330 



THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



I^le. That most flourishiog aud useful association, the Bath 

 and West of England, have recently made a serious alteration 

 in the usual programme. They have for years strongly uplield 

 the implement trials with all their old imperfections ; would 

 every year give almost a superfluity of prizes, and now have 

 decided on having no trials at all. Governments that will not 

 grant reasonable reforms have often to bow before a revolution, 

 and the Bath and West of England Society could no longer 

 hold its ground against the united phalanx of the great imple- 

 ment makers. This step will probably lower the influence of 

 this rising association, as far as the implements are concerned. 



The memorialists to the Royal Agricultural Society prayed 

 that the judges' report and observations might be published 

 with the prizes. Tnis would do much good. The farmer- 

 judge is often a heavy writer, and would gladly be spared the 

 trouble of furnishing a long report in January of what took 

 pl»ce the previous July. A competent person might compile 

 tht- judges' remarks, arrange a report, which, after being re- 

 vised by the officials, might be published in time for the meet- 

 ing Such a report would explain the nature of the awardsi 

 ami qualify some of the commendations, as well as direct atten- 

 tion to some good features in an imperfect implement. These 

 Bii-jjestions, and the one for having two permanent foremen in 

 the implement department at the shows to assist the judges, 

 seem to us particularly reasonable. 



We think that we have now considered the chief defects 

 which are supposed to exist in the present implement prize 

 system. Very many of the objections urged against it in the 

 pamphlets of 1857 are objections no longer; the defects have 

 been remedied, and the obstructions removed. Much yet re- 

 mains to be done towards making the system perfect, and the 

 longer, the more severe, and the more varied the trials, the 

 more the public will appreciate them. But to abolish them 

 altogether would be assuming that implements areperftct; 

 and no greater evil can befal individuals, or a branch of indus- 

 try, than a belief that they cannot be better, and that further 

 improvement is impossible.— Cr/orrf Journal. 



[The following letter has been written on the above able 

 series of articles, of which this is the concluding one :] 



THE BATH AND WEST OF ENGLAND AGRICUL- 

 TURAL SOCIETY. 



TO THE EDITOR OF THE OXFORD JOURNAL. 



Sir, — My attention has been called by some of my col- 

 leapuea in the Bath and West of England Society to your 

 ariicle of the 5th, in which, speaking most kindly of the good 

 done by that Society, you refer to our abandonment of prizes 

 for implements in terms which seem to call for some explana- 

 tion. 



It is true we no longer give prizes on the award of selected 

 ji)d>;e8, after trials conducted by those judges; but we have 

 nuile full provision for the trial of implements at work before 

 the public in the open field. We thiuk that, the attention of 

 in'elligent farmers having been awakened to mechanical ques- 

 tions, the amount of work done, coal and jiower consumed, &c,, 

 those farmers are now the best judges of the gross result as a 

 whole; and that their purchases and their experience will be a 

 safer guide to their less-instructed neighbours, and I may add, 

 I hope without ofl'ence, to some amateurs, than prizes awarded 

 under conditions more or less artificial, and therefore so far 

 deceptive. 



It should also be stated, in justice to our Council, that 

 although they reaisted the changes pressed upon them some 

 years ago, the recent change was the spontaneous act of the 

 Council on a review of the whole case, taking into account 

 the good done by the prize system in the infancy of agricul- 

 tural improvement, and the evils apparently inseparable from 

 I acing trials when a siugle prize is to be awarded by a local 

 Society. 



The expediency of retaining mechanical trials at the shows 

 of the Royal Agricultural Society is quite another question ; 

 although I think even then it is much to be regretted that a 

 system of classified awards, on the principle advocated by Mr. 

 Howard and Mr. Shuttleworth, has not been adopted; it 

 can hardly be maintained that the difference between the 

 ploughs and other implements of the first-class makers is 

 so great that one ought to stand first, another secoud, and 

 another third ; or can so stand with the general consent 

 of all competent judges, and under all ordinary circum- 

 stances. 



If the first prize is only awarded because in such a field, 

 with such a state of the atmosphere, and with such horses 

 and ploughman, and it must be said with such or such judges, 

 one maker beat another by halfa-neck, the judi^ment might 

 be reversed the next day— and, if so, what is it worth ? It 

 amounts to proving that the winner is a skilful mechanic, with 

 first-rate workmen ; but it does not disprove the same con- 

 clusions as to hi3 competitor. 



We thought, however, that if we abolished the prizes it 

 would not be worth while for a local society to stop half-way 

 with the certificate system. We believe the public, aided by 

 the Royal Agricultural Society, will be, in our case at least, 

 the best judges. 



Having adopted the principle of the Exhibition and Bazaar 

 in the Agricultural Department, we propose to extend it to 

 Arts and Manufactures, and anticipate a most interesting ex- 

 hibition of articles of all kinds, interesting to the farmer's wife 

 and family as well aa to himself; and to the tradesman and to 

 the artist, no leas than to the agriculturist. 



If you are kind enough to notice the fact, perhaps the 

 North Devon meeting at Barnstaple, from the 30th of May to 

 the 3rd of June, may be graced by productions from Oxford. 

 Coventry and Birmingham have already promised beautiful 

 contributions. 



I am, Sir, your obedient servant. 



T. D. AcLAND, Jun. 



Sprydoncote, Exeler. 



MIXED FEED.— A bushel of carrots and a bushel of 

 oats are as good for a horse, at moderate work, as two 

 bushels of oats — not because the carrots contaiu as much 

 nutriment as the bushel of oats, for they do not ; but they 

 aid the dii;. 'Stive organs in a more perfect appropriation of 

 the nutritive principles in both. When horses are continu- 

 ally fed on oats, much of the food passes undigested, and is 

 a dead loss, except to the manure heap. So with sheep and 

 cattle. Give them a few roots daily, and they will have a 

 better appetite, digest their food better, and cat greedily 

 coarse hay, that they would otherwise trample under foot. — 

 Ohio Farmer, 



