498 



HISTORY OF H E E E F li D CATTLE 



ule was lliree years old, the grade Hereford 

 at tliree years six months and fourteen days, 

 vvitli a mouth sliowmg six permanent teeth, 

 the grade Shorthorn represented at the same 

 age, with eight permanent teeth. 



At the show in 1880, of steers, three and 

 under four years old, there were slaughtered 

 two Herefords and one Shorthorn. One of the 

 Herefords was three years seven months and 

 thirteen days old, and the other three years 

 eleven months and thirteen days, each with six 

 permanent teeth. The Shorthorn was repre- 

 sented as three years six months and fifteen 

 days, having a full mouth of eight teeth, but 

 somewhat broken, and difficult to tell from the 

 teeth his age. 



In the year 1881 the slaughter test revealed 

 in the Shorthorn three-year-olds an older 

 mouth than the age for which they were en- 

 tered would indicate, while the mouths of the 

 Hereford bullocks corresponded with the ages 

 for which they were entered, as per standard 

 authorities. These mouths were preserved and 

 placed in the hands of the officers of the society 

 for preservation. The facts in reference to these 

 indications were fully before the Board through 

 its officers. An effort was made at the opening 

 of the show of 1880 to have the animals on 

 exhibition examined by a veterinary surgeon, to 

 determine the correctness of the entries that 

 had been made. He entered upon his duties 

 and met with a decided rebuff from one of the 

 leading Shorthorn exhibitors, while the Here- 

 ford exhibitors and several of the Shorthorn 

 exhibitors tendered their co-operation in mak- 

 ing such examination ; they were not, however, 

 completed. This brings us to the show of 1882. 



With our experience of the past shows, with 

 reference to entries of animals at fraudulent 

 ages, there came a determination to expose, if 

 possible, such frauds, if any existed at this 

 show, and cattle were generally examined by 

 experienced cattle men, exhibitors and others, 

 and it was found that a large number of cattle, 

 judging from the indications of the mouth, 

 were entered at ages much under what this 

 evidence would indicate. 



Among the rules governing the Fat Stock 

 Show was one as follows: Section 5. "In case 

 of protest notice must be given to the superin- 

 tendent of department before or during the ex- 

 arhination of the animal or article protested, 

 and a written statement giving the reasons for 

 protesting, verified by affidavit, must be filed 

 with the secretary on the day notice is given." 



Another rule. — Section 12. "Awarding com- 

 mittees are instructed that if they have good 

 reason to believe that any exhibitor, by false 



entry or otherwise, attempts to deceive the 

 committee or the public, and obtain an award 

 by misrepresentation, they shall report the fact 

 at once to the superintendent of the .depart- 

 ment, who shall report the same to the iSoard, 

 who may expel such exliibitor for fraud for at 

 least two years." 



Eule. — Section 17. "Decisions of awarding 

 committees shall be final, and no appeal will 

 be considered except in cases of fraud and pro- 

 test." 



These were the only published rules relating 

 to the subject of frauds in entering and ex- 

 hibition of cattle at this show. Section 12 pro- 

 vided for the disqualification and expulsion of 

 any exhibitor who attempted to deceive the 

 committee or the public, and obtain an award 

 by misrepresentation. It is true that this rule 

 made it obligatory upon the awarding commit- 

 tee to bring this matter to the notice of the 

 superintendent, and that he should bring it to 

 the Board, that they might expel such exhibi- 

 tor. The life of this rule is that an exhibitor 

 who, by fraud or misrepresentation, attempts 

 to deceive the public, shall be expelled. This 

 would be a fair construction of the rule, and it 

 would be a strained and unnatural construction 

 to say that the Board or its officers could not 

 take cognizance except it come through the 

 awarding committee, and from them to the 

 superintendent, and from him to the Board. 



It was a well established fact among ex- 

 hibitors and members of the Board that entries 

 were made at fraudulent ages, and when we 

 brought this matter directly to the president it 

 was properly before the society, and to say that 

 we had no right to a hearing until we came 

 before them through the prescribed routing of 

 Section 5, of the Rules, had no place in justice 

 or equity. The animals had not yet been be- 

 fore any committee, but they had been entered 

 and a catalogue of the entries prepared. The 

 animals thus catalogued were in the charge and 

 under the control of the society, and they had 

 a right to enter upon any investigation that 

 would tend to advance the best interests of the 

 show. The cattle were entered in classes one, 

 two and three years old, respectively. The ex- 

 hibitors had undertaken to give the exact age of 

 each animal. This was done among other 

 things, that the society might determine the 

 growth and gain per day, and upon such growth 

 and gain per day an award was to be made. 

 They had schedules which provided for an 

 elaborate detailed statement of the results to 

 be obtained. 



The fraud as Jo age committe/1 the great 

 state of Illinois, through the Agricultural De- 



