THE RAMBOUILLET SHEEP.

Otago Witness, Issue 832, 8 November 1867, Page 6

THE RAMBOUILLET SHEEP.

(From the Daily Times, Nov. 4. }

(To the Editor of the Otago Daily TrsfEs). " Monstrum horrendum. informe, ingens, cvi lumen ademtum."

Sie — Mr Low declines our challenge to place his Ramboiillots alongside our pure Merinos at the f orthcoming public exhibitions. This is only what we anticipated, and the columns on columns of vaunted superiority, turn out to be " great cry and little wool."

As to Mr Low's so-called counter challenge, we cannot comprehend the meaning of it. Suppose the mammas of our sheep, which Mr Low requires us to exhibit along with them, are superior to the mammas of Mr Low's sheep, what is to be the result 1 Are we to lose the match, or is it drawn ] Again, suppose we succeed in chartering a vreigh-bridge, and ascertaining the aggregate weight of our sheep and their mammas, as Mr Low requires, and that our sheep, though undoubtedly superior in fleece, and all other respects, are not so fat as Mr Low's ; do ' we lose the match, or is it drawn ? Mr i Low requires the " base of the experiment" to be, not the merits of the sheep shown, but " the increase of their weight over the weight of their mothers ;" does, Mr Low suggest that we are to scour the country to procure ewes to breed from, with a minimum amount of wool on ?

Mr Low claims, for his sheep "A larger and more valuable fleece." We denied his statement, and challenged him to the proof. It is not fair on Mr Low's

part to. evade our challenge, by going off at a tangent from, the real question at isßue, and insisting on tests' of mothers, 'grandmothers, tallow, and manipulation. 'What on earth have these, tests t« do with his assertions as to the fleeces of his 'sheep or ours ? Why, a" Lincoln she^p would beat us both'hollow at all points, if Mr Low's tests alone be relied on ; but then, like the Rambouillet, he requires gross feeding, and is not adapted to the hilly interior of this country.

We cannot help fearing that Mr Low insists on, all these impracticable conditions, in order to avoid, without admitting his defeat, the crucial test of public competition,' and that he wisely considers his sheep as safer at home than in a show yard; fearing lest "too much familiarity" of the public with them might "breed contempt."

We, therefore, finally decline any further communication, which would simply tire your patience and ours, in your valuable (jolumns. If, however, Mr Low snould ever send us privately a bona Jiie and practicable challenge, we shall be ready at once to take him up, and to ask you to publish the particulars of the match when completed.

We entirely agree with one of Mr Low's suggestions, viz. — that after the judges have decided on the general merits of the sheep, they should be shorn, and the wool weighed and judged ; we do not, however, think the manipulating process practicable at present, from want of proper paddocks, &c. ; nor do we think it would be as satisfactory a test as if the wool were j'idged in its natural state.

As regards Mr Rich's case of fleeces, Mr Low freely admits that "he has no wool approaching to it in fineness ;" but he proceeds to say, or rather insinuate, that these fine fleeces are small, and that his own are larger and more valuable. Now, thi3 is scarcely ingenuous on Mr Low'b parb ; the weight of each fleece is ticketed upon it, and Mr Low admits he has seen them often ; the fleeces vary from 181bs to 211bs ! Can Mr Low produce fleeces to equal these "small" weights ?if so, why refuse to do so. It is useless for Mr Low to endeavor to evade this challenge, as he has done ours. We again call upon him either to produce a case of fleeces equal to Mr Rich's, in any single one of the three qualities, viz. — weight, fineness, or value, or tlse to withdraw his reiterated assertions of the " superior weight and value of his fleeces.

Speaking of the wool in Mr Rich's case, Mr Low, says, "neither have Messrs Julius any wool approaching it in fineness." Messrs Julius have owned some uncommonly like it, for it so happens that they purchase, and have been breeding from " the very identical ram" from which the heaviest and finest fleece in the case was shorn.

Mr Low imagines, or at least says, that the Steiger fleece is smaller than the Rambouillet. We will undeceive him, and rtie public too. If Mr Low will send 100 of his young Benmore rams, yearlings, 2-teeth up (exactly , the sheep he mentions in his own challenge) down to the Oamaru shovr, he will there find 100 of our young rams exactly that age, which have lately been in snow two feet deep, which we are sending down as a sample of the lot we have for sale (they wilL not even be picked), we are quite willing to have both lots shorn at Oamaru, and the wool then and there judged and weighed.

We are too modest, even supposing it to be rendered practicable by the withdrawal of the grandmother and tallow tests, to suppose we should win the monster sweep proposed by Mr Low. We do not claim superiority over all other breeders ; but we may be vastly inferior to several we could name, and still be able to compete with and beat Benmore and Galloway combined.

" One of Ours" and Mr Low declare in their last letters that the discussion is closed by them. This letter finally closes it so far as we are concerned, and no amount of provocation shall induce us to reply again. Both sides have been heard, and .the public must act as jury. The learned judge sums up thus : —

" Gentlemen of the jury — The accused comprise all the Merino sheep in the world other than Rambouillets ; they are 'charged' (especially those who are natives of Australia and Germany) with being rubbish, and having fleeces vastly inferior in weight and value to those of the prosecutor, Mr Rambouillet.

The evidence tendered by Mr Low, the counsel for the prosecution, is : — Firstly and principally, the assertions of the counsel himself ; secondly, that at a wool show held some years ago, certain of the accused, natives of Australia, were beaten by the progeny of the prosecutors out of pure Australian mothers ; thirdly, that the prosecutors once at Benmore clipped 61b .2oz of greasy wool; and fourthly, (though you may not perhaps see howtne evidence bears on the case) that a gentleman, called " One of ours," is a (i single-, barrelled scribbler,^ does not understand

the capacity of deduction, and is profoundly ignorant of the principles of sheep- breeding ; that Messrs Julius , are like "prophets' asses," I suppose because they have spoken only once, and then very much to the point, that pate do foie tjras is made of Turkeys, and "Hercules was a monster."

To these four counts, defendants have replied as follows — Ist. By contradiction.- 2nd/ That the good qualities of the sheep which beat some of the accused ' were -duo only to their pure mothers ; that the Messrs Rambo'iillet have so deteriorated, that the accused beat them this year by over 2s Id per fleece in value at the Inter-Colonial wool show ; that accused also beat them at the wool show this' year, at the Paris Exhibition, and got medals, while the prosecutors did'nt. 3rd. That the accustd clipped, at Rugged fii<lges ; a pound a fleece more than the prosecutors did at Benmore. 4th. The accused declined to reply to the evidence under this head ; but they stated the following facts — That the Messrs Rarabouillet were lately challenged to compete at the shows at Oamaru and Dunedin, and would not do so. The Messrs Rambouillet were also challenged to produce fleeces, equal in weight, quality, or value, to certain rich fleeces of the accused, and can't do so. And, lastly, that the Messrs Rambouillet have been defeated by the accused at every exhibition in England, on the Continent of Europe, and in Australia, for many years past. Gentlemen, I shall make no remarks on the above evidence : you may retire and consider your verdict." E A. andß. .Itjlitts. Waitaki, October 29th, 1867.