JUDGING AT SHOWS. 51 



ness of purpose sufficient to carry good principles into fair practice, and there 

 are many men possessed of sufficient knowledge, who have yet such a deficiency 

 of moral courage as to make them require a coadjutor to share the onerous 

 responsibility of condemning to the ranks the dogs of their friends. On the 

 other hand, if, as we allege, it is necessary that both the judges of a class should 

 be possessed of equal knowledge, it reduces its amount to a much lower level 

 if double or treble the number of individuals are required, since we all know 

 that the managers of our shows have not a very large circle from which the 

 choice can be made. The question is, however, now fairly submitted to the 

 test of experience, and we need not, therefore, discuss it more at length. 



"But now we have to examine the most vexed of the five questions before 

 us, and yet it seems to us so clear as to be incapable of two opinions about 

 it. In examining it, we must remember that the judicial bench is not composed 

 of the same individuals at the various shows, and that many of them are known 

 to have proclivities as regards types, &c., which render it possible for a clever 

 exhibitor to ' place ' successfully under different judges, the various members 

 of his kennel, all of which could scarcely have a chance of a prize under any 

 one judge possessed of reasonable consistency and fairness. It is quite true that 

 it is impossible entirely to avoid this, and that, even with all the much- vaunted 

 integrity of the judges in our higher courts of law, well deserved as it no 

 doubt is, suitors and their solicitors are very apt to have a preference founded 

 upon well-known proclivities. But without statute laws, .and precedents equally 

 binding in our common law, our courts would resemble a lottery office still more 

 than they now do, and we think no one but a madman would desire to wash out 

 the written and unwritten code which guides us in all our transactions. Why, 

 then, should we leave our canine judges to a ' rule of thumb,' when in our 

 more important relations of life we adopt a different plan ? To this question 

 we know no answer, and we confess that this judicial blindness of the world of 

 'doggy ' men is beyond our comprehension. The only explanation we can give 

 is that it allows each exhibitor to use his powers of ' placing ' with a reasonable 

 hope of success, and that he thinks in that way he can cover the defects in his 

 dogs by his own cleverness. The special clubs have, however, in most cases 

 abandoned this plan, and have each drawn up a code of points, not only 

 describing most minutely the dog they combine to glorify and improve, but 

 appending a numerical value to each point ; and in setting this example they 

 have, no doubt, done good service in the cause to support which they have been 

 called into being. It may therefore be concluded that the days of judging by 

 ' rule of thumb ' are numbered. 



" Having thus reached a stage when it may be laid down as decided that 

 the judges of our shows are to be guided by a written code of laws, it may 

 reasonably be deduced that they shall carry out this code in a practical manner. 

 To show the fallacy of depending on a code theoretically, we may instance the 

 judging of Mr. Bassett at the recent show of fox terriers at Lillie Bridge 

 under the club specially formed to supervise that fashionable breed of dogs. 



