A Moot Point.

Evening Star, Issue 8529, 30 May 1891, Page 1 (Supplement)

A Moot Point.

Which is the mother of the chick—the hen that lays the egg or the hen that hatches it ? This is a question jaet decided by Justice M'Mahon, of Parkville, a small bat interesting suburb of Brooklyn. It is the first case of the kind known to have been brought into Court. The facta are that Farmers M'Caughn and Farmer Gormley are next door neighbor?, and their henneries adjoin each other. Farmer M'Caughn owns choice game birds, and the fowls belonging to his neighbor are of the ordinary farmyard standard. It was testified to that one of Farmer M'Caughn's hens scrsmbled over the fence and indiscreetly, if not wickedly and feloniously, did lay two eggs, at divers times, on Farmer Gormlej'a premises. The triumphant note which heralded this material achievement did not suggest to Farmer Gormley the propriety of picking up the eggs and delivering them into the possession of the owner of the hen v On the contrary, he promptly put them under a sitting hen owned by himself, andi in due course of time they were hatched > So soon as their feathers and little re<i combs began to grow Farmer M'Caughn observed that these dubious ehickens were full-blooded game birds, like those nf his own hennery, and he made a demand for them. Farmer Gormley denied the claim of ownership with emphasis and disdain. Then Farmer M'Gaughn summoned hia chicken-raising neighbor before the court for trial, and issue was joined. The question was not between hen and' hen, but between farmer and farmer—or, rather, it was a question as to whose hen waa mother of the chickens. Now, ordinary commonsense would suggest that as the hatching cf chickens is a mere mechanical process, chiefly dependent upon caloric, as science has demonstrated most thoroughly, it is not characteristic, or necessarily even suggestive of motherhood. The sitting hen is unquestionably an efficient incubator, and so, too, would be a rooster if you could get him to sit long enough, but who would presume to say that a rooster could become a mother even if he should hatch a dozen broodB? Justice M'Mahon decided that farmer Gormley must surrender the. two ohiokens to Farmer M'Caughn, or pay to him the full amount of their value. But is not Farmer Gormley entitled to pay for the labor and services of his hen in hatching the eggs? The decision of the justice ia righteous as to the main point at issue, but he seems to have overlooked the fundamental propriety of a counter claim. We advise Farmer Gormley to appeal.—' New York Tribune.'