ELECTING JUDGES. XVll 



satisfaction in all, it would probably be more satisfactory for 

 societies to appoint one man as the sole judge in the section 

 to which it is well known he has given special attention, and 

 to strictly confine his duties to that section. One thoroughly 

 qualified man would do the work quite as well, probably better, 

 and more expeditiously than the usual triumvirate now in 

 vogue, and the great responsibility incurred would add to the 

 weight of his decisions. 



The very cream of qualified men may be employed to judge, 

 and their awards may be made with the utmost fairness and 

 impartiality, but still their decisions may appear in the eyes of 

 the uninitiated to vary so widely, as to render them a source of 

 much dispute and dissatisfaction. This arises mainly from the 

 absence of any code or recognised system of judging horticul- 

 tural exhibits. Under the usual arrangements practised by 

 societies at the present day, each arbiter is a law unto himself, 

 and the methods of estimating the meiits and demerits of 

 exhibits are as numerous as the judges ! 



In adjudicating upon the merits of a collection of fruit, for 

 instance, it is a common practice for the judges to begin by 

 allowing three, or it may be four points as the standard of 

 value of the Vest lUsh in the collection, no matter how nume- 

 rous and varied the dishes may be. The highest number of 

 points, say four, is given to a first-rate Pine- Apple, three to a 

 dish of first-class Grapes, two to a fine Melon, and one to an 

 excellent dish of Peaches, when the scale is exhausted, and 

 nothing left wherewith to gauge the merits of the other kinds 

 of fruit in the collection. Another common practice is to 

 allow a uniform value to all kinds of fruit. Gooseberries and 

 Grapes being placed on the same level. A much more unsatis- 

 factory method is followed at times, when the judges compare 

 the dishes of the same kind of fruit, and thereby determine the 

 awards by the greatest number of "best" dishes, but taking 

 no account of the aggi'egate merits of all the dishes in each 

 collection. Worst of all, some judges, after a cursory survey, 

 "slump the lot" in making their awards; and to save their 

 life, they could not give a detailed and satisfactory explanation 

 of the conclusions they have arrived at. 



