JUDGING BY POINTS.

Clutha Leader, Volume II, Issue 89, 23 March 1876, Page 7

JUDGING BY POINTS.

The following letter by Lord Kinnaird to the editor of the « North British Agriculturist ' bears on a subject of s©me interest to farmers : —

Rossie Priory, Inchture, January 3rd, 1876.

Sir,— ln your article on the " Award of the Smithfield Prizes," which appeared in your journal of December 22, 1875, you make some remarks which I consider strengthen my argument in favor of "judging by points." You express your admiration of shorthorns, and then proceed to say : " Most people know that the strongest point of tlie shorthorn does not present itself in the pure-bred animal's own carcase in a fat stock show; Like the Leicester sheep, .the great value of the shorthorn lies in its wonderful. faculties of improving other breeds with wbicli.it may be crossed. That is to say, crosses from the shorthorn often carry more and better beef than the pure-bred animal. Now. while in a breedingstock showyard we could sympathise with judges giving preference to shorthorn breeding animals over beasts of any other variety, we cannor say so much in regard to fat stock exhibitions. In the latter we hold that the individual merits of the respective animals in the race should be the primary consideration, the question of which is the best or most popular breed being chiefly, if not wholly, left to the breeding shows." I quite agree with all this.

Yon next say that, had such been the case in recent years at the Smith- ! field shows, the result of the awards to first prize animals would have been very different. You then ask, " Why .should this be so at such an admirably conducted meeting as that of. the Smithfield Club is well known to be ? The reason. is this. It. so happened that last two or three years, when the three sets of cattle judges — nine in allmustered in the main avenue to award the -cups to the best male . and female animals, the shorthorn interest was greatly the most powerful. There is naturally.on sncb.an occasion an effort on the part of every judge to get the animal of the breed to which he devotes his special attention - to. the front, if the beast is^feasihly ?goody as, it generally •is'it Stoit&field. 1 It is:hbfc.:difficult-to see, then, that the, element that ; can swamp the other on a vote, will win. 'So. far as we can recollect.' in; 1871 there "were- only ;six judges 7 of : 'cattle— at least there werel not more than 'two in the .enlarged,. adjudicaiiiigV^ody w,ho: had 'any 1 Special 'leaning- towards-tho short^ horn.y :A And- - what; ; -was, ; ; the result ? i Why> tlmugh the interest referred' to j had a more creditable card to play in Sir Wm. de .Capell Jprdokps'. .three-- year- old shorthorn ox thW has-smce appeared .in; tbe male Amasses that breed, a Scotch polled ' -ox" gained the day,' with a Devon for * reserve. number'.': 'X-. -. .-» i, Clearly/ for: the satisfaction of the general ;h"oidy v , of exhibitors some change is:;; necessary. The nature of ! thatchange, we think, lies in the direction w^ch~in our report of the show this year and last we took the liberty of

pointing out, viz.,. that three men be Specially nominated forjthe selection 6f the best, male, the best, female, andjthe champion beast." ■-- - ' - You suggest the reduction of', the number of the judges to three, or the same number that is appointed at every show in the kingdom. Surely this will be little improvement, as it is well known how unsatisfactory in many instances are the decisions of three judges at shows of breeding stock. As ,1 said in my letter of .November last on the subject of judging* by points, it is easy to foretell, when the number of cattle to be judged wero reduced to a few which would get the prize, by seeing who was the leading or man of strongest will among the judges, and learning his favorite strain of blood. Judging* by points is the only way to arrive at an equitable decision, whether for purebred or for _fat stock. As I have before said, the plan is adopted in Jersey and on the continent of America in judging cattle, and in this country at dog and poultry shows, and in judging implements — the latter most successfully. (See the report on the trials of implements at Taunton in the Society's ' Journal/ where the system is extolled and the scale of points given). Mr Howard, of Bedford, advises me to persevere in advocating the system, but at my time of life it is not very encouraging, as he says that it is is fourteen years since he wrote a pamphlet oh the prize system of the R.A.S.A., in which he advocated a system of points for judging implements; although it was ridiculed at the time, and said to be impossible, yet now we see the satisfactory result of the system at Taunton. If agricultural journals will only take the matter up, and expose, as you do, the unfairness, not to say the absurdity, of the present system of judging, there will be some chance of my living* to see the prejudice against adopting the system of judging cattle by points overcome — a system which has been in other cases and other countries so successful. Yours, Kinnairb.