1 86 British Dogs. 



functions the judge is guided by an inborn faculty aided by years of 

 experience, and that his decisions should be received, accepted, and re- 

 spected without question by those not blest with such innate ability ; and 

 further, that it is not the duty of the judge to teach, nor is it in his 

 power to explain to the public, so that they can understand the pro- 

 cesses and stages by which he arrived at his conclusions. In fact that it 

 would be as fair to ask a clever prestidigitateur to explain how he accom- 

 plished his clever tricks and illusions as to ask a judge how he arrived at 

 his decisions the former could but shrug his shoulders and re-perform 

 the trick as plainly as he could, and so with the judge, both performing 

 their work by the power of an inborn faculty aided by years of practice 

 and experience. On the contrary, I hold that the objects of shows being 

 what they profess to be, it is essentially the duty of the judge to instruct 

 the public, and that he is not at all in the same position as the performer 

 of sleight of hand tricks who has only to amuse. The judge may be 

 more fairly compared to an expert mechanic one whose deftness and 

 rapidity of action in producing results wonderful to the uninitiated, can 

 yet intelligently explain every process from beginning to end, so that 

 anyone may understand. 



Judging by points, too, has this advantage ; it settles the question of 

 dual judging, by giving the opinion of both to the public in a concrete 

 form, and that of the arbitrator also on the point of difference on which 

 he was called upon to decide the cases where the two judges had 

 disagreed. 



It settles the question of public versus private judging fairly well, 

 providing a more substantial feast than seeing the dogs walked round, 

 and acting as indicators to every step the judge took in going through 

 his duties. With this solatium to wounded feelings the disappointed 

 exhibitor could look with more equanimity on the secret conclaves of 

 Curzon Hall. 



One objection I have heard urged against point judging is that it 

 would reduce judging to a dead level ; there would, it is said, be a dull 

 stagnancy about it that would soon asphixiate shows. 



I cannot see that there would be less difference of opinion under the 

 one system than under the other, nor would there be sameness in the 

 awards of the same man, nor more room for charges of inconsistency 

 then than now. It is unreasonable to expect perfection in the work 



