was too lengthy. Then it was cut short to Brahmah, and finally,
by universal approval, became Brahma, — a very good name for a very good
fowl, though I continued for years to oall my stock — precisely like his, and
brqd originally from the same pair of 'Chittagongs' with the lighter birds I
got on sliipboard in New York from China — what they really were, to wit,
' Gray Shanghaes.'

" This, in brief, is the true history of the original coining of the name
' Brahma.' (The theory set up by one writer, that ' the first pair of Brahmas
were brought from Luckipoor up the Brahmapootra River, in a ship to New
York, by a sailor ' whose name has never been given, is sheer romance and
nonsense.)"

Now, it should be observed just here, that Dr. Bennett's Poultry Book, pub-
lished by Phillips & Sampson of Boston in 1850, '51, makes no mention what-
ever of the " Brahmapoutra " or the " Brahma " fowl. He does mention the
"Gray Chittagong," however; and the illustrations of this breed in his book
(which, be it remembered, is of my Philadelphia " Gray Shanghaes ") are the

SHANGHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 71

very fowls lie afterwards purchased of me ; which he bred from, and the pro-
geii}- of which he first called " Buraiiipootras," and subsequently worked down
into " Brahmas; " while this further important fact must not be lost sight ot
just here, also, that, notwithstanding Dr. Bennett published his excellent Poul-
try Book in 1850 and 1851, this name " Brahma " or " Brahma Foutra " does
not appear in its pages at all, and no allusion whatever is made to this name
in that work by Dr. Bennett, or to Mr. Cornish's or Chamberlin's existence.

Now, no one has ever disputed or questioned the fact that Dr. Bennett manu-
factured this name. " Thou canst not say / did it ! " all others can truthful-
ly exclaim. Nobody takes any credit for this performance originally', save the
pleasant, ingenious doctor himself. Most assuredly the writer of these pages
never claimed to have applied this cognomen to the Gray Shanghaes. Still
there has been some controversy as to %chen these fowls were so named. I have
shown that this title was in no shape applied till after 1851.

Tracing this name with these birds thus, down from 1819 to 1852, the fol-
lowing further corroborative evidence that they vyere identical, and just what
I have now described them, assumes importance, namely: upon page 177, in
Wingfield's splendidly illustrated work on poultry, Dr. Wm. Guste Gwynne,
in 1853, speaking of the original Light Brahmas sent out by us from America
to England, says, " Another circumstance which confii-ms me in this view as to
"the identity of these 'Brahmapootra' birds (Bennett's) with the Shfuif/hae
breed, is the fact that the fowls recently presented to Her Majesty by Mr. G. P.
Burnham, under the name of ' Gray Shanghaes,' are admitted by Dr. Bennett
to be precisely similar to his oivn. And Mr. Burnham assures me that the
original stock from which the 'Gray Shanghaes' presented to Her Majesty
were bred was imported direct from Shanghae."

All of which is perfectly correct, as I have herein shown. The fowls I sent
to the Queen were bred from the first two Grays received from Philadelphia,
which stock Dr. Kerr informed me came from Shanghae, — and out of the second
lot I got in New York, through Mr. Porter, from on board a sliip direct fr<ftn
the port of Shanghae. No Dark Brahmas had then been seen, or alluded to.
Dr. Bennett's earliest chickens were bred out of that very first Philadelphia
pair of Grays ; and later birds were bred by him from the progeny of that
stock, and other younger fowls I supplied him with in 1851 and 1852, and
afterwards. He always admitted this. He had no occasion to deny or dis-

THE CHINA FOWL

AMnnicAN nAUK nnAirMA r.nrvi and iik?t. " hla^k rniNon" A?rn "joan."
J'rize /Urdu, hreU by Philanth'r iFiUitims, Taunton, Mii8».

SIIAXGIIAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. i6

pute it. The Doctor. alwa3'9 gave me creilit for wliat was tlien exactly true.
We differed simply in our oiiinions ag to what name this splendid variety
sliould be called by. I adhered to " Gray Shan^dlae ;" and he coined the
title of " Burampootra,'' " Brahma-Poutra," and finally "Brahma," as it now
stands in England and America.

And this brings me to further authoritative corroborating evidence upon
this point, occurring in 1852, and referring directly to the controversy then
rife in this countr}', about the naming of this stock — up to this time all
being if'f/Zii Brahmas — to wit : —

At the third or fourth Boston show, in the fall of 1852, the Committee
of Judges — consisting of Dr. Eben "Wight, Dr. Bennett, Messrs. Andrews,
Fussell, and Balch — reported in extenso, officially, upon the Chinese varie-
ties. From that Report (of which Dr. Wight was chairman), I take the fol-
lowing extracts, which will show the fanciers of to-day how near the exact
truth my statements are, and have been hitherto, in regard to this naming
of the " Brahma" fowl. This Report, from which I now quote in detail, was
made immediately after the Boston exhibition of the "New-England
Society for the Improvement of Domestic Poultry," as follows : —

"Your Committee would call your attention to the fact that, among the
numerous fowls exhibited this season, as upon former occasions (notably in
ISol), a very unnecessary practice seems to have obtained, in the Tnisnaminrf
of varieties. Cross bred fowls have been called by original cognomens un-
known to practical breeders ; and a host of Birds well known to the Committee
have been denominated by any other than their real conceded ornithological
titles. This leads to ridicule, and should not be sanctioned by your Societ3^
Many honest, careful breeders may thus be deceived ; and this multiplying of
unpronounceable and meaningless names for domestic fowls is entirely un-
called for. Your Committee recommend a close adherence, hereafter, to
recognized titles only, . . . and allude to a case in point.

" The largest, and unquestionably one of the finest varieties ever shown
among us, was entered by the owner of this variety as the 'Chittagong.'
Other coops, of the same stock, were labelled 'Gray Chittagong;' others
(same stock) were called ' Bramah Pootras ; ' and others, ' Gray Shanghaes.'

" Your Committee are divided in opinion as to what these birds ought
rightfully to be called; but the majority of the Committee have no idea
that 'Bramah Pootra ' is their correct title. . . . Several of the specimens
are positively known to have come direct from Shanghae ; and woweare known

74 THE CHINA FOWL.

to have come originally from anywhere else. For the present, however, the
Committee accept for them the title of ' Gray Shanghae,' ' Uhittagong,' or
' Brauiah Pootra,' as different breeders may elect, — admitting that tliey are a
very superior bird, and believing . . . they will be found decidedly tlie most
valuable among all the large C%m«*-e breeds, of which they are clearly a good
variety."

This is quoted accurately from the Report published in 1852, when several
parties showed the Light-Gr.ay stock, in competition, under the different
wawics above indicated. But the Committee of Judges — who saw at a glance
that all the birds were identical in color, shape, and characteristics — deemed
it but just to comment as they thus did upon this unwarrantable diversity of
cognomen for the same stock.

Now, all these four thus severally-?ia»iaZ varieties, to wit, the "Chittagongs,"
the " Gray Chittagongs," the " Brahma Pootras," and the " Gray Shanghaes,"
were then unquestionably my original fowls and their descendants. There
was at that time no question about this fact ; and tliree of these very lots we
all positively knew were mine, or out of my stock. These " Chittagongs," as
I have already stated, were entered at this show by G. W. George of Hav-
erhill, and were the original Gray Philadelphia (Dr. Kerr) pair, then three
years old. Mr. George purchased them of Dr. Bennett, to whom, as I have
said, /first sold them. The "Gray Chittagongs," then so called, were con-
tributed by a Mr. Hatch, and were said to have been bred in Connecticut.
The " Brahma Pootras " were Dr. Bennett's, first shown the year before as
chickens bred from my fowls, as we were all aware, but thus so named by the
Doctor. The " Gray Shanghaes " were mij contributions (sixty-four specimens
in all), three years old, two years old, one year old, and chickens, bred from
the two original Grays, and my second imported five lighter Gray fowls ; —
the first from Dr. Kerr, the second through Wm. T. Porter.

And, up to that time, no other such Light-Gray fowls had been seen, or
were anywhere else known to exist, in this country. These were identical in
color, form, beauty, size, and general characteristics ; and all were single-
combed birds, as far as any of us observed.

The chairman of the Committee, from whose official report I have last
quoted. Dr. Eben Wight of Dedham, Mass., was a gentleman above re-
proach or suspicion, in every respect, who could not have been induced, upon

SHANGHAR, COCniN, BRAHMA. 75

any consideration whatever, to have given his name or sanction to any asser-
tion tliat he did not know to be just and truthful. He said " all these fowls
were identical ; " that " they were out of the same stock ; " that " several of
the specimens were positively known to have come from Shaughae, direct ; "
that "none of them were known to have come from anywhere else;" that
" they were a good variety of the Chinese fowl ;" that " they were the largest
and finest fowls ever shown among us ; " and, though the Committee were not
then prepared to accord them a specific name, yet " the majority of the Com-
mittee had no idea that 'Brahma Footra ' was the rightfully proper title" for
any of them.

Dr. Wight was one of the oldest importers then known in America, and a
very careful, conscientious man. He then bred no Gray fowls of any de-
scription. He could have had no possible object, save to do justice to all
parties, in this Report. And his language on this occasion was not only
forcible and clear, but it was truthful, just, and reasonable, as well as un-
equivocal.

After this exhibition, the name of "Brahmah Pootra" was adopted by
Dr. Bennett, in spite of my own arguments, and the advice of otliers who
were opposed to this " multiplying of meaningless names " for varieties of
fowls ; and in this shape it went out to England. In course of time it came
to be reduced to Brahmah; and finally', as I have said, to Brahma. Bat the
fowls underwent no change. In England also they came to be called
" Brahmas ; '' and the very fowls I sent to Her Majesty, the receipt of which
were acknowledged by Hon. Col. Fliipps, the Queen's secretary, as " magni-
ficent Gray Shanghaes," were the following season exhibited by His fCoj'al
Highness Prince Albert, at the Birmingham Show (in 1853), as " Brahmas."
And so, after 1854, they came generally to be called by this accepted and
acceptable title, though not so by me for some years.

In order to show how incorrect is the statement made by Mr. Cornish in
1869 (see Wright's " Illustrated Book of Poultry," page 241), that " the name
of Brahma was established in 1850 " (!), I set these recorded facta down
here; and in confirmation of this I add that the first American "National
Poultry Society " in this country gave two annual exhibitions (in 1854, '55)
in New York, at Barnum's Museum ; the proprietor of which establishment,
Phineas T. Barnum, Esq., was president of this society, " assisted by forty
managers," — so ran the prospectus published at its formation.

76 THE CHINA FOWL.

The first exhibition of this National Association occurred in the winter
of 1854, and proved a great success. I was there with my Liglit and Dark
Gray Shanghaes, and other Chinese fowl?, and carried away a score of the
leading premiums with my variously-colored China breeds, old and young.
A. B. Allen, Esq., the famous cattle-breeder of Western New- York State, in
" The American Agriculturist," thus wrote of this fine Poultry Show : —

" This great show at Barnum's, contrary to general expectation, brought
out altogether the finest, largest, and choicest exhibition' ever witnessed in
America. Of their kinds, there were scarcely a pair of inferior birds in this
vast collection; and many fowls came five hundred miles for this occasion.
This very fact showed that poultry fanciers within striking distance of New
York had confidence in the Society, in its managers" (I was one of the
forty), " in the ability of Mr. Barnum to carry it out, and in his integrity, &c.

" As an evidence of the interest then felt among fanciers of all ranks and
all fortunes, they sent their birds, attended themselves, and took a lively
interest in every thing that appertained to the proceedings. We saw there
highly distinguished scientific gentlemen, lawyers, statesmen of great repute,
grave divines 'wise with the lore of centuries,' merchants, commercial men
called by way of eminence 'millionaires,' artisans, farmers, gentlemen, — sin-
gly, or with their wives and daughters and little children, all eagerly threading
their way through and by each other, to gaze at the coops and cages, intent
on seeing every thing, examining a great many birds, and not once only, but
repeatedly, day after day, during the show, did we see some of the same indi-
viduals, groups, and families.

"Now, this means something. People would not congregate at this inclem-
ent season, from fifty to five hundred miles distant, to witness a ' chicken
show' in New York, unless there was 'something in it.' There is something
in it. There is a study in it. It is a delightful contemplation in natural
history. These beautiful birds are a thing to love, to interest young minds,
and old ones too. They are among the things to make country life inter-
esting, to attach people to home, and make it pleasanter than all the world
beside," &c.

Thus wrote Mr. A. B. Allen in 1854, about the " National Association " and
its first show of fowls at New York. And, even at that period, it was
charged that " G. P. Burnham of Gray Shanghae notoriety was stoutly con-
tending against the establishment of the name 'Brahma Pootra' for the
popular Light-Gray fowls being so largely bred in America," which name had
not even then been adopted, not to say " established," by us !

SHANOEAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA.

77

A full-page cut (see page 78) gives us a drawing of a mature cocl< and lien
of the "Cliamberlin stock," so called, as bn^l by Mr. Emory Carpenter and
others in Connecticut. The bodies, plumage, and general outline of this pair
are good representations of modern Light Urahmas. The color is shown as
being considerably darker than the average birds of the light variety, nowa-
days ; yet it is very nearly the tint of feathering that characterized iny best
early Gray Shanghaes. This pair are too short in the leg for good breeding
stock ; but, as we bad the pleasure of examining Mr. Carpenter's fine fowls
at Hartford, recently, we can vouch for the fact that his Brahmas are not
thus deficient. We have rarely seen better-fashioned broods of this race than
the samples we were shown upon Mr. Carpenter's spacious premises, this
season, the generous size of which is especially notable.

The admirable drawings, by Ludlow, of W. H. Todd's beautiful Light and
Dark Brahmas (see plates on pages 65 and 81) give us a truthful idea of the
general character and appearance of those two well-bred American varieties,
up to standard, in points. This cock and hen in each picture are from pho-
tographs of the winning fowls portrayed ; and Mr. Todd is well known as a
leading successful Western breeder (at Vermillion, 0.), who has turned out,
in the past few years, some of the finest samples of both Light and Dark
Brahmas that have ever been produced in this country.

In all the varieties of Chinese fowls which Mr. Todd has placed in his
breeding-runs, this gentleman has procured the best stock that money could
purchase ; and his good taste and large experience have enabled him to make
the choicest selections attainable, both in this country and in England.

The illustration, page 72, of Philander Williams's American-bred Dark
Brahmas (younger birds, not fully developed in proportions when pictured)
also shows a fine pair of these symmetrical and favorite fowls.

The English Dark Brahma cock, figured on page 86, is described in the
London " Poultry Review " as a bird of great rarity. It is stated that " ten
of his brother and sister chicks carried off cups in 1872, at the British shows,
this cock being the flower of the flock." Mr. Lingwood refused 250 guineas
($1,250) for him and his five brothers, and 50 guineas ($250) for himself,
alone. Choice Brahma fowls must be "taking their place in the front," in
England, indeed. Yet such a bird as this is for a " Dark Brahma " — with
his monumental tail and fearful " hock " — could never win among first-class
American competitors, assuredly.

SHANOHAE, COCHIN; BRAHMA. 79

Altliough — as I look at the question of tlie origin of the Brahma fowl —
any new theory that may be promulgated in 1874 can possess no material
weight, and can liave no effect upon what was so clearly written, discussed,
and published nearly a quarter of a century ago, in all its confirmatory partic-
ulars, yet I cannot pass by witliout notice the account of Mr. C. C. Plaisted,
published in June, 1874, in " The Poultry AVorld ; " because Mr. Plaisted in his
" history " states much that is true, and all that he himself believes, undoubt-
edly, but at the same time some points which are clearly incorrect. And here
I insert an article from a Kensington (Penn.) correspondent of Wade's " Fan-
cier's Journal" of a late date, which will explain itself; with the single re-
mark that Kensington (a part of Philadelphia) was the former residence of
Dr. J. J. Kerr, of whom in 1849 I obtained my first pair of Gray Shanghaes,
and who sent Dr. Bennett also, in 1850, a trio of these birds, that Doctor
Kerr thought "quite equal to Mr. Burnham's," &c.

" Kensixgton, June 8, 1874.

" 2Ir. Editor, — I noticed in a poultry magazine, lately, by a Mr. Plaisted,
in a long story he tells about the origin of Brahma-Pootra fowls, the state-
ment, that 'G. P. Burnham, Esq., of Melrose, Mass., claims that he had the
first in INTew England ; ' that ' a ship came to New York at just the right time
for him to secure a new importation of these Gray Shanghaes,' as he calls
them, ' to add to his already choice stock that were never seen until after the
exhibition of 1851' in Boston.

"This writer claims that he attempts nothing only to state facts, just as
they existed. But, as he was formerly a partner in the chicken-trade with
Dr. John C. Bennett, of famous ' Burrampootra ' notoriety, it is a little strange
that he doesn't (?) know that said Dr. Bennett published his well-known
' Poultry Book' in 1S50, witli appendix (second edition) in 1851, in which Mr.
Burnham's splendid first Gray Shanghaes (there called Chittagongs by the
doctor) are both fully described and illustrated as 'most remarkable for size
and beauty.' And, in appendix, the doctor adds, 'We have just received
from Dr. Kerr, Philadelphia (the same party Burnham got his first ones
from), some of these imperial birds;' and Dr. Kerr writes, 'They are quite
equal to Mr. Burnham's.' . . . 'This is enough,' adds Dr. Bennett, 'to have
said more would have been a work of supererogation.' ,

"This in 1850, '51, by Dr. Bennett himself — this man Plaisted's business
partner, who writes, in the same article I quote from, that he (Plaisted) got
a lot of somebody else's Gray stock in 1851, which were the Simon Pure ; but
in reference to which fowls not a syllable is printed in Dr. Bennett's 'Poultry
Book,' issued that year, and which stock nobody then knew any thing about !

80 THE CHINA FOWL.

"I think it must be the oi-Z/e;- stock that Mr. Plaisted says 'were never
seen till after tlie 1851 exhibition.' For how could Burnhara's fine Gray-
fowls liave been thus pictured and so elaborately described in Dr. Bennett's
work in 18.50 and '51, unless they had been seen previously? as they had
been, and admired by thousands, 'the wonder of all poultry-fanciers who be-
liold them,' as Dr. Bennett puts it (see liis book). Or, if the Plaisted fowls
were then known, why didn't Bennrft know and say something about them
in his very comprehensive 'Poultry Book' issued at that time ?

The query embodied in the above-quoted article is pertinent; but the advo-
cates of the Cornish-Brahma origin theory are all similarly at fault in their dates.
Now, in reference to "some of the earliest Light Brahnias," which Wright
says, "Mr. Burnham sent to Her Majesty in 1852," I have simply to state
that the cage of fowls I sent to the Queen was duly labelled, in large printed
capitals, "Eight Gray Siianghaes." I wrote a brief note to His Royal
Highness, Prince Albert, in 1852, for Her Majesty, — which Hon. Mr. Inger-
soll (then American Minister to the Court of St. James) kindly forwarded, —
in which " I respectfully tendered to Her Majesty a cage of Gray Shanghae
fowls, bred from my stock imported into America from China, throe years
since;" and the Queen, through the Hon. Mr. Secretary Pliipps, "acknowl-
edged and accepted this magnificent present of Gray Shangliaes," and subse-
quently sent me her portrait, a photographed copy of which adorns this
volume (see frontispiece).

Mr. Wright continuously evinces a lamentable ignorance of the real char-
acteristics of what is now known as the Brahma fowl. We have it upon very
recent English authority, in two instances (from reliable persons of his own
neighborhood, who know him individuallj-), that "American poultry-men
appear to be Wright-mad, in quoting his opinions,'' &c. ; that "this man
never had anything but English Dark Brahmas, and, in breeding, he has
accomplished absolutely nothing with them, even, as compared with Horace
Lingwood, Mr. Boyle, Mr. Teebay, and many others."

Again, in his last work, 1872, '73, Wright says, "the pea-comb is the ori-
ginal American type ; " which statement is known by everybody to be a gross
error ; for, as all of us are aware, the Light Gray fowls were bred here three
or four years, at least, before this peculiarity was discovered or spoken of at
all. " Still," he adds in the same paragraph, " there were, till very lately,
some splendid yards of single-comb Light Brahmas in England, which would

SHANGHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA.

81

run English competitors closely " for the premiums ofiored at the shows there.
Himself thus admitting that, until a recant date, even, there were nut a few
"splendid yards" of the sinr/le-comh variety of Light Brahmas to be seen
in Wright's own neighborhood, — London.

K f

DAEK EKAHMA COCK AND HEN, BRED BV i'. H. KENEGY, POLO, ILL.

Mr. C. C. Plaisted of Hartford, Conn., who is now an earnest advocate of
pea-comb birds only, — and who asserts with great assurance that the strain
of Chamberlin-Bennett Light Brahmas he breeds will throw the triple comb

82 THE CHINA FOWL.

almost invariably, — thus expresses hiiiiself in Sept. 1874, in a poultry
monthly, upon this Brahma comb question. He says, "More than tliree-
fourths of the Erahmas which I bred, to 18G1, had the pea-comb; since that
time I have had but one single-combed bird. I do not claim that single
combs and smooth legs are marks of impurity in this breed ; but it is certain
til at breeders of them are behind the times, now. I am by no means the only
breeder in the country who has come to look upon the pea-comb as a settled
thing with the Brahmas ; but to obtain it on all, in perfection, is something
not yet a<jcomplished, for this triple comb takes many forms."

Another English writer, as late as in 18GC, affirm.s, that, "of the Light
Brahmas imported from America, and carefully bred in his hands, fully half
of his chickens showed the single comb; and esi^ecially," he adds, "is this
formation observable in the cocks raised in my runs."

An American fancier in Massachusetts, who has produced some of the finest
specimens reared in New England in the past twelve years, franlcly states in
a leading poultry journal, in 1867, that he "has found the single comb crop-
ping out on one-fourth of the best Brahma fowls — otherwise well pointed —
bred in li,is experience." It is most certainly the fact that all breeders of the
Lujlit variety, from whatever "strain" it may come, have bred and continue
to breed, to-day, more or less single combs. Mr. Plaisted is correct, however,
that breeders of single-combed birds, alone, would be "behind the times."
And a smooth-limbed Bralima would indeed be highly objectionable ! But
the single u.nd pea-comb were botli a characteristic of the original stock, and
this result is inevitable — at least at present.

With the Darlz Brahmas, this " deviation " in the comb formation has not
been frequent. Most of tliis variety come with the pea-comb well developed ;
and the single comb with these, is decidedly the exception, not the rule; as
has been the case from the outset.

Mr. Wright stoutly contends, that the pea-comb oiihj is the true indication
of " genuine blood," however. And, notwithstanding this theorist's mixed
opinions, in other respects regarding the prominent points in tlie Brahma
fowl, and his vehement partiality for the pea-comb only as an " indispensable
proof of purity" in the strain, he acknowledges in his latest work, that,
up to quite recently (see his new "Illustrated liook of Poultry"), he knew
"several line yards of suii/Ze-combed Light Brahmas in England that would

SHANGBAE, COCniN, BRAHMA. 83

run some of the present exhibitors a close race for our prizes." Again, in his
"Brahma Fowl" book, he says (p. 02), " tlie originals had both single and
pea combs," while Dr. Bennett says, " the single comb is the usual form."

Inasmuch as the pea-comb on Brahmas is a very desirable thing to attain,
this feature has become imperative, for competition in the show-pens ; and
every fancier strives to breed as large a proportion of pea-comb specimens ^
is possible in his flocks, in accordance with Standard requirements in this
regard, at the present time.

I never knew this point to be publicly discussed until after 1853. In that
year, I find in the Eev. W. Wingfield's elegant " London Poultry Book"
the following paragraphs, which I quote from that standard work, pages 175
to 178, on this "pea-comb question." (I will say just here that Mr. Plaisted,
in the June " Poultry World," says that " all the Light Brahmas shipped
by Dr. Bennett and himself to England were bred by them or Mr. Hatch,"
&o., from the Cornish-Chamberlin fowls, " except the pair sent to Dr.
Gwynne by Dr. Bennett himself" in 1852.) Dr. Gwynne says, in the work
I now quote from, " I obtained from Dr. Bennett of the United States Jive pairs
of these birds : three of these ten fowls, only, had small compressed or pea
combs, — a feature strikingly characteristic of the Malay fowl." ... "In
none of the other seven birds was this peculiarity found ; nor could I recog-
nize in them any thing, either in points or conformation, but what would be
found in Shangliae birds of the same age." Be it observed here, that Dr.
Gwynne's fowls were from Dr. Bennett of the United States — five pairs (not
one pair, as Mr. Plaisted has it) ; that Dr. Bennett bred, with Mr. Plaisted,
Hatch, Smith, and others, only " Nelson H. Chamberlin-Gornish fowls ; " and
that out of ten fowls of this strain so sent to Dr. William Custe Gwynne in
England, in 1852, only three then showed this pea-comb.

Further on in this same Mr. Wingfield's volume, I find the following state-
ment of Dr. Gwynne, to whom I never sold a bird of my stock, but who
received in England, and bred, only the Cornish, Chamberlin, Bennett and
Plaisted strain, which Messrs. Eelch, and other good " old breeders" of Light
Brahmas in Massachusetts to-day claim are genuine, because they breed this
coveted "pea-comb." In further reference to which. Dr. Gwynne writes, in
1852, '53, thus (see Eev. Mr. Wingfield's work, pp. 176, 177) : —

" The single comb would appear to be the usual form of that feature in

84 THE CHINA FOWL.

the Brahmapootra fowls; though, as Dr. Bennett admits, the true hreed
do sometimes present these deviations." ... "In response to which,"
replies Dr. Gwynne, " I can only say, that, out of twenty chickens bred by
the birds I reserved for myself (obtained of Dr. Bennett), I cannot detect a
single instance of this ' deviation ' from the single combs of the parents ; "
Which parents Dr. Gwynne and Dr. Bennett then, and Mr. Plaisted lately,
all affirm were sent to England, from the latter two gentlemen, to Dr. Gwynne,
out of the Cornish-Chamberlin-Gonnecticut stock, in 1852, '63, " which should
show only the ' pea-comb,' if they be pure bred."

"But," adds Dr. Gwynne, on same page, "another circumstance which
confirms me in my view as to the identity of these birds with the Shanghaes
is the fact that the fowls recently presented to Her Majesty the Queen by
Mr. Burnham, under the name of ' Graj' Shanghaes,' are admitted by Dr.
Bennett" (who sent him this Cornish-Chamberlin stock) "to be precisely
similar to his otvn;" while " Mr. Burnham assures me that the original stock
from which the ' Gray Shanghaes ' he presented to Her Majesty were bred
was imported direct from Shanghae," China, not India. And my fowls
sent to the Queen in 1852, I am quite confident, showed only the single comb;
though, among the pullets, the pea-comb might have existed, at that early
day, without my observing it; since this question had at that time been but
very little discussed, or this peculiar comb-formation noticed, among us in
America.

Two fowls, sent to Mrs. Hozier Williams about this time, by Dr. Bennett,
had the pea-comb, I think ; when Dr. Bennett immediately wrote that,
" though the usual form of that feature was single, the true breed of Brahma-
pootras do sometimes present this deviation" of the triple or pea-comb.
Thus it will be seen that all our stock in the early years showed both styles
of comb, the single comb then predominating largely in mj' birds, as well as
in the claimed Cornish-Chamberlin strain alike, though Bennett declares, in
1852, that " the single comb is the usual form of this feature in the Brahma-
pootra fowl," and that "the true bird" (whatever that was or is) "do
sometimes only present the deviation" of the pea-comb; which authoritative
statement, in 1853, by Dr. Bennett (Mr. Plaisted's partner), simply goes to
confirm the notable fact that at that period no one among the Cornish-Cham-
berlin pure Brahma breeders knew much about this "little joker," the
pea-comb.

sriAxaiiAE, cocnix, BUAin/A. 85

Mr. Tecbay snys, in Tegetmeier's choice " Poultr3' Book," in 1867, "The
head of the Bralimas should be surmounted with :v triple comb, known as
the pea-comb." . . . '' But when first introduced into England, many of the
Brahmas had single combs. At present, those with the pea-combs are held
in higher estimation." The editor of " The Poultry Yard," Miss Watts, says,
"The only difficult point is the variety of comb in the Brahmapootras, vizr,
the pea-comb ami the single. While we give the preference to the former,
•we do not see why both may not be pure, as in the Dorkings " (which show
the rose and the single upright comb, constantly).

Other writers agree upon the point that single and pea-comb birds among
ani/ "original" strain of Brahmas. or Gray Shanghaes, have both from the
outset been, and are now, bred more or less in every man's yard in this
country and in England. But the pea-comb variety is the most desirable,
as I have said, the only one now admissible in the show-room, under Stand-
ard rules, in competition for prizes, and this is being nowadays far more
generallv bred than the single-comb birds.

But, for .any sensible fancier who has reallj- had a goodly experience
with these Gray fowls, to assume, in the light of to-day, that he breeds or
meets with in his breeding o?!/y "pea-comb birds" from either Burnham's
or Chamberlin's or Hatch's or Bennett's or anybody else's stock, is entirely
unwarranted by all experience or previous facts in this case; and such asser-
tions cannot be entertained for a moment by any one who "knows the ropes "
in this Brahmapootra-Shanghae business, from the start, as I do.

The pea-comb is the preferable one. The single-comb birds are and should
be discarded. But when, from any strain, only the pea-combs are produced,
uniformly and unexceptionally, and I can be convinced of this fact, I want a
dozen fowls of that established, perfect, never-deviating breed of Brahmas or
Gray Shanghaes, upon my premises ; for which I will gladly pay their owner,
for the transfer of said stock to my yards, ten times the sum that any pur-
chaser in America will pay for them ; since, though I have had no difficulty in
preserving the color of my stock, in its shades of light and dark (never once
having bred from my Gray Shanghaes a huff fowl, as some old Brahma
breeders say they have from their strains), I have not been so fortunate, in
mv five-and-twenty years' experience with this race, as to be able to avoid
breeding both the single and the pea-combs, in my flocks ; and this, too, from
the very beginning down to the year 1874. While, at this time, I venture

86

TEE CHINA FOWL.

HORACE LINGWOOD'S ENGLISH PKIZE " DAEK BEAHMA" COCK, BRED IN 1872.

Sn.iXGnAE, COCHIN, BRAnHA. 87

further to predict, that the d;iy is not far distant, when, upon other colored
Shanghae varieties, or •■Cocliins'' as we all now call them, this pea-comb
will be bred universally, in preference to the single combs; as I know, just
now, it is being successfully established by one American breeder, in perfec-
tion, in Massachusetts,* upon the splendid '• Partridge Cocliins ; " and this
adornment for the head of both varieties of the Brahmas, it needs not to be
repeated, is the only style of comb that fanciers should breed, to be in the
fashion. Siugle-comb Brahmas have no value nowadays for the shows.

In all the public discussions, the Cornish-Chamberlin-Bennett tlieory advo-
cates avoid alluding to the superb Dark variety of ''Brahmas" which I first
sent out to Europe, in 1S53. Xone of these men refer to this splendid strain,
which at once surprised and interested English breeders as intensely as had
tlie beautiful early Liijhf birds I sent to the Queen, >tc. My Dark Grays were
as fine as the Light, and were originally produced after an experimentally-
studied union of my two imported Gray Shanghae strains, and have thousands
of ardent admirers to-day; though eftbrts have been made in England to im-
prove upon the originals, in the specimens latterly sent back from Great Britain,
in the shape of fowls they there call '•' Dark Brahmas," but which so very
frequently show the vulture hock, and are tainted in color with hrown or buff
feathering, instead of carrying the unrivalled pure steel-gray plumage that
alone characterized my original birds ; which defects plainly exhibit the Eng-
lish crossing with the Buff or Partridge Cochin, or with both, as well as with
that far more objectionable nuisance introduced on the other side of the water,
and which can never be bred oif of their birds, — to wit, the unsightly " hock "
upon the thighs, as is seen upon the cock, opposite.

A somewhat extensive Light Brahma breeder in Massachusetts, who con-
tends that only the pea-comb shows itself upon his breeding stock, wliich he
traces back to the '' pure Chamberlin " strain, has recently written a lengthy
treatise for a public journal, about breeding a "hocked" cock to Light pul-
lets, for some purpose or other. Xow, this " vulture hock " is an English in-
vention, altogether. It has been known in this country but a few years; and
npon the original Gray birds it was not seen till long after we had sent our
birds across the Atlantic. oSTeither in the Dark nor the Light Brahmas- was

• Full-page illustrations of this choice new variety axe given in this worls:. See- pp.
133 and li3.

88 THE CHINA FOWL.

it ever discovered till the British fanciers had tried their experiments with
the early stock, to "improve" what a Yankee fancier had first so nearly
perfected, at the start. But this crossing in with hocked birds was one of
their attempts to increase the leg-feathering in England.

Never upon my stock, bred by itself, was seen the falcon hock, — this vil-
lanous excrescence, first experimented with by English breeders, to add to the
feathering on the shanks and " middle toes." Upon the modern English
Dark Brahmas this offensive appendage is now of the commonest occurrence.
It is in this blood, only; and I have seen no yards of the English Dark
variety latterly among us that are not generously dotted with this blemish in
the flocks. The lauded prize cock, figured upon page 86, belonging to Mr.
Lingwood, a recent champion-bird in England of this class, it will be ob-
served, shows a monstrous hook ; and yet he is considered one of the finest
"Dark Brahma" cocks in Great Britain, and won first and cup at the lead-
ing shows there, in two past seasons, against all comers. But this " hock-
feathering," in either color, surely never cropped out upon my birds, if purely
bred, either in England or America, as every fancier will bear me witness.

Thus much for my original-imported and American-bred Brahmas. To go
back a little, in justice to other parties, having now stated my own case as I
conceive, fairly, and just as it existed from 1848, '49 to 1852, '53, '54, I give
place to the following account, which was first published from Mr. Virgil
Cornish of Connecticut at a later period; though the letter I am about to quote
was dated March 2, 1852, and ran as follows : —

" No doubt you are acquainted with the relative position of the State in
India called Chittagong, and the River Brahmapootra. Chittagong is on
the eastern border, bounding west on the Bay of Bengal. The Brahma-
pootra River empties into that bay. If the Brahmapootra fowls came from
that region, of which I think there is no doubt, still I am unable to say by
which name they should be called with certainty." ... "In regard to the
history of these fowls," -continues Mr. Cornish in this same letter, "very
little is known. A mechanic by the name of Chamberlin (in Hartford,
Conn.,) first brought them here. Mr. Chamberlin was acquainted with a
sailor, who informed him that there were three pairs o/ large imported fowls
in New York." {When this occurred, is not stated.) "But this sailor
dwelt so much upon the size of these fowls, that Mr. Chamberlin furnished
him with money, and directed him to go to New York and purchase a pair

SHAXGHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 89

of til em for hira ; which he did, at a great expense." (Of M>/iom. this sailor
bought this stray pair of Grays, is not known.) But " the sailor reported that
he found one pair of gray ones, which he purchased." (Wherej nobody has
ever stated.) " The second pair was dark-colored, and the third pair was
red," continues JMr. Cornish. "The man in New York, whose name I have
not got, gave no account of their origin, except that they had been brought
by some sailors in the India ship«. The parties through whom the fowls
came, as far back as I liave been able to trace them, are all obscure men."
This was Mr. Cornish's first frank statement.

Thus far, not much has been made out, as is evident, by Mr. Cornish in
this account ; though he unreservedly states that " very little is known to
him of their origin," any way. Most certainly, there is no evidence here
that this pair of gray fowls, which Mr. Chamberlin gave a sailor money ia
Hartford to go to New York to buy, were " imported " birds at all. Mr.
Cornish simply claims that Mr. Chamberlin says he " sent a sailor with money
to New York," and "this sailor reported that he found a pair of light-gray
fowls (somewhere), which he purchased." But, as he probably did 7iot go to
New York ; and, as neither this sailor, Mr. Chamberlin, nor Mr. Cornish tlien
informs us of whom these fowls were obtained; where the sailor found them ;
when they came into New York; whether they were old or young birds;
what the name of the ship (or " ships ") was ; who " the sailors that brought
them in the India ships " were ; who " the man in New York, that could give
no account of their origin," was ; nor yet one word about the identity of " the
parties through whose hands the fowls came," except that "all are obscure
men," — this extraordinarily indefinite account is indeed suspicious ! This is
Mr. Cornish's simple tale, however, at that time ; and he is entitled to the
full benefit of his statement, which some one thus repeated to him.

Further on, this same letter from Mr. Cornish says, " I obtained my stock
from the original pair brought here by Mr. Chamberlin." Not from Mr.
Chamberlin, but "from the stock brought here b>/ Mr. C." Now, it is clearly
stated previously in this letter, that " a sailor brought these fowls to Hart-
ford." Mr. Chamberlin " sent a sailor to New York, who reported he had
found a pair, which he purchased." However, Mr. Cornish thus proceeds :
" These fowls were named ' Chittagong ' by Mr. Chamberlin, on account of
their resemblance, in some degree, to the fowls then in the country called by

90 THE CHINA FOWL.

that name. The description of these fowls exactly corresponds with that
given by travellers and sea-captains," (who? and when?) "of the large
light-colored fowls found in the valley of the Brahmapootra, &c.," concludes
Mr. Cornish, in his letter.

The stock shown by Mr. Hatch at the Boston exhibition in 1852 (and I
think in 1851 also), spoken of by Dr. Eben Wight in the Committee's Keport
I have lately quoted from, — then called " Gray Chittagongs," — were said to
have been bred from this Chauiberlin or Cornish stock, which came to Con-
necticut in 1849, via a sailor, via a mechanic, via New York, via Hartford,
" in the India ships," via the hands of " all obscure men." And so we never
knew, and can certainly now never know, any thing further about tills "pair
of Light Grays." Yet such is the sailor's and Mr. Cornish's account in
1852, which Mr. Plaisted in 1874 pronounces a falsity, in toto.

I have no more doubt to-day than I ever had, that these two fowls were
chickens out oi mij yards in 1850 or 1851, or that they wore hatched by Now
York or Connecticut parties out of eggs sent there from my original Light-
Gray Shangliae fowls, than I have that I am living now to write this para-
graph. Nobody knows and never did know anything to the contrary, as to
th,iii strain of stock, except that "a sailor reported to Mr. Chamberlin " (who
sent hira to New York after big fowls), that "he found a pair of light gray
ones, which he purchased" of a man in New York, whose name Mr. Cham-
berlin never got, and "who gave no account of their origin, except that they
had been brought there by some sailors," &c., which statement is not a little
mixed and doubtful, upon its face, to say the least of it.

No time is fixed upon as to when these birds were thus " reported " to have
been "found by a sailor," in Mr. Chamberlin's employ. Now, what became
of Chamberlin's stock? Mr. Cornish says, "I procured my stock from the
original jJ'i'ir)" &c. Mr. Chaml)erlin called tliem " Clilttaguni/s." Mr. Cor-
nish sold his fowls (or some of them) to Mr. Hatch, who exhibited thom as
"Gray Chittagongs." Wliy? Because, wlion they were placed in the show-
room in Boston, alongside of my original Grays (then in G. W. George's
hands), they so closely resembled the Chittagongs (as Mr. Cornish says),
that Hatch considered this their proper name. Nobody tlien saw any differ-
ence between these fowls, and mine, and George's, and Dr. Bennett's. But
each of us had different titles for our birds, which the Committee of Judges

SnANGHAE, COCniX, BRAUMA. 91

complained of, as I have shown ; and Dr. Bennett was himself one of that
Committee, who then contended so ardently for the "Brahmapootra" title,
but who -was for the time being voted down in committee, three to one.

Mr. Plaisted (Dr. Bennett's former partner), writing of the Brahmas in
1S74, says that " Mr. Hatch entered his Chamberlin fowls at Boston as
' Chittagongs.' Dr. Bennett then announced these as ' Brahmapootras.'
He bought of and paid Hatch for his lot, and placed the prize cards on the
coops, with the new name and the names of the owners, among which was
Dr. Bennett's. This transaction displeased Mr. Hatch exceedingly; and
this was his first and last connection with the New-England Society." Mr.
Hatch preferred the name " Chittagong " to Bennett's proposed new title, and
left the show-room in high dudgeon, because the Doctor had thus nicknamed
what he called his " Chittagongs."

"Mr. Hatch had more of this stock at home," continues Mr. Plaisted,
"which by spring he was able to sell at round prices. He bred them in
1852 and 1853, and his experience with them ended about that time. He bred
those with pea-combs, and he considered them preferable to the single-combed
for this frosty climate," — which last-mentioned fact proves again that there
were a good many "single combs" around in those days, among the "pure
pea-comb Cornish-Chamberlin-Hatch-Bennett-Plaisted ' Brahmapootras.' "

How long Mr. Chamberlin bred the old pair of Grays, which are thus
" reported " to have been purchased by a sailor, from no one knows ivho, no
one knows where, and about which no one pretends to give any clue as to
their origin, I am uninformed.* The first of the " Brahmapootra stock " I re-
member ever to have seen, or heard of, was that which I have now described
as having been put into the Boston show in 1852, and I think, also, the few
young birds from Bennett in 1851; though I can find no reference made
to any other entry or contribution in that year. My impression is that
there were a few shown by Mr. Hatch in 1851, or some one from Connecti-
cut, — young fowls, — though I am not certain about this.

After the exhibition of 1852, however, the mania for the Gray fowls became
rife, and everybody began to look about for good specimens of the Gray Shang-

haes or "Brahmapootras." This name wassoon changed, because itproved too

_ , .

* In July, 1874, Mr. Plaisted says, " the old pair were killed in 1851." I am tempted to query
whxjl And to further ask why these old fowls were never publicly shown? — G. P. B.

92 THE CHINA FOWL.

cumbrous; and by the next year it had settled down partially towards Brahmah,
and every one who had any of this stock — from my birds, from Bennett's,
from George's, or from Hatch's, made the most of their opportunity ; while
breeders generally, both in England and America, agreed upon this last cog-
nomen (dropping the terminal h), as the accepted name for this fowl. I
have never changed my opinion that it is a misnomer, however, though in
its brevity, now, it is a good title. \

The fowl itself is of Chinese origin. None of the American original'l
stock (of any nominal strain) ever saw India, the Brahmapootra River, Luck-'
ipoor, or the Bay of Bengal. Nobody in that region of country has ever seen
or reported this fowl as being known tli&re. Notwithstanding the past five
and twenty years of excitement in America and Europe about these fowls,
when it has been freely known to sailors and shipmasters constantly coming
from and going to India, how valuable would be any fresh importation of
such stock, never but this once can it be said tliat "these Gray fowls came
from India." No duplicate shipments have ever been made from " Luckipoor
up the Brahmapootra." No such fowls have ever since been heard of, seen, ■
" found," " reported," bought, or possessed, by anybody, a,njwhere, in Eng-
land, or America, except this very stock (and its progeny) that I have now;
described; and all of which, I solemnly believe, came from the pair of Phil- '
adelphia Gray birds (1849) and the five Light Gray fowls I purchased in
New York, on board ship from Shanghae, through Wm. T. Porter, Esq., in
1850 ; and no honest " evidence " to the contrary exists. 1

No Gray Shanghaes, no Gray Chittagongs, no Light Gray Brahmas, no such
Crray fowls of any description, have come tp America or into Great Britain,
from either Shanghae or India, in the past nearly twenty-five years! All the
fowls we have had, therefore, have been bred from these two original impor-.
tations — my stock — as I have clearly demonstrated, at least to my own;
satisfaction. When anybody can show me any evidence that I am in error^
regarding either of the strains I have alluded to, which are all the ori-
ginal Light Grays (or Brahmas) that anybody has ever mentioned, to my
knowledge, I shall be very glad to be corrected. Until we have something
clearer and more definite upon this subject than we ever have had thus far,
the /acfe, as I have now stated them, must therefore stand; and my stock
is fully entitled to the claim I have set up for its originality, in this country
and Great Britain, whether that stock be good or bad.

DARK r.r.AHMA COCK AND HEX. i Prize Fowls. From Life.)
Bred anil owneil by W. H. Toilil, Vermillion, Ohio.

SHANOIIAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 95

III the face of these facts, nevertheless, almost a score of years afterwards,
a Mr. Weld "fires off" at Virgil Cornish of Connecticut " a whole string of
interrogatories," says Wright, to prove that this " one pair of large gray fowls "
(which this man in Connecticut had first announced he received there in
1S49) ''came into New York in a ship from Luckipoor in India, in Septem-
ber, 1846 ! " For some reason best known to himself, this Mr. M. C. Weld
thus thrust himself into temporary notoriety, and fancied that he could
acquire favor with the Englishman, if he could contrive to drag out of
Cornish some sort of testimony confirmatory of his (Wright's) silly theory ;
but found, alas ! that he had simply been " hoisted by his own petard." For
Cornish had unluckily forgotten his 1849 story, and fatally named the year
184G as the time when he got his wonderful "Brahma Pootras ; " which he
then (in 1869) states were so named in 1850 ! What name did he call
these birds by from 1846 to 1850? Can Cornish or Weld or Wright in-
form us upon this trivial point ? And can either of this hopeful trio, who
are so " accurate ',' and " explicit " and " unanswerable " in their statements
and conclusions, tell us where these remarkable birds were secreted, from
1846 or 1847 up to 1850 and 1851, that nobody knew of, or had ever seen
them ? "We pause for a reply," but fear we shall hardly live long enough
to get one from these " clearly accurate " and truth-loving gentlemen !

Upon this plainly doubtful story, when it was given to the public, the ac-
complished editor of the London Field commented very sharply, and showed
how manifestly improbable was this adroitly-concocted narrative. So far as
Mr. Cornish's tale was concerned, this writer said: —

"A sailor, whose name nobody knows, belonging to a ship whose name no
one remembers, and having a captain also unknown, is stated to have ' sailed
from the port of Luckipoor' with these original fowls. It is a pity Mr. Cor-
nish did not also forget the name of this port ; for geographical truth compels
us to state that Luckipoor is not a port at all ! but a small inland town in the
Himalava Mountains, one hundred miles distant from the nearest point of
the Brahmapootra River. Luckipoor is not among the ports mentioned in
the ' Sailing Directions of British India;' and, as far as we gan learn from
naturalists, and others acquainted with that part of the world, no such race of
birds is to be found there."

This emphatic clincher, from such authority as W. B. Tegetmeier, F.Z.S.,
is acknowledged all over the world to be, might be accepted ordinarily as a
finality. Mr. Wright shrewdly " dismisses thia subject of Luckipoor," very

96 THE CHhVA FOWL.

summarily, after reading the above from the Field (see Wright's latest work,
p. 243), " with the simple remark that it is scarcely matter for wonder that
the name of the sliip, captain, and sailor should be forgotten," &c. But I
will add here, that, inasmuch as no such skip ever arrived at New York,
either in 1849 first, or in 184G afterwards (as the two Cornish letters " accu-
rately state "), this fact will better account for all this " forgetting," or "never
knowing the names of either sailor,* ship, captain, or original owner " of these
"large light-gray fowls, so reported to have been found" somewhere (?) for
Mr. Chamberlin.

After Mr. Cornish's two different statements were published, and fulsomely
indorsed by Wright as being " unanswerably accurate " regarding the true
origin of this so-called Chamberlin pair of Light Brahmas, I visited New
York for the purpose of learning something about this fabulous " India ship,"
thus said to have arrived there twice, so mysteriously, with these lauded birds
on board, from Luckipoor.

I obtained access to the old Customs' Registers there, from a critical exam-
ination of which, though I previously, knew all about this Bennett " Brahma-
pootra " swindle, I ascertained the following two important facts, viz., that
there is not upon the records of the foreign inward arrival lists there, any
mention made oi any ship or vessel from " the port of Luckipoor, in India,"
in amj month of the year 1849, first ; nor is any such arrival at New York
recorded " in September " (or in any other month) " of the year 1846," after.

This finishes the sailor-Cornish story; which, no doubt, Mr. Cornish and
Mr. Chamberlin believed when it was first told. But, as Mr. Tegetmeier
truthfully asserted, " there isn't a particle of evidence in this to show that
these fowls ever came from India." Dr. Bennett, one of Wright's claimed
chief witnesses, purchased of me, for $50, the first pair of Grays I ever bred ;
from which he bred the first so-called " Brahmapootra " chickens he ever ex-
hibited (uide official report of judges at exhibition) in Boston, Mass. And
the Cornish (Hatch) fowls then shown were there called "Chittagongs," as
see Cornish's two letters, and the report.

When, in 1853, the Dark Brahmas were also first sent out from my yards
in Melrose, Mr. Tegetmeier in his "Poultry Book" justly observes, "Sud-
denly a new variety sprang upon the scene. These were the Dark Brahmas,

* In the fall of 1874, a Connecticut writer saye this sailor "still lives! "

. SFIANOnAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 97

wliicli Mr. Burnlmm of tlie United States sent to Mr. John Baily of London,
wliicli wore exhibited at the Birmingham show (1853), among the extra
stock ; and one pair of which were purchased of him by Mr. Taylor of Shep-
ard's Busli, for 100 guineas " (f 500) !

Now, these Dark Brahma fowls were very choice birds. And I sent this
trio out to ^h: Baily, in response to his express order that " they must be
tiuer than an}' thing I had yet sent to England, if it were possible." They
were good ones, very large, in splendid condition, finelj' pencilled, and car-
ried off tlie first prize at the Birmingham show of 1853, alongside of the
splendid Light Grays I had the previous year sent to the Queen. But all
these fowls were bred from the same stock precisely, at first. The Dark
and the Light varieties both came out of the Philadelphia Grays and the
lighter colored Gray birds I subsequently obtained from Shanghae through
Mr. Porter, at New York. And just as soon as it was discovered that the
Dark Brahmas were to become popular, and the fact was published that
the first Dark Brahmas sent to England had come out from Mr. Burnham
of Melrose, who had sent the first Light ones there, Mr. Cornish of Con-
necticut (or some one for him) published in a New- York paper the fact that
" he noticed, in course of time, as he bred his Brahmas, that theij greiv
darker in color." But neither he nor they had any Dark Brahmas to offer
from the pretended pair " reported by a sailor " to have been " found in New
York," the " origin of which nobody knew any thing about, except that the
first pair had been brought in the India ships, from up the Brahmapootra
River, which empties into the Bay of Bengal," &c. ; — which account might
have answered a purpose, had it been made public at any time prior to March
2, 1852, three years after I had been breeding my fine Gray fowls and send-
ing their chickens and eggs all over this country and England.

Whether my account thus gives the true origin of the Brahmas or not,
is not very material at this late day. I have now written it, however, and
furnished do.ta to back it ; and I have given the statement made by Mr.
Cornish, in his early letter, regarding the Chamberlin-Hatch fowls. I have
no doubt that Mr. Cornish — who is a very respectable and veracious gentle-
man — helieved what Mr. Chamberlin told him "the sailor reported" to
Mr. Chamberlin, as having come "from the New York man, who knew
nothing of the origin of the light Gray fowls " thus "found" there. And
Mr. Chamberlin, also, might have believed what this. sailor said. The sailor

98 THE CHINA FOWL.

probably believed what the man in New York (if there were any such man)
said, — to wit, that he " knew nothing of their origin," &o. And, though these
New- York parties are described by Mr. Cornish as being " all very obscure
men," it may be that " the man in New York, whose name he has not got,"
believed the storj' he repeated to the sailor, about what the other sailors told
him regarding these fowls coming there " in the India ships," &c. But I
don't. That is all the difference tliere is, or ever has been, between the
theory of Mr. Cornish and Wright, and the facts that I have herein related.

But this tale was utterly witliout foundation as to the Cornish-Chamberlin
graj' fowls having "come from India,'''' as this sailor is said to have an-
nounced; for no such arrival of the ship thus reported came into New York
from India, either in 1849, 184G, or 1817 ! No light " Gray Shanghae " and
no " Brahmapoutra" fowls ever came "from India" to Cornish, Cbamberlin,
Burnham, or any other man in America. The name " Brahmapoutra" was
concocted by Dr. Bennett, against my protest, and has been since adopted
by us all. The " Gray Shanghaes," or (now) "Brahmas," never saw India;
but I chanced to possess the first of this race that were thus developed.

It is altogether too much mixed, — this theory. And, what J further be-
lieve, and always have believed, about this very "pair of light Gray fowls"
which Mr. Chamberlin so got, through his "sailor" agent, who '^reported
that he found them in New York," is, that they went there from my stock ;
and that "the man in New York " sold them to him "at a great expense,"
perhaps knowing whence they came (and perhaps not), but making the most
he could in this bargain, because they were "a very fine pair of large ones."

What confirms me the more in this belief, is the notorious fact that none of
this splendid stock was seen anywliere until after I had bred my Grays in Kox-
■bury two seasons; and not until Dr. Bennett produced his fowls at the shows
of 1851 and 1852. Then we had young samples of this so-called Cornish-
Chamberlin-Hatch stock; but no old Gray fowls were even then shown, except
viine — a fact that cannot be disputed.

Now, i/this stock could have been shown to have existed in America ^n'or
to my introduction of the Grays to notice in 1849, '50, as the record exhibits in
my case, — why not then have let us know where it was, who bred it, what it
was called, and whence it had come ? What need existed for all this secrecy
and ignorance and ambiguity about a single pair of fowls ? It is too late to
go back now, and say in one sentence (as some one asserted in 1873) that the

snAxo/iAE, cocnix, brahmj. 99

" Light Brahmas came to this country from India in 1846," and undertake to
explain this nonsense by stating that tlie said fowls were the Cornish-Cham-
berlin stock ; because nobody has ever yet claimed tliat any of tJiat strain of
" Light Brahmas " were seen until 1851 and 1852, and fhi'se were only chick-
ens, or one-year-old birds. If " they were brought here in 1846," where zuere
they, pray, from 1846 to 1850, '51, four or five years '? when every competing
fancier and poultiy-raiser in Xew England — such active men as Burnham,
Bennett, Capt. Williams, iMarsh, Dr. Wight. Balch, Devereux, Ad. White,
Buckminster, Jaques, Sampson, and a hundred others — were constantly on the
qui vive, in search of large fowls and novelties in poultry; and who travelled
the country in every direction, continually looking out for something new,
which they could turn to profit, in this line, "without regard to expense"?

Is it at all probable, if such birds were then in this country, that some of,
us busy searcliers for " marvellous chickens " would not have found them, or
have known the fact of their existence, for five long years, in the midst of the
mania then current for the biggest and most extraordinary fowls to be had ?
Or is it at all likely, if ant/ man had such fowls in 1846, that he wouldn't
have let somebody know it in 1847, 1848, and 1849, when the rage was well
known to have existed everywhere in England and America for Shanghaes
and Cochins and Chittagongs, and prices for good specimens, their progeny,
or their eggs, were approaching the fabulous ?

If the fowls reported to have been brought to New York "by some sailors
in the India ships" were the ones that were said in 1873 to have "arrived
here in 1S46," will some one kindlj- prove to us where those " three pairs of
imported fowls, of enormous size " were secreted — among them this " one
pair of Light Gray ones," and their progeny — from 1846 to 1851, '52 ? What
became of the old pair ? why were they never exhibited ? where did tJiey
live? where did they die? and who owned them at last? Can anybody
answer these queries ? I think not .' And I am also quite positive that, what-
ever may be the facts as to the origin of the Cornish fowls, no " Light Brahmas
came to this country in 1846,"' to anybody. And it is quite as certain, to my
view, that no Brahmas ever " came from India," at any time, to America.
Most certain is it that, since the debut of my Light and Dark Brahmas in
the United States and England, no " Brahmas " of any kind have again been
imported from anywhere in the East, into Great Britain or America.

It would be erroneous to assume that the modern Dark Brahmas, such as

100 ' THE CHINA FOWL.

have in late years been received in this country from England, from leading
breeders there, are not sometimes improved birds in their general make-up.
This is frankly conceded, especially when we occasionally meet with importa-
tions fro'm that country believed to be any thing near the mark set forth in the
two admirable delineations in this volume, to be found on pages 93 and 101.
But these representations, though very attractive to look at, are of course very
partial, or are largely " fancy pictures." We have bred and seen and handled
a great many hundreds of superior Brahmas in our time ; but we have yet to
see the living specimens of this race that ever equalled these "portraits,"
as they are designated by the English breeders of them ; and we greatly doubt
if such perfect specimens are raised there, often!

Still these pictures are said to be life-likenesses of representative birds
belonging to different English fanciers, that have taken first prizes at sev-
eral of the leading Exhibitions in Great Britain in 1873 and 1874. The
nearest approach to these hens that we have ever had in America were two of
the five extraordinary Dark Brahmas shown for the Churchman prize at
Buffalo in January, 1874. The specimen that won, in that show, marked 97
points, according to the old standard, and is a very extra sample, of superb
symmetry and color. In 1873 we bred, among a considerable number of
Dark pullets, two only of the pure clear steel-gray, that at eighteen months
old proved splendid hens. But they do not equal the pictures given of the
English prize birds ; and we never expect to meet with the reality which
these fine drawings represent. Both these pictures show us very perfect
samples, however, and these are a very good pattern for ambitious fanciers to
aim to equal in form, feathering, marking, carriage, and general contour.

It is very well to place such charming specimens publicly before the readers
of the poultry-books, because they are certainly very pleasant to contemplate ;
and it may be that some of our enterprising American amateurs or fanciers will
be tempted to strive to breed quite up to such models. It may be that it has
been done in England. But we doubt if any such birds were ever produced,
through former or modern efforts. At the same time, we commend these
to the notice of the reader, as rare models indeed ; and trust that some Yankee
breeder may succeed in producing their equals, sooner or later. Of one thing
we feel pretty certain : none of us will ever contrive to excel them.

In the Light variety, we can equal the English, and " give them odds," yet.
No samples, to our eye, have ever been bred abroad, of this color, such as a

THrO OF DARK P.RAHMAS. Imported by S. H. Seamans, Esq., Wauwatosa, Wis.

Cl'.oice specimens of this variety are breii also bv AVills & Peter, BIooming:ton, Til ; C. G. Sanford,
Providence, E.F. ; E. J. Taylor, Waterloo, N.Y. ; W. S. Randall, Micli., etc.

SnANOHAE, COCniN, BHAHMA.

103

MODEL OF AN AMEEICAN LIGHT BEAHMA HEN, TWO TEAKS OLD.

dozen leading American fanciers have in their yards to-day, hy scores ; while,
at the public exhibitions of the past three or four years in the Eastern
States, as well as at Philadelphia, Penn., and at Buffalo, N.Y., individual
cocks and hens of the Light Brahmas have been shown that have never been
equalled in Great Britain, and will be hard to beat in this country, in the

104 THE CBJNA FOWL.

future. And we now refer especially to the prize Light Brahmas at the Bos-
ton show in February, 1874, the contributions of Messrs. Sturtevant of Fra-
mingham, and Mr. Buzzell of Clinton, Mass., and also 'to the Plaisted and
Carpenter fowls, as now being bred in Hartford, Conn.

It is not my design in these pages to argue the question of origin. I
have stated and will state only patent facts regarding the nativity of my
own stock, and shall quote such accounts as I can find, or am familiar with,
in reference to the stock of other importers. If what I record in this book is
inaccurate, the error will be unintentional; and I shall aim to be very care-
ful in my statements.

Yet, so far as I am informed at this time, I have herein set down the
exact truth, accompanied with veritable vouchers regarding the origin of my
Gray Shanghae, or now so-called " Brahma " stock ; and I believe that the opin-
ion I have expressed and have always entertained in reference to what has been
claimed as another strain, is entirely in accordance with reason and verity. And
the more I see of this splendid stock of both colors, as it is now bred from year
to year in England or the United States, the more firmly am I convinced
that it originated alone with the birds first in my possession ; of which, as to
their quality, color, proportions, and leading characteristics, I give the
annexed authentic descriptions from 1849 forward, taken from the pub-
lished authorities, — which I quote below, with dates, and names of the sev-
eral authors who have hitherto described my fowls ; as may be learned by
reference to the original statements, copies of which I here append : —

"This is a very superior bird, showy in plumage ; and the color of mine
(the Philadelphia first pair) is gray, generally, with lightish yellow and
white feathers on pullets; the cock gray body, tinted with stray light and
white; the tail and breast being nearly hlack." — G. P. Burnhani's descrip-
tion, in Dr. Bennett's Poultry Book, of his original pair received from Dr.
Kerr in 1849.

" This fowl, so remarkable for size and beauty, is placed first among domes-
tic varieties, as the true gallus giganteus. The specimens (cock and hen)
from which the portraits here presented were taken are in possession of
George P. Burnham, Esq., of Koxbury, Mass., and were obtained by him
from Dr. J. J. Kerr (Asa Rugg), near Philadelphia, Penn." — Dr. J. C.
Bennett's Poultry Book," p. 27, published in March, 1850.

" The mature fowls presented to the Queen of Great Britain left me in
December, 1852. The 'London Illustrated News' of Jan. 22, 1853, says,

SHANGHAE, COCHIN, BRAHMA. 105

' A very clioice consignment of Joniestio fowls from G. P. BLirnham, Esq.,
was broujrlit to Her IMajesty (Jneon Victoria, by last steamer from the
United States. They arc denominated " Gray Shanghaes " (in contradis-
tinction to the Red or Yellow Shanghaes). They are of mammoth propor-
tions and exquisite plumage, light silvery bodies, approaching white,
delicately traced and pencilled with black upon neck-hackles, and tips of wings
and tail. The whole of these birds are almost precisely alike, in form,
plumage, and general characteristics.' . . . ' The color is creamy white,
slightly splashed with pale straw-color, tail black, and hackles pencilled with
black.'" — Buniham's Historjj of the Hen Fener, pp. 102, 103, in 1855.
Extracted from London News of February, 1853.

" Among the first Light Brahmas ever seen in England were those sent
here bj^ Mr. G. P. Burnham," says Mr. Tegetmeier in 1867; and, in the same
work on poultry, Dr. Wm. Custe Gwynne says, " What confirms me in my
view as to the identity of these ' Brahmapoot7-as' (so called by Dr. Ben-
nett, who sent Dr. Gwynne his fowls) with these Shanghaes, is the fact that
the fowls previously presented to Her Majesty by Mr. Burnham, under the
name of ' Gray Shanghaes,' are admitted by Dr. Bennett (the author of the
name 'Brahmapootra') to be precisely similar to his own." — Rev. W.
Wingfield's London Illustrated Poultry Book, p. 177, 1853.

"There is not a particle of evidence to show that these fowls were 'im-
ported from India.' From all we can learn from naturalists and others who
have visited that part of the world, no such race of birds have ever been seen
or known there. In fact, they did 7iot originate in India, but in America." —
London Illustrated Poultry Book, by Tegetmeier, 1867. .

"The Light Brahmas are undoubtedly tc^wiiicaZ with those (rray birds that
in the first importation came from Shanghae ; and public attention was first
called to tliem by an acute fancier, Mr. Geo. P. Burnham, presenting a con-
signment of them to Her Majesty the Queen, in 1852." ..." These
birds were subsequently exhibited by His Royal Highness the late Prince
Albert, at the London and Birmingham shows, as ' Brahmapootras.' These
Light Bralimas, with pure white or cream-colored bodies, and elegantly pen-
cilled hackles, were in great favor, and were universally admired for their
beauty, &c., when suddenly a. ?ieiy variety sprang upon tlie scene. A pair of .
birds were shown at Birmingham (in 1853), which were sold for 100 guineas.
These were darli colored, and different from the others. Tiiey ivere the first
'Dark Bbahmas' ever seen in this country. Thej' were sent from Mr. G.
P. Burnham of the United States, to Mr. John Baily of London, in 1863 ;
and Mr. Taylor of Shepard's Bush was the purchaser of this pair at the
Birmingliam Exhibition," at the figure above mentioned. — Tegetmeier' s
Poultry Book (Illustrated) in 1867.

106

THE CHINA FOWL.

" We have found, in our own }'ards, that 2ve could soon breed black Brah-
mas (?) if such were desired; or tliat in three seasons, by choosing the
lightest, we could produce almost clear white ones ; and, as the original
birds were somewhat darker than the 'Light Brahmas ' notv shown, either
color (Dark or Light) could have been bred from them with still greater
rapidity and ease." — Lewis Wriylit, Illustrated Poultry Book, in 1870,
p. 246.

Both the Light and the Dark " Brahmas," as they are bred in England
and America to-day, are strong types of the true Gray Shanghae race. For

^ ^-h^-JO*.";! -i'

DAKIC BRAHMAS, BREU BV J. M. WADE, nilLADELPHIA, PA., 1873.

five-and-twenty years they have continued on in their unrivalled beauty of
form, plumage, great size, and admirable qualities for usefulness among poul-
try ; and no one who breeds these varieties as they should be bred — uncon-
taminated, amongst themselves — can fail to be delighted with the results.
]Mr. Flaisted says, in his recently-published history, that "the birds Mr.
Buriihara sent to England he knows nothing aboiit ; " but that the birds lie
and Dr. Bennett sent out there bred Buff chickens, and he " was more afraid
of this stock " (which he claims is the Cornish-Chamberlin strain, inire)
" throwing bujf chickens," sometimes, " after he sent his fowls to England,
than of any thing else."

S^A^'OHAIi, COCHIN', BRAHMA. 107

This might have been so with Mr. Plaistod's birds; and we all hnow that
Dr. Bennett's stock at the outset had the butF or liglit drab silver-cinnamon
cross in it. But / never knew of the first instance, until Wright falsely thrust
my name into a misquoted paragraph on this point in his " Book of Poultry,"
where chickens from ?)ty fowls came of " a buff color." And I do not believe
it ever occurred.

At all events, I can solemnly aver that I have bred thousands upon thou-
sands of my own stock, and I know of other thousands that have been bred,
in both countries, that never failed in the last quarter of a century to
breed onhj pure Light and Dark Gray fowls. They are naturally a parti-
colored bird, black and white; and the range of color in chickens, for years,
was uneven, coming lighter or darker at times, — from which, in subsequent
mating, either for breeding or for selling, it was found advisable to match the
birds nearest of a color together. But never a Buif chicken have I met with,
yet, in my Gray progeny. And I have yet to learn authentically of any one
who has bred them pure, as I tried to breed them — by themselves — who has
ever encountered this variation in the true Burnham stock.

And here I reprint an article from a correspondent of " The New York
Bulletin," Mr. Walker Waite (now of Brooklyn, formerly of Mass.), an early
patron of mine, who thus tells his experience with my Gray Shanghae stock,
in 1874. He says, —

" A recent writer (Mr. C. C. Plaisted) in a poultry monthly commences
a history of the early days of the Brahmapootra fowl, and tells us some
new things about the long-contested question as to where the first ones
came from. I don't think it is much of an object to know this ; but, whatever
is the true account, this writer has stated several glaring mistakes in his first
article on this subject. His dates are wrong and mixed; or else Mr. Cor-
nish's and Chamberlin's and the 'old salt's' account, and Wright, Teget-
meier, Burnham, Bennett, and twenty others, are wrong. His original fowls,
— that is, the first Chamberlin pair, — Mr. Cornish says, '"came into Connect-
icut from New York early in 1849, and he got his stock of Chamberlin,
next season.' Was there another pair of large Light Graj^ fowls got by this
same Mr. Chamberlin, through another sailor, two years before this? — or, as
this new writer says, 'by a Mr. Knox, in 1847, /or Mr. Chamberlin.'

" I never before heard of this, if it is so. But I think it must refer to 1849, '
when Cornish first tells his story (in his letter, March 2, 1852). At all
events, one other point in this article is new, and that is that this Gray stock
produced Buff fowls. This writer says indirectly, at random, that ' the early

108 THE CHINA FOWL.

ft
Brahmas sent to England by himself, Dr. Bennett, Hatch, &c., which Mr.
Lewis Wright has described as " Ur. Bennett's ^jwre Brahmas," in breeding
showed many different colors; the most objectionable being pure hujf, as
fine as we see to-day among the Buff Cochins.'

" I liave bred tlie Light and Dark Gray birds several years. I had my first
ones from Mr. Burnham, and from eggs I bought of liim, direct; and I have
had tile Cornish stock since. I bred them in 1852, '53, '54, and after that
in 1859, '60. But I never yet saw a Buff chicken out of eitlier of these Gray
strains; and, if there was any one thing the Burnham "Gray Shanghae "
stock did, it was that they bred true to color, as long as I had them. I have
no doubt all this stock comes from one parentage, and that it is all Chinese,
and not East India poultry. Mr. Burnham unquestionably gave us the first
specimens, — whether they were good or poor; and the others probably came
out of the same stock Ills did, in some way."

In furtherance of my opinion, I affirm that at the very last annual ex-
hibitions of poultry in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York State, the
first premium "Brahma" fowls, both Dark and Light, were the exact
counterparts in color, form, and markings of the best specimens I showed in
Boston, and sent out to England to Her Majesty the Queen, to Mr. John
Baily of London, and others, in 1851, '52, and '53.

In September, 1870, Mr. John Baily wrote me on the subject of Brahmas
these words^ " I continue to breed from the progeny the old type of ' Brah-
mas ' which you sent me sixteen years ago, as you may have observed from
the fine birds I have sent hence to Mr. Philander Williams and others in the
United States." These choice Brahmas, which Mr. Baily has thus returned
to tlie United States (bred out of my original stock), have taken prizes re-
'peatedly, as their parents did before them, at the principal exliibitions in
America, in the last half-a-dozen years, — Mr. Philander Williams's splendid
samples frequently bearing off the palm among the best, as everj'body in this
country is aware. A Worcester (Mass.) correspondent of " The Fancier's
Journal" thus puts it, in July 1874. He says,

" The real facts are : Dr. Bennett bought of Mr. Burnham the very old
gray pair that Dr. Kerr sent to Burnham from Philadelphia in 1849. Dr.
Bennett bred them, and in 1851 or 1852 exhibited chicltens from them,
which were the first Brahmas, or then called ' Burrampooters ' (see Report
of show) ever shown. If this name was established in 1850 (as Mr. Wright
makes Cornish say in 1869, though in 1852 Mr. Cornish himself then calls
them ' Chittagongs,' in his original letter), why did not Dr. Bennett, in his

SnANGHAE, COOIIIN, BRAUMA. 109

Poiilti-y Book in 1850, '51, illustrate and describe those fowls of Cornish's?
Dr. Bennett does not mention t\w word Cornisli, ' Burrampooter,' 'Brahma-
pootra,' or ' Brahma,' in his entire book. Why not ?

" Mr. Wright says he 'was an enthusiastic admirer of Brahmas,' and 'got
liis stock of Cornisli.' Cornish says tliis '■(tame was established in 1850.'
How can this be ' correct history ? ' If these fine fowls had been known as
Brahmas in 1850, when Bennett (who loved them so dearly, according to
Wriglit) wrote and published his descriptions of Burnhani's stock and
others, would not Dr. Bennett have been likelj' to know something of the ex-
istence of Mr. Cornish or his fowls ? I think this is clear ; and I have never
yet seen this important point brought forward. It certainly cannot be true
that this 'Brahma' name was established in 1850. Probably Mr. Cornish
meant 1852, or later — for he saj's himself, in his first published letter, March
2, 1852, that they were called ' Chittagong.' At that time Mr. Burnham
had been breeding the Light Gray birds, which he always called ' Gray
Shanghaes,' I believe, for several years, according to Dr. Bennett's authority.

" J\[r. Wright is very clearly at fault in this respect ; and his statement in
his 'Brahma Fowl,' that 'the first pair of Cornish fowls ever bred came into
Connecticut in 18-19,' contradicts his own witness, Cornish, also, who says, in
18(i9, that the fowls came in 1816. Mr. Wright's theory about this question
seems to be the worst thing he ever tried to prove, with the conflicting testi-
mony he has thus far produced; while I thijds: no poultry man in America,
at least, ever put any faith in the stupid ' sailor's story.' And the statement
of ' F. K. W.' that Mr. Wright is acknowledged to be the best living author-
ity on this breed of fowls, is simply ridiculous. How could he, three thou-
sand miles away, know any thing on this subject of origin, except what he
reads or hears about from this side of the water ? "

Mr. Mark Pitman of Salem, Mass., an old, cautious, experienced breeder
of Chinese fowls, who knows as much about the origin of the " Brahmas "
as does any American fancier, has within a few years publicly stated that
"the Light and Dark Brahmas, as originally bred, have both nearly the
same origin ; " and that " they were not imported, but were bred first in this
country." Mr. Pitman adds, that "Mr. G. P. Burnham, who surprised not
only the royal family of Queen Victoria, but all the breeders of fowls in
England (in 1852), by his present of an elegant lot of mature Light
Brahmas, then sent to Her Majesty the Queen, saw in the Dark variety still
greater remuneration, and disposed of them at what might even now be
termed fabulous prices. This variety at once took the lead of all others (for
a time) ; and from this stock many of the large breeders of England ^nd
Ireland were supplied subsequently." And, from the progeny of these birds,

110 THE CHINA FOWL.

which I sent to Great Britain, as in the instance of Mr. Baily of IMount
Street, Loiiilon (one of the leading dealers in England), have come back to
the United States from Ireland and England during the years 1865 and
1866 down to 1873, '74, scores of trios of choice Dark Brahma birds, again
the counterparts, with but slight variation, of the superior samples I first sent
out to Mr. Baily in 1853.

In further confirmation of this position as to prioritj' of date in the
introduction of the Dark Bralnnas to public notice, T quote from the cohinins
of "The New- York Poultry Bulletin," in the month of June, 1874, this
sentence, from the advertisement of Mr. John Baily & Son of London, still
running in tliat magazine: " Now ready for immediale shipment, — lirah-
mas, Light and Dark ; the former from English cocks and riiilander Wil-
liams's pullets; the latter direct descent from G. V. Burnham's origin.il con-
signment to us" (in 1853).

The theory of the advocates of the Cornish-Chamberlin-Beunett-IIatch-
Brahmapootra origin is, first, that Chamberlin (rii/c. Coruisli in 1S52)
"brought liis fowls into Connecticut in the early part of 1849." In 1860,
this same Mr. Cornish appears to have been drawn out in a second letter, by
a IMr. Weld (whom nobodj' previously had heard of), to aver that "the
Chamberlin fowls came from Luckipoor in India, up the Brahmapootra
River, into New York in September, 1846." Tliis goes back of his Jirst
plain assertion, according to Lewis Wright, tliree years. The reasons for
this second story I will explain in the closing chapter to this volume.

In 1874, Mr. Plaisted of Connecticut, who claims to be " the oldest
breeder of Light Brahnias in America" (and who was formerly a partner, in
1853, of Dr. Bennett, the author of the "Brahmapootra" iiamc), writes as
follows, in an article furnished to " The Hartford Boultry World," page V2l,
in June : —

"The first pair of these fowls, about which there has been so much dis-
cussion, and so much written, were brought by one Charles Knox to Mr.
Nelson H. Chamberlin, a resident of Hartford, Conn., in 1847. They were
first bred by Mr. Chamberlin in 1848. . . . Mr. (Jhamberlin paid for his first
pair of these fowls the sum of five dollars, — considered at that time a fabu-
lous price. . . . Cliarles Knox was at that time clerk on a propeller running
between Hartford and New York, and was cousin to Mr. Chamberlin's wife.
Haying been requested by Mr. Cluxmlierlin to purchase a nice pair of fowls
in New York, — something neiv, — Mr. luiox soon reported seeing two pairs

SriANGHAE, COCniN, BRAHMA. Ill

(not three pairs, as Cornish stated in his 1S52 letter), one red, tlie ottier
gray, ji(st arrived on an East-India vessel, and that lie had the refusal of a
pair until the next trip. Tlio result was the selection of the Grays at
a venture, and their removal to Hartford. Mr. Chaniberlin related these
facts to me, himself." •

The final conclusions of Lewis Wright's labored argiiment, put forth to
prove what never existed, and which never had the slightest foundation in
fact, are thus expressed by this English " authority," in the lust paragraph
of his " Brahma Fowl, a Monograph : " —

"It will be observed that the original importation being now determined
so early as 1846," . . . "there is not the slightest reason to question, that
both Light and Dark Brahmas may have been derived from the one stock
introduced into Connecticut by Mr. Chamberlin " (when?) "and afterwards
fostered by Mr. Cornish and Dr. Bennett." ..." The testimony (Mr. Cor-
nish's), so full and explicit, must be considered finally to settle this question"
— of the origin and "importation" of the Chamberlin-Cornish pair of fowls.

We have shown, in this volume, that no ship "arrived at New York from
Luckipoor in India," either in 1849 or 1846, as Cornish states in his two
letters of 1852 and 1869. We have also shown that no such " East-India
vessel " arrived in New York in 1847, as a later writer has it. And we have
adduced ample recorded evidence, dating long prior to the apjpjearance of
Cornish, or his fowls in public, which shows that the Burnham " Gray
Shanghaes" had been seen, talked about, written of, pictured, published in
the poultry papers and books ; and were everywhere known, as early as in
1849, to be " at the head of the list of modern domestic varieties " at that
period in the world. And it will thus be seen that all there is to this con-
troversy is, therefore, resolved into the following simple facts, to wit : —

The Chamberlin-Cornish-Bennett pair of large Gray fowls were first seen
"in Connecticut in the early part of 1849," in Chamberlin's hands. They
were stated to have been picked up somewhere, by " a sailor," who " bought
them at a great price" ($5.00 the pair, so Chamberlin tells Plaisted in
1874) ; and Cornish bought his stock the next year of Chamberlin, in 1850.
In 1851 or 1852, a Mr. Hatch exhibited a few young Light Gray chickens,
which he called " Chittagongs." Cornish says the name Brahmapootra
"was established in 1850." Mr. Plaisted says, "in all Cornish's state-

lllj THE CBINA FOWL.

meiits to Wriglit, Cornish is one year earlier in date tlian lie ought to
be."*

But there was positively' no "importation" of this pair of fowls, at all.
This is a sure thing. They were purchased for Chamberlin unquestionably
from my stock, sold into Connecticut and New York long before 1852, when
Cornish's first letter is dated ; though this letter did not get before the public
until it appeared in "The Domestic Poultry Book " in New York (which
very few persons ever saw), and in Miss Watts's "Poultry Yard, " in 1853
or 1851, in Loudon. And I have also shown by the judges' official reports at
the exhibitions of 1852 and ISo-t, in Boston and New York, that the name
Brahmapootra was not even tlien fixed upon; although Cornish avers, in
his last letter to Weld, " that this name was establislied in 1850.''

It may possibly savor of undue curiosit}' in me ; but / would like, for one, to
know where this fabled stock was in 1849, for instance, when the first great
fowl show took place, in tlie month of November of that j'ear, at the Public
Garden, in Boston? Here is a glorious opportunity now for Weld, Cornish,
Wright, or some other "live man" (Dr. Bennett is dead, unfortunately), to give
us some raeif version in answer to this pertinent query, namely; ^y the Cham-
berlin -Cornish fowls did come "into Connecticut in 1846," and Cornish
" bought the first brood in 1847, and the old pairf in April, 1848," as he " ex-
plicitlj' " states he did in his second (1869) letter to Weld, — and he had tlien
been breeding them three years, of course, — where were fill these fowls on
the 15th and 16th of the eleventh month of the year 1849, when all New
England was astir with the fowl mania when the first exhibition came oft' in
Boston ?

This question suggests itself to me for the first time as I write these lines,
in the month of July, 1874. And I turn once more to the printed records
which I find in Dr. Bennett's Poultry Book, issued in March, 1850, and
in the Boston agricultural papers of December, 1849. I now quote from
the official report of the November (1849) show, — Col. Jaques of " Ten
Hills Farm," President, and Chairman of the Committee of Supervision : —

" This exhibition may be said to have been in its character unprecedented

* " I do not consider Cornish's stories worth a pin. There is nothing ' accurate ' in \\Kjirst state-
ment, and his last one is still worse! " [C. C. Pl.visted, in Poultry World, 1874.]

t llr. Plaisted thus writes in 1874: "Mr. Cornish did »k)< purchase Chamberlin's first brood;
neither did he ever own the ' old pair,' at any time — as I can prove."

SnAyGUAJS, COCHIN, BliAUMA. 113

in tliis countrj'; . . . and the results have been peculiarly gratifying, both as
regards the number and variety and the quality of the different breeds of
poultry shown, and the interest manifested in this disjilay by the public. . . .
The number of specimens of the different feathered races presented on this
occasion was l,4L'o ; the number of exhibitors was 219 recorded. The num-
ber of people admitted to this show was not less than ten thousand. ... Of
the gallinaceous family, the display was very extensive. . . . Several varie-
ties were offered under the names of Cliinas, Cochin Chinas, Shanghaes,
Bucks Count//, Jers^/ Bhies, and Javas" (ne'er a "Brahmapootra," a " Chit-
tagong," or a "Bother'em" then in the entire category!), " and the exhibit-
ors of which were J. Giles, Providence ; J. W. French, Randolph ; George
P. Burnham, Roxbury ; Francis Alden, Dedham ; G. W. George, Haverhill;
Adm. White, East Randolph ; B. W. Balch, Dedham ; A. A. Andrews, West
Roxbury; T. Thorpe, Cambridge; Rev. C. B. Marsh, West Roxbury; H. L.
Devereux, Boston ; Messrs. Pierce and Osborn, Danvers ; George E. White, ,
Melrose ; John C. Bennett, Plymouth ; Samuel Jaques, Medford ; Josiah H.
Stickney, Watertown; John Eaton, Reading, and fifty-two others — all con-
tributing specimens of the C/i/«e«(3, or then so-called Asiatic races. . . . Un-
der the head of crosses of various breeds and varieties, the committee would
mention as worthy of notice the Pli/mouth Rock Fowls, so called by Dr. J.
C. Bennett of Plymouth, and presented by George P. Burnham of Roxbury."
(This was the onhj notable cross mentioned by the committee.) " The other
contributors numbered 151, and entered the different varieties of Dorkings,
Black Spanish, Games, Gueldres, Crested Fowls, Bantams, Plamburgs, Top-
knots," &c., &c.

Here, in November, 1849, were shown nearly fifteen hundred specimens of
the different kinds of fowls then known, from all quarters ; and there were
over two hundred contributors. But there were then no Chamberlins, no
Cornishes, no Knoxes, no Welds, no Wrights, no Sailors, no " Brahmapoo-
tras, no " Chittagongs," mentioned ; and these men, or their so-called fowls
(which are lastly, in 1869, said to have been in Connecticut at that time over
three years, if they came in 1816), were entirely unknown, unhonored, and
unrepresented in that great New England exhibition ! Verily, this is strange,
if the 1869 statements of Cornish to Weld be tnie. And Mr. Lewis Wright
can put the above facts into his pipe, and smoke them a good while, ere he
will be able to answer my reiterated query : Where were your Cornish-Cham-
berlin Brahmapootras, of which, on page 144 of your " Brahma Fowl History,"
you declare "the orig-inal importation is now determined" (according to your
sophistry) "so early as in 1846," and whicli must thus have been in Con-
necticut fully three years, "bein^ fostered by Cornish and Dr. Bennett."

114 THE CHINA FOWL.

Where were they, I ask, on the occasion of this notable public fowl show in
Boston, in November, 1849 ? Answer me tliat, Master Wright !

Wliij all these falsehoods and contradictious and inconsistencies about " one
pair of Light Gray fowls " should have thus ever been originated or fostered by
any or all of these people, and why Lewis "Wright should thus back up tliis
fabrication and deception with his added nonsense and sophistry and misrep-
resentations, is certainly inexplicable to ordinary comprehension, when it is
beyond cavil or question that there were rao " imported" birds involved in
this sailor's story at all. There was no ship at l5"ew York, as stated ; no sailor
(according to Plaisted, who says in June, 1874, they " came in the hands of
one Mr. Knox, clerk on a propeller running between Hartford and New
York"); and, over and above all, when nobody from 184G, 1847, 1849, or
*1S52 has ever been able to tell us who any of the Cornish-described parties
were, as at first mentioned, namely — sailor, owner, ship, captain, date, age of
fowls, or any other _/aci bearing upon this interesting subject ! It is all myth.
It was false from the start. Dr. John C. Bennett coined this sailor's yarn
originally, and the others tacitly agreed to it. The fowls were from my yards,
or out of my stock. And Bennett never denied this in America or England,
for he couldn't, had he wished to do so, while / lived; and he knew this fact
as / did, which accounts for the non-mention of me in all those days !

All this occurred, according to Mr. Plaisted, in 1847 (not in 1849 or 1846,
as Cornish has it, in two different places). But on all three of these occasions
there is only one pair of gray fowls ; Chamberlin is the first man who got
them; and, every time, they came either "in the India ships" to New York,
" in a ship from Luckipoor in India" to New York, or lastly "just arrived on
an East India vessel " at New York.

In neither of which accounts is there one word of truth, as to the "impor-
tation " of these fowls ; as I will in another chapter further on proceed to show,
beyond the possibility of contradiction. The accounts I have quoted from
Mr. Cornish's letters have long been before the public, and Lewis Wright
has revamped and rehashed them both (most audaciously and bunglingly, I'
know,) in his two latest works. But there never was a syllable of truth in
either, as Mr. Plaisted avers in 1874, when ho writes, " I would ask Mr.
Burnham what Cornish's accounts are worth, from first to last ? " To
which I can only reply, "Not much! Yet Lewis Wright makes the most
of them, to be sure ! "

PAIR UF LIGHT BHAHMAS, BRED BY DR. C. 11. KENEGY, POLO, ILL.

SELECTION A]S^D MATING-,

TO BREED "STAXDAEd" BIRDS.

I DEEM it appropriate, after describing and portraying as I have done in
the p)revious pages of this work the general liistory, characteristics, shape,
color, and qvialities of the China fowls we have had and now have in this
country, to add a chapter here embodying my views, and briefly offering the
results of my own experience, in the matter of mating or matching individ-
ual fowls, for the production of high-class specimens of the " Cochins " and
"Brahmas " for the exhibition-rooms.

" Like will produce its like," is an old adage. As a rule, this is truthful.
It depends in a great measure, in the reproduction of ih^ fowl species, how-

116 THE CHINA FOWL.

ever, upon what the character of the stock to be duplicated is ; how long
the strains may have been bred in-and-in (through relations) ; how pure it
was originally ; and how it is subsequently mated (the males with the
females), — whether or not success will follow, even upon the most carefully
planned experiments attempted in this direction.

Darwin, in his exhaustive work on the "Variations of Animals," states
that " the reproductive system is highly susceptible to changes in the condi-
tions of life ; but whrj — because this reproducing system is disturbed — this
or that part should vary more or less, we are profoundly ignorant. Yet we
can here and there catch a faint ray of light." And among these " faint
rays " is this important one, namely, the clearly apparent influence of the
male first having fruitful intercourse with the female, upon her subsequent
offspring by otlier males. In demonstration of this point, we quote the an-
nexed fact, related by Sir Edward Home : " A young chestnut mare, of seven-
eighths Arabian blood, which belonged to the Earl of Morton, was served in
the year 1815 by a quagga, — a species of native wild ass, from Africa,
whose skin-markings are not unlike those of the zebra. This seven-eighths
Arabian mare was covered but once by this quagga (by way of experiment),
and gave birth to a hybrid colt, which had, as was anticipated, the distinct
markings of the striped quagga, in the shape of head, black bars on legs,
shoulders, &c. In 1817, 1818, and 1821, two, three, and six years afterwards,
this same mare was served by a fine black full-bred Arabian stallion, and she
threw three colts in those years. Although she had not seen the quagga
since 1816, all these colts bore his curious and unequivocal markings."

Numerous instances of this kind could be cited, and the principle is clearly
established among horse and cattle breeders. Mr. James McGilivray, a noted
Scotch veterinary surgeon, has stated, sensibly, that "when once a pure
animal of any breed has been pregnant to an animal of another breed, such
pregnant animal is a cross forever, incapable of producing pure progeny, after-
wards, of any breed." This result — under similar treatment — in any race
of animals, is the same ; whether it be horses, cattle, rabbits, sheep, dogs, or
poultry. I have proved this, beyond question, in repeated instances of care-
ful practical experiment ; and I can affirm that this is so with whatever
animal it may be attempted.

The attention of Mr. Darwin was called to this fact through certain results

SELECTION AXD MATING. 117

of oxporimonts triod by Mossioiirs Corbii.' ami liotanl, with pigeons — and he
adds, "I was tlius h'd to make my ox|ieriiac'uts with _/b((7s. I selected long-
established, pure breeds, in whieh there was not a known trace of i-ed (in
tlieir color), yet, in several of tlie progeny, featliers of this color appeared.
One niagniticent bird, tlie oftVpring of a Black Si>anish cock, and a White
Silky hen, came colored almost exactly like the wild Bankiva cock. Now,
all who know anything of the breeding of poultry, know that tens of thou-
sands of pure Black Spanish, and of pure White Silky fowls have been
reared, without the appearance of a ;Y(/ feather/'

!Mr. Tegetmeier speaks of the frequent appearance, in crossed fowls, of pen-
cilled, or transversely-barred featliers, like those common to manj^ gallina-
ceous birds, the Chinese varieties, notably, as being apparent!}' an instance
of rercrsioii to a characteristic in color, formerly possessed by some ancient
progenitor of the family. The so-called " Himalayan "' rabbit is of a snow-
white body, with black ears, nose, tail, and feet; and it reproduces its like
perfectly true. Yet this race is known to have been formed by a union of
two varieties of ii:ih'er-(j)-ai/ rabbits. Now, if the Himalayan doe be crossed
with a sandy-colored buck, a silver-gray rabbit is the product ; which is evi-
dently another case of reversion to one of the original parent varieties.

In the case of j)ou!tr>/, take our quite modern " Plymouth Rock '' variety,
which the latest American Standard recognizes as " a breed." We know
where and when this " breed '' (or cross), was originated ; and, perhaps the
best specimens we see, are those produced in Connecticut, from a union of
the Black Java with the Dominique bird. Both these original fowls breed
their like in their purity, very accurately, as is well known — and the so-
called " riymouth Eocks," jirojucei! in tliis ira;/, from the union of the
original strong blood mentioned, prove very uniformly, good-colored specimens.
The jvotjeiii/, however, bred together, come imperfect in color, and undecided
in markings of plumage, at once; "throwing back," naturally to the Black
Java, or clear Dominique in color, in greater or less degree, and inevitably.
And the progeny of this cro$s continued to be bred " in-and-in,"' however
cautiously we may m.ake our selections, can never: be bred s,atisfactorily to
produce in succession the color, at all uniform, which the Jirst product of the
pure Java and the Dominique gives. This is a prime law of Nature, and it
cannot be changed.

118

TBE CHINA FOWL.

The accompanying cut portrays a recent ideal specimen of what is called
the Felch strain of the Chamberlin stock. This picture represents a young
cock, with very dark pencilled neck-hackles, of good depth, well up on the
legs, full breasted, and of tasteful shape and carriage. Mr. Felch sa^'s, they
have been called the "pouter-jjigeon strain." I do not see the aptness of the
title. This cock is a well-modelled bird, but the picture is again a '' fancy "

design. Not one sample, surely, in
a hundred can be produced, so per-
fect in symmetry as this delineation
indicates; though, perhaps, such
methodical breeders as Messrs.
Felch may occasionally find among
theirs a single cock that would ap-
proach this figure, in comeliness.

The " pencilled " feathering upon
the Brahiiias, light or dark, and the
same characteristic observable in
the diflerent colored Cochins of the
present daj', is one of the most
marked and invariable points in
the plumage of this race tliat it
possesses. And no one who has
bred any variety of these Chinese
fowls, but^ will have observed that
this conformation is universally
prevalent, in some degree of devel-
opment, upon every specimen pro-
duced, from whatever " strain '' or
stock the fancier may chance to possess, either in this country, or in
Great Britain. This " pencilling " of clear white and black was a notable
characteristic in the plumage of the original Shanghaes, of my own im-
portations, of all colors, and especially on the Light and Dark Brahmas. It
is seen to-day, in every instance, more or less prominently, in the progeny
of these importations, wherever this stock is bred; and the so-claimed
Chamberlin-Cornish variety exhibits it, invariably. The Partrido-e and

LIGHT BllAHMA" COCKEKEL.

DAKK-HACKLED

SELECTION AND MATING. 119

Grouse Cochins show this feature as perfectly as do any variety, however
dark or light their body-plumage otherwise may be. In any and every cross
made with these varieties upon other pure breeds — say with the Dorking,
the Black Spanish, the Leghorn, or otherwise, the "pencilled" hackle, or
saddle-feathering, will inevitably show itself; and this marking can never be
bred out of stock into which it has once been introduced.

In mating for breeding birds of anj' particular caste of plumage, with these
varieties — that is to say, of lighter and darker pluming, or darker or
lighter hackle-feather, it is necessary towards the production of a particular
style of feathering, Jirst to select such birds as you may have some knowl-
edge of, that are fairly established in their color in a general way. From
such strain or varietj', secondly, it is requisite that 3'ou choose birds (to
furnish you with the desired colored progeny), that are properly marked in
one way for males, and in another way iov females. And this is a nice un-
dertaking, altogether.

Still, the experiment is an exceedingly interesting operation. Por the
show-room, to win in competition, your standard requires, for example, with
Light Brahmas, that the cock shall be of good weight, not less than 12 lbs.,
or the cockerel not less than 10 lbs., the hen 10 to 11 lbs., and the pullet 8 to
10 lbs. This variety must have the pea-comb, firm and straight; the cock's
head broad and straight; neck long, well arched, and pencilling on hackles dis-
tinctly marked ; body plumage clean white and black; fluff rich and soft, and
heavily feathered legs, without " hock-feathers," &c. The hen must be similar
in color, with the pencilling of the neck flowing well down to the shoulders,
and clearly defined. Now it is desirable to produce these show-birds as near
to perfection as it is possible to attain, and the younger fancier is desirous
to know how he shall accomplish this.

As I have said, this is not easy to compass. It can result only through
careful manipulation, and it does not usually occur without repeated experi-
ments; though, with proper caution, and the exercise of fair common sense,
the chances are in favor of a successful result, at any time. I have bred a
great many birds, and I have been often disappointed ; and, on the other hand,
I have frequently realized extraordinary success, when I least expected it, in
my experimental experience.

I have found, as a good general rule, with the Light Brahmas, in order to

120

THE CHINA FOWL.

ENGLISH PEIZE "LIGHT BRAIDIA " HEN, TWO YEARS OLD, 1872, '73.

SELECT lOU AND MATING.

121

ENGLISH PRIZE "LIGHT BRAHMA" COCK, 2 YR3. OLD, 1S72, 73.

122 THE CHINA FOWL.

breed a majority of the beautiful, so much admired, medium-pencilled-necked
pullets, in a given number of chickens, that a good vigorous ten and a half to
eleven pound light hackled cock, see p. 115, at head of this chapter, short-
legged, fully feathered on shank to the toes, with head well up, generous
wattles, short full inclining (not upright) tail, square body, and flat saddle,
coupled with longish-legged hens (or pullets) of pure white bodies, black
tipped lower wing feathers, clear black short tail, good fluffy thighs, heavily
feathered shanks to the toes, small head and wattle, and a distinct, full, well
defined neck-hackle quite dar/c and even in "pencilling," are the best to mate
in male and females, for the average production of these desirably plumed
PULLETS. This union will give you more rich medium-pencilled evenly
hackled pullets than otherwise. The cocks that eventuate from such a union
will not all be what you desire. And, if you wish to breed the more perfect
hue of MALE birds, I recommend the reverse of this plan, in the parent stock.
The hens may be lighter neck-hackled, and the parent-cock should be full
dar/o-necked, with the other characteristics as above described.

If the back quarters of the saddle-hackles have the slightest tinge of palest
straw-color splashed through the white depending mass, upon the breeding-
cocks, I have found it no objection. My original cocks both carried this
feathering upon the rear saddles ; and I have found that this creamy tint in
the male, at this point, gave me more evenly colored young cocks than when
bred from those having the blank white hackling, en masse, at this extremity
of the long back feathers.

We present on pages 120 and 121 two spirited pictures of representative
English-bred Light Brahmas, drawn by Harrison Weir of London ; a mature
cock and hen. The male bird is not the style of Light Brahma we fancy in
this country, however, and we give place to the drawing simply for purposes
of comparison. Such a tail or rump as this upon a " Brahma " cock, in an
American exhibition room, would disquahfy the bird at sight, in the opinion
of a competent judge of this variety of fowl, whatever other good points he
might possess. While, for breeding purposes, he wouldn't be worth a shilling
in a Yankee fancier's yard. His legs are too short, also, and his neck is simi-
larly faulty. There is the evident presence of blood "foreign" to the true
American Brahma in this cock's composition, and an unmistakable mixture
of the big-tailed, squatty white Dorking in his figure.

SELECTION AND MATING. 123

Yet this is a fair type of many of the Eiiglisli Brahmas hrod in 1S72 to
18.4. The hen is better, but her legs are too short for her large-framed body ;
her neck is similarly objectionable; the head of both cock and hen are by far
too coarse for a first-class thorough-bred Light Brahma, as we produce them
now in this country; and both partake too strongly' of the pattern of tlie duck-
legged, clumsy, badly-bred modern English "Cochin," of late years frequent-
ly to be met with among the " importations" from Great Britain, from unre-
liable sources; of which Zaf^er variety wo have seen several samples that have
been got out at high cost, which exhibited unmistakable evidence of the ad-
mixture in their breeding of the gray Dorking blood, more especially observ-
able, too, in some of the later Dark Brahmas received here from England
in recent years.

Upon page 126 may also be found a fine drawing by this same English
artist, of a you]ig Light Brahma pullet at ten months old, whose general
form, in this instance, for her age, is very much more like what is deemed
in the United States about the thing; though it will be said by close breed-
ers, familiar with the nice points in this variety, that the shanks of this
young fowl are rather long in proportion to the body. The j^ullet, in this
respect, we do not think could be so greatly improved. To produce good pul-
lets, we have found it indispensable that the parent hens bred from mutit
be longish-legged. The cock delineated on page 125 is, to be sure, pretty well
"up in the world." But he is a young bird, and the form will naturally set-
tle down considerably with age. If his limbs were a trifle shorter, we should
like him better. In color and pencilling both these specimens are fine,
though they would not answer to mate, if the owner desired to reproduce
likenesses of this pair. For average chickens marked like these, this cock
should be bred to darker-hackled hens ; and a pullet marked as this is, would
be better mated, for breeding, to a much lighter-necked cock. In the show-
pen, however, such a pair of ten-months' old birds as these "portraits" rep-
resent, are seldom seen ; but when found together, they are pretty sure to
win, with average fair judges at exhibitions.

I am aware of the opinions of other breeders upon this subject, who differ
with me ; but I speak from my own experience in the matter of the prepon-
derating influence of the male in poultrj'-producing. The impress of the cock
upon the progeny is much more remarkable, within my knowledge, than that

124 THE CHINA FOWL.

of the liens, in all varieties of fowl. I incline to this opinion from the existence
of one important fact; and that is, that the male hird is alone iu his harem usu-
ally. His "life-principle " is distributed among a flock of a dozen females, or
less. Tliey are constantly in his company. They meet with no other male
birds (I am now speaking of close, clean breeding) ; and the stamp of this
one male operates to reproduce among his wives, as a rule, a likeness of him-
self, naturally. The power, mettle, greater strength, and sturdier character-
istics of the male, are thus brought to bear, of themselves, directly upon one
point; and his mates being continually with him, and him only, for the time
being, as naturally "reflect his image" in form, .color, and points (in the
main) in their progeny.

A writer in " The Poultry World " says to another, " The cause of a second
litter of chicks resembling the Houdan cock" (which had been allowed to
run with Light Brahma hens a few days, carelessly, but which was then
taken away, and a Light Brahma cock substituted), "is explained by a nat-
ural law well known to breeders ; viz., that, when a hen is pregnant to a cock
of a different breed, sli,e is a cross ever after, the purity of her blood being
lost in consequence of her connection with a cock of foreign blood. She is
then a cross forever, and cannot produce a pure chick of any breed. This
law is applicable to all our domestic animals." This is to the point; and it
will so operate, in every instance, witli fowls, sooner or later, in all cases
where a cock of a different breed or color is even permitted once to associate
with such other variety of hens; thus showing the immense [ireponderance
of influence of the male over that of the female, for breeding to either color
or points.

I have in my mind at this moment the theory of a well-known Light
Brahma breeder, who has produced a great many fine birds, who contends
that this matter of crossing a fowl temporarily does it no injury as to the fu-
ture pure breeding of the birds. This same gentleman is a stickler for " pedi-
gree fowl stock," too, about which he writes fluently. His notion is, in brief,
that "there is no union of circulation between the embryo-chick and the hen-
mother;" that is, between tlie egg and the layer of it, I suppose : and there-
fore this principle is not, in his opinion, analogous m poultrij to tlie relations
existing between the -moihuT-animal and her progeny. But I do not see the
force of this position ; and I feel very confident, that, whatever may be the

SELECTION AND MATING.

125

published arguments of this breeder regarding his notions on this subject, he
would not run the risk of thus permitting any of his breeding-hens to be ap-
proached, for a single interview, by a strange cock, particularly of a different
color or rarict_y to that of his selected Light Brahma pedigreed males, with
any hope that ho could ever retrieve his favorite female birds from the certain
contamination that would succeed such "temporary union." It is one thing
to preach, and quite another to prac-
tice. And I am quite sure this gen-
tleman, who writes so cleverly upon
this point, is too skilful a breeder
ever to venture upon the fallacj' I
have hinted at, so long as he under-
takes to produce, and sell for genu-
ine, anj^ "pedigree Brahmas."

The annexed illustration repre-
sents a model young cock of the
so-called Cornish-Chamberlin strain
of " Light Brahmas," which Mr. C.
C. Plaisted of Connecticut states, in
August, 1874, he has been breeding
from during the present season.
Having examined Mr. Plaisted's
stock in his runs this summer, I am
constrained to say that this picture
does not do his fine birds justice, at
all. But this cut is put forth to
represent his "Chamberlin strain,"
as lie has perfected it, after breeding
this same stock steadily for some twenty years, so he afSrms. The reader
can judge, by referring to other authentic drawings in this volume, how
nearly this strain (from the delineations given by different artists) is like my
original Light Grays, and Dr. Bennett's, as portrayed in 1850, '51, '52, on
pages 67, 69, and 137, 138. In this upright, long, rangy outline, the dis-
tinction (if there be any) presents but the slightest difference, to our eye.
And this portrait in 1874 only goes to confirm my early and "chronic"

126

THE CHINA FOWL.

J, GOOD TYPE OF MODERN LIGHT BKAHMA PULLET, 10 MONTHS OLD,

As bred in the Unied States, in the last seven years.

SELECTinif Ai\D MATINO. 127

opinion, tliat all this stock comos from tlio same original parentage, — to wit,
niy first two lots of " Gray Shan,;,'liaes," of 18 19 and '50.*

Upon tlio snlijoot of tlie point in Braiimas known as the pca-comh, — which
fowls of both colors and sexes must nowadays have nicelj' developed to qualify
thcni to compete in the show-rooms, — I have to saj' that tliis peculiar forma-
tion was also original in America, and that Dr. John C. Bennett thus named
it at au early daj'. And below I give an extract from an article furnished
by me to ''The London Poultry Review," in the spring of 1874 : —

" I will briefly refer in this paper to a peculiar characteristic of this race
of poultry, which has been the cause of much discussion ; and that is the pea-
comb of the lirahmas. One English writer says, 'The only difficult point
with the Brahmas is their variety of comb.' Another asserts that 'the pea-
combed Brahma cannot be a Shanijliae fowl.' AYell, let us see about this.
A third adds, • If it be so, and if Brother Jonathan made it, I wish he would
make us something more.' That Brother Jonathan did make the pea-comb
originally, nobody questions. That Dr. Bennett gave this comb its name, we
all know.

'• He called mj- attention to this pieculiarity the year after I received my
second lot of Grays from Shanghae direct ; and, though we all bred both
single and pea-comb Brahmas for j-ears afterwards, this feature originated
with my stock. And not until the third or fourth year after its first discov-
ery, did we undertake to breed the pea-comb, vnifonnhj. The first birds you

* III regard to the names " Gray Shanghae " and " Chittagong," it may be well to state, at this
point, as to the origin of my jir$t p:iir of Grays, that some persons appear to have got the impres-
sion that these ttco idtntical binU were " imported from Shanghae." I have always stated very
clearly that this pair were obtained by me from Dr. J. J. Kerr of Philadelphia, who wrote me Sep-
tember 3, 184SI, that, "although they were then called ' Chittagongs,' they came out of Chinese
stock, and were bred from birds imported from Shani/hae, into Pennsylvania." Hence I called
them " Gray Shanghaes," after getting my second lot of lighter-colored Grays through Jlr. Porter
of Xew York, in 1S60. Jlr. Cornish, Mr. Chamberlin, Mr. Hatch, Dr. Kerr, Dr. Bennett, Mr.
George, and myself called all this light gra}- stock " Chittagong " at first;, and none of us knew
any thing about different "strains " (if any ever existed) until the " Brahma Pootra" title began
to be bruited, in 1^51, '52. I never heard that anybody pretended that the original Dr. Kerr pair
bad a history apart from this; viz., that they were the only light j7ra»/, fowls-then known, of thij
cl.iss of birds, and that they were bred out of stock imported into Pennsylvania, from China, some
two years before I received them ; the color of which imported ^(irtiw^ stock I never inquired about,
nor do I now know whether it was originally black, white, or blue. And I have never yet deemed
this to be of the slightest consequence, since I know how perfectly in oolor these Grays have bred,
from 1849 and '50 down to the present day. — G. P. B.

128 THE CHINA FOWL.

had in England were mostlj'' single-combed; and to-day, in our best yards,
we occasionally meet with fine Light Brahmas having the single comb. But
these latter are tlius disqualified for exhibition, at tlie present time.

"Now I propose to give you 'something more' akin to what tlie writer
alludes to above, in the way of pea-comb. The Dark Brahmas, as well as
the Light variety, must have the pea-comb to make them pass muster with
the judges at the shows, as we are all now aware. And wlij^? Because
everybody is satisfied that tliis style is the best for cold climates, the pretti-
est, the neatest head-ornament for a largo fowl of eitlier sex, and, more espe-
cially, because it is a peculiarity of the Brahmas, and no other fowl carries it.
'It is a distinguishing mark of the purity of this variety,' writes one enthu-
siastic gentleman. Another (in Tegetnieier's last edition) saj's, 'Mr. Bum-
hain declares they are Shanghaes (Cochins now). If they ara Shanghaes,
will the advocates of this opinion tell me if they ever bred Buffs, Cinnamons,
or Grouse, with pea-combs?' And this brings me to the point I am about
to present, in direct reply to this gentleman.

"For four years past, I have been watching this very thing, in its perfect
development, in both the Grouse and Partridge Cochins in this town [Mel-
rose]. A very careful breeder discovered amongst his Partridge Cochins (four
years ago) a few chickens, cocks and pullets, clearly marked with this pea-
coinli. He could not account for it. He had only this breed on his i)remises.
He has never had any others since. He has bred from the pea-comb birds
only, selected them the second year, then culled tlicm the third ; and the
fourth season he put into the Massachusetts show (in 1874) several cages of as
perfect pea-combed Partridge Cochins as ever were grown. Nobody else that I
ever saw has this variety. Prom seventy-five to a hundred — old and young
— may now be seen in this gentleman's yards, fully developed with this
'peculiarity of the Brahmas.'

"They are not a cross. Never a taint of cross in any of them. The ori-
ginal stoek came out of eggs laid by a Shanghae lien ])urchased from on ship-
boaril. And there they are, to speak for themselves, precisely as the pea-comb
was originally developed upon my imported Gray Shanghaes (or P>rahmas)
the second year I bred them, — accurate likenesses of which choice birds will be
found upon pages 143, 153. This gentleman has not yet sold any fowls, and de-
clines to do so. But he has got them, of all ages ; and they are true poa-combcd
Purtridfje fowls. What becomes of Mr. Wright's theory on this subject, if this

SELECTION AND MATING. 129

is established in the Partridge, as we all know it now is, fairly, in tlie Brali-
mas ? And wliy, as in the instance of the Brahmas, is not this a most valu-
able acquisition ?

" Mr. Wright has contributed to poultry literature a vast amount of plausi-
ble and solid material ; and usuallj' he writes clearly and well. But the facts
I have herein set down are at variance with much which this author has
penned ; and they dispose effectually of the theory suggested by the other
English writer upon Brahmas, who triumphantly argues in his query, ' Will
the advocates of this [my] opinion tell me if they have ever bred Grouse
Cochins (Shanghaes) with pea-combs?' since the fancier I speak of has
this year got out forty chickens, all pea-combed, from his stock ; whilst
a quartette of his year-old stock, placed in the hands of another person in
Norfolk County, Massachusetts, have produced sixty more chickens in March
and April, 1874, perfectly marked with this peculiar "pea" comb.

''I conclude this too lengthy article with these final assertions. No so-
called Brahma fowls ever came from India in 1846, or at any other time, to
America, /originated these fowls, now called Brahmas. I sent to England
the first Light and Dark purely-bred Brahma birds you ever had there (as
' Gray Shanghaes '), or they went hence from my stock. And, lastly, the pea-
comb has been established in America upon the Grouse or Partridge Cochins,
as I have now informed you. And Brother Jonathan hasn't yet done with
improving domestic poultry, as I trust we shall show in the future."

In those earliest days, the " fine points " upon our imported stock of Shang-
haes were not appreciated by us. This pea-comb question was long a debat-
able one. Dr. Bennett claimed, for years after we discovered this peculiar
formation, — which he first pointed out to me in my yards, — that the single
comb was the true one for the Brahmas, though the deviation of this " pea-
comb" (to which he gave this name, from its similarity in shape to a half-
blown pea-blossom), he said sometimes occurred with this fowl. He didn't
know whether it did, or not — when this opinion was given! Nor did any
one else know, at that time. The appearance and final perfecting of this
feature of the pea-comb upon pur Gray birds was a surprise to us all ; and a
deal of labor followed, to establish it. It required several years of experiment
and care to produce this head-ornament with any great degree of uniformity
or success, as I have shown in the quoted opinions of all the original breeders
of this stock, possessing any nominal strain. The Queen's birds were single-

130 THE CHINA FOWL.

combed, so far as I remember. Dr. Gwynne's early fowls were, soven-tentlis
of tliem, single-combed ; and these he received from Bennett and I'laisted, who
bred the Cornish-Chamberlin strain (so Mr. Plaisted says), and the Buruliam
strain (so Dr. Bennett says) ; see pages 80 to 85, for tliese authoritative state-
ments. And even up to this day, more or less of the Light Brahmas are bred,
of anybody's stock, in any man's yards, with the up-right, single, serrated
comb that Bennett claimed, at first, was the proper style of comb for this breed.

Even Cornish himself says (in 18G9 !) "I did notice the 'pea-comb ' on my
bii'ds. It was not so with all." He does not say anything about this peculiar
formation in \\\s, first account, dated March 2, 1852, I observe ! And yet, ac-
cording to his last "accurate" statement, ho must then (in 1852) have had
these birds in his possession (from September, 184G) fully six years ! Did he
"notice this pea-comb " OJi his birds before he wrote that first letter ? If so,
why was this peculiarity not mentioned by him? It certainly was a most ex-
traordinary development! Nobody in America or England knew anytliing
what this rare feature meant. Tegetmeier writes, as late as 18G7, "this pea-
comb was a great novelty with us in England." Another English -writer then
saj's, " in all our crosses, we have never met with anything like this ! " I do
not remember myself to have observed it till my second j'ear of breeding with
the second lot of Grays I obtained from Shanghae, via New. York. It was a
curious discovery, and it is decidedly a very desirable thing to breed as many
pea-combed birds among our Brahmas as possible. But the single comb will
appear, more or less, with the best families to-day, nevertheless.

This same Dr. Gwynne, whom Bennett, Tegetmeier, Blaisted, Burnham,
Wright, and Mias Watts, all agree contributed one of the two first pens of
Light Brahmas shown at Birmingham, England, and who himself declares,
in Kev. Mr. Wingfield's London work, " I received from Dr. Bennett of tho
United States, in 1853, five pairs of these Cornish-Chamberlin fowls, — three
only of which had the pea-comb," also, subsequently adds, regarding the
Brahma pea-comb question, "All / can say on this point is, that out of
twenty chickens bred for myself out of three of the ten birds received from
Dr. Bennett of the United States, I cannot detect a single ' deviation ' among
thum from the single comb of the parents." And yet it is claimed by Lewis
Wright that " this pea-comb alo7ie is absolute evidence of the antiquity and
purity of the Cornish-Bennett fowls over Burnham's mongrels ! "

In mating the Buft', the White, or the Black Cochins, there are no such

^.

PEA-COMCED l'AhTl!Xl)(;K (JMCIIIN COCK, 2 YEAliS OLD 1S74.
From the origiaul stfK-k of C. II. Edmonds, Mcli'ose, I\Ias3,

SELECTION AND MATING. 133

requiremoiits as I have described, inasimicli as there is but one general
color, eacli to be souy;ht for in these difl'ercjit varieties. But with the Partridge
Cochins, tlie pencilling of the neck and back-hackles and the markings of the
body-feathering, as in the Dark Bralimas also, comes a nice point again,
in mating for breeding, to produce the desired fashionable "Standard"
specimens of fowls.

The Partridge Cochins, and the Grouse Cochins are very similar in general
hue, both being of a rich deep brovi^n, with similar markings and pencil-
lings ; except that one is of a reddish tinge (in the lighter plumage), and the
other golden bay, or a deep orange tint, in the more brilliant parts of the gen-
eral ground-feathering in the hens. The colors of the Partridge or the Grouse
cock (of the most acceptable character), are but slightly different in each.
Tho-^e tints that are best understood as applicable to the superb " black and
red Game Cock," are in the main the most desirable. The breast, thighs, and
under body-color of the male Partridge Cochin should be cle^v l/lack, to accord
with the "Standard" requirement. Tail and base-feathers, metallic black.
Hackles ".pencilled," orange and black, &c. These for the show-birds.

But, for mating to breed them, the presence of brown feathers S23arsely inter-
spersed upon the breast, flanks, and thighs, is (in mj' experience) the better
indication towards producing finely marked pullet chicks. And I have found,
in a large majority of cases, that a good, vigorous, well formed two year-old
cock, with this style of marking, would throw finer pullets than the dead-
black breasted birds. But to breed the others (cock chicks), the black
breasted male, and the darkest brown hens are the best, of course; and all
these, I repeat it, are nice points, resulting satisfactorily only through careful
studied experiment, oftentimes necessarily long continued. And here it is
that the theory of "constant selection " of the best birds in your breeding
stock comes in, pertinently.

I understand, perfectly well that this principle is a good, if not the true
method. In all cases, whatever the opinions or experience of the fancier
may be, the successful breeder resorts to this mode in his breeding. I wouldn't
give a row of pins, for example, for a Cochin or Brahma cock-bird, to breed
from, that turned the scales, in weight, at over twelve pounds. I prefer one
at eleven pounds, even ; provided he be " well up on his pins," courageous,
healthy, well pointed, not leggy, squarely framed for a Cochin, and perhaps
a little more " rangy " in form for a Brahma. And I prefer my pullets, or

134 THE CHINA FOWL.

hens, in proportion higher on tlie leg considerably, to be mated to such
cocks. Both should be well marked in plumage, as I have described ; and
all should be kept in "high condition," without permitting them to get fat
while beiug bred. With such birds, of good stock, you may count on very
good chickens in the average.

And yet, in spite of all, you must be prepared to be often disappointed.
Why it is, that freaks in Nature occur so frequently in one's experience, do
what the breeder ma^', is altogether inexplicable. Many fanciers there be who
are prone to the recounting of strange stories about their favorite strains of
stock, and of their continuous and wondrous success with certain varieties,
bred from some imaginary " early imported bloods," which would be
counted certainly marvellous if the tales could be verified. But I have met
with so many ups and downs in chicken-raising, and I have been so often
deceived in my anticipations, first and last, that I do not calculate very
accurately upon any thing coming exactly like its parentage, when I start out
with new bloods, of late years, that "have taken first prizes,'' for example, or
that come down from "Confucius" and "Hebe," with a pedigree "much
longer than my arm."

In mating such samples (and I have tried this more than once, to my cost),
the progeny do not often come up to the mark. They have been badly
mated in jji'svious generations. The individual fowls thus purchased have
been rare samples to behold of their accredited race, frequently', and I have
anticipated "stunning results" from the eggs laid by these fine looking speci-
mens, that had " won first premiums;" and for which, on more than one
occasion within my remembrance, I have cheerfully paid down fifty to one
hundred dollars each, in the exhibition-room. '

I have sold eggs from these very fowls, at almost fabulous rates, in
good faith, and believed, as did the parties I bought of and sold to, that we
had something rare indeed in the poultry way. And I have not only been
wofully disappointed myself, in the first or second hatcliings from such fowls;
but I have been compelled subsequently to endure the anathemas of incon-
siderate patrons, for sending them at high cost, eggs that produced chickens
of almost any color save that of the birds which laid those eggs. But the
parent fowls had been contaminated before they reached viy hands, and I
bred from them only what Xature gave mo, through this impure channel.

Thus I say it is well that, in selecting your original breeding-stock, you

SELKCTIOX AXD MATIXG. 135

pay attention to olitaining it out of a sitrain tliat you know to be as pure as
cau be had, itself, first. Then by mating your birds in the way I have now
briefly indicated, j'ou may, as a rule, calculate upon getting a tnajoriti/ of
chickens that will answer your expectations in color and features.

AVe give place to fine plate illustrations on pages 133 and 143, of the new
Pca-coinhcd PartriJije fowls, a cock and hen — two years old — bred from
imported Chinese blood, and fostered by C. H. Edmonds, Esq., of Melrose,
Mass., for the last four or five years. The pictures are faithful representa-
tions of these two mature fowls, which for size, color, markings, rotundity of
form, and good make-up, throughout, are excelled by no specimens of the
Cochin varieties that we have ever met with.

That the pea comb is now a desideratum upiou the I!raJiiiia,<, Light and
Dark, is already decided upon. The production of a new variety of the
Cochins possessing this marked pii?culiarity. uniformly, is certainly a grand
improvement upon the old style of single upiriglit comb, especial!}' for our
cold northern American climate. That the establishment of this desirable
feature has been accomplished. j.H'/'Wia/it'jf^i'y, upion the Partridge variety, and
that it has already been transmitted from Mr. Edmonds' original stock
through five generations, down to the summer of 1874, is a fixed fact.

The stately trio of Dark Brahmas so nicely portrayed upon page 101. the
piroperty of Mr. S. H. Seamaus. AVauwatosa. Wis., were imported by him in
1S73, from England. The drawing is from the pencil of the celebrated J. W.
Ludlow, and these beautiful birds have been winners of first prizes at the
American Western sholvs, deservedly — being verj* perfect specimens of their
kind, from which Mr. Seamans is now breeding, successfully.

Mr. Chamberlin himself has never " mentioned '" any thing about any
fowls, that I ever heard of. and he didn't go to Xew York for fowls, at all.
Mr. Cornish said i^in 1852) that "the Chamberlin fowls were brought into
Connecticut in the early part of 1S40."' Then this same ^Ir. Cornish said ;^in
1869), '■ These fowls came in a ship ■'' (which never arrived there) ■■ to
New York, in September, 1846."

This is all that has ever been known about that mythical " one pair of
Grays," and all that ever will be known now, except what I have elsewhere
stated in this work ; viz., that no ship "arrived at Xew York from Luckipoor
in India,'' either in 1849, first, or in 1846 ; or in 1847. as a later writer puts
it. All these stories are false — as in the final chapter I will show.

136 THE CHINA FOWL.

The advocates of this pea-combed Chamberlin-gray-fowl theory are
sadly indisposed to agree in their stories. Mr. Cornish, in 1852, as we have
seen, did not know " the sailor " who found this pair of fowls.* Even in 1869,
he saj's, "the sailor's name I never noted, and cannot give." In 1870, he
adds (according to Wright), " my letters were written at an early day, when
the parties who brought the fowls from India to New York " (the sailors of
course) "were living, and to he seen. They ivere often seen," &c.

But, previously to this last letter, they had all died off, conveniently, at the
right time, — so it was universally contended. And nothing could be learned
further of these " all-obscure men," who could " give no account of the origin
of these birds," as Cornish first avers in his 1852 letter ! Yet, in 1874, we
find that iVIr. Plaisted good-humoredly resurrects them. In the "Poultry
World" for August, this writer says, "the unknown sailor, of whom Mr. Cor-
nish writes, and whom Mr. Burnham attempts to ridicule, 'still lives,' and
will, I trust, take an important part in this feathered drama, now having such
a remarkable run. When he comes on deck, let the unbelievers 'look out for
squalls.' Like Captain Cuttle, he too will ' stand by,' and his opponents may
be obliged to ' take to the long boat ! ' "

Now, we have not "attempted to ridicule" the "unknown sailor," at all.
He was a perfectly harmless and unoffending party in this business, and he
has been dead near twenty years ! At least, so we have all been informed
repeatedly by the Cornish men. If he is alive, so much the better for him,
individually. But we think it is rather late in the day to trot this sailor out,
710V} ; though it may be, that, for Wright's and Cornish's purposes, this ven-
erable salt will prove a Bunsby, indeed ; and he may be able to give us " an
opinion as is an opinion " on this vexing Bother-'em-Pootrum question. Still,
we submit that it is not a little strange, during all the controversy that has
occurred in a quarter of a century about the sailor-Cornish pair of Light-Gray
fowls, that this ancient mariner has never before turned up !

* In August, 1874, Miss Watts of London writes to Lewis Wright tliat, " early in 1853 she sent
her first order for Light Brahmas to Dr. Bennett, and specified that tlie fowls must be singU-
combed." . . ." This was objected to (in America) on the score that the single comb was not
right." So/)e(!-comb birds were sent her. This lady says she bred the so-called Chamberlin-
Bennett stock, but found "no Darh Brahmas until after 1862." when she crossed hers with birds
from Dr. Gwynne's stock; and which Bennett sent to Dr. Gwynno from my yards, years before!

MoI.|:i. OF '-^rANnAKO" PAIIK llKAiniA COCK, -J YKAKS OLl>, 1874.

\- lnv,l I.A rhilainlrr Williams, ( f. 1'. r.iirnham, E. (.'. lomry. .1. P. liu//cll. I". (.». WaiMw.-ll,
.lac. I. (iravr^. C. C. I.oriii-. I '. W. Clianilicrlin, etc., >[;lss. ; J. Y. liiclilioll, X. Y. : 1!. \- .1. I'del-s,
Chri-taua, Del. : C. 11. Saiif.ml. aihl II. A. lilu.dcs, K. I.; Dv. 0. II. KcHOgy, I'olo, 111.; aiul other
Irailine- .Vinericaii fanciers wlui knew the ililTeronce between this and English " hoeked " hivd^.

I>;(I.K SAM" AM) ■■<UKA." ril A >Mli:itI,l N I.Kilir l'.];Air.M A,s. (]S.'t;i.)

The alxjve is an p>uglish picture of an early paii-of Li^lit ISra.hmas belonging
to i\Iiss E. Watts — author of tli(! London '■Poultry Yard" — which slie im-
ported from Dr. J. C. Bennett, in lSo3. In 1874, she writes that Mr. Plaisted
and Dr. 15. selected all this stock bred liy lier, up to l.S('i2, when she obtained a
pullet to cross with her own from Dr. (TWj'nue's impoi'tation from America :
and adds that " about the same time " when she first received hers from America.
■• iMr. Baily, of Mount .Street, Lond(in, received a pen of Dark Birds from ^Ir,
Burnham, which were not exactly to her fancy, on account of tlicir heanj color :
but they were very tine."

In closing this article upon selection and mating the Brahmas, &c., for breed-
ing, I ask the reader to comjiarc the above drawing of Dr. Bennett's fowls of
I85.3 with the picture of my light (iray Shanghaes of 18.52, on the opposite
pa;;e. Both these engravings were drawn b}- the same Kuropean artist, from
life. Is the difference (if there be any.) discoverable? / can not see it. Yet
one pair are drawn from my " Gray Shanghaes" in 1852 '.'3, and the others are
from Miss E. Watts' birds, sent her liy Dr. Bennett and Plaisted, in 1853 '4.

rOKTKAITS OF TllK " LIO.IIT-GUAY SlIANOHAES," draWll ill 1S52.

BURNIIAM AGAINST WRIGHT.

" Life woulji be (I perpetual (lea-liimt, if a man were obliged to run Jown all the innuemloes,
inveracities, insinuations, nud suspicions which arc uttered against him. " — Uev. IIenet
Ward Beeciier.

" But for that blindness which is insc])arable from malice, what powders of evil would it
possess! Fortunately for mankind, its venom, — like that of the rattlesnake, — wlien most
poisonous, clouds the eye of the reptile, and defeats its aim." — W. Giljioue Simms.

Ix closing this volume, I am constraiiioJ, in view of certain demonstra-
tions pronmlgateJ by Lewis Wright, of England, in a late expensive poultry-
book he lias issued iu London, to conclude my account of tlie '' China Fowl,
SJumr/liac, Cochin, and ' Brcrlnim,' ''with a brief personal protest against the
rigmarole and pointless twaddle eiubodied in said Wright's recent attacks
upon me in that work, and its smaller predecessor, wherein he has so
wantonly assailed Mr. G. P. Burnham and his poultry-stock, by his utterly
senseless and groundless attempt at argument in reference to the origin of
the mythical Cornish-Chamberlin-Sailor-IIatch-Bennett-Brahmapootra " im-
portation of fowls from Luckipoor, in India; " which silly tale, for twenty odd
years /have known, and which every fancier in America has been confident

13S THE CHINA FOWL.

was, in its details, one of the grossest inventions at humbug that ever was
perpetrated in the whole history of the lien fever.

The poultry press in this country and England have kindly permitted me
to reply, through their columns, to this utterl}' baseless attack : and I would
here express my grateful obligations to Wade's "Fanciers' Journal," Pliila-
delphia; Stoddard's "Poultry World," Hartford; " The Pet-Stock Bulletin,"
New York; " The Country Gentleman," Albany; "The Turf, Pield, and
Farm," New York; "The Poultry Review," London; " The Poultry Rec-
ord," Farmington, III. ; " The North-Western Poultry Journal," Minneapo-
li.«, Wis. ; " The Poultry Argu.s," Polo, III., and other American and English
journals, for the favor they have accorded me, in enabling me to set myself
" right on the record" in this affair, in reply to Lewis Wright's unfounded,
unreasonable, and atrocious assault upon a man tvJio never had aught to do
with, the suhject-viatter he treats of in his abusive works, except to ridicule
this nonsense and chicanery, from first to last.

Mr. Wright commences upon a false foundation, starting out with the
assumption, in the opening paragrapli of his "Brahma Fowl" book, that the
large Light-Gray Shangliaes, Liglit Brahmas, — or whatever they should right-
fully be called, — were " originally imported from India." He then proceeds
to argue the question towards establishing this fallacy, instead of either
accepting or reciting well-known facts regarding the actual history of the
origin of this fowl. He declares that "it appeared to him possible to throw
some additional light" upon this long mooted subject, and "to point, with
Mr. Darwin's aid, with certainty to a scientific and rational conclusion " as to
whether these fowls came from India, or from Shanghae, in China.

When the record was so ample and so plain, at least in this country, and
the existing accounts so simple, as they have been for more than twenty
years, it does seem to the view of an American reader or fancier, who is
reasonably posted in current poultry affairs, that this pretended "labor of
love," on the part of the Englishman has been conducted in a most singu--
larly hateful and stupid manner, from the outset ; and that Lewis Wric^ht
has evinced a most remarkable lack of foresight in the crudities he has pro-
mulgated, as well as having repeated a string of old untruths ; and the course
he has in this instance pursued, has gained him no friends in the United
State.s, verily ! As to his affording the poultry world any reliable informa-

BUTiNUAM rf>. WnWJlT. l^S

tiou aliout Iiraliinu fowl liistory, ov sccinluijlv naiiiini:; aii^' cPiil Ivriowli'ilgo of
till' sdlijcct fov liinisi'lf, liis lato atU'inpts liavc iii'o\cil absolutely liut most
pitiablo failui-ps.

What is tlu' use, for iustiinoo, of citing M\: ]>arwiu's pliantasies to help
prove an i-vcut that never had an existence ? Either tliese fowls camo from
(.'hina, or hulia, or they ilicln't ! l)oes the sha]ie of the sluill in two iiuli-
yithial samples of foreign [loultry, picked up in a man's yard and found to
(litTer somewhat in their internal or external formation, prove what countr3'
the hinls eanie from ? Yet this — and these — are Wright's arguments to
establish his theory that the Gray Shangliaes (or now so-called Brahmas),
which originated in JMr. G. P. lUirnham's yards in America, were "imported
from the port of Lnckipoor, India, into New York,'' on board a ship that
never arrived there !

And through two huge volumes of this sort of argument — scientific,
literary, historical, anatomical, botanical, ornithological, chemical, and un-
natural, this pedantic poultry author at second-hand strings out the details
of his " saili.>r-\'aru,'' a I tuiiini'diii, in the attempt to establish what never oc-
curreil, au.l whiih wa^ never really believed by half a dozen persons on this
side of the Atlantic to have contained the first particle of truth or reason in
or about it. from beginning to end. This whole fabricated tale was notori-
ously known here to have been a regularly concocted sham from tlu> start.

I do not feel that I can do better than to make free use of the substance
of the articles that have appeared, in one or other of the lirst-class journals
nanu'd above, in thus defending myself, and in replying in these pages to
AVright, who has been most egregiously sold by some one. That he has been
deceived, thiMugh some source, is very clear: although he voluntarih'
enlarges nji.'n whatever inimical information he may have gathered to
enhance the venom of his spleen ; and, with certain undeniable and patent
facts before him (which he has utterly' ignored, in his persistent tirade), he
has proceded to misrepresent, malign, misinterpret, and interpolate my writ-
ings in the most disingenuous, unfair, and disgraceful manner, witliiwt one
iota of provocation for his balderdash and slang, or reason for his miserable
attack upon me and mine, in his two late books on poultry matters, and
especially in connection with the origin and early hi-tory of the so-called
'• Brahma " fowls.

140 THE CHINA FOWL.

An officious anonymous correspondent of Wade's Fanciers' Journal (who,
from tlie nature of liis calling, could much better have employed his leisure
in doing his Master's service than in thus meddling with a personal matter
entirely outside of his pi'ovince, which it was none of his business to inter-
fere with), gratuitously forwarded to the editor a long abusive extract from
one of Wrights' books, recently, whei-ein the author launched his assaults
upon Mr. Buruham without stint ; and which I was, for the first time, thus
made conversant with, in their particularity. I replied to this attack, that
Mr. Wright had picked vie up without the slightest show of reason ; and
that, in his i-emarks about my connection with the " Brahmapootra "' subject,
he had entirely mistaken the position I had always maintained towards
this notable humbug ; inasmuch, as, from outset to conclusion, I had never, in
any way, shape, or manner, been concerned in this deception, but, from the
beginning, had steadily and consistently fought it, and ridiculed it — for
more than twenty years ! I then added, that Mr. Wright in his hooks did not
touch the main question at issue in this controversy, strange to say — and
that is, as to the time when, and the mode in which, this name " Brahina-
pootra " or "Brahma" came about, and my aversion to it.

Imprimis., you will observe, that / (Mr. Burnham) never laid any claim
to this "Brahmapootra" misnomer. I did not make this name. I then
called my fowls " Gray Shanghaes," — never by any other name, and simply
for the good reason that Dr. Kerr, who sent me vaj first pair from Philadel-
phia, in September, 1849, in his letter, said: "Though they are called ' Chit-
tagongs ' (precisely as Mr. Cornish called his at first), the stock came to Penn-
sylvania from Shanghae, China." My second lot of Light Grays were pro-
cured in 1850, through Wm. T. Porter, Esq., editor of the "jSTew York Spirit
of the Times," from on board a ship at ISTew York, direct from Shanghae,
China. I then had other Chinese fowls of different colors, hut these last
were light gray. What else could I properly call them, but what I did ; viz.,
"Gray Shanghaes." And here let me quote what Dr. Gwynne, of England,
wrote in 1852 : —

"I obtained of Dr. Bennett of the United States, five pairs of these birds.
Three of these ten fowls only had compressed pea-combs ; in none of the
others was this found, nor could I recognize in them any thing but what
could be found in the Shanghae birds. I had several communications from

BURN HAM r.s'. wniGiir. 141

Pr. Boniu'tt, and in roply to all my inquirit<s, dirocteJ to learn the cause of
naming as 'n new breed, ' birds, »;06'^ of whicli were essentially Sliaiighaes,
in slia|)e and character, I could gather no iiit\)rmation but tliat the difference
of i-ohv between these and other Shanghaes precluded their being thus
classed; but I cannot accept tliis as adequate proof of 'Brahmapootras '
being a 'new breed,' and therefore prefer the conclusion that they are
identical with the Shangliaes, and only a new variety of that fowl. Another
circumstance which confirms me in this view, as to the identity of these
birds with tlie Shanghae breed, is the fact that the fowls recently presented
to her Majesty, by Mr. Geo. P. Burnham, under the name of Gray Shang-
haes, are admitted b^^ Dr. Bennett to be i^recisehi similar to his own, and
Mr. Burnham assures me that the original stock from which the 'Gray
Shanghaes,' presented to lier Ma.]'esty were bred, was imported by himself,
through Dr. Kerr, of Philadelphia, direct from Shanghae."

Did 'Mr. Lewis Wright find it convenient or useful to place this square,
clear evidence about me and my fowls (written by Dr. Gwjmne in 1852)
in his poultry book? Not at all! Thus I continued to designate mi/
fowls, long years after Dr. Bennett fixed "Brahmapootra" first, and then
" Brahma " for his birds ; though at that very time (1852) Dr. Bennett vol-
untarily wrote Dr. Gwynne, as above, which was the true statement; but
which I do not find in Mr. Wright's account.

Observe / did not say this. Mr. Tegetmeier did not say so. This was
Dr. J. C. Bennett's own account, published from him direct, in Rev. Mr.
Wingfield's early editions of his "Illustrated Poultry Book;" see page 177,
indorsed by Dr. Gwynne, himself Yet, notwithstanding this patent fact,
Mr. Lewis Wright goes out of his way, in the extract furnished, to assert
that " Dr. Bennett got his stock from Connecticut ''—meaning from Cornish,
I presume. I do not know but he did. What I believe is, that it was all
originally bred from my stock, though thus variously named ; and Mr. Cor-
nish himself (see his letter) called his fowls "Chittagongs " (not Brahmas)
at first, because they so nearly resembled the large Gray fowls (mine) then
bred in this country, so he says; and under which very name Dr. Kerr
sent me vaj first ones from Philadelphia.

Now, who knew best, at that time, where Bennett's fowls came from?
Dr. Bennett, or Mr. Wright ? The former being the man who sent the
fowls to England; who raised this question about a name {or them; who

1-12 TEE CHINA FOWL.

said, in 1852, that mine and his were the same : tlie latter in London, simply
uttering an ipse dixit, based on the Cornish letter, which does not mention
me or Dr. Bennett either. Now, herein lies the utter inconsistency of Mr.
Wright's theory, to wit: He took for granted that what Mr. Cornijsh meant
(not what he saiVZ) was that his fowls were " Brahmas." But this was not
true. Neither Mr. Cornish, Mr. Chamberlin, nor " the sailor who reported
he had found some light gray fowls " (see the Cornish letter) then said any-
thing about these being " Brahmas." This name, at that time, had not
been decided upon by anj'body, and Mr. Wright cannot find it so used at all
anywhere (in 1852) at the time when he undertakes to prove his false
position by quoting Cornish's letter. Tliis is very unfair, to say the least of
it ; but, whichever way it was, surely / had nothing whatever to do with all
this. I neither suggested, made, approved, used, or adopted this name of
"Brahmapootra" or Brahma for my fowls — never. Yet Mr. Wright dis-
tinctly asserts that "Mr. Cornish's statement was published long before Mr.
Burnhara's," and that "Burnham might have bred some very good imitation
Brahmas," etc.; when it is so well known, and always has been, that I had
never claimed, or asserted at any time, anywhere — in those years — that I
ever imported, bought, bred, owned, or sold a«(/ fowls known as "Brahma-
pootras." Never, Mr. Wright ! and you can not find it in the published
records anywhere, prior to the late war — unless you have so written it.

I had then never had aught to do with naming the " Brahma " fowl.
I always opposed this bald nonsense, and would never permit Dr. Ben-
nett, Mr. Cornish, or Mr. Anybody to thus misname my fowls. Every-
body in England and America knew this ; though my name was, by others,
sometimes mentioned in this connection. But, if Mr. Cornish, Dr. Bennett,
or Mr. Wright; Dr. Gwynne, or Mr. Bailj^ ; Mr. Tegetmeier, or His Eoyal
Highness Prince Albert, chose (as some did, I believe, after a while) to call
my Gray Shan ghaes "Brahmas," could I help it? I never called any of
their fowls " Gray Shanghaes," surely !

How a sensible man, who writes so cleverly as Wright does, usuallj^, could
have wrought himself up to penning such a tirade as he thus has, is more
than I can comprehend — since it . is notorious that I opposed it in com-
mittees ; in my writings ; in conventions ; in public and private ; first, last,
and always, — upon the ever-constant principle that my fowls were "Gray
Shanghaes " from the start, and not " Brahmapootras."

PEA-COMIiED PARTRIDGK CdCHIX HKS, 3 VEARS OLD 1374.
Ei-oiQ the original stock of C H. Edmouas, Melrose, Mass.

BUR Nil AM VS. WHIGIIT. 145

Tliose bad t^tcaJily been my .assertions. Still, IMr. Wrigbt kept calling me
barj names, declaring tbat I "never bad anj' genuine Bralnnas " (wbo says I
did ?), and tbat " Burnbam niiglit bave bred some tolerable imitation lir.abnias"
(wbicb I didn't). I bad never even said I bad a)ii/ " Brabmas " wbatever, gen-
uine or imitation ; tbat I ever tried to breed " Brahmas," or pretended I did ;
I had never even called my fowls " Brabmas,'' and never would. And I surely
made no statement, or.al or written, in wbicb ]Mr. Cornish's fowls were involved,
where I was a witness " more '' or " less reliable," as Mr. Wright states ; be-
cause bis •■ Cbittagougs " or '■ Brabniapootras," or whatever be named them,
never interfered with my '' Gray Sbangbaes " any more than did Dr. Ben-
nett's '• Wild East-India Fawn-colored Dorkings," at this same period
notable.

Mr. Wright lays great stress on the fact tbat " Burnbam vainly tried to pur-
chase this stock, but did not succeed." Admitted, again, tbat I did' not. Thus,
of course. Mr. Wright is a good witness tbat the fowls I had (presupposing tbat
I ever had cin)/) were not of this Cornisb-Chamberlin, " Chittagong " or "Brah-
mapootra " strain. This settles one point clearly.

But I had hetter ones, and this it was that troubled my competitors, as
thousands testified in favor of my birds, all over the world, in those years. I
raised over sixteen hundred of the " Gray Shanghaes " in one year (1832 to
1853) in Melrose, and sent them all over Great Britain and the United States,
to my generous patrons' entire satisfaction, but never once calling them by the
detested name of Brahmapootras, about wliich Mr. Wright has raised such a
silly fuss.

All this, be it remembered, I now state as applying in point of time to the
period when Mr. Wright got out his books. Of course, in the last few years
(since this "Brahma" name has been so universally in use), I have as often
spoken of tTieiii as of my Gray Shanghaes, because everybody latterly thus
designates this kind of poultry, fbr convenience. And in my "New Poultry
Book,*' issued in 1871, I advertised and wrote about them as "Brabmas,"
because we had all accepted this latest popularly established name — both in
England and America. But not previously, when Wright published his
works. And I solemnly declare that I never was concerned in making or in
sustaining this name of "Brahma'' for fowls, and never claimed it for my
stock, for I bad no occasion to do so.

146 THE CHINA FOWL.

Now, the fowls lately coining from England to the United States, in
the shape of "fresh importations" of "Cochins" or"Brahmas," are bred
tJierc, and very skilfully too. The Englishmen call these birds what they
please, naturally. Our fanciers and poultry societies follow suit — though,
in the Light Brahma class, we lead them still, as we have done from the
outset. The later Dark Brahmas received here from England, are fine; but
I have never heard of any fresh stock, of this particular varletij and color,
having been received by anybody in Great Britain, from China, or " from
Luckipoor, in India," since the advent of my first Dark Brahmas (or Dark
Gray Shanghaes) into England in 1853, as is stated at that period by Mr. W.
B. Tegetmeier. And I know of no one who has ever set up any claim to have
received from anybodj^, anywhere, previously, or since I sent those Dark
Brahmas to London, in that j'ear, any similar birds from awy place hut
England ; while we have yet to learn, with all Lewis Wright's platitudes, and
his rigmarole about his " Indian officers' reports" of the existence of these Gray
" Brahmas " formerly and still in that country, that there has over, since 1853,
been a single bird of this character brought thence into British ports !

Here is another patent /Itc* fur Mr. Wright's consideration. Does ho allude
to this important circumstance in either of his ponderous books? Not he!
But I now point to this reality in earnest. If the Light and Dark "Brah-
mas " were, or are, so plenty out in India, with which country the Britons are
known to be so constantly in communication, why have we or they not chanced
to liave had a fresh importation or- two, or a dozen, within the past more than
twenty years, from this paradise of the " Brahma" varieties ? Or, why have
not similarly-plumed birds fou})d their way to either England or America from
China — from Shanghae, Canton, Ning Po, or IIong-Kong, even — in all
that long period ? I rather think Mr. Lewis Wright will find this question a
poser to answer satisfactorily, either to himself or to the breeders and ad-
mirers of these two varieties that originated in America, and were first
owned, bred, and shown publicly in this country and in England, by George
P. Burnham of Melrose, Mass., and " not in India."

I do not deny, and never will dispute the fact, that this stock has been at
times improved by domestication and skilful breeding in both countries, since
I originated these birds, of either variety, as a general thing. And yet I have
never seen a finer lot of the Liylit variety than those I shipped to Ilur British

BURN HAM VS. witiauT. 147

IMajesty in 1S52, from my j'.inls ; nor have I ever seen a better trio of tlie
Dark strain tlian the tJiree uplendid birds I first sliippod in 1853 to Jolm
Baily. of Mount Street, London ; and I never expect to see these twelve fowls
excelled for size, beauty, truthfulness in blood, markings, or general points.
To-dav, ^[r. Baily advertises his Dark IJrahmas as being " bred from stock
descended from Mr. G. P. Bnrnham's original consignment to him." If the
Light and Dark Brahmas are so readily to be had, and are so " common in
India," why haven't some of the Wrights, the Gwjaines, the Watts, the
Bailys, the Bakers, the Teebays, the Beldons, and a thousanc"! other enter-
prising leading English breeders, obtained from " the port; of Luckipoor, in
India, in the valley of the Brahmapootra," where these superb fowls are said
by Wright and his officious '' India friend " to so abound (?) some samples of
this celebrated race of poultry, with which to " freshen up " the Yankee stock
or English strains that they have been breeding in-and-in so many years ; but
which, in the year 1874, is as fine as it was in 1851, '52, in every respect, and
which so " marvellously holds out " in all its original proportions and charac-
teristics, form, weight, size, and comeliness, notwithstanding the tens of thou-
sands, aye! hundreds of thousands of birds that have been bred from my ''ori-
ginal seven " and their progeny, on both sides of the Atlantic, during the last
more than two decades of years ?

Come, Mr. Lewis Wright ! You know some things about poultry, though
you really know precious little about the Brahma fowl-origin, evidently. We
have in the United States, to-day, five hundred fanciers who can teach you the
A, B, C, of this business ; malgre all your profundity in a general way in
the science of chickenology. Will you, for the benefit of the fancy in
America and Great Britain, please give your views in response to these
queries I have just herein suggested ? I do not ask this upon my own
account, because I know all about this "little joker," the "Brahmapootra."
I am not a fool, if I am the deceiver you attempt, in your two books, to
make me out. And I have studied this subject " in a reverent spirit," for the
greater part of the last quarter of a century, assiduously. I know this
Burampooter-Brahmapootra-Gray-Shanghae-i>raA?)ia subject through and
through ; although you facetiously express the opinion in your " monograph
of the Brahma Fowl," page 46, that "to every breeder of this fowl, it will
be evident that the amount of knowledge here hinted at is not very great,

148 THE CHINA FOWL.

and tliat nothing could better show ]5urnhara's ignorance of tJie fowl itself,
tlian liis expression of opinion."

Ah, Lewis, 3'ou have a deal to learn upon tliis subject, j-et ! And I am
sure it will not savor of boasting, when I affirm that I have long ago forgotten
more than you can ever know about the wretched humbug of tliis l>rahma-
pootraism ; though I never was inveigled into, or implicated in it, indi-
viduallj', thank heaven ! except to fight and satirize it. That part of the
work I have faithfully attended to, first and last, for over twenty years, and I
have not finished yet: sincg such men as you are, keep rising uji, like Ban-
quo's ghost, — whom I am compelled to " lay," — one after another ; and this
keeps me busj' still in this direction.

Y'ou have shown yourself pretty clever at railing, Lewis, but your recent
efforts, in terrorem, pointed at me, will not have the desired eflvct you evidently
aimed at. You can not " rail the seal from off mij bond " in this controversy,
through your mulish contumacy and clumsy platitudes, while these two facts
stand upon the record; viz., Lst. "!Mr. Geo. P. Burnham exhibited in Bo.ston
the first (iraj Shanghae fowls ever seen there ; from which stock, bred in his
yards. Dr. John 0. Bennett produced tlie first so-called 'Light Brahmas '
ever shown in the world ; 2d. Mr. Geo. I'. Burnham sent to England, early in
1853, the first trio of ' Dark Brahmas ' ever seen there, or anywhere else,
which latter (from the same original stock) went from Mr. Burnham's yards
in Melrose, Mass., direct to Mr. John Bail3', of London."

Thus much is certain — deny it, argue it, or dispiute it, who will !

Nobody shows (upon the piast record) any of this now so-called Brahma
stock, of either Liglit or Dark varieties prior to those two showings. Since
then, you can point to no one fresh "importation" \>y anijhodij, either in
England or America, of a single Light or Dark Gray Hhanghae, or " Brahma "
fowl from India, China, or other Eastern country ! There have been none
since. There were none before. And I challenge you, or any man on earth
to show that this "expdicit statement " of mine is not true, to the letter.

I care not who has bred this stock since then. I am indifferent as to who
has raised other Light Gray fowls since that period. It is immaterial to mo
what birds have been reared since the time when I first showed and sent
those two varieties of "a new breed of poultry" all over the world. And
it is of the very least importance Ilow this may have been effected after me.

BURyilAil F,V. WrtlGUT. 149

I furnislieil the stork oftlie tiro oriyiiial slnilini of now so-called Light and
Dark Bralmias — tliough I calleil it by its rightful name at, and from, the
outset; while Dr. lionuott [first) theu Cornish, with a hundred others, and,
lastly, Lewis Wright, eliose to nick-naiue these line birds by another title.
This J could not control. iUit the facts remain, and the fowls are to-day un-
changed — save that, in the main, they have been somewhat improved upon
by long domestication and careful breeding, in the hands of skilful fanciers
on both sides of the Atlantic. When you can show us that these assertions
are incorrect, and when you are able to satisfactorily answer the queries I
have herein propounded — it will be quite time, Mr. Wright, to talk of and
arijuc the points referring to the assumed pre-history of the Coruish-Gham-
berlin-Beunett-Hatch-Knox-'' imported-from-India "-Brahmapootra strains.

Perhaps you do know sufficient about this business to reply to tlie ques-
tions I have proposed. Will you then please tell us, also, why it is that the two
Cornish assertions (which statements you inform me by letter dated London,
May 23, 1874, are the basis of your opinions and theory), about the arrival
of his fowls ''in the ships at ISTew York from India in 1849," and twenty
years afterwards that " they arrived from Luckipoor, in India, in September,
1846," are considered by j'ou to be " accurate and conclusive evidence " that
Burnham is a deceiver and a swindler, and that "his stock is spurious,"
when said Burnham, his fowls nor his existence is once referi-ed to, nor hinted
at, in those two letters ? And will you be kind enough, at the same time
(though I woitld not occasion you too much trouble at once), to inform us
ignorant and illiterate people on this side of the Atlantic, why those India
ships, arriving at Xew York, with the Cornish-Chamberlin gray fowls in 1849
first, and in 1846 afterwards, never made any "port entry" at the Custom-
house in Xew York, of "ship, or captain," as our United States revenue laws
imperatively require? Were fowls, ship, captain, sailor, obscure owner —
a\\ sinugijled into New York? And is this tiie reason why everybody so
conveniently forgot the date and the reticent parties who had to do with this
" little job " ■;' It may be so ; but I think this hardly possible. Still, this
hypothesis is a far more reasonable one than are the published conclusions
upon your premises, which 3rou so triumpliantlj' indulge in at my expense,
in view of tlie actual facts existing in this important point in the case, as I
have fairly presented them.

150 THE CHINA FOWL.

The limits of this volume will not afford me space to arcjue this question,
were I inclined to do so, which I am not. And I simply present these in-
terrogatories as pertinent, in my judgment, to the issue involved. If Mr.
Wright can answer these plain queries, we sliall certainly thus learn what
we do not at present know in America ; and I have always believed that we
knew all that anybodj' did upon this "Brah)na-origin " topic. His reasoning
and sophistry are of no mortal account. His pedantic display in tautological
and technical particularities, as to the formation of the skulls of ±he now
so-called '' Brahmas," and the now so-called " Cochins," in comparison,
carries no more weight with it than would the utterance of so much Sanscrit
in the estimation of ordinary fowl-breederS ; wlio, nevertheless, appreciate
all this " moonshine " at its true value.

And so I shall not here attempt to answer his "points," seriatim, in kind ;
since I am only desirous to place the naked facta before my readers, in as
plain a dress as my humble capacity to make myself understood will p)ermit,
leaving it to their common intelligence to decide, after examining said facts,
whether Wright is wrong, or Burnham is right — or otherwise, — in this
already greatly over-discussed matter. I have stated that Wright has
interpolated and misquoted me and others in his books, to my personal dis-
advantage, most malicious]3^ Below, I give an example (out of dozens that
I might quote, had I room in this book), where Mr. Wright indulges in this
sort of contemptible wrong and distortion towards me. In the English"
" Cottage Gardener," 1853, appears tliis sentence, which I extract to the
letter : —

[Tlid oriijhwl paiwjra2)h.)

" Mr. P. Jones states the fact of a pair of Gray chickens he bought" (of
w/w/ft ;'j "breeding 'silver cinnamon' offspring; whilst tha pure unmixed
stock of Dr. Gwynne, who had his direct from Dr. Bennett, and a Mr.
Sheenan and others," (not Burnham !) " invariably bred pure gray." And
again, same paper, "while what have been considered as the purest strain
of the Brahma Poutras have thrown pure chickens onlij, we know, on good
authority, that the produce of imported birds of equally higli pretensions
have produced Bujf ahickana with black hackles."

And here is the manner (italics and all) in which Lewis Wright cooks up
this paragragh, when Jie pretends to make this extract for his "Poultry
Book," see page 241, to aid him to " confound Burnham " with !

nURXIIAM vs. WUICUT. 1 Ti 1

( The qiiolalion as j'rhileil hi/ ]Vri<ilif.)

'• Mr. V. Jonos, in tlio Cott:i<j;e Ganli'iicr, tells of ;i pair df ctiiv ('liiclicns lie
bought hrevdiwji sil ri'r viiniaiiioii iili's[)riiiL;', — a Mirc si;;ii of iTnssliii^-, — wliile
the pure uniiii\i.'il stock, olitaincd tlircrt IVnm ! ir. J M'linct t, who liail his i'roui
]\[r. Cornish, ■ invaviaMy hreil pure gray.' In tho same year the editor himself
writes, that ' while what havi' heen eoiisiil.-ie il llu- purest strain of Firalnna
I'outras have thrown inirc clii'-/:riis o/i/i/. \\-{' ]v-no\v on good authority that the
produce of iDiportcil /iir(/s of equalli/ Ji'kjIi [n-ctrnsions (I'urnliam's) liave pro-
duced Buft' chickens with black hackles. ' "

Is this — with its italics, alterations, and additions — penned b}' Wright in a
Christian teni[ier ? Is this "conducting the j^oultry fancy in a reverent
spirit ? " Is this " striving in the fear of God to do good to the community,
of which we form a part ? " as Lewis Wright, in the preface to this very
''Brahma Fowd '" bool: (Ih-st editions) cantingly claims we should do ? . . .
This entire perversion of the sense and text of the original paragraph, thus
garbled b}' ^Vright, — which in no one word refers to me or my fowls, any more
than do the two Cornish letters ho similarlj' garbles, — I simph' pronounce ut-
terly false, as well as infamous. And Wright ];netv he was uttering this falsity,
and perpetrating this infamy, wdien he thus inserted my name in parenthesis
in. and changed the phrasing of, that [lara graph, thus ignobl}', gratuitously,
and designedly — as he has similarly done in other places.

This is but a single instance of Wright's folly and contumely towards me ;
and, as to the paragraph just quoted from the "Cottage Gardener," — /
never knew, or heard of the instance, in my whole five-and-twentj' j'ear's ex-
2)erience with my Gray stock, where a " buff chicken " appeared among their
progeny, — in my own yards, nor in the hands of any other person who bred
my gray fowls clean, — either in America or England; and I do not believe
the case ever occurred. They did breed all shades of Light and Dark gray
birds ; but never a buif one, within ray knowdedge, from 1849 to 1874, in-
ehisive. While, on the other band, in reference to the Cornish-Bennett
strain, prated about bj' Wright in this altered quotation he makes, I find
in June, 1874, in the " Poultry World," written by Mr. Plaisted (Dr. Ben-
nett's business partner in the chicken trade in 1853 and '54), these re-
markably candid words upon this verj' subject: —

"Dr. Bennett removed to Iowa,- in March, 1853" (from New Hampshire).
"He was unable to endure the western climate, and made me a proposition

152 THE CniNA FOWL.

to go into company in tlie poultry-stock business " (at Great Falls, !N". H.),
" which I accepted. He returned in October, 1 853, and this plan was car-
ried out to the letter." . . . " I selected every Brahma that J)r. Bennett or
Bennett & Plaisted ever shipped to England, excepting the pair {he first)
sent to Dr. Gwynne." . . . "All these Brahmas, shipped to England, were
bred either by Dr. Bennett, S. 0. Platch, George Smith, or niy.selt, excepting
the pair sent to Dr. Gwynne. I know this for a certainty, and tlieso are the
fowls ichich Mr. L. Wright ha.<; described as -Dr. Bennett's " puke Brahmas."
In breeding these, many diiferent shades of color were produced, the most
objectionable being pure Imff, with the exception of a pencilled neck, as fine
a color as ire see to-daij among the Buff Cochins." . . . "Deeming it best to
keep these oaf of the stock as much as possible, I selected those with fine
pencilled ncchs, black tails, &c." ..." I had more fear of the buff showing
itself /rojft the stock sent to JUngland hij us, than of any thing else. It was
reasonable to suppose that, if they bred all colors the first year or two, the
English fani-iers would reject tliem, and consider that we had been playing a
'Yankee trick.' Whatever may be said of the early history of these 'Brah-
mas,' it is an indisputable fact, that buff's were found in all the yards where
tlicy were bred, as well as the shades of color before mentioned.'' ..." Mr.
Wright thiiiks those sent to England by Mr. George P. Burnham were
mongrels. These I know nothing about. He (AVright) gives as his reason,
that tliKi/ bred buff ; yet they might have been as pure as any of the others
sent, and still breed buff progeny."

This from Mr. C. C. Plaisted, in 1874, who claims that lie is writing a fresh
history for the " World," of the Cornish-Chamberlin-Bennett-Hatcb "pure
Brahmapootras," and who " know.s nothing about" the. gray fowls Mr. G. P.
Burnham sent to England, which Wright falsely says "produced buff chick-
ens with black hackles." It is pretty clear from this account, so frankly
given by Mr. Plaisted, and so accurately (as I know it to be), that the
buff-chicken breeding from the Grays, in England, occurred with this very
Cornish-Bcnnctt stock that Wright so lauds (at my expense) ! And, since I
can affirm that I never sold a gray fowl in England to " Mr. P. Jones," to
the "editor of the Cottage Gardener," or to "a IMr. Sheenan," in my life,
and never knew or heard of a case where my Gray Shanghaes ever once
threw a buff chicken, anywhere, in all my experience, I declare this to be
another coined falsity of Wright, made up out of whole cloth, to serve the
dastardly jiurpose he had in view in thus interpolating and altering this
fjuotation he makes (upon this particular pioint) in his two densely muddled
"historical" chicken books.

r.rnNiiAM ivs'. wtiKiiiT. ]f>;i

After tlio lorcyoing pai^'os wci-c priiiled, Mr. Wiiglit in liis August Gazette

renewed his attaek upon nie. Instead ol' Udting my answer to his original

assaults, he turns to the " Ihai Fever" to suslain his falsities; and starts anew

with liis old evudities, in a. promise ''to do Mr. lUirnham justice." lie says —

"1 state ((.II ii!ifj:r 2-tO iif my " ISniik i.f I'nultry,") that, in the flni Frva; liiiniliam alKnns (Ii:it
Li,i;ht and Iliirk I'ralnnas had (//.f^mf*^ ('/-iV/z/^f, Luit lliaf In- — luoilcst man! — had made them /juth ;
tile Liudlt liy hi-ei'diiie- frnm smne immv. iima-iissed (Irey ('nrliiiis. the Dark liy ei-ossiliL;' (_'nehiiis with
(ire\- C'hitta_L;-(.ii,i;s .... Lale in 18.V2 lie sent nvry a emisienmeid of an-ciilkd Lif/ht Brahmns
to Her ilajesiy the t)neen, and in tin' l'nih)A\ine- yi-ar a nnnd)i'T v( Durk bin/s to various iiriieilers.
.Vlld ae-ainon pae-e 24-t. I ol.-er\e: AVhen Ihirnlnlm said that the Dark llrnjunns were formeil Ijy .a
ero>s hetween tiri'V (.'hitta^on;;s and ('oeliins, lie meant, ..^e., kS;e."

In what I did write, I "meant" precisely wluit I said — and not what Lewis
Wright falsely "quotes," or allirms that I said. I have already, in these pages,
insisted that I never made the above statements, and tliat I never "sent over
aiiv so-called Light Bralimas to Her Majesty." I sent tlie (^ueen a cage of my
" Gi!-\.Y Sit.\.XGii,A.ES," only. Then " so called " b}' me, always so called by me,
accepted by Her Majesty as " Gray Shanghaes " — and nothing else.

I now repeat that the sentences Wright pretends thus to quote from my early
book, do nut appear there. The term ^^ Dark SSrahmtis" is not once used in the
entire .li."! pages of my "Hen Fever I " Nor is the sentence that I "made the
Lirjhl Brahmas liy breeding from pure, uncrossed Grey Cochins," in that vol-
ume — anywhere. Again — the lines " IViiriiham said that the Doric Brahmas
were formed by a cross between Grey Chittagongs and Cocliins," are Wright's
words — not mine. I n.'ver said so, or penned this paragraph.

I iu)w say that neither the Darh " Brahmas " or the Darl: " Grey Shanghaes "
are alluded to, in the Hen Fever. But, in order to back iiii liis first falsities,
Wright fabricated tliis stuff, in his "Book of Poultry," tuid adlieres to it, yet!

In the name of all that is righteous or decent, is this sort of "argument" fair
dealing towards me, on the part of Lewis Wright? On pages 150 and 151 I ex-
pose other altered and interpolated quotations made by Wright — in a similar
vein, with a similar sinister purpose. Still, in his London paper of August 22d,
'74. he reproduces a 'part of Cornish's first 1852 letter, (adroitly leaving out the
sentence he prints from that document in his " Brahma Fowl " in 1870, which
declares that " Chamberlin got his Gray fowls in 1849 ! !") and the whole oi tlie
second 1809 letter, wherein Cornish says he " got them in 1846 " — to rc-liolster
his previous blunders coupled with Cornish's two accounts ; which last mentioned
article he concludes with this remarkalile passage: "I promise that my next
accounts from iMr. Bundiam will not lie hea\'y reading . . . and I 'fudge,'
tliis \ve(dc, liy simply giving that of Mr. Cornish."

154 THE CHINA FOWL.

This word fudge, used by Wriglit, I did not at first appreceiate. Upon con-
sulting Webster, however, I find tlie definition of this ungraceful term to be as
follows: "Fudge — v. t 7 o devise ; to contrive ; to fabricate; to foist; to in-
terpolate." In his London Gazette, page .'537, Wright says — "I fudge, this
week, by simply giving the accounts of Mr. Cornish." To which / add, (not-
witlistanding Wright's frank confession of his offense, in this instance,) that he
has been constantly " fudging," from the outset ! Yet it is refreshing to see
liim admit that he has devised, contrived, fabricated, foisted, and interpolated.

And here I will note the fact tlwt the " Poultry World " for September con-
tains a portrait of Mr. Chas. Kno.v, in 1847, "a clerk on a Hartford and New
York propeller" — whom Mr. Flaisted argues is "the sailor" we have heard
so much of, in connection with tlie Cornish-Chamberlin-Brahma-pootras. A
pleasant but indefinite letter is given from Mr. Knox, who sa3rs " In 1847 I went
on board a ship at New York, to look at two pairs of remarkable ]ioultry, which
were to be exhibited at Franklin Market" — and "next trip (after reporting to
Mr. Cliamberlin) I went and bought the gray pair, and took thein to Hartford."
lie, too, states that he " never knew what port this vessel came from, n<ir her
name ; " and " this is all lie can remember of the transaction."

I only say to this that I never before heard of Mr. Knox, who it appears was
no " sailor," but a clerk on a propeller in 1847 ; now a highly respectable gentle-
man in Ohio — "a man of honor and alike of wealth." 1 liave no doubt he
"saw" and "l)ought a gray pair of fowls," as he avers. / have done this same
tiling, often. Hut I cannot conceive wliat this gentleman's seeing, linying, in-
writing about " tliis transaction in 1847 " has to do with me, or mine — since he
makes no reference to Mr. Burnham or his poultry, in this account. And surely
it can have no bearing upon "accurate" Mr. Cornish's two storitts about " Brali-
ma-]iootras." Yet this new theory is as plausible as Wriglit's old one; tliough,
as I have said before, it is rather late in the day to cook this tale up, and ajiply
it as " liistory," thus ex pt/st-facto.

However, I know nothing about Mr. Knox, or tliis IS 17 ])aii' of grav fowls.
1 never saw them, oi' heard of them before. My affair is with Lewis Wright,
and his stui)id C'ornish-yai'ns of 184!) and 184(). In giving this letter I'rcnn iMr.
Knox, dated " Toledo, 0., .Inly 22d, 1874," Mr. C. C. Plaisteil exnltingly (^n(|uires,
with King Jolni, " Have I not here the best cards for the (fame ? " In answer to
which I reply, " I tliink not — since you liave 'sliewn your liand ;' and it doe.s
not look to me like a winning one. You have 'called' too soon, friend P!"

BURNUAM V,S. WRIGHT. lo5

It is generally known among poultiy fanciers in America, tliat Mr. Virgil
Cornisli of Connecticut lias written the two letters which have been puljlishi.'d,
referring to "a pair of large liglit-gray fowls " which a Mr. Chamberlin in
said to have become possessed of, mj'storiously, in the early yeara of the
poidtry mania. These two letters (nearly twenty years apart in their dates)
are reprinted in both, of Lewis Wright's latest books ; and upon these two
different accounts by Cornish, Mr. AVright tells ns he bases his singular theory
of the " origin of the Brahma fowls."

In one of these published letters, — the first, dated March, 1S52, — Cornish
says, his fowls "came to New York in the India shi}?," and thence "into
Connecticut, in 1S49 ; " and "it is certain they never were bred until they
reached this [his] town." In the other letter, Cornisli says, just as "definitely
and accurately " (which second letter is dated November 9, 18G9), " the ship
arrived with my fowls at New York in September, 1840 ! I bought t\\e first
brood batched out, and, in April following, i/te old pair I"

Now, what is there " explicit " or " accurate " in these two distinctly dif-
ferent statements of Cornish, that he first got his pair of fowls from the sailors
of the India ships at New York in 1849," that " it is certain they never were
bred till they reached Connecticut," and his "town, in that yenr;" then (in
1869) stating that they "arrived at New York in a ship from Luckipoor, in
India, September, 1846," and he " got the first brood hatched in 1847," etc. ?

Mr. Lewis Wright's capacity for understanding very plain language must
be most indifferent, indeed, if he cannot see the inconsistent character of these
two accounts! But, in addition to this, — not by one syllable, in either
of these letters which he quotes from Cornish, does that gentleman allude to
me, in the remotest way. Why, then, should Wright drag me into this mess?

Mr. Cornish and Mr. Burnham never once, in those j'ears (before Wright
wrote his books), or since, ever had any dispjute or "conflict." And is it
not clear, upon a moAnt's examination, in view of the above two antago-
nistic accounts, that both Mr. Wright's false theory and Cornish's repeated
misstatements alike " go up in a balloon ? "

In Wright, page 17, we have it thus : Cornish says that " Chamberlin
brought his fowls into Connecticut in the eailj' part of 1849." Mr. Cornish
says, in the same letter, "I got my stock from Chamberlin, direct." Then
he says (in 1869), the ship with these fowls on board arrived in 1846 ! Most
of the first brood came out in May, 1847, which I purchased in August, and

156 THE CHINA FOWL.

the old pair in April following." Thus, though he asserts clearly, in March
2, 1.S52, that Gliamberlin did not "bring his fowls into the State until 1849,"
he "purcliased of Chamherlin the most of the first brooil in August, 1847,
and tliP. old pair in April, 1848 ! " And, in that same first letter (see Wright,
page 16, and Miss Watts' Poultry Yard, page 62, printed in italics), Cornish
says, "it is certain they never were bred till they reached his town, in 1849 ! "

Now, I will shortly present the recent, evidence of a Connecticut Light-
Brahraa writer and breeder, in reference to Cornish's two statements, who
positively asserts that "there is ^oj/t/rajr accurate in the first one; that the
last one is still worse; that Cornisli did not purchase Chamberlin's first
brood; and tliat ho never owned any 'old pair' of' Grays, at ffwy time ! "
Which assertions will be backed by three witnesses, now alive, at Hartford.

Yet Lewis Wright repeatedly insists, in his two works, that "Mr. CoriiisKs
accounts are the only reliable ones puLlislied ; " tliat "Cornish tells the story
of the lirahma origin accurately and clearly ;" that Virgil Cornish's state-
ments " are explicit and indisputable ; " that " no one can question Mr. Cor-
nish's accuracy;" and that, for all the details of his stupid and utterly falla-
cious theory, he (Wriglit) relies upon "the unimpeachable, succinct, consistent,
triitliful, clearly-narrated statements made and repeated by Virgil Cornish !"

However, I must not omit just here to repeat that in neither of the aljove
accounts of Mr. Cornish — whether tliey be false or true — does that gentle-
man once refer to me, or to my fowls, in the remotest way. And I will add
that I should not now have spoken of Mr. Cornish but tliat Wright goes so
far out of his way in the endeavor to sustain his nonsensical theory in his two
books as to drag Mr. Cornish and mj'self before the public, antagonistically;
when the exact truth in this matter is, that Mr. Cornish and Mr. Buruham
never had a word of diiference, written or verbal, until Wright thus pitted
them against each other, for his own inexplicable purposes.* And hero I call
especial attention to the pertinent extracts on pages 1^ to 161.

»■ Since these present pages were written, — notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Burnham had
previously, through the poultry journals and by private letters, communicated the true state of the
case to &Ir. Wriglit, in full, — this gratuitous maligner in tJie papers assumes new grounds of
assault, and persists in the bigoted determination to sustain his originally-invented nonsense. But,
avoiding the issues ho had already made, he starts afresh upon entirely untenalde grounds, and
witli a totally different line of argument, to prove what " Burnham did," and " Burnham didn't,"
iu the years ago. To which latest rodomontade, by Wright, entirely in the old vein, I will simply
here apply the trite but truthful apothegm, — " false in one, false in all." — G. P. B.

BUItNHAM VS. WRIGHT. lo(

AVe shall liiid that the so-stateil " iiiiportatiou from Iin/la" of tlie Cor-
nish-sailor gray fowls has mi foumlatiou iu fact; auJ though the young
birds, shown at the early exhihitious iu Jiostou, were very good speoinieus,
there can be no doubt (as there exists no evidence to the coittrari/) that a/l
the Light-Gray sanijiles oxliibited in 1S50, '51, '52, — as the Committees of
Judges at Boston declare officiall}-, — came out of the same original stock, and
that this '• large pair of gray fowls," naid b}' the sailor to liave been " found "
by him in jSi^ew Yort, or elsewliere, were hatched from eggs sent previously
from m>/ yards, or were sold by me to some unknown party, as chickens ;
which chanced to develop into a fine pair of birds in tlie hands of tlie person
who thus obtained them. C>r, they might have come from Pennsjdvania, as
mine did in tlie first instance — ^from Dr. Kerr.

As to the first letter signed by Virgil Cornish, dated March 2, 1852, I will
add here that I am ready to take oath that Dr. John C. Bennett came to my
house and passed the night there, a few months previoiisl// to the date of that
document, when he exhibited to me and to members of my famil}' Jtis ready
prepared account of what was " shortlj' to be forthcoming as the true history
of the origin and importation of the Brahmapootra fowls, from India,'' which
precious document (as nearly as I can now recollect it), in his handwriting,
was almost word for word this verij letter, published in 1852 as Mr. Cornish's !
During the Doctor's visit to me that day and night, at Melrose, he informed
me that this very statement was to be published, and that it would be ap-
proved by Mr. Cornish and Mr. Hatch of Connecticut. He then took up a
proof I had of the illustration of his original three "Brahmapootra" fowls,
the first ever shown in the world, which may be seen on page 20 of this vol-
ume (which block was engraved twentj'-four years ago, and which wood-cut
I have the original of now in my possession), and npon the margin of said
proof he wrote thes*. words : ^^ Remove streamers, make the two j'^ullets
larger, no featliers on legs ;" which directions were addressed by Dr. Ben-
nett to the artist who made the drawing, for the purpose of republishing this
cut to suit his ideas, then, of the " Brahmapootras " he wished to delineate.
The above memoranda, in Bennett's own hand-writing upon that proof, I have
still in my hands. The "streamers," as tlie Doctor called them, referred to
the slight top-knots which appear (see engraving) at the back of the heads
of all tliree of these original " Brahmapooters.''

158

THE Criiy^A FOWL.

PKO

AND

CON.

Extracts from otlier Poultry Authorities.

" The clearness of the white, nnd the well-defined
markin:;s of the two contriOiUions ^-^hown nl Ilir-
niiiiirlKUii.altriictedatti'Mtion. A few week.-^ al'ter,
some of these hirds, sent over on siK'Oiilaiion by
lir. .1. C. lleiiiu'tt. were .^liown in Hakor Siiuet."
— Miss }ratts' J.oiuh»i '' rouftri/ Yani:'

" 1 never sent ovit to Iler ::\l:Vies(y ,7}n/ so-ealled
' Uriihnias,' carlv or hile. I never s>tid 1 did. I
n'-'Vi'i- pretended 1 did; and no one. save Lewis
"Wright, has ever said, or pretended, 1 did!" —
C. A Buniham, in nii Ihc I'oaltrK Joiinuils.

"Tlie Rrnhmaswere r(/\sV exhibited in Rostonby
i*[r. llatcli,or (.'onncetii-iit.as • (Jray (.'Iultai:^onffs,'
in 18.">0. I f/iv.'//(t'</L'xhibitin';. Ilien. 1 prebrred
to te^t ilu'ni fiirihi-r. 1 sold no birds to any one
until /'^■••ni/'er, isr>0. 1 sold {In-ni at tirst at 81^
pLM- pair." — }'/roil Cornish, Connecticut, in icti'cr
dated Xov. 'J, Iblitt.

" There is not a jiartiele of evidence to sho^\■ that
theso fowls eanie from India' Tlie banks of the
llrahniaiioolra Itixer lia\e loiii; been in possession
ol' the lii-itisli, and no sncli fon-!s ircre I'rcr seen in

Extracts from Wright's Two Poultry Books.

" The Rralima Fowl was nnquestionably first in-
troiUicod into Euiiland as late as the year 185"^,
\\ lien two pens ^vure sliown at liirndiiL^hani by
5[rs. Ilozier \\"imanis and Or. Guyiine. It was
saiil ild- fowl was a new breed, imported from In-
di I." — Ifright's ^' Brahma Fou-J.'^

" ^[r. Oiirnham, of the United States, who, it
will be remembered, sent o^■e^ some of tlie earliest
so-callfd ' IJralinuis' as a jiresent to Ilci' Majesty,
in IS^'J, artirms that he ori;/inated them." — Front,
the " lirohina Fowl " by Lewis Wright.

"T\\Q first exhibition of lifrbt Brahma chickens
took phi'ce in lioston. in October, lsr>0, and were
thos..- of Dr. .1. (.'. liennett. This \H.-\t ^\ as eon-
sidi-rod nia^^nilieent ; and lir. Bennett's own slute-
nu'iit wa-^ that he imrcliased them jii-evioitsly at a
vcr\" hiixh fitrnre tVoni Mr. ^'. Curuisli, of C'ouu." —
" Jiruhin I FoicV again.

'■ 3Ir. ('■hamberlin, of f'onnecticnt, sent a sailor
to XfW York, who reported that he found a pair
of Li.^ht-firay fowls, whicli hu purchased. The
man in New York, wliose name we ha\e not ^ot,
^ave no account of their ori.Lrin, except thai they thit locdih/. In I'act, the Brahmas originated noi
came over in the ^)(//(r ships." " Tliese were said in Imlia, "hiil in America "— [fliey were first

to be orii2:inal)y ini]>orted from India."-
ma Fonil," pp. \) and 10.

' Bruh- broil. ijht lo jmblic notice by Mr. Burnlunn.] —"the
t\vo varieties." — Tegetineier's /\>iiliri/ Book, p.ijo.

"Dr. Bennett stated (in IR.^0^ that he pur-
cliased his tirst fowls of Sir. Cornish; and a por-
tion of Mr. Cornish's account, not ijuoted in Ids
tirst published letter (about these lo\vls), stales
that ' Chamberlin (of whom Cornisli p:ot his chick-
ens) l:)rouiLilit his fowls into <_'onnecticut in the
e trli/ ji'irt'oflH4i>.'" ... "I give below all the
facts {Nov. 9, ISG'.i.) relating to the early history of
the Brahmapootra fowls. . . . Mr. Chaniberlin's
name was Nelson II. The ship arrived in New
York in Septendier, IS40. The name of the port
from which the ship sailed ^\ as Luckijioo]-, in Jn-
di I. ' 1 bought the tirst brood liatchid out, in Au-
gust, and the ohl pair in April follouing.' The
BrahuKis were tirst exhibited in Boston as 'Gray
Chitlagongs,' in 18r>0. The V'imr was then es-
tablished." This is ]\Ir. Cornish's statement,
and is "the only account consistent with the
fads and itseli'. wtiich is seen to be corroborated
in e\ery possible wav." — ]rn';/ht's " Orie/in of
the Brahma," pp. 17, liO, and Xi-l.

" ]\rr. Cornish being the lirst who has seen tit to
publish a ' history.' of the Brahmas, and having
therein made statements not easily prti\ en, I shall
take the liberty of criticising his account. I am
nnable to gather from those ^\"ho first owned them
in this eoiintr> , positive evidence concerning their
nati\ ily. Some ha\ e asserted that they were ori-
ginally from Chiltagong; others name the Bnr-
rampooier A'alley, India, as their natural home;
and ^Ir. <'ornisli, in ii, fater account, says they
came from a port called ' Luekipoor,' up the Bnr-
rampooter lvi\er; none of whicli statements are
proven to be antlientic. If Mr. (.'Ornish had stated
that they were a ' hickv hit,' I should have airreed
with hini. Mr. V'ornisji rehites that 31r. Hatch, of
llainden, <'oun., exhibited llrahmas in 18.^0, in
Boston. .Mr. Hatch resided in Franklin at that
time, and the date of his Urst exhibition was in
18r>l (not lS.->0). :\Ir. Cornish, in all his slate-
nicnts to Mr. AVrighf, goes back one year earlier
than he onght to.'' — C. (_'. Pknstcd. in isM.

*' So far as positive eridencc U concerned, it must " Tho first pair of these fowls, about which there
be considered decisively the fact that Barnhani's has been so niuch discussion, w(Me hionghl by one
account is a deception, while Mr. Cornish's is cor- (.'harles Iviiox lo Mv. Nelson 11. Chaiidierlin,

rect ; and that (dJ the genuine ' Brahmas ' were
bred from the original pair lirst brought into Con-
necticut bv Mr. ( 'hamberlin ! " ( IVhen ? in 1 840 ?
in 184(1*? or in X^^.'X'-l) —Wright's '' Brahma

Foirl," pp. '20, ^1.

Ilartlbnl, Conn., in 1847. They were_;jo-^ f,rcd
by Mr. Chamberlin in 1S48. Mr. Ivnox" reported
tliem just arrived on ;in l^ast India vessel, !i( N^w
York."— C. C. J'laisled's {Bennett's partner) uo-
County in 1^71:.

PRO A\D coy.

159

" Tt apponrs, both from the statcnionts of privtite *' Mr. S.O. Hatch, of Connecticut, ^j'S^ exhibited
iirrespoiidfiicc aridCrotii the various iiapers of the these fowls in Kovembei\ 1851. An crroneoiia
period, Ihat the firat public exliibitioii of l,i;;ht stalenient has been made in rieiirly all the h'adin;;

Itrahnias toi»k plac
\\ ere chir7:,'iis, and wei
t. eat FaU-s, N.ll.'— "

lioMim,

11 1«.-|0. T

> shown b

l>r, I'.Llillptl

ISrahmi I

oH-i," p. ir.

poultry books and pajn-rs, lluil ih*- Li/^dit Brahnias
ol" ■were first sltowii at th<.' cxhildlioii in Jio.ston, iu
lvSr>0."— C. C. J'luislcd, in 1^74.

" Tliis pen (shown by l>r. lieniulf, in Octol)er,
1S.">0,) wa^ ei'Usidcred ni;i,!j:uiiieiMii l,i erery wnj,
and was the principal atlniclioii of (tie sliow. The
ijiiestiou at once occurred, from wiioni did Dr.
J^enuett procure these bird-*? And it is imjios-
sible to doubt lih oicii st<itcmeiit, made in answer
to every in(iuiry, that 'he purcba ed them from
Btr. Cornish, of fonnecticut.' " — Jf, ii/ht's •' Ori-
ffin of Bnilun !," p. 17.

" ^Ir. P. .Tones states the fact in ' 'J'lie Cotlnge
Gardener,' of a pair of Gray chickens lie boui^hi,
breedinpr silver ciininmon ortsprin^, a sure si^u of
cro>sins; while ibe pure unmixed stock, obliiined
from Dr. Bennett, wlio bad Ills from -■\ir. Cornish,
invariably bred imrc f;ray." ..." Wlnle tliis pur-
est strain of l;iah]iia.s have thrown pure chickens
onli/, we know that the produce of imported birds
of eijually hi,crb pretensions (Burnliam's) have
produced -Cwif chickens." — Leuris IFngkt's altcre I.
quotation, piige-J.i\, '' Illustrated Booh ofPoultrij."

"This is the trio jVir. A\'rir;]it has mentioned as
' \\\i.'jiri.t ijurc-bred ISrubmas exlubited at JJo.,tori.'
'i'liev were a cross, and iwt of tlie i.'haml'erlin
stock. Tliey were b^dit ^ray ; liad lop-knofs, and
attracted much attention, i'iut Ibis was in 1851,
November. At thi^i sliow ( 1311) ilr. Hatch gave
us the ^ir.s'i sight at pured^rod t'liamberlin Brab-
nias." — ('. ('-. Plaisttd,iii the Hartford '^ Poultry
jror!d," Ls74.

" Jly friend, Dr. Bennett, consulted me as to a
name for a brace of Gray fowls I saw in his yard,
in 1851. He entered these at our Boston show
that year, as ' Braniapootras.' These fowls were
bred by him from my lirst (I^r. Kerr) Gray.Sbang-
hae cock, which I sold the doctor, and aLigbt-Drab
{oi- silver cinuam<n)) .■^lianp:liae hen, in Massachu-
setts. Subsequenil}- the.--e I'uwls came to be called
' Burram Pootras,' ' Brahniajjootras,' and tinaily
Br->hinas." — Burnham's " yew /\'U'try Book,"
1870, ^j. 159, quoted from another work in ly55.

" All the facts strongly corroborate Mr. Corni-^li's

account, pro'^ ing that 'Connecticut was the bead-
quarters of this breed, and that from the very^r^'i
it bred with extreme purity as regards all the
characteristics." . . . ".Mr. Burnliam visited this
New-Kngland show in 1^5*% and endeavored to
parchase some of this ' Brahma' stock, bur failed."
— iVright's ''Brahma Fowl," p. 18.

" Tlie Light Brahmas undoubtedly originated in,
and were identical with, those Gray fowls (Burn-
bam'.s) tliat from the very first cai'rie over from
lYh'tnghae, with the Butf and Partridge birds now
universally known as ' Cochins,' and liere we ap-
pend Mr. Burnham's account of them, from his
amusing "History of the Hen Fever." — Tcget-
meiers' Poultry Book, London, Ls(J7.

"We have tlius tw^o very defnile statements by
3Ir. Burnbam : lirst, tljat he was the founder, or
original breeder of ' Brabmas; ' and secondly, that
the Light ^"arietv w^ere pure, uncrossed Gray Co-
chin:-." — ^Vri'jhVs " Origin of the Brnhma Fowl,"
in. l>-70, p. 12.

"T never had claimed to be the 'founder,' or
'originator,' of cry 'Brahma-^.' I simply said I
was the hrst breeder of the ' Gray .Shanghaes ' in
America (never ' Cochins '), such as I sent to tlie
Queen in 185^;;," See— G. P. Burnham, in all the
Poultry papers, 187-i.

" A!! Mr. Burnlujm's earlv Brabmas were single- " The single comb would appear to be the usunl

combed, while tne originals (Cornish's) were all form of that feature in the Braiimapootra fowl;

triple, or 'pea-combed.' The pea-comb alane is though, as Dr. Bentiett .~ays, 'the true breed do

alniO'C conclusi\e evidence of tlie superior an- som.e(i;«e.'; present thi-^ '/dwaf/.^ii of the pea-comb.' "

tiijuitv or purity nf the Brahma fowl." — Wrigh/s (.^ome.imes \)^ B v. }[r. Win gfield's Poultry Book,

*• Illustrated Poultry Book," p. 247. p. 170; puhlidhed in lb.3:i.

*' The comb know^n as the ' pea-comb,' is pe-
C'diar. No ;j''re strain ought to breed a solitary
comb in whicli this peculiar triple character is not
perfei:tly di.--tinct. 1 would not press a fancy point
too far; but, considering bow typical the pea-comb
is, I would not breed from an imperfect one, &c."
— Wright's " Poultry Book," p. 24'J, and last Lon-
don edition o/" Brahma Fowl."

"Upon this point,'/ can only say that out of
tweniy chicks bred for myself from a cock and two
pullets obtained from Dr. liennet', of the United
atatej (of the Light Cornisb-Chambcrlin stock),/
cannot detect a single instance of the 'deviation*
from the single cornbs upon ihc parmts, received
from Dr. Bennett." — I'r. Wm. C. Gwynne, Eng-
land, to Jlev. Mr. Wingfield, in 185.3.

*' THr..Jo?. Hinton commenced with the pure Xz^ft^ " Jlr. B. H. Bowman's chickens, of Bosemoran,

Cornisb-Chandjerlin stock; and in three j ears' which he bought of Mrs. ITozier \Villiams," sent

breeding he transformed- his strain from Light to to her in England by Dr. Bennett Sc Co., in l85t;.

Dark; producing", from these Light Cbamberlin out of the Chamberlia stock, "are of uniform

IGO

THE CHINA FOWL,

birds, his famous well-knowu D irk Bralinin code,
for two year^ a lea<Un^' Engli^^h pi ize bird known as
' Champion,' and the Daik heus as we see ilieni
now," the most notable strain of Dark lirahmas
to-day in all England! —Lewis IVright's new '' Il-
lustrated Poulti y Booh" 1^73, 74.

" I did notice the pea-comb on mj^ first birds. It
was not so witli idl ; yet it appeared ditfei'ent fi-om
the Cldfta^ong. Tliere was a teiideiicij to throw
itAiiiv chickens, but a greater tendency to bfconie
lighter. All fowls having dark and light feathers
can be varied either ivay, to darker or ligliter, by
choosing always tiie darkest or b.-^'lite^t fur breed-
ers. / never bred to eitlier extrfme." — J'irgil
Cornish's second letter, " Uruhinic low!," p. 143.

" The statement that tlie two varieties of Urah-
mas (Liglit and Dark) had 'distinct origins,' is
known to every breeder of the.-e fowls to be un-
true. Miss "Watts, whose (Chamberlin's) strain is
probably the only Englisli one that has not been
crossed, assured us, in tlie most distinct manner,
that she never had but the one stock, from which,
by selection, she has bred both tlie Bark and the
IJr/ht" varieties. — WrighVs litest work, p. 240. —
'• Illustrated Book of Po'uUry."

" We liave found in our own yards that we could
soon breed black ' Bralunas,' if such were desired ;
or, on the other liand,that in about three sea^^ons,
by choosing the lightest birds, w'e could produce
almost clear white. And as tlie original birds
(Burniiam's, of course,) were somewnat darker
than tlie Light birds now shown, either color could
have been bred from them (tlie originals) wath still
greiiterrapiditv and ease." . . . " Jiurnham claims
for his the credit of being the original birds, ^'^ and
unfortunately found in England what he never
could in America, a writer who would adopt his
tale."— WrighVs Illustrated- ''Poultry Book,''
1873,;;. 247.

•'As an instance of the general appreciation of
tMs man, we liad recently an announcement from
a valued American correspondent that 'our old
friend, Biirnham, has let him.self out again;' and
were somewhat perplexed by this enigmatical in-
formation, until the receipt of 'linruliam's New
]'oultry Jiook,' published in 1871. It is the simple
fact, that not one American writer, and but one
English, ever regarded Burnham's accounts as of
any value." ..." Wliether tlie latter may have
bred very tolerable imitations of Brahmas, is not
the (question, "\^'e had seen that there were two
qualities of birds known in the early days — one
spurious, which bred mongrel progeny, and could
be traced to Burnham; the other pure, whicli was
always traced to Connecticut, or to Dr. Bennett,
who procured his from that State."

* I r/iV? enter my claim, in the cartv days (lotiE before Mr.
liCwifi Wriglit bRci-ni to senk tbr means to abuse ii rid cry down
mv fowls, wliicli wen- so ju-ily poinlar in Enphmd), as the
" originiit^r " of the Gran Sluiitrihae a^ocV.. which 1 ai'nt to
Hfr :\I;'JL-sty the CJin.'i-n,'»rid otJuT--', in Enjjland, !is well as
nil over tile TTiiitcil Scat H, as such. I did no ( claim toori-
LTinatu, breed or sell, own or kee|), aiiv " Uriihmapootra'^ "
11! thotie veir?. nt nrnc k^ioxr ihis f.ujt bctt'T thuQ do
JI.i.so,. C. Weld a;id [,ew:.- Wrib'iil!-a. i'. u.

co^OT — nduski/ gray, striped with black on head,
neck, and back." Dr. Bennett wrote to Dr.
Gwvnne in 1S5-', that ''his fowls and Mr. Burn-
ham's were precisely similar, and both were brea
from the same stock" (the Gray ShaughaesJ.—
Ilev. 2Ir. Wi-igfitUVs Book, 1853.

" Among Americans, Mr. Burnham says, these
fowls are Shaiujh >es. Dr. Bennett (and Cornish)
contends that they came from India. One says
ih& pea-comb is decidedly preferable; the others
say it should be single, upright, and well ser-
rated. This 'pea-comb' is a iwvelty with us in
England; and, in all our various crosses, -we have
never seen anything like tUs.'' — Tegetmeier s
London Ilhtstrated Poultry Book, 18G7.

"Mr. Burnham's Light Brahmas, with pure
white or cream-colored bodies, and elegantly pen-
cilled hackles, were in great favor" (at the Bir-
mingham Show, in '03), "when suddenly a riew
variety sprang upon the scene. Apair of birds Ironi
3Ir. Burnham were .shown there by Mr. Baily of
London, and sold for lOU guineas ! I'hey were D<'rh
gray in color, and were the first ' Dark Brahmas
ever seen in this country."— fF. B. Tegetmeier,
Editor of "London Fidd," in 1&53.

The T>ark Brahmas sent out to England first
by Jfr. Burnham, in 1853, " at once took the lead of
all others, and many fanciers in England were
supplied. But, wishing to ' improve ' them, if pos-
sible, in size and color, these old sagacious breed-
ers crossed the hens with the block hre isted
Dorking, the only bird which would give the
qualities desired. A gentleman who visited those
old establishments, a few years after the first birds
were sent there from the United States (Burn-
ham's), was in time to detect this cross; and at
once observed the change in size, the black breaSt,
and actually saw the fifth ioe." — Mark Pitm'm,
in " Kew York Poidtry Bulletin," in 1S70.

"Our readers will find a contribution in this
week's 'Fancier's Journal,' over the signature of
8. J. Bestor, Esq., the well-known fancier and
writer — on' IVrii/ht vs. Burnhum.' 3fr. Bestor is
a gentleman, a well-known old breeder, of Hart-
ford, (.'onn., and \\eJl read; for two years presi-
dent of the Connecticut State Poultry .Society."

Wade's Philadelphia. Fancier^ June 26, referring
to the following article : —

" I am not personally acquainted with Mr. Burn-
ham, never ha\ing met him; but have read «?? of
his works, and especially his later contributions to
the press. He shows very clearly that no ship ' ar-
rived at New York from Luckipoor, in India,'
either in 184G or in 1849, as is claimed; and it
does strike me that Mr. Wright has seriously erred
in his theory about the origin of the now so-called
' Brahmas;' and lie has plainly made a gross mis-
take in his attempts to argue Mr. Burnham out of
the deserved credit of originating this stock in
America, and of being the^trs^ to introduce it into
Enfi^land, of both iJght and Dark varieties.
Wright went a long stretch out of his way to im-
plicate Mr. Burnliam in Bralnnapootrais'm. Mr.
Burnham has recently completely vindicated him-

run and con.

IGl

" Itiit siK-Ii. iin.l luroiiuls .if sm-1i, i.iiltlislir.l
uTUt (lie pure Ilralmiiis wcrt- inililicl>' slmw n, ciui-
not iii\ uliiiiilt.' II ruusisliMiI ild'Oiinl ;;"|\(Mi IVdui llu'
vi.'i-\' lir^I of till' ^ruiiiuo slniiii, as IMr. Coriiisli
jnsily iiv.nin's. It is plain tliiil tin ir w !is a slraiii
or real liralmias disiiiu't IVoiii Sliaii,yluu's, or tin-
ro\\Is tlu'ii \i.\w\\ 11 ill AiiK'ricii us ( 'Iiiiiaf^iMiL's, all
■\\liioll w iTt.' Irarril up tu llic liirds lu'oii^lit into
C'onncoiii'nl li\ Mr. CinnnlKTliii." . . . "Amlasan
a^cil l\ast hulian oIliciT writi's iis rort'nlly, that
' iliis fowl uas ilu' I liKtngoiKj brt'i-d, of wli'irh lio
had soi-n ImmtriiU in liidia".' . . . ^Mr. (oniisirs
istock mil/lit, of fotn>o. Iia\ e ln.'i.'U ^;iianj;inu's as
nuu'li as IWiintiaiu's woro. \\'i.' lia\ o socii tluit tlio
}\irh- Kraliina ran bo bred from Ilio Lii/ht — oi\
raihtT tho finn/ ,' And on this and olht-r o\ idunce,
^o coniL'nd tliai iho fiiw I is of one race. . . . Wo
a-sorr tliat all llu- ca idciico we have, traros this
fowl back to Mr. t'ornisli's stoi-k, and all tlu' fai'ts
harnioni/i' w illi ibis tln-ory." — }i"rii/ht's "Jiraliiift
Fold," list Loinhni cdili-ti.

tt5^ " A portion of iMr. (.'Ornish's k'tler of l^Cy*,
not qnott'd in the ' t'onltr\' \ ani,' (at lirst) states
that (.'htnuUrliii l>ri'U(/ht his /o/r/.s into the i^tute
(Connfotii-nt) /// tlu' ciirh/' ]iitrt of 18-li>." —
Jrrinhrs " />'/■< hni j Foil I, '• p. 17.

&£*" "The name of the port from which the ^hip
sailed, willi iliese fowls on boartl, is l>tieki])oor, m
India. 'I'hc ■'^h.'ji urrired in \i't York, i)i Scpfem-
Wr. tS4G. 'V\u- fir.sY brood I pnrehased."— CVr-
n^sh's sconhf letter, iNV.i, p. Hit, s^nne n-orl:

^do' " 'I'hf lirst pair of i lieso fowls were brouj;ht
by one C'liarles Knox to Air. Cliambevliii, in Hart-
ford, Conn., in 1847. Mr. Knox reported tico
pairs, on an Ka^t-Tudia vessel, at iSew York."
— Hie Intest occoitnt, by C. C. J'loisteil, in 11S74.

'* The Brahma and Hie Slianghac (Cochin) fowl
being confessedly closela-relnted races, it is inter-
esting to estinnite tlieir relative antiquity. The
pea-comb has been found on the JIalay, and on
the China fowl. Tlie importance of this matter,
with regard to the \vlu)le subject of the origin of
this species, must be our apulog}- for devoting so
much space to it." ..." A\ Idle it is possible the
' itark' birds, which came o\ er in the ship* with
tho>e here recorded, nia\ have also been lirahmas,
there is not the slightest reason to t|uesfion that
both ma>/ have been deri\ ed iVoin the one stock
brought into Connecticut by Chanilierlin, and
afterwards fostered bv <~'ornish and Dr. Ben-
nett ! ! : " — Wright's " llruhinj FoicL"

" Chanibcrlin's nan\o i-* Xel-on II. "says Cornish.
" I purchased bis lir-t brood, batched in August,
1S47, and the old pair ihe .Viiril following." This
testimony, so full and explicit, nnist be considered
tina ly to settle the qiiesiion. Mr. Cornish's direct
and explicit evidence is ttie strongest point in this
ease. . . . " I will only say that rheditiiculty in my
mind is, the plain, deiinite, accurate statements of
]\[r. Virgil Cornish, on this subject." — Lewis
Wriqht in *^ Hriihnii Fmrl," a7id in a letter to G.
P. Burnh im in J/"'y, 187.1.

self agaiuHl llu' wiiolesale aliack of ]\Tr. AVrigbt,
who, eviileiillv, is not as ' K. K. \V.' has It, ' [lie
best living auriiorlly upon this Brahma question,'
liowev<'r good he iniiv have been on ol her ])Oultry
nndters. As lo (lie sailor's tale about Hie 'imjioria-
tion ' of Cornish's stock 'from Liiekiiioor, in In-
dia,' Blr. Biindiam elleclually disjioses oi' th(ft—
since no record oi' ttiis shiji's uirival in New York
is to be found; which it could now be readilv, upon
the old Cniied Stales Customs i;ej;is(er, Imd it
occurred eillu-r in 18-1<» or in 1>U*J. 'fhe result
of all is, undoubtedly, that all llicse ' large IJgbt-
(.iray Foa\1s ' come from o)ie pari'iilagi- ; and there
is no question in ni\- mind to-duA', lliat Afr. JiUrn-
ham had tlie first •>/d hints in the Ui-iled States, to
wit; those be inqiorted in 18!0and 18r.O, from
Sbanghae; and that this splendid stock (now im-
proved by long domestication among ns) was
originally of CiiiNEsi:, and not of Jmliii origin, as
Jlr. Tegetmeier so clearly states." — ^S. J. liestor^
in ff'ade's Philadelphia Fancier, June, 1^7-1.

" Jfr. Cornish first announces in AVright's book
that his fowls came into Connecticut from the
tailors of the /;?(/?'((. ships, in 1S40. < tn pages 142,
14:!, same work, appears Cornish's second letter
(Nov. '.I, ISO'.)), stating that his iowU arri\eil in a
ship from Luckipoor, India, at New York, Sep-
tember, 1846- In .Tune, 1874, 5Ir. I'laisted says,
these fo\\ Is came into Connecticut from an East
India ship, just then arri\ed af New York, in
1847. In l;s7u, I went to New York, and carefully
searched the United States Customs Kecords for
this ship; and I now positively state that there is
uo entry of any such ship to be found there —
either in tS40, 184G, or 1847-"— G- P. Burn-
ham, in " Turf Field, and Farm," June 20, 1874.

" Mf-. Burnliam clearly points us away back to
Pr. Kerr's letters, in 1849. in support of his claim
to the origin, of tlie Gray Shanghaes — now called
' Brahmas; ' and there can no longer be any doubt,
from all the evidence before the public, that these
Light-Gray Fowls had a common origin in this
country; and that they have been, since 1850,
'51. '5'-3, variously 7!amc(? by dillereiit parties to
suit their own tastes. We "will a(id that, as far
back as in 1855, '50, we ourselves bred these fowls
in ^lassachnsetts. They were then known as
'Gray Shanghaes,' or ' Chittagongs,' and, as we
recollect them, they were certainly identical with
the Light Brahmas of to-day." — Editor Fanciers'
Journ d, Philadelphia, in 1874.

" I would ask what Cornish's accounts are worth,
from tirst to last ? I do not consider his stories worth
one pin, after investigating the subject as I have.
The're is nothing accurate in his first statement,
and his last one is still worse, ilr. Cornish did
not purchase 5Ir. Chataberlin's tirst brood of chick-
ens, neither did he ever own the old ' lirst pair' of
those fowls at any time, as I can prove to the sat-
isfaction of the most incredulous."— C. C. Plaisted
in Jiis Jirahnia Ili^tory, Hartford " PouUry
World," 1S74.

• "Dnrk birds wliicli cuiiie over," in n-lnU sWi^i? The one timt " arrived at New York," in 1840 P or 11^4« ? or in
ItS-fy? Tlicrc WHS )(" g ich eliip arriveii from Inilia na ia claimed bv Wriglit — in cither year — wilh eitlicr "Dark
M'-;Is"nr I.ichi! ■• Tiu' Hmhiiiat ori\'iiriteil not in ludia," says Mr. Tegutineier, of the Loudon" Field," "but with
ilr. U. P. Duruharn, In America," ^t>r/* vaiiulicj.

162 THE CniXA FOWL.

Dr. Bennett wislieJ to change the orir/iiiaf cut of his tliree birds, and
'•remove" the top-lcnots. I never -would allow tliis block to be touched.
He endeavored still to enlist me in his " riralnnapootra " scheme; but I
steadily declined, and strove to show him how unreasonable ^vas his preten-
sions about this Cornish-sailor story which /u' had liatched up; and I heard
no more of this tlien shilfnlly prepared yarn (^very slightly varied, to the
best of m V remembrance, in its details), until it was first made public, a 3-ear
or more subsequently to this interview between us. Dr. John 0. Bennett,
himself, prepared this sailor-story in the main, oriijl}>aIh/ : he alone inrciitcii
the name of ■• Brahmapootra "' for the Gray-Shanghac fowls ; he also originated
the title of the "pe.a-comb."' The other parties in the Brahmapootra interest
in I80-, '53 joined the Doctor in this story and the deception about the '• im-
portation of these fowls from India." — under his lead, — and subsequently
told his tale so many times, that some of them (not all 1 ) came at last to be-
lieve in its truth.

I have n.iw upon file upwards of a score of tlie Doctor's old confidential
letters, from which I could, if it were necessary, quote overwhelming corrobo-
rative "testimony," written by his hand, in support of the above declarations.
But John C. Bennett is in his grave. He was my intimate friend for more
than twenty-five vears. He never wrote or uttered one ott'ensive word to, or
of, me or mine, to my knowledge. He possessed first-class natural talents,
was liberally educated, and proved himself a genial, companionable man,
though he was a sharp competitor in the chicken fancy, and ortentimes eccen-
tric, reckless, and erratic in his business management. But I hiwe nothing
to offer derogatory to him ; and his memory will hereafter be no farther criti-
cised by ill!/ pen. Were he alive to-day, he would cordially indorse what I
have now stated — as I have the means of kiioiriiiij. And here let /liiii rest.

If, then, this mythical "one pair of gray fowls" were not '• imp.irted," and
there does not, and never has existed down to this day the slightest particle
of real evidence that they ever came from India (as Jlr. Tegetmeier so dis-
tinctly averred in 1867), what becomes of Mr. Lewis WriglU's elaborated and
long-spun straining to prove what the originators of this foolish story first
fabricated ? Of wdiat mortal use is all this reiterated misrepresentation —
first or last? What has Weld gained by the " firing off of his long string
of questions " at Cornish, except to stultitj' his own witness, when he makes
him repeat the details of this long-ago-played-out falsity ?

BUIiNlIAM VS. WUIGJIT. 103

And li't luc iisk, here, Mr. "Wright, wliere 3'ou first got your '^ Dark
Mriiliuias" from, in Great JSritaiii ? Did Mr. Cornish, Mr. Charnljor-
lin, Mr. Plaisted, Dr. Bennett, Mr. Knox, Mr. Weld, Mr. Anybody, except
Mr. Burnliam (whom you so wantonly vilify), ever send to England any
])ark Dralinias, tliat you over heard of, in those years you liave written
about so llippantly ? Can you name ani/ otlier American who sent to Eng-
land, from 1852 to 18G1 (when the rebellion broke out in tlie United States),
the first speeimen of " Dark Brahnja " fowls of twi?/ strain, whatever? No,
sir! You ean not. None of these " up-the-Brahmapootra-Eiver men" have
ever had any thing to say about the Darh Brahmas, in tlie years j'ou have
written of so disgracefully in your two late books ? No one but you, Lewis
Wright, lias ever undertaken to show that " Soi/i the Light and tlie Dark
varieties maj* have been derived from the one stock," or that "it is possible
the • Dark ' birds which came over in the ship with those recorded by 3'ou, may
also have been Brahmas ! "

You know very well that no one ever pretended that there was but " one
gra}' pair, the others being red and brown," brought bj' the mythical ship into
New York. But there was no such ship came over, as j'ou and they claim !
Therefore, there could have been no such " lirahmas," of anij color. And,
least of all, any " Dark " Gray ones. This declaration of yours, at the close
of your book on the origin of the two varieties of the Brahmas, simply exposes
your wilful ignorance of this whole subject. I originated the Dark Brahma
fowl in m3' own yard, at Melrose, Mass., Lewis ! You ought to know this, for
all England and America knows it. Nobody ever claimed or pretended to take
precedence of me, with this variety, surely. And even the Cornish-Bennett
men have never set up any theory upon this point, regarding their stock.
The Dark Brahma, or Dark " Gray Shanghae," is my pjatent, Mr. Wright.
I originated it, in 1853. I never saw them till that year, but it was the re-
sult of a studied experiment of mine; and I raised a great many of these fine
Dark birds in the succeeding years. Look over the records, and see if you
cat) find any ^^ Dark Brahmas" spoken of — anywhere on earth — until my
first splemlid trio went out to John Baily of Mount Street, London, in 1853.
And tell me too, if, suhser[uently, at any time before the war, any bodj' but
G. P. Burnham of the United States sent to England one single specimen of
this Dark variety, to any living man. You can't name him. Sir ! He doesn't
exist. Nobody had that stock but myself, in all those years.

164 THE CHINA FOWL.

Observe, Lewis, I am not now arguing this question. I am stating facts,
simply. And "facts are stubborn things," you know. I make no mention
of wliat " might have been," or what was " possible." I tell you that I origi-
nated, upon my premises, the fowl known from the outset (in this "historj'
you have so distorted and perverted) as the " Dark IJrahmas," in the year
1853. And you nor no other man living can go behind, or before me, in this
matter, as the record clearly shows. No one, save yourself, has ever ques-
tioned this. No American breeder has ever pretended that he has ever bred
Darh birds from the so-claimed Cornish-Chamberlin-ljennett stock. From
my "Gray Shangliae" fowls, the Light and Dark birds (in my own way),
I produced the Dark Brahmas (so called) which I shipped to England, and
bred hundreds upon hundreds of, subsequently, which I sent there and all
over this country. Your people have, since 18G4, '05, bred some fair "Dark
Brahmas," as they call them; but never a pair that equalled mine, i\ia.i I
have ever yet seen.

And, notwithstanding all this truth, which you must have been cognizant
of when you penned your two abusive volumes, you give me no credit for
having done in this business what no man else has ever claimed to have
done, before or after me ! Is this justice ? Is it fair? Is it generous? Is
it honorable ? Is this kind of treatment towards a man you never saw, and
whom 3'ou can know nothing of, pursuing a manly course of conduct " in the
fear of God ? " It may be so, in your warpied opinion ; but / should say you
penned these sentences with the Fiend at your elbow.

How did I do this? No matter; I did it ! I produced a strain of dark-
plumed birds which you, in England, never saw until I sent them there, and
since 1858 and '59 which you have been striving to imitate ; but which you
have not yet succeeded in repjroducing like the originals, because you have
not gone about your experiments in the right way. There were no brown
feathers and no "vulture hoch" in my "Dark Bralima" or Dark-Gray
Shanghae blood ; but in all the English "Dark Brahmas" we have had
here, this hroivn feathering and hock are found (to a greater or less extent),
in every bird, male or female that I have examined, which has come from
your side of the Atlantic in the past six or seven years. There is no excep-
tion to the cropping out of this defective color in your English dark birds —
cocks and hens alike. Therefore, I repeat it, j'ou don't breed them aright.

BuiiNn.iM rs. wRiaiiT. 165

Turn tn tlie Eiigllsli Park (AX-k, page 80. His monstrous tail and
fearful liock would disqualify him at oucu inider tli(! scrutiny of an Ameri-
can expert ! We have attended im exliiliitiou in tlio last five years where
we have not seen scores of ])ark liralinia cocks that would heat this sam-
ple, out and out, — supposing it to he a likcTiess; and Weir is generally
very faithful in his delineations, as we all know. We insert the picture,
therefore, more hy way of warning, than otherwise ; and, as in the instance
of the large LigJif Brahma English hird, on page 121, we say emphatically,
"none of tJicsc styles of Brahmas for us." Thejf are not ihe thing at all.
They are an English manufactured bird, altogether. We have seen numerous
Dark samples that hare been " imported " into America in the last half-dozen
years, not unlike this, — with the exception of the shockingly deformed tail,
— and we never saw one of them j'et, in the bodj'-plumage of which tve
could not detect the brown or bay feathering (to a greater or less extent),
wdiich comes from a cross with the Partridge or Park-Cinnamon Cochin fowl,
while the chickens bred from these English importations, invariahbj upon
the pullets, in fiutf, saddles, and sides, are spotted with the brown or foreign
feathering; and the young cocks bred from such stock, almost as invariably,
are similarly blemished in plumage upon the thighs and flaidis. The pure
steel-gray (white and black) of my originals is lost, or thus clouded, and
American purchasers of these costly birds wonder why it is that they cannot
get good colored progeny from their expensive English importations ! It is
siniplj' because they don't breed them there as they were at first bred; and
as they can onlij be bred, in tJieir pii,ritij. In reference to which point, Lewis
Wright, after arguing through page upon page, in his late work, in favor of
this true color test, concludes with this vagary : " Mr. Teebay strongly dissents
from our view, and believes there must have been another original strain (be-
sides the so-called Cornish), to produce the dark variety." . . . But " we
think little of this ' color ' test ! " A final annoirncement by Wright, wdiich
will unquestionably be fully appreciated by American fanciers, who know
that the clean, pure, Steel-gray Park Brahmas have never been bred in this
country from any strain save my originals. ISTo American Light Brahma
breeder to-day claims that he can produce the darlc birds from wdiat is called
the "Cornish-Chamherlin strain," though Wright states that this has been
done in England. I deny this, too. It has never been done, and it cant be
done, with the light stock alone. This is simply impossible.

166 THE CniXA FOWL.

In continuation of what he knows about this breed, Mr. Wright says,
" Botli Dark and Light varieties of the Bralima fowl should be i^recisclii alike,
in size, shape, and carriage — differing only in color." And then, to prove his
opinion that both varieties come out of one parent-stock, he adds, that "Mr.
Joseph Plinton. whose experience goes back to the early days, informs us that
his birds «ere originally Ligltt lU-ahmas, obtained of Dr. Gwynne. Dr. Den-
nett, & Co. Later, he obtained a somewhat darker cock from J. K. Fowler
(also an early breeder), from which, with his darkest of the Light liens, he
bred a most beautiful Dark Bralima cock, and hens so deiiselj^ dark as to be
nearly blade." Which latter statement merely repeats our own experience ;
since Mr. J. K. Fowler's Dark bird mentioned, I am quite positive -went to
England from m}j yard, in Melrose, and Dr. Bennett first supplied Dr. Gwynne
and Mr. Hinton from my stock direct, I know, with the c?rt;7,'-plumed birds.

It is clear, Mr. Wright, you can know nothing of me, except through
some malicious busybody who may have slandered me. And I repeat it,
I am at a loss to understand icluj j'ou should have thus villainously lam-
pooned me. For four years, I find (since your first volume was issued)
I have remained almost in ignorance of the existence of this libel ! I
had onh' casually heard that " IMr. Wright was down on !Mr. Burnham in
his Brahma Fowl,'' and never gave the matter a thought further; till,
in the month of Slay, 1874, the subject was forced upon inj notice, by the
publication of the long abusive extract from j'our books, inserted from an
anonymous scribbler in a Philadelphia paper. Since tlicn. I have endeavored
to defend myself, though I am "on the shady side of life" in years, and
know full well that I cannot do this so vigorouslj*, perhaps, as I once couW.
But I am an old man now! It may be, upon examining the extracts I
have presented upon pages loS to IGl, of this volume, that you will change
your conclusions. It may be not ! It is idle for you to assume, as you do in
your letter to me in May, 1871, that you " did the best you could with the
evidence upon this subject that was accessible to you,'' or that " you relied
upon the statements of Mr. Virgil Cornish, publicly made '' prior to 1870,
upon which your atrocious theory is based ; inasmuch as, up to the date of
Cornish's 'personal letter to you, in 1871, you very well know that he had
never once mentioned my name, or my fowls, in his letters published. The
malicious animus of your rodomontade against me, thrusts itself out offen-
sively in every page of your two hooks, prcvioushj written; when, up to that

ncRxriAM rs. wniouT. 167

period, you ommot find (lio .slightest ground in C'uniish's "evidence," to im-
plicate nu', in ;iiiy wdy wliatever in this miserable husiness, of which yoic have
at last gratuitously involved uie, or attempted to entangle me, so unrighteously.
In all candor let me say, in the language of anotlier, that " misr('[)resenta-
tions unwittingly made may possilily he construed as simple manslanghter ;
but deliberate falsehood, jn'rsisted in, with the liglit of truth before us, can
only be accounted downright murder, with malice aforethought." And if
this axiom be inapplicable to 3'our case, I am not a judge of the course you
have so causelessly pursued towards me, in the "Braliina Foirl, a mono-
gi'apli," enlarged upon and extended, insufferablj', in the otherwise presenta-
ble pages of your last quarto, the •' III astrated Book of Poultry.'" Why pile
up the agony, as you have done, in this /((^er volume? Was your splenetic
disposition unsatiated with the abuse you had voluntarily heaped upon my
unoffending head in that //'r.s-^ work? Could 3'ou not be content with putting
forth edition after edition of tliat scurrilous volume, but j'ou must fill your
later ponderous tome with the venomous shafts of your spleen directed at
poor me — in page after page of slanderous speculation and bosh, about
'' Burnham this," and " Eurnham that?"

In view of all the unjust and plainly malicious vituperation and slander
thus concocted by j'ou, in your two recent books, backed by the far-fetched
"testimony" furnished l^y your officious friend Weld (whom I never before
heard of), I am forced to the conclusion that 3'ou have heaped u[i this cal-
umny and abuse most causelessly and recklessly. Without a show of foun-
dation for your ill-conceived and basely considered assault, you have thus
wantonly vilified a man, wdio has for thirty years striven to the best of his
power, assiduously and steadily to improve and advance the interests of the
poultry fraternity ; and who has succeeded — as you cannot deny — in ac-
complishing some small share of good in this direction, iirst and last.

You are welcome to all the " pleasure and benefit " this " labor of love "( ?)
on your part "has yielded you." But if, in your retired hours, you reflect
upon the evil calumnies you have put forth thus inconsiderately, embodying
the groundless assaults you have made upon me, therein, so totally uncalled-for
and so unreasonably indited, under any view of the facts in the case — I
doubt not the "still small voice" that has its home in the breast of every
honest man whom God has furnished with ordinary powers of reason, will
suggest to you that you liave, in this instance, committed a grievous wrong

168 THE CHINA FOWL.

towards an inoffenJing fellow-man, that j'ou will not live long enough to set
aright. " No one ought to know better tlian yourself that an uttered fal-^itj'
is like the out of a sahre, — the wound m-Aj he:d, but the scar remains!

Turn you, now, Lewis Wright, to the prefaee of your "Brahma Fowl,"
and read these lines, penned by you in the early editions of that work —
which, I observe, you (or your publisliers) have expunged from the preface ot
your third edition !

"We do assert that even the poultry-fancy may be carried on in the
reverent spirit of earnest work, and tliat we know some who are really seek-
ing in this way, not alone to amuse their leisure, but in the fear of God to
benefit the communitj', of which they form a part. . . . We have thought it
worth wdiile to give time, and thouglit, and labor, even to a book about
'nothing but lira/nnas.'" (It certainly would have been nearer the truth,
had you here stated ' a book about nothing Imt Burnham ! ') " We can truly
say it has been a labor of love (!! ) and it has yielded to ourselves both
pleasure and benefit in many, many ways."

These are commendable sentiments — -though, under all the circumstances,
to mij mental olfactories, in your case, they "smell strongly of the shop."
Why are these sentences left out of your latest London edition, which I
received bat a few weeks ago? Those words were about the best in your
bcfok ! Restore them, in youi- next edition — ami leave out the heaped-up
abuse of "Burnham," that disgraces so many otii.er pages of that volume.

"The worm you tread on will turn to bite," in his poor way. I am not a
worm, but I have been forced hy your malignant assaults upon me, into this
ungracious and unjust C(uarrel ; and I leave the public to judge if I am the
aggressor in this contest.

At all events, in closing these pages I feel assured in my own mind that
those who will take the trouble to examine tlie overwhelming evidence I
have in this volume presented, touching j'our baseless theory and discourteous
treatment of me, inyourtwo recent elabirate poultry books, will daciAn justly
between us ; and I do not fear the judgment that will )iow be accorded by
the intelligeirt, unbiassed reader, upon tlie question. Is Geo. P. Burnham rlglit
in this controversy, or is Lewi.s Wright clearlj' and reprehensibly wromj?

THE END.

-HA^iCP

BULLtlirj,

fIVaiPH

civtrtiN,

• !•%! h': 1 !.

CORD

liVit'si n 'ir »''

. ■'.•'i'r> !>!">-

F,-N