I have recently started to show lilacs, not because I had set out to, but because they cropped up in my line of blues. I also did not breed blues with the aim of exhibiting them, but as an outcross to my pearls. Lilacs are hardly ever shown as, for some reason, they were never very popular as a variety. They were only accepted as a standardised self variety in 1995, but they seem to have caught the attention of fanciers much earlier, as this article, reprinted from Fur & Feather, seems to indicate. Interestingly, the lilac fox seemed a more appealing choice than the lilac self.
I have copied the text from a blue book of news cuttings by John Kellett, a well-known fancier of old. His grandson kindly donated eleven of these books to the NMC and I have started perusing them. They start in 1953 and end in 1978.

WIDESPREAD INTEREST IN DOVES AND LILACS

By C. H. JOHNSON, “Highfield,” 31 DECEMBER, 1953.

The interest in dove and lilac mice is more widespread than I had believed, and set out below is some information taken from letters recently received. Firstly, Mr. V. Stephens writes:
“As you know, I am interested in the lilac fox mouse. Two years ago, I sent a selection for the consideration of our committee. They were turned down because, as Mr. Hutchings said, they were black-eyed doves. With the decision, I did not grumble. What I did was to scrap the lot and start again.
“I now think I have a mouse that can be called lilac, as distinct from B.E. dove. It will, of course, take time to get the ideal shade, and we won’t get it very soon if the committee is in the same mind as you, namely, that lilac is pale lavender or violet.
“What we should, in my opinion, take for the ideal colour and aim for is the bud of the lilac flower.
“If you will let me know when the committee will next meet, I shall be pleased to send some lilac fox for them to see. I will also put in some chocolate and blue fox as a contrast.”
As an old breeder of the lilac rabbit, I entirely agree with Mr. Hutchings’s remarks.
“When I started to breed lilac rabbits in the early 1920s, they were almost the shade that my mice are today. In those days, breeders were troubled with dark ears and noses, and in breeding out these defects, the colour has become much lighter and is now dove.”

U8 Lilac (bottom) compared to Blue (top)

Mr. B. Makin writes:
“You will no doubt remember it was I who proposed the amendment to the proposal on dove and lilac mice (1953 A.G.M.) that one or other of the two varieties should be discarded altogether. The amendment was put up quite late in the discussion after I had heard views from several other members. I hoped the amendment would give time for discussion on the subject by members, including those not present, without having to make an immediate decision.

“I did not intend to imply that I favoured the retention of both varieties in our standards, nor that the lilac can really claim to have been standardised except in name only.

“We have certainly had the discussion, and once again, I have waited to hear other views before contributing my own. So far, nobody has made any concrete proposals regarding these mice.

“It may be that nobody cares since neither of these varieties can be considered popular at the present time.

“Mr. Hutchings gave his views in order to present the two varieties from a genetical standpoint, but obviously did not set out to favour one or the other.

“I rather tend to disagree with Mr. Ashley in his comments on Mr. Hutchings’s article.

“He knows Mr. Hutchings very well, so he should also know that he is one of our most successful exhibitors, having on two successive occasions carried off the Warkworth Bowl for creams and the Foster Hackwood Trophy for self chocolates at N.M.C. cup shows.

“Both these varieties are bred according to his genetical concepts, so I can hardly see how our good friend Mr. Ashley can support his contention that the people who delve into genetics do not entirely see things from the exhibitor’s standpoint”; and his following paragraph also:

“What we have to consider really is the suitability of the so-called lilac mouse to be given an actual standard in addition to official recognition, which is all it now enjoys. Its possible confusion with a poor specimen of dove is stated, but is also very largely hypothetical since nobody, as far as I know, has actually bred the two varieties to possible exhibition quality and compared them or their wasters.

“Mind you, I don’t see how a comparison of waster material can be taken as any sort of criterion for assessing exhibition animals, which are really the only ones that count.

“I, personally, don’t think the so-called lilac would be confused with dove, and we must not forget that the dove has a ruby eye and the lilac black.

“To anyone who would fire back at me that that is not much of a difference to split varieties on, I would reply by asking them to consider the red mouse and the fawn, for there is precious little difference apart from the eye colour, and yet nobody has suggested discarding either of these varieties.

“The real villain of the piece in the present controversy is not so much the mice as the irresponsible person who, way back, called this variety by the name lilac. In my opinion, no amount of selective breeding will produce a mouse of this make-up that in any way resembles the lilac rabbit or the lilac flower. Optimism is all very well, but to have any hope of success there must be the latent possibility present, and I don’t think it is in this case. The introduction of the dove mouse into this consideration of the lilac is only drawing a red herring across our paths.

“I am afraid the lilac of the mouse fancy is our ugly duckling, and I don’t think it will ever become a swan. Therefore, if it is decided that one of these varieties is to be discarded, then I suggest we discard the so-called lilac, putting on record that it is ‘until such times as specimens are exhibited that show sufficient evidence of becoming a distinct and attractive exhibition variety.’”

“There is one snag, of course, and that is that the lilac was finally recognised after the acceptance of lilac fox into the fancy.

“Having seen these mice, I cannot help but say that they are really attractive, but very largely due to the favourable combination of the lilac colour with the white of the fox character.

“Can we discard self lilac and yet retain lilac fox? If we retain lilac fox, then we shall have to define lilac as a standard, and the whole affair might then be open to ridicule, much as it is now when we recognise both but have no standard for the colour.

“Now, for a moment, I will refer to our red herring—the dove. When this mutation first appeared, it was given the name lilac, which I think was quite reasonable.

“However, when it was standardised, it was given the official fancy name of dove, and so it has remained, but apparently someone had to have lilac and picked on the poor chocolate and blue combination, which hadn’t got a name. It was an unhappy choice, resulting in our present little controversy and almost lack of popularity for the poor mouse. If a pale shade were bred for with this variety, then a possible exhibition variety might result, but it would have to be given an entirely new name, and the present one discarded.”

I am sure our members will join with me in thanking Messrs. Stephens and Makin for their contributions. I had to give both together for they touch on the lilac fox mouse as distinct from the self or tan.
In the New Year, we hope, as a club, to go fully into the question of the dove and lilac mouse, and in our deliberations, the contributions of Messrs. Stephens and Makin will no doubt be found useful.