CATS AND THE CAT FANCY IN AMERICA 1900s - MABEL CORNISH BOND (MRS S HAZEN BOND) AND THE US REGISTRY
Mabel Cornish Bond (Mrs Samuel Hazen Bond) was a breeder of Black Persians and could have had a long career in the cat fancy had she not treated other cat fanciers with contempt. In 1906 she set up a rival studbook and register to the Beresford Cat Club and entered into a bitter feud with them. Ultimately she lost, after which she largely disappeared from view in the cat fancy. Mrs Bond was mentioned briefly by Frances Simpson in “The Book of the Cat”: “Washington has come to the fore of late, but has not within her borders many regular breeders outside of Mrs. Hazen Bond, who exhibited with a good deal of success during the season of 1901-1902.” I have gathered together her own words and other published information to document this interesting character and her contribution to the American cat fancy in the early 1900s.
BOND’S EARLY COMMENTS ON THE AMERICAN CAT FANCY
In her article “Cat Raising As A Business” (Munsey’s Magazine; 1901) she wrote “the cat of the finer breeds - has made so marked an advance in prestige and popularity that this may well be called the second golden age of her feline majesty [. . . ] The popularity of the cat, from an esthetic as well as an economic standpoint, has resulted in systematic and scientific breeding of the animals, sometimes out of love for pussy, hut more often for profit. It is not at all strange that cat raising should be a feminine industry. [. . .] The "catters" are a most enthusiastic people. They are striving to regain for the cat the proud place she held in Egypt, and to do that they must make her worthy of such a position. They admit that they are still groping in the dark, but they are sure they are moving in the right direction.” Quite why she thought early cat fanciers were “groping in the dark” is uncertain (and a little conceited) as no-one in the West had previously bred cats into distinct varieties.
“The cat prized by breeders and fanciers [. . .] is the magnificent, the luxurious, the oriental Angora or Persian [. . .] The tendency here, at present, is to call them all Persian, either through ignorance, or from a desire to distinguish them from the cats of Maine. The progenitors of these latter were brought to America by old time sea captains who touched at oriental ports. The modern animals are unworthy and degenerate descendants, and one aim of breeders is to eradicate this Maine strain. “
“Beautiful Angoras and Persians have for some time been raised in England, and our showing is very poor in comparison. We bring out two to five in a class at our shows, while the British breeders send thirty to forty. Only in the last twenty five years have cats been carefully bred in America. In the last three years the fancy has taken a sudden spurt. [. . .] Two monthly periodicals are published solely in the interest of the long haired cat, while almost every dog, horse, or poultry journal has its cat page. One cannot but wonder where it will all end, especially when the judges tell us that few really fine cats appear at the shows, that few high priced cats are imported, and that much of the booming and banging is about really inferior animals.”
“Such terms as " imported," " registered," and " pedigreed " inflate prices outrageously, and cats are sold more by eloquence than points. On the other hand, many really fine specimens go for mere songs, or caterwauls, just enough to pay the expenses of raising them. It is said that many a woman in business has little or no conscience. This is especially true where the merchandise is cat flesh. She will blandly try to make a two hundred per cent profit on "importing" stock for the novice. She will patch up pedigrees, sell notoriously diseased animals, and practise the various tricks of all trades; reminding one forcibly of the London fanciers' street where one can have made to order, on twenty four hours' notice, any breed of dog, cat, or other creature.” As far back as 1901, Mrs Bond was writing inflammatory comments about cat fanciers. Her later comments in the “US Studbook Register” would therefore come as no surprise to the breeders and fanciers she already maligned.
She advises the novice to ”subscribe for all the cat papers, to get well disgusted with sentimentality and exaggerations, and visit a large show, where you may consult with the judges, but beware of the exhibitors. [. . .] The term "prize winner " does not as yet mean much here, and the valuations of fond owners mean even less. In England Lord Southampton sold for three hundred dollars, which is said to be the highest price on record, while a thousand dollars was refused here for King Humbert. Experts consider few cats in America, at present, worth more than a hundred dollars [. . .] The American shows are still judging coat and eyes chiefly, because so few really worthy specimens come up for comparison. “
THE U. S. REGISTER AND STUDBOOK FOR CATS
There is an excellent article in The Studbook Fanciers Association Newsletter No 10 (c. 1969/70) from which I’ve drawn a summary of early rivalries in the North American cat fancy. For a start, few, if any of the cats listed in Bond’s “US Studbook Register” (SBR) appear in other stud books other than as parents or ancestors. But what is really interesting is the distinctly acrimonious preface by its compiler, Mrs. Bond.
To give some context, the law imposed a high tariff on imported animals with the exception of pure bred stock imported for breeding. While the US government had studbooks for dogs and horses, it lacked a studbook for pedigree cats. The Beresford Cat Club had submitted its volumes for recognition by the government as an official studbook, but approval had not been received in a timely manner. Anxious to know what technicalities might be holding up certification, the Beresford Cat Club, probably in the person of its president and founder, Mrs Locke, contacted a "Washington lady” for an on the spot investigation. That Washington lady was most likely Mrs. Bond.
Mrs. Bond was a promising, fancier. Her Black Persians, Menelik III and Sweet Lalla Rookh, are found in many Black Persian Pedigrees in North America. She was intelligent and hard-working, as attested to by her volume which represents an enormous amount of painstaking work. Had she not embroiled herself in a feud, her contribution to the fancy might have been much greater and might have covered a longer period. Instead she seems to have dropped out of the picture shortly after publication of the SBR in 1906. No second volume was ever published nor does her name appear as breeder behind cats registered in other association stud books.
The preface seems to be a shocking indictment of Mrs Locke and the Beresford Cat Club. Mrs Bond tried to present herself and her cohorts as the champions of virtue, truth and honesty, contending against the petty, vindictive and power mad Mrs Locke and her coterie. The preface shows that Mrs Bond was just as petty, vindictive and power mad as those she accused. She contradicted herself several times and published untruths. Not having read Mrs Locke’s version of the story, we can’t say whether she was vindictive about it or not. In print, Mrs Locke chose her words carefully and remained as diplomatic as she could. She was by no means an angel; she is described in the Studbook Fanciers Association Newsletter as a proud woman, friend of many top English breeders, founder of a very successful club, the first club to register cats and compile a published stud book. She must have been furious with Mrs Bond’s presumptuous behaviour. Although a woman of undoubted ability, and no doubt honesty and sincerity, it was Mrs Bond's brashness that got her into the resulting mess. She believed that she and her friends alone could be the salvation of the cat fancy but this self-confidence bordered on conceit. She lacked any humility or modesty had gall in abundance.
When asked, Mrs Bond had willingly investigated the holdup in certification of the stud books and rendered a report to the effect that they were beyond salvaging and should be scrapped and redone. The Beresford Cat Club quite rightly took umbrage at this and refused further discussion. Mrs Bond and her company decided that they had by now become so knowledgeable regarding stud book requirements that they alone could produce a proper stud book acceptable to the government. This did nothing to improve relations with the Beresford Cat Club. When complete, Mrs Bond and her friends submitted their volume and received approval but certification was held up pending a sponsor. Here is where we see Mrs Bond’s sheer gall in asking the Beresford Cat Club, through its president, Mrs. Locke, to suggest that the Beresford become the sponsor of the new work. And it wasn’t just a case of sponsorship – she suggested that they accept it as a replacement, to become as Mrs Bond put it, "the successor of her [Locke’s] rejected book.”
The Beresford Cat Club declined to respond despite repeated requests from Mrs Bond. Mrs Bond and her cohorts then formed the United States Stud Book and Register Association and had it incorporated as an association whose objectives were “The advancement of the domestic cat”. First- By the encouragement of careful breeding . Second - the maintainance of an accurate record of pedigrees. Third - The facilitation of importation of thoroughbred cats under the provisions of the act of July 24, 1897 " As a club, they could sponsor the studbook. Certification was granted and the new association contacted every known club both in the USA and abroad with offers to become the one central registry for all cats. This shows incredible conceit since Britain had its own registry which was managing very nicely thank you very much!
While recommending itself (in its preface) the USR cast aspersions on the Beresford Cat Club. There was no need to name their rival, but it was the only other registry in the United States at the time so no name was needed. Mrs Bond's claim that the “largest and most general club" in America had adopted the USR as its official register is pure fallacy because the Beresford was the largest and most general club and it did not approve at all. Mrs Bond also claimed that all but two American clubs had responded with enthusiasm to the USR, though this is unlikely as the USR had put too many breeders’ noses out of joint. Her claim that "during fifteen years without competition the Beresford Club recorded only seven hundred and forty seven cats not a single one of which has been shown to be purebred" while the USR in less than four years had registered five hundred cats, one-hundred of them purebred was totally fallacious because the Beresford had only been founded five years before the date of her preface and therefore could not have been registering for fifteen years. The phrase “without competition” contradicted Bond’s earlier statement that there were other registers.
"Pure breeding” seemed to have been the crux of the whole matter. Pure bred as Mrs Bond understood the government’s meaning meant three generations registered in the same stud books. The Beresford (at least in vol. 1) did not have many, if any, cats with three generations of Beresford registry. Most top cats of the period were either imports or were less than three generations from Imported English stock.
Mrs. Bond rather presumptuously solved that problem by registering, the requisite three generations with USR numbers with or without permission of the owners. This was actually a good idea and would later be adopted by other associations, but it was a new idea at the time. The Beresford Cat Club had methodically recorded all the ancestry submitted, inlcuding numbers and colours wherever possible, but had not thought about registering any of the ancestors with Beresford numbers for line-tracing purposes. There was some doubt as to whether or not this was a proper procedure. In ACA vol. 1, Miss. Lucy Johnstone, the ACA recorder and former Beresford recorder, did register the cats’ English ancestors although accepting any idea from her critic, must have pained her and she declined to use the USR number for any USR cat that appeared behind an ACA cat. Nor did Miss Johnstone adopt Mrs Bond's idea of separate sections for stud book and foundation register as did the later CFA and CFF. ACA also didn’t use Mrs Bond's idea of pictures, an idea that was briefly toyed with by the early CFA, but not really adopted until much later. Whatever her faults, the credit for pictures in stud books belongs to Mrs Bond.
I have found some errors: Persia is registered as both (21) and (24) while Shadu l’Mulk is also registered as (21). Some duplicated numbers are indicated by a “*” to differentiate between the cats. Nevertheless, in a day when this was all done by hand, it’s an astonishing undertaking, albeit an ego-driven one. The book is largely illustrated with photos of her own cats and her own cats are registered under variations of her name.
It’s not clear exactly when Mrs Locke and her group succeeded in getting their stud books registered, but we know that government recognition was accorded to ACA (as mentioned in Vol 1 of their studbook) if not the Beresford Cat Club. Mrs Bond was disturbed over the recognition of her bitter rival’s stud records. She did not fear harm to her own group through possible withdrawal of recognition in favour of the ACA studbook, but we know that she and her friends vigorously opposed recognition on the grounds that another stud book was unnecessary – a conceit on her part since hers was the newer registry – that there was no general demand for another stud book and in the event of its recognition "neither book could ever become a full and complete record." The Beresford/ACA studbooks and the USR each had features the other lacked. Miss Johnstone’s method of recording all the ancestry possible and giving the British NCC numbers made the ACA volumes easier to use than the USR which only gave USR numbers, preventing easy cross-referencing to British ancestors.
It’s a problem for historians that no one US registry contains all registrations from the beginning of the fancy onwards, however it seems that Mrs Bond, who so busily condemned her enemies claiming they had banded together and forgotten their animosities in their efforts to accomplish an objective "of infinite minuteness – annihilation of the US Studbook – had somehow overlooked the fact that her own objective had been the annihilation of the Beresford Cat Club register. Mrs. Bond’s conceit was such that she may have felt completely virtuous and justified in attempting to do away with the earlier registry in order to make her own far superior work (in her opinion) the only registry in the United States.
History shows us that the USR failed to survive, perhaps through lack of support due to the animosity it had caused or perhaps because it failed to fill the needs of the fancy. It proposed to concern itself solely with registration and importation, ignoring the fancy's need for a governing body to handle other aspects of cat fancying. During its brief existence it published a fortnightly periodical, ‘The Cattarian.’ The plan had been to publish challenge lists in the existing publications prior to slating any application submitted for inclusion in the stud book, however, it seems that the periodicals that had agreed to publish those lists had reneged and refused to do so when the time came. The USR Association, therefore, published its own periodical to fill the void. Without copies of The Catterian it’s impossible to know whether the lists it published were those required for producing Vol 1 of the USR or whether they are listings for the proposed Vol 2 (the latter would be even more interesting to historians!).
Then, in The Saint Paul Globe of 16th September 1903 (and various other papers in September and October) comes this article, which is almost certainly related to Mrs Hazen-Bond as it uses her term "cattarian": It is said that an agency is about to be formed in England for the purpose of buying high-class cats for America. This, comments an American cattarian, would no doubt be an excellent thing, but it will be difficult to secure reliable buyers. There is no danger that English breeders will not offer their best stock to America, but they are more than likely to ask extortionate prices. First-class prices for second and third-class stock are, it seems, quite the rule for such transactions.
Mabel Cornish Bond founded and edited the fortnightly “Cattarian," a magazine "devoted to the advancement of the domestic cat,” between 1903 - 1907. The Cattarian published news of prominent cat clubs and catteries, advertisements for kittens and cat studs, advice on cat care, cat-related humour and updates on cat-related legislation. One of Bond's articles in 1903 detailed the darker side of cat show: many cats didn’t survive those early shows due to dangerous means of transport, poor ventilation, fluctuating temperatures, bad food, and highly infectious diseases. As well as reporting on shows and breeders, she used The Cattarian to bridge the world of the cat fancy and animal welfare/animal medicine, using her own medical knowledge and breeding/exhibiting experience to try to improve the lot of cats in her country. Following the failure of the USR to monopolise the American cat fancy, she – and The Cattarian - dropped out of sight.
THE U. S. REGISTER AND STUDBOOK FOR CATS, VOLUME ONE
COMPILED AND EDITED BY MABEL CORNISH-BOND, COPYRIGHT 1906 BY THE UNITED STATES OFFICIAL REGISTER ASSOCIATION (INCORPORATED)
A record of pure bred breeding cats of recognized breeds, and a record of breeding cats of recognized breeds but not pure bred in the meaning of U. S. Laws; to which is appended a, list of nonbreeding and other cats which are either not pure bred or not of recognized breeds.
Dedication: This little book belongs to the universal Cat Lover. It represents a five years' unremitting labor of love. Founded on confidence in advancement of the domestic cat in America, it bespeaks his ultimate superiority over cats of other lands. Hereby, it is dedicated, individually, to each dear mother heart, which, failing of rightful heritage turns to this next of kin — the soft, warm, loving, "little brothers" — and, in appreciation of blessings conferred through the mysterious and half-divine fellowship of brutes, seeks to uplift their race into a plane where one day they may be better understood of man.
PREFACE (by MRS. S. HAZEN BOND)
The domestic cat is not mentioned in Biblical narrative. He is presumed to have originated, with other domesticated types, in far Eastern lands. The beginnings of recorded history relate that he was a pampered pet and even a worshipped idol in semi-tropical climes. In the middle ages, we are told, he was a luxury, a necessary servant, and an object of persecution. He is not indigenous to the Western Hemisphere, nor is he found in Indian tradition. His advent in the Americas seems to have been with the early white settlers. No information is to be had concerning breeds until comparatively recent times, when New England sea captains began to bring home long-haired specimens as mementoes of strange shores. They were regarded as great curiosities, so it may be inferred that the cats to which the colonists had been accustomed, either at home or in America, were not long-haired. Not until the last century were long-haired Eastern cats carried overland to England, and not until the last decade were they bred for show and for sale. Restricted breeding of short-haired varieties was not undertaken in England until the last few years, and has not yet been seriously at tempted in America.
The operation of the Tariff Law of 1897 excluded the better class of cats from the United States, except when introduced by persons of wealth, when smuggled or entered upon false valuations or through other culpable devices. A paternal government, seeking to protect home industries, had placed a prohibitive customs duty of 20 per cent ad valorem on live animals unless pure bred and imported for breeding purposes, In construing the law, the method adopted for determining eligibility to free entry through pure breeding was the recognition by the Government of studbooks in which pure breeding was a prerequisite of registration.
Enough material and interest had accumulated in the United States to afford an incentive for breeding and showing pet cats. Clubs had been organized and records were kept of the cats owned by their members. At least three of these registers appeared in print . As the fancy grew and customs duties, under proper appraisements, became more burdensome, the desirability of importing pure bred breeding animals free of duty gained prevalence. To that end the establishment of a studbook having government recognition was imperative.Two of the club registers were offered for recognition. They did not meet the requirements of the Tariff Law and were promptly rejected. Presuming that the difficulties attending its failure involved technicalities, which might be met by someone on the ground, the aid of a Washington lady was evoked to ascertain why one of these records had been rejected and if the objectionable features could be removed. Inquiry showed that the imperfections went to the essence of the record. It had not been formulated on a plan contemplating enforcement of the requirements which the government regarded as necessary to establish pure breeding. Entire reconstruction only could remedy its defects. The book, as presented, had met the purposes of its promotors and they were unwilling to consent to the change. But the advocates of true registrat ion, whose aid had been solicited, did not wish to sacrifice the advantages gained by this experience in a closer acquaintance with the provisions of the law and the requirements of the Departments. They prepared a book which, after much careful study and patient labor, met and solved all these problems of paramount importance to the fancy. The United States Register and Studbook for Cats, a studbook prepared under the guidance of the Departments, so completely filled the requirements of the Tariff Law that it was promptly added to the list of books recognized by the Government from which certificates of pedigree might issue, as evidence of pure breeding and eligibility to free entry into the United States. It has since been declared superior to many studbooks previously recognized for horses, dogs and other animals. The ladies' pet thus gained the distinction, so arduously sought, of being eligible to enter all ports of the United States on exactly the same terms and with identical privileges as animals of economic value.
Departmental action certifying the book was temporarily withheld, pending selection of a custodian. The new book was at once tendered to the Beresford Cat Club, through its President , to become the successor of her rejected book. It is neither pertinent nor proper here to discuss the motives which actuated its officers in failing to bring a matter of such importance to the attention of the club. It is sufficient to relate that after a reasonable length of time had elapsed - the Beresford remaining inactive despite repeated requests for immediate act ion by wire – the U. S. Official Register Association was organized to assume responsibility for the management of the recognized studbook. Some months' delay brought the Beresford explanation: "We did not believe that cats had been recognized." But, alas, it was too late! The first official act of the Register Association, after certification, was to extend to every known cat club a cordial invitation to cooperate in compiling a correct record of cats' pedigrees. Every club in England and America, save two, responded with enthusiasm and congratulation. The largest and most general American club voluntarily adopted the U. S. Studbook as official register. Leaders of the two unresponsive clubs began to solicit its control. A hitherto unsuspected element in its value suddenly developed. It was made shockingly clear that the motive underlying the struggle for its acquisition was the definite purpose to convert it into a money-making device wherewith to promote individual interests in one cat club – and to assist in destroying all others. Up to this time there had been serious friction between American cat factions. Now the disappointed leaders met, for the first time, on common ground. They suffered a common complaint. Convinced of the fact that the U. S. Studbook would remain a public benefaction, and that it could never become a private source of revenue, they combined under a name even larger than "United States," and with an objective of infinite minuteness – annihilation of the U.S. Studbook. Operations opened with most outrageous misrepresentations. Periodicals, which had solicited permission to print applications for registration and had volunteered before its recognition to "stand by it," and "take care of it," now absolutely refused any space whatever for its use. So, in order that publication and challenge of pedigrees before acceptance might not fail to afford the one possible remedy for innumerable preventable evils, the association began in June, 1903, to publish its own official organ. To every known cat club was immediately extended courteous individual invitations to regularly occupy in The Cattarian, free of expense, whatever space might be desired for the promotion of general interests.
In 1904 the salient features of the U. S. Studbook were reported to have been copied by the disgruntled faction and secretly offered for recognition as a new studbook. Private advices and certificates issued to applicants for registration stated, however, that the "new book" would be a new volume of the rejected Beresford! Considerable support was secured by alleged confidential assurances of unofficial understandings with certain government officials purporting to have culminated in an agreement to withdraw recognition from the U. S. Studbook in order to have it to bestow upon the Beresford. The Register Association was, of course, little disturbed over the possibility of any action on the part of the Departments affecting the status of the U. S. Studbook or the rights of its clients, except for cause, but the proposition of governmental certification of two studbooks for the same breeds of cats was widely and vigorously opposed, on the grounds that another was not needed; that there was no general demand for it ; and that in the event of its recognition neither book could ever become a full and complete record. The friends of the association were most loyal in support of these contentions and evidenced their disapproval of the new scheme by thousands of autographic protests, besides disqualifying, to any unbiased mind, much of the support claimed, and, in some cases, uncovering shockingly culpable proceedings.
In 1902 the Departments did not believe that cats came within the provisions of the Tariff Law or that their recognition was either necessary or desirable. In 1904 the recognition of a second studbook was seriously considered, despite the fact that the precedent of recognizing but one American book for the same breed of horses, dogs or cattle had previously been invariably adhered to. The American Kennel Club annually records about eight thousand dogs. Another book for dogs has been found "unnecessary," though several superior ones have been offered. In less than four years the U. S. Register has recorded five hundred breeding cats of recognized breeds, about one hundred of which are shown to be pure bred. During more than fifteen years without competition, the Beresford Club recorded only seven hundred and forty-seven cats, not a single one of which has been shown to have been pure bred, and very many of which are shown to be either non-breeding or not of recognized breeds. Nevertheless a desperate effort was made to convince the Departments of the necessity for two studbooks for cats. The rejected Beresford under a nom de plume again became a candidate for recognition.
The U. S. Studbook has sought: First, to record as nearly perfect pedigrees as possible; Next, to hold the cat public responsible for their accuracy. The means employed to accomplish this end has been the enforcement to the letter of clear, concise, direct and comprehensive rules of registration and publication of all pedigrees before acceptance. All applications have been voluntary. Not one has had a single "string" of any kind attached. No one has been "assisted" or "shown how" to register. No information has been privately furnished from the records. The operations of the Association have been conducted in the broad daylight of publicity. Not an application has been considered until duly executed before an officer authorized to administer oaths. Not a change has been permitted by anyone in any application after oath. All necessary data have been given to the public precisely as submitted for record. The personality of no applicant has entered into the examination of any application blank. The rules have been enforced alike in al l cases. No favoritism has been shown. No prejudices have been fostered through the U. S. Studbook. Some two hundred applications have had to be rejected on account of unwillingness of applicants to comply with the rules of registration. Confessed participation in customs house frauds has disqualified several.
The U. S. Studbook provides for every breed of domestic cat . Longhaired cats are also indiscriminately called "Angoras" or "Persians," but authorities agree that these once distinct breeds have been intermingled for so many years even in their original habitat that, as distinct breeds, they have long been obsolete. The present tendency towards the establishment of variety, based on various colors of coat, bred out of the original cat colorings recognized by scientific men, is approved and accepted in classification, but the movement is too recent and not yet sufficiently defined for practical purposes and has, therefore, not been adopted as a basis for the determination of pure breeding. The breeds recognized by the Departments as varieties of Short-hairs were suggested in 1902 by the Prominent American Fanciers interested in securing free entry for cats into the United States. Some have proven to be open to grave criticism. Recent provision, by these same Fanciers, for classes at "American" cat exhibitions for the marsupial Australian "cat ," indicate that desirable stability on this point has not yet been reached.
The Association has been asked why it provides for every known breed of domestic cat except the "Native," recently recognized as a variety of Shorthair at the instigation of the aforesaid "American" Fanciers. The U. S. Studbook provides for no "Native" breed, because, while every cat must of necessity be born somewhere, no breed of cat is today distinctly native anywhere; because, since no domestic cat existed in America until comparatively recent times and no one can state whether the first introduced were long- or short-haired, no particular breed can be authoritatively claimed to have ever been native to the United States; because nativity alone can not constitute breed; and because, since the U. S. Studbook is not designed to puzzle even the most ignorant novice, it has seemed preferable to classify on lines so broad and by characteristics so definite that all who run may read. It has seemed proper therefore, that the short -haired domestic cat (Felis domestica), possessing no distinguishing feature other than short hair and of no definite habitat , but found in all lands and known in various localities and languages as the "Alley," "Barn," "Common," "Garden, " "Woodshed" or other "cat," should be called simply the "Shorthaired Cat," and that the various other breeds of domestic cats that are also short-haired should be designated by the various names (since they have known no others) of the various lands to which their various origins have always been accredited. Certificates of pure breeding can not issue for any of these distinct breeds, albeit they also possess short hair, where pedigrees show lapses, in the requisite generations of ancestors, in breeding to the "common" Shorthaired Cat , any more than certi ficates can issue for Longhaired Cats whose pedigrees show similar lapses.
It has also been asked why the rule was revoked permitting registration on a showing of superiority based upon awards received at exhibitions. The promoters of the U. S. Studbook were, at the time of its certification, novices in Fancy matters. They fondly believed – as they were told – that cat show prizes were indicative of worth – criterions of breeding. Voluminous documentary evidence collected by the Register Association during the past three years, demonstrating how show awards are bought, sold, exchanged, lost, strayed and even stolen, disqualifies, sufficiently for any purpose of the U. S. Studbook, their recognition as evidence of pure breeding.
There has been some complaint against the ruling of the Association that "Any person may register any cat ." A claim has been put forward that none but owners should be permitted to register. The absurdity of this contention appears to be sufficiently answered by pointing out the fact that to import into the United States, under such restrictions, any animal not already registered as pure bred, would probably necessitate ownership of all his ancestors! Except as an item of interest , or a possible adjunct to identification, ownership has not proved of any particular value as a test of pure breeding. Criticism may also arise from the fact that the U. S. Studbook has not followed time-honored classification and distribution of varieties customary among exhibition promoters. In order to be absolutely impartial the book has been prepared on an alphabetical basis throughout. Candidates for registration acknowledging spots or markings could not conscientiously be classified with solid colors. They have been placed with Bi-colors or Tabbies. Where pedigrees of such specimens have been given, it will generally be seen that they would be found wanting in any scheme of pure breeding based on variation in coloring. For similar reasons "shadings" have not been regarded as differences in color.
Registration has always been claimed by Fanciers to be "a means of identification." This has been the plea advanced as the reason why club and exhibition promoters should control studbooks. There is not one instance on record wherein any cat has ever been identified by registration – nor has there ever been any such recorded description of any cat whereby he could have been at all times or places definitely selected from others of his kind. One cat of a certain color and sex is not so different from every other cat of similar color and sex that he could be pointed out by a disinterested individual with a studbook. Besides, the majority of cats vary greatly in appearance with age, condition and circumstances. A young cat, say, an Orange-eyed Smoke, is registered as such. Six months later he has developed into a Lemon- or even Green-eyed "Bad Black. " Where is the judge able to identify him by his registration? The eyes, coats and whole general appearance of all cats undergo temporary – sometimes periodic changes in greater or lesser degree. The only items not subject to change in authentic registration are those of birth and ancestry. Registration does not afford a reliable means of identification and can possess, therefore, no value – simply as registration – to club or show promoters.
By registering cats one assists in the compilation of a record containing a variable equation, but possessing, nevertheless, the one inestimable desideratum of the intelligent breeder – basis for the establishment of pedigree. Pedigree has never entered into cat exhibition perquisites, yet breeders can build confidently only upon history.There has been little careful cat breeding in America. Pedigree, quality or individual fitness, have received scant consideration. Breedings result largely from exhibition awards and "yellow" advertising. Selection is frequently determined by "advice." the necessity of winning adherents to various causes, "accommodation" for various reasons, and even simply in exchange for various club and exhibition favors. Few breeders ever see the studs to which their queens are sent. Others keep their own studs and often sacrifice improvement of breed, sincerely desired in some instances, rather than risk the danger of Fancy frauds, so well known to be frequently practiced.
The Cat Fancy has been afforded every possible opportunity for securing, through the U. S. Studbook, a record containing correct data only. No challenge has been disregarded. Each has been fully investigated and decided upon the evidence submitted on both sides. With this out line of its origin, purpose, working methods and obstacles surmounted, the U. S. Official Register Association presents the first and only record of pure bred breeding cats ever compiled. The Association is confident that, before its second volume appears, fancy difficulties shall have reached a solute ion; that more general attention will be turned to the careful breeding of cats, to compiling a correct record of pedigrees, and to effecting a cooperation from which can spring the harmony and prosperity at present so unnecessarily but conspicuously lacking.
MRS. S. HAZEN BOND, Registrar. Washington, January 1. 1906.
GOVERNMENT RECOGNITION
Copy of letter from the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of the Treasury, recommending the addition of The United States Register and Studbook for Cats to the recognized books of record.
Department of Agriculture. Office of the Secretary, Washington, D. C.,
June 25, 1902.
The Honorable, The Secretary of the Treasury.
Sir: Referring to paragraph 473, of the Act of Congress approved July 24, 1897, authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to determine and certify what are recognized breeds and pure bred animals I have the honor to recommend that the United States Register and Stud Book for Cats be added to the American books of record recognized by your Department for the free entry of cats imported into the United States for breeding purposes. I would respectfully suggest that the form of placing this entry in Your circular of instruction be as follows:
CATS
Name of Breed: Long-haired (Angora or Persian), short-haired (Siamese, Manx, Mexican,
Abyssinian, Indian, Russian and Japanese).
Book of Record : The United States Register and Stud Book (except appendix).
By Whom Published - The United States Official Register Association, Incorporated.
I have the honor to be, sir,
Your obedient servant,
JAMES WILSON,
Secretary."
Copy of circular of instruction from the Secretary of the Treasury.
ANIMALS FOR BREEDING PURPOSES
Free Entry of Cats Recorded in ‘The United States Register and Stud Book for Cats’
To Officers of the Customs and Others: The following decisions of the Department upon the construction to be given to the various acts of Congress relating to the tariff, administration of the customs, etc., are published for the information and guidance of officers of the customs and others concerned.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 27. 1902.
Referring to Department's circular of June 22, 1899 (T. D. 21298), regarding the free importation of animals for breeding purposes under the provisions of paragraph 473 of the act of July 24. 1897, I have to inform you that, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture, 'The United States Register and Stud Book for Cats' is hereby added to the list of books of record set forth in said circular, and will be recognized as a register for cats, from which certificates of pedigree, may be issued as follows:
CATS
Name of Breed: Long-haired (Angora or Persian), short-haired (Siamese, Manx, Mexican,
Abyssinian, Indian, Russian and Japanese).
Book of Record : The United States Register and Stud Book (except appendix).
By Whom Published - The United States Official Register Association, Incorporated.
Respectfully, H. A. TAYLOR, Assistant Secretary
RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING REGISTRATION IN THE UNITED STATES REGISTER AND STUDBOOK FOR CATS
The Book of Record Established for al l Recognized Breeds of Cats. Recognized by the U. S. Treasury Department on the Recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture under the Provisions of the Tariff Act of 1897.
RULE I - The requirements for enrollment in the Studbook are those provided by law for free entry into the United States, i.e., the cat must be a pure-bred breeding animal of recognized breed, and its sire and dam and its grandsires and granddams must each and all have been separately recorded in the book of record established for the same breed.
RULE II - Breeding cats of recognized breeds furnishing satisfactory evidence that their sires and dams were both of the same breed are eligible for enrollment in the Register. Such cats, when their sires and darns and their grandsires and granddams have each and all been separately recorded in the Register, will be enrolled also in the Studbook.
RULE III - Non-breeding cats; those whose sires and dams were not of the same breed; or those whose immediate progenitors – one or both – are unknown; are eligible for enrollment in the Appendix.
RULE IV - No applications for registration are accepted until thirty days after publication unchallenged.
RULE V - Applications must be made on blanks furnished by the Registrar for that purpose.
RULE VI - Applications containing unfilled spaces are not accepted.
RULE VII - Applications for enrollment of kittens under three months of age are not accepted.
RULE VIII - Duplication of names is not permitted.
RULE IX - Kennel Names, Prefixes or other Distinguishing Words are not accepted as part of the names of cats applying for record unless separately registered as such.
RULE X - Applications unaccompanied by the proper fees are not accepted.
* * *
HER FAMILY
Mabel Anna Jane Cornish was born on 6. Aug. 24, 1867. Her father was George Gordon Cornish (born 1834 or 1835, died 1909) and her mother was Ann A. Dorithy. (born 1839, died 1912). The couple married in 1857 and had their only child, Mabel, 10 years later. Mabel graduated from Vassar College in 1889, and studied for her degrees at the Women's Medical College in New York City, going on to practise as a doctor in Washington, D.C. In 1897 she married Samuel Hazen Bond, of Washington, DC, apparently against her mother’s wishes. She was a member of the Humane Society and the US Social Hygiene Association. She became a physican in Washington D.C. in the early 1900's when this was unusual for a woman. She was also a parasitologist and, much later in life, a Jungian pyscho-analyst. She wrote an article for Munsey's Magazine in 1901 titled "Cat Raising as a Business" and one for Country Life in America in 1902 titled "Zoroaster of the Persians" (which I’ve never been able to locate), and at least one book. She was an only child left no known descendants and died in San Luis Obispo, CA on Oct. 26, 1955.
Her father, George Cornish was born into a farming family in Northern New York and entered the Union army in the 60th New York Veteran Volunteers in 1861 where he became a Hospital Steward. In 1863 he was mustered in as 1st Lieutenant in H company . He lost his left arm at Savannah, Ga., in 1864 and was discharged due to disability in 1865 with the rank of Brevet Major. In 1865 George became a civil servant, joining 2d Auditor’s office in Washington DC. According to the 1880 Washington DC Census, he became a Clerk (examining the accounts of army officers and of the clothing and equipment branch of treasury). He died in 1909 and was buried in the officers’ section of Arlington Cemetery , Virginia. His wife died 3 years later and was later buried with him.
Less is known of her mother, Ann A. Dorithy. Court case records show that she disapproved of Samuel Hazen Bond courting her daughter, and that she regarded her daughter’s hobbies as “fads”. She disinherited Mabel for not being a dutiful daughter, from which we can surmise that Ann probably didn’t approve of her daughter having a life outside of the family home. It’s possible that Ann held very traditional views and disapproved of (or resented) her daughter having a career and supporting women’s suffrage.
There is also less information on Mabel’s husband, Samuel Hazen Bond. He was a member of Phi-Delta-Phi fraternity. Special Student at the Smithsonian Institution. He gained his Bachelor of Law degree in 1894, his Master of Law degree in 1895 and his Master of Patent Laws in 1896. He worked at Hensey, Bond & Robinson, Patent Lawyers, Washington, D. C..
Mrs Hazen Bond (Mabel Cornish Bond) was part of America's high society and is listed in "Woman's who's who of America, 1914-15": BOND, Mabel Cornish (Mrs. Samuel Hazen Bond), "Dumblane," Forty-second and Warren Sts., Washington, D.C. Born Washington, D.C, Aug. 24, 1867; dau. George Gordon and Ann Araminta (Dougherty) Cornish; ed. Vassar Coll., A.B. '89; Woman's Medical Coll. of the New York Infirmary, M.D. '92; m. Washington, D.C, Nov. 26, 1897, Samuel Hazen Bond. Resident physician Babies' Hospital, N.Y. City, 1892-93; mem. staff Woman's Clinic, Washington, D.C, 1893-97. Favors woman suffrage." Their residence, Dumblane is an American Craftsman bungalow built in 1911, by Mr. and Mrs. F. Hazen Bond and now listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Her name appears in various society notices in newspapers for example stating that she and her husband would be sailing for [wherever].
Mrs Bond was disinherited by her mother, Mrs Ann A Cornish , in 1909 and went to court to contest her mother’s will. Quite why she was disinherited isn’t entirely clear, though news report said that she disapproved of her daughter’s marriage, that she hated cats and that her daughter was not dutiful enough. Mabel was evidently a very determined woman (it sounds as though Mrs Cornish was a rather overbearing mother who disagreed with her daughter’s lifestyle and interests). There’s a record of the protracted case in Washington Newspapers between 1912 and 1914 (it appears Mrs Cornish was no longer able to manage her own financial affairs between Aug 1912 and her death in June 1913).
Probate. The Washington Post, August 2, 1912. Collector for Cornish Estate Acting on a petition filed in the Probate Court yesterday by Mabel Cornish Bond asking that the Washington Loan and Trust Company the executor named in the will of her mother Mrs Ann A Cornish be appointed collector for the estate. Justice Barnard signed an order appointing the trust company to the position.
The Washington Post, March 29, 1913 Reason Given as to Why - Mrs Bond Lost Estate. Contests Her Mother’s Will. Defendants in Suit Involving Estate Left by Mrs Ann A Cornish to Her Niece Assert That Daughter Was Cut Off Because She Was Not Dutiful.
The suit by a disinherited daughter Mrs Mabel Cornish Bond, wife of S Hazen Bond a well known Washington attorney to break the will of her mother Ann A Cornish now being tried in Criminal Court No 2 before Judge Gould sitting as a probate court has developed a number of interesting features. Mrs Cornish who was 73 years old at the time of her death on June 13 1913 left all her estate with the Washington Loan and Trust Company as trustee for her grandniece Miss Dorothy E G Miller the income - to be expended for her maintenance and education till she reaches the age of 30 years when she is to receive the entire estate which is valued at about $50,000 Including the property at 128 B street northwest which is valued at about $20,000. Mrs Bond who has been married about fifteen years - contends that her mother’s will was improperly executed and that she was unduly influenced.
Say Daughter Was Undutiful . Those defending the will contend that the daughter was disinherited because she was not dutiful and did not entertain the views of life that her mother wished that she should. A number of Mrs Bond’s so-called fads have also been mentioned It was claimed that at one time she was an ardent cat-fancier and frequently had in her possession a number of high-priced felines of Persian and other breeds It was also stated that she was Interested In foreign postage stamp collecting and was the local exchange agent for those making collections. It is contended that these and other things caused Mrs Bond to be somewhat lax In attentions to her mother who took the grand-niece to live with her.
Rev Dr Hugh Johnston a Witness. The Rev Dr Hugh Johnston of the Methodist Episcopal Church known as President McKinley’s pastor because of his having been minister at the Metropolitan Church here where the President worshiped was an important witness for Mrs Bond. He expressed the opinion that she had not neglected her mother but on the contrary had been neglected. He took the stand that the mother - should have been more sympathetic with the daughter’s ideas of life. Dr Johnston came over from Baltimore to testify It is probable that all the witnesses for Mrs Bond will have been heard at the close of court next Monday. It was stated yesterday that 29 witnesses will be called in defense of the will Attorneys George E Sullivan and A S Worthington are defending the will and Attorneys Douglas Baker Ruffln Obear are appearing for Mrs Bond.
JURY IS DISCHARGED IN BOND WILL CASE. Deliberates All Night in Suit of Daughter to Break Her Mother's Testament. . The Washington Times. April 10, 1913: After listening to sensational testimony for about two weeks, the Jury In the trial of the suit of Mrs. Samuel H. Bond to break the Will of her mother. Mrs. Ann A. Cornish, widow of Major George G. Cornish, who left her entire estate to a grandniece, Dorothy E. G .Miller, was discharged today by Justice Gould, in Probate Court. The Jury deliberated all night. Mrs. Bond attacked the sanity of her mother and charged that undue influence had been exercised by Miss Miller or other persons In Inducing her mother to make the will. She alleged that her mother had not treated her affectionately, and that Mrs. Cornish had been in fear that she would be poisoned and had refused to eat certain food because of that fact. In attempting to show that ill feeling between mother and daughter was justified by the latter action, counsel for Miss Miller Introduced testimony and evidence to show that Mrs. Cornish had objected to Mr. Bond paying attention to her daughter. The fact that Mrs. Bond "raised cats" and had other pets objectionable to Mrs. Cornish was also brought out in the testimony to show grounds for ill feeling between the two. There was also testimony to the effect that there were frequent quarrels between Major Cornish and his wife. The Jury is understood to have stood eight to four In favor of Mrs. Bond.
CORNISH JURY DISAGREES. The Washington Herald, April 11, 1913. Unable to Reach Verdict In Contented Will Case. A jury in the Probate Court, Justice Gould presiding, yesterday announced its inability to reach a verdict in the contest over the estate of Mrs. Ann A. Cornish, whose daughter and only child, Mabel Cornish Bond, had been disinherited and protested against the will. Justice Gould discharged the jurors. The deceased was the widow of Maj. George G. Cornish, a retired army officer, and, by her will, left her estate, valued at $24,000, to the Washington Loan and Trust Company in trust for a grand-niece, Dorothy E. G. Miller. No provision was made for Mrs. Bond, the daughter, because of an estrangement with her mother.
CORNISH FAMILY REACH COMPROMISE ON WILL. The Washington Times, January 27, 1914. A compromise was reached today in the litigation over the will of Mrs. Anna A. Cornish whereby her estate will be divided equally between her daughter, Mrs. Mabel Cornish Bond, of Washington, and her niece. Dorothy E. G. Miller, of Oklahoma City, Okla. The will of Mrs. Cornish, who died June 13, 1913, left her estate absolutely to her niece. Mrs. Bond alleged undue influence and mental incapacity on the part of her mother, but the jury disagreed when the case was tried a year ago. The compromise provides for the deduction of 2,000 for expenses incident to the litigation.
BRIEF COURT ITEMS The Washington Post, January 28, 1914. Mrs Mabel Cornish Bond, wife of a well-known corporation lawyer of this city, and Dorothy E. G Miller, 23 years old, of Oklahoma City, Okla. , will divide the estate of Mrs. Bond's mother, Anna A. Cornish, who died June 13, 1912, by the terms of an agreement reached between them, and which the District Supreme Court is asked to ratify, in a petition filed yesterday by the Washington Loan and Trust Company, executor of the will and trustee for Miss Miller. Mrs Cornish left a will dated July 5, 1909, which disinherited her daughter and bequeathed her entire estate in trust to her niece, Miss Miller. A "Suit in which the jury disagreed followed.” The agreement now reached is that the Washington Loan and Trust Company is to convert the estate into cash as soon as possible, and, excepting $2,000 for expenses of the litigation, divide it, giving, one-half to Mrs. Bond and holding the other half in trust for the benefit of Miss Miller.
HER CATTERY AND CATS
The only "Zoroaster of the Persians" I could locate is this excerpt in a newspaper: A PRIZE CAT: The patriarch of cats Indeed is Zoroaster. At the ripe cat age of eighteen years he is nearly as strong and fully as beautiful as ever. A pure Angora, brought at the tender age of six months from Turkey by "an old sea captain,” he tips the scales to-day at fourteen pounds. He possesses perfect hearing and might have sired many “blue-eyed whites,” as he glories in the requisite one blue and one amber eye of exceeding brilliancy and remarkable depth of expression. Whatever the time of day, his pupils dilate whenever he is deeply interested. When his mistress rises he can manifest his joy in no satisfactory manner except to run as fast as possible the whole length of the house and back again. Then he asks for breakfast and fresh ice water, for he will drink no water in which he does not distinctly discern a piece of ice floating about, and always tests its genuineness with his paw. — Country Life in America (could this be by Mabel Cornish Bond?)
ARISTOCRATIC CATS OF WASHINGTON - The Times, Washington, April 13th,1902: Washington possesses the finest cats in the country. There is one of these creatures the number of whose ancestors many a parvenu here covets. The pedigree of Mrs. Mary Cornish Bond’s prize Persian, Menelik III., dates back thirty generations. Menelik leads off in value of Mrs. Bond’s 11 cats. He is worth over $1,000 and the others follow at values of from $250 down to $10. The kittens are sold as fast as they can be bred, and even the skins of these long-haired creatures are saleable for small rugs at a good price.
The genealogy below can be opened full size in a new window
FOR FAMOUS FELINES - Evening Star, 6th January, 1903
Only “Kat Kennel” South Of Philadelphia Located In This City - King Menelik III And His Charming Queens - Home Of Many Beautiful Persians That Have Captured Honors At Cat Shows.
Washington is the home of some of the finest imported Persian cats in the United States. Many' Maine cats, also called “coons” and “shags,” claim Washington as their home under the misleading name of “Angoras,” but there are few real Angoras here. There is only one establishment that makes a specialty of raising thoroughbred felines, and these are Persians.
Of course, there is little difference between real Angoras and real Persians, except a slight geographical one, although fanciers try to find some variations in length of coat, tail, etc. True it is that the Maine cats, the degenerate descendants of the Angoras and Persians long ago brought to our New England states by the old sea captains, make fine pets and often grow longer coats than some of the Persians, due entirely to their having been bred in a colder climate. As they are sold very cheap, however, sufficient attention Is seldom given to their early health, and usually they come into one's possession at a very immature age and frequently succumb to some of the seeds of future ills already implanted in their tender organisms. Careless breeding and injudicious inbreeding leave weakened constitutions.
Washington has the only cattery, or “kat kennel,” as these colonies of pussies are now called, south of Philadelphia. None but Imported Persians of the best quality and pedigree are bred. From this inclosure no pussy cat has ever gone forth to a cat show but to win; none return but covered with honors. Last season some of the inmates traveled hundreds of miles, visiting the large shows at Rochester, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, New York and Troy, and brought back with them more than twenty first prlzes and many valuable specials.
The finest black cats in America are said to be here, and King Menelik III has doubtlessly been embarrassed by more newspaper notoriety and had more cat honors thrust upon him, through his prize winning sons and daughters, than any other proud Sir. Tomlemagne in America, just at present he is the most talked of cat in feline social circles, and is known as “the bone of con-tention” in the two clubs which have recently prepared the “new rules” governing cat championships. It is said to have caused many a pussy heart to flutter and the two cat clubs such jealous pangs to have a coal black individual walk in and carry off a championship in one season that they call him a “bogus’' and do not believe him to be really a cat, but a big black devil.
Menelik and Roxana, his queen, were bought In London some four years ago. Their origin is unknown. But results have shown in this case that pedigree does not always make the cat. Roxana took honors in the show pen at Detroit last year for the best mother with offspring, and Detroit is a regular storm center of brown tabbies. Menelik glories in three more wins, beyond his championship, than any cat advertised as a champion in the American register. His best points are his broad head, small, well-set ears, unusually expressive eyes, short legs, back and tail, intensely jetty coat and, by no means least, his gentle, affectionate and altogether doglike disposition.
Besides the imported brown tabby, Roxana, his queens are Shadu l’Mulk, Lalla Rookh, Chow, and Turcana, and a number of regular visitors who pay their respects every year, coming from New York, Michigan and all points between.
Shadu l'Mulk, which Is Persian for “delight of the harem,” is a beautiful golden or brown tabby, who realizes the proverbial “tail fifteen inches across.” She lives apparently but to be admired, as she quite forces her attentions upon the visitor and struts about with her plume weaving grace-fully, while systematically shirking all maternal duties and inevitably employing a less gorgeous but far more practical nurse for that purpose.
Lalla Rookh is a large, jet black lady with deep orange eyes. She was the only female of the famous “four-leaved shamrock” litter bred by Sir Robert Little of Kent, England, who is said to raise the finest black cats in the world. Her grand-sire is Johnnie Fawe, admittedly the best of black cats, and through him and her equally noted grand-dam, the smoke Namoushka, Lalla traces her ancestral tree back to remote ages. When yet under a year old, in England, she won a number of important prizes, among them being the breeders’ cup for the best black cat or kitten. There were a thousand entries.
And Lalla Rookh is yet otherwise known to fame. A carte blanche order was given an English agent to procure the “finest black queen to be had” for Menelik, and for a year she was waited for, as most fine kittens are engaged before they ever see the light. Just about that time a Washington woman took up and finally succeeded in accomplishing something that the American cat fancier had been striving fruitlessly to gain for nearly twenty-five years. This was the recognition, by the Treasury Department, of fine cats as desirable breeding animals and the consequent sanction of their entry into the United States free of custom duty under the tariff act. Previously, an ad valorem duty of 20 per cent was levied on all felines knocking at our doors.
Lalla Rookh was the first cat to register in the United States cat register and stud book for cats, the first cat ever to enter the United States free of duty under the tariff act and consequently the first feline ever recognised by the United States government on exactly an equal footing with thoroughbred dogs, horses, sheep, cattle and swine as a “pure bred animal imported for breeding purposes only.”
Chow is a shaded silver or chinchilla – the only cat of this coloring in Washington and one of the very few in America. She is a worthy daughter of the many times champion Lord Southampton, sire of the most noted silvers alive. Chinchilla is one of the “manufactured coat colorings, as are also the smokes and some of the other scarce and exceedingly valuable varieties. The original cat colors are thought to have been white, black and orange, and from these the other "self” or “solid” colors, red, blue, etc., as well as all the many variations of color are supposed to have been derived.
The tabby, we are told by scientists, originated from years of wanderlng in the wilderness. Just as today if any cat Is left to roam the woods and forests,iIn a few generations scientists will tell us the coats will be found to have taken on stripes and spots, which it is said is a wise provision of nature to protect her among her foes. We see this theory best Illustrated in the great cats - the tiger and the leopard.
So in domestic cats we have the brown tabby, the great tabby, the blue, the red or orange, the silver and other tabbies. Some of these we' find as reversion of type, but the majority are carefully bred. All varieties have ‘their enthusiastic admirers and in England they band together, forming clubs to specialize in the coloring their members admire and strive in every way to perfect their particular hobby. In America there is only one special club, but it has quite a range, including cream, orange, red and tortoiseshell.
However, this club counts among its members enthusiasts in all of the other colors and its active membership roll is the longest of any cat club in the United States.
The chinchillas have been bred heretofore for color only, the attempt being to imitate newly coined sliver, and “show points” have had to be neglected. Most of the chinchillas, therefore, present narrow heads with long noses and inferior bone. Chow is a wonderful exception to the rule. She won many prizes in England, among them being a silver cup for the lightest silver, and her children are covered with glory over there. She has the broad head and large bone usually found only in male cats and exceedingly rare in all silvers, but her great glory is her enormous, beautiful, sea-green eyes.
Turcana is young and has never visited a show. She is of a noble house, however, with blood blue and extending back beyond the memory of stud book. The best blues are obtained by judicious intermingling with blacks, and the best blacks are said to be the result of the use of most decidedly contrasting colors, as a deep orange or a chinchilla on black. For this reason Menelik’s queens were selected each for marked distinction in her class as to color, as well as for perfection in any show point in which Menelik himself might be lacking.
Menellk and his five queens do not reign alone. A son, Cambyses by Roxana, has won three first brown tabby prizes and is noted for his “sweet type,” his short nose and his pretty face, said by many admirers to greatly resemble a pansy. Among his children he points with pride to three by the best marked brown tabby in America - “Baronia,” imported by and belonging to Mrs. Gotwalts of Pottstown, Pa.
Darius Dunain is a very light and very large brown tabby, with the disposition of a baby. He is happy only when being held and fondled, and is intensely jealous of every other feline.
Many fine pets have gone forth from the Khorassan, and at all seasons of the year the six patent traveling crates are in use for transportation to shows or to happy homes far away. A few of the best known are Amytis of Pittsburg; Artaxerxes, winner of first at nine months over eight old and noted cats at New York last season; Menelik-Atossa and Khorassan-Shireen, who, with their sister, Shadu l’Mulk, last season wrestled female brown tabby honors from the famous Chicago cats, which had so long and so gracefully worn them; Dr. Harley's Mary Jane at Vassar College; Highland Laddie of Atlantic Highlands. N. J. ; Persia of Cleveland Park, D. C.; Fluffy, belonging to Mrs. E. A. Evans; Cyrus, the brown tabby neuter belonging to Maj. G. G. Cornish, that took first In his class at New York last year and was neglected by the show authorities and kept In the cellar for four days without food or water; Stratonice-Rustum, three firsts and a silver cup, and many others.
These Khorassan cats are fresh and rapidly getting their winter coats, having attended but one show this season, the fair held in Syracuse, N. Y., under the auspices of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Only four representatives composed the delegation, all young males, but they returned with three big blue rosettes, one red ribbon and one championship, the latter being awarded for the best longhair male present, and won by Ras Maconnen, named in honor of the representative of King Menellk II of Abyssinia to the coronation of King Edward VII of England, a young, marvelous dark smoke, bred in England and born in America to Menellk’s queen, Sweet Lalla Rookh.
None of these cats attend the shows held by pigeon and poultry associations.
This snippet is from the New-York Tribune of 27th March, 1903: Mrs. Mabel Hazen Bond, is said to be ono of the leading "cattarians," to use her own words, of America. Mrs. Bond’s specialty is black Persians. The king of her cattery, Menelek III. was purchased in London without a pedigree, and his success in the show pen has been extraordinary. His queen, Sweet Lalla Rook, was known as Colleen in England, where she took three first prizes. Her brother, Sir Robert, is now the property of a physician in New-York, and won the championship at the Crystal Palace last October. Menelooka is the handsome son of Menelek, and took a first at Detroit recently.
MRS HAZEN BOND'S OTHER WORK.
A BOARDING HOUSE FOR CATS - Pittsburgh Daily Post, April 6, 1902 - By Frederick Moore, Special Correspondent of The Post
(also printed as ARISTOCRATIC CATS OF WASHINGTON - The Times, Washington, April 13th,1902)
Washington, April 4 The new Capital Cat club has brought out some generally unknown. And to those unknowing, some interesting facts about felines. To begin with, Washington possesses the finest cats in the country. There is one of these creatures the number of whose ancestors many a parvenu here covets. The pedigree of Mrs. Mary Cornish Bond's prize Persian, Menelik III., dates back thirty generations. Menelik has just returned from a tour covering New York, Troy, Rochester, Cleveland, Chicago, Nashville and other cities, and while his beautiful silken black coat is much ruffled from wear and tear on the sides of the box in which he was transported, his temper, from the wear and tear at the shows, is much improved at being once again returned to his beloved mistress. He took first prizes at each of the cities visited, and brought back meals and vases galore and the sum of $500. . . . Menelik leads off in value of Mrs. Bond's 11 cats. He is worth over $1,000 and the others follow at values of from $250 down to $10. The kittens are sold as fast as they can be bred, and even the skins of these long-haired creatures are salable for small rugs at a good price.
Mr. Bond follows a still more curious profession, one that depends upon the cat fancy, but pays, strange to say, even better. It is cat photography. Cats are the craze here just now. They are as numerous as pugs were some few years ago. The odd fact that a cat photograph gallery is maintained and supported by the leaders in fad fancy brings many another cat-possessor to the institution to see its subjects, its manipulation and its products. The process is so amusing and the products so cute that invariably the declaration is My Tom (or Minnie) must have her photo taken. The price of photographing a cat is $2 more than the average charge for photographing a baby. Every woman's publication and many others in this country and Europe will print a good story on cats if well illustrated. Mr. and Mrs. Bond have a reputation for such stories. You must have seen fancy photographs of the most intelligent-looking cats on sale in the picture, book and novelty stores about Christmas and Easter times. These bring about 50 cents t $1 a piece according to the size and mounting. They are the product of this institution and find a ready market all over the country.