HISTORY OF HEREFORD CATTLE 



253 



other steer, if the Board could determine. It 

 should have been given to one of the first pre- 

 mium animals in the classes; if this could not 

 have been determined, it should have been held 

 for some special meritorious animal. 



The above is a fair statement in reference to 

 this steer for his record in 1879. On this rec- 

 ord we would claim that he should have had no 

 standing in the exhibition of 1880, and it was 

 on this record that G. M. Culbertson and T. L. 

 Miller made their protest against his being 

 shown at the show in 1880. 



In reference to the entry and the action of 

 the Board in admitting him to compete for the 

 champion prize in 1880, the Board placed 

 themselves in a position where their action 

 was a proper subject for criticism. 



The steer was entered in 1880 as a four-year- 

 old, while Mrs. Prescott, who bred the steer, 

 says he was a five-year-old, and Dr. Paaren, 

 supported by others (j[ 161), says he was nearer 

 six years old. The testimony of J. W. Prescott, 

 until it shall be disproved, was sufficient war- 

 ranty for rejecting the animal from entering 

 for the champion prize in 1880. Especially is 

 this true when Dr. Paaren was selected by the 

 Board to determine the ages of the animals on 

 exhibition. 



It is clear that an animal may be, for a two- 

 year-old, in his weight, character and quality, 

 the best animal in this class or in the show, but 

 if the animal has another year on him and has 

 the same weight, character and quality he would 

 not be the best animal in the class or in the 

 show. The fact is self-evident ; for at the Smith- 

 field Show in London in 1879 the champion 

 prize went to a two-year-old, not because he was 

 the best steer or best animal in the show with- 

 out regard to age, but considering his age he 

 was the best animal in the show. 



The protest against this steer secured another 

 verdict, and that was that the grade Hereford 

 steer, two-year-old, belonging to T. L. Miller 

 was the best steer in the show if the Nichols 

 steer was ineligible. 



There is no reasonable doubt but that the 

 Nichols steer was over five years old, weighing 

 2,465. The two-year-old Hereford was three 

 years younger and weighed 1,845 pounds, and 

 his carcass was worth as much (or more) on the 

 block as the Nichols steer. The grade Here- 

 ford steer here mentioned, Conqueror, was the 

 best of the six two-year-old Hereford steers ex- 

 hibited by us. There was not an uneven spot in 

 him ; he was evenly covered by thick, firm flesh. 



Why did the Illinois State Board accept this 

 steer Nichols as a four-year-old and permit him 

 to be exhibited as such ? Did they require the 



cancellation of the awards on the animals to 

 which, of a right, they belonged? Why did 

 they permit the steer Nichols when the ex- 

 hibitor did not know how old he was, and Mrs. 

 Prescott had said he wa's dropped in 1875 

 permit him to show as a four-year-old? Why 

 did the Board go on and publish the cut of this 

 Nichols steer, and the reports of the commit- 

 tee, when they had the evidence before them 

 that he had been shown under fraudulent repre- 

 sentation ? 



It would have been difficult for the Board to 

 explain their actions in this matter in a way 

 that would have satisfied the public or compet- 

 ing exhibitors. The facts in reference to his 

 breeding and age which disproved every state- 

 ment of the exhibitor were before the Board be- 

 fore their report was published, and their atten- 

 tion was called to these facts; still the report 

 was made and no reference made to the misrep- 

 resentation. This thoroughbred of 1879 was 

 permitted to exhibit as a four-year-old grade in 

 1880, when satisfactory evidence was before 

 them that he was a five-year-old. 



To show how the English courts of law looked 

 at a similar matter (fl 162) of false pretenses, or 

 of selling an animal with a false pedigree, it 

 will be well to read carefully the trial of "All- 

 sop vs. Hopkins," in England, for damages re- 

 sulting from the sale of a Shorthorn bull, with 

 fraudulent pedigree. Mr. Stavely Hill, the at- 

 torney for the plaintiff, in stating his case to 

 the -court and jury, gave the following defini- 

 tion of the origin of the Shorthorn breed and 

 of the English 

 Shorthorn Herd 

 Book. We repro- 

 duce this report 

 because it gives a 

 clear, concise state- 

 ment of the origin 

 and character of 

 the Shorthorn 

 breed of cattle. 



"Mr. Stavely 

 Hill, in opening 

 the case to the 

 jury, after refer- 

 ring to the import- 

 ant issues raised 

 by the pleading, 

 proceeded to give- 

 an interesting ac- 

 count of the origin of the Shorthorn breed, 

 and of the Herd Book kept by the society. 

 He pointed out that towards the close of the 

 last century some experienced farmers had no- 

 ticed that the breed of large cattle in the south 



J. B. GREEN, 

 Marlow, Herefordshire. 



