ALBERT R. MANN
LIBRARY

NEw YorK STATE COLLEGES
OF
AGRICULTURE AND HoME ECONOMICS

AT

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

THE GIFT OF
PAUL POMEROY IVES 2D
IN MEMORY OF
PAUL POMEROY IvES

Cornell University Library

SF 487.H75 1919
ience of s

iia

637 mam

Cornell University

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

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

http:/Awww.archive.org/details/cu31924003143637

THE CALL OF THE HEN

OR THE SCIENCE OF

SELECTING AND BREEDING POULTRY
FOR EGG-PRODUCTION

BY
WALTER HOGAN

Copyrighted, 1913, in the United States and Canada, Great Britain,
Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany and Denmark.
[All Rights Reserved.}
Copyrighted, 1914. Copyrighted, 1916.
Copyrighted, 1919.

PRICE, $2.00

Revised, Published and Sold by the
AMERICAN SCHOOL OF POULTRY HUSBANDRY
LEAVENWORTH, KANSAS.

Fa

a
AT
if 7°
S41F

EK 6908

DEDICATED
TOgTHE POULTRYMEN WHO,
LIKE THE AUTHOR,

DO NOT KNOW IT ALL.

NOV 15 1919

Jerrerson City
Tue Hucu Stepuens Co.
PRINTERS

94
© cl A534 a

1

THE CALL OF THE HEN.

eng 2% Ver, aie

Lady Show You, a White Plymouth Rock hen, that holds the world’s egg record
for a two-year-old hen; laid 281 eggs in the National Egg-laying Contest at the Missouri
State Poultry Experiment Station, Mountain Grove, Mo. She met the Hogan test.

_ THE: MISSOURI STATE
POULTRY EXPERIMENT
’ STATION

MOUNTAIN GROVE, ~
: Mo. J

a :

PRIZE
PEN

MISSOURI
NATIONAL
EGG
LAYING
ee CONTEST

MOUNTAIN
GROVE
1911-1912

Photographed by request of the Chamber of Commerce, Petaluma, Cal.

These hens weighed less than 4 pounds each and laid 131 pounds and 2 ounces of
eggs. They won the prize for laying the greatest weight in eggs in the NationaljEgg-
laying Contest. Each hen’s eggs would have sold for $4.50 on the Petaluma Market,
if reduced to No. 1 eggs. They are the result of five years’ breeding by the author
from common Petaluma Single Comb White Leghorns. It is possible for the reader
to do the same with almost any breed by following instructions in this book.

PREFACE

This is an age which demands action, applied thought, and a prac-
tical, actual, and workable science. The world is demanding to know,
not “What are you?” or ‘What do you look like?” but ‘What can you
do?” Drones are being culled out in all lines of business activity and
rightly so; and the same is true with the poultry business. The hen
which delivers the goods is the hen which is in demand. ‘‘The hen that
lays is the hen that pays.”

We have two reasons for publishing THE CALL OF THE HEN. Some
three years ago Mr. Hogan sent us three males, all, Single Comb White
Leghorns; one was of his 280-egg type, selected according to this system;
another was of the 150-egg type, and the third was of a 70- or 80-egg
type. He also sent us two pens of hens of his own selection and breeding.
We trapnested all the hens, and bred from all three males. The results
in every case have borne out Mr. Hogan’s claims and the truthfulness
of his methods of selection and breeding. We have also tested the hens
in the egg-laying contests; taken measurements and made tests and
judged their capacity for laying as per this system, THE CALL OF THE HEN.
The results so nearly tally with the system in practically every case that
we feel that this is a valuable method of selection and breeding, which
should be in the hands of everyone who attempts to raise poultry.

Capacity, condition, type, and vigor must all be taken into con-
sideration in determining whether a hen will be a good producer or a
poor producer. By making a careful and sensible application of the
rules made known in this book, it is possible for any poultry-raiser to
avoid great loss.

We are told and have good reason to believe that it is true, that
the average farm hen lays less than 80 eggs per year. If that be true,
about half the poultry is being kept at a loss to the owner. If this
is the condition, are we not justified in doing something to attract the
attention of the farmers and poultry-raisers to methods and practices
which will lead to the production of more eggs than the average hen,
and to the necessity of culling and selection, and to more careful and
painstaking methods?

The object of THE CALL oF THE HEN is to stimulate an interest
in increasing egg-production in all varieties of poultry and to encourage
the breeding of strains of high-producers. We have come to the point
where our efforts to breed fowls with perfect plumage for show purposes
has overshadowed that of the ability of our hens to lay; and it can cer-
tainly result in no harm to call the attention of the breeders of the
nation to the good which would certainly come from a study of the things
which would tend to increase egg-production. We should all be vitally
concerned in any attempt to better conditions, to increase the pro-
ductiveness of the hen, and to give impetus to an industry which is
already one of our greatest agricultural factors.

(5)

6 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

For a half century the fanciers and poultrymen generally have
devoted their attention to the showroom in the development of shape
and color. No opportunity has been offered or anything specially
done to encourage the farmer and poultryman to develop the natural
resources of the hen—her ability to lay eggs. A few of our best experi-
ment stations have made some investigations along this line and done
some very valuable work indeed. Here and there an occasional poultry-
breeder has given some thought and attention to breeding for egg-pro-
duction; but certainly, as a whole, the attention of breeders generally
has not been along this line, and it seems that this important matter has
been too much neglected. ;

Haphazard methods of mating and breeding don’t pay, and in-
discriminate methods cannot prove successful in building up a flock of
laying hens. There never was a time in the history of this country
when poultry and eggs were in greater demand; the price at which
poultry and eggs sell has increased much more in proportion than has
the price of feeds necessary to produce these products; but because the
industry is flourishing today more than ever before does not justify
us in continuing indiscriminate or foolhardy methods. The opportunity
is ours to insure greater profits, if we will but carefully and systematically
solve the problem which is facing us: ‘How can we insure a reasonably
high average egg-production?”

The interests of the fancier are served through the showroom. If
a breeder enters birds in a showroom and is beaten, he tries to improve
his flock and perfect it by introducing new blood or by improved methods
of breeding and careful selection. If he wins, he tries to keep his flock
in that high state of perfection. It is just as important, and even more
so that he know just what his flock can do in the matter of production,
and he ought to use the same care in trying to perfect his strain of layers.

There are exceptions to all rules. You will find some exceptions
in selecting, testing, and breeding your poultry according to the method
described in THE CALL oF THE HEN; but many breeders have tested
it for some six or eight years; many of these have doubled their egg
yield in this time. We feel certain that Mr. Hogan’s method of selec-
tion and breeding will prove him to be to the poultry industry what
Burbank is to horticulture, Edison is to the electrical world, or Darwin
or Mendel to the breeding kingdom. That the mastery of this method
of selection and breeding, and sensibly applying the principles revealed
herein, will mean much to the poultry industry, is our honest belief.

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF POULTRY HUSBANDRY.
Leavenworth, Kansas.

FOREW ORD

The writer’s introduction into poultry-keeping was in the city of
Boston, Massachusetts, in the autumn of 1857. By the spring of ’68
I had a flock of nearly 400 birds, among them a lot of the best Single
Comb White Leghorns that I could find. I went in person to New
York City to get them. My friends thought such extensive poultry-
keeping the limit of folly, and freely remarked that I was going crazy.
In those days eggs were almost worthless during the spring and summer
months, but would often sell for fifty cents per dozen in the winter.
This set me to thinking that perhaps it might be possible to increase
the egg yield in the winter and by so doing make the fad a better paying
proposition. Through ’my experiments I found that all hens were not
alike; that some would be very good table fowl and. poor layers, others
would be very good layers and poor table fowl, while still other hens
would be very fair table fowl and very fair layers. At this time we had
all the old-fashioned breeds we could get, and discarded them all for the
Single Comb White and Brown Leghorns. I had decided that knowl-
edge was of commercial value only when applied, and having a working
knowledge of the anatomy and physiology of the hen, I decided to try
to turn the same to a commercial account, and in a couple of years
had evolved what is now known as the ‘“‘Walter Hogan System,” which
consists in ascertaining the value of a hen for the purpose you desire
by the relative thickness of and distance apart of the pelvic bones.
Before 1873 I had communicated this discovery to some of my friends
under promise of secrecy. One of them, Albert Brown, once a well-
known banker of Amesbury, Massachusetts, and O. H. Farrar of the
same place, an overseer in the Hamilton Mills, and a light Brahma
specialist. After using the above so-called “‘system’’ for a number of
years, I' developed a new method, which I have taught in part privately
for some years, and which I now introduce to the public under the title
of ‘‘The Call of the Hen; or, The Science of Selecting and Breeding
Poultry.”’

My friends early prophesied that my penchant for invention would
land me in the poorhouse in my old age. So by some occult inspiration
I was induced to abstain from publishing any part of my discoveries
until 1904, when, by the advice of Ex-Congressman Haldor E. Boen
of Minnesota, to whom I had confided my poultry secrets some years
previous, I decided to publish only my first discovery, known as the
“Walter Hogan System” (which will be found in the latter part of this
work), after the same had been tested at the Minnesota State Experi-
mental Station by Professor Hoverstadt, the superintendent of the
station. However, before taking any steps to bring this matter hefore
the public, I wrote to some thirty or more poultry judges, who were
supposed to be selected as judges to officiate at the coming poultry
show to be held in Buffalo during the exhibition at that place in 1901,
asking them if they knew of any way to tell when a pullet was about

(7)

8 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

to lay. I thought that if they did not know that much of the laying
proposition, I would be safe in going ahead with publishing my secrets.
The letters I received were left in Minnesota when I came to California
shortly before the earthquake in 1906, so I cannot name the judges at
present, but they will remember me as the proprietor of the Fergus
Falls Woolen Mills; and I must say they replied in a very courteous
manner, saying there was no way except the general appearance of the
bird, as to its maturity of form, redness of comb and wattles, singing,
looking for nest, etc. One only of the number charged me one dollar
for this information.

Failing health obliged me to dispose of my manufacturing business
and retire to the farm, and it was in the spiing of 1905 before I published
my ‘‘Walter Hogan System,’”’ when it appeared in a number of poultry
papers. (See Reliable Poultry Journal, March, 1905.) I did not
copyright the work at that time, although my experience in mechanical
inventions had taught me that I should have done so, and the following
August imitations began to appear until in 1912 a number of different
parties in the United States and foreign countries were claiming author-
ship and selling it under the same or different titles.

My years of research and expense brought me no financial returns,
and in the spring of 1906*I left Minnesota for California, a physical and
financial wreck. After having regained my health, I began here at
Petaluma to build up the same kind of a flock of layers that I had done
in previous years, with the idea of publishing my entire work when I
should have bred up a strain of 200-egg hens and better.

After I removed to California, Professor M. E. Jaffa, of the Uni-
versity of California, became interested in the matter, and at the request
of the Petaluma Poultry Association, had the discovery tested at the
California Poultry Experimental Station for two years, and continued
for two years longer for the purpose of determining the value of four-
year-old hens as layers, as it is outlined in this book in the chapter
relating to the selection of the best layers in a flock.

It was also tested in New Zealand by D. D. Hyde, chief poultry
expert for the New Zealand Government, and Prof. Brown, of the New
Zealand Poultry Experiment Station. J have repeatedly been requested
by my friends in different parts of the world to publish the full matter
in book form, but poor health and lack of sufficient funds have pre-
vented me from doing so until now. As this work will be copyrighted,
I do not anticipate the literary pirates will raid it as they have my
former work. In justice to the poultry fraternity, I want to say that
while I have been and am now a member of the American Poultry
Association, and have raised poultry fifty-six years, and now raise them
by the thousand, I have never in the past classed myself as a ‘“‘poultry-
man” in the strict sense of the word. Neither do I claim that I am the
only one who has discovered the facts set forth in this book. I only
know that I have never seen them in print before. I know what the
results of following this method have been with me, and I feel safe in
assuming that the things I have discovered have not been known.
Hundreds have known me as an inventor and woolen manufacturer
where one would know me as a “‘poultry crank;’’ and the apology I have
for offering this book to the public in a field already crowded with poultry
literature is the earnest solicitation of my friends.

WALTER Hocan.

Petaluma, Cal., July 7, 1912.

THE CALL OF THE HEN; OR, THE SCIENCE
OF SELECTING AND BREEDING POULTRY

By WALTER HOGAN.
CHAPTER I.

,

THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES WHICH GOVERN THE SELECTION AND
BREEDING OF POULTRY ARE CAPACITY, CONDITION, TYPE, CoN-
STITUTIONAL VIGOR AND PREPOTENCY.

In the winter of 1910 I received a letter from a woman in Oregon
which read as follows:

“DEAR Str—My husband is a machinist. He is getting old and
his health is failing. We have both worked hard all our lives, and have
saved enough to buy a small place in the country. We can no longer
do hard work, and in looking for some light occupation that would
bring weekly returns, we have looked favorably on the poultry business.
We have kept a small flock of hens on a town lot for a number of years,
and think we have done well with them. We also take four poultry
papers, but each one tells a different story, and we canrtot decide what
to do. We have been years accumulating our little savings, and if we
should lose them, we would have no resources left for our old age. I
enclose two articles from the September (1910) number of the Pacific
Fanciers’ Monthly. One article gives me to understand that it is almost
hopeless to think of making a living with hens, if we depend on selling
eggs and poultry on the market. The other article holds out the promise
of a possible income of a thousand dollars per year from 300 hens if
handled under right conditions. One means utter failure and bank-
ruptcy in market eggs and poultry, and the other means the fullest
measure of success. Both of these articles are in the same number
and one follows the other on the same page. How can you reconcile
these two conflicting opinions?”

(The articles follow.) ,

“A CoMMON QUESTION WISELY ANSWERED.

“By George Scott.

“Can a living be made from poultry? Probably there is no one
who has attained distinction in the avicultural arena to whom this ques-
tion has not been put hundreds of times; and it is a question of perennial
interest to the poultry-keeping public. There are many people who will
tell you that a living, and a good living, can be made from poultry-
keeping alone, and as proof of their statement will point out the numer-
ous men whose names are household words in the fancy. On the other
hand, a vast majority will most emphatically give utterance to state-

(9)

10 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

ments calculated to deter any poultry-keeping aspirant, and give weight
to their contention by citing hundreds of cases where men have tried
and failed. Truly the mass of evidence appears to be with the latter
_ belief, for it is an indubitable fact that for every person who succeeds
in this business a hundred fail. But, looking at the matter from a logical
point of view, the fact that a minority rely on poultry for their daily
bread, is ample evidence that it is quite possible to make a living out of
~ poultry-keeping, and the abnormal number of’ failures merely proves
that the business is a difficult one.

“The fact that a man who has failed in some other business takes
up poultry-keeping with a like result in no sense proves that poultry-
keeping does not pay; it is only what could be expected, and any ex-
perienced aviculturist would have prophesied such a result. It is,
however, useless to explain such things to the man who is contemplating
starting a poultry farm. ‘To suggest that he is unfit for the task would
be taken by him as an insult, for the public, in its ignorance, has con-
ceived the idea that poultry management is the simplest work that
anyone can think of—in fact, I question whether an outsider considers

“it to be work at.all.

“Such a hold has this belief obtained on the man in the street that
it almost amounts to a superstition, and until the fallacy is exploded
the number of the unsuccessful will be constantly increased. The public,
apparently, cannot understand the difference between keeping a few
fowls as a paying hobby and managing a poultry farm as an enormous
one, and that the minor difficulties to be met with in the former case
are increased a thousand fold in the latter.

“Probably there is no other business which calls for so many qual-
ifications as that of the poultry-farmer, and to say that the man who
has been successful in any other walk in life is totally unfitted for this
business, though somewhat exaggerated, will give the tyro some idea of
what is wanted. An intimate detailed knowledge of poultry manage-
ment, an unlimited reserve of perseverance, determination, and resource,
a genuine love for fowls, the capacity for hard, continuous work for
seven days a week, combined with business knowledge and thrifty man-
agement, are all essential, and will, with ordinary luck, lead one to the
desired goal. ;

“T am very dubious as to whether a living can be made from utility
poultry-keeping, pure and simple—that is to say, by selling eggs and
birds solely for edible purposes. A profit can undoubtedly be made,
but it is so infinitesimal that the income derived from this source alone .
would, I am afraid, scarcely suffice for the needs of the most parsimonious.
If it is decided to specialize in utility points, pure-bred stock must be
kept of the popular varieties, and eggs for hatching, day-old chicks,
and stock birds must be sold. This will make all the difference, and
once a connection has been worked up, there is no reason why the busi-
ness should not pay, and pay well.

“The breeding of exhibition birds is, without doubt, the most
profitable branch, and when once a name has been made, stock and eggs
can be disposed of at most remunerative prices. Success, however,
cannot be attained at once; it is often the work of years; and many
breeders never rise from the ranks of mediocrity. Moreover, much
capital is required to start an exhibition poultry farm, and one’s expenses

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 11

incurred in the management are infinitely heavier than in the case where
utility. points are the only consideration.

“IT would not advise anyone unversed in poultry-culture to give up
''a situation, however poor, in order to go in for poultry-keeping as a
means of earning a livelihood. To think of such a thing is foolish in
the extreme, but for anyone to burn one’s boats behind one in this way
would be suicidal. What I would suggest to poultry-keeping aspirants
(and I believe the number of these reaches well into four figures) is that
they should keep as many fowls as they can attend to properly in their
spare hours, and see what profits they can make from the birds. Above
all, they must find out if they have a genuine love for the work, for withr
out this nothing can be done. When a name has been made as a breeder
of good stock, then, and then only, is it time for the amateur to consider
the advisability of adopting poultry-keeping as a business; and long
before this point is reached the glamour of the idea may have faded
for the life of a poultry-keeper is, contrary to popular belief, far from
being a bed of roses. Practically all the men who are today making
a living from poultry commenced keeping fowls as a hobby, and the
knowledge and experience which they gained in this way enabled them
to found the establishments which are to-day of world-wide reputation.

“To those who are qualified for the work poultry-keeping offers
a good living; but to the idle, the thriftless or the pleasure-seekers of
this holiday-making age it offers more desolate prospects than any other
trade or profession. In this business nothing but dogged determination
will enable the beginner to climb the rugged, precipitous path to success,
and anyone who is lacking in this essential, or who is afraid of hard,
continuous work, will save himself the obloquy of failure by choosing
some other field in which to exercise his powers.”

“Tue Goop LItTLeE HEN.
“What She Will Do for You if You Will Treat Her Right.

“ By Mrs. A. Basley.

“There is money in poultry for the man and especially for the
woman that will dig it out. This I can assure the Fanciers’ Monthly
readers, if they are in doubt.

“ ‘Dig it out’ seems a curious way of putting it. When I spent
a summer in a big mining camp in Colorado, I noticed a great many
holes in the sides of the mountains. ‘Yes,’ said a miner, ‘and not 5
per cent of those holes have paid.’ It was appalling to think of the
thousands ‘of dollars lost in those holes. ‘Give me a hundred hens,’
said I. The money it took to dig one of those unprofitable holes would
have started a fine poultry plant and the good’ little hens would have
brought in a living for their owners.

“There is money in poultry. Every inch of a hen is valuable.
I would like to give you one of the values of the hen and what it costs
to keep her.

“First, there are the eggs she will lay, if properly fed and treated.
Twelve dozen eggs per year is the average, although I personally know
poultry plants now being’ operated in Southern California where the
output, as shown by carefully kept records, is sixteen dozen per year.
The average price at the Arlington Egg Ranch for the past year was

12 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

31 cents a dozen, because the proprietor arranged to have his hens
laying when eggs cost most, in the fall and winter months.

“Sixteen dozen eggs at, 31 cents a dozen means each hen brings in
$4.96 in eggs, whilst her food costs 10 cents per month or $1.20 per year,
leaving $3.76 as profit for eggs.

“There is still another source of profit in the hen, and that is in
the droppings. At several of the experiment stations it has been found
that a hen voids about 100 pounds of droppings per year. These drop-
pings have been analyzed and show a value as fertilizer of from 30 to
35 cents per hen; the value being controlled not only by the market
demand, but also by the quality; the droppings being richer as fertilizer
where the food was rich in protein and where the hens are fed the ‘full
and plenty’ method.

‘“ ‘What do you do with the hen droppings?’ I asked a beginner.
‘Throw them away; glad to get rid of them,’ was the reply. At the
rate of $10.00 per ton, that was a waste of 50 cents per hen. Two of
our neighbors had lawns which were in so bad a condition from the soil
being worn out that they were on the point of having them dug out
and new soil put in and the whole re-sowed, when they thought of their
hen droppings; these they had spread over the lawns and then raked off
again and the lawns well watered. In a month’s time those lawns
looked beautiful—better far than if they had been re-made, and at far
less cost.

“When I lived in the Eastern States, my window garden was the
envy and admiration of everyone that passed; there were flowers galore
all through the dark winter gloom and cold frosty days. I loved my
plants, took good care of them in every way, but the secret of the won-
derful blossoms was hen manure.

“Once a month I half-filled a bucket with hen droppings, poured
a kettleful of boiling water on it, filled the bucket with the water, stirred
it with a stick, let it settle and cool, and watered the plants with that
liquid. I found that hen droppings enrich the ground for almost all
plants better than anything; roses are the only exception that I have
found, they doing much better when fertilized with well-rotted cow
manure.

“But to return to our hen. She gives 26 pounds’ weight of eggs,
or sixteen dozen, valued at $4.96; she also gives 100 pounds of valuable
fertilizer, worth here $10 a ton, or 50 cents per hen, which brings the
amount of her earnings to $5.40, and at the end of the year we still have
the hen to eat or sell at market value, about 75 cents or $1.00. If we
eat her, we have the feathers, which are easily saved, and can be sold or
made into pillows, the bones pounded up and fed to the other fowls.

‘Poultry pays, and pays better than any other legitimate business,
considering the amount invested. Why then are there any failures?
I will tell you why: The failures are not the fault of the good little
hen. She will always do her duty; she will always respond to the treat-
ment she gets. The failures are the people who care for the hen. The
owners are the failures, and not the fowls.

“Success is what we all want to attain in whatever we undertake:
and, ‘lest we forget’ some of the things which lead to success, may I
repeat that there are three essentials to egg-production. These are:
Comfort, Exercise, and Proper Food. I would like to review these.’’

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 13

I wrote the lady that both of these articles were right. Let us see
_if we can prove the statement. If the reader has ever had any ex-
perience with cattle, he knows it would be sure folly to buy a herd of
Polled Angus or Herefords for a dairy farm, for they have been bred
for years for beef, and practically everything fed to them goes to meat;
while it would be just as foolish to buy a herd of Jersey cows and expect
to make a living from them raising beef, as they have been bred for
years for butter-fat, and practically everything fed to them goes to milk
and cream. If the reader’s experience has been with horses, he is aware
that a man engaged in teaming would not select the trotting type of
horse, neither would a turfman put his money on an 1800-pound Clyde
horse, if the balance of the field were trotting horses; that would not
be horse sense. Now, the same comparison holds good in the poultry
field, except with this difference, that the egg type and meat type in
poultry have never been segregated into different breeds, and each breed
bred for a number of years along the line it was intended for—the egg
type bred for eggs alone, and all birds inclined to meat-production dis-
carded—both male and female, and the meat type bred for meat, with-
out regard to eggs, except enough to perpetuate the species, just as the
typical butter cattle and typical beef cattle have been bred.

I have seen a great many cases like the first mentioned article,
where a person would go into the poultry business and get started
with stock that was of the meat type, and, not knowing any better,
would think that all poultry was the same as his, and the only way any
money could be made in the business was to sell fancy birds and eggs
at fancy prices. Now, these people are not to blame for what they do
not know. ‘They think their hens are as good layers as any other hens
and they have no way of knowing any better.

I have also seen a great many cases like Mrs. Basley writes of
except the profits were not so large, owing to different environment
I suppose. These people had the same breed of hens as the parties
before mentioned, but they were fortunate in getting the egg type,
and they made money with their hens. Everyone thinks every other
person’s hens are the same as theirs, if they are of the same breed, and
that is the reason there are so many different conflicting statements in
the poultry papers, and not because the writers are not intelligent or
not truthful, as some suppose. From a scientific point of view, and
apart from the fancy, and as far as the knowledge of meat and egg pro-
duction is concerned, the poultry business is in its infancy, and the
people who write for the poultry papers give their experience for your
benefit. That is all.

To further impress on your mind the difference between poultry
and other stock, I would say that while some individual cattle of the
various beef breeds will not be a paying proposition, the only safe plan
is to select your leaders from the beef family; and while some Jersey
cows will not pay as butter-producers, still, as a breed, they are among
the best for that purpose. Though some trotting hoises do not make
good, as arule, they will carry you over the road in good time, and though
some draft-type teams are not sure pullers, they are a success as a class.

The same general laws apply to all animal nature. The hen is no
exception, only in this respect: that while cattle and horses#have been
bred so that as a rule novices can select the type they wish by selecting
the breed, hens have not been bred that way. We have what purport

14 THE, CALL OF THE HEN.

to be egg breeds and dual-purpose breeds. The first are supposed to
be a paying proposition as a whole for egg-production. The latter are
supposed to be a paying proposition for both eggs and meat combined;
some breeders claiming that their breed will give you the very largest
number of eggs per year and the greatest weight of flesh all in one bird.
Now, these claims are misleading. It is an utter physical impossibility
for any hen to be a typical egg type and at the same time be a typical
meat type. It is against the laws of Nature. We have the Leghorns,
Minorcas, Spanish, and a number of other Mediterranean breeds that
are called “egg type.”’ While the truth is, that while they have been
bred as best the breeders knew how along the lines of egg-production,
you can find vast numbers that will not lay eggs enough to pay for the
feed they eat. Great numbers in some flocks have all the characteristics
of the beef type, and will lay about three or four dozen eggs per year
and sometimes not over a dozen. The Plymouth Rocks, Orpingtons,
Wyandottes, and Langshans are classed as ‘‘dual-purpose’’ breeds,
which means hens that will lay a medium number of eggs and givea
good large carcass for the table; and while this is true in a majority of
cases, I have seen numerous specimens that laid over two hundred and
fifty eggs per year, while some would lay little or nothing. In fact,
while I have bred Leghorns for more than forty years, and they are
my favorite breed, I must say I have found as good layers (within a
few eggs) in all the other breeds I have named as I have found in the
Leghorns, and I have also found as poor layers among the Leghorns
as I have found in any other breed. As far as the number of eggs is
concerned, as a rule, I find that the breed of the hen has nothing to do
with it whatever.

I do not wish to be considered dogmatic in anything I may say
in this work. I am merely giving the opinions I have formed by ob-
servation and experiment during a period of fifty-six years that I have
kept poultry, not to make all the money I could out of them, but to learn
all I possibly could about them—in fact, until a few years ago I never
kept poultry for the money there was in it. The keeping of hens has
been a passion with me. I have spent years of time and thousands of
dollars, but I think I have found something that will be of inestimable
value to the world, and I have found it not because I was any bette1
fitted for the work than thousands of other lovers of poultry, but be-
cause I stuck everlastingly to it, without any regard as to whether it
paid me in dollars or not.

As previously stated, it is not a matter of breed as to whether a
hen is a good layer or not. It is a matter of type, capacity, and consti-
tutional vigor. First, in almost all breeds there is a type of hen where
everything she consumes over bodily maintenance goes to the pro-
duction of eggs. This we call the ‘‘typical egg type.’’ Second, there
is a type where about half the food consumed over maintenance goes
to the production of eggs, the balance over bodily maintenance going
to make flesh. This is called the ‘“‘dual-purpose type,’’ as this hen
performs two functions that are considered necessary in the economy
of Nature: the production of eggs and the production of meat on a
commercial scale. Third, there is a type where everything consumed
over bodily maintenance goes to flesh. This hen we call the ‘‘meat
type,” for the reason that practically all her energy is used in producing
meat.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 15

Now, here we have three distinct types of fowl in almost every
breed. We have divided these three types into six separate classes
for each type:

No. 1 of the typical egg type hen may lay about 36 eggs;

No. 2 may lay about 96 eggs;

No. 3 may lay about 180 eggs;

No. 4 may lay about 220 eggs;

No. 5 may lay about 250 eggs;

No. 6 may lay about 280 eggs;

All this is in their first laying year.

No. 1 of the dual-purpose type hen may lay about 20 eggs;

No. 2 may lay about 50 eggs:

No. 3 may lay about 96 eggs;

No. 4 may lay about 115 eggs;

No. 5 may lay about 130 eggs;

No. 6 may lay about 145 eggs;

This is in thei first laying year.

No. 1 of the typical meat type may lay from nothing to a dozen
eggs. Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 may lay from nothing to a couple of dozen
eggs, and, as a rule, will lay these in the spring when the crows lay.
The reason is very plain, if we stop to think that the same natural
laws govern all animal (and human) nature. ;

The egg type hen is of a nervous temperament (that is why she is
usually free from body lice, if she has a suitable place to dust in), and
all she eats over bodily maintenance goes to the production of eggs.
The hen of the sanguine temperament is a little more beefy, and lays
less eggs; the hen of the bilious temperament is more beefy still, and lays
still less eggs, while the hen of the lymphatic temperament will lay
little or nothing, almost everything she eats going to flesh and fat.
(The reader need borrow no trouble over the meaning of the terms
“nervous,” ‘‘sanguine,”’ ‘‘bilious,”” and ‘lymphatic’ temperament, if he
is not familiar with them, as the charts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 will specify
matters so that anyone can understand the matter of selecting the dif-
ferent grades of hens with very little study and troutkle.)

We have said that we have divided the three grades, the egg type,
dual-purpose type, and meat type, into six separate classes. There is,
in fact, a seventh class, but it is so rare that we will not take it into
consideration here, but will explain it later. But we have, in fact, made
ninety classes of these six for convenience in selection, and the process
could be extended indefinitely, but it would serve no needful purpose.

Now, when we consider all these different grades in the hens of
every breed, and the further fact that there is the same number of
different grades in the male bird, is it any wonder that there is so much
difference of opinion in regard to the profits derived from poultry-
keeping? We have visited hundreds of poultry plants that numbered
from about fifty to two thousand or more hens each. We have seen
some flocks of five hundred that would not pay for the feed they con-
sumed, for the simple reason that they were not the right type of hens.
They were fine-looking, healthy meat-producers, but there was no
earthly way possible to feed them that would induce them to lay eggs
at any time except a few months in the spring when the crows laid,
and eggs were cheap. The owners of some of these flocks were bright,
brainy, vigorous business men, who tried every method that usage and

16 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

science suggested, and fought with sheer desperation to make a success
of the business, but went down in failure; while their next neighbor, a
little pin-headed, conceited specimen of humanity, strutting around
like a peacock, was getting rich with the same breed of hens. ‘‘Luck,”’
do you say? Yes, it is mostly a matter of chance. The first man was
unfortunate in that he got his eggs or breeding-hens from stock such as
that described in the first article of the Fanciers’ Monthly, while the last
man got his eggs or breeding-pens from stock described by Mrs. Basley
in the second article.

We once visited a gentleman who had a very extensive poultry
plant. He had a large number of different breeds yarded off in finely
appointed yards, with help and financial means to satisfy every need
of a poultry plant. His pens of Rocks, Orpingtons, and Langshans
were remarkable layers, while his Cochins, Houdans and Polish were
very good layers. After looking ove: the last-named birds, he re-
marked: “I have 500 Leghorn hens that are eighteen months old which
I wish you would look at.” After we had looked at them a few minutes,
he asked, ‘‘What do you think of them as layers?”’ I replied that if he would
tell me which pen laid an average of all the pens, I would tell him in
a few minutes. ‘That pen there,” said he, pointing to No. 20, “has
laid an average number of all the eggs laid.’’ After examining the hens,
I told him I would not take them as a gift, if I had to keep them one
year. ‘Why’? he asked. “Because,” I replied, ‘‘after keeping them
a year and selling them, the price I would receive for the hens and the
eggs they would lay would not pay for their feed. I cannot see why
you keep them.’’ The next evening he said to me, ‘Do you see that
man moving into the place over yonder? Well, I have sold those
Leghorn hens to that newcomer for $500.” “Is this an exceptional
case?’”’ you ask. I have only this to say: that all the David Harums
are not in the horse business, neither can I see why a poultryman should
be his brother’s keeper, when it is not the rule in other lines of business.
It seems to me the better way is to study poultry from a scientific point
of view, so that you can judge the value of a hen for the purpose you
want her for, and not have to depend on other people’s opinions.

By studying this book carefully you will be able to tell approximately
the number of eggs a hen is capable of laying in a year; you can also
select the hens that will be the best for breeding purposes, for eggs,
for meat, or as a dual-purpose hen—that is, a hen that will give you
the largest number of eggs possible with the largest possible amount of
meat when you wish to sell her, or the hen that will produce the best
broilers, regardless of any one particular breed. Some hens will be
very good layers, some very good meat-producers, some very good
dual-purpose type, and some very fine fancy birds, and you can mate
them with the same type of male bird and breed from these birds for a
few generations, and their progeny will degenerate. The chickens from
the hens and cockerels or cock birds of the 200-egg type may lay less
each generation, until in eight or ten generations they may not lay
enough to pay for their feed. The progeny from some of the best meat
and dual-purpose type matings will sometimes degenerate just as the
egg type, until they are practically worthless as profitable meat pro-
ducers. The chicks from the fancy mating may be a failure from the
fancier’s point of view.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 17

This is the rock that some old poultry-breeders are sometimes
wrecked upon. One case of national interest was the case of the late
lamented Professor Gowell, of the State of Maine Experiment Station.
He had started some years before to breed up a heavy-laying strain by
using the trap-nest, selecting eggs for hatching from hens that were his
best layers and conformed as near as possible to the standard, and using
cockerels hatched from these eggs to mate with his hens. Now this was
all right as far as it went, but there was something that the Professor
had not taken into consideration. He had procured the best birds he
could find, had trap-nested them to discover the hens that were the most
prolific layers, had selected the eggs from what he had considered to
be the best hens for the purpose (and few men had better judgment in this
respect). He had mated up the best-looking cockerels from these best
eggs from the best-laying hens, and according to all apparent precedents
was he not justified in expecting an increase each year in egg-production?
But what were the results? If reports are true, there was a decrease
in egg-production, and what do you suppose was the cause? ‘There
must be some cause. There is a cause for every effect. Sometimes we
think things just happen; that there is no natural law that governs
them; that in this or that case it was all chance; that it may not have
happened to another person, and will not be likely to happen to us again,
and so we dismiss the matter only to have the same thing repeat itself,
until we either solve the problem or meet our doom through it. And
thereby hangs a tale.

Some time in the summer of 1905 I received a letter from a doctor
in one of the suburbs of Boston, asking me what I would charge to visit
Orono, Maine, and havea talk with Professor Gowell, and incidentally
to drop a few remarks that might be of some help to him in his in-
vestigations. I had never met the Professor, but I replied to the Doctor
that I would go (I was then living in Minnesota), and would pay my
own expenses, as I wished to visit Boston, my birthplace, and where I
first started in poultry-keeping in 1857, and it would be a small matter
to go from there to Orono, Maine, where Professor Gowell was con-
ducting his experiments. While I was waiting for a reply, I decided
that as Professor Gowell had put so much time and thought into the
trap-nest proposition and had built so much on that one thing, and that
as he could get results from it (only it was a waste of time), that in this
first visit to him I would offer only one suggestion and that was the
secret of selecting the birds, both male and female, that would be sure
to breed progeny that would be better than their parents along the
lines in which the parents excelled, or, in other words, transmit their
predominating characteristics to their offspring; that is, if the cockerel
or cock birds and hens were typical meat type birds, the progeny would
excel along these lines. Some of them would excel their parents in the
production of meat; they would be hardier, better feeders, would digest
and assimilate their food better, and consequently arrive at maturity
sooner, and be of better flavor and more tender, and by breeding these
birds along the lines laid down by I. K. Felch, of Natick, Massachusetts
(“line breeding” he calls it), they would improve each season, so that
in a number of years there would be a great difference in their favor
over their parents. If the pen was a fancy proposition and had been bred
some years for fancy points, the progeny would show a decided improve-
ment in a few years over their parents. If the pen were the typical

O H--2

18 THF CALL OF THE HEN.

egg type, the progeny would show an increase over their parents in
stamina and egg-preduction. I would also have shown him where the
birds he was breeding frorh were deficient in the faculty that governs
fecundity, or, in other words, which controls the function of reproduc-
tion.

Whittier, in “Maud Muller,” says, ‘‘For of all sad words of tongue
or pen, the saddest are these: it might have been.’ Yes, “it might
have been.” Professor Gowell might have lived to give many more
years of aid to the poultry world and his tragic death been prevented;
but he wrote the Doctor that he did not want me to come. He seemed
determined to solve the problem himself, and no doubt would have done
so if he had been as care-free from routine duties as a man in his position
should have been; and I charge his untimely end to society. The men
and women in our public institutions who are giving their lives for the
benefit of humanity are not appreciated at their true value. We de-
mand the full limit of routine duties, forgetting that it is impossible for
a tired body to furnish sufficient nutriment to the brain to solve these
intricate problems that are continually confronting them, and while
we cause them to suffer mentally and physically individually, we cause
ourselves to suffer collectively, by our parsimonious treatment of them.

CHAPTER II.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS, GIVING SOME ADVICE TO THE
READER.

The writer is not one of the long-winded kind. I don’t like to talk
a long time in order to say a few words, or write a dozen pages where
one will do as well. I believe in handing out the chunks of gold with
as little dross as possible. I think the reader would rather receive
the information I have to offer in one page than in a dozen; that he would
rather discover the facts in a few feet than to be obliged to hunt over
a hundred acres of literary space for the same information. For that
reason I will make this work as brief as possible. I will be aided in my
effort to do so by the fact that the theories offered in this work have
been more or less demonstrated by the Government Experimental
Stations of New Zealand and the States of Minnesota and California;
also in the poultry plants of the five State hospitals (which contain
thousands of hens) in the State of California, under the auspices of the
State Board of Health.and the physicians of the different hospitals.
It might not be a difficult matter to mislead a few poultrymen on a
subject that deals wholly with physiology and anatomy, but it would
be absurd to think for a moment that one could deceive all the phy-
sicians in five State insane hospitals. It seems a man who would still
doubt would believe the world is flat, especially when he learns that a
member of the State Board of Health told the writer that there was a
difference of $1,500 in favor of using this system in one year, in one
of the hospitals alone.

We commence in this chapter the unfolding of a method or test
by which the reader can tell approximately the value of a hen and a
male bird as a breeding proposition (and in the chapter on Breeding
alone this book will be worth its weight in gold to the fanciers)

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 19

egg-producer or a meat-producer. It is my desire to make the facts
contained in this book so clear and the tests so easy of application that
anyone can become proficient in the use of them in a short time. There-
fore I have prepared a series of illustrations showing numerous types
and conditions of fowls, also various other facts that may better be shown
by pictures than by explanations alone.

You will remember, no doubt, that you did not arrive at your
present proficiency in reading in a day or two; that it took some little
time, and there was a certain system or evolution in your study. You
will find the same true of this method. There is a certain process that
leads from one step to another, until you have covered the system,
when by repeated study and practice you will become proficient and
accomplish what at first seems impossible. It may seem an impossible
task to handle and grade sixteen hundred hens in six hours, but the
writer has done it. With sufficient help to hand me the hens, we graded
(or, in other words, tested out) sixteen hundred hens in six hours in the
State Hospital Poultry yards at Ukiah, Mendocino County, California,
in March, 1910. ‘‘Not so bad for a semi-invalid of 62,’’ we hear you
say. Our reply is, ‘It’s practice.’ You can dothe same. Go through
the movements with every hen you pick up each day, and in a short
time what at first is difficult will appear quite easy.

For some years previous to 1912 there was great activity in the
poultry industry, there having been no lack of poultry papers, farm
papers, and magazines that for a nominal sum would give tuition in
poultry culture. The ease of getting a theoretical knowledge of the
business induced thousands to take it up who otherwise would not have
thought of doing so. The apparent ease of conducting the business,
the small amount of capital it was supposed to require, with the large
and steady income it offered, were the will-o’-the-wisps that lured many
to financial loss. I would warn my readers against rushing into the
poultry business on a scale beyond their means without first obtaining
a working knowledge of the same. With good stock, with the proper
environment, a good market, and a working knowledge of the business,
there is little danger of failure, if one is willing to do the work necessary
ona poultry plant. It offers the most independent living for the smallest
amount of capital of any business I know of.

The requisites for success are the knowledge of how to be able to
select the hen you need for any particular purpose, whether it is for
eggs or for meat or fancy; whether the hen will be a paying proposition
or not (this may depend on your market); whether she will be able to
transmit her predominating characteristics to her offspring or not.
Also you must be able to judge accurately the value of the male bird
as to what you want him for and as to his ability to stamp his offspring
with the desired qualities. All the above you can learn from this book.
You should also know how to operate incubators; how to feed and care
for little chicks; how your hen-houses should be built to suit your climate;
how your growing pullets should be fed and housed; and the best way
to feed to get the most eggs at the smallest cost, and how to feed and
mate to get fertile eggs and vigorous chicks. There are numerous
books published on all of these latter subjects that you can buy from
the publishers of any poultry paper; so we do not take up the matter
in this work; we give only what you cannot get elsewhere.

a

20 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Following is a series of half-tones and explanations representing
the method we have used in instructing hundreds of poultrymen and
women in California and other States and the managers of poultry
plants in a number of State institutions in the State of California.

CHAPTER III.

THE VARIOUS STEPS IN THE APPLICATION OF THE METHOD OF THE
SELECTION FOR EGG-PRODUCTION.

There are four characteristics that it is absolutely necessary for
a hen to possess for the economical production of eggs or meat. The
first is capacity, the second is condition, the third is type, and the fourth
is constitutional vigor. The reader must bear the first three in mind
in studying the next few chapters, as we will dispose of these before
taking other matters into consideration.

First. What is Capacity?—Capacity means the abdominal capacity
to consume and assimilate the amount of food necessary to produce
the number of eggs or amount of meat necessary to make the individual
hen under consideration a paying proposition. We measure the ca-
pacity of the hen by placing the hand across the abdomen between the
end of the breast-bone, or keel, and the pelvic bones. The method will
be shown in detail in Chapter IV.

Second. Condition.—If the hen under consideration is an egg
type, she must be kept in proper bodily condition by supplying her with
the right quantity and quality of food that will furnish her with vitality
material necessary to produce the number of eggs required of her. If
the hen is in good condition, the flesh on the breast will be plump or
practically flush with the breast-bone. Any variation in that condition
will be shown by a shrinking away of the flesh of the breast, and will be
followed by a corresponding shrinking of the abdomen. We show this
by illustration and example later.

Third. Type.—She must be of a type that everything she consumes
is used in producing the desired effect, whether it is meat, whether it is
eggs, or whether it is the maximum amount of eggs and meat that a
dual-purpose hen can produce. According to our idea, the type of hen
determines how she will dispose of the food she eats. The kind of type
is shown by the relative thickness of the pelvic bones. The very thin
bone indicates the egg type. As we pass into the dual-purpose and beef
types we find the bones becoming thicker. We show these by illustrations
and charts later.

With the reader bearing the above three propositions in mind—
namely, Capacity, Condition and Type—we will proceed to show how
to judge the hen with the least amount of time and labor.

Fig. 1 shows the interior of an open-front colony house, largely used
around Petaluma. The roosts are connected to the house by hinges, so
they can be hooked up out of the way while cleaning the house or ex-
amining the hens, as in the present case. These houses are usually
about 8 feet wide and 10 feet deep inside, with 4 feet posts and pitch
roof. These houses are open front, with the exception of 18 inches on
each side, as can be seen on one side, where hens are going out of the
house into the catching-coop. When hens move too slow to suit, one

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 21

or more persons (children will do) can take a grain sack by bottom
side in one hand and top side in the other hand and go into the house
holding sacks spread apart and moving gently close to the floor or ground
and drive the hens into the catching-coop. When the coop is full,

sim down the slide door on outside to prevent hens returning to the
ouse.

Fie. 1—Showing hens in house. Note exit in the corner and catching-crate
placed just outside. They walk into this unconsciously, and this saves them from
excitement and rough handling. As soon as the crate is filled the door is closed behind
them.

Some readers may have long houses, holding five hundred hens
or more. In this case you will need a panel, run diagonally across
the house to a point near the opening, where the hens go in and out of
the house, as in Fig. 1144. This panel can be as long as required for
the width of the house and made in sections, if desired, and should be
6 feet or more high.

Fig. 2 shows hens in the coop. When there are enough in, we
shut down the slide door and proceed as in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Note the slide door on top of the crate. We open this
just enough to admit our arm while we grasp the hen firmly by both
legs, so she can’t twist around and injure herself. A slide door is better
than a hinged door, as you can open the former just enough to take out
the hen without so much danger of any of the other hens escaping.
Be careful not to break wings or tail feathers or to injure the hen.

Fic. 1144—Showing 2-inch wire panel placed diagonally across house holding
2,000 hens. Panel frame and wire can be seen at left. This forces hens to go out
at exit in the corner of house and they walk into the catching-crate on the outside of
the exit.

wpolli

Fic. 2—Showing hens in catching-crate.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 23

Fic. 3—Showing how hens are taken out of catching-crate. If they are taken
out in this manner be sure to grasp both legs firmly and be careful not to break wing
or tail feathers.

Fic. 4—Showing right and wrong way to hold arms.

24 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fig. 4. Note how the right arm is held in Fig. 4. This is not the
right way, but it is the way most persons hold the left arm when they
receive their first lesson. Now, note how the left arm is held; this is
the right position, and it is difficult for me to teach students to hold
their arms this way. I have to drill them repeatedly before they will
do so. The hand which holds the hen by the legs should be at the
height of the hip; this enables you to use the other hand in examining
the hen for capacity with greater speed and accuracy. :

Fig. 5 shows how the writer holds a bird to ascertain its capacity
by holding it this way. After long practice, he is enabled to inspect
one in a few seconds by having three parties to hand him the birds
and to take them from him. A small, light hen or pullet is best to prac-
tice with.

Fic. 5—Showing how a hen may be held while testing capacity.

Fig. 6 shows where the head of the bird should be. You will note
that her eyes are covered up so she can’t see, and that has a tendency
to keep her quiet while you examine her.

Fig. 7 gives an example of testing the capacity of a hen. The hand
is placed on the abdomen between the two pelvic bones and the rear
of the breast-bone; the left hand holding the legs is turned under enough
to bring the thighs away from the point of the breast-bone, so that the
thighs will not interfere with measuring the depth of the abdomen.
The depth of the abdomen will vary with different hens; some will be
one finger (a finger means the width of a finger the widest way; I have
called it three-fourths of an inch) between the two pelvic bones (some-
times called ‘‘lay’”’ bones or ‘‘vent’’ bones) and the rear of the breast-
bone. Some hens will be two fingers between the two pelvic bones and

Fic. 6—Showing where the hen’s head should be so she cannot see anything.

Fic. 7—Showing how to test capacity.

26, THE CALL OF THE HEN.

the rear of the breast-bone, some will be three fingers, some will be four
fingers, some will be five fingers, some will be six fingers, and occasionally
one will be seven fingers between the two pelvic bones and the rear of
the breast-bone. The depth of the abdomen indicates the capacity or
the ability of the bird to consume and assimilate food, and it applies
to all breeds, except that, everything else being equal, the longer-bodied
hen, having more room for the digestive machinery, would have some
advantage over the shorter-bodied hen.

Fic. 8—Showing how to test condition. The legs of the hen are drawn upward,
so that you can see the breast. The condition is tested by placing the thumb and
forefinger about 14 inch from the front of the breast-bone. Figs. 20, 21 and 22 show
the method in detail.

Fig. 8. This indicates how to hold a hen when you examine her
for condition. This is one of the most difficult and serious problems
a poultryman has to deal with. To illustrate, I will cite one case out
of hundreds that have come under my observation. A gentleman
wrote me to call on him, as he was having trouble with his hens. When
I arrived at his place, he told me that when he fed his hens well he got
lots of eggs, but some of his hens died; then when he did not feed them
so well they did not lay so many eggs, but none of them died. He said
he had repeated this a number of times with the same results. He said
the ones that died were as fat as butter. I picked up one of the hens;
she was in prime condition for the market. I picked up another one;
she was very thin. I examined all his hens. I found he had, like a
great many poultrymen, three distinct types of hens: the egg type, the
dual-purpose type, and the meat type. As he had fancy birds in all

_ _ Fic. 9—Showing one movement that has proved an aid in testing type. The
right hand is placed under the breast of the hen to steady her while the legs are drawn

ee to bring the hen into position so that she may be examined for type (as in
cut :

Fic. 10—Showing another movement that has proved an aid in testing type.
The legs are drawn well under the hen, thus throwing the pelvic bones forward. The
right hand is then removed and used to examine the thickness of the pelvic bones
(Fig. 11).

28 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

the different types, he did not want to dispose of any of his flock, so I
segregated them into three divisions: the egg type, the dual-purpose
type, and the meat type. After that he fed the egg type all the grain
they could clean up in the scratching-shed and kept a balance-ration
of dry ground feed before them all the time. The dual-purpose hens
were fed all the grain they could clean up in the scratching-shed, with
a small amount of dry ground feed each day. The meat type hens
were fed a smaller amount of grain in the scratching-shed, with a couple
of feeds each week of dry ground mash—just enough to keep them in
condition. After this he had no more trouble with his hens not laying
in the proper season and dying from being too fat. He would occasionally
pick up hens in the different pens and note their condition and feed them
accordingly. He told me later that before he had taken the lessons he
had been working completely in the dark, but now he understood the
matter thoroughly and knew what to do.

Fig. 9. After examining the hen as in Fig. 8, place the hand as
an Fig. 9, and hold right hand firmly enough to prevent her from slipping

own.

Fig. 10. Then move the left hand down, as in Fig. 10, and hold

left hand firm enough to keep her in place while removing right hand.

TYPE.
Fig. 11. Now, brush feathers away from vent with back of hand
and part! the feathers near pelvic bones with fingers. Then grasp end
of pelvic bone so that it comes flush with outside of fingers, as in Figs.

Fic. 11—Shows method of testing types. The thumb and forefinger are
placed one on each side of the pelvic bone so that you may estimate the thickness
of the same, including flesh, fat, gristle, etc.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 29

11 and 24. This indicates the Type of the bird. Some will be one-
sixteenth (!/1.) of an inch thick, including the flank as held between
the thumb and forefinger, as seen in Figs. 11 and 24, and will vary all
the way up to one and a quarter (134) inches, including bone, gristle,
fat, and flank, as seen in Fig. 31.

The reader is aware by this time that we are in the chapter per-
taining to Type, the last of the three classes that it is necessary to
divide poultry into in order to make a scientific classification to enable
one to arrive at the approximate value of the “Individual Bird’’ as an
Egg or as a Meat proposition (and without any regard as to its value
as a breeder, which will be shown later). I wish to repeat here that
Type is controlled wholly by temperament. We must select the tem-
perament or combinations of temperaments that suit our purpose, and
then, with the desired capacity and by scientific feeding, so as to keep
the subject in proper condition, poultry-culture will become more of
a science with the majority of poultrymen than it is at present. In
order to prepare the reader for what is to follow, I will divide poultry
into three distinct classes as to temperaments.

The hen that will produce the largest amount of eggs with the small-
est amount of meat possible for her capacity is of the nervous tem-
perament. The hen which uses one-half of her vitality in producing
eggs and the other half of her vitality in producing meat—in other
words, the dual-purpose hen—is a combination of both the sanguine
and bilious temperaments and is called “the hen with the sanguine-
bilious temperament.” The hen that produces the largest amount
of flesh and the smallest amount of eggs consistent with her capacity
is of the lymphatic temperament.

In a fowl all the different temperaments and their different degrees
of combinations are indicated by the pelvic bones. In the horse they
are indicated largely by the breed. The Arabian, the ideal running
and trotting horse, is a good type of the nervous temperament, the coach
horse is a good type of the sanguine-bilious temperament, and the
Clyde is a good type of the lymphatic temperament. In cattle we
have a good example of the nervous temperament in the Jersey, and
of the lymphatic in the beef family of Durham, also Hereford and
Polled Angus, while the Holstein and Ayrshire cattle are good types
of the sanguine-bilious combined.

I have made this deviation so I could offer to my poultry friends
this thought: that there are certain laws in Nature that have no regard
for our theories, and the better we understand these laws, the less liable
we are to make mistakes.

CHAPTER IV.

CAPACITY.

In the preceding chapters we have given the reader an idea of the
method we use in judging the value of a hen for the purpose we wish
her for. In the succeeding chapters we will explain the method in detail.

First, we will take up ‘‘Capacity.”

Fig. 12 shows a hen with only one finger capacity (34 of an inch)
between the two pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone.

30 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fig. 13 shows a hen with two fingers capacity (114 inches) between
the two pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone.

Fig. 14 shows a hen with three fingers capacity (214 inches) be-
tween the two pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone.

Fic. 12—One-finger abdomen. (Capacity.) This indicates a hen of very small
capacity to consume and assimilate food. She never can be a large eater, hence of
net much value.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 31

Fig. 15 shows a hen with four fingers capacity (3 inches): between
the two pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone.

Fig. 16 shows a hen with five fingers capacity (334 inches) between
the two pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone.

Fic. 13—Two-finger abdomen. (Capacity.) Slightly larger capacity than the
preceding, but still of relatively small ability to consume food.

32 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fig: 17 shows a hen with six fingers capacity (414 inches) between
the two pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone.

Fic. 14—Three-finger abdomen. (Capacity.) Indicating very good ability t
consume and assimilate food. We find hens that lay as high as 180 deus in hele Grok
laying year in this class, depending on the type.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 33

NOTE: The tests for type and capacity cannot be applied to
young pullets with any degree of accuracy. These tests cannot be
properly made until the pullet has laid at least one clutch of eggs. A
pullet must obtain her natural shape and be fully developed before
you really know what she is. These two tests can best be made on yearly

Fic. 15—Four-finger abdomen. (Capacity.) A hen of very large capacity to
consume and assimilate food. We find 220-egg hens in this class, provided they have

the right type.

34 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

hens. This is where many poutrymen fail in making their tests and
it is why many of them condemn this system. It is absolutely accurate
in 99% of the cases if properly and sensibly applied.—Publishers.

Fic. 16—Five-finger abdomen. (Capacity.) A hen of still larger ability to con-
sume food than the preceding. We find 250-egg jhens in this class, if of the right type.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 35

Fic. 17—Six-finger abdomen. (Capacity.) Indicating extremely large capacity
to consume and assimilate food. She may be a 280-egg type hen or a heavy beef type
hen.

CHAPTER V.

ConpDITION.
We next come to “Condition.”
Fig. 18 shows a hen in very poor condition.

Fig. 19 shows a hen in perfect condition, as indicated by her full
breast.

36 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fic. 18—Showing hen in very poor condition. The feathers being plucked away
shows the actual condition of the flesh. We call a hen in this condition ‘‘three fingers
out of condition,” which indicates that her abdomen has shrunken up three fingers.
If she now has a capacity of one finger, when in good condition she would be four fingers
abdomen; if she has a capacity of two fingers now, she would have five fingers capacity
when in good condition.

Fig. 20 is somewhat thinner, as indicated by breast-bone. We call
her one finger out of condition.

The degrees of condition show the amount of shrinkage in ab-
dominal depth. One finger out of condition shows she has shrunken

Fic. 19—Showing hen in good condition. You will note that the flesh is even
vit the breast-bone. This hen would show her normal abdominal depth when exam-
ined.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 37

one finger in depth of abdomen two fingers out of condition shows she
has shrunken two fingers in depth of abdomen, three fingers out of
condition shows she has shrunken three fingers in depth of abdomen.

I
“Fig. 20—Showing hen one finger out of condition. You will note that the flesh
appears slightly shrunken away from the breast-bone. When the thumb and forefinger
are placed as in the cut, about 14 inch from the front of the breast-bone, the flesh will be
below the breast-bone, as shown by the mark on finger in Fig. 23. This would indicate
that the hen was one finger less capacity. If three-fingers now, she would be four fingers
capacity when in condition, etc.

Fig. 21 is still thinner, as reader can see by the breast-bone. We
call her two fingers out of condition.

Fic. 21—Showing hen two fingers out of condition. The flesh is shrunken away
from the breast-bone to about the depth indicated by the middle line on the finger in
Fig. 23, which is about the middle of the first joint. This shows that she is two fingers
less in abdominal depth than when in good condition.

Fig. 22 is still thinner. This we call three fingers out of condition,
and is about as thin as a hen usually gets, if there is any chance for her
ever being of any use.

38 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

_

Fic. 22—Showing hen three fingers out of condition. This hen would be three
fingers less in abdominal depth than when in good condition.

Fic. 22a—This shows you just where to place your finger on the keel or breast-
bone in order to measure or determine the condition of the hen. In order to properly
determine this fact, place your finger about 1 inch back from the front point of the keel
or breast-bone, as you see illustrated above.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 39

Fig. 23 shows about how the first joint of an index finger must
be divided up to determine the three degrees of condition. The first
joint of the index finger is divided into three parts, each line or division
representing what we call ‘‘one finger’? in measuring or determining
condition. If a hen had a three-finger abdomen or capacity and was
one finger out of condition, that would mean that she would have a
four-finger abdomen or capacity if she was in condition.

Fic. 23—Showing where the imaginery lines should be drawn on the first joint of
the forefinger in order to judge the condition of the hen or pullet.

CHAPTER VI.

TYPE.

We now come to “Type.” This is indicated by the thickness of
the pelvic bones, together with the flesh, fat, gristle, and cartilage on
same. (See page 17.)

Fig. 24 shows a hen whose pelvic bones are one-sixteenth (1/15) of
an inch thick that is about as thick as a piece of carboard that paper
boxes are made of, and the reader must bear in niind that the measure-
ment of the pelvic bone does not mean the bone alone, with the skin,
flesh, gristle, and fat scraped off, as some may suppose, but with all the
above included.

Fig 25 shows a hen with pelvic bones one-eighth (1/s) of an inch
thick.

Fig. 26 shows a hen with pelvic bones one-quarter (14) of an inch
thick.

40 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fig. 27 shows a hen with pelvic bones three-eighths (?/;) of an
inch thick.

Fic. 24—1/y¢-inch pelvic: bone. Indicating a typical egg-type hen, which means
that virtually all the food she consumes above that necessary for bodily maintenance
goes toward the production of eggs. If of one-finger abdomen, she would lay about
36 eggs in her first laying year; if of three-finger abdomen, she would lay about 180
and if of six-finger abdomen, she might lay 280 eggs in her first laying year.

Fic. 25—1/s-inch pelvic bone; indicating egg type, but not so typical as the preced-
ing. If of one-finger abdomen, she would lay about 32 eggs in her first laying year;
if of three-finger abdomen, about 166 eggs; and if of six-finger abdomen, about 265
eggs in her first laying year.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 41

Fic. 26—4-inch pelvic bone; indicating a slightly more beefy hen than the preceding
types, but still of the egg type. If of one-finger abdomen, she would lay about 24
eggs in her first laying year; if of three-finger abdomen, about 138 eggs; and if of six-
finger abdomen, about 235 eggs in her first laying year.

Fic. 27—%/,-inch pelvic bone; indicating that the hen uses a larger proportion
of the food she consumes in making flesh and less in the production of eggs. A one-
finger abdomen hen would lay about 16 eggs; a three-finger abdomen hen, about 110
eggs; and a six-finger abdomen hen, about 205 eggs in the first laying year.

42 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fic. 28—14-inch pelvic bone; indicating a still more beefy hen than the preceding
—that is, a still targer proportion of the food consumed is used to make flesh and less
to produce eggs. If of one-finger abdomen, she would lay about 8 eggs; and if of three-
finger abdomen, she would lay about 82 eggs; while if of six-finger abdomen, she would
lay about 175 eggs in the first laying year.

Fic. 29—%4-inch pelvic bone. A pretty good specimen of the beef type. We
find no two-finger abdomen hens that have pelvic bones so thick, because they cannot
consume enough food with such pelvic bones. A two-finger abdomen hen is virtually
a non-layer; a three-finger abdomen hen will lay about 24 eggs; and a six-finger abdomen
hen will lay about 115 eggs in the first laying year.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 43

Bh

Fic. 30—1-inch pelvic bone. A very beefy type. Almost all the food consumed
above that required for bodily maintenance is used in the making of flesh. We find
them in the hens that have abdomens from four to six fingers deep. They lay very few

eggs.

Fic. 31—14-inch pelvic bone. This indicates that the hen is of the typical beef
type. She is an enormous feeder, hence only found in hens of about six-finger capacity.

She will lay practically no eggs.

44 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

‘ pe 28 shows a hen with pelvic bones one-half (14) of an inch
thick.

Fig. 29 shows a hen with pelvic bones three-quarters (34) of an
inch thick.

Fig. 30 shows a hen with pelvic bones one (1) inch thick.

Fig. 31 shows a hen with pelvic bones one and one-quarter (114)
inches thick.

Fic. 32—Crooked pelvic bone. ‘‘A, A,” Position No. 1.

Now, please bear in mind that everything shown and related here
refers to Leghorns and applies to other breeds as well, only in a lesser
degree—so small that it amounts to almost nothing, as I will show later.

A, A, Fig. 32, shows the pelvic bones with flesh cleaned off.

B, B, Fig. 33, shows the pelvic bones with flesh stripped off farther
and painted black so they will show up better. You will notice that
the pelvic bones in Fig. 32 and Fig. 33 are crooked. The majority of
poultry have more or less crooked pelvic bones. Sometimes the bones
come close together, which is an obstruction in laying, and should be
bred away from as much as possible.

Fig. 34 shows perfect pelvic bones. In this form they are very
easy to take between the thumb and finger; also, when the hen wants
to lav the vent has a chance to fall down between the pelvic bones,

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 45

which allows the egg to be delivered without straining on the part
of the hen. Not every poultryman, but every poultrywoman has seen
cases where a hen has gone on the nest and after a couple of hours com-
menced to cackle her head off. Presently we hear the whole flock take
up the chorus, and going to see what the trouble is, we find the hens

Fic. 33—Crooked pelvic bone, ‘‘B, B,’’ Position No. 2. Hens with bones curved
like this will lay about 20 per cent less than hens of the same type and capacity with
straight pelvic bones, as in Fig. 34.

holding an ‘“‘Old Maids’ Convention” and declaring they will never lay
another egg, it hurts them so much to do so. On examining them, we
find the pelvic bones so crooked they come together like the horns on a
Jersey cow, and when the hens lay, instead of the vent dropping down
between the pelvic bones, allowing the egg to be released in an easy
manner in a few minutes after the hen goes on the nest, the egg is forced
to be delivered between the pelvic bones and tail bone, thus prolonging
the agony of the hen sometimes for hours, when, if she was built right,
as in Fig. 34, she would be relieved of the egg without pain in a few
minutes. And instead of wasting vitality in getting relieved of the egg,
she would be rustling around for material to build another one, and thus
add at least 20 per cent to her egg-producing value. This matter of
crooked pelvic bones is more frequent in some breeds than in others,
and is a serious matter that is very easily remedied by breeding only
from birds with the straightest pelvic bones especially looking after
the male birds, as one male bird with crooked pelvic bones will trans-
mit this defect to all of his daughters.

46 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

When I came to Petaluma, I found whole flocks of thousands of
hens with crooked bones; now they are very rare. The poultry-breeders
soon caught on to my straight-and-thin-pelvic-bone idea; and I think
the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals should recognize
my services in relieving millions of hens of the agony of parturition.

The reader will please bear in mind that Fig. 34 represents 100
per cent pelvic bone and holds the same relation to pelvic bones in gen-
eral that a bird that scores 100 in the show-room holds to all other high-
class birds.

A 250-egg type cock bird or cockerel with pelvic bones like Fig.
34 would be of inestimable value. The writer has cock birds like the
above that he would not part with for any money, for the reason that
it would take several years’ breeding to produce their equals.

Fic. 34—Most perfect pelvic bones, ‘‘C, C.”. Hens with pelvic bones like this
will lay about 20 per cent more than those having bones like Fig. 33.

If the reader has male birds whose pelvic bones are far enough
apart that he can grasp the ends with thumb and finger when measuring
the thickness, he should be satisfied until he can do better.

So long as the pelvic bones are comparatively straight after leaving
the frame and do not curve abruptly toward the ends, the birds may be
used as breeders, with the assurance that some of the offspring will
show a wonderful improvement in this respect. Figs. 32, 33, and 34
are extreme cases.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 47

CHAPTER VII.

Tue First LAYING YEAR.

What is meant by “the first laying year?’ All old poultrymen
know what the above means, and I have no doubt some of my readers
may be impatient with me for explaining little things that are so familiar
to them, but they will remember that poultry parlance is not all con-
tained in the dictionary, and a great deal of the contents of this book
may be Greek to the beginners in the poultry business who will read
this work. For this reason I cannot be too plain in my language or too
careful of details in explaining matters. The first laying year has
nothing whatever to do with the age of a hen or pullet. I have had
hens that had passed their first laying year when they were sixteen
months old. On the other hand, I have seen hens that were over four
years old that had not commenced on their first laying year. The hen
that had passed her first laying year when she was sixteen months old
had commenced to lay when she was four months old, while the hens
that were over four years old had never laid an egg. So the reader
will see the first laying year commences with the first egg a pullet lays
and ends one year from that date, when her second laying year com-
mences. Some pullets will commence to lay at four months old, while
others of exactly the same type, fed and cared for in the same manner,
will not lay before they are eight months old, owing to different en-
vironment. Everything else being equal, poultry will develop faster
on a warm, dry, sandy soil than they will on a black, damp, heavy soil,
and they will mature much sooner in a good corn country, where it is
warm in the shade and warm at night, than they will in a poor corn
country, where it is cool at night and cool in the daytime in the shade.
I have raised Leghorn pullets that were fully developed in size and form
and laid a full-sized egg when they were four months old.

It can be done in Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire, and
Minnesota, and in parts of California, where the nights are so warm
that one can sleep comfortably under a sheet only but not where you
have to cuddle under a lot of blankets on a summer night to keep warm.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE SELECTION OF TYPES.

If the reader has practiced handling a hen as in Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10, and 11, we will proceed with a lesson in judging hens as to the number
of eggs they will lay their first laying year.

We will look for a small hen to commence with, as she will be easier
to handle. Having our hen, we will hold her as nearly as we can as
in Fig. 5, and try to have her head as in Fig. 6, so she can see nothing.
She will then be easier to handle. Place hand across her abdomen,
as in Fig. 7. She may be a one-finger-abdomen hen, as in Fig. 12.
Then hold her as in Fig. 8. Her breast may be as in Fig. 19 if so, she

48 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

will be in good condition. Next go through movements as in Figs. 9
and 10 and hold her and examine her pelvic bone as in Fig. 11. Her
pelvic bone may be one-sixteenth (4/16) of an inch thick, as in Fig. 24.
Now look on Chart 1. Your hen is one-finger abdomen, in good condi-
tion, and her pelvic bone is one-sixteenth ('/15) of an inch thick. You

CHART 1.
One-finger Abdomen.
'/1_ pelvic bone.........0.....0006- 36 eggs
1/, pelvic bone.............-.-0045 32 eggs
3/16 pelvic bone..... 6... 2.2.25 08- 28 eggs
1/, pelvic bone..... Naas. saad ened 24 eggs
5/16 pelvic bone..... opal RUE in tay, 20 eggs
3/s pelvic bone..... saa cit tein lane 16 eggs
7/1 pelvic bone..... Bis en Dae tenes 12 eggs
1/, pelvic bone.............. .... 8 eggs
9/1, pelvic bone............-. .... A eggs
5/, pelvic bone.. ............ .... 0 eggs

will see that she is a 36-egg type hen. That means that if this hen is
one of a large number on a commercial poultry plant, she is capable of
laying three dozen eggs her first laying year, if she is fed and cared for
properly, barring accidents and disease. So we will call her a 36-egg
type hen.

We will drop this hen and take another from the crate and go
through the same movements. Hold her as in Fig. 5 or Fig. 7, with
head as in Fig. 6 (she may also be a one-finger abdomen hen, as in Fig.
12), then examine for condition, as in Fig. 8. Her condition may be
good, as in Fig. 19: then hold as in Figs. 9 and 10, and measure thickness
of pelvic bone, as in Fig. 11. Her pelvic bone may be three-eighths
(?/s) of an inch thick, as in Fig. 27; in that case she would read like this:
One-finger abdomen; good condition; three-eighths (3/s) pelvic bone.
Now, look on Chart 1, and you will find she is a 16-egg type hen.

We will drop her and take another from the crate, ed go through
the same movements as before. This hen may be a one-finger abdomen
hen also, in good condition, with pelvic bone 14 inch thick, as in Fig.
28, and by consulting Chart 1 we find she is an 8-egg type hen.

We drop her and take another from the crate. She may be a
hen with a one-finger abdomen, as in Fig. 12. When we examine her
condition, we find she is like Fig. 20, which indicates that she is one
finger out of condition (the subject of ‘‘Condition”’ is explained in Chap-
ter V.); her pelvic bone may be 1/16 of an inch thick, as in Fig. 24. This
hen will read different from the other hen that was 1/16 pelvic bone.
This hen is out of condition. She may have been in condition up to
a few weeks previous to our examination of her; the cause of her lack
of condition may be improper food or care, or both, or it may be due
to moulting, or she may have been broody. In any of these cases it
would not be the hen’s fault that she was out of condition, and she
should not be held responsible for it. Her condition indicates that there
is something wrong, and it’s up to her owner to right the wrong, and
when we do right the wrong, the hen will come back into condition, and
her abdomen will then measure two fingers instead of one finger. We

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 49

must, therefore, read her as a two-finger abdomen hen, !/16-inch pelvic
bone, when, by looking on Chart 2, we find her capacity would be 96
eggs her first laying year, if we kept her in condition.

We will drop her, and take another hen out of the crate. This
hen may be a one-finger abdomen hen, as in Fig. 12. When we examine
her for condition, we find her as in Fig. 21; this indicates that she is
two fingers out of condition; her pelvic bone may be '/15 of an inch.
Under her present condition, she might lay 36 eggs her first laying year,
whereas, if she were kept in good condition, she would have a three-
finger abdomen. She might lay 180 eggs.

We will drop this hen and take up another one. She may be two
fingers abdomen and her breast-bone may be as in Fig. 19. Her pelvic
bone may be 1/15 of an inch. We would read her as a two-finger-ab-
domen hen in good condition, pelvic bones !/15 of an inch thick. We
will look on Chart 2 at */1¢-inch pelvic bone, and find she is a 96-egg
type hen.

We will drop her and take another from the crate. She may be
two fingers abdomen and two fingers out of condition, as in Fig. 21,
with pelvic bones 14 of. an inch thick. She would read two fingers
abdomen and two fingers out of condition. She would be four fingers

CHART 2.
Two-finger Abdomen,
1/1, pelvic bone.........--....0000 96 eggs
1/, pelvic bone.................... 87 eggs
3/15 pelvic bone...................-. 78 eggs
1/, pelvic bone............ 22... 69 eggs
5/15 pelvic bone....... er ee 60 eggs
3/, pelvic bone............ 0... 51 eggs
7/1 pelvic bone....... both Eh roc mcs 42 eggs
'/s pelvic bone........... Lo... 83 eggs
9/16 pelvic bone........... wo. we. 4 eggs
5/, pelvic bone........... wo. oe.) eggs
Ug PEI DOME ii. 5o0i00's a ees .... 6 eggs
8/4 pelvic bone...... ............ 0 eggs

abdomen if in condition, and 14-inch pelvic bones. Being a four-finger-
abdomen hen (if in condition), we will look on Chart 4 at 14-inch pelvic
bone, and find she is a 175-egg type hen. We will drop her.

Take another. She may be a two-finger-abdomen hen, as in Fig.
13, in good condition, as in Fig. 19, with pelvic bones 34 of an inch
thick, as in Fig. 29. She would read two fingers abdomen good condi-
tion 34-inch pelvic bones. We will look on Chart 2 for 34-inch pelvic
bone, and find this hen will lay nothing. This does not mean that she
is an absolutely barren hen, that she will never lay an egg (I will explain
this when we get to the six-finger-abdomen hen)’ she may lay a few,
perhaps half a dozen, in the spring when the crows lay; but as a com-
mercial proposition she will have no more value than the hen that never
laid an egg. Everything she consumes goes to the making of flesh,
except’ what she uses in bodily maintenance.

We will drop her and take another. She may be a three-finger-
abdomen hen, as in Fig. 14. Her condition may be as in Fig. 19, with

c H—4

50 THE CALL OF THE’ HEN.

pelvic bones as in Fig. 24. She would read three fingers abdomen;
in good condition '/,.-inch pelvic bone. We look on Chart 3 at '/16~
inch pelvic bone, and find that this hen is a 180-egg type.

CHART 3.

. Three-finger Abdomen,

1/1, pelvic bone........ .......0-- 180 eggs
1/, pelvic bone.... ... ......--. 166 eggs
3/1, pelvic bone..... ........--.5- 152. eggs
1/4 pelvic bone.... ..........-.. 138 eggs
5/15 pelvic bone............. ... .124 eggs
§/, pelvic bone..... ... Palkide sats 110 eggs
T/ys pelvic bone.... ... .... ... 96 eggs
1/, pelvic bone..... Loe ee sa 82 eggs
9/1, pelvic bone.......... ... ... 68 eggs
5/, pelvic bone.......... ... .. 54 eggs
1/15 pelvic bone...... ci. ee... 40 eggs
3/, pelvic bone.. ... ... ... ... 26 eggs
13/15 pelvic bone..... tees ee... 12 eggs '
T/,s pelvicbone.. ... ... .... .. O-eggs

We will drop her and take another. She may be another three-
finger-abdomen hen, like Fig. 14; she may be in good condition, like Fig.
19, and her pelvic bone may be %-inch thick, like Fig. 28. She would
read three fingers abdomen; good condition; 44-inch pelvic bone. We
will look on Chart 3 at - inch pelvic bone, "and find this hen is an 82-
egg type hen.

We will take another hen. She may be a three-finger abdomen,
like Fig. 14; she may be in good condition, like Fig. 19, and her pelvic
bone may be 34 of an inch thick, as in Fig. 29. We will read her as a
three-finger-abdomen hen; in good condition; 34-inch pelvic bone. We
will look on Chart 3 at 34-inch pelvic bone, and find she is a 26-egg type
hen.

We will pick up another hen. She may be a three-finger capacity,
as in Fig. 14; she may be three fingers out of condition, as in Fig. 22,
and her pelvic bones may be !/1¢ of an inch thick, asin Fig. 24. We would
read this hen as a three-finger abdomen; three fingers out of condition;
and '/1e-inch pelvic bone. When a hen is three fingers out of condition
she is in a serious way. She may have been sitting or laying heavily
and have been underfed. In either case, good care and plenty of the
right kind of feed will bring her back into condition, provided she has
not contracted tuberculosis (going light) or some other wasting disease.
I will cite two cases out of hundreds that have come under my obser-
vation.

One was a Barred Rock hen that I intended to set on duck eggs;
she was six fingers abdomen, in good condition when I put her on the
nest, and 1/1-inch pelvic bones; that indicated that she was a 235-egg
type hen. She was on the nest two weeks before the duck eggs arrived
and four weeks on the ducks eggs, making six weeks setting. Owing to
stress of other work, and being confined in an out-of-the-way place,
she was somewhat neglected, and when the ducklings were hatched she
was three fingers abdomen and three fingers out of condition, thus

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 51

indicating a 138-egg type hen. Six weeks later she was laying, and had
developed to six fingers abdomen, which was her normal condition.

Another case was where a gentleman was in a class that took in-
structions. After the close of the meeting he brought a hen that was
three fingers out of condition. He said she was his best hen, and asked
me how many eggs she would lay. She was three fingers abdomen,
three fingers out of condition, and '/s-inch pelvic bone. Her head and
actions indicated perfect health. I told him she might lay 180 eggs
her first laying year, if her condition had been the same as it is at the
present time; but if she was my hen I thought I might be able to make
her lay 280 eggs. “You don’t feed her half enough.” He replied
“That is the only hen I have that lays a white egg. I got her when
a pullet, before she commenced to lay. She has been laying about
a year and has laid 176 eggs. I had a small lot of hens at the time that
were so fat they were dying, and I cut down their feed and have fed them
sparingly ever since, so they would not get too fat and die.”’ I went to
his place, and found he had three types of hens: the typical meat type
(one with pelvic bones 1!/s inch thick), some with pelvic bones 14-
inch thick, and this hen that laid the white eggs, whose pelvic bones
were !/,5 of an inch thick. I told him to segregate his hens into three
lots, and feed. them according to their type. Give the egg-type hens all
the grain they could clean up each day in the scratching-shed, with a
dry balanced mash before them all the time; the dual-purpose hens
should be fed all the grain they wished to scratch for, with an occasional
mash and the beef-type hens should be fed what grain they could clean
up in. the scratching-shed in about an hour. The litter should be good
and deep in all cases. I did not mention charcoal, grit, shells, and green
stuff, as that is not my business. Every man who takes a poultry paper
knows that part of the business, and every person who keeps poultry
should take a poultry paper in order to keep posted on current poultry
topics.

The gentleman wrote me over a year later that he had succeeded
in bringing the hen up to normal condition, as in Fig. 19, but after
laying awhile she went back to five fingers abdomen and one finger out
of condition, and had laid 288 eggs her next laying year.

We will now take another hen. She may be a four-finger abdomen,
as in Fig. 15, in good condition, as in Fig. 19, and her pelvic bones may
be 1/16 of an inch thick, as in Fig. 24. She would read four fingers
abdomen; good condition; '/is-inch pelvic bone. If we consult Chart
4, we will find she is a 220-egg type hen.

The next hen may be also four fingers abdomen, as in Fig. 15,
in good condition, as in Fig. 19, with pelvic bones 14 inch, as in Fig. 28.
She would read four fingers abdomen; in good condition; 14-inch pelvic.
bones. We will see by Chart 4 that this is a 115-egg type hen.

Our next hen may be a four-finger-abdomen hen; condition good;
pelvic bones 1 inch thick. We would read her as a four-finger abdomen;
condition good; pelvic bones 1 inch. If we look on Chart 4 at 1-inch
pelvic bones, we will find this hen will lay approximately nothing.

Our next hen may be a four-finger-abdomen hen, one finger out of
condition, '/s-inch pelvic bone. She would indicate a 205-egg type
hen under her present condition, but we would read her four fingers
abdomen, one finger out of condition that would mean a five-finger-

52 THE

abdomen hen if in condition, !/s-inch pelvic bone.

CALL OF THE HEN.

We look on Chart

5 at 1/s pelvic bone, and find she is a 235-egg type hen.
Our next hen may be a five-finger-abdomen hen, as in Fig. 16;
she may be in good condition, as in Fig. 19, and her pelvic bones may be

CHART 4.

Four-finger Abdomen.

1/1, pelvic bone

1/, pelvic bone...

3/18 pelvic bone
1/4 pelvic bone
5/16 pelvic bone
3/, pelvic bone

7/1 pelvic bone....

1/, pelvic bone

9/45 pelvic bone....

5/s pelvic bone
11/16 pelvic bone
3/4 pelvic bone
18/16 pelvic bone

t/s pelvic bone.....

15/1, pelvic bone

1-in. pelvic bone

1/1, of an inch, as in Fig. 24. She will read five fingers abdomen; con-
dition good; pelvic bones !/is-inch. We look on Chart 5 at 4/i¢-inch
pelvic bone, and find she is a 250-egg type hen.

CHART 5.

Five-finger Abdomen.

1/16 pelvic bone
'/, pelvic bone
3/15 pelvic bone
1/4, pelvic bone
5/15 pelvic bone
3/3 pelvic bone
7/15 pelvic bone
1/. pelvic bone
9/16 pelvic bone
5/3 pelvic bone
11/1, pelvic bone
3/4 pelvic bone
13/15 pelvic bone
7/, pelvic bone
6/15 pelvic bone

1-in. pelvic bone. .
1'/16 pelvic bone

L/s pelvic bon

Cres sr.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 538

Our next hen may be a five-finger-abdomen hen, as in Fig. 16;
she may be in good condition, as in Fig. 19, and her pelvic bones may be
3/,-inch thick, as in Fig. 27. We would read her as five fingers abdomen;
good condition, and 3/s-inch pelvic bones. Chart 5 would show us that
she was a 175-egg type hen.

The next hen may be a five-finger-abdomen hen; condition good;
pelvic bones 1 inch thick. She would read five fingers abdomen; good
condition; l-inch pelvic bones. The chart would indicate that she was
a 25-egge type hen.

The next hen may be a six-finger-abdomen hen, as in Fig. 17;
she may be in good condition, and her pelvic bones may be 1!/, inches
thick as in Fig. 31. I hear the reader say, ‘‘What breed of a hen has
pelvic bones as thick as that? or do you mean that both of her pelvic
bones are 1!/, inches thick, counting them both together?” No; I
mean that each one of her pelvic bones is 114 inches thick. Counting
the bone, gristle, fat, and flesh (flank), both of the pelvic bones would
be 21% inches thick. When we speak of pelvic bones being so thick,
we always mean one of them. And as to breed, this hen is a Single
Comb White Leghorn; she is the typical beef type. You will see by
Chart 6 that she will lay practically nothing; and here I will explain
this matter.

CHART 6.

Six-finger Abdomen.
NERVOUS TEMPERAMENT.

1/1, pelvic bone.... ... ... ... ..280 eggs
1/, pelvic bone.... ... ... ... ..265 eggs
3/16 pelvic bone........ ... ... ..250 eggs
1/, pelvic bone............ ... ..285 eggs
5/16 pelvic bone............ ... ..220 eggs
SANGUINE TEMPERAMENT.
3/3 pelvic bone...... Sas Mage bo bata stds 205 eggs
T/4s pelvic bone.. .... ........... 190 eggs
1/, pelvic bone...... 0 ........... 175 eggs
9/16 pelvic bone...... beh tg bent cea 160 eggs
5/3 pelvic bone..... wee wees os. 145 eggs
Bitious TEMPERAMENT.
11/1, pelvic bone...... 1. ee. 2-180 eggs
3/4, pelvic bone...... ............ 115 eggs
18/1, pelvic bone...... Lie see 2-100 eggs
7/5 pelvic bone.......... ........ 85 eggs
15/1, pelvic bone...... Lee eee eee. 70 eggs
LYMPHATIC TEMPERAMENT.
l-in. pelvic bone...... iste, plane sate 55 eggs
13/16 pelvic bone...... Lee aes ae. 40 eggs
11/s pelvic bone...... Mise deco sa asics 25 eggs
13/16 pelvic bone............... .. 10 eggs

1'/, pelvic bone....... ee eae O.eggs

54 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

A man once brought me a two-and-a-half-year-old hen that he had
trap-nested for two years, and asked me to tell him how many eggs
she had laid her first laying-year. I told him she had never laid an egg.
Her abdomen was six fingers, she was in good condition, and her pelvic
bones were 1!/; inches thick. He cautioned me to be careful, as he had
always trap-nested his hens, and his record showed how many eggs they
had laid. I replied, ‘‘If that is the case, her record shows that she has
never laid an egg.”’ He said no more then, but brought me another hen,
asking me how many she would lay. I examined her for capacity. I
found she was a six-finger-abdomen hen; her condition was good; her
pelvic bones were 1/16 of an inch thick; they were both alike as to thick-
ness. I questioned him as to how he had fed her, and if she had been
sick her first laying year. As he is one of the best breeders in the United
States, I could depend on him knowing what he was talking about. I
asked him then to take off his hat. I could see by the shape of his head
he was a strictly honest man. I then told him that I had never. raised
that breed of hens, but if it was a Leghorn, it might lay 280 eggs its
first year, and if a Plymouth Rock, it might lay 270. He said her trap
nested record showed she laid 276 eggs from the time she commenced to
lay in her pullet year until she had laid one year. ‘‘That’s all right,” I
replied; “‘but what about the first hen we examined?” ‘We have never
found any in the trap-nest from her,” he said, ‘‘but she might be in the
habit of laying in the yard.”” And as he offered $1,000 for her, he was
very anxious to get some chickens from her. I explained to him that
while most typical beef hens could be made to lay a very small number
of eggs in the spring when the crows laid, by feeding them a little lean
meat and shrunken wheat and bran on a grass plot of white clover (if
the blossoms of the white clover are clipped off), that his hen could not
be made to lay, as she was a barren hen, as indicated by the rigid cord
that connected both of the pelvic bones together, thus indicating that
Nature never intended her to lay. I could name a number of professors
and physicians that have told me they have discovered the same condi-
tion after they had taken my lessons..:

The reader will please bear in mind that the two pelvic bones of a
hen are not always of the same thickness. Some hens may have one
pelvic bone thicker than the other; when this is the case, add the two
together and half of the number will be the right thickness to judge by.
For instance, if one pelvic bone was !/s of an inch and the other one was
1/, of an inch, the added thickness would be #/s of an inch; dividing this
would give you */16 of an inch as the thickness of one pelvic bone. Where
one bone is thicker than the other, the thinnest one is on the left side of
the hen.

Our next hen may be another six-finger-abdomen hen, as in Fig.
17, she may be in good condition, as in Fig. 19, and her pelvic bones
may be !/s of an inch thick, as in Fig. 25; she would be a 265-egg type
hen. A

Our next hen may be a six-finger-abdomen hen in good condition;
pelvic bones #/s inch; she would read six fingers abdomen; good con-
dition; pelvic bones */s of an inch. By consulting Chart 6, we will find
this is a 205-egg type hen.

Our next hen may be a six-finger-abdomen hen, in good condition;
¥-inch pelvic bones; this hen will be a 175-egg type hen.

‘THE CALL OF THE HEN. 55

Our next hen may be a six-finger-abdomen hen, in good condition;
pelvic bones 1 inch. We look on Chart 6, and find that 1-inch pelvic
bones indicate the 55-egg type hen.

Our next hen may be a four-finger-abdomen hen; she may be two
fingers out of condition, as in Fig. 21, and her pelvic bones may’ be
3/16 of an inch thick. We would read her as four fingers abdomen;
two fingers out of condition; this would make her a six-finger-abdomen
hen if in condition. We look on Chart 6 at 1/,,-inch pelvic bone, and
find our last hen is a 280-egg type hen, if in condition, and it is up to
us.to put her in condition and keep her there as nearly as possible.

I will admit it is a hard proposition to keep the non-setting typical-
egg type hen in condition, but the man that comes the nearest doing
so is the best feeder. I will have more to say in regard to the matter
of condition in the chapter on Judging Utility Fowls at the Poultry
Shows. This work is a matter of line upon line, and I must necessarily
repeat the same matter in some respects time after time. But as this
is an educational more than an entertaining proposition, I hope that
my readers will bear with me.

As I said before, there are three types of hens. The hen listed
on Chart 1 as !/is-inch pelvic bone is a typical egg-type hen, because
all she consumes over bodily maintenance goes to the production of eggs.
The hen listed as */s-inch pelvic bone is a dual-purpose hen; half of her
vitality is used in producing eggs and half in producing meat. The
hen listed as °/s-inch is a typical meat-type hen; all she consumes goes
to the production of meat, except what she uses in bodily maintenance.
The hen listed as 1/1s-inch pelvic bone on Chart 2 is a typical egg-type
hen; the hen listed as */s-inch pelvic bone on same chart is a dual-pur-
pose hen; and the one listed as oy s-inch pelvic bone is a typical meat-
type-hen; the same rule follows in all the charts. All the hens listed
as }/y.-inch pelvic bone are typical egg-type hens and they can’t be
made to pay as a meat proposition. The hens listed in the center of
each chart are the dual-purpose hens; they can be used as an egg and as
a meat proposition. The hens listed on the bottom of each chart are
the meat-type hens. Nature has fitted them for the production of flesh,
and there is no human energy that can change them to a paying egg
proposition.

Between the above three distinct types there are combinations
of each adjoining type. This allows sufficient latitude for the preference
of each individual breeder. A person can breed the typical egg-type
hen and cock bird with pelvic bones 1/1. of an inch thick. If he thinks
this type is too delicate, he can breed from the */16-inch pelvic bone.
stock; this is my favorite type; the hen of this type is better able to
withstand the vicissitudes of the poultry-yard than her finer-bred
sisters. I will have more to say along this line in the chapter on Broilers.
I think we have given sufficient examples in Chapters III, IV, V, VI
and VII, to enable the reader to examine a hen so he may be able to
arrive at her approximate value for the purpose he wishes to use her for.

In a previous chapter we have said there is occasionally found a hen
seven fingers abdomen. If the reader finds one, he can score her by
Chart 6 and add 15 eggs to the number indicated. For instance, if the
hen is in good condition and measures seven fingers abdomen and her
pelvic bones are */s inch thick, Chart 6 would indicate she is a 205-egg
type bird; we then add 15 eggs to the 205, which gives the hen 220-egg

56 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

capacity. If she is five fingers abdomen and two fingers out of condition,
we call her seven fingers abdomen, and proceed as above, which gives
us the same results.

There are two other matters I wish to call the attention of the reader
to in this place. One is, that I have found hens occasionally that laid
a great deal better by the trap-nest than they scored by the Hogan
test, but it was owing to a mistake made in measuring their abdomens,
owing to the rear of the breast-bone turning up, sometimes almost an
inch over normal shape, thus indicating a smaller abdomen than really
was the case. The other matter is a more serious one—in fact, very
serious in some flocks. It is the bagging down of the abdomen over
the rear of the breast-bone. Every hen used in the breeding-pen should
be examined for this defect, for if one of them is bred from, she is almost
sure to transmit her weak ovarian system to her offspring. Some of
these hens will make remarkable egg records for a year or so, then will
never lay another egg; and again, the eggs are liable to be very infertile
and more or less thin-shelled; and if you have great numbers of hens,
you can hardly tell when these hens stop laying for good, unless you
trap-nest them, as their pelvic bones do not close up as readily as hens
in normal condition.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure in this case, as
it is very easy to prevent all this trouble. I meet hundreds of the above
hens in my visits to poultry plants, but never have a case in my yards.
I examine all my pullets when about a year old for possible breeders.
If a hen satisfies me as to Capacity, Type, and Prepotency, I then hold
her as if I were testing her for capacity, except that I hold her by the
right leg only. I then lay my hand on her breast, so that it (my hand)
will conform to her shape, and draw it slowly along her breast-bone
(or keel) from front to rear. When my hand reaches the rear, if I feel
the slightest indication of her abdomen dropping the least bit below the
rear of the breast-bone, I reject the hen as a breeder, and thereby save
myself a world of trouble in the future.

CHAPTER IX.

PREPOTENCY.

We will take up in this chapter Prepotency, the science of breeding
poultry, so that we can breed with a definite knowledge of what we are
doing, and not leave it to intuition or chance. It is an old saying that
‘ike begets like;’’ this seems to be true in some cases, but seems not
to be true in other cases. Students of human nature can readily see
where it has apparently failed. Some children will resemble and act
like one parent and some will resemble and act like the other parent;
then again, some children will be like neither of the parents. Breeders
of horses and cattle are well aware of the variations in offspring from the
type and characteristics of sire and dam. It is more through persistency
in breeding than the general knowledge of any scientific principle that we
have succeeded in producing the grand types of animals we see at our
State fairs. The breeding of poultry is no exception to the above rule.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 57

While some breeders have good success in breeding for the desired type
of bird, whether for fancy, for eggs, or for flesh, others will have very
poor success.

The purpose of this chapter is to explain to the breeder who has had
poor success a method that will enable him to breed with the full under-
standing as to what he is doing. It is a well-known fact among the
clothing trade that if a woolen manufacturer has a sample of cloth
presented to him, he can manufacture thousands of yards that will
be an exact duplicate of the sample. The same is true in other industries.
But suppose the reader gives an order to one of our well-known poultry-
breeders for 1,000 pullets, to be delivered at four months old, these
pullets to be housed, fed, and cared for as the breeder designates, and
to approximately lay a certain number of eggs their first laying year;
how many breeders do you suppose could fill the order? Until a ma-
jority of them can do so the poultry industry will not be on a business
basis, but will be more or less of a gamble.

I have said that seemingly like does not beget like in some cases.
We will take, for instance, a hen that is five fingers abdomen, in good
condition, 14-inch pelvic bones. She will scale up as a 205-egg type
hen. We will make up a pen of these hens with a 205-egg type cockerel
or cock bird; we raise 100 pullets from this mating and they may scale
175-egg type. We then say, ‘Like does not produce like.’ Here is
where we make a mistake. In one sense we are right, in another we
are wrong. Nature makes no mistakes. We have mated 205-egg-
type male and female, and we get as a result 175-egg type product.
That’s as plain as the nose on one’s face, and we throw up our hands
in despair and say, ‘It’s all luck and chance.” Another party mates
up the same type of birds and gets a lot of pullets that average 210
eggs their first laying year; still another party mates up the same type
of birds and does not get a chick.

The reader may smile, but this is no dream. A number of such
cases have come under my observation. One case was that of a pro-
fessor in one of the Southern California public institutions. He had a
pen of twelve Black Minorcas, headed by a splendid-looking cock bird;
also a pen of twelve Andalusians. He said there was something peculiar
about these hens, and he wanted to know if I could detect it. I tested
all the Andalusians, and told him they should average 140 eggs their
first laying year, and I would expect twelve eggs out of every thirteen
to be fertile. After testing the Minorcas, I told him they would average
about 160-egg type, but if they were mine, I would not set any of their
eggs while they were mated to the present cock bird, because I would
not expect them to hatch, and if they did hatch, they would be degener-
ates. He said, ‘“‘This is the second season I have bred from the birds;
I always get good hatches from the Andalusians; but, although I see
the rooster serve the hens, I have never been able to hatch a chicken
from the Minorca pen.” I replied, ‘‘He serves the hens out of sym-
pathy.”

Another case was a Barred Rock hen, the only one a neighbor
had in a small flock of Houdans. He called me one day, saying he had
a remarkable pullet at his place, and he wanted me to call and tell him
how many eggs she would lay her first laying year. She had been laying
two months, and he was keeping her record. I went with him, tested
the hen, and told him she might lay 250 eggs, but I did not think that

OC H—5

58 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

any of them would hatch. After her first laying year was up, he showed
me her record. She had laid 258 eggs, and although he had a good
Barred Rock cock bird with her, and had set a number of settings under
hens, he failed to hatch a single chick. I could cite a great number of
such cases.

In the first of these cases the fault was with the male bird; in the
last case the fault was with the hen; in both cases the trouble was caused
by a lack of prepotency (amativeness), and not through any defect in
the anatomy of the birds. Everything in the universe is governed by
certain immutable laws. If we understand these laws and can discover
a way to control them, we may be able to use them to our advantage.
Does the reader ever stop to consider these matters? What, in your
opinion, is the greatest effort-of Nature? The writer thinks it is the
effort to reproduce the species in all their different forms of animate
and inanimate life. If the case were otherwise, this earth would be
barren of grass and shrubs, of flowers and fruits, and of every living,
moving thing on land and in the sea. What a desolate old world this
would be with only bare dirt and rocks and water. And when we consider
what a wonderful thing life is, can we doubt that Nature has made
some extraordinary provisions for controlling its inception? In. the
wild state the survival of the fittest prevented degeneracy of the:species,
but under domestication birds cannot follow their instincts; and their
owners should be familiar with Nature’s laws in order to be able to
breed intelligently.

When the writer was twelve years of age he took up the study of
human nature, and later had help from that great teacher, Professor
©. S. Fowler. Years of practice in dissecting and in anatomy and in
the study of the skulls of animals and birds gave me the opportunity
to, study the construction of the different skulls and classify them as to
the known habits of the birds or animals under consideration. The
knowledge gained in this way was of inestimable value in later research
in the selection and breeding of poultry. I am positive that without
this early training I never could have accomplished what I have.

. After raising my first lot of Leghorns in 1869, I decided to dispose
of all breeds but the Leghornsand Light Brahmas. [I said I would raise
Leghorns for eggs and Brahmas for meat. Up to that time I had not
paid much attention to the individual laying qualities of the birds.
Experience had taught me that the. Light Brahma, when fed right and
of the right age, made a delicious table-fowl, and I was led to believe
the Leghorns were all great layers. That was a good many years ago;
and we have made wonderful discoveries and progress in science and the
arts since that time. The reader can imagine my surprise when I found
by experience that some of my Leghorns laid very few eggs and laid
them only in the spring months; others laid large numbers and laid late
in the fall and early winter. In those days we had no cold-storage
plants, and while eggs were very cheap in the summer, they were very
dear in the winter, and I decided to experiment with my Leghorns,
with a view to getting more eggs in the winter. After a few years of
study and experiment, I mated the best egg-type birds and from some
pens got good results, from other pens not so good, and from still others
very poor results. My previous studies in anatomy had enabled me
to select the matings from birds that were all of the same type, and I
expected to raise a lot of poultry that would be duplicates of their

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 59

parents, as far as their egg-laying qualities were concerned. But after
numerous experiments in mating the 180-egg type cock bird with 180-
egg type hens, I found I could not depend on getting definite results.

Some are born rich, some are born handsome, and some are born
lucky. The writer was born with none of these gifts, but with a com-
bination of faculties that compelled to invention, to wander and toil
and delve in the fields, the by-ways, and the mines of the mysterious.
These researches, with the aid received by studying the pioneers in the
same lines of investigation, led to the discovery, as the writer thinks,
of the fundamental principle that underlies the reproduction of the
species. After.a number of matings that were more or less discouraging
failures, I decided to look to the brain of the bird as the seat of the
cause of a great many of the variations between the characteristics of
the offspring and those of the parents. I had previously demonstrated
by experiment that environment had an influence on the shaping of
the skull of the birds. By focusing on this subject the skull-knowledge
I had gained in the previous nine years, I was led to think that brain
governed most of the functions of the body, and if so, why not the
reproductive function? I reasoned that as J had mated up several
pens of the same type of hens with the same type of male birds, and that
as there was no difference in their temperaments, that the hens all
looked alike, all weighed alike, and were all in the same condition—
or, in other words, they were all in perfect condition (to be more explicit,
the hens were three fingers abdomen, pelvic bone 1/15 of an inch thick;
all hens were in good condition; the cock birds were two-finger abdomens,
in normal condition, and pelvic bones 1/1. of an inch thick; all hens were
alike and all cock birds were alike, and all were about a year old); that
there must be something apart from the anatomy and physiology of the
hen that governed or in some measure controlled the reproductive
functions. As I had exhausted all my resources in the above lines, I
was very reluctantly obliged to enter a new field of research—the field
of Phrenology: I killed the cock birds that had given us the best
results, boiled their skulls until free of flesh, and found them as in No.
1, Fig. 85. The skulls of the cock birds that give the next best results
were like No. 2, Fig. 35, and the skulls of the cock birds that gave the
poorest results were like No. 4, Fig. 35.

The Arrows A, B, C, and D show the base of the brain. If A were
continued upward, it would pass through the projection 14 of an inch
from the end; if B were continued, it would pass through the projection
about !/; of an inch from the end; while C would be at the extreme end
of the projection, and D would pass outside the skull. The part of the
skull where the arrows 1, 2, 3, 4 point contains the rear lobe of the brain,
an examination will show that the development of this portion: of the
brain corresponds to the shape of the skull at this point.

And right here is where we were on the point of the eerend great
secret in breeding that would verify the saying that ‘‘Like begets like.”
The first discovery was, that if we wished to raise pullets that would
be good layers, we would have to mate good-laying hens with the same
type of male bird, and not with the meat type—that is, the male birds
would have. to be of the same temperament, of the same anatomy,
and of the same physiology as the hen. I found that if I had a hen
that laid 180 eggs by the trap-nest, and if I wanted to raise a lot of
pullets that would average 180 eggs, I could not depend on the trap-

60 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

nest to aid me any farther than to tell me the number of eggs a hen laid,
what particular eggs she laid, and the progeny of each hen, both male
and female. I also found great variations in type in mature cockerels
from each individual hen, which we considered was due to the difference
in type of the male bird and the difference in vitality of one or both
birds at different times during the breeding season; sometimes the hen

Fic. 35—Three degrees of amativeness (otherwise called ‘‘prepotency”),

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 61

at other times the cock bird, transmitting their characteristics. When
I was assured of this through numerous experiments, I reasoned that
my failures were because the male birds were of a different type from
the hens, and when I had demonstrated that the male birds were of a
different physiology by practice and scientific measures, and mated ac-
cordingly, I flattered myself with the assurance that I had discovered
all that was necessary in order to breed poultry intelligently. But
after more experiments, I was not wholly satisfied with results; and as
I had adopted the motto, ‘Like begets like,” I reasoned that although
the birds we had mated were alike, as far as we could see, the remaining
difference must be some place where I had failed to look for it. My
knowledge of the different variations in form of the skulls of animals
and birds of the same breed, together with the knowledge I possessed
of human skulls, led me to investigate the head as the only remaining
factor in the problem. When I reduced this proposition to a method,
and when I was able to measure its potentiality, then I assembled the
hens and cock birds, mating the 180-egg type hens and the 180-egg
type cock birds, each bird with the same degree of prepotency. Then,
and not until then, had I ever knowingly mated like to like. For years,
like many others, I thought I had mated males to like females, but I
was mistaken. And here is where I discovered my second great secret.
After this I mated like to like more intelligently, and the results were
more satisfactory.

I consider the selection of the male birds for mating along anatomical
and physiological lines, together with the proper understanding and use
of the faculty that governs the reproductive function, as the greatest
discoveries ever made in the poultry industry.

The reader may think there is very little difference in the skulls
in Fig. 35. If you add an inch to the length of a man’s legs, it does
not seem to make much difference in his height, but if you add an inch
to the end of his nose, it would make a great difference in his looks.
I found this expansion on the back of the skull corresponded to the faculty
of amativeness in the human family. I found that when it was large in
both male and female the parents possessed the ability to transmit their
predominating characteristics to their offspring. If the parents were
fancy birds, their progeny would in some cases excel their parents in
feather, vigor, and other good qualities. If the parents were of the
egg type, some of the chicks would be as good and some better layers
and more vigorous than the parents; if of the meat type, the progeny
would be of a stronger constitution, of a quicker growth, and assimilate
their food better—in a word, if both parents have this faculty (called
“‘prepotency”’ by some) large, the chicks will be more likely to be equal
to, and some will, excel their parents along the lines in which the parents
predominate. If the parents have the faculty small, the chicks will
not be so good as the parent stock, but will degenerate along the lines
that the parents excel in. If a hen is a 200-egg type and she has this
faculty small, she will be just as valuable as an egg-producer as if she
had the faculty large, but she will be of no value as a breeder; she will
be an old maid from choice, and her eggs will not be fertile, if she has the
faculty small enough. If the male bird has it small, his eggs will not
hatch well, and if small, they will not hatch at all. I have found a few
cases where the cock bird had the faculty of prepotency (amativeness)

62 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

large and failed to fertilize the eggs, but the cases were very rare, and
I attributed it to weakened or diseased nerves; as, for instance, the nerves
of the teeth or sciatic nerve, in the human being.

Fic. 36—Holding hen ready to put in sack.

Fig. 36 shows how to hold a hen before putting her in a sack to
examine her for prepotency.

a 37—Holding legs with right hand and gathering sack around legs with left
hand.

Fig. 37 shows how to put her in the sack, holding legs with right
hand, with back of hen against bottom of sack, and gathering sack
around legs with left hand.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 63

Fig. 38 shows tying sack around legs so that she cannot move while
examining her for prepotency. (Cut a little off the corner of thé sack
—Just enough to get her head through. Hen in Fig. 38 is too far out
of the sack.) ;

Fic. 38—Tying sack around legs so hen cannot move while examining her for
prepotency. This method of holding the bird is only necessary while you are learning.
If'there is someone to hold the hen for you, it would be quicker. When you become
skillful, you can hold the bird as in Fig. 43.

The best way for a beginner to learn how to handle a hen for ‘pre-
potency is to select a hen you wish for the table. Cut the corner off of
a gunny sack; hold her as in Fig. 36; put your hen in sack and tie. her,
as in Figs. 37 and 38; then make a hook of wire or a hair pin, attach it
to a string with small weight or stone; hang hen up against barn or shed,
head down, back against building; take long-bladed pocket or other
knife with sharp point, insert in hen’s mouth, and draw across the roof
of the mouth at the back of the brain at the junction of the neck, severing
the blood-veins, then immediately force the knife through the roof of
the mouth into the brain. The knife should be forced well into the
brain, which will sever the nerves, and the bird will feel no pain; then
insert hook in the nostril, and the weight will hold the neck straight.
The hen should bleed freely. After bleeding has stopped, clean mouth
and surrounding parts of blood, and place hen in some convenient place—
on a box or coop. The thumb-nail on the left hand and nail on the
forefinger of the right hand should be longer than the thumb and finger,
so the flesh on end of thumb and finger will not prevent the nail from
entering the slight depression between the skull and neck.

We will suppose the reader has handled the hen as suggested above.
Lay the dead hen as in Fig. 39; take hold of comb or head and pull neck
up with right hand, and while holding head up the neck will be stretched
out. Turn the head down with right hand, so the back of the head
will point up and beak will point down as much as possible. This will
make the projection of the brain (arrow 1, Fig. 35) appear more promi-
nent, so it will be easier to locate it; then draw ball of thumb of left hand

64 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

down on head until you feel back of skull; when you feel back of skull
with ball of thumb, then turn first joint of thumb down until thumb-nail
fits in between end of skull and neck and well up against base of brain;
then, while holding left hand and thumb as in Fig. 39, put forefinger of
right hand at base of brain behind the ear, as in Fig. 39, between the
neck and the skull and against the skull behind the ear, as in Fig. 39.

Fic. 39—Showing thumb !/. of an inch ahead of forefinger; indicating hen is total-
ly lacking in prepotency. (See Skull No. 4, Fig. 35.)

The ear can readily be discovered by lifting up its hairy covering. The
thumb-nail must be held perfectly straight across the neck, as in Fig. 39,
and not sideways; and the forefinger must be held perfectly at right
angles with the thumb, or the length of projection (arrow 1, Fig. 35)
eer the base of the brain (arrow 4, Fig. 35) cannot be measured accu-
rately.

The reader will notice that my thumb-nail is ahead of my forefinger-
nail in Fig. 39; this indicates that this hen is wholly lacking in the ability
to transmit any redeeming qualities to her offspring, also that she has
no desire for offspring. If this were a male bird, the eggs from his matings
would be infertile. Fig. 40 shows thumb on line with forefinger. Mat-

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 65

ings from this type of head would not produce very fertile eggs, and the
progeny would deteriorate each year if they were bred from stock with
heads like this. If the parents were 200-egg type, their egg-yield and
vitality would be reduced each generation of breeding. If they were of
the beef type, their vitality and ability to produce flesh economically
would diminish with each generation. If they were a fancy type, the
breeder would be up against a stone wall of discouraging experiments.

Fic. 40—Thumb even with forefinger; indicating she has prepotency small. (See
Skull No. 3, Fig. 35.)

I would advise the reader to take special notice of Fig. 43,.as this
cut shows the method of determining prepotency plainer than any of
the others.

Fig. 41 shows a hen with prepotency full—i. e., thumb '/, of an
inch behind forefinger. Sometimes a poultryman will be lucky enough
to mate up a lot of pens of the right type for his purpose with heads like
Figs. 41, 42, and 48. His business prospers, and his neighbors call him
‘ucky.’’ While others are going bankrupt raising poultry, he holds
his own and is making a good living. Figs. 42 and 43 show a hen with
an excellent head for breeding purposes. The thumb in this case is

66 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

14 of an inch behind the forefinger. If this hen is mated to a male
bird of the same type and prepotency, her eggs will be very fertile, and
a large number of the progeny will be equal to and some will excel the
parent stock in the lines that predominate in the parents. By selecting
these few specimens each season for breeding, it is possible to breed a
highly valuable type in the course of time. Fig. 43 shows how to hold
a bird between the knees after you become proficient in testing the head
while the bird is in a sack. After a little practice you will become so
proficient that you can test birds for prepotency without having to put
them in a sack.

Fic. 41—Showing thumb '/, of an inch behind forefinger; indicating hen has pre-
potency full. (See Skull No. 2, Fig. 35.)

CHAPTER X.

TESTING HENS ON A LARGE SCALE, USING CHartTs 44 AND 45.

I will describe in this chapter how I cull hens when we have large
numbers of them, as we have in poultry plants in California. I shall

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 67

take it for. granted that the reader has no method of selecting the good
from the poor layers, except, perhaps, the ‘‘Walter Hogan System”’ or
some of its pirated forms:that are now used extensively in all parts of
the civilized world, and which is based on the theory that the value of
ajhen as an egg-producer depends on the relative distance apart of her
pelvic bones and the thinness of same. We will suppose the reader has
300 hens; one lot are about a year and four months old, another lot are
about two years and four months old, and another lot are about three
years and four months old. Each lot has been kept in separate yards,
so there can be no mistake in regard to their ages, or they have been
toe-punched or otherwise marked. We notice more or less feathers
lying around the yard, thus indicating the season of the year when
moulting is near at hand. Everything else being equal, the poorest hen
moults first, and if she is a very poor layer, she will stop laying when
she begins to moult and will not lay again until the crows lay in the
spring. We consider it is about time to cull out the poor layers and send
them to market.

Fic. 42—Showing thumb 4 of an inch behind forefinger; indicating hen has pre-
potency large. (See Skull No. 1, Fig. 35.)

68 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Fic. 43—Showing how to hold bird between knees after you become proficient
in testing head while bird isin sack.

The next thing that comes to mind is the question, ‘‘What is a poor
layer?”’ That all depends on the price you get for the eggs, the price
of feed, houses, etc. I raised poultry in Todd County, Minnesota, in
1886 and 1887, and sold good lumber at the saw-mill for $5.00 per 1,000
feet. Wheat was about 1 cent per pound, and wheat screenings for
chicken feed could be had for the hauling. It is very evident that a
poorer class of layers might have been kept at a greater profit when sup-
plies were at that low price than can be profitably kept when supplies
are as high-priced as they are at the present time. So the reader can
see that the matter of the profitable hen is a local matter. At this
writing you can buy nearly two bushels of wheat in some parts of Minne-
sota for what you will pay for one in California. I was told a few days
ago that you could buy twice as much oats at the present time in Minne-
sota as you can in California for the same money.

When studying Charts 44 and 45 we see there are certain figures
lined off from the rest; this is for the purpose of aiding the reader at a
certain time each year to select the poor layers from the good ones without
using the charts, thereby saving the time necessary to look over the
chart and classify each hen.

‘Charts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, as the reader will learn by bearing in
mind the following instructions, need be used only to determine the laying-
score of the individual hen.

The first figures underlined in Chart 44 are in the column indicating
three fingers abdomen, from '/16-inch pelvic bone to ®/1.-inch pelvic bone.
The second are in the column indicating four fingers abdomen, from

69

THE CALL OF THE HEN.

The

ic bone.

The third are five fingers
h pelv

bone.
bone to 9/16-
, from */16-inch pelvic bone to #/i5-inch

1nc.

1C

1C

bone.

1c

1/\¢-inch pelvic bone to 7/1.-inch pelv.

abdomen, from 1/1.-inch_ pelv
fourth are six fingers abdomen

pelv

In this

any four you

d

When there are enough

ide-door that holds them in.
in min

ing-coops 1n position as 1n

t place in the yard where the sixteen-
We will suppose that the ends are all

*(uoTJeUTWeXe JO UII} 94} 38 sy ay? Jo UOTpUOO ay} UOT}eIapIsUOD OJUT BuTye} sheMpe) PUOIES ot}
oyut daay 02 Aed [tm uosees Surczy Ys1y Jay UI s8Za jo usZOp OT UY} ssoy sAe] yey} Vay B Jey} ain3y jou
Op aM eIUIO;e> UT “JO pasodsrp astmayYy are ‘sour Jo YOY} Your &/, souog stayed YIM ‘susy sasuy

-9914} pue ‘uoseas SurAe] Js1y ay} JO pua ay} 3 pjos ore suawopqe Jasuy-om} pue -9U0 YIM sudY [TV

“yday ore suay jo srequinu a3ie] aay yueld 38a persaurus0d Joy YeYD ys1y BuUIMOYS—FP ‘OTA

Ss)

ee

a

2

®

pres

mt

a

B

—

)

S)

oO

2

joy

3

fo]

° ical
wD e o
=H she 5
yeas Sb
a Oaet i=)
fas] peach

by 3 =|
= ARDS
Eos O25
ee) OE
ais ye
Cea gas
Sgagask &
>eeo.adg os
Q 2s a
oga "ago
Ore woo P
3 ae o oa
ar we
wHyr eo ag
Sy aon OH
geerostsy .
ato a os
See
Sus SB oz
e€Oqq07 ate
VB nm .~a 3
SoGyts p
GEO .H gt
895.05 42
Stones a

$8399 ‘‘‘t*tauoq oad = 8/,
s830 ZT ******auog StAjad 81 /sy
s33a 97 ‘****‘auoq o1ajad—*/,
$330 OF ‘**'**auoq oAjad t/q,
s83a po ****cauoq oajad = 8/,
s88a gg ‘*****auog o1ajad = /,
s3889 79 "7°" auog atajad Ss 2/,
$339 96 *'****au0q o1ajad = 8t/,
$333 OTT’ """" auog aajod 8/5
$333 PZT auog otAjad = 8T/,
$839 g¢q*****auoq o1ajed —¥/y
$339 7ST ‘'**'*‘auoq o1ajad = 8,
$339 99T'""""* guog o1ajad_—8/,
$339 0gT"""""" auog atajad_— 8 /;

s330 ¢¢

meee auoq otajad
sts sgu0q orAjad
“+++ +gu0q otAjed
“+++ *gu0q orajed
"r++ -3uU0q oTAjad
Sia auoq o1Ajad
are ‘au0q orajead
eee *auoq orajed
see auoq otajad
ste *gu0q stayed
“+++ -300q oralad
SSeS Se auoq otAjad

$3399 °*'*'*auoq o1Ajad
s33a 7 *****aUOq OTAjad
s88ag °°" *‘auoq orajed
s339 7] “""*"* auog d1ajed
8332 oT **'***auoq S1Ajed
$88 97 °°****auoq otAjad
$83a pz *'***‘auoq oTATad
$339 gz ***** ‘aug IAjed
s33a 7¢ "77" auog stayed
$88a 9¢ *****‘auoq orAjed

useulopqy Jesug-ae.14],

usWIOpgY Jesuy-OM,

uUsUIOpgyY Jesug-319

THE CALL OF THE HEN.

70

“uosevas ZUIAL] QUO Wey} SIU OJ BIUIOJeD ursn Aed jou [[LM Ady asnedaq ‘uosvas BUIAR] 3sIY ay} Jo pua
a7 1 Pos are yory? your /, wey? sour sauog orajad yIIM suay JaSuy-xIs pur ‘yoIy} Your /1 UeYI a10UL
sauoq o14jad yy suay JeZuy-in07

satiog o1Ajad yy suey Jasuy-aay “Yory} your %"/, ueyy asiour

“‘yday oie suay jo siaquinu 331%] a19YM Jud [eIOIVUIUTOD Joy WeYD puoses SuIMoyS—soP ‘O1g

sd39Q ‘"***tau0g oIAa{d ¢/;7

s339 QT ‘""** auog atajad 1 /,T f

s83a¢7 -"'* auog orajad «= 8/;, 9=s889Q “tte auog o1ajad = 8/;T

$3339 Op oc '* auog aAjed = %/;, s88a QT ****'auoq otajad § %/,7

s83a og ‘777 "* auog o1ajed ‘ur-~ s88a¢7 ***'**auoq o1ajad ‘uly s88aQ -''''- ouog dajad -uL-T
s339Q, ‘"''"* auog s1ajad T/o, SBBA QP auog sajad T/ep SBBIQT “1 '* auog o1Ajad )—t /g,
S839 OQ) Se auog otajad = 8/, S889 Gg “tt: auog sAjed —8/, = S8B8a¢Z auog otajad— 8/,
$339 OO," '"""* auog s1ajad 8t/,, = SBBA QL ttt Tt auog o1Ajad 9/5, SBB9 QF “°° ** auog otajad 8 /_y
8839 ¢[]'""'*auoq orajad = #/,,_ Ss SBBAGg vt auog aAjad = ¥/,p SBBACGG TTT TT: auog Ajad_—¥/,
8330 0¢T auog atajad = 9t/,,| $839 QQT****’ auog sajad T/y, SBBaQs “ttt auog o1Ajad 8 /,,
s83a CPT *'*'‘auoq stajad ~—8/,| s88acq{{°"****auoq stAjad) = &/,_—s SBS Sg ‘"****auoq sajad_—8/,
$339 QOT'""""* auog o1ajad) St /,| sdda get auog stajad—/,| sB8a QOT******auoq orajad = 8t/,
s38a¢/q °°" auog o1ajad Ss @/,| S830 GPT auog aajad = 2/,| sBBa cTt****: auog aAjad— /,
$333 06" *" auog otajad = 8t/,| 8889 QOT auog atajad = t/,| sBB9 OST” auog otajad—8t/,
$333 $oz7° °°” auoq stajad = 8/,} 9 SBBa GyT tT auog atajod = 8/,|_ s88a cpt +: auog o1ajad_—8/,.
$339 077°" auog o1Ajad=— ST /,| 8889 Q6T auog atajad = T/,| ss8a QQT° auog atajad_— 81 /,
s33a ¢¢Z auog otAjad = #/,| 8889 GgZ*°* auog Ajed ~—¥/,| S889 GcyT ott auo0g orAjed Wy
$333 0SZ°'** auog otajad = /,, = 8889 OZZ auog s4jed /,| S889 Q6T 7” auoq aAjed 8 /,
$833 g97° "°° auog o1ajad Ss 8/,| s88a ¢ez-t auog aAjad_—s8/,| s88a ¢gz°* "+ * auog o1ajad_—8/,
$339 O87’ auog atajad st /,| s88a Qgz°*** auoq os1ajad = /,] S889 977° °° auog atajad ®t /,

g seesug bez re
O~0REeDaMoO F
pr geen 00,5 “on G
mM et ot eae L8
BS OU aa Sao Es
O ag Yt fe oo
ga aae salads
Sn S i= >a 5 is
Seas ..gososs
CeO 6 e yous mes
Soe tt ecrar dae
HOPBPans oso
a, §agtaeane
£2 ORY oe ae
Sa SUIESEC, 26
>3ADedlPotsg ae
uUSU go ee
DAdg* SOR mE OA
S Peg Arg & aot
io eae) Po eg
SOR ge Sw SB SL
ono Ovo wn o
Zoe os WORE Ge
mo een tee es
P= erie ROL oe
22 o.8 Or REA a ok
Se S-=s oF +h Yen)
eae # oop .&
SS DOG eer om
oe AYP Vo ae
eget se BH as
—_ Ww
egno Sms os oe
a Ry nv OS Sy
o SG
VOeBGks, ose
Sa4e5Sr5 8 os
SPOR ae Votav ay
v SOROS ESE
See's a FT ORB wo
pe) Be oS wl gag
Sowh es bebe cog
c ot
Sa Ssoe eee ees
eggbEsses a
SeEE825 Gos eé
5 “AaB So Oe gs
a er
Gon tes eee es”
pO eeu se | Oo ac
owned Of8VO SHAE
Goss obo ™so®
BSCO SS Ss gts
Bet eeS SES gs
Wen O0Qe0Og o>
ESepoadaak.de

uawWOpqy Jesuyg-xIg

usWOpgy Jesug-9Alq

UsUIOpqYy Jesug-im07

THE CALL OF THE HEN. val

use the figures 1, 3, 5, and we 1s for the three-, four-, five- and six-finger-
abdomen hens. You perceive that the older the ‘hen the greater the
number of eggs she must have laid in her first year. Here in California
we keep large numbers of hens, and in this way we can sort out and
market here each year in a short time, as we do not have to stop and
figure out the percentage of loss for each year of age, as these figures
come near enough to suit our purpose. If they do not suit the local
market, the reader can use any figures that will.

dt shall give a few examples only to show how we would proceed to
cullout the hens. The reader must be familiar with the general principles
of capacity, condition, and type. He should by this time have familiar-
ized himself with the charts. Now, if he prepares the figures as I have
directed, he will experience no difficulty in determining in a moment
just where and what to do with each individual hen. We establish a
certain standard of production for the first laying season, in order to
know how long to keep her. You may take 80 eggs for one season, 120
eggs for two seasons, and 150 eggs for three seasons, or any other set
that suits your local conditions. Here we take about 120, 150, and 180
eggs as the standard; that is, a hen must be able to lay about this number
in her first laying year in order to stay with us for two, three, or four
seasons.. With this explanation, we shall proceed to cull, putting into
the shipping-coop all hens that fall below our standard, and dropping
in the yard where we stand any that we desire to keep.

Now, take a hen out of the catching-coop as in Fig. 3, and hold her
as near as possible as in Fig. 5. Place hand on abdomen. She may
be one-finger abdomen, ih good condition; her pelvic bone may be #/16
of an inch thick; her capacity is three dozen eggs her first laying-year.
She has laid all these eggs and will lay no more until the next spring
when the crows lay, and eggs are cheap; so we decide to put this hen in
the shipping-crate, to be sent to market.

We take another hen from the catching-coop, and go through the
same process. She may bea two-finger abdomen hen, in good condition;
her pelvic bones 1/15 of an inch thick; this indicates a hen that may lay
eight dozen of eggs her first laying year. As a rule, when hens are so
fed and cared for, they will lay their maximum number of eggs their
first laying year; they will, as a rule, lay about 15 per cent less each year
after, provided, they are ‘given the same care and feed. In this case
the hen in hand might lay about 85 eggs; if you think that will pay you,
let the hen drop out of your hands into the yard where you are standing;
if you think it will not pay to keep her, put her in the shipping-crate
for the market.

The next hen may be two fingers abdomen, one finger out of condi-
tion, as in Fig. 20, with pelvic bones 14 of an inch thick. If this hen’s
comb and wattles are:red, and the hen is strong and active, being one
finger out of condition indicates that she is not being properly cared for,
either in food or environment, or both; in the condition she is in at
present, if continued the whole year, she might lay about 69 eggs, while
if kept in normal condition, she might lay 138 eggs. (See Chart 3.)
So we will call her a good hen, and drop her.

The next hen may be three fingers abdomen, */1.-inch pelvic bone,
and in normal condition. If this hen were in Petaluma, we would drop
her, as she would be a paying hen. By referring to the chart, you will
see that she is a 124-egg type hen. You must bear in mind constantly

72 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

that a thick bone in a hen of small abdominal capacity would mean a
practical non-producer, while the same thickness of bone in a hen of
much larger capacity would mean simply a more beefy hen. :

The next hen may be three fingers abdomen, in normal condition,
asin Fig. 19, and pelvic bone 1/3 of an inch thick. This hen has then
same abdominal depth as the preceding, but her pelvic bones being
3/, of an inch thick would make her a 110-egg type hen, and with us no
hen that lays 120 eggs pays to keep two seasons. We put this hen in
the shipping-crate for market, as it will not pay to keep her any longer,
ifin Petaluma. She will not pay for her board after this time and leave
enough profit.

The next hen may be four fingers abdomen, in normal condition,
and 7/,.-inch pelvic bone. She, being a 130-egg type hen, it will pay
to keep her another year, so we drop her.

The next hen may be four fingers abdomen, in normal condition,
and 14-inch pelvic bones; this hen will lay approximately 115 eggs her
first laying year, but not enough her second year; so we put her in the
shipping-crate for market.

The next hen may be five-finger abdomen hen and in good condi-
tion; °/1.-inch pelvic bone. She is a 130-egg type hen, so we drop her.
While this hen has a pelvic bone 9/16 of an inch thick, she has the abdom-
inal capacity to supply herself with food enough to lay a profitable number
of eggs and put on flesh at the same time.

The next hen is five fingers abdomen, in normal condition, and
5/s-inch pelvic bones; this is a 115-egg type hen, so we put her in the
shipping-crate. The hen we had just before this one was kept; but when
we come to the °/s-inch pelvic bone, we decide that we have reached
the lowest-limit of egg-production.

The next hen may be six fingers abdomen, in normal condition,
sai 11/1¢-inch pelvic bone; she will be a 130-egg type hen, so we drop

er.

The next hen may be six fingers abdomen, in normal condition;
pelvic bones 34 of an inch thick; she will be a 115-egg type hen, so we
will put her in the shipping-crate.

The next hen may be three fingers abdomen, three fingers out of
condition, and '/s-inch pelvic bones. If her comb and wattles are pale
and bloodless, she is no doubt diseased and should be disposed of; but
if her comb and wattles are red, it indicates, as a rule, that she is out of
condition on account of accident or lack of feed. Inher present condition
she scores 166-egg type. If we get her in one finger better condition,
she will measure four fingers abdomen, and score 205-egg type; if we
can get her in two fingers better condition, she will measure five fingers
abdomen and may be #/1.-inch pelvic bones, on account of becoming a
little more fleshy, and score 220-egg type; and if we get her in three
fingers better condition, she would then be in normal condition, and her
pelvic bones might be */15 or 14 inch thick; if the latter, she would
score 235-egg type. (We will have more to say on the changing of thick-
ness of the pelvic bone in the last of Chapter XVIII.)

We will continue selecting or separating the good from the poor
layers in the same manner, keeping every hen for another year in the
three-finger-abdomen class that is 5/15-inch pelvic bones and thinner, and
sending every hen to market that is over °/1-inch pelvic bone in the three-
finger-abdomen class; keeping every hen in the four-finger-abdomen class

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 73

that is 7/1-inch pelvic bone and thinner, and sending every hen to market
that is over 7/i-inch pelvic bone in the four-finger-abdomen class;
keeping every hen in the five-finger-abdomen class that is °/1.-inch pelvic
bone and thinner, and sending every hen to market that is over 9/16-
inch pelvic bone; keeping every hen in the six-finger abdomen class that
is "/,.-inch pelvic bone and thinner, and sending every hen to market
that is over !!/,.-inch pelvic bone thick.

I want to say here that there is nothing arbitrary in regard to Charts
44 and 45. Each poultryman can draw the lines where he thinks it
will best suit his purpose. A great many years of experimenting has
led the writer to believe these charts answer the purpose very well.

We have disposed of all the one-year-and-four-months-old hens,
and will move our outfit to the two-year-and-four-months-old hens, and
arrange the catching-coop and charts as in the first case.

The first hen we take from the coop may be a one-finger-abdomen
hen, in good condition. All one-and two-finger-abdomen hens in good
condition over one year and four months old, as a rule, should be disposed
of. There is no profit in them after they have laid their allotted number
of eggs their first season—or, in other words, after they commence to
moult in their first laying year; so after this we will not consider them in
this connection.

There is a great difference in the number of eggs a flock of hens will
lay each year as they grow older. Some will lose 5 per cent, some 10
per cent, some 15 per cent, and some 20 per cent. Some will not lay
anything (this will be explained later) after their first laying year. It
depends altogether on the vitality of the hen and how she has been fed
and raised; and the variations in the percentage of eggs laid by exactly
the same type of hens will vary with different poultry-keepers and also
with the same poultry-keeper, varying more or less in each separate
pen, proving that environment has more or less to do with egg-production,
all other things, as far as human knowledge is concerned, being equal.
Some people who are good mathematicians, but who are wholly ignorant
of animal nature, look surprised when I explain to them the difference
between classifying the production of a number of like machines with the .
production of a number of hens of the same score in egg production.
As a scientific proposition, it is impossible to write a chart beforehand
that will fit every case. If we took 1,000 hens of any pronounced type—
say 100-egg type, which were fed, housed, and cared for in exactly the
same manner, and one of them laid 5, 10, or 15 eggs more or less some
year than the other 999 hens, it would prove our contention or theory,
from a scientific point of view. I am sure that 100 expert poultrymen
could take 100 hens of the same general type that would score the same
egg-capacity and would all be in the same condition, and each poultryman
feed and care for his 100 birds for four years the best he knew how,
and very few of them would agree on a set of figures that would give the
percentage of decrease in egg-production each year. The one who fed
the heaviest and produced the most eggs would have the largest per-
centage of decrease, while the ones who fed for hatching eggs and did
not force their hens with condiments and stimulants would get the
least number of eggs and the lowest percentage of decrease, not figuring
the percentage of decrease from the number of eggs actually laid, but
from what the hen would lay each year.

74 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

The writer does not claim that he has discovered'a system that will
infallibly give results just as he has written them. No poultryman needs
to be told this, but for the benefit of the amateurs I have inserted the
above caution. The writer claims, by years of investigation and prac-
tice, to have formulated a poultry code as contained in this book that is
commercially the approximation of perfection. A eee

We will return to our two-year-old hens. We said all one- and two-
finger-abdomen hens should be sold and we will consider them no more
than to put them in the market crates when we find one. The reader
will remember that in selecting the sixteen-months-old hens we retained
only those in the three-, four-, five-, and six-finger-abdomen columns
that measured °/16, 7/16, 9/16, and "/1. of an inch or less, and everything
below these lines went to market. In the show room, when the writer
judges utility birds, we use the charts, so as to score each bird according
to its capacity for egg-production; but when we cull the poultry on
commercial plants, in order to save the time of looking on the charts,
we keep in mind only four figures for the hens of any age that we are
examining. For hens about sixteen months old, we use the figures;
5, 7, 9, and 11, which represent that many sixteenths; for hens with
three-finger abdomens, we use the figures °/i.; for four-finger abdomen
hens, 7/16; for five-finger-abdomen hens, °/1.; and for six-finger-abdomen
hens, "/,g. All under three finger abdomen go to the market and all
under the line go also. ;

For the two-year-and-four-months-old hens we keep in mind the
following figures: 3, 5, 7, and 9 sixteenths. For the three-finger-ab-
domen hen, ?/1.-inch pelvic bone; four-finger-abdomen hen, °/1¢6-inch
pelvic bone; five-finger-abdomen hen, 7/1.-inch pelvic bone. . Everything
below these figures goes to the market; also all one- and two-finger-
abdomen birds there may be in the lot.

We now go to the hens that are three years and four months old.
Any one- and two-finger-abdomen birds that we may find goto market
and all the three-finger-abdomen birds below !/1.-inch pelvic bones. For
the three-years-and-four-months-old birds we bear in mind 1, 3, 5, and 7
sixteenths. Three-finger-abdomen hen, !/1s-inch pelvic bones; four-
finger-abdomen hen, °/js-inch pelvic bones; five-finger-abdomen hen,
5/y-inch pelvic bones; and six-finger-abdomen hen, 7/1.-inch pelvic bones.
All below these lines go to market.

If the reader has some good hens that he wishes to breed from, he
can use the figures: 1, 3, and 5 sixteenths.

The fourth year, when he wishes to select from the four-, five-
and six-finger abdomen hens, it will be: Four-finger-abdomen hen, !/16-
inch pelvic bones; five-finger-abdomen hen, 3/is-inch pelvic bones; and
six-finger-abdomen hen, 5/1.-inch pelvic bones. Very few will want to
keep hens as long as this. They will be five years and about four months
old when you will sell them. Most people here sell them about the
time they commence to moult—after they are two years old; but I
selected the hens used at the California State Poultry Experiment Sta-
tion to test this method as far as the egg-laying qualities were concerned,
and the hens I selected as hens that would pay at four years made a
good paying record.

The reader will understand that the way we have just been selecting
the paying hens is the way we select when we have large numbers; this
is the way I selected 1,600 hens in six hours at the poultry farm of the

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 75

Ukiah State Hospital, Mendocino County, California, and at other
State hospitals and poultry plants. We do not have to stop to figure
out the percentage of loss of each bird. You can take any combination
of figures you wish, as 44-inch, 3/s-inch, 14-inch, ®/s-inch, for sixteen-
months-old birds; '/ie-inch,. ?/16-inch, °/15-inch, 7/1.-inch, for twenty-
eight-months-old-birds. You can figure out the percentage of loss each
year and take a combination of figures that will suit your purpose. You
have only to carry four figures in your mind. The percentage of loss
each year is computed by good poultrymen to be from 10 to 20 per
cent in egg-production on plants that are run for hatching eggs. If you
force your hens with an excess of meat and condiments, the loss will be
according to how you feed them, and no one can tell what it may be
but yourself. Some poultrymen will get practically all there is in a
hen out of her the first season, then sell her.

CHAPTER XI.

Tue Mate Birp.

This is not a treatise on cattle or horses, but we have to use them
very, often to illustrate the matter in hand. Stock-raising has been
brought to more of a science than poultry-raising, and is well understood
by thousands of our progressive farmers. I have met hundreds of them
who could describe to me the points I would have to consider in selecting
a good-paying, butter-fat, beef or milk proposition, both in dam and
sire; and while there may be as many poultrymen who understand the
selection of poultry, both male and female, for egg- and meat-production,
I have failed to meet them, and while I was made the butt of ridicule
by the poultrymen when I issued my first pamphlet, entitled the ‘‘Walter
Hogan System,” in March, 1905, the stock-raisers who were interested
in poultry stood by me toa man. The reason was, that the cattlemen
had been studying along the utility lines in both sire and dam in order
to develop the milk, butter-fat, and beef-producing capacities of their
cattle. It was a comparatively easy proposition for them. The form
of the animals was plainly to be seen. They were not covered with a
coat of fluff and feathers that hid the shape and form of the subject.
It was easy to distinguish between the cat ham of the butter-fat type
and the full, deep ham of the beef type. It was no trouble to compare
the udders, milk-veins, and wedge-shape type of the Jersey with the
full, rounded build of the Hereford or Polled Angus. ;

On the other hand, the poultrymen, to some extent, were deceived
by the appearance of their hens. Take, for instance, the Cochin and
the Bantam; they would hold about the same relation to each other as
the lordly Durham would to the fine-bred Devon, yet I have found
Bantam hens with as deep abdomen as a great Cochin hen; and it is
my opinion that if poultry were as bare of feathers as cattle are, the
poultry industry would be as far advanced at present as is the cattle
business.

The greatest impediment to the successful breeder of poultry has
been the inability to select the male bird of the required type. The
custom.in vogue at the present writing with most poultrymen is to trap-
nest their hens and raise cockerels from the best layers as indicated: by

76 THE CALL OF THE HEN,

the trap-nest. The trouble with this method is, that while the hen
may lay a large number of eggs, she may not have the faculty to transmit
her laying qualities to her offspring, and her cockerels may be deficient
in both egg-laying qualities and the ability to transmit what good
qualities they may possess to their progeny.

Again, I have seen a great many cases where poultry-farmers would
send away and buy a lot of cockerels. The man that raised and sold
them had no knowledge of how to classify them, and the man who
bought them knew he was buying cockerels and that is all he did know
about them. He could not be sure whether they would increase his egg
yield or not. He had to pay his money and take chances. It was
nothing more nor less than a gamble; but the days of gambling in the
poultry business are passed for the intelligent, progressive poultryman,
no longer will he be obliged to trust to luck or intuition. He will be able
to select his male birds with as much assurance as his hens, and instead
of groping in the dark, he will have the satisfaction of seeing and knowing
just what he is doing by bearing in mind the instructions in this chapter.

The reader will by this time be familiar with the different types and
capacities of hens, and will not be surprised to learn there is a similar
number of variations in the male birds; and if one wishes to produce a
certain type and capacity in a pullet or cockerel, he must select the
parent birds that will produce that type. We know how to select the
hen; we will now take up the study of how to select the male bird.

We go through the same movements in selecting or testing the male
bird as we do in selecting the hen, but we use a different set of charts.
For example, it is possible for a hen to change from six to three fingers
in abdominal capacity within a month and be healthy and active, and
in another month to return back to her original six-finger capacity,
but it is not so with the male bird after he is mature. I have tested male
birds at nine months of age that scored four fingers abdomen, ?/15-inch
pelvic bone, that did not change for four years, except that their pelvic
bones being !/1. of an inch thick at nine months old, I have found them
to be !/s of an inch thick at eighteen months old. They had increased
in thickness of bone from 1/15 to !/g inch. These were egg-type male
birds; the meat-type will vary more or less in the thickness of the pelvic
bones—depending on how much flesh they put on or lose between the
different times of examining them.

It will be easy to distinguish the egg-type cock bird from the meat-
type bird; the former has thin pelvic bones, whether in flesh or not,
while the latter has thick pelvic bones with a more or less lump of gristle
on the end of them, whether he is thin or in good flesh. I have found
that in classifying the male bird as we have the hen as to type and
capacity for a certain egg-yield it requires less abdominal capacity in
the male bird than in the female. For instance, the male bird that is
two fingers abdomen and '/j¢ of an inch pelvic bone is the same type and
capacity for breeding purposes as the three-finger-abdomen hen, !/1.-inch
pelvic one. The male of the same class, as regards capacity, does not
require as large an abdomen as the female; this is so self-evident that it
would be a waste of time to try to explain the reason for it.

I have heard poultrymen say that the male bird is half of the flock.
I wonder if they stop to consider whether this is so or not. My birds
are wonderful layers, and J mate one male bird to every twelve hens,
and from a breeder’s point of view I consider my male birds a great

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 77

deal more than half the flock. If I mate 100-egg type cock birds with
200-egg hens, the progeny may lay about 150 eggs, thus reducing my
egg-yield about 25 per cent in the progeny of each of the twelve hens.
For this reason I have given as much thought to the male bird as I have
to the hen; and in arranging the charts for the male birds have experienced
a great deal of difficulty, as it takes years of time and hundreds of matings
to arrive at conclusions that would be approximately correct. In any
one case, everything else (type, capacity, and breed) being equal, care
and environment have a dominating influence on the product, whether
eggs or meat; consequently, if a number of investigators were working
on this proposition, using the same system of selection, they could not
help but arrive at somewhat different conclusions as to figures, but that
would not affect the value of the system.

MALE BIRD—CHART A.
One-finger Abdomen.

1/1, pelvic bone............---000-- 84-egg type
1/3 pelvic bone....... aint Svticspleiget si ets 75-egg type
3/16 pelvic bone...............-.. . .67-egg type
1/, pelvic bone............. ... ..68-egg type
8 /s¢ PELVIC DONE: os sss ake Sate bees 50-egg type
3/, pelvic bone................. . Al-egg type
T/1e pelvic bone.... ............05- 33-egg type
1/, pelvic bone..............-.0-0- 24-egg type
9/16 pelvic bone....... didlel sonh the bieont 16-egg type
5/, pelvic bone....... shdtis .fodonaln ate 7-egg type
1/1, pelvic bone............ ....--. 0-egg type

MALE BIRD—CHART B.
One-and-one-half-finger Abdomen.

1/1, pelvic bone..............-..-. 132-egg type
1/, pelvic bone................05. 120-egg type
3/16 pelvic bone... ....... hee .109-egg type
1/4 pelvic bone........... ... ... 98-egg type
5/16 pelvic bone...... oo .. ... 87-egg type
3/3 pelvic bone...... Lo... ... 75-egg type
7/16 pelvic bone... .. Loss see se... 64-e9g type
1/, pelvic bone..... ........ .... 58-egg type
9/15 pelvic bone...... Li. use wee. 42-e99 type
5/gs pelvic bone.. ....... ... ... 80-egg type
u/,, pelvic bone.. ... ... ... ... 19-egg type
1/, pelvic bone...... 2... ... 8-egg type
13/1, pelvic bone..... seine wodessbcnaeatins 0-egg type

7/s pelvic bone...... Li. uae we. ©O-egg type

78

THE CALL OF THE HEN.

MALE BIRD—CHART C.
Two-finger Abdomen.

1/4¢ pelvic bone. ...
1/, pelvic bone..

3/16 pelvic bone
1/4 pelvic bone

5/16 pelvic bone.
3/3 pelvic bone.
7/16 pelvic bone. .
1/, pelvic bone. .
9/16 pelvic bone. .
5/, pelvic bone...
1/16 pelvic bone...
3/4 pelvic bone...
18/1, pelvic bone... .

. .180-egg tpye

166-egg type

.. .152-egg type
.. .138-egg type
...124-egg type
..110-egg type
.. 96-egg type
. 82-egg type

68-egg type °

54-egg type

.. 40-egg type
. 26-egg type

7/s pelvic bone....

MALE BIRD—CHART D.
Two-and-one-half-finger Abdomen.

1/16 pelvic bone. .
1/3 pelvic bone. .
3/16 pelvic bone. .
1/4 pelvic bone. .
5/16 pelvic bone. .
3/, pelvic bone. .
7/16 pelvic bone. .
1/. pelvic bone...
9/1, pelvic bone...
5/g pelvic bone...
1/1. pelvic bone. ...

- 12-egg type

0-egg type

200-egg type

. .185-egg type

171-egg type

. .156-egg type

3/4, pelvic bone....
13/1, pelvic bone: ...

7/s pelvic bone....

15/1, pelvic bone... .

MALE BIRD—CHART E.
Three-finger Abdomen.

1/, pelvic bone. .
i/s pelvic bone. .
3/15 pelvic bone. .
1/4 pelvic bone. .
5/16 pelvic bone. .
3/3 pelvic bone. .
7/16 pelvic bone...
1/, pelvic bone...
9/16 pelvic bone...
5/g pelvic bone.

4/1. pelvic bone

142-egg type
127-egg type
113-egg type

98-egg type

.. 84-egg type
.. 69-egg type
. 55-egg type

40-egg type
26-egg type
1l-egg type

0-egg type

235-egg type
220-egg type
205-egg type

.. .190-egg type
...175-egg type |
..160-egg type

..145-egg type
. .180-egg type

115-egg type
100-egg type
85-egg type

THE CALL OF THE HEN.

3/, pelvic bone. ..
13/1, pelvic bone....
7/s pelvic bone.

18/1, pelvic bone
l-in pelvic bone

17 /\— pelvic bone.

70-egg type
55-egg type
40-egg type
25-egg type
10-egg type

0-egg type

MALE BIRD—CHART F.
Three-and-one-half-finger Abdomen.

1/18 pelvic bone

1/g pelvic bone. .

3/1, pelvic bone.

1/4, pelvic bone

5/19 pelvic bone. .

3/3 pelvic bone
7/1 pelvic bone
1/, pelvic bone

9/16 pelvic bone. .
5/, pelvic bone. .

11/1. pelvic bone

3/4 pelvic bone. .
13/1. pelvic bone. .
7/3 pelvic bone...
15/16 pelvic bone...

l1-in pelvic bone
17/1, pelvic bone

1'/g pelvic bone....

. .257-egg type

és .242-egg type
....227-egg type
...212-egg type

. .197-egg type

ie . 182-egg type
....167-egg type

. .152-egg type

sat 137-egg type
.. .122-egg type

. .107-egg type
92-egg type
77-egg type
62-egg type
47-egg type
32-egg type
17-egg type

O-egg type

MALE BIRD—CHART G.
Four-finger Abdomen.

1/1, pelvic bone....
1/, pelvic bone.
3/16 pelvic bone... .
1/4, pelvic bone....
5/1, pelvic bone....
3/, pelvic bone.
7/16 pelvic bone.
1/,. pelvic bone.
9/16 pelvic bone.
5/3 pelvic bone.
11/1 pelvic bone.
3/4, pelvic bone.
13/4. pelvic bone.
7/3 pelvic bone.
15/1 pelvic bone.
j-in pelvic bone.
17 /,. pelvic bone.
11/s pelvic bone. .
13/15 pelvic bone. .
1!/, pelvic bone...

280-egg type

; .265-egg type

250-egg type

.. .285-egg type
.. .220-egg type
. .205-egg type

a .190-egg type
. .175-egg type

160-egg type

...145-egg type
.. .130-egg type
...115-egg type

. .100-egg type

85-egg type

: 70-egg type
. 55-egg type

a 40-egg type
. 25-egg type

10-egg type
0-egg type

79

80 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

We consider the male bird of so much importance that we have
made seven charts for his classification as to egg and meat types. See
Charts A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. While Chart A may not be needed
and Chart B used very seldom, we thought it best to include them.
All old poultrymen and stock-raisers know that so many considerations
enter into the breeding and raising of live stock of all kinds that it is
impossible to lay down hard-and-fast rules that can be depended upon
beforehand to bring definite results in all parallel cases. This is written
as a caution to beginners, especially to those whose experience has been
at the desk or behind the counter.

Fig. 46 shows a cock bird four fingers abdomen and Fig. 47 shows
the same bird '/s-inch pelvic bone, making him a 265-egg type bird.

The reader will see by Figs. 46 and 47 that we use the same methods
to determine the egg-value of a male bird as we use for the hen, except
that we do not think it advisable to take the matter of condition into
consideration, or rather it is better not to lay down rules in the matter,
as it is very hard to keep the egg-type birds in good condition; but I
try to keep my cock birds in good flesh and not over one finger out of
condition at any time. There are times before the male birds are a
year old and while their bones are soft that their abdomens will contract
and expand, it depending on whether they are stinted in their feed, or
whether they are fed liberally. Egg-type cockerels selected for breeders
should have the best care and food (see chapter on Selecting Cockerels
for Breeding). In examining the male birds for prepotency, the reader
should select them with the greatest care. I cannot impress this on the

Fic. 46—Showing four-finger depth of abdomen of 265-egg cock bird.

THE CALL OF THE HEN.

=m

Fic. 47—Showing 34-inch pelvic bone of 265-egg cock bird.

Fic. 48—Showing 1-16-inch pelvic bone of 280-egg type hen.

Cc H—6

81

82 THE CALL OF THE HEN,

Fic. 49—Showing six-finger depth” of abdomen of 280-egg type hen.

Fic. 50—280-egg type hen and 265-egg type cock bird. Tail of cock is somewhat
ramped for want of room.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 83

reader too strongly. They should be as good or better if possible than
No. 1, Fig. 35, and do not forget that the thumb nail on the left hand
and the nail on the forefinger of the right hand (reverse the order if
left-handed) must be somewhat longer than the flesh, if you expect to
take correct measurements.

CHAPTER XII.

SELECTING THE COCKERELS AT BROILER AGE.

I have tried to impress on the reader the importance of the careful
selection of the male birds, and perhaps he is fully alive to the value
of doing so. He starts out at the first opportunity and visits all the
poultry plants far and near, with the determination to purchase the best
male bird he can find. Before starting out, he decides he will have
nothing less than 200-egg types Imagine his disappointment when,
after handling perhaps fifty or more, he can find nothing that will come
any way near the 200-egg type; while if he examines the same number of
hens, he will very likely find at least one or perhaps more that will come
somewhat near what he is looking for. Then he will say that there is
no such bird as the chart describes as a 200-egg type cock bird. I wish
to say here that I think I have at least fifty male birds at the present
writing that will scale from 200 up, according to the charts. I have
over a dozen that will scale from 250 to 265, and these have all been
developed within six years from hens with three-finger abdomens and
14-inch pelvic bones, mated to cockerels with 114-inch finger abdomens
and !/i¢-inch pelvic bones.

The first season in California we raised about 300 cockerels up to
three months of age, which is within the broiler age for this section.
We arranged our house and catching-coop as in Figs. 1 and 2, and we
went through the same movements that we do when testing the hens,
except that we do not have to use all the tests on each one of the cockerels
that we use on the hens. We hold the cockerel as in Figs. 5 and 6 and
lay our hand on his abdomen as in Fig. 7. As soon as we lay our hand
on his abdomen we can feel instantly whether his pelvic bones are straight,
like Fig. 34, or crooked, like Fig. 33. If his pelvic bones are like Fig. 33,
we have no use for him as a breeder and put him in the shipping-crate
for market; if his pelvic bones are straight, like Fig. 34, we measure the
depth of his abdomen; if it is less than two fingers, we put him in the
shipping-crate; if two fingers or over, we examine him for prepotency;
and if the projection on the back of his head, as in No. 1, Fig. 35, is less
than '/s of an inch behind a line drawn at right angles from the back
of the ear (see Figs. 41, 42 and 43) we put him in the shipping-crate,
no matter how good he is in other points. We take no chances with
him, because if we have made no mistake in measuring his head lines,
abdomen, and pelvic bones, it will be a waste of time to breed from him;
but if his head measures up good, we keep him as a prospective breeder.
We say ‘‘as a prospective breeder,’ as it is very evident it will not pay
to raise all the cockerels to maturity.

Here in Petaluma, where there are over 600,000 cockerels raised to
broiler age in a season, it would be impossible to raise them all and test
their breeding qualities, neither is it necessary. If a person has a

84 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

delicate touch, the comparative value of chicks for prepotency can be
judged as well when they are three days old as at any time later. Then
again, we are obliged to keep our chicks until we can distinguish the
males from the females, and as a rule we will lose nothing if we keep
them until they are at least ten weeks old, when, if they have had the
right care and feed, they will be old enough to test. If their pelvic
bones are thick at this age, it indicates they are more or less of the meat
type; if their pelvic bones are crooked, it indicates that they never will
be straight; and if they lack prepotency, it indicates that they will always
lack it, for they come out of the shell with this organ relatively large or
small, just as a baby is born with a nose on its face.

I want to impress on the reader the importance of using the utmost
care in measuring the head for prepotency, as it is very easy for a person
to think he has measured the head right when he has not done so;
especially if he has large self-esteem, he then thinks everything he does
must be right; it would be impossible for him to do anything otherwise
than the right way. In my classes I have found workers in the ma-
chinists’ trade made the most correct measurements, epecially if they
had the faculty of human nature large, while I have found that profes-
sional men who had human nature small make the poorest measure-
ments; this was owing to prejudice, and not to the absence of the com-
bination of the necessary mental faculties. I suppose there will always
be found those who will discredit the most obvious fact, if it puts them
at a disadvantage from a mental, moral, or financial point of view;
but in this case it would be cutting off your nose to spite your face to
be careless in any of these tests.

I have never yet, in my investigations of hundreds of poultry plants,
found a degenerate lot of poultry but that they were small in prepotency.
But to return to the cockerels: As we said on page 83, we raised 300
cockerels the first year I was in California. After testing them at three
months old, as described, I found eighteen that I considered worth
keeping to the age of nine months, when I would give them the final
test. When they were eight months old I tested them again, and while
I found that they all had good depth of abdomen and good prepotency,
six of them had crooked pelvic bones. The pelvic bones on. twelve of
the cockerels had continued to grow straight, while the pelvic bones
on six of them had grown crooked and were coming together at the points
like the horns on a Jersey cow. I had to discard these six breeders and
send them to market.

The reader will see that, out of 300 cockerels, I had only 12 that
were capable of improving my flock. Last year (1912), out of about
1,200, I had only 200 that I considered good enough to keep for breeders;
and while all my birds have been more or less squirrel-tailed, one of last
year’s 200 is a very well-formed, low-tailed bird, but he lacks the pure-
white ear-lobes. He scores 250-egg type, and I have refused $50.00
for him. I am going to see if I can breed a low-tailed type of Leghorn
in quantities that will conform to the present American Standard, and
average about 200 eggs per year in large flocks. The reader will under-
stand that the parents of these cockerels were selected with the greatest
care as to capacity, type, and prepotency. Type and prepotency are
more or less hereditary traits or features, distinguishable in the sub-
jects, if we have the knowledge necessary to discern them. But the
individual inherent or innate potentiality of any one or each bird cannot

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 85

be increased or diminished by the breeder; that is to say, feed and
environment will not materially change the impotent bird into a potent
ae neither will it change the typical meat-type into the egg-type
itd.

“But,” I hear some sarcastic reader say, ‘‘we certainly can diminish
or increase their prepotency by alternately starving and feeding them
well.’’ That is begging the question. You could affect their fecundity
very readily; but what the writer wishes to impress on the reader is,
that while type and prepotency are fixed before birth, and also the
ability to govern capacity, and while type and prepotency can be procured
only by selection, capacity can be governed more or less by environment
—in other words, feed, care, the right kind of houses, ground, etc. We
will say, for instance, the reader has a pen of egg-type birds, both male
and female, with large prepotency and capacity, and suppose they were
all 200-egg birds. ‘There would be no difficulty in raising chickens from
them with the same degree of type and prepotency; but if he should
stint them in feed of the proper kind and quantity while growing, they
would lose in capacity each generation. I Cevelop the capacity of both
pullets and cockerels from the time they are three days old to the fullest
extent by the most liberal feeding, care, and surrounding conditions.

In concluding this chapter, I would say that the bird with the desired
characteristics is more or less of a sport, and the value of the ‘‘Hogan
Test” lies in the fact that with this knowledge you can discover the sport
and perpetuate it through intelligent breeding. Again, I want to say
kere that my best cockerels measure four fingers abdomen at three
months old. -All my stock is developed as much as possible at this
age, and I try to prevent the cockerels from shrinking. But the pullets
will develop until some of them are six fingers abdomen.

The following article from the Petaluma Weekly Poultry Journal
emphasizes what we have said in regard to the feeding and care of young
stock. These cockerels were not crammed or penned up and fed, but
were taken off free range and sent directly to market. I wish to remind
the reader here that in examining the cockerels for prepotency. he may
be proficient enough in the matter to examine them by holding them
between his knees and not be obliged to put each one in a sack. The
article follows:

‘WALTER HOGAN CAN RAISE CHICKENS.

“Walter Hogan backs up his system of selecting the good layers
from among the poor ones, but he has never made much fuss about his.
ability as a poultry-raiser. Forthat reason some people have absorbed
the idea that he is more of a theorist than a practical man. But he
now has a flock of his own, and evidently he is making good, for he is
getting results that will convince any one from Missouri or anywhere
else who must be ‘shown’ before believing. For instance, last week
there was a spell of most discouraging depression in the prices which
dealers were willing to pay for young poultry. There were large arrivals
of Eastern poultry in San Francisco besides heavy receipts of California,
and nobody wanted any more. Just the same, Mr. Hogan received
$4.00 a dozen for sixteen dozen cockerels just three months old, when

86 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

the same dealer was paying but $1.50 for birds of the same age. Now,
what do you think of that? And Mr. Hogan says these cockerels were
not descendants of the beef type of hens, but were hatched from eggs
laid by hens selected as the egg type. They were not especially fed or
in any way prépared for market. They cost 22 cents each for feed,
and thus the profit on the bunch was $21.76.

“In speaking of this matter, Mr. Hogan made the point that if all
poultrymen would pay especial attention to producing fine broilers for
market—that is, in preparing the broilers that they are obliged to produce
in order to have a corresponding number of pullets—they would benefit
themselves greatly. Not only would they get a better price for the birds,
but they would greatly increase the demand. as many people who now
care nothing for the common dry-meated birds would become pleased
consumers of the improved broilers. The Poultry Journal man knows
by personal experience that the broilers turned out by Mr. Hogan are
ae delicious when properly cooked, and far ahead of the ordinary
article.”

CHAPTER XIII.

SELECTING THE SETTING HEN.

“How can I select the best hen for the purpose when I want to hatch
chickens with hens?”

The writer is asked the above question very often. It is a serious
matter with the poultryman when he has a small number of choice eggs
he wishes to hatch and gives them to a hen that is apparently setting
well only to have her spoil most of them. He very naturally lays the
cause to mites or lice, or both. While it is true that the nests and sur-
roundings must be kept free from mites and the hens kept clean from
hen lice, the trouble is not all here by a good deal. Sometimes a great
deal of the fault lines in the hens. Some are born layers, some are born
mothers, and some are born too lazy to get off the nest at the call of
Nature. The hen born a typical egg type is of no use as a setter, neither
is the hen that is born a typical meat type; she is too lazy to care for her
chicks, even if she is fortunate enough to hatch any and not kill them
all by standing on them. She is too stupid any way, and the typical
egg-type hen is too nervous and has no time to attend to them. She
thinks of nothing but manufacturing eggs. So we will have to. look
for a hen between the above types, which we have in the dual-purpose
type, with the following characteristics:

First, she must have prepotency large; that gives her the mother
instinct; next, she should be in normal condition, as indicated by her
breast-bone: that is self-evident, for a hen out of condition lacks more
or less of the animal magnetism, that is an aid to successful incubation.
I need not mention good health, as indicated by good red comb and
wattles, as everyone knows that. The hen should be four fingers ab-
domen, since anything heavier is more or less liable to break the eggs
and anything less than that would not be large enough to cover sufficient
eggs. If the hen is a three-finger abdomen hen, her pelvic bones should
be about 7/16 or 1 of an inch thick; if she is a four-finger abdomen hen,
her pelvic bones should be about % or °/ig of an inch thick. If you

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 87

can find hens such as described here, you will have hens with the mother
instinct. They will not be too lazy to take proper care of themselves
and their chicks, nor will they want to lay so soon as to neglect their
chickens. The nearer you can get to procuring the above type of hens
the better success you will have raising chicks with them. ,

CHAPTER XIV.

SELECTING THE STOCK FOR RAISING BROILERS.

A great many of my friends have requested me to write a chapter
on how to raise broilers, but as there are so many excellent books on the
market that describe the process of the feeding, caring for, and raising
of broilers a great deal better than I could do it, I will confine myself
to the selection of the breeding stock only. The writer has raised Light
Brahmas and White Plymouth Rocks for years, and has experimented
with them to get the greatest amount of meat from the smallest amount
of feed; to get the greatest weight of meat at three months old in the
White Rocks and the greatest weight of meat in the Light Brahmas at
maturity. In the process I have run up against two distinct proposi-
tions: One was a success from a commercial point of view, and the other,
while not a financial success, was a success from an epicurean point of
view. I will describe the financial proposition first:

We will select a pen of hens from our favorite breed, or from Wyan-
dottes, Orpingtons, Plymouth Rocks, or Rhode Island Reds. The hens
must have large prepotency; they must be six or seven fingers abdomen
and their pelvic bones should be °/s of an inch thick, in good condition.
Now you have hens that should lay twelve dozen eggs their first laying
year, and they are a paying proposition. Do not breed from them the
first year, but wait until they are over one year old; then mate them with
a mature cockerel or young cock with large prepotency, with abdomen
four fingers deep or more and pelvic bones from 1 inch to 1144 inches

Frc. 51—The dry-mash hopper we use, closed.

88 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

thick. You should feed the pen for eggs, and keep them as healthy as
possible. If they are fed right, you will get lots of eggs and good, healthy
chicks, capable of putting on flesh rapidly and fattening very easily.
Asa paying proposition for market broilers I have never found any
combination that would equal it.

Fic. 52—The dry-mash hopper we use, open.

But for my private use, without regard to profit, I would take the
same combination as the above, except that the pelvic bones of the hens
would be 1 inch thick, instead of about °/s; this would give a broiler
that would put on flesh much faster, consequently it would be more
tender. I have raised broilers the flesh of which would almost melt in
your mouth. I have a few secrets in the raising of them which I have
never divulged, but may do so in a few years.

CHAPTER XV.

UsING THE HoGAN TEsT IN JUDGING POULTRY AT THE POULTRY SHOWS.
From the Live Stock Tribune, Los Angeles, California.

(Now Pacific Poultrycraft.)
“INGLEWOOD POULTRY SHOW.

“A poultry show will be held in the Inglewood Poultry Colony on
March 18th and 14th. This show will be the first of its kind ever given
in the United States. All poultry shows that have been held in this
country heretofore have awarded prizes according to the color, markings,
and shape of the fowls only. The show at Englewood will be unusual
in that prizes will be awarded irrespective of the color, variety, shape,
size or age of the fowls in competition.

“Birds in competition will be judged as to their egg-laying capacities
and reproductive abilities only. The judging will be done by the system
discovered and perfected by Walter Hogan and now used in practical
poultry-raising by the members of the Inglewood Poultry Colony.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 89

“First, second, third, fourth and fifth prizes will be awarded to
the best males and females entered from Inglewood; first prize being
$5.00 cash, second prize being $3.00 cash; all winners receiving ribbons.
In addition to the foregoing, there will be the Jaffa Grand Prize of
$25.00 in gold, which will be awarded to the hen in the show which shows
the greatest capacity as a layer, combined with the ability to reproduce
her kind.

“Entries for the regular prizes will be limited to fowls from Ingle-
wood, but competition for the Jaffa Grand Prize will be open to all comers.
Entries from poultry-raisers outside of Inglewood will be limited to.two
birds each. No entry fee will be charged, but all birds entered will be
sent at the owner’s risk, as is usual at all shows. .

“The birds entered will be cared for and reshipped to. the owners
by the White Wyandotte Farm, under whose auspices the show will be
given and to whom all entries should be sent. No entries will be received
after 10 o’clock a. m. on March 12th.

“This show will be unique in that it will present the commercial
side of the poultry industry to the exclusion of fancy breeding. Every
step in the poultry business from the hatching of the chick to the prepara-
tion of the mature fowl for market, and the packing of the eggs for
table use will be illustrated by actual demonstrations on the famous
White Wyandotte Farm, where the exhibition will be given. Incubators
will hatch not less than 2,000 chicks during the show, and chickens in
every stage of development, from one day old to ten weeks old, will
be shown as raised in the best brooders with the best care.

“There will be demonstrations on both days of the show of killing,
picking and preparing fowls for market, as well as of packing fancy eggs.
The best and latest in poultry supplies, fittings, and equipment will
be shown as actually used by the capable, successful men who are in
the business for revenue only.

“No admission fee will be charged, the show being given for the
purpose of exploiting and demonstrating the poultry business as it is
being developed in Southern California.

“The Jaffa Grand Prize is given and named in honor of Professor
Jaffa, of the University of California, who was the first man in public
life in this State to test and verify the excellence of the system discovered
by Mr. Hogan.

“Transportation from Los Angeles to Inglewood will be free, and
it is understood that the Board of Trade of Inglewood will make arrange-
ments to take those who visit the show around the city of Inglewood in
automobiles.

‘“‘Those who visit the Inglewood Poultry Show will see an exhibition
that will be more interesting by far than any show that has preceded it in
California or in any other State, because one will have an opportunity
to see, not the pedigree, but the money in the chicken and a practical
way to get that money out.”

In judging the poultry show at Inglewood the management made
the rule that all birds were to be judged according to the condition they
were in at the time they were judged, and while this rule may be all
right in judging the fancy bird and the beef-type bird, it will never do

90 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

for the egg-type bird, as the reader will see when I relate an incident
that occurred during the show in Inglewood, which was held in March.
A gentleman had entered a White Leghorn hen that he had trap-nested
a year up to the previous November, and had her record with him.
The hen scored (as near as I can remember) two fingers abdomen, two
fingers out of condition, and °/,.-inch pelvic bone, and according to the
rules of the show I was obliged to give her credit for 78 eggs her first
laying year when, according to his trap-nested record, she had-laid 180
eggs. He said she had been sick and had just commenced to improve
shortly before he sent her to the show, and he wanted to prove whether
or not I could tell how many eggs she had laid her first laying year.
I told him I could not tell how many eggs she had laid, but I could tell
how many she could have laid if she had been fed and cared for right,
barring accidents and sickness; that her capacity was 190 eggs her first
laying year. He then showed me her record, which was 180 eggs.

In the autumn of 1911 George D. Holden, ex-president of the
American Poultry Association, judged the fancy and the writer judged
the utility birds at the Pajaro Valley Poultry Show, held at Watsonville,
Santa Cruz County, California. In judging that show full credit was
given each bird, both male and female, as to what they were capable
of doing, whether in meat or eggs, and for prepotency, without any
regard as to how their owners cared for them—or, in other words, without
regard to their condition. And the owners of the birds who were inter-
ested in knowing were instructed how to rectify any deficiency there
may have been in the birds. It seems to me this is the best way to
encourage and develop the poultry industry. I am sure the American
Poultry Association could formulate a code of rules that would greatly
aid in judging utility poultry and thereby add greatly to the interest
of our poultry shows; in fact, I am advised that such a proposition is
being considered at the time I am writing this (July 25, 1913).

CHAPTER XVI.

STAMINA IN POULTRY.

When I came to California and told the poultry-raisers that I was
going to take their birds and in the course of time breed a flock of 200-egg
hens from them, they declared it could not be done. They said if it
was possible to breed up a large flock of 200-egg hens, their progeny
would be so weak I could never raise them, and that their eggs would
be so misshapen and thin-shelled they would not be marketable. I
replied that perhaps they were right, but I saw no reason why I could
not do so here, as I had bred up one lot in the Eastern States and another
lot in Minnesota. Both lots were Leghorns, and I thought it would
be easier to develop Leghorns in California than in Minnesota, and I
have now demonstrated in California that the following can be done:

1. The 200-egg hen is a fact and not a theory.

2. That she can be bred and fed to lay as perfect an egg as
any other class of hens.

3. That her eggs are as fertile and will hatch as strong chicks
as the hen that does not pay for her feed.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 91

The breeder need not take my word for the above statements.
The frontispiece shows five of this type of birds that the writer bred
and raised in California. These birds laid the greatest weight of eggs
(131 pens of five birds to each pen competing, including three pens of
Indian Runner ducks) in the National Egg-laying Contest at the State
Poultry Experiment Station, Mountain Grove, Missouri, U. S. A., for
the twelve months ending November 1, 1912. These five hens laid 131
pounds of eggs, which, reduced to No. 1 eggs as rated in Petaluma,
would be 229/, eggs for each hen. The eggs these five hens laid while
moulting were put on exhibition in the Chamber of Commerce in Petaluma
and were pronounced by good judges to be as fine a lot of eggs as they
ever saw, and that is saying a great deal, as there are more eggs produced
within a radius of ten miles from Petaluma than in any other like part
of the world. Wehave hundreds of letters from our customers testifying
to the value of this stock, a few extracts from which we will introduce here
to prove to the reader that because a flock of hens are great layers it
does not follow that they are of low vitality.

EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS.

PORTLAND, ORE., June 23, 1912.
Received eggs. None broken. Very nice. Fifteen infertile out
of 150. C. F. PERKINS.

Linve, Hawatt, June 11, 1913.
Eggs arrived O. K. None damaged. Have fourteen chicks four
weeks old doing fine. Am well pleased.
E. H. BROADBENT.
(These eggs were shipped over 2,200 miles by rail and steamer to
reach their destination).

WATSONVILLE, CauiF., April 5, 1912.
Eggs received. Finest we ever had. Got forty-nine strong chicks
from sixty-four eggs. Ora L. HILt.

VANCOUVER, B. C., May 18, 1912.
The 100 eggs received. Express and customs ran price to $14.00.
Am very well satisfied. Hatched 70 per cent beautiful chicks; doing
well. G. W. McLELLAnD.

Quincy, Wasu., April 14, 1912.
Chicks received; not a dead one in the bunch, which speaks well
for the vitality of your stock.
H. L. Jounson, Treasurer
and Manager Quincy Lumber Company.

VicroriA, B. C., Sub. P. O. No. 1,
April 19, 1912.
Received the 100 chicks; four dead. Think that is very good, coming
that journey. James D. WEstT.

92 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

SALEM, OrE., April 19, 1913.
Received baby chicks; they are just lovely; not one dead, which
we think is great. They came in fine shape.
Mr. AND Mrs. Hayre.

SEATTLE, WAsH., August 25, 1912.
Received the 1040 chicks about ten weeks ago; there were five
dead in the boxes. Have lost about 75 of them, all told.
S. K. SuTTLE.

Tucson, Ariz., February 17, 1913.
Received chicks in good condition; 1 dead, 623 alive and kicking.
L. E. SMITH.

Reno, NEv., March 11, 1913.
Chicks came through fine; 1 dead in 700, which speaks well for their
vitality. They surely are a spry bunch. A. L, RICE.

Reno, NEV., July 22, 1913.
Chicks are fine; they are the largest and best-looking ever seen in
Nevada. They are just 4 months and 12 days old. One of them laid
yesterday. Every poultryman that sees them remarks it’s too bad I
haven’t a thousand. A. L. RIcE.

The preceding extracts are taken from a few of the many unsolicited
letters I have received from my customers during the last two years
that I have been selling hatching eggs and day-old chicks. I have
repeatedly shipped hatching eggs to the Hawaiian Islands and as far
east as Minnesota, and day-old chicks where they would be over seventy-
two hours on the road. Last summer I turned down over $6,000 worth
of orders that I could not fill at $10.00 per 100 for eggs and $15.00 per
100 for day-old chicks. I am aware I will have a hard time convincing
some of my readers that what I claim for the 200-egg hen is true, but it
seems to me any progressive poultryman would be satisfied with the
proof I offerhim. I will admit that the eggs and chicks from the 200-egg
type hens as now bred are not all we would desire, but that is owing to
lack of proper knowledge of breeding. As I have said before, by using
the ‘“‘Hogan Test” the reader can breed as fine or as coarse as his condi-
tions require; and by selecting only those birds with large prepotency
he will be assured of success.

CHAPTER XVII.

“At SEA OvEeR Matinc’’—WuHAaT SHALL IT Bg, THE Trap-NEST,
MENDELISM, OR THE HOGAN TEsT?

(From The North American, Philadelphia, Pa.)
“At SEA OVER MATING.

“America has some good layers, unheard of and unknown, ’tis true,
but we are evidently all at sea in the matter of mating for egg-production.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 93

“Can it be possible that Mendel’s law obtains in egg-production
just as it does in feathers and form? Do we eliminate, according to
Mendel, the factor governing certain things in egg-production, just as
we do in the attempt to control coloring in birds, fowls, animals, and
flowers? If a son of a heavy-laying female is mated to a non-layer and
this son does not carry the excess of laying proclivity, do we get poor
layers or good layers? If a 100-per cent producing hen (200 eggs or
more) is mated to the son of a 100-per cent producing female, it does
not follow, if Mendel’s law applies, that the mate to the second 100
per cent female inherited egg-laying proclivities; therefore, why should
the offspring of the second mating be prolific egg-producers? And how
far back must we go to get the excess of female inclination to repro-
duction?

“Predominance of inclination exists somewhere in some tangible
form, but we do not seem to be able to find it under our present system.
That we will is conclusive, but we must do so quickly, in order to offset
the growing increase of foodstuffs.”

The trap-nest identifies and gives you the number of eggs a hen
lays and is absolutely necessary if we wish to line breed or raise pedigreed
stock. The writer has studied Mendelism since the.spring of 1910, as
he has numerous other scientific works, in the endeavor to find some-
thing that would be of aid in getting out this work. I must confess
that the title, “The Call of the Hen’’ was suggested while on a visit
with Comrade Jack London, and that is all I have been able to find
that has aided me in this case. Mendelism may be found an aid along
the line of feathers but I doubt if there is anything in it that will aid
the poultryman in the selection of breeders for type, stamina, and the
production of eggs or meat. It may be that, having eyes, I fail to see
it. Even if there should be anything of value in Mendelism, it would
take two or more years to get it out, while “‘The Hogan Test”’ indicates
the value of a bird in a few minutes, at most. It looks to me as if the
poultrymen will have to look at the trap-nest and.‘‘The Hogan Test”’
to develop and maintain the high-scoring meat- and egg-producing hen.
The best pullets can be selected at maturity by ‘‘The Hogan Test”
and then trap-nested when the poultryman is breeding pedigreed stock:
while the culled pullets, lacking in prepotency and other points, can be
kept as market-egg producers. In this way it will be necessary to trap-
nest only the cream of the flock, and thereby save an immense amount
of labor. The cockerels can also be selected at three months of age and
the most promising saved from slaughter. By this.method poultry-
breeding will be reduced to a science and become a pleasure, where now
it is a brain-racking proposition.

A Trap-NEST OR THE HOGAN SYSTEM.

By Charles H. Parker.
March 21st, 1916.
To the Editor,
The Poultry Item, Sellersville, Pa.

Dear Sir:—Some seven months ago I saw an advertisement in the’
Poultry Item about the Hogan System. I at once wrote for a copy
and after reading it carefully was so much impressed with the principles
upon which it was based that I determined to give it a thorough trial.

94 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

The enclosed article gives the results of my six months’ test of the system;
these results are so striking that I have ventured to send them to you
for publication in your paper. I hope you will be able to use it as getting
these facts has involved a great deal of close personal attention and effort.

I presented a copy of Mr. Hogan’s book to a neighbor poultryman
and induced another to send foracopy. The book was entirely unknown
in this section. Both of my friends are enthusiastic about the system
and have already found it of great value. They are both expert poultry-
men, one of them having charge of Mr. C. F. Lewis’ poultry yards here
and the other having been in the business for fourteen years. The
latter has found the chapters devoted to prepotency of cocks especially
valuable and now understands why his flock went all to pieces some
years ago after five years of careful upbuilding.

Very truly yours,
CHARLES H. PARKER.

“Do the physical characteristics of a pullet or hen—the distance
between the pelvic bones and the breast bone, the width of the pelvic
bones and the condition as indicated by the amount of flesh on the
breast bone—enable a poultryman to foretell, with approximate accuracy,
the number of eggs that a pullet or hen will lay in a year? This is the
question the writer decided to answer for himself after reading Walter
Hogan’s book ‘The Call of the Hen.’

“If the system as outlined by Mr. Hogan is to be relied upon the
use of the trap-nest would not be necessary except for pedigree work.
No poultryman needs to be told how valuable, if reliable, such a system
would be in enabling him, with a minimum of labor and expense, to build
up a flock with a high egg yield, to regulate feeding by separating the
egg from the meat type and in many cases to turn losses into profits.

“This book made such an impression upon the writer that he at
once determined to measure his hens according to the directions given
by Mr. Hogan, to note the egg-laying capacity as thus indicated and to
check this forecast with an actual trap-nest record.

“Following are the very striking results of this experiment, extending
over a period which put the system to a severe test—the months of
September, October, November, December, January and February, in
the state of Connecticut. The hens were Fishel’s White Rocks, fed
during the test, according to the Cornell formula and confined in yards
allowing 100 square feet per bird. Each hen was carefully measured and
leg-banded, great care being taken that no mistakes were made in the
measurements. “These measurements and the egg-laying capacity they
indicated according to the system were as follows:

Capacity Condition Pelvic bones,

Hen No. in fingers. in fingers. inches. Egg capacity.
R10 5 1 1/, 235
G3 5 1 1/4 235
G7 5 1 3/¢ 205
R8 4 2 5/6 205
Gil 5 1 5/5 205
G8 3 2 a/¢ 175
R4 5 0 Vo 145
R6 3 1 '/s 115
G9 4 1 a/ 85

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 95

“According to the measurements given in the above table R10 and
G3 were the best hens and would lay, if properly fed, in six months
about 100 eggs. On the other hand R6 and G9 were not worth keeping.
Following is the actual number of eggs laid during the six months of
the test from August 24 to February 23rd, compared with the forecast
made according to the Hogan System.

Hen No. Hogan forecast. Actual trap-nest record.
R10 100 104
G3 100 102
G7 83 83
R8 83 82
Gi1 83 77
G8 73 60
R4 60 51
R6 48 21
G9 35 19

“Tt will be seen from the above table that the relative egg-laying
value of the nine hens was not altered in a single instance. In the case
of the first five hens it is remarkably accurate. The next three hens
went into partial moult during the test while G9 was sick for a while.

“These figures speak so eloquently for themselves that no comment
is necessary except to emphasize: the value of the system from a financial
point of view. The profit or loss on the nine hens, figuring the cost
of feeding at $1.20 per hen for the six months is as follows:

Profit over
Hen No. cost of feeding. Loss.
R10 $2.48
G3 $2.47
G7 $1.72
R8 $1.41
G11 $1.53
G8 $ .57
R4 $ .50
R6 $0.64
G9 £0.70

‘“‘The writer wishes to urge the importance of absolute accuracy in
taking measurements and in taking them at the right time—when
hens are laying well. This is illustrated in the case of R7 which just
before going into moult measured 4 finger capacity, 2 fingers out of
condition and 1/s pelvic bones. This indicated 265-egg type. But
her measurements after moulting were 6 fingers capacity, condition
perfect, pelvic bones 7/16, indicating 190-egg type. The writer has found
that the condition of a hen has considerable influence upon the size of
the pelvic bones.

“In conclusion the writer does not c'aim that a six months, test of
a system either proves or disproves the merits of that system. He
merely gives the results of his experiments for the interest or value that
may be attached to them. It is his intention to continue this test
until the year is finished, when he hopes to be able to offer something
more definite and reliable about a system which at least seems worthy
of greater recognition among poultrymen.”

96 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

CHAPTER XVIII.

“How Can I Tet, A Lavine HEN?”

I am asked this question very often, and in reply would say that
from a scientific point of view it is impossible to tell the laying hen
except with the X-ray. When J say this I do not mean that you cannot
tell in the vast majority of cases, but there are occasionally hens whose
formation is such that no known method will tell you whether she is a
laying hen or not. I give in the last chapter my original ‘‘System”
and the later supplement, which caused a great many questions to be
asked, which I trust have been satisfactorily answered in this book.

I was at a place in San Francisco lately where this subject was
brought up. There was a small party present, all of whom had my
“System.” One of the party worked in a large meat-market, where
they bought and dressed live poultry. He said that occasionally he
dressed a Hen that showed no indication of being a laying hen, but
upon being opened an egg would be found in her. I told him the hens
that he had described were those that laid a very few eggs and laid them
only in the spring. Their pelvic bones expanded only while the hen
was being delivered of the egg. This hen has practically but one egg
under process of development at a time, consequently her abdomen
does not have to expand to make room for only one egg. Whereas the
hen that lays 150 eggs per year has a number of eggs developing at the
same time, and her abdomen expands in proportion to her needs. The
200-egg hen has a still larger number of eggs developing and she requires
more room for them, hence her abdomen expands in proportion. The
250-egg hen has a still larger number of eggs of all sizes developing and,
her abdomen expands still wider than the 200-egg hen. When the hen’s
abdomen expands, her pelvic bones, being literally a part of and con-
tinuation of her abdomen, must expand and contract with it. When
she is through laying for the season her abdomen contracts, and the
pelvic bones must come closer together, which they do, although there
are exceptions to this rule. We will take the 145-egg hen, for example
of the sanguine temperament. She will be four fingers abdomen and
3/z-inch pelvic bone, when in normal condition, with pelvic bones of good
shape. We draw our hand along her breast-bone (keel) from front to
rear, and find her abdomen does not drop down the least bit below the
rear of the breast-bone. This hen we might call a ‘‘normal hen.’’ Her
pelvic bones will, in all probability, expand and contract in conformance
with her condition of laying. If she is in the flush of laying, her pelvic
bones may be about 134 inches apart; later in the season, when she is
not laying so frequently, her pelvic bones may close to about 114 inches;
and when she stops laying for the season her pelvic bones may close to
about 114 inches. This will very likely be repeated each year.

Now we will select a hen of the 250-egg type. We draw our hand
along her keel, as with the last hen; we find she is all right, closely built
and firm. We drop her and take another 250-egg type hen. The per-
formance of drawing the hand along the keel is for the purpose of picking
out the future breeders that may later bag down, indicating weak ovaries.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 97

In this connection I wish to say that in selecting breeders I found that the
best way to eliminate the hens that would begin to bag down behind
was to follow directions as given below. Of late years I have not had
this trouble to contend with. It is always the heavy layer that breaks
cowie which indicates weak ovaries, and we do not want to breed from
such.

In drawing our hand along her keel (breast-bone) we find a slight
bagging down in the rear. The abdomen seems to drop below the rear
of the breast-bone slightly. We will say this is a pullet, perhaps six or
eight months old. She is well developed, and you can call her one of
your best hens. You are proud of her, and have decided to set every
egg she lays. Do not use her as a breeder. This pullet should be put
in a yard with others of her formation after she is sixteen months old
and trap-nested. She may stop laying any time and never lay another
égg, or she may continue to lay another year or so; in any case, she has
been such a continuous layer that her frame has become set to that form,
and her pelvic bones, as it were, set and will contract very little; they
will indicate that she is laying, when in fact she may not have laid for
years. 1 have kept such hens until they were 6 years old, and some of
them have never laid an egg after they were about 16 months, still
others after they were 2 years old. This is where a trap-nest will save
you money. When you select your hens by Charts 44 and 45 at 16,
28, and 40 months of age, the ones that bag down the least bit should
be put in a yard by themselves and trap-nested to discover the ones
whose ovaries have broken down and will lay no more. This is not
difficult to discover, as the hen that is over the 205-egg type lays more
or less at all times during the first two years of her life, if not stimulated
to over-production her first year. ‘‘A little learning is a dangerous thing,”
is an old saying applicable to this case. When a man says, ‘Don’t
kill that laying hen,” he should furnish you with an X-ray outfit that
will enable you to comply with his request. .

The writer has used the pelvic-bone proposition for over forty years
in selecting the laying hen, and has found the following to be a very good
method in selecting the hen that is not laying:

The hen that scores 130 eggs her first laying year would measure
about 7/3 of an inch between her pelvic bones after she stops laying for
the season. The hen that scores 150 eggs her first laying year would
measure about 1 inch between her pelvic bones after she stops laying
for the season. The hen that scores 200 eggs would measure about.
114 inches between the pelvic bones after she stops laying for the season.
The hen that scores 250 eggs would measure about 114 inches between
the pelvic bones after she stops laying for the season. The 250-egg hen
does stop more or less after her second and sometimes after her first
season, if not cared for right; but if feed and environment are right
she may continue to lay more or less until 3 years old, when her frame
may become set. When she is done laying her pelvic bones may remain
2 inches apart. As hens grow older their pelvic bones become thicker
during the winter months when they are not laying. The thickness
varies according to their type, the typical egg type changing little or
none, while the more ptonounced the meat type becomes the more the
pelvic bones change, owing to the increase or decrease of flesh on the
abdomen (flank) of the fowl as it takes on or loses flesh, as indicated by
her breast-bone.

98 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

CHAPTER XIX.

FINAL REMARKS ON CONSTITUTIONAL VIGOR AND VITALITY.

As we have now reached the end of ‘‘The Call of the Hen,” I wish
to impress upon the reader’s mind the importance of the five propositions
that govern the Selection, Breeding, and Profitable Keeping of Poultry
as follows: Capacity, Condition, Type, Prepotency, and Vitality or
Constitutional Vigor.

No doubt you have a good working knowledge of the first four
subjects, and you wonder why I have not written a chapter on Vitality.
The reason is, that when I decided to write ‘‘The Call of the Hen,”
I told my wife that I would write nothing that even a blind man could
not understand and practice. I have tried to do so, for to her patience,
perseverance, and untiring zeal I owe much of the success I have had
in getting out this book.

The writer can see only three ways of detecting vitality in a fowl:
the most ancient is intuition, then observation, and lastly the trap-nest.
A hen may be a typical 250-egg type hen, she may have the very best
of care and food, and yet, for lack of vitality, may not be able to lay
over 150 eggs per year. Let us take the steam engine for example.
There are a great many types of engines besides the high and low-
pressure ones, as there are a great many types of hens and cock birds.
The diameter of cylinder, length of stroke, and revolutions per minute
give you the capacity of the engine, as the length and depth of abdomen
in the fowl gives its capacity. The fuel fed into the fire-box generates
the steam (vitality) to run the engine, as the food fed into the hen’s
abdomen generates her vitality.

The writer has owned steam engines where there was defective
fire-box construction—scale in the boiler and tubes, loose rings in the
piston head, cylinder worn out of true, and other defects that reduced
the efficiency of the power system a great deal—or, in other words,
lowered the vitality of the engine. In just the same way a weak digestive
system in a 250-egg type hen will reduce her egg-yield. But do not
think that you can make a 150-egg type hen in perfect condition lay
200 eggs by any of the feeding formulas now in vogue. If you try to
force her, she will go to flesh and then break down with liver trouble.

If you lack the intuitive faculty and lack the time to carefully observe
individual hens, I would advise you to select the hens by the chart you
wish to breed from. When they are about a year old you can breed
from them. Then, if you wish to breed from only those with the greatest
vitality, trap-nest these hens for the next two or three years. The hens
with the greatest vitality will be great layers and strong, vigorous birds,
and save the time wasted in trap-nesting a lot of birds that you will
eventually have to discard.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 99

CHAPTER XX.

WALTER HoGan’s SYSTEM.

This chapter contains ‘Walter Hogan’s System,’”’ as written by
M. F. Greeley, editor of the Dakota Farmer, to whom I gave the notes.
This was published in 1904. At that time Mr. Greeley refused to put
in anything about the skull theory. He said that I would make myself
the laughing-stock of the world. I am merely putting this old work in
this book in order that the reader may know the evolution of the dis-
covery. The pelvic bone method of selection was, of course, my first
discovery; then later, the relation between depth of abdomen and thick-
ness of pelvic bones; after that, the working out of the mathematical
relation between egg-laying ability and those points before mentioned.

When I came to California I gave out merely the ‘‘Walter Hogan’s
System” which had been printed in Minnesota; later I published a
“Supplement,” which gave a general idea of the capacity and type
proposition; still later I issued typewritten charts as they are found in
this book. I could have done all this many years ago, but my reasons
for not doing it are explained elsewhere.

I do not desire any of my readers to make the mistake of considering
what comes after this as having anything to do with ‘The Call of the
Hen,”’ except in a historical way. WALTER HoGan.

Petaluma, Cal., July 31, 1913.

100 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

UTILITY SCORE CARD

A great many poultry shows now have their birds judged by the
“Hogan System’ as well as by the “Standard of Perfection.” The
score card which is illustrated herewith is used in a great many shows
and is recommended by Mr. Hogan. On the front of the card can be
recorded the condition, capacity, type and prepotency of both the
male and female. On the back of the card the judge can give the owner
some idea as to the quality of his bird from a Standard viewpoint.

The score cards are 8 inches long and 414 inches wide, they can be
purchased east of the Rocky Mountains from the American School of
Poultry Husbandry, Leavenworth, Kan., and on the Pacific Coast
from Walter Hogan at Petaluma, California.

UTILITY POULTRY SHOW

SCORE CARD.

COOP Nowcriciinee ie oon oo Se cea ns es eine aan MIE Se dee ee emehe

VARTE DY ios 8.02 pane tagpainces dpacaakarnarelaeG BAND: NOkcesacauiels de cole ce
FEMALE

OUT OF CONDITION: 1——2——3 Fingers.

CAPACITY: 1——2—_-3——_4—_.. 6 7 Fingers.

THICKNESS OF PELVIC BONE: 1/16, 1/8, 2/16, 3/4, °/16, 3/8, 7/16, */2, 9/16, °/a, 1/16,
5/4, 8/16, 7/2, 8/15, Lin., 14/16, 14/2, 1/16, 14/4.

PREPOTENCY: 1 2: 3——4.

TYPE: Egg——Dual Purpose Meat.

Possible egg capacity in present condition. .......... 0.66 cece eee eee teens eggs.

Possible egg capacity represented by this specimen if in good condition..............
eggs

Pawar isionsessce Sa teeditrens discraie cpsing eth ed hse tealncoed. oadg.s's ea uivtlat nia ate re ope dom REE Sate dues nara acer

CAPACITY: 1——-2——-3——4——5 Fingers.

THICKNESS OF PELVIC BONE: 1/16, 1/8, 2/16, 4/4, ®/16, 3/8, 7/16) '/zy 9/16, ®/) 2/16,
3/4, 8/16, 7/a, 8/16, Lin., 14/16, 12/8, 18/16, 14/4.

PREPOTENCY: 1 2. 3——4.

TYPE: Egg

Meat.

Dual Purpose

NOTE—Draw a circle around or check off figures or words designating
score in each section.

Egg type represented by this specimen......... 2.0.2... 0. oe cece eee ee ee es OES.
Award sccice casi neweiuee ins Vinrea yt heacuman rs edeeaieemsa aes
Judges .ccssscen:

NOTE—The awards in the Utility class are based entirely on facts given above. The
facts on the opposite side are for the information of the owner.

SHAPE
Comb and Wattles occ caged ean e es Gas Dall see ae Sy ce enoves Ravn se eee Ses
Head and Béak...: cic sccs donmee ne vess oe | BPeast s2us ceca ye cade eb eu nae aawad Boas
INGGIE:. 56 miicad reat neta deni canada Po pen Are RId WOU ae aeaiinics- oe auesi pina ains.e Wun Rabe ee we
Ba le pce eiyevssence cag 4 tela d & RUG de PR eee RO Wegs and: Toes ict siesta dele aie alae s
Disqitalificatio ts ¢ wi -siresvecuvnnegt cusihs waren wre -sa hey faves cie een wg Sting PAR CREM wit

IH aniali nee GIR, cect cee tain, on soa otnac cea eee iveana tunuee etemses eutee ae
VR Bese eie iec.c. 8 clas erenetes: Rane b deet Bee tuppayanmenc ths OG Gigs Laem Wen MSS aae AGL mete Gey Gusset
SO CrELATIY «i b-dcc incl wraleniedtt ade gckile SonSeiebekarectthed edansomaid'e) a Sine, gulkidee shoud nanan desi big ane AO

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 101

EXPLANATION OF SCORE CARD.

CONDITION refers to the body condition of the bird and. indicates whether or
not the fowl is being supplied with the right quantity and quality of food and care to
furnish the vitality and material necessary to produce the number of eggs or amount
of flesh made possible by breeding and Nature. The condition of the male bird is not
taken into consideration when judging, as its capacity (depth of abdomen) does not
change periodically as does the hen. Each finger represents three-fourths inch.

CAPACITY indicates the ability of the bird to consume and assimilate sufficient
food to produce the desired amount of flesh or eggs. Each finger represents three-
fourths inch,

TYPE indicates the purpose for which the fowl is best suited—eggs, meat or dual
purpose. The kind of type is shown by the relative thickness of the pelvic bones.
To get the Type divide charts 1-2-3-4-5-6 and a-b-c-d-e-f-g in “Call of the Hen” into
three equal parts as nearly as possible, commencing at the top and reading down,
the first Part will be Egg Type, the second Part Dual Purpose Type and the third
Part Meat Type.

PREPOTENCY indicates the faculty of the bird to fertilize eggs and to transmit
its predominating characteristics. 1 signifies ‘‘prepotency very large; 2 signifies
“prepotency full;” 3-signifies ‘‘prepotency small;”’ 4 signifies ‘‘prepotency very small.”
‘ Hd “possible egg capacity” is meant the first year’s production in the case of a

emale.

All birds judged by this system, with the greatest degree of accuracy, should be
mature, 4

SHAPE AND SURFACE COLOR. 1, Good; 2, Medium; 3, Poor; 4, Very Poor.

This bird was judged. by the American Standard of Perfection for shape and sur-
face color and by the charts and methods described in the ‘‘Call of the Hen’ for con-
dition, capacity, type and prepotency.

102 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

WALTER HOGAN'S SYSTEM.

WALTER HOGAN

The Originator of the Walter Hogan System.

There are two ways of selection, described in this document.

When hens are in flush of laying, selection by the pelvic bones alone
is the easier way; but when not in flush of laying, the pelvic bones
together with the abdomen will be found the most ready way. (See
Supplement, next page.)

Please bear in mind that the hen with thin pelvic bones and large,
soft abdomen is the heavy egg-laying type.

The hen with thick pelvic bones and large, fleshy, fatty abdomen
is the large beef type.

The hen with medium-thick pelvic bones and large, medium-fleshy
and medium-fatty abdomen is the dual-purpose type, and can be made
to lay fairly well or made to produce flesh, it being a matter of how she
is fed.

The hen with small abdomen is of small account, either as an egg
or as a meat proposition, as she lacks the abdominal capacity to digest
and assimilate food enough to sustain the every-day wear of her system
and at the same time to produce eggs or flesh in paying quantities.

Everything related here applies to the male bird as well, only in a
lesser degree.

The remarks,in regard to pullets refer to mature pullets, as Leghorn
pullets are at five months old in the New England States.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 1038

My birds in Massachusetts were bred for eggs only for years, and
their type became set and their pelvic bones contracted, when not laying,
to average about 25 per cent; but I find that hens bred promiscuously
contract about 50 per cent.

The points to be borne in mind in using this System are:

That selection by the pelvic bones alone is best made in the flush
of laying.

That thin pelvic bones and soft abdomen indicate the egg type.

. That thick pelvic bones and hard, fleshy, fatty abdomen indicate
the beef type.

The size of the abdomen indicates the capacity of the bird, either
as an egg or as a meat proposition as the case may be—large abdomen,
large capacity; small abdomen, small capacity.

The same rules apply to the cockerel, cock, male bird, or rooster,
as he may be called.

In order to determine the capacity of a hen for egg-production by
one selection, she should be in normal condition and not more than a
few days broody.

The estimates in this document refer to hens about one year old.
As a rule, they will lay less each year as they grow older—how much
less depends on the vitality of the hen, other things considered.

SUPPLEMENT TO WALTER HoGAn’s SYSTEM.

If you will get a little 1-foot rule to check yourself up while getting
used to measuring with the tips of your fingers, as in Fig. 4, you will
have no trouble in applying its principles right. You can hold the bird
feet up and head down between your knees while you are measuring;
then hold as in Fig. 4, and learn to estimate the width right. Anything
under 1 inch will not pay, all over 114 inches will pay; from 1 to 1*/;
inches are doubtful; 2 inches is about the 200-egg type; 2°/s inches about
the 250-egg type, and 234 inches about the 280-egg type.

Hens measuring from 1 to 1*/s inches should be put in a yard while
being fed well and looked over once a week at night in the dark for
about eight weeks, if you wish to make a careful test. Any that come
up or down in measurement can be put in the good or bad yards, as the
case may be. Hens will go up or down about 25 per cent in measurements
as they are in flush of laying or not. The best time to examine hens is
after dark while on roost, which should be about 18 inches from the floor.
Place left hand on back of hen, lift up tail with thumb of right hand, and
apply tips of fingers to pelvic bones. With a little practice you will
be able to inspect thirty per minute. It is admitted by all physicians,
professors, and students of physiology that I have talked with in regard
to this matter that the abdominal capacity of a hen, together with a
strong vital temperament, has everything to do with her value as a
laying proposition. The pelvic bones (being a continuation of the body
structure of the fowl and subject to very small changes in the formation
of flesh) are, when comparatively straight and thin, an index to the width
of the abdomen, and the best if not the only one we have, as they protrude
from the body and may be easily measured. The depth of the abdomen
can be taken by placing the palm of the hand crosswise below, between
the pelvic bones and the rear of the breast-bone. Sometimes it will be
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 fingers. (A finger means 34 of an inch.) Also place

104 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

fingers between pelvic bones and tail-bone. Sometimes it will take one,
sometimes. two fingers. In this way you can judge the size of the ab-
domen, which, with the pelvic development, will be a rule as to a hen’s
value as a layer, except in rare cases of misplaced or diseased organs.
Sometimes a. hen will have a large abdomen, but her pelvic bones will
grow crooked and come almost together, like the horns of a Jersey cow,
and she will lay better than the distance apart of her pelvic bones will
indicate, but never will do as well as she should, and should not be bred
from. She wastes too much nervous force in laying. The farther you
get away from the crow formation the better your hens will be.

As a rule, fowls are almost twice as long coming to maturity in
California as they are in the Eastern and Middle Western States. What
the reason is I suspect, but do not know, but will find out in the next
two years.

No document purporting to be a copy of ‘‘Walter Hogan’s System”
is genuine without my signature as is set hereunder. Wishing you the
best of success, I am, sincerely yours,

THE WALTER HoGAN SYSTEM OF INCREASING EGG-PRODUCTION BY
SELECTION AND BREEDING.

It has been estimated that to add one-half dozen eggs to the annual
producing capacity of every hen in the United States would result in
additional returns from our poultry sufficient to pay the national debt
within less than a year. Allowing this to be true, we are prepared to
show that the method of selection and breeding herein outlined is capable
of paying off our great debt several times during a single year, without
having to increase the number of hens kept a single bird or the cost of
keeping them a single dollar.

The method—or ‘‘discovery,’’ we might call it—has been tested by
the writer in every conceivable way, regardless of expense, time, or
trouble, and has been found absolutely faultless in every particular.
It has been submitted to one Government Experiment Station (as will
be shown later) with the same unerring results, and also to a number
of the foremost poultrymen of America, who fully and without exception
corroborate all that is claimed.

This, you will agree with us, means a revolution in economical egg-
production; it means, too, that no poultryman, however small his flock,
can afford to go on in the old way a single year longer.

_Every animal on the farm has a well-defined mission all its own,
outside of the general one of producing meat. The great mission of
the cow is to produce milk; of the sheep, wool; and the mission of the
hen is evidently and pre-eminently egg-production. This being the case,
her value varies or should vary largely with her ability to produce eggs.
And still it is a well-known fact that, while every farm animal has been
selected and bred for the best there was in it along its own peculiar line,
and all prizes have been awarded accordingly, the hen has been bred
largely and prizes awarded her almost wholly for feathers and markings,
the judges seldom or never deeming it important to know whether she
was capable of laying at all or not.

The writer was amazed to find this state of things when, some
years ago, he turned his attention from managing woolen-mill interests
to trying to manage a poultry-yard. But, in spite of the fact that he

THE CALL OF THE HEN 105

was wholly unable to find a bird or strain that were known to be excep-
tional egg-producers, he succeeded, within six years after starting, in
pulgiae up a flock that averaged annually considerably over 200 eggs
per hen.

Cur No. 1—A Leghorn hen showing this development has the egg-laying instinct
at its maximum.

Before deciding to publish this work, I found, after diligent inquiry
among the leading poultrymen of the United States and Canada, and
some correspondence reaching to other countries, that there was no known
method—other than the slow and costly one of trap-nesting—of selecting
birds of great egg-producing capacity. Trap-nesting, in addition to the
faults mentioned, which makes it almost impracticable for the farmer,
had a still more serious one in the writer’s judgment; it could not trap-
nest roosters, which I have found to be more than “‘half the flock.’’ For
this seemingly insurmountable difficulty I have found an easy solution,
and can as readily identify the male as the female, and as unerringly.

The facts of which this document treat are a discovery, a method,
and a development all in one. The happy inspiration and discovery
came within a few hours; but it has reached this workable and abso-
lutely reliable form by a costly analytical and experimental process
extending through years. After the underlying principle had been found,
it had to be tested and proved to my own satisfaction. ‘Then the various
objections and criticisms, which will occur to many readers, had to be
answered or met by actual practical experiences.

106 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

The method enables one: :

1. To easily and without error weed out all the worthless birds
from a flock; those that do not lay at all, also those that lay so little that
it is aloss to keep them. This alone means millions to this country.

2. To separate just as unerringly all pullets before they begin to
lay; indicating the coming great layers, the fair layers, the very poor,
and the barren. The latter will be found in nearly all flocks.

3. To tell those not liable to lay when disposing of old or other
hens for the table or market or for other reasons.

t

Cut No. 2—This is a hen of minimum development. She is a fair layer.

Beginning my investigation, as I was compelled to, with birds
selected wholly without egg-record, I was soon greatly impressed with
the dissimilarity of formation of the pelvic bones and surrounding
portions of the body, particularly of the former. Some I found nearly
closed up, hard, and unyielding; others barely admitting one finger
between these points; while a very few would easily admit the end of
three fingers between the tips of the pelvic bones, and these were generally
thin, tapering, and elastic. With this clue, IJ was not long in finding
that my great layers were the latter and my barren and nearly barren
ones the first mentioned. My attention was next forcibly called to this
by seeing a long row of dressed pullets and hens in a butchering estab-
lishment. Noticing the great difference in the formation, I secured the
privilege of numbering the hens and having the entrails, as they were
removed, left by the side of each bird. In every instance I found my

THE CALL OF THE HEN 107

,

Cur No. 3—Hens of this development are of little or no value as layers.

Cut No. 4—Showing a convenient method of holding fowls when testing them.

108 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

suspicion verified; the indications of large numbers of eggs and ample
machinery to go with them, with the wide, pliable pelvic bones; and
just the opposite condition with the narrow ones, the very least, or no
egg indications whatever, with the bones very close together at the
points and unyielding to pressure, hard, thick, and rounced in. This
experiment was tried again and again, with different breeds, but never
with different results.

I was satisfied I was on the right trail now, and determined to spare
neither time nor money to make sure I was right. For several years
followirg these discoveries I spent much time and money visiting well-
known poultrymen and others, frequently paying as high as $10.00 for
best known layers, only to kill them to prove or disprove my conclusions
—to photograph the liye bird, next her dressed bocy, then ker skeletor.
In every instance I found my theory correct. I divided my own flock
according to my findings into three flocks, and the very first cay’s lay
proved my theory beyond question, so far as one Cay, cculd. I then
diviced other and many flocks; but wherever they were and whatever
breed, without an exception the same result followed.

Skipping a number of years, I might say right here that in 1904 I
diviced the flock of sLeghorns, Wyandottes, and Plymouth Rocks at
the Minnesota Experiment Station at Crookston into three pens: first,
the best; second, medium to poor; third, very poor or barren. I was
about twenty-five minutes doing this in the presence of C. S. Greene,
at that time the manager, whom nearly all the leading poultrymen knew,
and Mr. T. A. Hoverstad, then superintendent of the’ station. These
gentlemen then had absolutely no faith inthe method, not knowing
anythirg about it; but were assured by me that if the barren pen laid
an egg or either of the others failed to perform as I indicated, they were
at liberty to publish the method and me to the world as a fraud. The
first day showed pen No. 1, 45 eggs; pen No. 2, 20 eggs; pen No. 3,
no eggs’ and this continued, with slight variations, the entire period of
the experiment, which lasted for weeks; though not a single egg appeared
in the barren pen. The per cent of eggs to the 100 hens for the entire
time was: First pen, 60 per*cent per day; second’ pen, 37 per cent:
third pen, nothing. But for lack of room J might give many more experi-
ments and tests fully as startling as the above. —

But to go on: Within a few years after selecting my first layers
in this way. I had a flock the larger part of which was laying 200 eggs
and above per year, individual layers greatly exceeding this.

Then came another discovery, fully as important as the first. I
noticed that, though I hatched all my pullets from the best layers’ eggs,
some of them were exceedingly poor layers; now and-then one of them
barren. I studied upon this for a long time, spent more money, and
killed many more birds. Then with another idea, which as suddenly
as the first dawned upon me, I made for the slaughter-house once more.
I soon had a row of forty or so dressed male birds: this time laid out
before me; and then at a.glance I saw my long-sought solution. There
was the same great difference in the pelvic formation found in the hens.
I examined my roosters to find that half of them were absolutely worth-
less. Why do I say that the rooster ‘‘is MORE than half the flock?”
Because later I found, as many know, that the female offspring take
largely after the father and the male offspring after the mother. It is
so with all animals, and almost always so in the human family. Had

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 109

I:used males of my own raising, I should have done better, but I had
net. By the way, I found two high-priced and ‘high-scoring’ birds
used at the Crookston Station in 1904 absolutely without value, and Mr.
Greene now agrees with me fully that they were, although he was at
the time quite indignant when I pronounced his costly beauties worthless.

I may say here that, while I found one very good exhibition bird in
this experiment station flock that was wholly worthless as a layer, I am
pleased indeed to be able to state that one bird which had taken several
prizes for markings, etc., I found to be a priceless layer. I never saw
but one bird that came anywhere near being that hen’s equal. I found
one, however, with very poor markings that outranked any hen but her.

From this time on breeding hastened matters fully as much as selec-
tion, and I soon had—or rather, to be accurate, at the end of six years
from my first start I had a FLOCK AVERAGING CLOSE AROUND
250 EGGS EACH PER YEAR; A FLOCK PAYING ME MORE
THAN DOUBLE THE PROFIT MY FIRST FLOCK COULD. | Dur-
ing the last few years of this period I again and again, for experimental
purposes, mated excellent hens with narrow-pelvic-boned males, and every
time a crop of pullets that varied greatly in egg-yield was the result.
Again and again I bred wide-pelvic-boned males with narrow-boned
females with the same results. But wide-pelvic-boned males with hens
of the same: formation (with the exception now and then at far-apart
intervals, a freak) brought excellent layers. Occasionally a male bird
failed to transmit well, but this I afterwards found was only when it
was wholly lacking in masculine qualities, as denoted by the width and
depth of head and back of neck, with other indications common to mas-
culinity in all other animals. From this time I began. mating wide-
pelvic-boned males with my widest hens and a marked increase in the
number of great layers was evident—in fact, the third year it was the
great exception to find anything but first-class layers among the pullets.

Its ADVANTAGES.

The advantages of this method for one owning even a small flock
of birds are so apparent that space need not be given to discuss it. To
one having a large flock it means, must mean, a small fortune, in addi-
tional profit, with no more labor or investment; to those engaged in
selling eggs for hatching it is bound to mean everything in the near
future. It would be simply suicidal for a farmer, or anyone depending
upon the eggs of his flock for the profit, to be so unbusinesslike as to buy
eggs for hatching from untested flocks. We do not believe it would
be possible to find one who would do so, after knowing from experiment
stations and otherwise that the method is unfailing.

Some of the advantages over trap-nesting have been stated; per-
haps the’ strongest being that we cannot trap-nest roosters. In ad-
dition, I might call attention to the fact that trap-nesting a single bird
must extend over the entire year to be at all accurate, and would take
many times the amount of time it would require—by this method—
to settle the laying possibilities of a thousand pullets. <A little more
time would settle the laying powers of a large mixed flock at mixed
laying seasons, which might require two or at least three examinations
a week or ten days apart.

110 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Again, a worthless pullet can be found when she is from five to six
months old and fattened and sold without having to keep her a full year
in order to do it safely. Besides, handling hens almost always tends
to disturb and discourage laying. Trap-nestirig will, if persistently
followed the entire year, give nearly the exact individual record, which
is not material to one egg man in a thousand. It cannot be exact,
however, as a shut-in and otherwise disturbed hen never does her best.

This method applies to other birds as well—turkeys, for instance.
Last fall I bought two turkeys for experiment; one was SMALL, with
LARGE egg-development; the other LARGE with SMALL egg-de-
velopment. The small bird has laid and hatched out two litters of four-
teen each the present season, and has at this date laid twenty-three
eggs toward a third litter. The large one laid and hatched fourteen
eggs early in the season, and has shown no signs of laying since, but
has taken on much more flesh than the laying turkey. This would, in
addition to indicating laying turkeys, also show what to breed if large
birds only are desired—as would nearly always be the case with turkeys.

The absolute surety of never killing a bird for market or home
consumption that is laying, about to begin laying, or is liable to lay in
the near future, is another decided advantage over the trap-nest, and
one of the quickest available advantages of the system.

Again, the process requires no investment in patent nests, leg-
bands, or other fixings, which amount, in trap-nesting, to many times
the first and only cost of this method. For accuracy in all the ad-
vantages claimed for this method, we will most gladly submit to a test
with the greatest expert trap-nester that can be selected, if it can be so
arranged that some high authority in poultry matters or some Govern-
ment Experiment Station shall have charge of it. This unconditional
offer we make to the world.

How To SELECT.

As a basic principle of this method of identifying capacity for egg-
production is the width and relative condition of the pelvic bones and
surrounding construction, it is obvious that exact measurements cannot
be given, unless a distinct breed be designated. A Cochin lays a large
egg, and is built accordingly; a Bantam lays a small egg, and its pelvic
development in inches is correspondingly smaller. It would be manifestly
misleading to apply the same measurements to the two birds.

While the ability to make this allowance will come to the operator
quickly—almost intuitively after a very short experience—I have
thought best to confine all my descriptions and measurements here to
one breed of fowls only, the Leghorns, these being a medium-sized,
representative bird, well scattered over the entire country. It will be
easy from the measurements to work up or down, as the birds on hand
may be larger or smaller. It is all a matter of comparison, and, all things
being equal, the bird with the widest and most pliable pelvic bones will
be the greatest layer, while the one with very narrow contracted pelvic
formation will lay little, if at all. Behind the pelvic bones lies the egg
machinery, and it will be found more abundant and roomy the wider
the bones.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 111

SELECTING PULLETS.
(Leghorns.)

Perhaps the best time to select layers for a flock is when the pullets
are from four to six months old. If all are in a uniformly thrifty con-
dition at this time, it is next to impossible to make a mistake. The
best pullets at that age should show a width of about 2 inches, while the
best matured laying hens should show a development of about 2!/,
inches. (See cut No. 1.)

Pullets of Plymouth Rocks and their class should be selected about
a month later and then show slightly larger, about 21/, inches. The
best Asiatic pullet, about 2144 inches at seven or eight months old;
the Leghorns being earlier maturers. At the end of six years of careful
selecting and breeding I found my Leghorn pullets quite as wide and well
matured at four months as my first ones were at five months.

Second-class Leghorn pullets from five to seven months old will
show a development of about 15/s inches. (See cut No. 2.)

At six months old all Leghorn pullets showing only 1 inch or less
pelvic development should be discarded, regardless of feather or comb.
They will never make layers. (See cut No. 3.)

All things being equal, the earlier a pullet begins to lay the better
and longer will she lay.

SELECTING MaTurRE LAYERS.

The next best time to ascertain a hen’s laying qualities is when
the whole flock is in the flush of laying—in other words, when about
all are at work. Those found then to measure about 21/s, inches are
extremely good layers. Some flocks have very few of these priceless
birds in them, while others have good numbers. From this class of
layers, and above that measurement, and from these only, should eggs
be saved for hatching.

Occasionally hens are found measuring as high as 234 inches;
these hens, with the best of care, will lay as high as 280 eggs per year;
those measuring about 2°/, inches may be depended upon to go as high
as 250. The fact that this kind of hen can be found is ample proof
that with proper selection they can be bred in large numbers.

Hens found at this time measuring from 17/g to 2 inches are real
good layers, and should not be discarded, if one wishes to build up a
large flock, but they should not be bred from hens in the flush of laying
measuring only 114 to 11% inches are poor, and those showing from
an inch down should be discarded, regardless of shape or color.

A large enough flock of the first mentioned hens would make any
poor man rich; the second kind would keep themselves and their owners
going; while many of the last-named class would make a rich man poor.

Poor layers, kept well and fed a large variety of scraps and other
foods, will sometimes make pretty fair egg records for a short time,
and birds of the best quality, under exceptionally hard conditions, will
make poor records. There are also occasional freaks in both extremes
of measurements, but they are so infrequent as not to be at all important.

112 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

Approximately 280-egg hens that measure as high as 2°/s inches in the
flush of laying will show about ?/s to 14 inch less when not laying and
this shrinkage in measurement will apply to all other grades in about
this proportion.

SELECTING FOR FALL MARKETING.

We do not like to kill birds about to begin laying, that are laying.
or really good ones that are just through laying, particularly when there
are plenty in the flock that do not come under any of these heads.

In this alone the cost of this method, when once well understood,
ah saved several times in a single season with a good-sized flock of

irds.

While the exceptionally heavy layers can be told readily and at
almost any time, laying or not, and an absolutely worthless bird can
be told the same way, there is a time, just when the real good layer is
resting and: the common to poor layer is doing her best, when they come
—for a short time only—close together in pelvic appearance.

While it is not safe to kill a bird that measures 1'/s inches or over,
it is possible for a very fair layer to not be much wider than that at the
close of laying out her litter. Some good layers, that in the flush of
laying will measure 134 to 2 inches, at the close of their laying period
will sometimes close up to about np inches. A very poor layer in the
flush of her laying time might be 114 to 1'/s inches, so care must be taken
at this period not to confound the two conditions, which do not exist
atany other time. This is referred to in the Introduction. To wholly pre-
vent this—when it is desired to save every at all good layer—it is well
to make two or possibly three examinations, a week or so apart. In
this way there will be no danger of confounding the one about to begin
laying with the one about to quit, and the poor layer can be told from
the good one. ‘%

When killing a whole flock at two or three years old, as many do,
no hen measuring 11/, inches and under is worth keeping; particularly
is this true if the birds have been well fed and stimulated to about their
full capacity. No hen of any value for egg-production will have an
egg in her at this time and measure so small unless she is a slow, in-
frequent layer at her best. Sometimes this kind of a hen with the very
small measurements will be found laying an occasional egg late in the
season.

SELECTING ROOSTERS.

We have said how important it is to have males of the right for-
mation to mate with the great layers for breeding purposes; we need
not emphasize this; it is so evident that we cannot trap-nest a rooster,
and equally so that years of trap-nesting hens can be ruinously upset
in a day by crossing with an inferior male, that it would reflect upon
our estimation of the reader’s intelligence to say more about it.

I have found Leghorn roosters that measured 134 inches, but they
are rare and priceless. A good matured bird should measure 1!/. inches
and a pretty fair one 1 inch. I would not use one that measured less,
if I could possibly help it. Many fine-looking birds measure only 4
inch, but such ones will ruin the offspring of the best layers and should
be discarded, whatever their qualities in feather, tip of comb, or any-
thing else.

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 113

Now and then the objection reaches us that the high-type roosters
referred to cannot be found. I have found them, as others have, and
I believe there are nearly or quite as many in proportion as there are
of the 250 and above hens; but we do not save all the roosters as we
do all the pullets, and they are correspondingly scarce among mature
males. By selecting always from large numbers.of males before they
are killed off this objection will be largely and quickly overcome.

The fact that males of this class can be selected is of itself a dis-
covery sufficient to revolutionize the whole poultry business without
the examination of a single hen—were time enough taken; but the two
together bring absolute and immediate results.

In the hands of a slightly experienced or an at all competent person
the element of chance is entirely removed by this method of selecting
layers and males; and one is just as sure of the results sought as that
a hen will die if her head is cut off.

We ask but one thing: that judgment be withheld till method
be tried. If the tests are fairly conducted, there can be no failure.

Crude infringements and imitations of this discovery and System
—as of everything else of value that has cost years of investigating and
experimenting—are liable to spring up, but the safety and economy of
going direct to the fountain-head need scarcely be suggested.

Dated November 20, 1904.

LESSON 10.

ON SELECTION AND BREEDING FOR EGG-PRODUCTION.

1. What four things influence egg-production or largely determine
the number of eggs a hen will lay?

2. What is ‘‘capacity,’’ and how is it measured or determined?

3. What would a five-finger ‘‘capacity’’ or abdomen indicate? a
three to five-finger “capacity?”

4, What is meant by “condition?”

5. What portion of the body i is a good indicator as to whether the
hen is in good “condition” or poor ‘‘condition?”’

6. What outside factors or environments are largely responsible for
the ‘‘condition”’ of any hen?

7. Is “condition” a thing that the common sense or gumption of
a poultryman can control largely? How?

8. How does the breast of the hen appear when she is in good

“condition?”’

9. The first joint of the forefinger is divided into how many parts
for the purpose of determining “condition,” or represents how many
fingers out of ‘“‘condition?”’

10. Ifa hen hasa one-finger abdomen or “‘capacity’”’ and is three
fingers out of ‘condition,’ about how many fingers abdomen or ‘‘capa-
city’’ would she have if this same hen was in ‘“‘condition?’’ or, in other
words, each finger out of “‘condition’’ means how many more fingers
“capacity” or depth of abdomen if the same hen was in normal ‘“‘con-
dition?’ ee

‘11. If a hen is three fingers out of ‘‘condition,’’ should she ever
be used again as a breeder?

114 THE CALL OF THE HEN.

12. What is meant by “‘type’”’ in this lesson in selecting hens for
egg-production?

13. What is meant by “egg-type?” by “dual-purpose type?” by
“beef type?” How do you determine each of the three types?

14. Do we find practically the same difference in the “‘types’’ of
male birds as in females?

15. What difference is made in the use of food consumed by the

“egg type’ and the ‘‘beef type?”

16. If you had a flock of hens of the ‘‘beef type,’ how should they
be fed as regards to quantity so as to get the largest possible egg-yield
and prevent them from becoming too fat?

17. Do we find all three ‘‘types” in all varieties of poultry or are
each of these ‘‘types’’ confined to certain varieties or breeds of poultry?

18. What does a pelvic bone 4/15 of an inch in thickness indicate?
one */; of an inch in thickness?

19. A hen in good condition, with a two-finger abdomen or ‘‘ca-
pacity” and 14-inch pelvic bone, should lay about how many eggs during
her first year.

20. A hen in good condition, with a five-finger abdomen or ‘‘ca-
pacity”’ and a !/j.-inch pelvic bone, should lay about how many eggs
the first year?

LESSON 11.

SELECTION AND BREEDING FOR EGG-PRODUCTION.

1. Should we breed from poultry with straight or crooked pelvic
bones? Why?

2. About what per cent less eggs will a hen with crooked pelvic
bones, close together, lay than a hen of the same breeding with straight
pelvic bones, farther apart? How can this defect be largely eliminated
from a flock?

3. Does a hen that has an abdomen bagging down over the rear
of the breast bone indicate a strong or a weak ovarian or reproductive
system? Should they be used for breeders? Why?

4. What is meant by ‘“‘prepotency”’ or ‘‘amativeness?”’

5. What does it indicate, in judging males or females for ‘‘pre-
potency”’ as described in this method, if the thumb is '/s of an inch
ahead of the forefinger? if the thumb is 14 of an inch behind the fore-
finger?

6. Which of the two would make the best breeder in transmitting
its good qualities to its offspring?

7. Some poultrymen mate females with a record of 150 eggs each
to males of the 150-egg type or males bred from hens with equally good
records, and the offspring from such matings often lay only 100 or 125
eggs on the average? In your opinion, what causes this decrease in the
number of eggs?

8. How many eggs should a hen lay the first year to justify you
in keeping her the second year as a breeder or as a layer?

9. In breeding for egg-production, would you prefer to breed from
males that mature early and from females that lay early, or would you
select the opposite kind? Why?

THE CALL OF THE HEN. 115

10. Should you breed from the fall and winter layers, or should
you select for breeders those that wait until spring to lay? Why?

11. Should you breed from the active, alert birds, or the inactive,
lazy ones? Why?

12. Should you breed from those that are early to rise and late to
retire, or from the opposite? Why?

13. Should you breed from the heavy eaters or feeders, or from those
that eat comparatively little? Why?

14. Other things being equal, would you prefer to breed from a
male bred from a high-laying hen, or foam one bred from a medium
layer? Why?

15. What is meant by ‘‘stamina” and ‘‘vigor’’ in poultry?

16. Which has the most to do with determining the number of
eggs a hen will lay-——the breeding, the feeding or the housing? Why?

17. What difference would there be in the probable number of
eggs laid by a hen with lots of “capacity,” a six-finger abdomen, with a
thick pelvic bone, 1 inch in thickness, and a hen with but little ‘‘capacity,”’
a two-finger abdomen, with a rather thin pelvic bone, 5/1. of an inch in
thickness, both hens being in good condition?

18. Everything else being equal, which moult first, as a rule, the
good layers or the poor layers?

19. What, if anything, has the width or the distance between the
pelvic bones got to do with egg-production?

20. Do we feed hens for the purpose of feeding eggs into their bodies,
or do we feed them to develop the eggs which selection and breeding or
Nature has placed within the hen?

Learn Poultry Farming

(The Quisenberry Way)

By Correspondence Through
The American School
of Poultry Husbandry

The Only Exclusive Poultry School in the World
Teaches Every Branch of the Poultry Business

The Poultry industry in the United States amounts to “A Billion Dol-
lars” each year. The American School of Poultry Husbandry will teach
you how to succeed in raising poultry on a large or small scale and
guarantees satisfaction or refunds your money. Opportunities were never
better than now and you can ‘harvest your crop every day in the year
regardless of drouths, floods, wars or panics.

EXPERIENCE IS A DEAR TEACHER!

Mistakes cost money! Thousands of people have failed to make a
financial success of the poultry business solely because of improper methods
due to a lack of reliable information. Don’t run the risk of failure, when you
can insure success! Any one of a hundred single mistakes you might make
in a single season would cost you more than a complete course in the American
School of Poultry Husbandry.

YOU CAN GET OUR CATALOG FREE AND IT WILL EXPLAIN THE
WAY. YOU NEED THIS COURSE

Whether you are a beginner or an ‘‘old timer,’”’ a farmer or a ‘‘back
lotter,”’ it will pay you to investigate this course, and to do it mow while
the special rates and terms are in force. Remember, The American School of
Poultry Husbandry is the only exclusive poultry school in the world.
It is unanimously endorsed by thousands of enthusiastic students in 48 states
and 12 foreign countries. Here is the opportunity of a lifetime to put both
feet on the road to success in this fascinating and profitable business.

Send today for a copy of our Free book ‘‘Dollars and Sense in the Poultry
Business. ;

The American School of Poultry Husbandry

T. E. Quisenberry, President
LEAVENWORTH, KANSAS

ares,
=

ee eee