12 



other of the principal agricultural societies, and there learn, by a 

 perusal of the award papers of their shows, as much with respect to the 

 animals with which they wish to become acquainted, as if they actu- 

 ally saw and examined them. 



Looking again at the third advantage claimed for the point, 

 system that it is in a high degree educational we find that the 

 existing mode of judging is not for a moment to be compared to that 

 system. At present the judges give no reasons for their awards, and 

 merely decide which animals are the best \ and if the uninitiated wish, 

 as they always do, to know why one animal is preferred to another, 

 they receive no information whatever from the judges, and can only 

 guess at the excellences of the one and the defects of the other. Under 

 the point system, however, we have, as has been already said, an elabo- 

 rate report on each animal pointed, showing how nearly it approaches 

 to or how far it is from perfection in the estimation of the judges in 

 every quality. And although the most important object to be kept in 

 -view in making the arrangements for judging at shows is to select judges 

 who will be capable of giving correct decisions, certainly the object 

 next in importance ought to be to carry out the judging in such a way as 

 to render the exhibition thoroughly educational, and to afford the 

 greatest possible amount of information to breeders and the public 

 with respect to the stock shown and their excellences and defects, 

 thereby teaching the uninitiated, and educating the rising race of 

 breeders. In this most important respect the advantage is wholly on 

 the side of the point system. 



5. Objections to the point system. There are only three objections 

 of any apparent weight, which have been brought forward against 

 judging by points : 



(i.) That very few of the judges would be capable of judging in 

 that way. 



(2.) That even if they were, the system is too tedious and would 

 occupy more time than could be spared. 



(3.) That judges would dislike to judge by points. 



With respect to the first objection, it is alleged that, although there 

 are many judges who are able to say with certainty whether an animal 

 is good or bad, and which is the best in a class, yet they could not give 

 the reasons for their decision, nor say in which points the one animal is 

 superior to the others ; and especially that they could not give the 

 proper number of marks for the several points. Now this is a palpable 

 mistake ; for any one can see that no one is qualified to be a judge 

 who cannot take an animal to pieces, i.e., who does not know every 

 point and quality an animal ought to possess ; and that, if a person 

 know these points and qualities, it is absurd to say that he could not, 

 after a little practice, set down the relative values of the different points 

 in the Award Pper, according to the scale fixed by the principal 

 Agricultural Societies, and thus give the highest number of marks to 



