254 



HIST OK Y OF HEKEFOKD CATTLE 



G. H. GREEN, 



Of the firm of J. B. & G. H. Green, 

 Marlow, Herefordshire. 



of Durham and in the north of Yorkshire had 

 capabilities of great improvement, so as to ren- 

 der them more valuable for dairy purposes, and 

 at the same time that they would have greater 

 capabilities for putting on flesh. With this 

 view Messrs. Colling of Ketton and Mr. Bates 

 of Kirklevington crossed their breed; the one, 

 it is said, with a polled Galloway and the other 



with a Kylo, or 

 West Highlander 

 ( fl 1 6 3 ) and 

 after several ju- 

 dicious crosses 

 succeeded in pro- 

 ducing the pres- 

 ent best establish- 

 ed and illustrious 

 families of the 

 Shorthorn tribe. 

 It would be clear 

 that this breed 

 must be consider- 

 ed an artificial 

 breed, and there 

 would be a ten- 

 dency to breed 

 back to the older 

 breed, which 

 would take every opportunity of reasserting it- 

 self ; and, undoubtedly, if left to a state of na- 

 ture those points of the animal which might 

 be called its natural characteristics would reap- 

 pear, while the Shorthorn points would in pro- 

 portion be lost. In these circumstances it was 

 necessary to keep a constant watch with a view 

 to eliminate any reappearance of the older 

 breed displaying itself, either by a dark nose 

 or a straight horn or other characteristics, and 

 to keep for breeding purposes only those ani- 

 mals which showed the permanent Shorthorn 

 features, and for this purpose the Herd Book 

 has been established as a register of those ani- 

 mals which might be relied on by the breeder 

 to maintain the character of the tribe. The bull 

 in question in this action, professed to be a bull 

 of five crosses, and to be thus eligible for entry 

 in the Herd Book; and the learned counsel il- 

 lustrated the difference there would be between 

 the produce of such an animal and an animal 

 such as that he should prove the bull really to 

 be, viz., one got by a pedigree bull upon a dairy 

 cow, by pointing out that in the latter there 

 would be much doubtful blood as would amount 

 to illustrate by means of a chess board to 

 one-half of the board, while in the former 

 the doubtful blood would be equivalent only 

 to one square, or one-sixty-fourth of the board." 

 Those who have used the Shorthorns to cross 



upon other breeds will recognize the truth of 

 the attorney's statement when he says: 



"It will be clear that this breed of cattle 

 must be considered an artificial breed, and 

 there will be a tendency to breed back to the 

 older breed, which would take every oppor- 

 tunity of reasserting itself; and, undoubtedly, 

 if left to a state of nature, those points of the 

 animal which might be called its natural char- 

 acteristics would reappear, while the Short- 

 horn points would in proportion be lost." 



In the action referred to, Mr. Allsop ob- 

 tained judgment for $3,750, which was not 

 only the direct damages, but the constructive 

 damages for the produce of a bull in the herd 

 of Mr. Allsop, being the difference between the 

 value of the calves by this bull, and what the 

 value would have been had he been what he 

 was represented to be. 



The bull in question had been shown at the 

 Birmingham Animal Show in March, 1875, as 

 a thoroughbred; when these facts, brought out 

 in the trial, came to the knowledge of the Bir- 

 mingham society, that society commenced an 

 action against Mr. Hopkins, which was tried 

 at Warwick Assizes, February 18, before Lord 

 Chief Justice Cockburn; of which we present 

 the following report: 



"His lordship having summed up, the jury 

 retired to consider their verdict at half-past 

 four, and shortly after, returned into Court 

 with a verdict of guilty, and his lordship, in 

 sentencing the prisoner, says: The jury have 

 found you guilty of obtaining 20 ($100), 

 given by the Agricultural Society for the ex- 

 hibition of the best animal in the class. I 

 think it is a pity to see a young man of your 

 respectability and position, standing convicted 

 of fraud, yet I do not think the jury could 

 have arrived at any other conclusion. You 

 possessed, no doubt, a very fine animal, but 

 then you had no pedigree, and by the condi- 

 tions of the exhibition you were not entitled 

 to take a prize. You manufactured a pedigree 

 that no reasonable man can doubt. A man 

 who does that to gain a prize, gains that prize 

 by false pretenses, and he robs not only the 

 society, but the man who ought to have taken 

 the prize, just the same as if it were taken out 

 of his pocket. If you were not sensible that 

 this was a dishonest transaction, then I am 

 sorry for you, for you did not properly appre- 

 ciate the turpitude of the act. That it was 

 robbing another competitor is the real nature 

 of the case, and if such frauds were allowed 

 to go on unpunished there would be an end 

 to open and honest competition. The jury 

 have recommended you to mercy, and I take 



