NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1077, 16 March 1911, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

The keen rivalry existing between the Wellington Gas Company and the Municipal Electric Lighting Department just now seems likely to prove a valuable' asset to the promoters of the Industrial Exhibition to be hold here shortly. Both these purveyors of light seem prepared t'i undertake displays of their respective illuminants on a quite exceptional scale, and with a little encouragement' from th'e promoters these displays would certainly develop into one of the most striking features of the Exhibition. Unfortunately there appears to be some suspicion v th'at the municipal undertaking can exercise influences which may place its rival at a disadvantage, and should these fears prove well founded, the Exhibition may bo rebbed of one of its attractions by the withdrawal of a valuable exhibit. We cannot believe that the committee which has. the matter in hand wciild be so unwise, as well as unjust, as to make any distinction in its treatment of the two concerns affected. The municipality is no more entitled .-to special consideration at the expense of its rival than is the Gas Company, and every care should be taken to leave no room for doubt that both are being treated alike.

The discussion provoked by Mn. H. G. Williams's letter on "sheepfaking," published in our issue of March ■!, cannot fail to bo of value. While some breeders do not think the judges at shows are misled or that farmers generally suffer in anyway from the artificial methods adopted of improving the appearance of show sheep, there appears to be a general consensus of opinion that ''faking" can be, and in cases is, overdone. Moreover, so far as we have been able to discover there has not been a'single good reason advanced why "faking" should. be permitted. No one can object to proper cave being taken to sec that sheep are shown to the best advantage, but the amount of "faking" that admittedly goes on has not \o far bsen shown to bo necessary or oven desirable. The moat gratifying feature of the discussion u;i to the j

present has been the evidence that stud breeders who do not adopt the methods of the "faker" can yet compete with him in the disposal of their stud stock. Probably tho "faker" gels more publicity and makes occasional isolated sales at fancy prices which eclipse tho individual prices obtained by those who do not believe in practising the yfi rious artificial devices for improving the outward appearance of their sheep; but on the average his advantage is not great. The real test after all with those who purchase stud sheep is the result they obtain from tho stock bought, and it does not take very long for a farmer to learn that it is not necessarily the. most artistically clipped and 'trimmod .ind coloured sheep that produces the best stock. The plea that the public would not attend shows unless the sheep arc "faked" so as t.i make them look pretty is so weak a defence of the practice that it is surprising to find it seriously put forward. One suggestion that has been made as the result of the controversy strikes us as being a very good one, if practicable. That is the proposal ,of Mb. R. Cobb that the .fudging of sheep should be on a points system—so many points being allocated for quality of wool, conformation of sheep, and so on. With the points so awarded posted on the pens as a guide, visitors to shows would be able to see for themselves the basis on which awards were made, and with sound judges to carry out the work tho educative effect should prove of great value. Probably the difficulty would be to get the judges.