THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE, 



163 



mitted that the most active members of the Club were entitled 

 to much consideration ; but on the other hand, they must not 

 overlook those to whom all looked up with great respect. He 

 did not concur in the opinion that Islington is out of London 

 (Hear, hear.) He thought the Crystal Palace was in that re- 

 spect much more objectionable than Islington. But he was 

 not at all sure that it was desirable to remove the Show from 

 the place v/here it was now heid. Had the removal from Gos- 

 wcU-street to Baker-street proved beneficial or mischievous ? 

 (Hear, hear). If it had been beneficial, that gave them a little 

 of the nisight of experience ; and, tliough he did not deny that 

 for some reasons Islington would be convenient, he maintained 

 that they must look at the whole combination of circumstances 

 in arriving at a decision. Islington would be convenient for 

 the salesman ; but would it be for the public, whom they 

 most wanted to interest in the Show ? (Hear, hear). He ear- 

 nestly recommended that this question should be postponed, 

 and postponed in a good spirit, till December. If he lived to 

 attend the meeting then, he would be prepared to listen 

 attentively to any reasons which might be urged in favour of 

 this project ; and if he should be convinced that the incouve- 

 nieiices of Baker-street were so great as had been stated, and 

 that Isliiigtoa presented such great advantages as some 

 appeared to imagine, he would at once abandon his opposition. 



Mr. Dob MAN said, as regarded the question of postpone- 

 ment, he must observe that the owner of the land had positively 

 detlared that he would not allow the matter to stand over any 

 longer. There was great difficulty in inducing him to do so 

 after the previous meeting. 



Mr. W. F. IIOBBS said, having been a member of the com- 

 mittee from the first, he did not attach any great importance 

 to that remark, for a similar one had been made at all the pre- 

 ceding meetings. He felt bound to support the amendment 

 of Sir John Slielley. He had always been a consistent advo- 

 c.'ste for holdiug the exhibitions somewhere near the centre or 

 in the western part of the Metropolis, and therefore it could 

 not ba thought that he was now acting in an antagonistic 

 spirit. One objection to this proposed removal was that it 

 would involve a tax on every exhibiter. He thought he was 

 justified in saying that it would be a tax of £1 on every ox or 

 cow, and of from five to ten shillings on every sheep or pig. 

 Again, it had been rumoured within the last six weeks, and tbat 

 rumour had gained ground since the meeting at Canterbury, 

 that the cosimittee of this Joint-Stock Company intended to 

 hold exhibitions, which might be injurious either to the Smith- 

 field Club or to the Royal Agricultural Society ; he meant ex- 

 hibitions during the summer months. Perhaps so long as Mr. 

 Webb remained the head of the Company there would be no 

 d.iugerof anything of that kind; but it should be remembered 

 tS'.at among the directors there were many members of imple- 

 ment firms. 



Mr. Sidney : Three out of twelve. 



Mr. HoBBS continued: lie might be mistaken as to the 

 proportions ; but he knew that great interest was taken in 

 this question by persons of that class, and he trusted that, if 

 any agreement were entered into between the Smithfield Club 

 and the Company, Mr. Webb would take special care, so long 

 as it should be ia his power to do so, that uo exhibition vras 

 helJ which could militate against the interest either of the 

 Smithfield Club or of the Kojal Agricultural Society (Heiir, 

 hear). He would only add that, as the exhibition was now 

 regarded as a national cue, an opportunity should, be 

 thought, be afforded for a general expreaaion of opinion, with- 

 out as well as within the Club. 



Mr. Garrett wished to explain that the reason why he 

 had not taken any shares in the new Company was, that he 

 desired to avoid doing anything that might appear detri- 

 mental to the interests of the Club, or to have a selfish ob- 

 icct. His sole object in joining the Company was, that the 

 Club might have sometiiing tangible to dtal with (Hear, 

 hear). It had been thought desirable that the shares should be 

 offered, in the first instance, to the members of the Club ; and 

 that course would be pursued (Hear, hear). The promoters had 

 not been actuated by a wish to have a good commercial spe- 

 culation, though he believed that the Agricultural Hull would 

 prove oiie ; and, one-sided as the agreement was, he had no 

 doubt that the public would take any shares which might be 

 refused by members of that Club. 



Mr. GiBLETT said that the whole of the shares were, in 

 one sense, bespoken. It was understood that they were to be 



kept in abeyance till they had been offered to the members of 

 the Club; but should any be declined by them, they would, 

 he believed, be taken by other persons, immediately after. 

 He was confident that the promoters of the Company had 

 been actuated throughout by the best motives. Having been 

 connected with the Smithfield Club Show during almost the 

 whole of his life, no one, perhaps, knew more than be did 

 about the inconveniences to whicli exhibitors had been sub- 

 jected at Baker-street (Hear, hear). 



The Chairjian : Perhaps before putting the question I 

 may be allowed to say a very few words. On entering this 

 room I did not intend to take any prominent part in the pro- 

 ceedings, wishing to leave the discussion in the hands of 

 others. I was, however, surprised to find that, as the only 

 vice-president in the room, it became, in the absence of the 

 President, my duty to take the chair, and hence it is that I 

 occupy the position in which you see me. Now, never having 

 expressed, I think, my opinion in this matter, I think it right, 

 considering the position which I now hold, that I should en- 

 deavour to state in very few words the opinion which I enter- 

 tain on this question. I have always considered that the 

 great objection to the proposed arrangement was the binding, 

 or the attempting to bind, the Smithfield Club for so long a 

 term as 21 years (Hear, hear). I feel that there would be 

 much less objection to binding the Club for 5 years, as it has 

 been already bound to Mr. Boulnois. I regret very much the 

 necessity of removing from the central position we now oc- 

 cupy to a place which is not, so far as the visitors to the 

 exhibition are concerned, equally convenient. But it Diust 

 be admitted that the premises in IJaker-street are too srtall and 

 confiued for the purposes of the show, and that, therefore, it 

 is desirable to obtain, if possible, another place. Imust say 

 that, from all I have heard, I do not believe a better site can be 

 found in another place than that which is now proposed. I do 

 not believe there is another of the same kind to be found in 

 London. The observation, however, made in the Duke of 

 Richmond's letter puts the aaatter in that clear and comnion- 

 seuEe light in which his Grace is in the habit of presenting 

 his opinions. He says he is afraid that the tradesmen, who 

 are our principal supporters, will not follow us up to Isling- 

 ton. I think there is great force in that remark, and I am 

 most unwilling to bind tlie Club, either at law or in honour, 

 for so long a term to hold their meetings in what I must con- 

 sider to be a somewhat out-of-the-way place. Mo doubt, so 

 long as it is the interest of the Club to hold their meetings in 

 this new hall, if it should ever be built, they will hold them 

 there; not but I think we should be doing extremely wrong if 

 we were to attempt to bind the Club for bo long a time as is 

 proposed. With respect to the legal question, I am unwilling 

 to express any opinion where lawyers differ, but I have always 

 understood that in order that an agreement may be binding, 

 there must be two parties to it, and a consideration. Either 

 the Smithfield Club, or some parties acting on their behalf, 

 must be bound, or there is no consideration, and in that case the 

 Company can no more be bound, I think, than the Club. At 

 all events, this agreement is of so extsaordinary a nature, that 

 it might involve us in some legal questions, and I think the 

 Club had very niuch better avoid tbat evil (Hear, hear). We 

 have not to look solely to the respectable and honourable 

 names of those who are now at the head of the Company ; we 

 must also take into account those persona who may hereafter 

 form part of the Company. The sJares may fall into the 

 hands of persons about whom we know nothing ; and I think 

 it would be a most dangerous thing for this Club to involve 

 itself in an agreement uhich might or might not be bmding. 

 or in legal difficultiea which might give us immense trouble, 

 and entail upon us great inconvenience (Hear, hear). 



Mr. Sidney, in replying, said that if it should he found 

 within twelve mouths of the time fixed for opening the show 

 at Islington, that the Agricultural Hall Company were not 

 taking proper measures for thai; purpose, he should be the 

 first person to propose that the arrangement with them should 

 be terminated. He was far from wishing to say anything dis- 

 paraging of his opponents on this question, but he felt bound 

 to do all in his power to Becure a suitable building for the 

 Shov'. 



Mr. Boulnois having solicited and obtained permission 

 to address the meeting, although the discussion was closed , 

 as a matter of order, said, lis (object in rising was 

 to endeavour to throw some light on the subject. The 



