ON JUDGING AT FIELD TRIALS. 61 



consequence of recent very remarkable events, which tend to show that we have 

 not been without a good foundation for those so often expressed in these columns. 



" In regard to the trials, we think that two positions have been established 

 by the late meetings at Shrewsbury and Horseheath. First, that the absolute 

 winner should never be selected until the latest possible time; and, secondly, 

 that the same absence of haste should be displayed in finally rejecting each 

 competitor that is to say, the system of running the dogs in pairs, adopted in 

 coursing, should not be followed in field trials. The great drawback to those 

 trials is the necessarily short time which can be devoted to the several pairs; 

 and, as a conseqxiencet it is desirable to arrange them, so that, if possible, a dog 

 should be estimated according to his whole performance, if tried more than 

 once, rather than by that in any separate run. In coursing it is impossible to 

 carry out such a scheme, because the relative amount of work done by the two 

 dogs previously to any particular course after the first round influences their 

 respective powers very considerably, and, therefore, it would be very difficult for 

 a judge to select any two at his discretion for trial; and the result of long 

 experience is, that the only resource is to draw the whole entry out in pairs by 

 lot, and afterwards try the several winners in the successive rounds together, 

 according to their first position on the card. But in pointer and setter trials no 

 such difficulty exists. The amount of work done by each dog is only sufficient 

 to steady him, and the judges can fairly pair any two whenever they like, as 

 has been done at all meetings but those of late years held under the auspices 

 of the Kennel Club. At Shrewsbury the covert has generally been so bad, and 

 game so scarce, that the trials have been only of the nature of a farce ; but this 

 year the ground was nearly equally good with that at Horseheath, and it is 

 therefore fair to compare the results of the two meetings conducted as they 

 are on wholly different plans. 



"At Shrewsbury a scale of points originally drawn up by Mr. Brailsford is 

 adopted, in which a certain value is attached to the several qualities demanded 

 in the setter and pointer in the abstract, calculating the whole, when perfectly 

 displayed, at 100. This scale is printed, and furnished to the judges, with the 

 addition of the names of the competitors in each stake, and is made up as 

 follows namely, for pace and range, 20; obedience, 20; style in hunting, 15; 

 game finding abilities, 20 ; style in pointing, 15 ; merit in backing, 10 total 100. 

 After trying a brace of dogs, the judges have only to go through the scale with 

 each, and set down under the above heads the comparative degree of merit 

 shown by them. Thus, under 'pace and range,' if a dog is only of average 

 merit, they put down 10; if three-quarters, 15; or if perfect, 20. Proceeding 

 next to ' obedience,' they estimate his merits in the same way as compared 

 with perfection, putting down 10 if an average display has been made, and 20 

 if perfect; and so on through the whole scale, calculating the figures according 

 to the amount of merit. 



"After thus estimating A., the next thing is to proceed in the same way 

 with B., and whichever has the higher figure of merit is declared the winner; 



